The Nation Newspaper

Category: Barometer

  • Ooni, Alafin and lexical storm in a teacup

    Ooni, Alafin and lexical storm in a teacup

    Spokespersons sometimes get their principals into trouble. Last week, former vice president Atiku Abubakar and political coalition leader on the platform of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) had to quickly debunk a statement purportedly made by him suggesting he was more concerned about rebuilding Nigeria than he was desperate to be president. It seemed contradictory, but because Ola Olateju, a professor, claimed during a meeting in Lagos welcoming defectors into the ADC that he was representing the former vice president, many observers were puzzled about what had changed so soon in Alhaji Atiku’s perspective. About two days later, another spokesman claiming to represent the former vice president insisted his boss was still in the running for the presidency, and that Prof. Olateju did not have his mandate to speak the way he did.

    Well, the troubles often stirred up by spokesmen are obviously never in short supply. Before two spokesmen contradicted themselves over Alhaji Atiku’s presidential ambition, two other spokesmen had exchanged in lexical jousting over their principals’ monarchical rankings in Yorubaland. The Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi, had conferred a chieftaincy title on an Ibadan-based engineer, Dotun Sanusi. He probably thought nothing of the conferment, and never expected that it would trigger a furore. But it did, in a teacup. First to draw blood over the title was the Alafin of Oyo, Oba Abimbola Owoade, whose media and publicity director, Bode Durojaiye, flew off the lexical handle by issuing an ultimatum to the Ooni. It was indeed a colourful ultimatum, the kind that reenacts the lost art of insults when literary giants crossed swords and challenged one another to a duel.

    READ ALSO: Racing to death: How reckless car racing turns highways to death tracks, claims lives

    Mr Durojaiye was entertaining, in a pompous way. He said: “The attention of the Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Abimbola Akeem Owoade I, has been drawn to the purported conferment of the chieftaincy title of Okanlomo of Yorubaland on a business tycoon, Dotun Sanusi, by the Ooni of Ife, Oba Enitan Adeyeye Ogunwusi. The conferment of a chieftaincy title which borders on Yorubaland by the Ooni of Ife is an affront to the revered institution of the Alaafin, who is the Titan of Yorubaland and who holds the exclusive right to confer any chieftaincy title which covers the entire Yorubaland on anyone. The Ooni of Ife is behaving as if there is no authority to check and call him to order, and because of that ‘above the law’ syndrome of his, he is in the habit of walking on everybody’s back, including the Apex Court in the country, the Supreme Court, which had ruled on the exclusive preserve of the Alaafin to confer chieftaincy titles that cover the entire Yorubaland on anyone.”

    It was not the most dignifying of statements, one complete with the detachment and cadence many observers of great monarchies associate with illustrious traditional institutions. But, alas, it was just the tip of the iceberg, or perhaps volcano. Mr Durojaiye had fiercely added: “The instrument of office presented to Oba Ogunwusi during his installation specifically limits his traditional area of authority to Oranmiyan Local Government, which has now been split into three local governments, viz: Ife Central, Ife North, and Ife South. The dictum that nobody is above the law of the land is now being put to a crucial test, and the reality of our time makes it very obligatory for the Alaafin to call the Ooni of Ife to order and demand revocation of the so-called Okanlomo of Yorubaland chieftaincy title conferred on Engineer Dotun Sanusi within 48 hours, or face the consequences…”

    The victims of so engaging an ultimatum were at first fairly restrained. But the ultimatum was too tempting, definite and colourful to be shrugged off with a mild sentence or two. The Ooni’s spokesman, Moses Olafare, first told the media that he would not dignify the Oyo provocation with a response, but soon issued a cryptic, defiant and sarcastic statement. “The Ooni is busy setting up businesses and creating jobs for youths across Yorubaland, while they (Alafin and his crowd) are busy fighting supremacy that does not exist. Dead empire. Their 48-hour ultimatum will soon lapse. We are waiting. Dead Empire. Ooni plans for the groundbreaking and launching of the Ojaja smart city in Ibadan, the biggest in Africa; and someone is somewhere busy issuing 48 hours empty threats. Where does this king (Ooni) have time for supremacy hullabaloo? Issuing 48-hour ultimatum over a chieftaincy title that doesn’t even exist.” There you have it. The contempt from Ile-Ife could barely be hidden, just as the Oyo ultimatum was deafening.

    It turned out that the recipient of the title himself had posted on his social media handle that he had been conferred with the title of Okanlomo Oodua, not Okanlomo of Yorubaland. In other words there was really no basis for a verbal skirmish. Media reportage probably transmuted Okanlomo Oodua to Okanlomo of Yorubaland, maybe in error or ignorance; for indeed how does the uninitiated differentiate between Oodua and Yoruba/Yorubaland? Of course the media obligingly went on to feast on the brickbats between the foremost traditional rulers to the dismay of the Yoruba. It was also clear that the brief lexical skirmish was essentially between the spokesmen of the two monarchs fighting century-old grudge matches on their own behalf and on behalf of their principals. Their statements were idiosyncratic of their individual hot-headedness, bearing little resemblance to the monarchs whose comportments are fairly well known to be regal and aristocratic. And judging from the less-than-satisfactory lexical exactitude of the contending statements, it was abundantly clear that none of the aides had adequately weighed or judged their words well before dishing them out on behalf of their bosses to more discerning and discriminating public.

  • Peter Obi heads to court

    Peter Obi heads to court

    Former Labour Party presidential candidate, Peter Obi, who is as at today of no fixed political party address, has shocked many Nigerians by deciding to sue human rights activist and lawyer, Deji Adeyanju. By threatening to take legal action, he has probably let his exasperations with Mr Adeyanju’s relentless verbal attacks get to him. Last week, his lawyers wrote the activist asking him to delete his alleged defamatory posts begun since 2022 and to top it with an apology. Sensing that Mr Obi had taken the bait, an elated Mr Adeyanju announced to the world that he was eager to square off in court with the greying LP pugilist. The younger fighter knows that all he has to do in court to quash any defamation allegation is to prove just one of the offending characterisations complained about by Mr Obi.

    READ ALSO: 2027: Racing for keys to Agodi govt house job (2)

    For a notable politician and presumed leader of the cyberbullies (or Obidient) movement, it is not known why Mr Obi has not developed a thick skin to verbal assaults, the kind his supporters torrentially levy against his opponents. He clearly does not like Mr Adeyanju calling him a fake messiah, religious bigot, and corrupt investor. Shortly before Mr Obi struck, the activist’s lawyers had last week written Serah Ibrahim, one of Mr Obi’s female aides, threatening to sue her for defaming Mr Adeyanju’s wife. If the Obi case ends up in court, it will be a bruising battle susceptible to all sorts of delay tactics once an injunction is secured to gag the defendant. Mr Obi will count on the Obidients to rally and inflame the crowd in his favour and against Mr Adeyanju, but the latter also has a captive army of roughnecks capable of fighting on all terrains and in all weather, including biting in the clinches. Nigerians should brace for a battle royal, assuming one of the combatants does not chicken out.   

  • Atiku, Obi, el-Rufai bewildered

    Atiku, Obi, el-Rufai bewildered

    The results of the last by-elections in 12 states have probably put coalition leaders in a quandary, their ambitions seemingly more jeopardised than ever. After the elections, the political parties the coalition leaders hoped to deploy as their weapons for seizing power in the next two years or so have spectacularly underperformed. Close to the elections, and having seen that their projections were too optimistically hinged on the packed crowds that attended their rallies, they publicly announced that the polls would after all not be a litmus test on their popularity. However, they cautiously hoped their declarations were misplaced.

    Read Also: EFCC declares Atiku’s son-in-law wanted for alleged money laundering

    In the end, their lowered expectations turned out to be an egregious overstatement. They have of course resorted to the time-worn excuses of accusing winners of the polls of rigging the election, probably to save face with their supporters, but in their private reflections, they must have begun to contend with the fear of having leapt into the void when they defected from their big parties to much smaller and lesser known parties. Unfortunately for them, regardless of where their reflections lead them, they can’t return to their former parties, and it may be too late to begin finding a new, more structured and ideologically sounder party. Trapped in the middle of nowhere, they may become more desperate and dangerous, flailing as well as lashing out viciously at the ruling party using fair and foul means. The country must beware.

  • Agunechemba, Ibom Air and women victims

    Agunechemba, Ibom Air and women victims

    Unknown to the public, more than two weeks before Ibom Air made Comfort Emmanson famous by stripping her of her dignity in the name of enforcing aviation regulations, an even more sordid attack on another woman, a youth corps member, Jennifer Elohor, had unfolded in Oba, Idemili South Local Government Area of Anambra state, on July 23. Where Ms Emmanson was dragged from the Ibom Air plane and stripped naked on August 10, her body becoming public and lasting spectacle, Ms Elohor was not only severely beaten, she was stripped even more stark naked, videoed, and threatened with all manner of gender violence. In the August 10 affair, the country was both puzzled and horrified to hear aviation officials, airport security men, and airline cabin crew attempting to justify their action. Furthermore, the Aviation ministry had expected that by quickly dousing the controversy, further revelations on both the questionable tactics employed by officials to handle the crisis and the antecedents of the affair that appear to exonerate the victim of blame could be avoided. The last has obviously not been heard of the matter.

    But in Anambra State late July – and video evidence exists to confirm the sordidness of the affair – the state-owned Anambra State Vigilante Group, Agunechemba, took the law into their own hands, brutalised the youth corps member, threatened her, and traumatised her colleagues living in the same Corpers’ Lodge. The incident took place on July 23, but it was not until last week that the public became fully apprised of the incident. All the people, authorities and institutions which should have managed the incident and ensured justice and redress were too inured to the victim’s pain and societal morality and standards to be outraged. Governor Chukwuma Soludo uncharacteristically quibbled about compensations involving replacement of phone devices, and Agunechemba operatives suspended and under investigations, and victim’s family reluctant to press charges. His senior special assistant on internal security also waffled about the affair, indicted himself by emphasising that, after all, the incident took place in July, and concluded by saying that the eight offending operatives were under investigations. There was no outrage in his voice or in the responses he gave to the media.

    Read Also: Women Leaders in Delta South APC throw weight behind Tinubu, Oborevwori

    Worse, the state police spokesman was tame in his answers to the media. He hinged the law enforcement agency’s pussyfooting on the reluctance by Ms Elohor’s family to press charges. There was no attempt to convince the public that the family in question was not being intimidated. And in the face of Prof. Soludo alluding to the eight Agunechemba operatives as bad eggs in an otherwise effective security outfit which has enabled the state to sleep well at night and helped Anambra to become one of the safest states in the country, it was not surprising that those who should have taken firm and immediate action to deal with the affront to civilisation in the state were lulled into complacency. It took the human rights community leading the battle cry, perhaps after viewing the appalling videos of the assault on the corps member, before the authorities in the state stirred themselves to say a thing or two.

    It is also shocking that the federal authorities, including the police and the NYSC in both Anambra and Abuja, took the matter quite tamely. Had they expressed enough outrage, the matter would have come to light much sooner, and both Anambra State and the state/federal police would have taken decisive actions to punish the errant Agunechemba operatives, take down the offending videos, and propose realistic and reasonable measures to ensure that there would be no reoccurrence anywhere in the country. The brutalisation of women by so-called public officials hiding under the guise of law enforcement, either on a plane or on land is becoming an epidemic. If it is to stop, the state and federal authorities must take much firmer stand and much sterner measures to curb the recurring malady. It was not until the human rights community sensitised the country to the Anambra affront before the state dismissed the eight operatives. State officials cannot defend the tardiness of investigations or the tameness with which they viewed the assault. Have they also become desensitised?

    The Aviation ministry and Anambra State need to revisit the outrages that occurred on their watch. They must be honest enough to admit that they misjudged the situations, allowed themselves to be distracted, empowered shoddy and prolonged investigations, and incompetently tried to downplay the assault on the women. Worse, they have done nothing to ensure that the nude videos of the victims were taken down from the Internet. The videos are still circulating. The Aviation ministry and Ibom Air, which needlessly dragged in the judiciary in the case involving Ms Emmanson, are having a rethink over how they handled the matter, but Anambra State and Agunechemba think that it was enough that they had dismissed the vigilance operatives and ordered their prosecution. No, it should go farther than that. They need to show believable outrage and reassure the public about the lessons they have learnt from the affair and what training and reforms they would embark on going forward. It should never be business as usual. What happened in Anambra last month is unfortunately one more solid argument against state police.

    More crucially, despite operating a federal constitution, to which the country pays lip service, the federal authorities have not quite shown more than a passing interest when things go horrifyingly wrong in some parts of the country, especially when it involves the right to dignity of defenceless women. If the NYSC in Anambra had paid closer attention to the mistreatment of their corps member, and had escalated the matter to Abuja with a decisive note indicating their outrage, it is inconceivable that it would have taken so many weeks before the erring operatives were dismissed or handed over to the police for prosecution. The debasement of womanhood that happened on Ibom Air and Anambra State in the past few weeks is a terrible embarrassment to Nigeria. Sadly, by their reluctant and hesitant approach to tackling the malaise of public mistreatment of women, officials have not demonstrated the right attitude to ensuring that the debasement would end soon.

  • FG, Ibom Air and Ms Emmanson

    FG, Ibom Air and Ms Emmanson

    Judging from how speedily the Aviation ministry has tried to douse the firestorm created by the Ibom Air/Comfort Emmanson scuffle, and the ValueJet/Wasiu Ayinde (KWAM 1) kerfuffle, it is obvious that Nigeria’s penchant for amicable resolutions will once again rob the country of the opportunity to set a precedent for tackling such dangerous encounters or to enable its institutions function independently and seamlessly. The ValueJet affair occurred first, on August 5, some five days before the Ibom Air August 10 scuffle. There has been enough blame to go round all the people and organisations involved in both affairs. ValueJet pilots, who were probably angered by KWAM 1’s effrontery, were accused of violating departure procedure by taxing before the ground staff gave the all-clear. Mr Ayinde, who tempestuously prevented the aircraft from taking off because cabin crew denied him the use of the contents of a handheld flask, was accused of arrogance, unruly behaviour and violation of a number of aviation regulations.

    In the second affair, Ibom Air cabin crew and aviation security officials were accused of highhandedness and unprofessionalism in their attempt to restrain Ms Emmanson, a passenger on the Uyo-Lagos flight of August 10. First they prevented her from disembarking on her own on the grounds that she had violated some aviation regulations, then used force to deplane her and in the process stripped her naked. Ms Emmanson on the other hand was alleged to have assaulted cabin crew, damaged airline property, and behaved most cantankerously before the plane took off and when it landed. The Aviation ministry, in the eyes of some Nigerians, among whom was former Anambra State governor Peter Obi, was accused of giving preferential treatment to Mr Ayinde while expeditiously charging Ms Emmanson in court a day after the Lagos Airport incident. The uproar among the public, not to say the din which both affairs had raised particularly in legal circles, was so animated that the Aviation minister Festus Keyamo looked for a way out of the quandary. He eventually directed the withdrawal of criminal complaints and charges against both KWAM 1 and Ms Emmanson, arguing that no one involved in the fracas was guiltless, and that in any case lessons had been well learnt. However, investigations will still be carried out in order to better understand what happened, what went wrong, and what remedies should be administered for improved aviation procedure and passenger flying experience.

    Read Also:How Ibom Air passenger was provoked – Eyewitness

    Undoubtedly, the Aviation industry and Nigeria’s justice system will learn a thing or two from both incidents, and in the weeks and years ahead, Nigerians will hopefully have a far better flying experience than they are used to. However, exacerbated by social media commentaries, the incidents will once again expose the fragility of Nigeria. It is of course human that some individuals will have anger management issues, can be instigated by wealth and status to commit antisocial behaviour, or as the case of the National Youth Service Corps member Rita Ushie Uguamaye, commit full public indiscretion just for the heck of it. But what truly bothers many Nigerians is the corrosive ethnic insinuation arising from the official management of the KWAM 1 provocation and the Ms Emmanson scuffle. These insinuations were of course largely limited to the social media. But as feral as the social media has become, its influence cannot be discounted in shaping for the worse social and political behaviour. To learn the right lessons, therefore, the country must reexamine the way aviation regulatory bodies and professionals handle provocations and anomalies, the procedure by which the justice system responds to disputes of the kind brought before them, and how officials handle or comment on public affairs with the sensitivity and impartiality required of their exalted positions.

    Read Also:

    Preliminarily, aviation regulatory bodies, including the Aviation ministry itself, had handled the two affairs in a desultory manner, almost incompetently and emotionally. They acted before engaging in full and impartial investigations. The justice system in the Ms Emmanson case also allowed itself to be stampeded by biased regulatory bodies and media rather than be guided by the facts before the court. Ms Emmanson was clearly and tragically railroaded into jail. Most political leaders declined to comment on the two cases because they awaited more facts, but Mr Obi, who interprets opposition politics in terms of spontaneous comments and conclusions on minutiae, focused more on seeing double standard in the official response to the two provocations. He spoke less about the appalling disregard for rules and professionalism, not to talk of the indefensible mistreatment of Ms Emmanson bordering on oppression, torture, and abuse. Mr Obi should have waited a little bit more in order to avoid making simplistic conclusions. As events unfolded, it became clear that the two incidents were different; and while both showed a violation of aviation regulations, the August 10 incident harks back to the long-standing and culture-based mistreatment of women in Nigeria.

    Mr Ayinde and the ValueJet pilots may have escaped with a slap on the wrist, and the case against Ms Emmanson rightly withdrawn because of its shoddiness and manifest one-sidedness in order to defuse tension and redirect attention to other less combustive matters. But Mr Keyamo and other relevant aviation-related agencies must still press on with their investigations to unearth what went wrong, in what manner officials abused their privileges, and what lessons everyone can imbibe to engender a better Aviation industry. These steps must, however, not preclude whatever legal remedies Ms Emmanson might wish to pursue to find relief for her rights that were cruelly and indefensibly violated by Ibom Air crew and Aviation security officials. Suggesting that during interrogation Ms Emmanson showed remorse over her actions was a needless overreach to influence the outcome of investigations. Hopefully, too, the judiciary may have learnt a thing or two about judicial stampede which public officials are overly fond of, but for which the courts must show no toleration.

  • MBF as Obi’s surety

    MBF as Obi’s surety

    The Middle Belt Forum (MBF) appears eager to repeat the mistake of 2023, when, during the presidential election, it allowed itself as a bloc to be bewitched by politicians. Socio-cultural and political groupings, some of them formed along regional lines, fare very badly when they put all their eggs in one basket. Largely Christian and a minority in Nigeria’s political north, the Forum had reacted furiously to the last presidential poll in response to the ruling party’s same-faith presidential ticket by wholeheartedly supporting the Labour Party’s presidential candidate Peter Obi. In the end, the MBF’s fears were proved to be badly misplaced. But the Forum’s national president, Bitrus Pogu, has refused to learn any lesson. He adamantly stands surety for Mr Obi without showing proof why he does so.

    Read Also: Obi Cubana urges youth to shun envy, focus on legitimate paths to success

    According to the MBF president, “We believe Peter Obi is a man of honour and we believe that if he gets the win and he promises or promised something, he will keep to it…For now, as a people, we believe Peter Obi because we know he is a man of integrity and honour who keeps his words.” It would be surprising to know that the MBF is unanimous in standing surety for Mr Obi years after the assumptions of the last presidential poll were shown to be false. That poll was probably the most divisive ever, along ethnic and religious lines. However, the country is gradually healing from the politicisation of religion, despite herdsmen atrocities in the Middle Belt, and so it would be a disservice to both the MBF and the country for any cultural or regional grouping to take steps or make statements in furtherance of such divisions.

  • Ghana and Tanzania Vs. Igbo and Kenyans

    Ghana and Tanzania Vs. Igbo and Kenyans

    It was a curious and disturbing parallel made more poignant by the timing. In the closing days of July, both Ghana and Tanzania were up in arms against the influx of foreign small-scale businesses in their countries. In the case of Ghana, the animosity was unofficial, not quite elevated to policy level beyond the restrictions applied over a decade ago against foreigners, specifically retail traders of whom the Igbo were noticeable. For Tanzania, the animosity was official, with Trade minister Selemani Jafo announcing wide-ranging restrictions against foreigners operating small businesses. Kenyans dominate that sector in Tanzania, and the restrictions were widely interpreted as targeting them. The Ghana Investment Promotion Centre (GIPC) Act 2013, revivified some two years ago, provides for, among other regulations, minimum capital requirements for foreigners amounting to one million dollars for small businesses, and limiting them to economic sectors they could operate in. Nigerians, particularly the Igbo, insisted they were the main target, even though the law is not country-specific.

    Late last month, the problem recrudesced, this time with Ghanaian protesters singling out the Igbo for mention as the leading violators of the 2013 Act. They accused foreigners of sundry business crimes and violations, including immigration offences, non-payment or under-payment of business permits, falsification of business documents, tax evasion, and trading in substandard goods, etc. Ghana’s President John Mahama has, however, promised that Nigerians would not be discriminated against, but many foreigners recalled that since 2013, the problem and the discrimination had flared almost annually. For as long as the problem remained, and as long as a distinct group of people represents the face of the provocation, the periodic eruptions will persist. In fact, there does not seem to be an end to the push and pull. The Igbo, who are the face of the provocation in Ghana, must find a way through their unions, the Nigerian diaspora group, and diplomatic efforts to manage the problem. After all, as everyone knows, xenophobia, even in its mildest form, is ubiquitous.

    Even though relations between the two East African Community (EAC) countries of Tanzania and Kenya have not been at their best, the recent flare-up over the foreign-run small-scale businesses in Tanzania began at the end of July, with no end in sight. Last week, according to Mr Jafo, foreign nationals (read Kenyans), are prohibited from owning or operating small-scale businesses in about 15 sectors, including tour guiding, beauty salons, gift shops, radio and television operations, mobile money transfers, etc. Predictably, Kenya has argued that though the cap fits Kenyan businessmen in Tanzania, they won’t wear it because it violates the principles of the EAC. More, Kenyan Trade Minister Lee Kinyanjui has called for the abrogation of the restrictions. According to him, it would have a negative effect on the economies of the two East African countries. In a statement he issued last week, he said, “It is therefore critical, in the spirit of EAC, that bilateral engagements be held to resolve these issues.” What is evident in all this is that, like the case between Nigeria and Ghana, Kenyan businesses stand to lose much more should the dispute persist.

    Read Also: Tinubu’s 2027 re-election bid unstoppable- Adekanmbi

    Interestingly, even within Nigeria, this discriminatory sentiment exists on a pernicious scale. During the pogrom that preceded the Nigerian civil war in 1967, protesters targeted the businesses of their antagonists, and have since continued to inflict similar punishment on local migrants who dominate certain sectors of the economies of host communities. In the absence of tenable political structures, the discrimination or punitive restrictions and regulations have begun to expand alarmingly into the political arena. It is a continuing challenge every jurisdiction must find creative ways of managing. Germany was unable to manage its skewed business relationship with affluent Jews before WWII, thus leading to the November 1938 pogrom or Night of Broken Glass (Kristallnacht). If regional economic groupings and competing countries struggle to manage such crises, they are even far more difficult to manage domestically because of its sometimes political ripple effects.

    Kenya may have inadvertently provided the solution to the regulatory disputes provoked by foreign-owned businesses. In his reflections on the dispute instigated by Tanzanian regulations on foreign-owned businesses, Mr Kinyanjui suggested ‘bilateral engagements’ to resolve the problematic and mildly xenophobic responses. But regardless of whether these tough regulations are provoked by settler communities within a country or across squabbling countries, it is important to be sensitive about host communities. They must never be taken for granted. They have their fears and they suffer certain deprivations. Boastful foreigners who flaunt their wealth in the face of deprived locals will inevitably always cause their hosts to kick against economic domination, discrimination or oppression. It is a natural reaction, especially when there are underlying structural imbalances in the polity. While diplomatic engagements may resolve disputes between countries, such as between Ghana and Nigeria, and between Tanzania and Kenya, only political restructuring can obviate social and political eruptions capable of threatening state stability domestically.

  • Responding to bloodthirsty incitement

    Responding to bloodthirsty incitement

    Too many Nigerians can’t draw a line between the constitutional provision of free speech and the criminal act of incitement. But the law enforcement agencies and security agencies know the difference; yet they have been slothful in enforcing the law. The reason for the wariness, ironically, is that both the government and the security agencies are scared of being described as autocrats. The 1999 Nigerian Constitution is unambiguous about what constitute civil rights and what do not. Why the government and the security agencies prefer to loiter in the inexistent grey areas is indeed hard to tell.

    Two Saturdays ago, Nasir el-Rufai, former governor of Kaduna State, was in Sokoto State during his mobilisation effort for the African Democratic Congress (ADC). There, he described as dangerous to the polity any attempt by the electorate to re-elect the All Progressives Congress (APC) into office. As far as he was concerned, he roared, the next presidential election “will not be just an election but the fight of our lives.” In short, it’s a do-or-die affair. This was not just hysteria or hyperbole; it was also criminal incitement clumsily hiding behind the constitutional provision of free speech.

    Read Also: Ambode denies ADC defection rumours

    Days later, Charles Oputa, aka Charly Boy, was even more rabid. Speaking in an interview last week, he said: “All I’m interested in right now is: will our votes count in 2027? How do we do it? How do we get these monsters away from leadership positions? It’s not about Mr A can steal more than Mr B. The people stealing our national wealth are from all the tribes. We know the game. But I’m hoping to see ‘rig and die’ come 2027. Blood will flow; before it gets better, it will get worse.” Please, mind his language: he speaks deliriously about ‘monsters’ who must be removed from leadership, and he wants to see ‘rig and die’, and worse, he wants ‘blood to flow’ because, in his twisted mind, ‘it must get worse before it gets better’.

    Men like Mallam el-Rufai and Charly Boy have a death wish for themselves and the entire country. But they market their hysteria and ‘bloody revolution’ because the security agencies inexplicably give them the latitude. Tragically, in their deplorable logic, government is filled with monsters, and the opposition manned by saints. More dangerously, any other result other than the one they expect must have been rigged. No generation of Nigerians has been so fanatical than the one exemplified by the two quoted individuals, one of whom has no sense of moderation, and the other no iota of gravitas.

  • SDP sensationalises el-Rufai’s expulsion

    SDP sensationalises el-Rufai’s expulsion

    WHEN he finally makes up his mind to say something on his expulsion from the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and 30-year ban for antiparty activities and impersonation, former Kaduna State governor Nasir el-Rufai should dismiss his tormentors’ presumptuousness and follow it up by accusing the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) as the chief instigator of the disciplinary action purportedly taken against him. After all, it is in his nature to look for scapegoats anytime he is cornered, since he does not ever accept responsibility for his actions. Some members of the Kaduna chapter of the party have come to his aid, arguing that he properly registered as a member in the state; but it is not clear that their efforts will be far-reaching enough to offer him the relief he seeks. When he peremptorily defected to the party from the APC months ago, he had hoped that his co-travellers, former vice president Atiku Abubakar and Rotimi Amaechi, among others, would follow suit. But those ones were more cautious and calculating than Mallam el-Rufai was angry.

    More and more, it is beginning to look like the problem is personified by the controversial Mallam el-Rufai, the Kaduna gadfly who flies off the handle at the least provocation. He is reinforcing the suspicion, if not conclusion, that whatever he touches becomes controversial – indeed, that his very presence anywhere is tantamount to controversy. Even though the former Kaduna governor has dithered in his association with the much-ballyhooed African Democratic Congress (ADC) as the final special purpose vehicle destination for Alhaji Atiku’s presidential ambition, the acrimony within the SDP has all but made it clear that the so-called mega coalition to fight President Bola Tinubu in the 2027 election will never berth in the SDP. ADC may be rife with its own legal conundrums and administrative lacunae, but the SDP is now in obviously much worse condition than probably any other fringe party intent on prostituting itself for the next polls. The reasons are not far-fetched.

    Read Also: SDP disowns El-Rufai, says ex-Gov not a member

    When he began associating with the SDP, Mallam el-Rufai immediately postured as the soul and nerve of the fringe party. He dictated what they should do, and because he is naturally outspoken and glib, he said to the world and the media what he thinks the party should say. A few thoroughbred politicians in the party resented his audacity and impertinence, but they bided their time until his cup was full. Even before his arrival, the SDP was not quite the somnolent organisation its long history of electoral misfortune indicated. It required calmness, maturity and perception for a new ‘intake’ to navigate the party, let alone chivalrously thrust himself forward as their conscience and saviour. Mallam el-Rufai had no such virtues, and thanks to him, the SDP is now in full-blown rebellion. On July 25, the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC), including some 23 state chairmen, reportedly met and sacked the party’s feuding factions led by Chairman Shehu Gabam and Secretary Olu Agunloye. Mallam Adamu Modibo became the acting chairman of the party’s National Working Committee.

    While Mallam el-Rufai was transfixed by the turn of events, some three days later, the party upped the ante and engaged him in a street combat by fingering him as one of the agents provocateurs in the party and going ahead to expel him and ban him for 30 years. In a statement disseminated to the media last Monday, the SDP national publicity secretary, Araba Aiyenigba, indicated at length that the former governor was unwanted in the party. Here is what he said: “El-Rufai never registered with the SDP at his ward level as required by the party’s constitution, yet falsely declared on social media that he had joined the party. He further forged documents claiming membership and took photo opportunities with suspended party leaders to reinforce this falsehood. In line with the constitution of the SDP, the ideology, manifesto, principles and practices thereof, and in consonance with the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Electoral Act pertaining to the exclusive right of a political party to determine its membership, the National Working Committee deliberated on the controversial membership status of Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai from Kaduna State who has in recent months been parading himself as a member of the SDP despite the assertion of the Kaduna State executives that he has not joined the SDP, but has instead been promoting the activities of other political party in the state.”

    Continuing, and barely able to conceal their contempt for the former governor, the statement added: “At the initial stage, this individual Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai was given the benefit of the doubt, given his status as an elderly person, a former minister and state governor who should know the implications of false representation and impersonation… However, upon thorough inquiry, it turned out that the Kaduna State SDP was right, and this individual had not joined the SDP…El-Rufai was confronted by serious eligibility problems, given an unpleasant history of intolerance and persecution of the SDP as an opposition party during his time as the Governor of Kaduna State under the APC. Having confirmed that he publicly declared for the ADC and continued to act in a manner contrary to the principles and practices of the SDP, the party has no option but to disassociate from and excommunicate him…”

    Mallam el-Rufai must be livid. But this time, he is not just transfixed, he is also probably dumbfounded. No one, not to say a man of his political pedigree, had ever been so summarily booted out and banned for decades. Alas, the former Kaduna governor becomes the first politician to enter the SDP Valhalla. Did they manage to embalm him before interment, seeing that there does not seem to be any cadaverous scent around him? But even if he is appalled by this riveting soap opera at his expense, he will simply sneer at them, blame the APC for his ordeal, and with as much conceit as he can muster, dismiss their fury with a casual and idiosyncratic wave of the hand.

  • The Charly Boy brouhaha

    The Charly Boy brouhaha

    It is a sign of the vulgarisation of Nigerian politics that the renaming of bus stops in Lagos, particularly the one involving Charly Boy, the irreverent and infamous anti-establishment agitator and undistinguished musician, became news. All his life, whether it relates to his claptrap music or slapstick television shows – now all distant memories – he was never outstanding. So, he chose agitation, achieved renown, and confused that little publicity with legacy. For years he imposed himself on everyone he came across: his neighbours and neighbourhood, and the yokels entertained by his lewd theatrics. How he managed to have a bus stop unofficially named after him is still difficult to explain or imagine.

    Read Also: How ‘Charly Boy’ bus stop was named after me – Charly Boy

    Even if it was official, the local government/local council development area whose remit it is to make edicts on such matters as street names and bus stops has finally woken up to its responsibility of sanitising its operations. Some have said the actions of the local government bore resemblance to hate speech and ethnic bigotry, and agitator Omoyele Sowore and civil rights lawyer Femi Falana have tried to draw a distinction between local council development area and local government area as the final authority on naming bus stops. But they are simply tilting at windmills. The change is popular, though it may take a long time to get used to. More, this matter is one clear case where common sense has triumphed over legalism. The public should get used to it, because there will be more such interventions and symbolisms.