The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  • Boko Haram: The US angle

    James Entwistle, the US Ambassador to Nigeria, spoke very extensively last week on the raging insurgency in the north-east of the country and his home government’s perception of the matter. Apparently reacting to reports that the US was undermining Nigeria’s efforts in the war, he debunked such a notion contending they are heavily involved in supporting Nigeria’s response to terrorism through training of soldiers and information sharing.

    Even as some of the issues he raised were quite illuminating, others threw up contradictions that question his proper understanding of the complex issues involved in this war. These were evident not only from his responses to why the US government has been blocking the sale of certain military equipment to Nigeria, but also in his assessment of the propelling motivation of the Boko Haram insurgents.

    Before now, there have been reports that the US has been blocking efforts by the Nigerian government to procure military equipment, especially Cobra helicopters from Israel on grounds of human rights abuses. Entwistle corroborated this when he said that human rights abuses by Nigerian soldiers in the north-east had stood as a sore thumb when the US considers requests from Nigeria for arms.

    According to him, “before we share equipment with any country, we look at a couple of things. Does it make sense in terms of that country’s needs? The second thing we look at is the human rights situation in that country. As you all know, there have been instances. I’m not saying across the board, of human rights abuses by the Nigerian military in the north-east”.

    He said the kind of questions his country is interested in is the use to which such equipment will be deployed. If it is such that can adversely affect human rights situation, they will have to take responsibility for its proper use or lack of it, he further explained.

    The US government is within its rights to determine which country it sells its arms. It is also within its rights to withhold such sales where in her calculations human rights will be adversely affected by their use. It may as well have information on cases of human rights infractions since the war against terrorism commenced in this country. Neither can genuine concerns on human rights issues be discounted.

    But there is a huge moral question raised by blocking the Nigerian government from buying arms even as the same envoy admitted that Boko Haram had “gone beyond a small insurgent group, with a couple of guns to a very effective collection of conventional force”. If that is the case, the net effect of barring Nigeria from purchasing the needed arms to effectively contain this upsurge, is for the insurgency to get out of control. And when this happens, human rights abuses will further escalate to unimaginable proportions. So also will the killing and maiming of defenceless people especially given the murderous records of the insurgents. What then will be the position of the US: to begin arms sales to the government or allow the war get out of hands? This poser has been raised to underscore some of the contradictions in the current posturing of the US.

    Without prejudice to the reported cases of human rights abuses either by the insurgents or the military, it will not serve the interest of this country to allow the war be prolonged because our military lack the needed equipment to bring it to a conclusion.

    Even now, a lot of Nigerians hold the view that Boko Haram would have been history if President Jonathan had been very decisive in dealing with the menace when it reared its ugly head. Terrorism is a very complex war that does not permit of some of the calculations of conventional warfare. The US has no doubt about this as it has been waging wars against it in many countries. It would therefore appear cloudy for the same government to allow the Nigerian situation degenerate because of perceived human rights abuses. The right approach is to support the government to acquire the necessary and sufficient equipment to halt the killing and maiming of innocent souls by the insurgents while not losing sight of human rights issues.

    The ambassador appeared more controversial when he made his prescriptions on how Nigeria can end the current challenges facing it. According to him, “a genuine change through democratic process is the most precious and powerful tool to bring the desired change in a nation like Nigeria”. This statement is very loaded especially when it is considered that the current government came into power through the type of change Entwistle is canvassing. There is therefore the question of what a genuine change through a democratic process would imply in this case and how it will solve our current security challenges. In other words, to what extent can we regard a sitting government that wins another mandate through democratic process as qualifying for the kind of change process envisaged by the ambassador? And if this happens, what impact will it make on the current challenges in the absence of the needed arms to confront the scourge frontally? Or are we looking at change in terms of a departure from the status quo? If it is so, we needed to be told how that will play out in our current circumstance.

    These are the posers for the envoy to clarify further.

    This has become necessary given his further assertion that the war now has more political than religious undertone. Hear him, “a year ago, I would have said they are religiously motivated. But as they killed more and more Muslims, it’s hard for me to believe they were motivated by religion”.

    This appears an oversimplification of the matter as it casts the sponsors of the insurgency in the mould of people incapable of enacting complex strategies to obfuscate their real intentions and prolong the war. Boko Haram has never hidden their intention to install a theocratic state in this country. It is true they have in the last one year or so been killing Muslims and Christians alike. But that cannot in any manner whittle down the ideological basis of the movement which is deeply rooted in religion.

    It may well be that its sponsors, facing increasing challenges from their warped ideological promptings, had to change tactics to bring about the current situation that has left Entwistle seemingly confused. As a tactic, it has worked out well for strategists of the insurgency group. But nobody should be deceived by that.

    If the insurgents are no longer solely targeting Christians, it is not a matter of choice. Having been confined to states where the phenomenon is most prevalent, it has become difficult for them to penetrate the abode of Christians. This should not be misconstrued as benevolence or loss of direction. For, at the slightest chance, they will definitely show their true colours.

    What Nigeria needs now is support both at home and beyond to wrestle the terrorists to the ground. That the terrorists are now also killing Muslims does not in any way mask the potent danger which they pose to human lives and property.

  • Fayose’s inaugural acrobatics

    It was perhaps predictable that the inauguration of Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose on October 16 would feature acrobatic stunts, especially by the new helmsman who lived up to his reputation for attention-grabbing and self-projecting performance. In the countdown to the swearing-in, following his controversial electoral victory in June, it was a drama of claims and counter-claims by his critics and supporters about what is to be expected when he eventually takes up the reins of office.

    Interestingly, Fayose gave a useful insight into what to expect from him this time, eight years after he first governed the state from May 2003 to October 2006 when his four-year term was aborted by his impeachment and removal. To start with, Fayose may pay more attention   to the metaphysical these days, given his expressed intention on the eve of the inaugural ceremony. He reportedly said, during a programme on the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA), Ado-Ekiti: “I am expecting all clerics. They would first be at the Government House to carry out a thorough spiritual cleansing before we enter the building.” He continued: “Even if they are up to 1,000, they are all welcome for the cleansing. But anyone who is not sure of his calling shouldn’t come. They would be in front, we shall follow them. Our men of God would use the power of prayer to conquer all evil.”

    With such a symbolic beginning, it won’t be surprising if Fayose should expand the focus and scope of the so-called “thorough spiritual cleansing” to include the state’s 16 local government areas, given that his predecessor, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, must have stepped on their soil during his time in the saddle and may have made them “impure”.

    This spiritual dimension introduces a fascinating and thought-provoking perspective that deserves contemplation. Such thinking, particularly in the context of a high political office like the position of governor, may unfortunately encourage a socially unhelpful approach to the spiritualisation of politics and governance, which, in itself, is not negative. Indeed, it would probably be a positive development if more of the country’s political leaders should be guided by values that transcend the worldly and materialistic, for such orientation may likely prompt a greater concentration on possibly the overriding governmental purpose, which is “the greatest happiness of the greatest number”.

    It is noteworthy that Fayose did not clarify the religious platform of the clerics expected to perform the decontamination, whether they would be exclusively Christians because he is a Christian, or whether the spiritual cleansers would include priests of other faiths, for instance, Islam and indigenous religions. This  highlights the spreading problem of religionised politics and governance in the country; and it should be disturbing that Fayose may be about to infect Ekiti State with the virus. Furthermore, if his words, “all clerics”, meant unrestricted inclusiveness, does this suggest that, when it comes to religion, his administration would be disinterested?

    There is an aspect of this planned cleansing that fundamentally mirrors Fayose’s concept of governance. It is the implication of money, which the participants are likely to be paid in return for their services; or to put it euphemistically, which they will probably be offered for their prayers. Such reward, after all, is what Fayose’s buzzword is all about : “stomach infrastructure”.

    It is instructive to note that among the first appointments Fayose announced is the “personal adviser to the governor on special duties and stomach infrastructure”, which has helped in defining not only the seriousness he brings to the funny phrase, but also his thinking on good governance. In his inaugural address, he said: “I have forgiven Ekiti for removing me unjustly and I declare peace, prosperity, progress, employment, food, and stomach infrastructure. You can put tar on the road but if I don’t have a car and I’m hungry, then that tar is meaningless. Tarring our road is wonderful but putting food inside this stomach is very important.”  He added: “Already, I am grooming your chicken for Christmas. I am getting your rice ready to do stomach infrastructure. When I defeated them, they said it was as a result of stomach infrastructure. I will banish hunger in your midst. I will work hard to put food on your table.”

    This inaugural address is a study in self-definition, and even self-clarification. The governor’s effort in making sure that nothing is perhaps left to the imagination in the presentation of his personality must be commended. At least, it gives the people standards to judge him by, never mind if the standards bespeak pedestrianism.

    Fayose, who is 53 years old, said: “They want me to look like the governor of their imagination but I am governor of your own imagination, the governor that eats boli (roasted plantain) with you, the governor that drinks agbo jedi (local herbal mixture) with you, the governor that knows that the resources of this state belong to you.” He went on: “When I come to buy boli tomorrow, I will drop something. I will look after you. They are too clean in their own eyes to go to the jedi sector and that is why you voted them out. Whether they call it stomach infrastructure, it is their business, because I am going to appoint a special adviser for stomach infrastructure.”

    As things stand, Fayose would need to continue to eat boli and drink jedi as a way of socialising; and he would also have to “drop something”, that is, pay far more for them than they are worth in order to make the street vendors happy and demonstrate that he is a “good governor”. It is relevant to wonder what might happen when boli is out of season. Maybe Fayose would then switch to agbado yiyan (roasted corn).  Or isu yiyan (roasted yam).  So, he is likely to continually make seasonal changes in his eating habits to show that he is, as they say, “a grassroots politician”.

    Certainly, it would have been out of character if Fayose had not seized the moment for self-glorification. He said: “By the grace of God, I am the first son of Ekiti to be governor here twice and the first Nigerian politician to defeat two incumbents and all former governors of this state that have served at one point or the other.” Congratulations, Your Excellency!

  • Fayose versus Fayemi versus Maths

    Fayose versus Fayemi versus Maths

    After all his rhetorics at his swearing in, Governor Ayo Fayose said his predecessor, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, left a debt of N84 billion. Fayemi responded through his former Information Commissioner Tayo Ekundayo that it was not right. Ekundayo said the debt was far less. Explaining that of the N25 billion bond, N14 billion has been paid, he urged the new governor to look at the handover notes and figures before bellowing falsehood to the world.

    Hmm! So what is the story? Is it that Fayose does not understand maths? Or is it that Fayemi wants to deny his debt? If it amounted to N84 billion, we never knew that any such loans were taken unless he took them in secret, and such loans are never done in secret. They are matters of public record. Fayose has the opportunity to unveil the documents to the public now. Or it will be assumed that he wants to acquire N84 billion in debt to buy rice and stew for Christmas in furtherance of his stomach infrastructure policy. God so kind, he has appointed an office of stomach infrastructure. If he does not unveil the debt clearly, then he will be involved in what is called fuzzy math.

  • The rabble or the law

    The rabble or the law

    The cliché that one day is eternity in politics did not only happen in Adamawa State, it may be the Adam of things to come in the country. It reinforces the topsy-turvy of the polity. Heroes emerge in a climate of corruption. Startled stalwarts turn their assured strides into pussyfooting.

    Now, we know that barring another judicial jolt, Murtala Nyako has been yanked off the throne. Umaru Fintiri is finito. Bala Ngilari is the eagle landing.

    Where are the Ribadu sweepstakes for 2015? Whither Buba Marwa? The man rejected is now the head of the corner. Ngilari swished out of the shadows to become the lodestar. The humiliated has become the illuminated. Beware of the ides of the court.

    So, the Adamawa drama reflects what can go right in this polity when we follow law and order, when individuals count for nothing except under the spell of the grundnorm of political behaviour: the constitution.

    The Justice Ademola Adeniyi verdict is a city set on a hill. Fintiri and Ngilari are PDP. But Ngilari was their forbidden son thrust into outer darkness. Justice flushed him back as the Joseph of the city.

    But travel many miles south, we see the flip side. In Ekiti State, rapine replaced respect. A court judge was harassed by loyalists of a governor-elect. In the same country where a court rules to uphold decency, miscreants in the vanguard of a politician of so-called grassroots affinity turned the hallowed precincts of justice upside down. It became the beehive of bullying, raw chants, barbarous dances, mauling, shirt tearing. A riot of the earthy. Dark and Macabre. This is what playwright T.S. Eliot called Murder in the Cathedral, the violation of what is otherwise called sacred.

    The capstone of this absurdity is that the court is shut down. The reason: to stop any adjudication until governor-elect Ayo Fayose is sworn in. Fayose is believed to be afraid that the court may nullify his candidacy and thereby fail to become governor. This is a gangster approach to justice.

    We should not forget that this logic featured in the same Adamawa of today’s justice. A martial air of jackboots and brooding guns pervaded Nyako’s impeachment process. Armed men besieged the premises of the courts and home of the judge. Ngilari was forced to write a letter of resignation. The then speaker, Fintiri, was the head as Nyako and Ngilari spun in the headwind. With Nyako yanked off, Fintiri swaggered into Abuja to tell his masters that he had delivered. His masters said thank you faithful servant but we want somebody else as governor. Fintiri fumed. He was now governor with a lot of power and hand in the cookie jar. His masters flinched and said he should stay in office till 2015. Ribadu or other favorite sons would wait to replace him. That was an agreement. The court judgment has denied us the drama to come. Would Fintiri have played Jonathan with them and denied any agreement?

    Fintiri sat pretty, peacock-style on the throne. Then Festus Keyamo struck as Justice Adeniyi weighed in on the side of the law. In Adamawa, the rule of law has prevailed, at least for now.

    We cannot have democracy unless we respect the law of the land. In Adamawa, Ngilari claims he was coerced to write a letter of resignation. Imagine that Nyako was coerced to receive it. Even the law may not have saved Ngilari. Justice would have cried impotent in the Nigerian wilderness. But Fintiri and his cohorts were so sure in their perfidy because they thought they were law unto themselves. We are fortunate for their folly.

    Yet the political behaviour of the elite in both instances leaves much to be desired. It was not just a PDP errancy. The APC crouched in the sidelines to take advantage. Atiku Abubakar fished in the stormy waters.

    Power in the raw beclouded a search for decency. The principle of the separation of powers triumphed in Adamawa. That principle is at stake in Ekiti. It is because our politicians love the Greek philosopher Meno, who postulated that might is right. But for these politicians, they love to subject the state under their manipulative duress. They forget that two things make democracy work, the rule of law and the will of the people. It is not might that makes right. Right makes might. Or else we shall have, as is emerging in Ekiti, a Hobbesian law of nature where life is “nasty, brutish and short”.

    The concept of the balance of power inspired Montesquieu to prescribe separation of powers first implemented by the United States. It was to avoid hubris, where the executive usurps the judiciary. That is what we are witnessing in Ekiti. The president should not turn this democracy into a gangster enclave where the gang is star. Where powerful men trump the law, we have what Hobbes describes as the “war of all against all”. In that case, Hobbes says, “the law of nature and the law of nations are the same”. Episodes like that destroy democracy.

    But Fayose can say he is right. The people have voted for him. True enough. But the law that made the elections also made the courts. The concept of the rule of law is to check even the excess and barbarian instincts of democracy. That was the misinterpretation of Rousseau’s The Social Contract when he called for the supremacy of the “collective will”. It detonated the French Revolution that burned France, ended in the Napoleonic orgies around Europe and installed one-man rule instead of popular government.

    In Ekiti, Fayose’s rabble is in the throes of installing a first in Nigerian politics. On a raft of the rabble, he now has a society of thugs. If he continues with them into the state house, Ekiti will turn its society of thugs into a state of thugs, thereby enthroning the savage virtues of the street.Then might becomes right. That was how Hitler’s rabble rose. This column is not saying Fayose has the sophistication or organisation or intent of the Nazi party. But he has a grain of it to the extent that he works with a rabble.

    In his book, Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, Alan Bullock lamented when Hitler became Furher. He wrote that a street gang had taken over the most powerful country in the world.

    Fayose should decide whether he will subject himself to the law or subject the law to himself. Louis the 14th once said, “I am the state.” He said it in the age of absolutism, or the divine rights of kings. Yet long before him, the man who framed the French State, the great Cardinal De Richelieu, noted that the state is bigger than anyone, including the king. When the state is bigger than anyone, the rule of law prevails. When persons privatise power, might becomes right.

    The Adamawa verdict affirmed the rule of law. Now, in Ekiti, is it the rabble or the law?

  • Shekau: A reality check

    What’s in a name? Its significance is perhaps demonstrated by the recently reported but unclear killing of Abubakar Shekau, the commander-in-chief of the terroristic Islamist militia Boko Haram.  In a reflection of the haziness that has reigned since his death was first announced in August last year, the latest news of the killing of a terrorist by that name heightened the confusion. Was he killed a second time?

    Interestingly, the uncertainty was complicated by the release of a 36-minute video in which a figure claiming to be Shekau said: “Here I am, alive. I will only die the day Allah takes away my breath.” He also declared: “Nothing will kill me until my days are over…Some people asked you if Shekau has two souls. No, I have one soul, by Allah.”

    Compounding the drama is the intriguingly unresolved question as to whether Shekau’s soul goes marching on as indicated by the video. Although the Defence Headquarters (DHQ), in a statement, shot down the appearance and utterances of the character in the video, it nevertheless  left a sufficient margin for the invalidity of its own position, even if unintentionally. The DHQ said: “The Defence Headquarters is studying the claims made in the video purportedly released by the terrorists showing their leader Abubakar Shekau as dismissing his death.”

    It is relevant to highlight the puzzling contradictions by considering the background to the denial of death. The initial affirmative answer by DHQ spokesman Major-Gen Chris Olukolade to the question of Shekau’s death did not fully settle the issue. According to his statement, “The troops captured some of the terrorists and their equipment. In the course of those encounters, one Mohammed Bashir, who has been acting or posing on videos as the deceased Abubakar Shekau, the eccentric character known as leader of the group, died.”

    However, it would seem that things may not be so clear.  It is curious that a similar claim by the Cameroonian Army, supported by images, gave the credit to that country’s soldiers who reportedly carried out a cross-border raid inside Nigeria where they killed Shekau in an aerial bombardment of his hideout.

    Either way, ignoring the contentious circumstances, the death of the Boko Haram leader should reassure the troubled public that the country’s military may be winning the terror war after all, despite mounting criticisms of its alleged operational minuses. But the matter may not be that simple.

    It is noteworthy that Olukolade said: “The name Shekau has become a brand name for the terrorists’ leader”.  He also gave an insight into the multiple identities of the rebel who was allegedly killed, saying, “On restoring normalcy after the encounter, inhabitants of the community who were victims of terrorists’ activities corroborated the information on the identity of Bashir Mohammed, alias Abubakar Shekau, alias Abacha Abdulahi, alias Damasack etc.”

    The commonsensical implication of the alleged use of the name for branding purposes is that another so-called “fake Shekau” may emerge from the ashes of the previous ones, with the scary suggestion of continuity. Certainly, it would be unreasonably optimistic and a grave error for the military to interpret the claimed death of this particular Shekau as a definitive victory over Boko Haram. The anti-terror campaign just cannot afford complacency, even if it is true that the terrorists lost their chief, according to the DHQ, “in the Konduga battle in September.”

    Such a situation should be a setback for the insurgents, and it ought to be exploited maximally by the military, which means that the force must seriously address every possible hindrance, especially issues related to the effective equipping of the fighters and their welfare. In this connection, the point must be emphasised that the intervention of Cameroonian troops, to the extent that their involvement possibly affected the believability of  the reported killing of  the Shekau in question, leaves a great deal to be desired.

    The country must emphatically reclaim its capacity to defend its territory, and this certainly cannot be achieved through spin doctors who continue to paint a bright picture of a systematic weakening of the enemies without convincing evidence. It is worth mentioning that news of the killing of the rebel leader was accompanied by a claim that 135 Boko Haram terrorists were either captured or surrendered in Yobe and Adamawa states. Figures of captives or those who have surrendered will have to translate into a clear progressive crushing of the terrorists for any meaningful result.

    News of a proposed recruitment of members of the Civilian JTF, a volunteer group of locals, into special security forces in furtherance of the war on terror suggests that the Goodluck Jonathan presidency may be expanding its approach to the long-running terror-related security challenge in the country’s Northeast, which the imposition of a limited emergency rule has done little to arrest.

    As things stand, with Boko Haram having responded formally to the alleged killing of its leader through an apparent disproof, it remains to be seen what turn its terrorism would take and the consequences. It is noteworthy that in the last two months particularly, the terrorists appeared to have reimagined the execution of their five-year-old violent campaign, ostensibly for an Islamic territory, and have embarked upon a determined seizure of space, in addition to the frighteningly familiar bombings, raids and kidnappings.  The military must be prepared.

    It is fascinating that the claim and counterclaim related to Shekau’s existence illustrate the potency of the name. In this case, while the military probably hoped to project state capacity by taking credit for the alleged killing, Boko Haram possibly intended to present a picture of invincibility by discrediting the claimed killing. In a profound sense, there is a clash over the name Shekau.

    Indeed, Olukolade defined the weight of the name, from the military’s perspective, saying, “Since the name Shekau has become a brand name for the terrorists’ leader, the Nigerian military remains resolute to serve justice to anyone who assumes that designation or title as well as all terrorists that seek to violate the freedom and territory of Nigeria.”  On the other hand, the suggestion that Boko Haram may be interested in sustaining the name by using others to carry the identity indicates its value to the terrorists.

    However, in the final analysis, the battle is beyond the Shekau brand, and not to recognise this reality would amount to a trivialisation of the confrontation with evil. Whether Shekau is dead or alive is not as important as restoring peace.

  • Adamawa’s botched by-election

    The feverish preparations for last Saturday’s governorship bye-election in Adamawa state came to an abrupt end with the swearing-in of former deputy governor, Bala James Ngilari as the new substantive governor.

    An Abuja Federal High Court had in a suit between Ngilari, the speaker of the state House of Assembly and five others ruled that the former deputy governor did not resign properly from his office following the impeachment of Governor Murtala Nyako a few months ago. The court therefore ordered the acting governor, Umar Ahmadu Fintiri to quit the seat while Ngilari be sworn-in immediately.

    The court further ordered the Independent National Electoral Commission INEC to halt last Saturday’s bye-election in that state. With these ruling, that election was put off even as Fintiri reportedly appealed the judgment.

    Expectedly, the turn of events has jolted many especially stakeholders in Adamawa politics. This is more so as it came barely three days to the conduct of the bye-election which the Peoples Democratic Party PDP and the All Progressives Congress APC would have used to test their strength. The development has come to mean so many things for so many people depending on the prism from which it is being viewed.  Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and presidential aspirant of the APC saw the verdict as a temporary delay of the overwhelming desire of the people of the state to vote out the PDP government. While accepting the verdict, he saw it as nothing than postponing the doomsday for the PDP.

    Even within the PDP, the development has come with some discomfort. This is palpable from the reaction of the party through its National Publicity Secretary, Olisa Metuh. He had urged the new governor to maintain the balance in the party. Fintiri is equally uncomfortable with the situation and has vowed through his lawyer to press on to reverse the swearing-in of Ngilari. The PDP is also not certain of Ngilari’s direction given the turn of events and their earlier preferences for Fintiri.

    In spite of all this, the PDP is not worse off following Ngilari’s ascendancy since he remains a member of that party. In a way therefore, the party has turned out as the eventual beneficiary of the verdict even as Fintiri is one of theirs. The party is the eventual beneficiary because the outcome of the bye-election could have gone in either direction. Since nobody could say for certain which party was going to emerge victorious, a situation that brought back the former deputy governor is still of advantage to the PDP despite their differences with him.

    One other moot issue arising from the verdict is the hurried swearing-in of the beneficiary even when the judgment has been appealed. This is bound to raise questions. Issues could be raised as to why the swearing-in could not wait for the appeal to run its full course. Fintiri’s counsel Bayo Ojo has faulted the swearing-in arguing that the “implication of the appeal is that the order of the court cannot be complied with until the appeal process is disposed of. This is to forestall a situation where a fait accompli will be foisted on the appeal court”

    At things stand, we are yet to hear the last on the matter unless the PDP persuades Fintiri to drop the appeal.

    No doubt, the verdict took the people of Adamawa by surprise and made a mess of all the preparations and investments the various contenders ploughed into their campaign. It must have shattered dreams; dashed ambitions and left with it, trails of woes.  The larger effects on political calculations in the state will linger for sometime to come.

    Above all, it has saved INEC the burden of conducting election in one of the states that has been the epicentre of the Boko Haram insurgency; a state that has for the third time been under a state of emergency. It has denied the commission the relevant experience it would have called into action in managing elections in the more volatile Borno and Yobe states. That experience has been lost at least for now.

    The commission had come out last week with the information that elections would not hold in two local governments most susceptible to terrorism attacks. It would have been a worthy experience seeing how that will play out. It would have also been rewarding to witness the responses of the insurgents on the election day. Even for the areas where the election was billed to hold, it would have been a test case for the impact of the insecurity on voters’ turn-out. All these have been lost with the cancellation of Saturday’s bye-election.

    Adamawa is a multi-religious, multi-ethnic and multi-lingual society where adroit political balances play a major role in determining who occupies what office. We saw this at play prior to the ascendancy of Fintiri as the acting governor. We are also witnesses to the zoning arrangements the ruling party put in place for the 2015 elections. These are bound to be altered by the court verdict and Ngilari’s triumph.

    The controversy surrounding the purported resignation of Ngilari was all part of the complex dynamics of the plural politics of that state. The main issue then was his religion. He had to be traded off in a controversial or stage managed resignation to garner the support of the assembly men to impeach Nyako.

    But all that have come to naught following his victory at the court and eventual swearing-in.  Apparently conscious of the political coloration of that state, Ngilari has promised an open and transparent government. He has called on the people of the state to “rise above primordial differences of religion, ethnicity and political affiliation” pledging to “address our challenges which are not limited to general security, poverty, hunger, reconciliation and disease”

    One thing that appears certain is that he will have to contend with the task of reconciling the contending tendencies in the state. The state is sharply divided now and his ascendancy may not go down well with some bigots. He must work hard to prove that primordial predilections are only veritable tools exploited by the elite to exploit the masses.

    For a great majority of the people, it matters little who is there provided they are made to benefit from the mandate which leaders exercise. He would have made a big difference by the way the benefits of governance are felt in all the nooks and crannies of the state. Time is not in his favour as he will be saddled with events leading to the 2015 elections.

    He can still make his mark even with the limited time he has. The way he perceives his assignment which he has attributed to God will make the difference. For now, his triumph has diffused the political heat which last Saturday’s election was bound to generate.

  • Enugu’s troubled consensus

    A contradiction is playing out in Enugu State following the adoption of a serving member of the House of Representatives, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi as the governorship consensus candidate of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the coming elections. Reports had it that Ugwuanyi’s emergence was the outcome of a stakeholders meeting convened by Governor Sullivan Chime for all governorship aspirants from Enugu North senatorial district where the governorship was zoned. In that meeting, many of the aspirants were said to have stepped down for Ugwuanyi culminating in the adoption of a motion to have him as the sole candidate of the party in the 2015 elections.

    But the matter did not go down well with one of the leading aspirants and Senate’s works committee chairman, Ayogu Eze who was also at the meeting where the consensus was purportedly arrived at. Eze has alleged that he was invited to the meeting without being privy of its agenda and questioned the process that threw up the so-called consensus candidate. He had contended that the meeting was arranged to produce a pre-determined outcome leaving other aspirants without any choice and vowed to pursue his governorship ambition to its logical conclusion.

    Eze further questioned the democratic credentials of such a kangaroo arrangement that did not seek the views of all the aspirants before the final decision was taken.

    Since then, accusations have been levied from the camps of those opposed to the consensus arrangement and its supporters. A pressure group in the state condemned it on the grounds that it is a “desecration of democratic norms and internal democracy”.

    But some others have sought to fault Eze arguing that the process was democratic as it is in tandem with the PDP constitution 2012, as amended. One of such persons was Justina Eze, a member of the Board of Trustees BOT of the party. The BOT member feared that the chances of the zone producing the governor could be imperiled if Senator Eze continues to vilify the process leading to the consensus.

    As things stand, the Enugu East caucus of the party has also in a meeting at Government House endorsed Ugwuanyi as the consensus candidate with the West senatorial zone about to cue in. Despite the issues raised by Eze, all indications are that Ugwuanyi’s adoption is a fait accompli. It does not appear there is much Eze can do as Chime who is driving the process will likely have his way given the much abused incumbency factor. Soon, we may begin to see all manner of hurdles placed on the road to the ambition of Eze for daring to challenge the decision of the incumbent.

    But the issues that have been thrown up by this singular exercise cannot be wished away despite whatever merits there is in the consensus option.

    Inherent in them are posers as to the justification for a consensus contrivance that does not really offer any choice to other candidates because the processes leading to it were shrouded in secrecy. To what extent then can we rightly argue that such an option approximates the pristine tenets of representative democracy when it is deliberately manipulated to produce a known outcome?

    It would appear that is the point Eze is making. He does not seem to be against consensus as a policy. He is not particularly against Ugwuanyi as a person. He is against the absence of rigorous negotiations before the meeting where Ugwuanyi was adopted was convened. Had such discussions been in motion and invitees to the meeting told its agenda, the current controversy would have been minimized.

    It would appear to me that the senator reacted the way he did because the decision took him unawares. He may have put in so much in the pursuit of his ambition with high hopes to sail through. He may also have made plans the next day for the same purpose. For such an aspirant to attend a seemingly innocuous meeting, only to have his ambition dashed in one fell swoop is definitely bound to ruffle shoulders. His predicament should be appreciated. What it has brought to the fore, is the conflict we trigger off when we abridge that freedom of choice that stands out democracy as the most admired form of governance framework. It is for the same reason that some people constantly pick holes with the issue of zoning.

    Before now, we have been told of the array of choices which democracy promotes. If it is executed in its pure form, it will have no room for the contrived consensus that was the outcome of the Enugu North caucus meeting. It will also not admit the zoning of the governorship position to that zone. Zoning and the consensus option have their limitations when democracy is conceived in its pure form. But they are not entirely out of place within the democratic process. The issue is not just a rejection of consensus or zoning, but the logic, fairness and equity of the processes that produce them.

    The raging controversy in the Enugu case should be seen in this light. It is not a vote of no confidence in those options but a demand for them not to be turned into a tool by those in authority to subvert the collective will of the people. After all, Eze accepted the zoning of the governorship slot to the north without raising eyebrows. His opponents may finger a contradiction in his accepting zoning with one hand and rejecting consensus with the other. They may also raise questions regarding his silence when the two other zones were shunted out of the governorship race just to allow the north which has not had a shot at it take their turn. That issue can be raised. And the argument can go on and on. But the fact that the zoning of the governorship post to the north commanded general acceptance showed it was considered fair and equitable. There was sufficient evidence to support such a proposition. Same was not the case with the consensus option. The process ought to have been preceded by weeks of negotiations among the aspirants and their leaders. Apart from preparing their minds that primaries are likely to be streamlined, it will save them the energy and huge expenditure that have become part and parcel of electioneering campaigns on these shores.

    Moreover, if all of them had been taken into confidence, those who considered their chances slim, may have chickened out of the race leaving the most serious ones who can then be engaged in the consensus discussions.

    It is true that consensus may not satisfy all, just as direct primaries will leave a lot of casualties in its trail. But serious efforts must be made to build such consensus in both word and deed. We cannot build consensus when a behemoth somewhere sits in his bedroom and decrees his anointed person as the candidate. That is the issue that played out in the Enugu case. And that is why it is generating so much heat. Chime may have his way after all. But those whose ambitions he dashed in that abrupt manner are also within their rights to impugn the process.

  • As Dimgba departs

    As Dimgba departs

    “live all you can; it’s a mistake not to. It doesn’t so much matter what you do in particular so long as you have your life. If you haven’t had that what have you had? … I haven’t done so enough before—and now I’m too old; too old at any rate for what I see. … What one loses one loses; make no mistake about that. … Still, we have the illusion of freedom; therefore don’t be, like me, without the memory of that illusion. I was either, at the right time, too stupid or too intelligent to have it; I don’t quite know which. Of course at present I’m a case of reaction against the mistake. … Do what you like so long as you don’t make my mistake. For it was a mistake. Live!” – Henry James

    One afternoon in 1997, I walked into Mike Awoyinfa’s office and it was not the clatter of his type writer that ushered me in. Nor his familiar voice calling out for a copy. The air collapsed under an aroma. Before my eyes caught him as I stood on the threshold of his door, I wondered aloud. Who had turned the office of the Weekend Concord into a kitchen of rare delicacy?

    When I saw Mike, he was crouching in furious enjoyment over a plate. Pounded yam and what?

    “It’s Igbo soup,” he said between swallow-fulls. I was evidently an unwelcome guest in his hour of union between palate and plate.

    “Ask Dimgba,” he commanded. I was already hungry. I went out and asked Dimgba whose palate was also talking to plate.

    “It’s oha soup,” said Dimgba Igwe. It was my induction to that Igbo delicacy, but it was also a moment in national unity. Mike did not know the name of the soup. But he tried it because his friend, Dimbga, an Igbo man, ordered it. He also ordered it, and enjoyed it. Theirs was not a culinary union. It was a union of hearts that transcended tribe, history, family. They were twins by soul.

    “We are birds of different colours,” crooned Mike at the service of songs held for him at the Evangel Pentecostal Church on October 4. But they flocked together in stunning harmony in a friendship that lasted 30 years. It had the potential of another 20-year run if the impetuous madness of a car driver had not ended Dimgba’s life while jogging on September 6.

    Those of us who witnessed the friendship of Mike and Dimgba saw a mini-Nigeria. Tongues and tribes did not differ. In a corporate life where heads and deputies often did not agree, they were an alloy. The chemistry was unlikely given the trajectory of a larger Nigeria. I witnessed this unfolding, and it never occurred to me or anyone I knew that there was any tension, any suggestion that anything could bring them apart. Ordinarily, anyone who wrote such a script would be tagged a dreamer. Mike a free spirit. Dimgba a contained personality. Mike a lover of the social tempers of the day, such as music, drama, Sina Peters, etc. Dimgba in thrall of gospel music. Mike of the outdoors. Dimgba a home buddy. Mike a poet. Dimgba a word processor. Mike the adventurous. Dimgba the cautionary tale. Mike a Yoruba man. Dimgba an Igbo man. Their paths tracked in the opposite.

    Their friendship did not make Dimgba less an Igbo man or Mike less a Yoruba man. It only made them more Nigerian. But reality trumped imagination. Anyone who anticipated tension at the beginning now rooted for them. But they did not need anyone’s prayers. They were always together, in Lagos, in London, in the New York, in Germany.

    “It is not as if we did not quarrel,” Mike announced at the service of songs to a hall packed with media icons. Doyin Abiola. Sam Amuka. Ray Ekpu.  Dan Agbese. Nduka Irabor. Etc. He referred to his jeans affection. Dimgba did not like jeans. He was always formally dolled up. He recalled an occasion when the even-tempered governor of Delta State was looking for them. Governor Emmanuel Uduaghan did not see Mike but noticed Dimgba. According to Mike, Dimgba poked fun at him afterwards, saying how could the governor have noticed him when he was dressed like a mechanic? Ditto when they travelled business class when his sartorial humility was out of sync with others. Or when they drove to a fuel station and Mike would not want to pay for petrol, and Dimgba poked at the “Ijebu man.”

    Dimgba alone could reel out a biography of Mike at his 60th birthday. Affectionate and unflattering, it was executed with the candour of a brother. Dimgba trusted him saying he could leave everything in Mike’s hands and “go to sleep.”

    New Telegraph Managing Director Eric Osagie and I saw them in their Weekend Concord days as a study of human harmony. Osagie worked under them. I wrote a regular column. In fact, Mike was the first person to believe in me as a columnist and made me write every week based on the day’s cover story. Dimbga was the one that enforced the discipline. Dimgba also made the point of getting me paid for it.

    “Would you take your column to your landlord at the end of the month?” quipped Dimgba.

    Eric and I saw how Dimgba made Mike shine. Mike was impulsive as Dimgba was the stabiliser. Mike bubbled with ideas but the technocrat in Dimbga delivered the goods. Mike wanted to work for money but Dimgba knew how to turn it into bread and butter. They played without jealousy or envy. That is why private and work life merged.

    Their homes are next to each other, and there is no fence. Between this Yoruba man and this Igbo there is no barrier. That is the trust we do not have in the real world. Mike lamented that when he fainted on a Paris street years ago, Dimgba revived him. But he was not around for his friend when death visited him on a Nigerian road. He was out of the country.

    The church launched a trust fund for Dimgba’s family, his wife, boys and girls. All the governors and the president ought to deposit something handsome now into that purse before their attentions move away as humans do. Dimgba was a special journalist.

    Mike also now carries the burden of both families. It was evident when Dimgba’s son, Chinazam, paid tribute to his father. He broke into tears, especially when he said the hit-and-run driver “killed a legend, but not his legacy”. Mike put his arms around him like a fatherin consolation.

    He also nodded in approval as Dimgba’s daughter, Victory, rendered a song of plaintive power for her dad. Victory’s voice, kinetic and electric, is a talent that must be nurtured to stardom.

    But he also lived a good life and enjoyed it. Mike spoke about their travels, how in Helsinki he exulted at Sibelius Monument in honour of the composer Jean Sibelius, whose song inspired the Biafran anthem. In Egypt they saw Pharaoh’s tomb where Dimgba mused on the vanity of power. In Israel at River Jordan and how now he regrets turning down Dimgba’s offer to baptise him.

    Dimgba lived his life well in tune with Henry James’ advice in The Ambassadors: “Live all you can.” Dimgba did.

     

     Giving unto Caesar what is God’s

    The leadership of the Anglican Church gave a political award to President Goodluck Jonathan last week. They called it the Primatial Award for Excellence in Christian Stewardship. It is a shame that an offshoot of the Church of England could stoop so low to give an award that has no bearing in the Bible. What has the president done to warrant the citation that he has distributed Nigeria’s resources equitably to all Nigerians. What Nigerians. They also mentioned Al majiri. Almajiri school is not going to solve the boy or girl education in the North. In fact, it will become a term of derision and discrimination in future. Do schools for all. Such tokens are no virtue. There are more almajiri than the schools can take. Where did Nicholas Okoh and his errant clergymen get their statistics of equity from? They were playing the politics of religion at a time that the Nigerian church is under a moral attack. With all the corruption story around this presidency? They gave Caesar what belongs to God, or stellar men of God in our midst.

  • Ameyo’s apparition and Amosun’s ecstasy

    It is imaginable that she was an unseen presence at the show, and possibly other ethereal beings were in attendance.  “Why not now?” she might have wondered.  Those in a position to answer the question could easily have acted in a way that would have made the poser out of the question. But because they didn’t, the September 29 National Honours’ investiture seemed like an event that had lost its soul and had become soulless; these two conditions may not be the same.

    Speaking of souls, particularly the souls of the dead, perhaps such apparitions were at the venue, International Conference Centre, Abuja, just to see the spectacle organised by the living dead.  Or is there a better description for those who are biologically alive but morally dead?

    The celebration of deadened consciousness, which the event projected on account of glaring and jarring omissions in the list of awardees, represented yet another instance of institutional insensitivity. In this specific case, the institution is no other than the country’s presidency, or more precisely, the Goodluck Jonathan administration.

    It would take a phenomenal leap of the imagination to grasp the administration’s tactless treatment of the memory of those who recently paid the ultimate price and made a supreme sacrifice for the country. It would probably be more appropriate to call it an egregious insult which the departed do not deserve.

    What is even more unacceptably unthinking and unfeeling is the brusque defence by Dr Doyin Okupe, Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs to President Jonathan, who reportedly said via his Twitter account that the national honours were not given posthumously.  It is instructive that between September 19 when the full list of awardees was publicised and September 29 when they were decorated, there were loud calls from concerned quarters highlighting the nauseating exclusion.

    Two of such wake-up calls will suffice. The Chairman, Nigeria Medical Association (NMA), Cross River State chapter, Dr. Callistus Enyuma, said: “One would expect that she should not be neglected when honours are given. I believe it is not too late for her to be included on the honours’ list. She must have that honour.” Next, the President of Jojaina Deck of the National Association of Seadogs, Mr. Fabian Avoh, said: “Let us ask the Federal Government or precisely the presidency what yardstick was used in including all sorts of people on the list of the highest honour in the land when Adadevoh, who sacrificed her life, was not on the list.”

    In a reasonable context, the inclusion of Dr. Ameyo Stella Adadevoh who died on August 19 should have been beyond question, even if by way of special mention at the event and by immortalising her.  She was the most prominent among the country’s health care workers who died of Ebola Virus Disease (EVD) after contracting it from the Liberian- American Patrick Sawyer who brought it into the country and died from it on July 25. It is noteworthy that the Lagos State Commissioner for Health, Dr. Jide Idris, said of her role: “She it was who took the initiative to intimate the ministry concerning the index case; and substantially to her credit, the moderate containment achieved we owe to her and her colleagues.” There is no doubt that the professional intervention of Adadevoh and others arrested the possibility of a wide-spread dispersal of the deadly virus. The Jonathan administration must be suffering from inattentional blindness.

    Even more intriguing is the likelihood that the government may also be afflicted with complicated confusion. Two days after the disquieting silence on the EVD-related deaths of health care personnel who worked at First Consultants Medical Centre, Obalende, Lagos, Jonathan referred to the tragedies superficially. He said in his October 1 address on the country’s 54th Independence Day: “I appreciate and welcome the spirit of collaboration, unity and partnership with which we confronted the threat of the Ebola Virus Disease. I thank all Nigerians for working together to prevent what could have become a major epidemic. I particularly thank the medical personnel, some of whom paid the ultimate sacrifice.” Could this be interpreted as thanking the dead for dying?   What a way to reward heroic self-sacrifice!

    Interestingly, Jonathan’s idea of reward seemed suspect, if not mischievous, especially in connection with three personalities who made this year’s national honours’ list of 305 awardees: the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC) and a former governor of Edo State, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun; the Ogun State Governor, Senator Ibikunle Amosun; and the Ekiti State Governor, Dr. Kayode Fayemi, who is on his way out, having lost controversially in the June governorship election to Ayo Fayose of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party(PDP) . Considering that the men are members of the APC, the intensely critical opposition party with a strong ambition to rule the country, their inclusion may have been no more than a wily attempt to present the Jonathan administration and the PDP as perhaps dispassionate and uninfluenced by zero-sum mentality. They were given the title, Commander of the Order of the Niger (CON).

    It is food for thought that these particular honourees, who could have exploited the publicity opportunity to further rubbish the administration and what it stands for by maintaining a respectable distance, chose the path of counter-productive accommodation. Odigie-Oyegun was represented at the ceremony. Fayemi, rather than be in Abuja to receive the national honour, attended the opening ceremony of the Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi Centre for Gender and Social Policy Studies donated by his wife to the Obafemi Awolwo University, Ile-Ife, Osun State. He was quoted as saying: “It is thus at great cost that I am here in demonstration of my dedication to a worthy cause. Nothing can be more important than this. The CON can be posted to me by courier, but nobody can post this to me.”  In both cases, there was a sufficient indication of acceptance.

    Amosun surpassed them by displaying a petty ecstasy. Not only did he attend the investiture, he apparently got carried away. Listen to him: “When you are given an award like this, you are honoured; it is a call for more service. It is like describing an elephant; it is from the perspective from which you are looking at it. Yes, there may be one or two misgivings about it; people will talk anyway. I think whoever is given, it is a call to serve more, render selfless service to the nation and to our different states.”

    It would appear that Amosun may not have reflected on the governmental performance of the giver. Has Jonathan himself shown a satisfactory understanding of the concept of service in political office?  Why would he desire to encourage what may be indeed alien to him? What is the subtext of this dramatic political scheming?

  • Death at the synagogue

    Apart from the festering insurgency, two other recent events have combined to constantly keep the nation in the prying eyes of the international community. These are the outbreak of the Ebola disease and collapse of a five-storey building at the Synagogue church in Lagos. Though not essentially related, both have had the net effect of taking heavy tolls on human lives and will continue to dominate public discourse for quite sometime.

    This is more so as those who lost their lives in the two incidents were both Nigerians and foreigners.

    Not unexpectedly, world attention has for the greater part of the last two months been primed within our shores. And for a country that has not been rated high in managing crisis situations, it is to be imagined the avalanche of negative reportage these would have generated.

    Surprisingly however, our leaders were able to effectively and efficiently manage the first such that no less a body than the World Health Organization (WHO) came out to score us very high.

    Though the Liberian-American, Patrick Sawyer who imported the deadly virus into the country concealed information on his lethal ailment thus exposing others to mortal danger, our health professionals moved in quickly to arrest further spread. The efficiency with which they worked, posted positive results through minimal deaths such that today, the country has been adjudged free of the virus. This is something to cheer.

    But if the handling of the Ebola outbreak was an instant success, that of the collapse of a five-storey building at the premises of the Synagogue Church of All Nations in Lagos, left much to be desired. Ironically, the synagogue was the first place of worship visited by a medical team from both the Lagos State, the federal government and the WHO to solicit the cooperation of its general overseer, Prophet T.B. Joshua not to admit Ebola patients into his premises. They had then politely told him that the virus spreads very fast and is not one of such ailments that could succumb to faith healing.

    Joshua promised to work with the team to ensure that the virus does not spread by not admitting people from the affected countries and suspending some of his healing programmes. So he was part of the story that turned out as the successful management of the Ebola outbreak in this country.

    Ironically, the same church was to turn out the theatre of a monumental calamity some weeks after through the collapse of one of its buildings. Reports had it that the building collapsed while many visitors, mainly foreigners were having their lunch. Initial reports on the suspected cause of the collapse were sketchy, but there was some convergence that the building went down while construction workers were busy adding additional structures on it.

    While many were said to have been trapped at the various floors, rescue work could not commence early as the church officials and worshippers were alleged to have prevented rescuers access to the place. Even those who would have been saved had quick response arrived, lost their lives through delays arising from the inexplicable hostility of the church officials and worshippers.

    The church was to come out some days later to allege that the collapse was as a result of terror attack by the dreaded Boko Haram insurgents. In a video clip it showed to the public, Joshua claimed a plane had hovered around the building before it finally went down. Both Lagos State and the federal governments are investigating the incident. But Lagos has had to suspend action or further comments on the incident to avoid jeopardizing the inquisition of the federal authorities.

    Before now however, the state government had made it clear that the ill-fated building was originally approved as a two-storey building. It also said it had no records that approval was given for the additional three floors which were being added when the calamity occurred.

    From all indications, the Lagos State government has clear ideas of the issue at stake being the approving authority. Without prejudice to whatever the federal government panel is doing, it is certain that its job will be incomplete without the cooperation of the host government. It is not clear how that panel intends to work. But much of the information it requires to determine the cause of the collapse are with the Lagos State government.

    It would therefore have been more rewarding to build a synergy with the host government on the matter. The way things stand, the state government does not feel it should continue with its own inquisition to avoid conflict of interests. That is why it has suspended all activities on the matter. But that is where the problem arises. At what point will the state government come into the matter again? Or will it come out with its findings after the federal panel would have unveiled its results? These are some of the posers that seem to suggest there should have been collaboration between the two levels of government.

    The type of synergy that was called into action to curtail the immediate spread of the Ebola virus ought to have formed the plank for the investigations. With such collaborative efforts, all issues relating to the unfortunate incident would be fully examined and recommendations to forestall future occurrences made.

    It is still not late for the federal authorities to expand the panel to include relevant authorities of the Lagos State government. A situation in which the state government has now been forced to stall action on the matter awaiting the federal panel is not the best approach to it.

    The issue is of immense public interest and it will be counter productive if the two governments come out with different versions.  The right thing therefore is for both parties to work together, harmonize positions and come out with a common position.

    Joshua had introduced the terrorism theory. It should be investigated. But even before its outcome is known, it would appear such a theory will definitely lack in scientific validity. This writer will stand to be proved wrong.

    Beyond these, the nation must have been heavily embarrassed that as we were still giving out the casualty figure as 44, the South African President, Jacob Zuma went public to announce that 67 of their citizens had died in the incident. That really opened up public eyes that if one single country could lose 67 people, the fatality would have been much higher. And it came to pass. That country alone lost 84 citizens.

    The blame has been placed at the door steps of the church for its hostility to rescuers. The panel must get at the root of it. Those found culpable should be made to face the full weight of the law. The South African people are so piqued by this singular incident that their youths have vowed not to allow Joshua into their country until he has accounted for their dead compatriots. They also vowed to sue him. That is a measure of the outrage the incident has generated. The world is awaiting the outcome of the findings. We must demonstrate very unambiguously that the law is no respecter of persons through appropriate punishment to identifiable culprits.