Category: Columnists

  • APC vs. APC vs. APC

    APC vs. APC vs. APC

    Lack in the formative years of the Second Republic (1979-1983), when parties were being formed; and old political war horses being lobbied to join new parties, there was so much pull on Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe, Nigeria’s first – and last – ceremonial president.

    So enchanting was the lobby that a famed cartoonist hit on an even more enchanting cartoon, depicting a beaded Dr. Azikiwe, in feminine make-up, bejewelled, and perhaps perfumed – doesn’t perfuming come with the bridal territory? – as “Bride of the Year”!

    Now, the Great Zik appears resurrected in the fierce partisan attention for APC, the hottest acronym in Goodluck Jonathan’s Federal Republic. Indeed, APC would appear the bride of the century, in a political wedding conceived in intrigue and sponsored by millennial mischief.

    What really is hot about APC, hitherto some popular but innocuous drug; or, in security-defence circles, some motorised hardware called armoured personnel carrier? Nothing really, except high-stake politicking.

    Realpolitik? Maybe: for in a prebendal Nigeria where loss of power is tantamount to loss of everything, it could be extreme folly, indeed, for the regnant power holders to let go of their trove without a fight.

    That is clearly the contrived APC drama, no doubt orchestrated by a panicky Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), scared stiff of a looming opposition merger; but casually waved on by many Nigerians as “politics”.

    Here, a brief back-grounding is apposite. With fan fair, merging Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), All Nigerian People’s Party (ANPP), Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and a faction of the All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA), announced All Progressives Congress (APC) as their new name, complete with symbol and slogan, en route to formalising the fusion after each party’s respective conventions, as prescribed by law.

    Then, from the blues, came the APC scramble: first, African People’s Congress, which request application came from a naive but pathetic young lawyer who reportedly got N30, 000 and a telephone handset as initial payment; and later, All Patriotic Citizens.

    Somehow, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) kept the dirty drama under wraps until it tried to suggest the merging parties change their new name from APC because, it claimed, some phantom bodies had staked a claim to the acronym. Then, all hell broke loose!

    To be sure, the INEC suggestion was hardly a language of reason or logic. It was rather a language of power and impunity, carefully coated in cunning, suggesting a ruling party proxy-INEC conspiracy to scuttle a putative merger.

    Indeed, Prof. Attahiru Jega, INEC chair, was quoted on a radio programme to have suggested the merging APC consider a name change; while denying INEC had registered any APC; and that the electoral umpire would strictly follow the laws guiding party registration.

    Also, many a Nigerian, quite adept at abandoning their viewpoints, even if the other party is so cavalier with bad faith, had started parroting the crass legalism: whoever raced first to INEC owned the acronym, even if common sense could conclusively prove it was stolen property!

    Many even accused the legacy parties of “carelessness”, meaning they should either have kept their new name like a lamp under a bushel, or rush post-haste to INEC to announce it, despite legal provisions that merging parties may not approach INEC until the legacy parties’ national conventions endorsed the exercise. Great indeed is the ardour of those who base their conviction on getting wise after the fact!

    That was the stage before INEC declined one of the APC wannabes registration, on the pretext, quoting Section 222 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), that names and addresses of the party’s national officers were not registered with INEC. But is this legal deus-ex-machina, fatal to the case of one APC, a dummy to alert its phantom cousin to perfect its act, and only postpone the final registration crunch?

    That decision has expectedly sent one Onyinye Ikeagwuonu, pro tem chairman of the putative party, into a lather of cant. He railed of a “brewing storm”; and an alleged conspiracy against his party.

    With all due respect to the man and his holy rage, his rant only reinforces the déjà vu – that the subversive political pond that bred the likes of Arthur Nzeribe, Abimbola Davis and Daniel Kanu, notorious anti-democratic elements of the Babangida-Abacha era, is not about to dry up! What is not clear is if the citizenry would allow such rascality to snowball into a needless crisis, the end of which no one could predict.

    What might be INEC’s motives, by legally clobbering a phantom APC? A genuine effort to ensure good faith, common sense and good conscience, without which even the law is nothing but an empty code? Or a foxtrot off a partisan dais, to which it had inadvertently (?) been drawn?

    Whatever the motive, Prof. Jega and his INEC should pick up the history books and behold the self-imposed odyssey of the Michael Ani Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO), that mid-wifed the Second Republic.

    Chief Ani was doing just fine as a seeming independent arbiter until Richard Akinjide, SAN, national legal adviser to the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) soon to become the ruling party, proffered the controversial twelve-two-third legal joker, which FEDECO avidly accepted, just to escape a looming electoral run-off.

    Sure, NPN won that electoral trick; and even the highest court in the land endorsed that “victory”. But the Second Republic vanished in that bog of legal rascality, before it physically collapsed some four years and three months after.

    That brought the most virulent strain of military rule ever unleashed on this country. Should anyone essay 1979-era pranks, this polity might just lose more than a legal republic. The House of Lugard could come crashing down!

    To avert this tragedy, the opposition must press their right to APC, no matter the level of official plotting and subversion. That is the only way to subdue the bully tactics.

    Also, with this APC skirmish, it is clear INEC alone cannot be entrusted with clean elections in 2015 – such is the panic, paranoia, desperation and cunning of the Jonathan Presidency.

    Even with Jonathan’s good luck charm in 2011, Nasir El-Rufai claimed in his book, The Accidental Public Servant (page 466), that a PDP hierarch in Kaduna State “confessed” that 800, 000 phantom votes were added to Jonathan’s tally, just to make the 25 per cent requirement.

    If Jonathan and allies could pull such alleged stunts when the good luck man was riding high, and Jega was the exemplary electoral arbiter, what would a desperate president not do in these rapidly diminished times?

    Eternal vigilance, they say, is the price of freedom. Rigging – and a serious, soulless one at that – would come with the electoral territory from 2014. The opposition must seriously mobilise to make such venture hugely risky and unprofitable.

     

  • Theology of political  pardon

    Theology of political pardon

    It is the prerogative of the President in Council to grant clemency to anyone who has been under one kind of punishment or the other. The Nigerian Constitution section 175(1) states that the President may grant any person … convicted of any offence … a pardon, either free or subject to lawful conditions. In other words, presidential pardon is an act of grace which exempts individual(s) from the punishment the law inflicts for a crime the individual might have committed. This legal discretion on the part of the President is not a privilege enjoyed only by the Nigerian Presidents, even the President of the United States enjoys such a privilege. It is reported that former President Clinton of the United States granted 140 pardons on his last day in office and defended his action by stating that the framers of their constitution vested such broad powers on the President so that he would have the freedom to do what he deemed to be the right thing regardless of how unpopular such a decision might be.

    So what offence has President Goodluck Jonathan committed in granting pardon to some offenders including his former boss, former Bayelsa State Governor Diepreye Alamieyeseigha? I think the opposition to the President’s action is due to a wrong understanding or wrong interpretation of the concept of forgiveness. The essence of forgiveness is divine not human. It is in this connection that Shakespeare said in one of his works that “if Justice by thy plea consider this, that in course of Justice none of us shall see salvation, we do pray for mercy and that same prayer doth teach us all to render the deeds of mercy.”

    Essentially, forgiveness is divine. Since theology helps any religion to give an intellectual explanation of its beliefs and practices, even so, we can interpret the concept of forgiveness theologically to mean a spiritual factor that does not measure or limit the number of times it forgives an offender. Why? Because forgiveness is a thing of the spirit; a quality of the spirit. All spiritual sensibilities or realities such as love, mercy, grace, joy and forgiveness can not be measured or limited. They are by their very nature spiritual not physical.

    Forgiveness is a reality of the spirit. It is to be practiced at every opportunity. The spirit of forgiveness is to forgive 70 times seven i.e without counting. So says our Lord Jesus Christ in Matt. 18:21-27.

    Good human relationships are impossible without a forgiving spirit. Offending others is common to all. We are all sinful and we all offend others. If we kept score, there would be little time to do any other thing. To keep relationships healthy, sweet, strong and stable, we need to note at least four things. That sinning, failing and offending others are common to us all. That offending others is usually unintentional. All of us offend others, but we are often unaware that we have offended them. Keeping this in mind helps us to forgive others when they offend us. We offend others as much as they offend us. We are as human as the next person, and we need forgiveness as much as the next person. Finally, the common response to being offended is to react: react by withdrawing, or engaging in retaliation or vengeance, or retreat into self-pity or in to a spirit of un-forgiveness.

    The attributes of an un-forgiving spirit are basically those of ill-nature, self-centeredness, and spiritual immaturity. Un-forgiveness reveals that a person has not grown to be like Jesus Christ in understanding, compassion, mercy and love. There is a parable in Matt. 18: 28 – 35 where the king forgave his servant who could not pay the huge debt the servant owed him. The lesson here is that we all are bankrupt (unable to pay) God what we owe Him. Sin makes a man bankrupt and puts him in debt to God. We are made so bankrupt by our sin that nothing can pay our debt yet God forgives us all our debt. In spite of this, we often find it difficult to forgive our fellowmen who have wronged us. Why? The reason is shown in the story below.

    In the same parable quoted above, the servant who was forgiven saw a fellow servant who owed him. He reacted severely by attacking the debtor; and attempting to squeeze the payment out of him. He got angry and showed malice, no mercy. The offended servant rejected the cry for mercy and refused to forgive. He acted selfishly although his reaction was in accordance to law and justice. The man really owed the servant. The debt was a just and legal debt. The servant had every right to demand and force payment. Such is justice. But remember as Shakespeare would put it if justice by the plea, consider this, that in the course of justice none of us shall see Salvation, that is why we plead for mercy, and that same prayer doth teach us all to render the deeds of mercy.

    Again, let’s remember the divine point here: The King, (God), does not act towards us legally, executing justice; He has compassion and mercy upon us and forgives us, wiping out all our debts. The question is how often should we forgive our brother? The divine answer is as many times as he offends you. So let us have compassion and mercy, and not demand justice per se. Do not execute the law; do not trample an offender underfoot; do not act cruelly, swallowing him up and destroying his spirit. Love him and forgive him ‘just as Christ in God forgives you’ (Eph.4:32).

    So I proffer Christian theological perspective to the concept of pardon to mean a divine spiritual virtue that reminds us that to err is human and to forgive is divine. There were many sick people at the pool of Bethsaida, but Christ chose to heal only one person. That was an exercise of his discretion. Even so, President Jonathan should be allowed the freedom to exercise his presidential discretion in granting pardon to his former boss.

    • The Most Rev. Prof. Uka is Prelate and Moderator of The General Assembly, The Presbyterian Church of Nigeria.

  • Celebrating a consummate  bridge-builder

    Celebrating a consummate bridge-builder

    On Friday March 29, the National Leader of the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) and two-term governor of Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, clocked 61 years. The man at the forefront of the emancipation of the common man from the clutches of poverty through enduring democratic ideals and values thus added another eventful year to his industrious and selfless career which has seen him carry the lorry-load of hopes and aspirations of the common man wholly on his shoulders.

    Right from his sojourn into the murky waters of Nigerian politics, Tinubu’s policy has been to serve the people irrespective of race, religion or creed. He has always shown the willingness to abandon a personal cause for a collective one. Through actions and utterances, Asiwaju Tinubu has put himself forward as a man the common man in the country can trust to lead the battle against neo-colonialism in the country.

    To achieve his aim, Tinubu is always ready to humble himself aligning with people and groups of like minds who believe in his selfless ideas. Therefore to him, race, religion, status and creed do not matter; inasmuch you are ready to serve the people.

    The writer will never forget the events leading to the election of the Senate President during the aborted Third Republic during the transition programme of Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida.

    Tinubu came into the Senate then as the favourite to clinch the position. He had the highest number votes among senators; he was representing the biggest and most influential senatorial district in the country; he is rich; and above all, had in his firm grip more than the needed number of senators he required to win. Therefore, the position was his to be taken.

    But when the leadership of then Socialist Democratic Party (SDP) decided that the South-west should stake a claim for the presidency and it became obvious that taking the senate presidency will jeopardise the region’s strong claim for the nation number one office, within seconds Tinubu jettisoned his ambition and handed over his political machinery to the anointed candidate of the party, Senator Iyorchia Ayu.

    Asiwaju continues to show that he is a man who will never waiver in his determination to ensure that the generality of the people do not suffer even at expense of his personal comfort. One can still remember the persecution he faced during the Abacha regime. He was declared wanted, arrested and detained and later hounded into exile for his belief even when he had the option of joining Abacha government and accepting other juicy carrots thrown at him by the agents of that particular government.

    Suffice to add the role he played in financing human rights and pro-democracy activists in exile with his personal money even when his investment at home was being decimated by the agents of the military junta. His simple message has always been, “we have to liberate the common man and we will not relent until this is achieved”.

    The advent of the current democratic dispensation has more than brought to the fore the selfless traits of the ex-governor.

    He excelled during his eight-year reign as governor of the most populous and most important state in the country. And when the two terms allowed by the constitution expired, the thought of giving the people the best always galvanised him into single-handedly recommending a successor many did not even think of.

    In making his choice, Asiwaju jettisoned friendship, sentiments and selfish interest to settle for Babatunde Raji Fashola, SAN. Today Lagosians are praising him for his foresight and majority of the people of the state have come to realise that Tinubu has their interest at heart.

    Since his sojourn into party politics in the current dispensation, he has always been yearning for a party that will be people-oriented and take interest of the people as the fulcrum of its manifesto.

    Not a few Nigerians believe that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) which controls government at the centre has nothing positive to offer the country. After more than 13 years of controlling administration at the centre, PDP has left the country worse off which makes it imperative to dislodge the ruling party from the centre through legal democratic means. For Tinubu, the task of emancipating the people should be undertaken with all seriousness and commitment. He has successfully achieved the South-west part of the task but going national is more onerous task. He would not shy away from associating with people and groups of like minds, the result being the formation of the mega party, All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Asiwaju has not relented crisscrossing the length and breadth of the country to sell the gospel of APC to the people.

    Indeed, this consummate bridge-builder deserves all the best wishes on his birthday and I can only wish him many more happy returns of the day in his mission to serve the people selflessly and tirelessly.

     

    • Alawiye-King is a member of the Lagos State House of Assembly

  • Achebe: A literary titan and his times

    Achebe: A literary titan and his times

    A mighty tree fell in Boston, Massachusetts, two weeks ago, and its fall was heard across the world.

    That tree was Chinua Achebe, and the fall was heard by the tens of millions who had read his first and best known novel, “Things Fall Apart” in the major languages into which it has been translated, among them, his native Igbo, and Yoruba.

    It was heard in the leading world academies, where his novels, essays, poems, lectures and other literary forms are studied. It was heard in every establishment involved in making or executing policy or otherwise transacting business in Nigeria and indeed Africa as a guide. It was heard by everyone across creed, colour or tongue he had charmed with his incomparable skills as a story-teller, the majestic simplicity of his prose, and a profound sociological imagination.

    His writings burst upon the literary and political world at a time of ferment. The wind of change which gusting over Africa that British Prime Minister called the attention of the heedless apartheid regime in South Africa was gathering speed, sounding the death knell of colonialism and imperialism. In the United States, the civil rights movement was gathering momentum, putting Jim Crow and its clan on notice that all those “self-evident truths” must amount to much more than articles of faith in the Declaration of Independence.

    To them, Achebe lent a voice, a stirring, eloquent voice – a voice that derived its power from the acuity of his insights no less than from being so understated. He rescued subject peoples from the mutilate versions of themselves and taught them to see themselves whole, to be at peace with their being and essence. This was the context in which he got to know and collaborate with the writer James Baldwin, one of the leading lights of the movement.

    Africans and indeed black people everywhere can walk tall today in part because Achebe exploded the racist stereotypes Europe and America developed and assiduously propagated about them. He wrote back to the makers of empire. The civilising mission they prided themselves on was a rude disruption of long-established ways of life and was in some ways and actually a regression. It is a mark of his towering achievement that his obituary notice in the digital edition of The New York Times attracted some 150 comments from readers worldwide, all of them laudatory.

    In a famous essay, Achebe wrote that writer has a duty to teach. And what a teacher he was! Many of the better-known young Africans writing today owe their success to his example, his inspiration, and encouragement. The genre that has come to be called African Literature owes its status in no small part to Achebe as publisher and editor and teacher. He at once embodied and brought before the world the wisdom of his people.

    He was also an iconoclast. In another essay – or was it an interview? – he said the writer is the one who, when you beat your chest about the graceful architectural sweep of your city flyovers, calls to your attention to all the unsightly mess under it.

    Though often remarked in his oeuvre, the iconoclastic streak that perfuses it as well as his political engagements rarely gets the emphasis it deserves. Everyone familiar with his writings knows how he took down Joseph Conrad and Joyce Carey from their pedestal. All that was in the line of literary duty.

    Applied to Nigerian politics, which is still largely ethnic-based, and a blood sport of sorts, that kind of iconoclasm can have unintended consequences. As Obafemi Awolowo was being mourned in 1987, Achebe dismissed him as “a mediocre politician.” The Nobel was a European prize that did not and could not translate into the “Asiwaju” of Nigerian literature, contrary to the impression some “idle lackeys” of the Yoruba recipient Wole Soyinka were trying to create, he wrote.

    In the tit-for-tat matrix in which identity politics is played in Nigeria, it seemed very likely that, at his death, Achebe would attract among some of Awolowo’s adoring kinsmen at least something close to Achebe’s embittered putdown of the chief and his petulant remarks about the Nobel, its 1986 recipient, and his band of admirers.

    Achebe turned that likelihood into a certainty in his controversial last work, “There was a Country,” in which he offered it as his “firm impression” that Awo had, “for the benefit of his people,” devised or pursued policies that did incalculable harm to the Igbo when he was Federal Commissioner for Finance and Vice Chair of the Federal Executive Council during the civil war.

    This charge in effect makes every Yoruba an accessory to whatever Awo was alleged to have done or left undone. Achebe was not the first to make this charge; lesser characters have been bandying it for decades. But he gave it a fresh infusion of oxygen, with consequences that no one who pays even the most casual attention to the misnamed “social media” can applaud. It was as if the civil war was being fought all over again, this time in cyberspace, but with undiminished ferocity.

    Not a few Nigerians feel gravely offended by such charges and assertions strewn across the book with far less rigour than usually marks his work, and by significant omissions that would have provided a richer context. The Achebe they behold is not exactly the Achebe the rest of the world is celebrating — the literary titan, the voice of calm, reasoned discourse, the great teacher. They accuse him of setting out in his last work to glorify his people and vilify everyone else.

    Achebe was proud of his Igbo identity. He proclaimed it, celebrated it, rejoiced in it. He was not in the least apologetic about it. Nor should he have been; no one should have to apologise for his or her ethnic identity. If avowing and affirming his ethnic identity somehow constricted his political vision, Achebe would have said: so be it, secure in the knowledge that his place in the world of letters is assured.

    Not for him the sham pretence of being a “detribalised” Nigerian. Show me that “detribalised” person and I will show you a person who is practically unconscious. Some have succeeded more than others in sublimating or transcending their ethnic identities. Yet, it is by virtue of being Igbo or Hausa or Yoruba or Kanuri or Nupe or Tiv or Igala or Ijaw or Urhobo or Efik or Ibibio, or of belonging in some one of 300 ethnic groups that make up the national population that one can lay claim to being a Nigerian.

    By word and deed, Achebe taught that we should speak forthrightly on these issues, without muzzling opposing viewpoints or denying others the right to do the same.

    Would that we could do so with respect for one another, and without bitterness.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • Tukur’s frustrations

    Tukur’s frustrations

    Obviously, the PDP national chairman, Alhaji Bamanga Tukur is rattled in many fronts. He is rattled by the crisis in his state’s wing of the party. He is at war with PDP governors. And at the national level, he is faced with a daunting crisis of confidence. All of these challenges may not be his own doing per se.

    Much stem from the ambition of President Jonathan to control the structures of the party albeit unconventionally. Many interests have been hurt in the process and Tukur is expected to clear the Augean stable. The thinking within the party before now is that you can bulldoze your way to dominance and latter reconcile.

    Because of the influence of the party, this strategy had before now, worked successfully since members did not seem to have an alternative. That was the style of Obasanjo that shunted out the founding fathers of the party. Those who felt their ego was bruised and could no longer stomach the insult, were shown the way out and business continued as usual. That has been PDP for you. They do this because they are sure to win elections even if it is by hook and crook. So it matters little if people leave the party in droves. After all, it prides itself as the biggest party in Africa with a vaulting ambition to rule for the next 100 years. So what difference does it make frustrating foundation members when those angling for a place in the party are not in short supply?

    As usual with this make-shift fence-mending agenda, after Jonathan had captured the party’s structures with impunity, Tukur had to embark on zonal tours during which he was expected to reconcile aggrieved members. But the outcome this time around, has been largely disastrous. Not only were the tours boycotted by key personages in those zones, there was practically nothing to show for it. It was obvious that the old strategy could no longer hold water.

    Those being pacified had become tired of the brazen disregard of the constitution of the party, especially its principles on internal democracy. They were no longer enthused by acts of lawlessness by their leaders only for the same people to turn around to plead for questionable forgiveness. They seemed to be saying that the quick resort to Machiavellian principles of the end justifying the means has to stop. Such were the sentiments Tukur met on the ground that his reconciliation tours turned out a total fiasco.

    The failure was such that the chairman of the party’s Board of Trustees BOT Tony Anenih had to embark on his own version of reconciliation tours. His success is also yet to be seen.

    Apparently for want of any credible reason to offer aggrieved members, Tukur took resort to the absurd. He told stakeholders in the north-west zone that PDP is “all about patronage” In his own words, “we are going to dole out patronage to all our members who remain in the party”. This patronage he further explained, will also be extended to members who contested and lost election. He said there is enough to go round every one and that there is no need for any member to leave the party.

    These statements are to say the least, a great disappointment. They cast the PDP as a party with the ‘food is ready for sharing mentality; one whose quest for power is driven by the sole desire to share our collective resources among its members. And in a clime that is characterized by brazen corruption and mismanagement of public funds, Tukur has led us into why this malfeasance has festered. We can now understand why nothing is working in this country despite the 14 years the PDP has been in power. It is now becoming clearer why the EFCC has been unable to successfully prosecute the ex- governors they arraigned for sundry financial misdeeds while in office.

    It is also becoming clearer why the fuel subsidy probe and the fraudulent abuse of the scheme by sundry highly placed persons cannot go far. That is the folly of Tukur’s revelations and it should not be treated lightly.

    It may not be completely out of place for party members to benefit from the government of the day. This could come in form of appointments and contracts provided such contracts were competitively bided and conformed to best practices. But it is reckless to emphatically state as the PDP chairman did that the party is all about patronage to its members.

    Where do we then locate the place of the electorate within such a scheme? This poser is further reinforced when it is realized that the people constitute the ultimate sovereign on whose behalf power is held in trust. When therefore a government in power exists mainly to service the interests of its members, such a government has become a similitude of the salt that has lost its taste. That is the kind of emotions Tukur’s statements evoke about his party. Can any thing good come out of such a warped view of politics and governance? It is doubtful.

    Perhaps, the only ground the PDP chieftain can be forgiven for such a vacuous statement is that he spoke out of frustrations and want of any credible thing to tell aggrieved members.

    This line of argument is further given credence when we call to mind that he had in the same venue, told his audience that the party would face a “heavy war” ahead of the 2015 elections as a new group has come up to pull the rug off their feet. This was an obvious reference to the merger of four political parties ahead of the 2015 elections.

    It may also be for the same reason that he is finding it very difficult to push through the old idea that members could be bruised and disgraced only to turn round to pacify them. Then, the PDP was having a field day. With a multiplicity of weak parties, it was sure to win elections at least at the centre. It could therefore afford to disregard rules, impose candidates and still have its way through the advantage of the power of incumbency. His reference to “heavy war” is also very instructive. It is only hoped that this war will be prosecuted with conventional weapons.

    The emergence of a credible opposition is a very bold statement. And aggrieved PDP members are not oblivious of this heart-warming reality. That is perhaps, why Tukur had to take resort to promising them heaven and earth in a bid to sway them. But the promise is neither here nor there since out of office, the PDP will have nothing to dispense. Aggrieved members may be saying: to hell with your patronage; it is time to pay the party in its own coins.

    After all, you can deceive some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time. I think, the PDP has got this message.

  • The stone shall roll away

    The stone shall roll away

    In the effort to build up a note in line with the theme of The Redeemed Christian Church of God’s this Easter Let’s-Go-A-Fishing programme, I stumbled on a message that I found very significant to the situation of Nigeria. Since it is not debatable that the justification of Christianity is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, I could see the relevance of resurrection to the afflictions confronting the nation today. With this reality that goes beyond religion affiliation, I was convinced that there is still hope for this nation if only the right thing is done in accordance to the will and purpose of the indubitable creator of earth and man who remains the authority in heaven.

    According to the message, the tomb where Jesus was laid on Good Friday is now a completely different tomb… it requires a different type of watchman. It does not need a cemetery caretaker or a company of Roman soldiers assigned to protect the dead, but an angel from the realms of light and life. The servant-angel appeared first; then his Master was later seen.

    Implication? This is the signal that a new time has come; an era where heaven and earth are now joined, because Jesus Christ, the Saviour has risen. The wall of separation has fallen; God has reconciled Himself to sinful men; the sacrifice of the Son has been accepted by the Father. This is the supreme Easter truth.

    Last week, reminders of the factual state of the nation were again revealed. First, it was the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) National Chairman, Bamanga Tukur who declared Nigeria to be under attack. Tukur said: “Today, there is fear everywhere. Churches are being burnt. Mosques are being attacked. United Nations building bombed; motor parks are being bombed. People cannot go to motor parks again to travel for the fear of being attacked. Security installations, such as police stations, prisons are being burnt down and inmates released at will. Nobody knows the next target of attack.” Correct disclosures.

    Also at the 5th Bola Tinubu Colloquium, Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka and others lamented the dying of the nation. “Let’s face it. This nation is on the brink. There are those who don’t understand this, who won’t accept this. I feel very sorry that they will wake up and find out that we have fallen over the brink. It is not what we envisaged during our struggle for independence”, Soyinka was quoted as saying.

    CBN Governor Sanusi Lamidi Sanusi who took over from Soyinka as chairman of the event argued that it was wrong to assess a nation’s economy in isolation of the wellbeing of the people. “What is destroying this country is that people are corrupt and doing nothing. We need to be asking, as civil society, what are we doing?” For him, “we are a country which has absolutely no regard for merit and competence.”

    In Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s view, Nigeria is drifting apart because “we have leadership that is dividing us more and more every day”. The birthday celebrant insists we must question ourselves in Nigeria, since no nation has fought a religious war and survived it.

    Indeed, the afflictions confronting the nation today is killing the nation, which is why the opportunity of this season of resurrection must be seized for revival if the nation is not to be lastingly scattered. In the gospel, the story is that it was very early in the morning while it was still dark, that the women went out on a task of love to complete the anointing of of their Lord’s dead body which was earlier hastily done after He was crucified.

    They witnessed the death of Jesus; they had also earlier witnessed His passion for them. Now, it was time for them to give to Him, even if in death, their own passion – their own service of love. As they arrived at the tomb, they were faced with a predicament, one that they had not thought of before they set out: Who would roll the great stone away from the entrance of the tomb?

    As they arrived, they discovered the stone rolled off the tomb and were afraid that grave robbers might have disturbed the resting place and the body of the Lord. Suddenly, an angel appeared to them, sitting quite contentedly upon the stone, with a miraculous story to tell and an even greater mission: “Don’t be distressed. You’re looking for Jesus who was crucified and died? Well, He’s not here. He has risen! Go inside the tomb and see the place where they laid Him.” And they went inside and noticed that the grave was exactly as it would be if the body was still lying inside. But there was no body. The angel continued, “Go tell His disciples and Peter that He is going before them to Galilee. There you will see him, just like He told you.”

    Now they remembered, after all, the Lord had told them about this so many times that He would rise from the dead. And indeed, He has risen.

    The visions that at are being revealed about Nigeria must not be taken for granted if anyone must show sincere and true love for the restoration of the dead glories of the nation. Tukur could hardly comprehend where we are heading to as a nation. But he said since nobody can even explain what is happening now and nobody knows the next target of attack, the nation “must come together to fight the common evil as there is fear everywhere.” Just in matching approach, Soyinka believes that with the discovery of some cells in the plan to blow up Lagos, it has become clear that the security dilemma we are facing right now is not just regional. “It is national, it is a humanistic problem.”

    I concur with them for the gospel truth that the nation is in menace more so as our President seems not to know what to do and how to handle the stone blocking true transformation for advancement. That Nigeria still remains a country in spite of battles being confronted is entirely by the grace of God. If the purpose of God to be fulfilled is retarding in the hand of poor leadership, the same God might just be giving an opportunity for the obstacle stones to be rolled away that His glory might be witnessed again in the land.

    The stone at the tomb was not rolled away so that Jesus could leave the tomb; but that the women and everyone else could see that He had been resurrected and was no longer confined by a grave. It was also because Jesus knew that the sinful flesh of the people could not fathom the power of God that was His as God’s only begotten Son.

    What are the stones preventing us from seeing the resurrection power of God in our lives? Perhaps it is the life of unrighteousness, filled with overwhelming corruption and desperation for things of the world, instead of prioritizing Him, that might have been preventing the nation from God’s intervention.

    Yet, there is no doubt that the stone can be rolled away for us the people. Instead of allowing the nation to descend into a second round of destructive civil war, restoration of the corporate existence of the nation is possible.

    If politicians are failing to protect the country but only focusing on 2015, pushing to remain in power, Nigerian masses must be awake to imbibe the wisdom of God. One of the ways might just be as counselled at Tinubu Colloquium that youths who are the future of this country must wake up from slumber and take their destinies into their hands through making the right choice that complies with the will of God and wipe away the wicked killing their nation.

    Also, for as many with power to pray, they should do so unrelentingly for God’s mercy and intervention to roll away the stones of affliction and save us as a people.

  • Achebe versus Soyinka

    Achebe versus Soyinka

    Barely two decades ago, poet and playwright Femi Osofisan delivered a broadside, and it was as a keynote speaker at an annual convention of the Association of Nigerian Authors. According to the big-eyed lover of theatrics, only two serious Nigerian authors inhabited our literary firmament: Wole Soyinka and Niyi Osundare.

    Not a few writers and critics were scandalised by his claim. Many thought it was deliberately contrarian, an act of drama by a dramatist to draw attention to himself not by the pithy wisdom of his declaration but the mere vanity of it. He was a public desperado banging his shoes to gain attention.

    The first question thrown at him was predictable: What of Chinua Achebe? Wearing a glum mien almost as defiance, he maintained his assertion and said many people paid attention to Things Fall Apart, and that was not even his most accomplished work.

    At the time, I was in my mid-twenties and just beginning to overcome my illusion from my teen years. I was weaned on Things Fall Apart, read it, worshiped its creator and placed Achebe as the preeminent deity in the literary pantheon not only on the African continent but all over the world. But how many writers did I know and how many books had I read? How skilled was I in the art of appreciating the collaborations of words into narratives?

    But as I grew out of my naivety towards the end of my years at the Obafemi Awolowo University, renouncing Achebe as a god of literature was like a shock of atheism in the church. I was abandoning the temple, unfrocking the priests and demystifying the canon. I became an apostate in the true religion. I felt conned by my breeders. I ate the poisoned diet, malnourished by untutored chefs.

    Literature belongs to a complex world, and because everyone can pick a novel or play and read, the impression often comes across that it is everyone’s game. George Bernard Shaw said snidely that “vocations are a conspiracy against the laity.” He was right. Not everyone can be a medical doctor, or software analyst or Supreme Court judge. Everyone can sing but not everyone can tell why a good song is great although they have their personal attitudes and predilections. Not everyone can postulate on good literature. Achebe’s works were good literature, but whether he wrote a great novel, leave that to those who know.

    I never intended to write another column after last week’s in which I echoed William Shakespeare when I characterised Achebe as a self from self. That is, he struggled with alienation throughout his life.

    Since the bard’s death, many people either by subtle references or direct barbs have tried to do two wrong things. First, they claimed he deserved the Nobel Prize but was deprived. Two, that Achebe was greater than Wole Soyinka. By inference, they claimed that Soyinka did not earn the prize and the wise men of Stockholm ought to have given the medal to the author of TFA.

    How come the father of African literature did not win the preeminent prize? The phrase, made popular when he won the Booker Prize Lifetime honour, has been appropriated to imply that Achebe was number one on the continent. So why did he not win the prize? First, TFA was a great book not because of its literary properties but because of its ideological potency. The Nobel Prize does not go to a novelist whose work is signposted by sociological fixations supplanting narratives with long pages of how Igbo villages are organised. When Osofisan asserted that TFA was not his best book, he meant that more attention should go to Arrow of God, a better book. So why do his admirers say less of Arrow of God but pay more encomiums on TFA. It is because they are struck by the timely power of the book. The West, embraced TFA for its introduction of its peoples to the dignity of African society, a thing they did not care to glean from accomplished works that came before TFA. Even the writer, Amos Tutuola, with his Palm wine Drinkard, came long before. But the west wanted an African to write like them so they could applaud him. And Achebe did it in a simple language.

    Did he succeed by using the language as a tool of subversion? Hardly. For a sampler of that sort, read Yambo Ouologuem’s Bound to Violence. TFA was a story of a clash of culture, which was nothing new. He wrote about the assertion of local pride, which was hardly original. But it was a counter-narrative, and it was done with gusto and minimal dexterity, and that was enough for them. They were amazed at the manipulation of proverbs and other manifestations of local colour. But the proverbs were never original, just like many of the proverbs in Ola Rotimi’s The Gods Are Not To Blame.

    The other novel often quoted was A man of the People and critics have credited him with prophetic insight. The novel predated the 1966 coup. But it was hardly original because the conversation was already in the air on the continent. So he wrote good works, not great works, not textured by deeper insights that you would see in better accomplished works.

    Achebe was nominated severally for the Prize, but he did not get it because his works had to be weighed against the competition, other works also nominated by various groups. It was the comparison that exposed his works. If TFA was not his best work, it goes without saying that it was a book that thrived on popularity not subtlety. Literature is not about the popular text. It is about high art. If Achebe influenced a generation of writers, that makes him a great writer. But it is a testament to theme and not artifice.

    Soyinka, on the other hand, won based on his plays and poems. If we were to judge by popularity, many would pick the Lion and Jewel and the Jero Plays as Soyinka’s masterpieces. But far from it. They compare in richness to TFA. Many who cavil at his prize have probably not read the following: Death and the King’s Horsemen, Madmen and Specialists, Kongi’s Harvest, A dance of the Forest, The Road, Opera Wonyosi, among others. Each of these works is a stunner, primed with layer after layer of thought and meaning wrapped in narratives.

    Those who read TFA like clockwork may be put off by some of Soyinka’s opus. So they should not obsess out of ignorance. They should read first. If you knock Soyinka on obscurity, you have a right. But high art is not always easy to understand. Those who claim to enjoy TFA cannot write a literate essay on the book and why it is high art.

    Because of his stature as a playwright, some downplay his other gifts. In the Nobel citation, he was also praised for his prison Notes, The Man Died, as well as his long poems like Ogun Abibiman, which I guess many readers have not even heard of.

    It is true that some great writers are passed over for the prize. But few disagree that those who win deserve the accolades. The other Nigerian I expected to win was Christopher Okigbo, who was tragically lapped up by the Civil War.

    Achebe was a good story teller, so was my grandmother. Turning from a raconteur to an art of sublimity and depth belongs to the masters. Because of his influence on a continent, I compare him with Samuel Johnson of the Shakespearean era. He was described as a great writer but not a great artist.

  • America: Where did your dream go!

    America: Where did your dream go!

    •The people must protect democracy for democracy to protect the people.

    This piece returns to the American scene because it is important for Africa to understand the dynamics of America’s political economy. It is insufficient to imbibe the myths hoisted on you. If you accept them, you would believe America invented the words “democracy, justice and right.” Further, you would believe America’s actions are always and everywhere defined by these notions. To accept this perspective is to align on the wrong side of a grave deception. America occupies the pinnacle of military and economic power; possession of such might gives the nation an ability to broadcast its favored version of history and events with a force none can match. This dominance of the portals of information reshapes the minds of others. The frequency with which the fables are told becomes seen by the innocent and unaware as indicative of the accuracy of the message. That you regularly publish something does not make it true. It just makes the average nation and person think it’s true.

    America has always been an imperfect nation that engaged in many ignoble things along the road of national evolution. Slavery, the nearly total eclipse of Native American populations, and the strong-armed theft of the southwestern United States from an unfairly beaten and supine Mexican nation scar the nation’s path to greatness. American would rather you discount these things as mistakes from a dead past. But the past never fully dies; it exists in the present it helped create. These benighted events are as integral to American history as the march toward democracy, economic development and human rights. One set is the full counterpoise of the other. Those who say America is God’s country belittle God, reducing Him to a mortal who respects might and money more than compassion and goodness. America is not God’s nation; it is a man’s nation, save that man is stronger than any other at the moment. Like other nations, America is a mixture of good and bad, of noble and base, and of those who love democracy and those who so despise it that they would turn it into something different if given a chance at a chance. American democracy is not a monolith nor is it an altar at which all Americans worship. It is a composite human organism suffering a terrible affliction within. Some of its parts want no part of it. Ironically, the relatively smooth yet elitist operation of the system has provided those who would undermine democracy the money and power to do so.

    As such, America is a great republic turning small. Today’s America represents a textbook on how to lose democracy not strengthen it. For African nations like Nigeria, there is no lesson more poignant. You will learn much about how to grow your democracy by understanding how America is forfeiting hers. By learning how America bankrupts its democracy, you just might discover how to keep your own.

    Thus, this column frequently returns to the American scene not because America is a positive lesson. We examine America because too many of you perceive it as the pinnacle, when it is not. Once it was; now it is not. However, perception commonly trails reality. This err can be fatal to Africa. Thus we must cure it before it leads Africa backwards.

    Last week, the American government criticized the pardon granted former Bayelsa Governor DSP Alamieyeseigha. Local media was alive with this story. However, something was missing in much of the analysis of this bilateral spat. Reasonable people may differ about the merits of the action so there is little profit in trampling this worn ground. Suffice it to say the act was legal. There also is little utility in arguing that America’s statement represented an unwarranted interference in Nigeria’s internal affairs as America is the supreme global interloper. The American government sees it as its divine right to tell others what to do. This is what America does. What most of the media commentary failed to address was the American government’s obvious hypocrisy in criticizing another nation of corruption when America could not handle what it had in hand.

    While fustigating the pardon came, this same Administration recently found one, possibly two, banks willfully guilty of laundering drug money, with each institution washing nearly one billion dollars in dirty money. This was criminal action performed by senior bank officials. Yet, no criminal charges were had. The excuse was that invoking criminal sanctions would harm the banks. Because the banks were so large and important, such action would damage the economy. Put another way, the law cannot touch them because the officials hold important positions handling other people’s money. This begs a question: What do you call a banker who will not be charged for misappropriating other people’s funds? He is no longer a fiduciary custodian of the funds: he has become a thief in the making.

    Rarely has such a feckless excuse been given by law enforcement officials unwilling to enforce the law. In effect, the Justice Department lent its good offices to injustice. Eschewing the constitution and the laws they swore to uphold, administration officials revealed that Money Power trumped justice in their universe.

    No one was asking the government to set torch to the banks. Certain bank employees were guilty. Punishing them would not crash the banks or ruin the economy. We would have survived just as we make do when a bank official expires or falls ill. These people should have been sanctioned as severely as any drug pusher. Without willing bankers, the drug industry would not be as big, violent and lucrative as it is. It would not menace society as it does. Yet, the bankers were given a free pass. All the banks did was to pay a civil fine. The fine represents noting more than a “tax” on criminal behavior. Justice may be blind but she evidently has acquired a great deference to money.

    Worse, the same Justice Department declared it will not investigate, let alone, prosecute any of the misconduct that precipitated the 2008 global financial meltdown and concomitant recession. This mocks justice. Again the excuse was a spineless wonder. Officials rationalized the financial wrongdoing was too complicated and too massive to prosecute. What! Every major financial crisis is built on a mountain of crimes. The 2008 decline was no exception. Systematic accounting fraud by senior officials in the largest financial institutions reduced the world economy to its knees. Over 20 trillion dollars in nominal wealth was destroyed. Millions lost jobs they shall never regain. Lives becoming synonymous with poverty and unable to bear the weight of their decline, hundreds took their own lives. Meanwhile, the incomes of bank officials responsible for the morass grew, as if they fed off the misery of the economy.

    Authorities pursued wildcat criminals like Bernie Madoff whose one-man pyramid scheme inevitably collapsed. However, Madoff and those like him were fringe players in a larger drama. By foregoing any attempt to prosecute the wrongdoings leading to the financial crisis, the American justice system gave blanket pardon to the perpetrators of a trillion dollar criminal undertaking. In one swoop, the justice system immunized an entire class of professional wrongdoers. It was as if the Administration said, “You stole so much in such an arcane way, we’d rather you keep the loot!” Senior officials in the large financial houses are now above the law. As long as theft is not blatant and is aptly buried in the balance sheet, banker criminals will not be sanctioned and can remain among the most powerful and respected members of society.

    Not only does this pardon shield past wrongs it gives a green light to future sinister conduct. By its permissiveness toward financial wrong, government has approbated the resumption of the hircine behavior that produced the 2008 crisis. This means another financial crisis is inevitable. Shorn of its nigh unintelligible legal jargon, the government’s position is that sophisticated financial crimes which profit large banks are no longer illegal. A nation has reached the height of financialism when criminal justice officials, in contravention of Congress’s legislative prerogative to define crime, unilaterally deem legal financial conduct every sentient person knows is illegal. Sadly, the height point of financialism is a low form of corruption, as barren as the public office corruption bedeviling Africa. However, because people have been indoctrinated to see America as the exemplar of good governance, we don’t see its corruption for what it is.

    America’s big financial institutions are rife with crime but rifer with money able to fuel political campaigns. Consequently, financial firms have disproportionate sway over politicians, including the occupant of the White House. Yet, many firms are populated with senior officials who should be indicted. Instead, they deploy profits improperly acquired to buy undue influence in government. Because of this undue weight, government looks at the financial sector as sacrosanct to the extent that government has decreed that no serious crime can be committed therein. Wall Street is now America’s Vatican and Washington is but government for hire. In comparison, Nigeria’s prosecution of a handful of banking officials, while far from exemplary, still exceeds the American government’s performance in similar circumstance.

    In all, the reasons given by the American government for effectively pardoning the entire class of people who crashed the global economy are not as colorable as the reasons given for the Alamieyeseigha pardon. There may be people with cause to question that pardon. The American government is not one of them. Washington should first remove the forest from its eye before shouting to everyone to come view the speck in Abuja’s. At bottom, America’s grouse is not against corruption. In its hubris, America believes it should define those forms of corruption other nations should commit and those they should not.

    Meanwhile, people who celebrated Obama’s reelection, believing it would free him to become his truer self have gotten their wish. They now wish they hadn’t. The first months of Obama’s second term have been as pleasant as a rotting fish in one’s bed. This column has repeatedly declared Obama a consummate manipulator prone to do the opposite of what he says. For years, I have labeled him a Rockefeller Republican. That description has proven too ebullient. Although he continues to deceive people with his winsome personality, the man has become Nixonian in action.

    During the campaign, he pledged allegiance to the middle class, vowing not to balance the budget on their backs. Yet, outside the glare of the media, his Administration recently sent tens of thousands of government workers on unpaid furlough. Many will be permanently dismissed, never again to find work. By and large, these workers voted for him, hoping against hope that he would bring the change he promised. What they got in return for their trust in this man is change that will impoverish them. They have learned the bitter lesson too late. To lean on Obama is to lean on a mirage. You will fall.

    Obama also claimed he would not undermine Social Security and public health care benefits. However, he joined the Republican congressional leadership in temporizing as the deadline for comprehensive government budget cuts expired. Unable to hide delight as his boss’s political legerdemain, Obama’s chief economic advisor let the rat out of the trap. The advisor revealed the president’s public opposition to the cuts was political theatre. Obama actually wanted the reductions. The cuts would allow Obama to achieve the social service reductions he wanted yet allow him to escape blame for the austere measures. Obama could claim the Republicans forced him into cuts that, in reality, he wanted all along. In other words, He conspired with his Republican interlocutors to confound the electorate and as well as members of his own party who did not expect this level of fiscal austerity from him. That they did not know better was because they did not want to know their president. They would rather believe him than to know him. This may prove a costly preference.

    From the onset of his presidency, Obama set his heart on dismantling the social safety architecture constructed by Franklin Roosevelt, the Democratic Party’s greatest president. Though waving a liberal banner, Obama seeks the conservative Holy Grail: to shrink and privatize social security and public health.

    That Obama does these things although contrary to the interests of the people who voted for him does not make him evil. Like most American politicians, he is more hired hand than elected official. In America, elections mean less than the money that funds them. Without funds, there is no campaign, thus no victory. It is a myth that Obama’s campaign was dependent on no one because it was fueled by millions of small donors. Without the vast sums given him by Wall Street interests, Obama would not have made it. His election was purchased by the few. To the few, he owes his loyalty. This is the way of modern American governance. Elections keep it democratic in form. However, the system has been distorted to where all major candidates are simply indebted to different members of the same class of deep-pocketed donors. Thus, Republicans are now extreme conservatives and the Democratic Party has become moderately conservative on economic matters. In substance, American government is no longer democratic in terms of abiding the will of the electorate. It is democratic only in the venal sense that it is now open for purchase to the highest bidder.

    In the end, democracy is a rather odd species of governance. While other forms of governance leap at self-perpetuation, democracy recoils from longevity. Its core theme is the fundamental equality of man. Yet, not all people believe it. However, democracy does not penalize those who despise it. It allows them the freedom to amass the economic and political power to deracinate the very mode of government that provided them the space and freedom to prosper. A sad trait of human nature is the nearly universal and uncanny ability of elites to come to the wrong conclusion regarding the relationship between their personal attainment and the governing system in which they operate. The wealthier people become, the more they believe their fortune is unilaterally derived. They believe they achieved it despite the system. As such, the system becomes the enemy to their continued advance and fulfillment. They buy and bend the system to fit their purpose. The more it fits them, the less it accords with the majority of society. This is how democracy is placed on the auction block. This is the current state of American governance. It is nothing to celebrate. Emulate it at your peril for you will progress no further than you already have.

     

    08060340825 (sms only)

     

  • The Census of Ghosts

    The Census of Ghosts

    (An Easter Combo)

    Unholy ghosts!!! It is profoundly ironic that on the same day that Jesus Christ resurrected, Nigeria should be dealing with so many ghosts. Without any doubt, the Boko Haram sect has become the greatest threat to the corporate existence of Nigeria since the Civil War. The organization, as expected of all guerrilla outfits, is shadowy and shrouded in mystery. Whatever its provenance, whether secular or theocratic in inspiration, no insurgent group worth its salt goes about brandishing the names of its core leadership.

    The government has repeatedly made it known that it does not negotiate with ghosts. Since ghosts are hardly visible entities, this is an eminently sensible position to take. You cannot sit down to talk or negotiate with an unperson, somebody who is simply not there. Yet at the last count, these ghosts have killed almost half a million Nigerians in the last three years and still counting.

    The trauma of a ghost country is compounded by its inability to trace or account for its own ghosts. Something will have to be done to bring the government of ghosts and the ghost of government together before we all become ghosts.

    The entire country is swamped by ghosts. Ghosts have laid a siege to the country. At the moment, four principal types of ghosts can be identified. There are arms-bearing ghosts, otherwise known as the Boko Haram insurgents. These are the ghosts that have been killing other people. They have struck fear and trepidation into the heart of the people. The entire land is flowing with blood and tears.

    The second group of ghosts are the economic ghosts. These are the ghost workers who cost government billions every month. Among the ghost workers are the miracle workers of the temporal ministries who facilitate the ghost workers. There are also the ghost barons who help with phantom subsidies and of course the pension thieves who vanish into thin air like ghosts.

    The third group are the political ghosts. These are the ghosts of pensioners who have died waiting for their pensions and politicians who have been killed in strange and suspicious circumstances. The particular group of ghosts are notorious for not resting in peace or allowing others to rest in peace. Then there are the holy ghosts and spiritual merchants who spiritually launder the loot.

    The last group are the ghostwriters. These are the literary ghosts, writers, journalists, historians and columnists, who help others to prepare or settle accounts, particularly where and when disputes arise in the other groups over the allocation of resources, or the allocation of economic, military and political casualties. A columnist who chooses to wear the cloak of anonymity is for example a ghost writer

    In view of this plethora of ghosts in the land, snooper brings to you this morning a short excerpt from the novel, Bulletin From the Land of Living Ghosts published eleven years ago in 2002. It shows once again how fiction can anticipate reality.

  • The land of ghosts

    What was the beginning of the journey of the general, or to put it more accurately, the beginning of the journey of his coffin, to the Cemetery of Patriots. Certain journeys are reversible, and certain journeys are irreversible. Certain destinations are returnable, and certain destinations are irreturnable.

    Whatever the nature of the general’s journey and destination, it was to be a harbinger of greater stress and crisis for the country. Whether there was any connection between the two events could not be ascertained as at the time this chronicle of the travails of the people of Muleria was put together. What could be ascertained was that shortly after the night of horror at the Cemetery of Patriots, that was a few months shy of twenty-one years after the great warlord disappeared, the entire nation became a ghost country.

    It was not just the odd sighting of the old general, or the customary reports of some ghosts in the city and the country side. Things soon assumed an epidemic proportion. There was a plague of ghosts. Ghosts were sighted everywhere: in homes, schools, churches, mosques, buses, court-rooms, barracks, campuses, offices, banks, hospitals and everywhere two or three people were likely to gather.

    The entire nation was bursting with wraiths and apparitions. The problem was that there was no hiding place. Unlike a war with well-defined zones and sectors, these were hostilities without bounds or boundaries. It was as if the dead had decided to return en masse. The stress and strain began to take its toll on a normally cheerful and ebullient people.

    And it was not ghosts alone. There were other spirits, too: fairies, daemons, goblins, gremlins, gnomes, sprites, imps and all manner of supra-terrestrial terrorists. From being haunted by the ghost of mismanagement, the government found itself confronted by the mismanagement of ghosts. And it succumbed to both.

    First it warned about rumour-mongering and threatened to deal ruthlessly with anybody peddling ghost stories. Then after its own deliberations about ghosts were reportedly abridged by ghosts, it confessed that there were indeed ghosts everywhere but that it had awarded contracts to ward off the invasion.

    Certain national landmarks were designated as Places of Burnt Offerings from Offending Children of Muleria to Their Offended Gods. A million doves were buried alive. Spiritual contractors, merchants of mayhem and other profiteers and parasites of popular misfortune smiled to the bank. There was an astronomical rise in the sale of frankincense, olibanum, absinthe and other incenses from the middle-east, Arabia, Persia and India.

    No household was complete without ethereal smoke wafting from the roof and the entire nation was soon engulfed in a cloud of fragrant vapour. Smart-alecs set up corner shops selling ghost charms, ghost amulets and, failing that, wands that could turn people into ghosts. It became customary to ask strangers: “Are you sure you are not a ghost?”Invariably, only the bravest of souls waited for the answer.