Category: Monday

  • Soluife in Anambra

    Soluife in Anambra

    Education is the seed bed of any development. Roman historian and philosopher Tacitus harped it. It is also the audacity of Awo’s vision. Today, in Anambra State, Governor Chukwuma Soludo is inking his policy on that chalkboard. His name means “follow peace.” He is doing a lot in that regard, galvanizing his fellow Igbo governors to confront unease in the region. But his education policy is the dynasty statement. If his name means follow peace, he is also following the light, or Soluife. With his distinctive voice of a broadcaster that has earned him the title of the “Boom of Anambra Orchestra,” he announced free education up to JS three. It is big step. Education, as he says, will make the son of a mechanic become a managing director. The son of a driver will not become the driver of his father’s boss. Education disrupts dynasty. Soludo is one governor bringing imagination to the service of scarce resources.

    Read Also: Subsidy removal: You are sabotaging Tinubu’s interventions, Osun APC tackles Adeleke

    It means that those who have forced their wards to hawk on streets can now swap trade for brains. Their little children will become potential points of light to illumine the future. Soludo will not shy from saying he attended public schools at the primary, secondary and university levels. He is paying back with public service.

  • OBJ’s ostentatious humility

    OBJ’s ostentatious humility

    Olusegun Obasanjo thought he could undo ewo with one dobale. He thought wrong. By bowing to the Olota of Ota he had made enough ebo or sacrifice for his sacrilege. Wrong! Yoruba purists are not having it. They saw his bow as showy, an act of ostentatious humility, a pompous eating of crow. They even saw it as strategic humility in mockery.  He was probably saying, “If you think I disrespected the obas, I take a bow. Shotan!” But it is bowing as revenge, a cynical extravaganza of the humble pie. The people have frustrated his prostration by saying no to his act.

    Read Also: How to prevent Military rule in Africa, by Ganduje

    They want words of apology, not actions, not a theatre of a man who wanted to stoop to conquer. Even the English playwright Oliver Goldsmith will laugh in his grave at this gerontocratic guile. Goldsmith might have quoted the line from his play, She Stoops to Conquer, “I find this fellow’s civilities begin to grow troublesome.” Or when OBJ’s bosom neared the floor at Ota, that “those who have most virtues in their mouths have least of it in their bosom.” The play was about a woman. It seems written for OBJ. The Yorubas are too sophisticated for such cunning. The point is that he knows. The bard Soyinka, another playwright of the absurd, entertained a cultured audience with a mockery of the mocker. If OBJ could turn his wife’s response to a lovers spat, he has kept mum on Kongi, his nemesis and neighbour.

  • Earthquake Wike

    Earthquake Wike

    When he was appointed minister, this essayist announced Nyesom Wike a third-term governor. But few knew he would carry the halo of his state of provenance to his governance of Abuja. The man enters Abuja with expectations. A town where he never passed a night in eight years as governor will now give him a bed and a pillow.

     As Mister bulldozer of FCT, some feared his first stop was Atiku’s house. No dice. Others said, First stop PDP secretariat. When last week he became earthquake Wike, neither Atiku nor PDP was looking over the rubble of their palaces. They are probably the coward in Achebe’s Things Fall Apart who is looking at the ruins of the brave man’s house from the comfort of his window.

    But those whose lands went bust had exercised the fortitude of folly. The FCT minister gave them time to update their documents. He advertised them in the newspapers, including this one. They did not heed. Wike was not a man to bait. He acted and, like dominos, big names and small fell. The roll call was breathtaking. One of the big names was Peter Obi, the mister clean who has kept mute at the time of writing this essay on why he did not comply with the law. Others fell, too, including former governor Imoke, former Supreme Court Justice Niki Tobi. A corporate Bulldozer crumbled to the official bulldozer. That is, Julius Berger. This should not surprise anyone that Wike, in the early going, is the minister on the front perch. Politicians, moguls, celebrities, puny souls were lapped up.

    As governor, Wike was a man of shifting parts, often like a jigsaw puzzle. Even though a governor, you probably saw an entertainer. When an entertainer, he could become a philosopher. When he philosophised, he could come across as a fighter. When a fighter, at times you thought him a man of peace. Even as a man of peace, a pugilist is in the offing, like a tiger about to roar.  As we witnessed often, he strutted on project sites, under his hat and behind his dark goggles. He could become Al Capone but we knew he was not. He was just Governor Wike. Defiant, beloved, working.

    When he entertained, we were amused. When he philosophised, we mused. When he governed or came with projects, his fans emoted. When he fought, others felt like taking off their gloves with him or against him. When he mounted a peace offensive, some took offence while many were happy for a hug. As Mister Project, he lay brick after brick. He slammed asphalt on highways. For every cement he plastered, It appeared he was burying his foes beneath.

    He was a governor who some first saw as quicksand but later understood that he was marching his state on a firm footing. He marched, his people behind and beside him as he mounted projects, fought political wars, galvanized a people, united them and sometimes made his state, Rivers, the centre of the universe. He brought on the political platform a peculiar view of the social contract.

    This was his dimension of what philosophers like Locke and Rousseau crafted as social contract. Wike’s social contract did not come only in the soaring terms of a formal agreement between the governed and governor.

    Read Also: North Central APC warns Wike against actions harmful to party, region

    He had his election. He was voted and sworn in. He gave an inaugural speech. He took on the epaulettes of office. He had guards, motorcade, powers. But that was a technical social contract. Everyone in power must have it.  It gave his mandate the starchy air of the letter of the law. But the sort that Wike projected is a rare form of contract between the governed and governor. It is the contract of the impulse, the contract of the heart. In one word, the bond of the psyche.

    That was in evidence when he was launching a project and he burst into a rhetoric:  As e dey pain dem, e dey sweet us.  He burst into a song. He became the first governor to be a song writer. He had no filter of a producer or contract. Out of a spontaneous blaze of poesy and lyricism, he entertained not only those who attended the event. He had encased in the hearts of a nation an album of politics. Children sang it. Parents launched it as missiles at their neighbours. It became a chorus in lovers’ spats. They invoked it in local quarrels, in evocations at church, in the fights of the Holy Spirit against the devil. But from a song that was meant to remind us of the G-5 or Integrity Group, Wike had turned an intra-party feud into a cause celebre, a grudge match into an hour of artistic genius.

    We saw that in his desire to satisfy every aspect of Rivers State in his work of the heart. He built schools, courts, hospitals, stadiums. He understood as an Ikwerre man the need to traverse the ethnic groups, moving to Ogoniland, Kalabariland, Andoni, et al, embracing each land, and reminding them that he was not a governor as bigot. He had a kaleidoscope of interests.

    As if to stress that, he also popularised the phrase, Inye ne ba, inye ne ba, which showed that the world must be lived in mutual understanding.

    But it was all for Rivers State, even when he made forays on the national stage. He ran for president, and it seemed he was on the cusp of winning his party, the People’s Democratic Party’s, nomination, when a gang-up derailed a fait accompli.

    He started a war that many saw as patriotic. Why would the party not play fair, why would it not be faithful to an agreement? In a nation wracked by sectarian and regional suspicions, why would his party impose a sectional idea. Why would the PDP make Abubakar Atiku, a northerner, its flag bearer after all the southern governors had agreed that it must go south. Again, the party said it would not remove Iyorchia Ayu as party chairman, presenting both party candidate and chair from a section of the country.

    It was the principle of fairness that thrust him on the front burner of national politics, launching the Integrity Group, and its missiles as a party that did not know how to make peace.

    It was here that Wike, in all his eight years, showed his mettle as a man, guile as a politician and strategy as a leader. The party had sleepless nights, saying he only had one vote. He was disposable. He was not a factor. He was a sour grape. He was in his last career lap in politics.

    That was how he was able to make a bond with the nation the way he made a bond with his people in Rivers. He did not do it as a gentleman. He did not do it as a compromiser. He lifted principle over a flimsy pact. He did not succumb like a victim to a rapist.

    In the end, he won. He won for principle. He won at home, sweeping the state for his PDP, while letting the world know that PDP in the centre broke because they broke the basic law of organization: faith in the rules. He gloated over PDP loss in the centre, while the local chapter swept the governorship, senate, House of representatives and the state house of assembly.  

    Some gripe that he is a PDP man in APC government. APC says he is welcome. He sits in an extraordinary position of being a PDP man from a honeypot state with an APC sympathy. If some people are losing their lands, others are losing their party because of this man. The former loss may not equal the latter. Whatever the case, Earthquake Wike rumbles so some may grumble.

  • Akpabio’s hundred days

    Akpabio’s hundred days

    Godswill Akpabio is a specimen for the theatre. He once confessed if he had another life, he would be a comedian. But his comedy has been sublime, if controversial at times. He has been all his career. As governor, as senator and a minister. He is not going to be different as senate president. He has chewed up his first hundred days, and one of the most fascinating in the history of this republic.

    Few will ever forget how he emerged. The night before the contest, many thought the prize would go to former governor Abubakar Yari, his followers clucking like a cock. The day after, Yari lamented like a jilted lover over treachery. Akpabio had his burped like one after a lush meal. His triumph was more interesting than Saraki’s that came through the backdoor. It was nail-biting and when Akpabio clutched it, he glowed without a gloat.

    Read Also: Tinubu steering Nigeria through turbulent waters, says Akpabio

    He brought some cheer to the grueling ministerial nomination process, and played a role to calm a restive labour union and showed grit in stirring the house away from a war in these tempestuous times. However, for me, it is his sense of generosity that makes one know he wants to run the august assembly with malice towards none. He himself ensure that respectable committees went to his foes like Yari and Aminu Tambuwal. There is a lot of work ahead, and he will need his reserve of humour and open-mindedness to navigate the headwinds ahead.

  • Shabby and shoddy Chimamanda

    Shabby and shoddy Chimamanda

    In a recent CNN appearance, novelist Chimamanda Adichie told respected anchor Amanpour that the tribunal verdict was “shabby and shoddy.” Nothing wrong with her opinion except that she confessed she was still reading the verdict. How would she feel if one gave a damning judgment of her debut children book without reading it through? Amanpour, who was clearly wowed by a writer she announced as a superstar, did not see the shallowness of her verdict. Amanpour did not prepare for the interview, and it shows how hollow some western journalists are about African society. It is contempt on us when they do not probe their subjects. The same thing happened after the polls when Ajuri Ngelale rattled Zain Asher of the same CNN over INEC’s performance. We should not blame Adichie for an empty answer but CNN for a shoddy job. If she had asked the right question, the world would have known the author of Americana was in the mould of children fantasy. Again, maybe she would have blended into the slumber choir if she had accompanied her hero and kinsman Peter Obi to hear the verdict.

  • LUTH: Beyond Michael’s controversy

    LUTH: Beyond Michael’s controversy

    Even without the clarification from the management of Lagos University Teaching Hospital LUTH, claims that a resident doctor with the facility, Umoh Michael died after working 72 hours non-stop, would appear demonstrably inconceivable.

    Not only is it humanly impossible for anybody to work for that number of hours without stop, such a practice in a teaching hospital strikes as a very remote possibility. Yet, that such a narrative made the rounds last week courtesy of a letter addressed to the Chief Medical Director of LUTH by its branch of resident doctors suggests all is not well with the working conditions of those doctors.

    In the letter triggered off by the death of Michael after slumping at a church service, the resident doctors stated: “We the house officers are in deep grief over the loss of our colleague, a co-house officer (Dr. Umoh Michael), who died on September 17, 2023 after having a 72-hour call in the Neurosurgery unit”

    The letter further claimed that his roommate attested to the fact that Umoh barely slept in their apartment over the past one week as he was always on call or the day he came home, he returned around 3am. The resident doctors then chronicled other challenges they face such as bullying from senior colleagues, stressful call hours without break in-between, no call food and poor accommodation. 

    Read Also: LUTH denies late doctor worked 72-hour call duty

    The unfortunate incident has expectedly drawn the ire of the public. The thought of a promising young medical officer dying in the circumstance painted has evoked emotions. This is especially so, given a recent related incident a young female medical doctor lost her life due to elevator failure in a general hospital in the state.

    But the management of LUTH did not allow this narrative to gain undeserved ground. Even as it would not want to be drawn into unnecessary controversy in deference to the deceased family, it said the story of a 72-hour non-stop shift is false.

    According to the management, “the record from the neurosurgical unit shows that the last time he was on call was 13th and Septemeber14, 2023. He was not on call on the 15th, 16th and 17th (the day he died), contrary to the insinuation on social media. He was at home with his parents on September 16 and 17”.

    Before this time; the management went on, he was also on call on September 7 and 8. This shows that Michael was on call for four days in September 2023, LUTH said emphatically. With the explanation, it would appear pretty difficult to sustain the picture painted by the resident doctors on the circumstances of his death.

    It is also possible the account of the number of times he slept at the resident doctors’ quarters as allegedly furnished by his roommate did not factor in the fact that he has a family house in Lagos.  With this disclosure, it is possible the account of the days he did not sleep at the quarters did not capture the number of days he opted to stay with his family.

    But that is beside the issue. As unfortunate as the death of the young and promising doctor is, the issues it threw up should not be completely waved aside. Those that crafted the story of a 72-hour non-stop shift may have exaggerated the situation. But they may be indirectly drawing attention to the difficult conditions house officers do their work.

    And this should not be surprising to anyone. Not with the recurring decimal of strike actions by resident doctors. One of such strikes was just suspended last month. Central to their grievances were the release of the circular for ‘one-for-one replacement of clinical staff’ and the payment of the 2023 Medical Residency Training Fund.

    National President of the Nigerian Association of Resident Doctors NARD, Dr. Emeka Orji had justified the demands during the strike on the ground of acute shortage of doctors in the hospitals leading to the overworking of the few remaining ones. This should be instructive. Definitely LUTH is not exempted from the picture painted by the NARD president. It is probable the death of Michael just provoked the sad feelings nursed by the doctors on their difficult working conditions.

    This angle is quite potent. It is evident from the other grievances in the letter the resident doctors sent to the management of LUTH. It is clear from the general exodus of doctors and allied medical staff to foreign lands leading to acute shortages. The fact is that some of these grievances are not peculiar to LUTH even as it has a fair share of it. They are an integral part of the agitations for which the NARD has been engaging the federal government, sometimes resulting to strike actions.

    Ironically however, the past regime in this country lived in denial of the shortage of doctors in our hospitals. Two former ministers-health and labour, Prof. Osagie Enahire and Dr. Chris Ngige had on two different occasions respectively denied there was shortage of doctors in our hospitals.

    Enahire had while admitting they have heard of doctors leaving the system claimed there are actually enough doctors in the country. According to him, Nigeria produces between 2000 to 3000 doctors yearly while the number leaving is less than 1000. Then also, the National President of the Nigerian Medical Association NMA, Dr. Uche Ojinmah had faulted the claim of enough doctors for running contrary to available statistics.

    At other times the shortage had been rationalized by government officials on tardiness in the recruitment process. Ironically, as they bandy these excuses, our hospitals suffer acute shortage of medical doctors and allied personnel. The World Health Organization WHO puts the doctors’-patient ratio at one doctor to 600 patients.

    The same WHO had also pronounced that Nigeria and 54 other countries face the most pressing health workforce challenges related to universal health coverage. How the arguments canvassed by Enahire and Ngige conform to this ratio, is anybody’s guess. But one thing that is not in doubt is that Nigeria is confronted by dire manpower shortages in the health sector.

    Our doctors especially the experienced ones are leaving in droves to foreign lands where they are offered better salaries and congenial working conditions. Not only are we losing our experienced doctors and allied personnel to the advanced countries of the world, African countries have miserably joined in the poaching spree.

    That was the sad story told by the chairman of the committee of Chief Medical Directors of Federal Tertiary Hospitals, Prof Emem Bassey when he appeared before the House of Representatives ad hoc committee investigating employment racketeering in federal agencies. He lamented that countries like Sierra Leone and Gambia are offering them up to $3,000 and $4,000 which is about four times the amount paid locally.

    Additionally, recent data obtained from the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria. MDCN showed that 53 Nigerian doctors are practicing in Sudan, 41 in South Africa, 17 in Egypt and Ghana respectively. Uganda employs 13 Nigerian doctors while there are seven others working in the Gambia among other African countries.

    The register of the General Medical Council of the United Kingdom puts the number of Nigeria-trained doctors practicing in that country at 11,872. Ordinarily, there would have been nothing untoward about this if the leadership of this country had admitted the reality and taken steps to ensure there are enough medical personnel to attend to the needs of the citizenry.

     But they rather chose to live in its denial resulting to shortages that stretch the capacities of the few remaining ones. That was the sad irony presented by the LUTH situation which found immediate ventilation after the unfortunate death of Michael.  

     The excruciating economic conditions worsened by the depreciation of the local currency have even made matters worse. The controversy LUTH was embroiled in, though unfortunate, may not be unconnected with the general difficult conditions of work in our hospitals. It may not be the fault of the management of that institution. The federal government that has been slow on replacing departing staff shares much of the blame.

    Michael may not have died as a result of work overload. But the lesson served by his death should not be lost. The working conditions of doctors and allied staff should be improved upon else we will have self-fulfilling prophesy to contend with. Addressing the issues that prompted the controversy should serve as a befitting tribute to Michael. May his soul rest in peace!

  • University fees’ hike

    University fees’ hike

    It would appear some of the issues to the last suspended strike by the Academic Staff Union of Universities ASUU are creeping back, albeit, from a different angle. Emerging events are beginning to raise concerns as to the genuineness of some of the promises made by the government for which ASUU called off its strike action towards the end of last year.

    Central to this was the issue of adequate funding for the universities. Then, the government had said it made a provision of N300 billion revitalization funds in the 2023 appropriation bill to improve infrastructural facilities and operations in the federal universities.

    Given this, the general expectation was that these funds would be made available to the universities to address some of the debilitating infrastructural challenges that had over time, been the source of conflict between ASUU and the government leading to prolonged strikes. But emerging signals point to a different direction.

    Within the last few weeks, federal universities have been announcing general but very substantial increases in the fees paid by their students as they are set to commence a new academic session. The managements of the University of Lagos, Obafemi Awolowo University, OAU, Ile Ife, the University of Jos, Michael Okpara University of Agriculture Umudike and University of Uyo among others have had their fees increased.

    Fresh students of OAU in the faculties of arts, law and humanities will pay N151, 200 while their returning counterparts in the same faculties will pay N89, 200. Returning students of the same faculties paid N20, 000 during the last academic year.

    The same pattern of phenomenal increases featured at the University of Benin with science students who previously paid N73, 000 now required to pay N190, 000. Non-science students that paid N69, 000 previously are now required to cough out N170, 000. These are in addition to other fees such as exams, library, laboratory, sports, ICT etc. Ironically also, the universities have attributed the increases to rising cost of learning materials and the need to adequately fund their activities.

    These phenomenal increases have not gone down well with the student population and they are mounting serious opposition to them. They contend that given the dire economic situation in the country that has thrown many into unmitigated hardship, the high fees will inevitably squeeze children of the poor out of the university system. They would therefore want the increases reversed back to affordable levels.

    Read Also: Sanusi, Elumelu, Saraki, others in New York for UNGA 78

    But they did not just stop there. Students of the University of Lagos, UNILAG, took to the street to protest the increase vowing to continue until the fees are reversed downwards. The management of UNILAG was compelled by the protests to prune down the fees.  Students of the University of Jos blocked the road leading to the institution to press home their demand for a reversal while those at OAU are threatening serious action if nothing is done to checkmate the situation.

    Unfolding events have again raised fears of uncertainty within the university system. There is palpable apprehension that the protests could disrupt normal academic activities with dire consequences if something urgent is not done to diffuse the hot air.

    But more fundamentally, the situation has again brought to the fore the nagging issue of university funding and the propriety of government’s position that tuition fee in federal universities is free. Permanent Secretary of the federal Ministry of Education, David Adejo had at a public hearing by the House of Representatives ad hoc committee on students’ loan said last August that no federal university is allowed to charge tuition fees.

    He had then also claimed that what the universities collect are charges to cover the cost of accommodation, power, ICT among others and that the powers to approve such charges resides with the governing boards of the various universities. 

    But the governing boards of the universities are yet to be reconstituted by the government following their dissolution by President Tinubu. Yet, the universities are in the bazaar of increasing all manner of fees to levels that create serious doubt as to whether they are to make up for tuition fees. We are faced with the contradiction of justifying these high school fees in the face of claims by the government that tuition is free in federal universities.

     It is not for nothing that the new fees are viewed with utter scepticism by the academic community. They see it as either a reintroduction of tuition fees or a prelude to it. They contend that based on the laws establishing federal universities, the universities require clearance from the National Universities Commission, NUC, and the federal ministry of education to review such fees. They find highly incongruous any attempt by the government to wash off its hand from the fee increase spree.

    Accusing fingers are also pointing at the government for being behind the scene of the fee increases in the universities. It is believed that the buck passing on who approved the fee hike may be a strategy by the government to set the students against the universities as seen in the current pattern of protests.

    The development has also not gone down well with the national president of ASUU, Prof. Emmanuel Osodeke. He contends that the constitution of the country mandates the federal government to provide free education and that it will be difficult to run the universities without sufficient funding. For him, the universities do not receive adequate funds for their activities even as he would want the government to fund the universities adequately.

    Those opposed to the development find a correlation between the increase in fees and the introduction of students’ loans. President Tinubu had after assuming office last May, signed the Students’ Loans Act to enable Nigerian students access loans at interest-free rates. To access the loan, a student must show evidence of being indigent even as default attracts two years imprisonment or a fine of N500, 000 or both.

    What seemed to have emerged from the above is the recurring decimal university funding has been.  It featured centrally in all the disputes between ASUU and the government often snowballing into precipitate and long-drawn strikes that diminish the worth of certificates issues by our higher institutions. It is also at issue in the current increase in school fees despite claims by the government that tuition fees are free.

    It is getting increasingly difficult to sustain the argument of free tuition in our universities in the face of the multiplicity of fees paid by students. Fee is fee, no matter the names by which it goes. Perhaps, the only difference is that these fees are bound to go even much higher should the tuition variant be added.

    More fundamentally, the situation points inexorably to the dilemma faced by the government in running the universities. It is confronted with the challenge of making education affordable to the citizenry in the face of dwindling resources. So it has to allow the individual universities to charge fees even as it claims that tuition remains free.

    The quandary the government faces was succinctly captured by the immediate past chairman, committee of vice chancellors of universities, Prof. Samuel Edoumiekumo. For him, “the government does not provide overheads for universities. In a month, they provide N10 million for a university that cannot even pay for electricity bills. Most of these costs will now be covered by the students and this was what ASUU was fighting against but Nigerians will not like to listen to ASUU because of the strike”.

    That is the troubling issue-university funding. How long it will take the government to come clear on this reality is a matter of conjecture. But even as students’ loans will aid beneficiaries in offsetting some of the charges, it does not in any manner address infrastructural deficits in federal universities.

    Those were the twin purposes behind the defunct Education Bank. Sadly, Education Bank failed due to actions and inactions from the same government that set it up. It is time to come clear on the funding of federal universities.

  • Macron, Fela and African slaves

    Macron, Fela and African slaves

    Like one on a holy trip to mecca, French President Emmanuel Macron waltzed into the ecstasy of Fela Shrine. Smitten by the whirligig of rhythm, voice and beats, he acted like one of us. Nigerians praised him for embracing the abami eda. He descended from his Eifel tower to croon like us, dance like us, and blend into the smoke and tone of Afrobeat. Here was one Caucasian icon shorn of racial contempt on his white face.

    Don’t be fooled. Sooner or later, as American writer Toni Morrison once posited, such white persons would betray you. Like autumnal leaves in Paris, Macron has unveiled his true colour. He declared that without France, there would be no Gabon, Niger, Mali or Burkina Faso. In simple terms, he asserted that there was no country until France made them. Macron ought to withdraw that statement. It is racist. For one, no one begged France give us nations after their own imperial heart. We have never lauded the British for lumping peoples to form Nigeria. They did it for themselves and not for us. He implied French West Africa had no past before their imperial adventurism into our lands.

    President Macron is in league with white historians who have been banished from African historiography. He is like the Oxford Professor, Hugh Trevor-Roper, who, in 1962, wrote, “Perhaps in the future there will be some African history to teach. But at the present there is none; there is only the history of the Europeans in Africa. The rest is darkness…and darkness is not the subject of history.”

    We can understand the fury in Niger and other French West African countries asking the French to leave their lands. Coup plotters have exploited this fever. It feeds their cynical egoism. The French treat Africans like children. Historians call it paternalism. Their colonial policy, assimilation, was a condescending strategy to hoodwink the black subjects and tell them they had promoted them from slaves to children. The French were superior, so everything they did must conform to French civilisation. If you wanted to mail a letter to the next street in Cotonou, it must pass through Paris.

    Macron meant we should applaud colonialism. We should be grateful for slavery. They set us free. It is not restricted to the French. The British thought so, too, as witness the words of the Oxford professor. Lord Lugard’s companion Margery Perham wrote same points about Nigeria. Their great philosopher, John Stuart Mill, loved liberty so much that he recommended colonialism for societies like India and Africa. We were too primitive to be free. It’s like the Austrian nationalist Metternich, who the poet Lord Byron satirized. “He had no objection to true liberty,” wrote Byron of Metternich, “Except that it would set them free.”

    Macron needs a little lesson in African history. Before the whites started taking over our territories, we were building our nations in the sweep of the 18th and 19th centuries, even into the early hours of the 20th. It reflected in the quality of resistance.

    Read Also: Oyetola to attend 2023 UNGA in New York

    Did he hear of the Dahomey kingdom, the Amazons of their army and the glorious soldiery of women who defied breasts for martial glory. They cut out of Oyo thralldom and even walloped some Yorubas into their fold until they chafed and fell, especially to the Egba. Did he know of the Agbajigbeto, the spies who might have given the CIA a model? Also, we had Samori Toure, the African Napoleon, who played the French against the British, and the Malinke hero of the Dyula Revolution introduced war strategies to stalemate the white colonialists for 15 years.

    Macron should plough into the biography of Mahmadou Lamine of the Senegambia, and it was he, the great warrior of the Sarrakole tribe, who built a great coalition and a people with Islam to rattle the French and the conniving Tukolor. The French had to build the French Marine Corp as well as what was known as the Senegalese Sharp Shooters to mow down a great race. My later professor, Olatunji Oloruntimehin devoted a book, The Segu-Tukolor Empire, to the exploits of Lamine and his Sarrakole people.

    Macron ossifies views of inferiority in our people. Again, it should challenge our people to read history. We had our exploits here, too. Did we not have the Habe dynasty for centuries as well as the Kanuri Empire or Kanem Borno, with the longevity of the Saifawa dynasty? Was that darkness? Did warrior Uthman Dan Fodio not capsize tradition with his 1804 jihad for over two centuries now? The Yoruba Wars gave a pageant of warriors: Sodeke, Kurunmi, Ogunmola, Latosa, Fabunmi, Ogedengbe, et al. Or the impregnable Itsekiri blockade under the doughty Nana Olomu, who puzzled the British Navy. Shall we forget the great Benin Kingdom and how its prosperity enticed the rapacity of the British to trade in the Benin River. Their historians called it massacre. I insist it was Benin Resistance. As we had heroes, we had traitors like the Obaseki ancestor of the present governor of Edo State. A similar story played out in Dahomey, now Benin Republic, when the king, like Ovonramwen, hid after the European onslaught. A palace quisling exposed his whereabouts.

    If what the Africans were doing was to build wars of integration and nation building, the western historians called them barbarism. Yet, in the same period, Europe was embroiled in their own hostilities. They had what was called the Westphalian Treaty that forbade any nation to disrespect another’s sovereignty. Yet, we had Napoleon fight wars of meaningless conquests across Europe, leaving a trail of butchery all the way to Russia. There was no Gaul until France, only Prussia until Germany. The French roared against the Germans in brutal wars until Bismark humbled her with Alsace and Lorraine. The Roman Empire viewed some of the so-called civilized Europe today as barbarians, including the Germans and people of northern Europe.  Cavour and Garibaldi revived Italy. Professor Femi Omosini, in my European History class, interrogated the view that there was no concept of Europe until about the fifth century. It was seen as a period of total darkness. Its Middle Ages was also seen as a period of darkness. But their historians, who were waking up from the sway of Roman swagger, saved their continent from the somnolent narrative. When they woke up, they set Africa to sleep in the night of their historiography. Macron is a product of that prejudice.

    Today, the French West African countries still store their treasures in French Central Bank, and African leaders beg in order to withdraw. In 1958, France browbeat colonies to sign an accord called Loi Cadre where France determines how they run their country. Guinea’s Sekou Toure, who had Samouri’s DNA, said no, until he imposed a sit-tight tyranny.

    You understand why Macron is nervous. During the Second World War, Charles De Gaulle set up the Free French when Germany overran his country. It rallied blacks to help liberate France. They were colonial subjects being asked to save France that had now become a colonial subject. Africans became slave of slaves fighting for their master slave. The 19th century African warriors were the precursors of 20th century Negritude movement that highlighted African dignity with poets like Diop, Senghor and a subtler Soyinka,  who said “a tiger should not shout its tigritude.”

    For all his charisma, De Gaulle expressed discomfort over photo-ops with visiting African leaders when he was president. At the Fela Shrine, Macron was friendly but not a friend.

    The Bard’s barb

     Professor Wole Soyinka threw a broadside at the Obidients last week, and they turned crybabies on their familiar turf: the social media. The bard said Peter Obi came third and his followers know it but are just indulged in what the Yoruba  call Gbajue. He translated it as force of lies. I would rather translate it as “lies by force.” In his Nostromo, Joseph Conrad described it as “the bravado of guilt.” No matter. But what is striking is that when Soyinka described Obi during the hustings as a “new kid on the block,” the obidients had love for the bard.  He was not a Yoruba man then. A new kid who was governor with old guard, in bed with Atiku in 2019, pitched Catholic against Anglicans, cannot explain why he stashed money offshore while a governor and erected Abuja marque supermarket, etc.  Soyinka’s intervention shows that there were a few fair-minded Obi supporters who have sat back and seen through his fraud. Obi is the Gbajue in chief. Soyinka is sincere enough to admit that the man did not win. The obidients have no such grace or integrity. They cannot abide the barb. They are innocent of facts and processes. They cavil at the Tribunal verdict without asking Obi’s lawyers why they had no facts for their claims. Of such persons, the Bible says, “I will send them strong delusion that they should believe a lie.” Like Pharoah’s hardened heart. Their pastors as well as the Catholic elite should read their Bible. A teardrop for them.

  • A Blue Line of thought

    A Blue Line of thought

    he Blue Line launch by the BOS of Lagos, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, has suffused the news waves. Many are hungry for a ride. A programme for the ages has come to fruition. The paradox is that the BOS had all these programmes, including the train, housing, education, etc. to sell his bid for a second term. COVID 19 defined the term more than anything else, when his daring overshadowed even the presidency.

    Read Also: FG shifting attention from hydrocarbon to renewable energy, says Alake

    Yet, at the election, his performance was not on the front burner. It became an election about identity, not about progress, pocket book, the anxiety about prosperity. It was about whether you were Yoruba or a non-indigene, Christian or Muslim. Democracy stood on its head. Hence it has been proven many times that performance is no guarantee for electoral success. It is often an ‘us versus them’ syndrome. Bisi Akande, for instance, was reputed to have performed well during his stewardship as governor of Osun State. He did not get a second term, partly due to Owu chief. Same to Oyetola. Churchill was voted out after leading the country through the worst war in history. He would later be voted the best British of the century but he lost his reelection bid. Clinton could not help Al Gore succeed him even if he gave America its greatest economic expansion in history. We have to be wary of turning democracy into a game of closets and cocoons. We have the obidients to thank for that. Some of them are enjoying the Blue Line, and they should.

  • Between Jonathan and Fayemi’s positions

    Between Jonathan and Fayemi’s positions

    Some of the obstacles against Nigeria’s greatness re-echoed last week at a national dialogue and book presentation in Abuja. Though two of the guests, former president, Goodluck Jonathan and former Ekiti State governor, Kayode Fayemi spoke from different angles, the major thesis of their presentation revolved around the challenges standing against effective functioning of the Nigerian state.

    Jonathan’s major concern was the abysmal progress of the country in national integration. He would rather hold Nigeria’s founding fathers liable for doing a poor job at national integration subsequently.

    He lamented that the country was so polarized at the early stages of political parties’ formation resulting in the evolution of the parties along regional lines. “There was no sense of commitment to integrate Nigeria into an entity that you can say this is a nation with core values, common philosophy and people will be patriotic to that nation”, the former president contended.

    Drawing parallels with Tanzania which shares similar history of ethnic and religious diversities as Nigeria, he said that country’ foremost founding father, Julius Nyerere was able to build a nation out of these disparate cleavages through the instrumentality of a one-party state. Whether a one party state was a way out of Nigeria’s national integration challenge is another kettle of fish. 

    For Jonathan, his own modest attempt at nation building was the driving force for convening the 2014 National Conference. Had the recommendations of that conference been adopted, he believed we would have had a nation called Nigeria. We shall return to this.

    Read Also; Akeredolu signs LCDAs Bill

    On his part, Fayemi picked holes with the ‘winner takes all’ style of Nigerian democracy. For him, the challenges facing Nigeria today cannot be solved unless the country embraced proportional representation where the spoils of elections are shared between the contestants.

    “What we need is alternative politics and my own notion of alternative politics is that you cannot have 35 per cent of the votes and take 100 per cent, it won’t work. We must look at proportional representation so that the party that is said to have won 21 per cent of the votes will have 21 per cent of the government”, he argued.

    The former Ekiti State governor touched on a recurring issue that left many bewildered when he said the protests that trailed the removal of fuel subsidy during the regime of Jonathan in 2012 were propelled by political interest. He admitted that the opposition which he was part of ‘knew the truth’ about the imperative of fuel subsidy removal but was merely playing politics with the Occupy Nigeria protests. This disclosure is interesting but at the heart of all that is wrong with the politics of this country.

    There is a common thread running through the presentations of Jonathan and Fayemi. This can be gleaned from the convergence of views that the Nigerian state is not just working and that certain institutional adjustments and reforms must be carried out for it to discharge on its mandate to the citizenry.

    Jonathan identified lack of progress at national integration and blamed our founding fathers for their inability to construct a Nigerian personality out of the various groups that make up this country. To the extent that the emergence of political parties before and after independence followed regional lines, he has a point in wanting the founding fathers to share in the blame for lack progress at national integration.

    But some individual regional leaders share more in this blame than others. Even then, the mistakes made at the founding stages of the country pale into insignificance in the face of the brazen mismanagement of our diversities by subsequent leaders especially in the last couple of years.

    The politics of exclusion, alienation and marginalization which hallmarked the last eight years wrought incalculable harm on the psyche of the average Nigerian. That may in part, be what Fayemi referred to as the winner-takes-all politics. This country really had a dose of that adversary politics where the commanding heights of the national security architecture and key federal positions were almost exclusively dominated by people from certain ethnic and religious persuasions. The brazen impunity with which these policies of exclusion were carried out led to the generally accepted notion today that Nigerians are more divided than they have been since independence. The facts are there!

    They can be seen from the raging battle against weird religious insurgency. They are evident from lure for self-determination. They can be gleaned from the multifarious dimensions of the festering insecurity across the country. It is also no less manifest in the increasing competition between the federal authority and non-state actors for the loyalty of the citizens.

    Progress at national integration presupposes genuine and conscious efforts to redress those fundamentals that stand against collective progress. That is the point Jonathan raised when he lamented the non-implementation of the recommendations of the 2014 National Conference.

    Its corollary is that this country must as a matter of necessity address those vexatious issues of our federal order for meaningful psychological reconstruction of the individual psyche to take root. That goes without saying.

    A cursory glance at the key recommendations of the 2014 National Conference will drive home the point being made by Jonathan. But the 2014 National Conference is by no means the first attempt since the end of the civil war to address the national question through some form of national conversation.

    While a constitutional conference was instituted during the Abacha regime, Obasanjo convoked the National Political Reforms Conference NPRC. While there was convergence of views on some of the issues identified by these conversations, the 2014 conference stood out as the most far-reaching in providing enduring solutions to the national question.

    Here are some of them: the creation of 18 additional states-three from each geo-political zone and one additional state for the southeast to bring it at par with others except the northwest. Though the rationale for 18 states may be debatable today, the justification for one additional state for the southeast is still as potent as it has ever been given it is the only zone with just five states.

    On resource control, derivation and fiscal federalism, a technical committee was to be set up to determine the appropriate increase in their percentages. NPRC had recommended increasing derivation from 13 per cent to 17 per cent. Similarly the 2014 conference recommended a revenue allocation formula of 42.5 per cent, 35 per cent and 22.5 per cent between the federal, states and local governments respectively.  

     Presidency is also to rotate between the north and south and among the six geo-political zones while governorship rotates among the three senatorial zones. This will take place in a home-grown system of government combining the presidential and parliamentary variants.

    There were also recommendations scrapping the immunity clause for offences that attract criminal charges and the setting up of special courts to handle corruption cases. The two are to encourage accountability and reduce the long delays in the prosecution of corruption cases in the regular courts.

    These are some of the challenges Jonathan identified as standing against national integration, unity, progress and stability of the country. They are still much with us. The country’s inability to record significant progress in all indices of development is a measure of how far we have fared in addressing these irritating challenges.

    Fayemi captured part of this contradiction in his notion of zero-sum game politics. But more fundamentally, he touched on the ruinous dispositions of the political class that vitiate national progress in the partisan political reasons he gave for the opposition mounted against the 2012 fuel subsidy removal. But the country has been the loser.