The Nation Newspaper

Category: Sunday

  • Adulterated APC and unpardonable sins

    Adulterated APC and unpardonable sins

    Anyone who thinks the theatre of the absurd currently playing out at the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) over the acronym ‘APC’ is a freak coincidence, will believe anything. Anyone who believes those most threatened by the opposition dissolving into the All Progressives Congress (APC) are not in some way involved in this circus is naïve beyond belief.

    I refer here to the ruling Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). Forget the bluster, they are worried and are wise to be disturbed. Obviously, you’re not likely to find fingerprints of their national officers plastered all over the grubby application letter of the adulterated APC, when nondescript proxies can execute the task excellently.

    Aside the flurry of meetings and caucuses of the PDP in recent weeks, this latest dirty tricks stunt calculated to throw the energised opposition out of their stride, is the best indication yet of how rattled the powers-that-be are. The received notion that certain persons and groups can never work together to challenge the anticipated 60-year PDP hegemony, has bitten the dust. For once, the monster which thought itself invincible is flailing around blindly.

    Suddenly, everyone wants to register a political party that will generate the acronym ‘APC.’ Aside the merging opposition parties, the ‘Jankara’ African Peoples’ Congress, a new bunch have turned in a letter at the electoral commission seeking to register something called ‘All Patriotic Citizens.’ The power of imagination displayed by these clowns is simply breathtaking!

    This rash of political party formation activity comes against the backdrop of the deregistration, by INEC, in December 2012 of 28 political parties on grounds of their inactivity and near electoral irrelevance. None of them won a single seat at any level at the 2011 general elections.

    Among those consigned to the political wilderness by that action are some of Nigeria’s best known political activists like Balarabe Musa, Olu Falae, Tunji Braithwaite, Dr. Junaid Muhammed, Rev. Chris Okotie to name a few.

    While not denying anyone their legal right to seek registration of their wives and children as political parties, the point must be made that such a step bucks the emerging trend.

    In a competitive environment where familiar political figures found it difficult to thrive, it is not surprising that the old logic of Nigeria being essentially a two-party state is swiftly evolving into our present day reality.

    In this sort of circumstance, it is not credible to expect that any political organisation with serious designs on power will seek to strike out on its own; even worse, do so in the transparently mercenary and bumbling way the fake APCs have gone about the business.

    While the mischief is evident for all to see, and while the leaders of the opposition merger vehicle will be foaming at the gills with consternation, the broader worry should be about how low we are sinking into the morass of mediocrity.

    Whichever political ‘strategists’ are pushing the adulterated APC operation deserve to be fired. If the best they can come up with to counter the threat of the new opposition grouping is the silly trick of denying them use of a particular name or acronym, then they deserve to be pitied. The parties could always pick another name that will resonate even better with the populace.

    Someone is probably wondering what all the fuss about the name is. You need to have hung around politicians to know why. What may seem trifling to the rest of us carries grave implications where they are concerned.

    A typical politician understands that a huge chunk of the electorate – the ones who actually queue in the sun for hours to vote – are largely not too well-educated. So there is the need to keep things very simple for these kinds of voters. So they pick a name or acronym that will, for instance, place them at the top of the ballot paper.

    That way they can explain to the simpleminded that their party – Action Alliance – is right at the top of the ballot paper. ‘It’s the very first box; you can even thumbprint it blindfolded.’

    Notice that in this fight over names and acronyms, there is no discussion of solutions to the challenges confronting Nigeria. That is because those sorts of matters don’t decide who wins elections in Nigeria. People go through the motions of campaigning, but they know that in the end what will count is how well you have deployed financial resources to get out the vote, or how well you’ve deployed your master riggers to fix the elections.

    So rather than beginning to engage the new threat on the basis of what they would do differently, we are stuck in the quick sand of ruling party officials trying to trip up their rivals in the vain hope that it will make them go away. But that is not going to happen.

    What is emerging now is a clear pointer that the elections of 2015 will be more of the same: a rigging contest – full of dirty tricks and uncontrollable violence.

    Of course, INEC might still do the right thing and register those who have presented themselves to the world since early February using the name All Peoples Congress and the ‘APC’ acronym. But even if they choose to do what the typical Nigerian institution will do, and register any of these other fly-by-night outfits, there will be important lessons for the opposition to learn, and grave implications for the credibility of the electoral commissions as an impartial arbiter.

    The opposition needs to quickly get its head out of the clouds and realise that PDP is not going to hand over power on a platter. If they are going down, they will do so making an almighty racket. They will employ dirtier tricks than the current APC stunt, and invent new ones that are not already in the books. Put simply: 2015 will be war.

  • Ahmadu Ali’s fulminatory portrayal of the Southwest

    Ahmadu Ali’s fulminatory portrayal of the Southwest

    It is easy to miss the Saturday Sun’s interview with Col Ahmadu Ali (retd), a former chairman of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and also former Minister of Education. Often, no wisdom is gained by reading some interviews, not to talk of the flagrant manner the interviewees sometimes concoct approbation for themselves. But thankfully, I saw the Ali interview and read it. As expected, Ali said many things about himself and the great work he did as a three-time cabinet minister and resilient party chairman. If his brilliance did not endure or was not recognised, he blamed the iconoclasts that succeeded him, and the ungrateful barbarians that undid the country with their narcissism.

    But for such an eminent self-confessed tactician and public servant, it is surprising that Ali didn’t notice his views, as harsh on others as they might seem, gave an unflattering impression of himself as Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s zany. Now, he probably is not such a person, only that he gave that impression of himself. However, he thinks the world of Obasanjo, and describes him in superlative terms. “Obasanjo is sitting down there,” he began with a fulsomeness that matches his political obscurantism. “He is a bundle of knowledge for this country. If you have any difficulty and you cannot go to him and say come, how did you do it? This is my problem. You are wasting your time. All the people hanging around all these people (in public office) are just bootlickers. They are not advising properly. Obasanjo is the only person who has been Head of State three times in this country.” Ali’s depiction of Obasanjo reminds me of Nebuchadnezzar.

    The high point of the interview was when Ali portrayed the Yoruba as a totally ungrateful people on account of their rejection of Obasanjo both as a leader and as an icon. “This man, (Obasanjo) kept faith and voluntarily handed over to civilians,” Ali gushed. “He could have said he wasn’t going. What can anybody do? After all, it is the gun that got them there. And you people still don’t recognise him, especially the Yoruba people who are totally ungrateful kind of people in this country.” That may be a very sweeping dismissal of the Yoruba, but Ali is entitled to his views, even if it indirectly underscored his idolatrous fondness for someone the Yoruba are unlikely to ever respect, let alone embrace.

    Ali took his worship of Obasanjo to dizzying heights when he brutally eviscerated the Yoruba in terms that should make a sober man wince. Ali’s interviewer had suggested that the Yoruba could not forgive Obasanjo for robbing a fellow Yoruba, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, of the presidency in the 1979 election. Ali was incensed, and thundered in response: “Don’t talk rubbish. You are talking rubbish. That is the stupidity of the press and the self-appointed Yoruba leaders who are failures in their various fields of endeavour. They are just a total failure. How can you say, in an election where one candidate scored 12 million and showed presence in more than 12 states out of 19 and another candidate scored five million and showed presence in only five states, you then give it to the second person? What is democracy about?…Yoruba are another character.”

    The problem is not that Ali harbours such a disconcerting view of the Yoruba, and was not wary of going public with it. The problem, as the malevolently discriminatory Goodluck Jonathan presidency is showing, is that there are many more people in high places who entertain such horrendous prejudices against the Southwest, perhaps angered by the region’s sanctimoniousness, crusading disposition on civil liberties, including press freedom and activism, and their irritating superior airs. Do the Yoruba themselves know how rampant these sentiments against them are in other ethnic quarters? If they do, why do they not moderate their internal schisms to enhance their survivability?

    Ali’s fulminatory portrayal shows very clearly why most Yoruba politicians are apologetic about their Yorubaness: like Obasanjo, they believe they must be ethnically masochistic to be relevant in national politics. In a country brimming with perverse deductions and analyses of political behavior, it is not enough for a politician to be an exponent of fairness and justice; for the Southwest in particular, he must also deny his background and culture to be electable. Yet, what we need are not politicians who deny their Hausaness, Igboness or Ijawness, but those who in spite of their ethnic affiliations can be relied upon to be uncompromisingly fair and just, no matter whose ox is gored.

  • ‘Before this generation shall pass’: our need for a true intergenerational dialogue (1)

    ‘Before this generation shall pass’: our need for a true intergenerational dialogue (1)

    Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled.
    Matthew 24:34, King James Bible [Cambridge Edition] Generation, noun: 1. the entire body of individuals born and living at about the same time; 2. the term of years, roughly 30 among human beings, accepted as the average period between the birth of parents and the birth of their offspring; 3. a group of individuals, most of whom are of the same approximate age, having similar ideas, problems and attitudes Dictionary.com (online)

    For most adult Nigerians whether old or young, there seems to be a great divide, a chasm even between two broad, composite generational groups: those who came of age before and those who did so after the Nigeria-Biafra civil war, with its massive infusion of petrodollars and petronaira into the economy, and the SAP-induced devaluation of the naira, with all the attendant humungous cuts in public expenditure, especially in education and health care delivery.

    Of course most Nigerians also generally acknowledge the existence of smaller units of generational cohorts within these two broad composite groups. For instance, there is said to be at one end of a spectrum Nigerians much advanced in years that had lived most of their biological and social adulthood before independence and inclusive of the first decade after that. At the other extreme pole of this spectrum are said to be the post-globalization, SMS-texting youths to whom the life and times of late-colonial and early postcolonial Nigeria belong to a misty past that occupies a tiny, indistinct part of their collective imagination. But by and large, I believe that it is the notion of two broadly composite groups of generations before and after the civil war, before and after the rise and fall oil-rich, oil-doomed nairamania, and before and after the SAP-induced turnaround in economy and society in our country that fundamentally frames all discourses about unbridgeable generational gaps in Nigeria. This is the issue that I wish to explore in the series of two articles that begins in this column. As we shall see, my central argument will be our great need to deconstruct and transcend this alleged chasm between generations of Nigerians if a genuinely democratic and egalitarian order is to take root and grow in our country.

    In order to facilitate this review of currently prevalent ideas about the existence of these two broad generational groups, permit me to make an allusion to a keynote address that I delivered at the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ife, in the year 2006 on the 30th anniversary of the award of the Nobel Literature Prize to Wole Soyinka. Titled “The Unfortunate Children of Fortunate Parents”, the speech focused on the innumerable and nearly insuperable problems and challenges faced by younger generations of Nigerian writers, artists, scholars and critics, problems and challenges that members of my own generation and our elders had not faced in our young adulthood. I confess that I did not even remotely foresee the impact that the speech eventually had on my/our younger colleagues in the arts and humanities community, even though I must also confess that I was deeply gratified that my speech had the impact that it did. At any rate, I used the countervailing terms “fortunate” and “unfortunate” in the title of the speech to draw attention to the great advantages that my generation had enjoyed but which, in sharp contrast, the younger generation sorely lacked. These include secondary and tertiary education of a very high quality; the easy availability of highly professional editing services and publishing outlets; a vibrant homegrown critical community that had both local and international visibility and influence; and a national community of writers and artists small and cohesive enough to be sustaining to us all, as individuals and as groups.

    It was with these extraordinarily auspicious conditions in mind that in that speech, I used the word “fortunate” for my generation. And indeed, we had supreme assurance in the reality of these advantages, so much so that we simply took them for granted. Superior editing and enlightened, well-heeled publishers are indispensable to good writing and its perpetuation; most of the first generation of Nigerian authors had ready access to them. By contrast, the vast majority of the younger writers had absolutely no access whatsoever to first rate professional editors; even more dauntingly, for the most part, they had to self-publish, at great financial, artistic and intellectual costs, in order to have the ghost of a chance to create and nurture a homegrown readership. Thus, their “misfortune”, in the framework of that speech of 2006, was that those highly auspicious conditions that we had taken for granted were as strange to the overall circumstances of the younger writers and artists as life-saving water would be strange to a wanderer lost in the arid, parched wilderness of a desert.

    The great point in all of this was of course the hugely portentous fact that these nearly crippling problems and challenges that the generality of our younger generation of writers and artists faced were but a microcosm of what all young people, writer or no writer, educated or unschooled, faced in present-day Nigeria. Permit me to give a personal testimony of my own graphic and unforgettable encounter with this matter when, about a decade and half ago, I visited Kuti Hall to which I had belonged as a resident in my undergraduate years at Ibadan. The tiny room that I had shared in my first year with Tokunbo Dawodu now housed five or six students. Even the dinning hall of Kuti had been turned into mass sleeping quarters for students called “squatters”. And in nearly all Nigerian universities, one heard of hyperrealist terms like “one/zero/one” or “zero/one/zero” which were supposed to represent the Spartan daily meal plan a student was compelled to follow in the face of very dire economic conditions.

    As if these were not enough, there emerged the strange phenomenon of so-called “professional students”. These were the large number of undergraduates who chose to – or were “chosen” by harsh economic realities – to linger for as long as possible in the university since, out there in the world, no jobs were available to those who had already graduated and left with their Bachelor’s, Master’s and even Ph D degrees. Nearly two years ago, the Governor of our Central Bank, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, gave the figure of 25 million for the educated and seemingly permanently unemployed in our country. By contrast, when I left university at the end of the decade of the 60s, it was absolutely unheard of, perhaps even unthinkable and therefore unthought, that a graduate from any Nigerian university would still be jobless three months after the completion of his or her university education.

    From all my observations and reflections so far in this discussion, it should be apparent that in our social genes, if not in our biological DNAs, we carry the differential markers of the decisive, formative experiences of our separate generations. This is why there seems to be such a deep chasm of memories, sensibilities and perspectives across the generational divides, making nearly impossible a meaningful intergenerational dialogue in our country. But then there arises the fundamental fact that in one old understanding or usage of the term, “generation”, we are all of us currently living in the same country and the same epoch of human history, members of the same generation. This particular usage of the term is what Christ had in mind in the quotation from Matthew 24:34 that constitutes the first epigraph to this article: “Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass till all these things be fulfilled”. Similarly, it is this very same idea of “generation” as a national or global community of all those living at a particular moment in time and space that is explicitly stated in the first dictionary definition in our second epigraph: “the entire body of individuals born and living at about the same time”.

    I draw attention to these other meanings and usages of the term largely because they are either totally unknown now or have almost been forgotten. At any rate, when I hear or read of conversations between our different generational cohorts – most of them very bitter and extremely recriminatory – it is almost entirely the following particular dictionary definition of the word in our second epigraph that comes to mind: “a group of individuals, most of whom are of the same approximate age, having similar ideas, problems and attitudes”. If this is the case, there would seem to arise this great intellectual challenge: If these diverse uses and meanings attached to the word “generation” are equally true, equally valid, how do we reconcile the differences and tease out a synthesis between them?

    I suggest that this problem is more apparent than real, more formal and logical than actual and substantial. For in real life, and at all times and in all places, conversations are always going on, simultaneously and referentially, intra-generationally and inter-generationally. In other words, we talk both within our own generational cohorts and across the presumed divides that separate us from other older or younger generations. I think we pay scant or no attention at all to this fact because the only divides that typically engage our attention are those, real and/or imagined, constructed around ethnicity, religion and regionalism. Occasionally, we do also talk about divisions based on class and power, but only very infrequently. But in my opinion, least of all do we talk about the fact that in one important sense, we all belong to the same living generation.

    The great challenge, the great need is to tease out the common denominators, the bottom line for all, as it were, for all of us of the generation that is coevally alive now, all full of great foreboding and little hope for what looms ahead of us as our common destiny, whether we are of the old, hoary generations or of the generations yet to cut their moral, psychic and ideological milk teeth in response to the crises already confronted or those hovering on the horizon of the present. In these common denominators that will be our starting point in next week’s concluding piece in the series, the things that separate “generation” conceived as a cohort of those of the same approximate age are folded into “generation” conceived as the universal community of all those living at the same time in a nation or in the entire world. As we shall see, there is equal blame and equal inspiration to extrapolate from the experiences of both the old and the young of our society as we confront one the most important statistical figures pertaining to realistic prospects for our national commonweal. This is the fact, compatriots, that the median age for our country is just 19.

    Biodun Jeyifo

    bjeyifo@fas.harvard.edu

  • The colonel in heavenly cockpit

    The colonel in heavenly cockpit

    With the passing this past week at the age of fifty eight of Hugo Chavez, the late Venezuelan leader, Latin America has lost one of its most colourful leaders and potent force against global imperialism. The iconic colonel was in every material respect an original in the true sense of that word. An unreconstructed military putchist, he had twice tried to seize power in bloody military uprisings only to be eventually swept into the Venezuela Presidential Palace in a popular and democratic uprising against the ancient regime.

    Thereafter and for the next 14 years, the son of impoverished middle class teachers unleashed his strange and utterly quixotic brand of socialism on the Venezuelan populace, winning unprecedented popular approval in the process. By the time he died of cancer-related complications in a military hospital in the capital city of Caracas last Tuesday, Chavez has become an authentic hero of the teeming masses of the Venezuelan people and the nearest thing to a secular saint.

    The unprecedented outpouring of grief on the streets, the hysterical wailings and chants of “Chavez to the pantheon”—a heartrending reference for the late leader to take his place beside the legendary Simon Bolivar, a.k.a the Liberator—only confirm Chavez status as one of the most illustrious sons of Latin America of all time. The pantheon of great Latin American leaders who lived and died at the behest of their people would be smiling indeed .

    In order to better appreciate the global odds Chavez faced, it is appropriate to situate his career and anti-imperialist and anti-American jingoism within the context of the turbulent template that threw him up , particularly the end of the cold war and a resurgent and rampart American mega-power. Unlike the morally and ethically compromised Manuel Noriega who screamed at “Gringo piranhas” even while cutting a deal under the table, Hugo Chavez was as straight as a primitive arrow. He was a genuine article and a real man of the people.

    Almost 30 years after President George Bush, the Elder called for a kinder and gentler world as an antidote to the neo-conservative cruelties of the Reagan years, the world is neither a kinder nor a gentler place. If anything, the modern world is increasingly marked by arbitrariness, by a brutal and random contingency, and by the sure and sheer certainty of uncertainty. The only thing predictable is what is unpredictable.

    Perhaps it is foolish and delusionary in the extreme to expect human society to escape the more sinister anomalies of human nature itself. Even the so-called idyllic and harmonious communities of the past are nothing but ideological mirages; fictional constructs through which we vent our frustrations and disappointment with the present. As somebody famously quipped, if there is anything sure about the organic communities, it is that they are always gone.

    Still, there can be no denying the fact that militarily, economically, politically and spiritually the world might have gone to the dogs in the last 30 years. Thanks to the principles of globalisation which made it possible for capital and labour to be switched round the globe and for the constraints of time and space to be summarily abolished, western countries, particularly the USA, have been able to exponentially increase their wealth.

    But this new-found prosperity has also led to a widening of the gap between the filthy rich and absolute poor, thus fuelling social disaffection within countries and among countries. The great political irony here is that it is the social inequity arising from economic inequality of staggering and idiotic proportions that has brought an African American to the White House for the very first time in the history of the United States.

    It is only the politically incurious who will be taken by surprise that the most potent forces against Barack Obama’s ascendancy comprise of the rump of the old Reaganite redoubt in alliance with the new missionary right with its bible-thumping fundamentalists. This is America’s contribution to the New Crusade. They brook no intellectual opposition, and with their wild-eyed fanaticism and the zealotry of their unipolar vision of human civilization and modernity, they represent a danger to both America and an increasingly multi-polar world.

    Militarily, the USA has extended its unrivalled dominion over the rest of the world. Perhaps, not since the Roman Empire has the world seen such awesome power and might. It has been suggested by military experts that after America, the next 25 countries combined do not possess the martial superiority of Uncle Tom. Grappling with America is like wrestling with a 500 pound gorilla in the jungle.

    Yet the tense stalemate of Afghanistan, Somalia and Iraq suggests that in the evolving world, military might is not enough to prevail. Discretion may still be the better part of military valour in matters of political and ideological contestation, particularly if the ideological conflict comes with a religious and spiritual coloration. It is easy to militarily subjugate a territory, but it has proved not so easy to coerce a people into surrendering their religious beliefs. It is always a duel unto death.

    The tragic events of September 11, 2001 have shown the world how globalisation can work both ways. Switching men and material round the globe in a ceaseless manner, using electronic transfer of funds to thwart financial surveillance and deploying modern communication gadgets to abolish the constraints of time and space, the religious adversaries of the west were thus able to use the very principles of globalisation against the masters of globalisation

    This is the turbulent trajectory that has defined the life and times of the late Venezuelan leader. Yet despite Hugo Chavez’ sterling patriotism, there are a sizeable number of his country people who would frown at this posthumous apotheosis and near deification of a man they consider to be a mortally flawed demagogue. To a few of his fellow Venezuelans, Chavez remains a divisive and controversial figure who exacerbated the economic and ethnic fault lines of his nation.

    To them, his economic doctrine was barmy and simply did not make much sense, based on socialist emotionalism rather than a sound attempt to use god-given resources for truly transformative purposes. By dipping his hands freely and joyously into the petroleum reservoirs of his nation like some oilman of Caracas, Chavez has shown himself to be nothing but a vagabond potentate who would have led his country eventually into economic ruination.

    This may make economic sense, but it is a politically worthless argument. There can be little doubt about the salutary and telling effect of Chavez largesse to his people. By his emancipatory policies, Chavez has freed the most wretched of the Venezuelan earth from the clutches of the most desperate of poverty, disease and illiteracy.

    But more importantly by allowing the Venezuelan people to enjoy their god-given bounty, Chavez has returned us to the first principles of sovereignty: that power and national resources belong first and foremost to the people and not to a thieving political elite and their mealy-mouthed equivocations about a mythical transformation. This is a signal lesson to the ruling classes of other Third World countries, particularly Nigeria.

    In the end, what is important is what a leader means to his people and not what the homogenising citadels of political and economic correctness feel. In the age of western-induced globalisation, the reaffirmation and reassertion of national destiny has returned to the front burner. The nation-state paradigm may be frayed and frazzled at the edges but it still remains the most dominant instrument of territorial mapping.

    In death, Hugo Chavez has joined the illustrious pantheon of Latin America leaders who lived for their people and fought with them. Simon Bolivar, Che Guevara, Salvador Allende, Fidel Castro, etc. Together with a stellar galleria of equally iconic writers, poets, novelists, essayists and philosophers they have succeeded in forging a unique identity for the Latin American continent and as the counter-hegemonic lodestar against late imperialism.

    It was often said that the right may win all the major political battles in Latin America, but it will never produce great leftwing writers of the global stature of Pablo Neruda, Louis Borges and the incomparable fabulist, Gabriel Marcia Marquez. Yet the rise and ascendancy of a series of leftwing, anti-imperialist governments committed to a more humane and equitable vision of human society in contemporary Latin America may no longer be a historical fluke but the final working out of some momentous historical contradictions.

    The world and humanity at large may yet have the Latin Americans to thank for providing us with a way out of the six hundred year epistemological cul de sac of western modernity. As they have done with their Liberation Theology, their concept of no-capitalism, the stellar challenges of their original and groundbreaking scholars to the grandiose claims of Metropolitan modernity, the contributions of their institutions to a new global knowledge order and the vast array of different developmental models emanating from their governments, they have shown us that it is possible to envision a more humane and redemptive world order. May the great soul of Hugo Chavez rest in peace.

  • President Jonathan’s extemporaneous love note to Borno, Yobe

    From what I gathered from the governor of Yobe during my visit, the problem is coming down (abating). It is coming down in Adamawa, in Gombe, in Bauchi and in Niger. But in Borno, we still have some problems. So, if you elders will not condemn it, you will continue to suffer under the terror of Boko Haram, because without peace, we cannot develop Borno. Myself and any head of the security agencies do not want to pay one day allowance to anybody… We need that money to do other important things that will change the economy of this country. We need that money to fund agriculture and to create wealth across this country, including Borno State.

    “We are not happy to be spending so much money in the Niger Delta, keeping the JTF there. We are not happy to be spending so much money keeping the JTF in Borno State and other places. Definitely, we are not. In fact, if the elders agree now to come and sign agreement with me that I should move out all the JTF, but if anybody dies in Borno State, I will hold them responsible, I will sign and I will move, and I will do it. If somebody dies, yes, I will take you. I am going to remove the JTF, but come and sign and I will remove the JTF and you guarantee the safety of life and property of individuals. When you do that today, as I am going, the JTF will start moving to their barracks. But you must guarantee, if anything happens to anybody that you must be held responsible. If the circumstances that brought the soldiers are no longer there, that day, they will all leave.

    “Let me be very frank, because the analogy that oh, when one soldier is killed the soldiers come and kill scores of people, we have always been admonishing that. We always tell the soldiers to conduct themselves because they are doing internal security job that ordinarily soldiers are supposed not to be involved in. But because of the calibre of weapons the militants are using, the police alone cannot stand. And government will never sit down quietly and wait for insurgents, for some people to take up arms and take a part of this country. Never.

    “Whether it is in the Niger Delta, and I have given the directive to security services, I don’t want to hear that one soldier is killed in the Niger Delta, I don’t want to hear that one security officer is killed in the South East kidnapping, I don’t want to hear that one soldier is killed in Borno State or any part of this country. I cannot preside over this country as a president and my security officers are killed. This people leave their families, stay on the roads and the bush so that we will sleep and I will not want to hear that one of them is killed.

    “We will not allow it and I will not celebrate death of one security officer anywhere in this country, whether it is in Bayelsa State, whether it is in the Niger Delta, Anambra State, South East, South West, North West, North Central, anywhere. We will not, and I repeat, will not accommodate it. So, if we the elders of Borno State will not condemn it, we will continue to suffer under the terror of Boko Haram, and without stopping Boko Haram, without peace in Borno State, we cannot develop Borno State. Who will come and invest in Borno State? You award road contracts, who will come and work? Nobody! So, let us not play to the gallery.”

     

  • Okon sets a cat among the pigeons

    Only an event involving two of Nigeria’s most illustrious sons could have attracted the stellar crowd that graced the formal investiture of Wole Soyinka as the first recipient of the Awolowo Leadership Prize. It was perhaps the greatest collection of eminent Nigerians since the great philosopher-statesman dined alone. The commodious Harbours’ Hall filled to its full capacity.

    Unknown to a snooper disoriented by flu and long distance gallivanting, Okon had slipped his domestic mooring and dressed like a traditional Efik chieftain, the loony lad was right there in the crowd glad-handing and back-thumping like a politician of the First Republic. Snooper was aghast by this display of social delinquency by this impossible boy. But the make-belief racket was unsustainable and a brisk commotion soon engulfed the reception foyer.

    “Where is your card?” Okon was asked by one of the delectable hostesses.

    “Me, I no dey carry card. I come represent dem paramount ruler for dem Jamestown for Calabar. Abi you no sabi say na him safe Papa Awo from dem godogodo soldiers?” Okon retorted with a devilish sneer.

    “So have you registered?” he was asked again.

    “Me, I no be politician. So I no dey register nothing. Na dem Lai Mohammed dey do dat one for Abuja. Lai na my friend. Him nickname na Okunrin Raufu”, Okon sniggered. At this point, having realised the opportunity cost of detaining the scoundrel, he was waved on. But fate intervened and Okon was accosted by a lone television crewman.

    “Sir, how do you see the occasion?”, the earnest and intense looking chap asked a self-important Okon.

    “Me, I no be woman. Na woman dey use Ladies Occasional pill”, the mad boy intoned with a swaggering gait to the squirming embarrassment of his stranded interviewer. The affronted chap decided to seize the initiative.

    “What I mean is this: how do you see the prize given to Professor Soyinka today?”

    “Hen hen, na dat one you for say. As for dem prize, na dem Yoruba people dey deceive dem Nigerian people. I like dem Kongi man, but make him no dey follow follow dem yeye Yoruba people. Abi you wan tell me say dem no find Efik man to give dem prize? When dem wan lift heavy crane na Efik man, but when dem wan award prize na Yoruba man. Abi you think say we know sabi dem trick?”

    “Now that President Jonathan has reversed himself over UNILAG name change, are you happy?” the interviewer asked Okon with a deadpan expression.

    “Wetin concern agbero with dem knock engine? You see the problem with dem Jonathan be say na reverse him dey drive. Him dey reverse into everything and everybody. Everybody dey run from am like dem Gaiser for permanent reverse. He done reverse into dem Obasanjo and Baba dey cry for inside him bedroom. Na no break no jam vehicle or wetin dem Yoruba people dey call pakaleke Express. But katakata go burst when he come finally reverse into dem abandoned mala petrol tanker. Na dat one Baba Lekki dey call holocaust. Dem locust go dey scream ho, ho ,ho!!!!” Okon intoned with feverish excitement. At this point, even the interviewer became overwhelmed with apprehension. Casting furtive glances across the place, he quickly melted into the crowd with Okon in hot pursuit.

    “Yeye Kobokobo boy, you don finish the interview? You no even ask me about dem Patience woman”, a viciously jubilant Okon screamed at his heels.

  • Be warned, you can be ‘googled’

    Be warned, you can be ‘googled’

    Last Thursday, while searching for a term I was not familiar with on Google, I stumbled on an article titled: 5 Ways to spot bad employees…before they are hired

    I was curious about what it means to be a bad employee and clicked to read the article.

    One of the five ways titled Google the candidate caught my attention.

    The article by a staff of allbusiness.com stated thus: Blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, and even industry articles can reveal interesting details about a person that you’d never be able to uncover in even the best interview. This kind of research can also help you uncover inaccuracies in the candidate’s résumé.

    The above advice to employers reinforced my belief that people should be careful about what they put online. In the present digital world, you are as good as what search engines say about you than your carefully prepared curriculum vitae or the positive impression you give at interviews and during your interaction with people.

    Employers want to know more about you than your educational qualifications. They want to know the company you keep, the quality of your thoughts and many other things about you which what you say or share online or is said or shared about you online can reveal.

    I remember reading a quote that cautioned against unrestrained use of the internet that said in future, some of us may have to change our names to erase our cyber past.

    With growing internet access in the country, we all seem to be too eager to share so much online at the slightest instance. Many are so obsessed with posting on facebook that they literally violate their own privacy.

    While it may be okay to indulge in some occasional sharing of information and pictures, especially on anniversaries and a few other special occasions, what many do on the social media is an abuse of the forum at their own expense without realising it.

    We don’t have to share information about everything we do. We need to realise that almost everything about us online can be found through use of search engines.

    If you are very active online, search for your name on Google and you will be surprised what you will find. Things you have forgotten about and things about you that you are not aware are online.

    To regulate use of social media for instance, some organisations abroad have social media policies. There are things employees must not do online for the sake of the image of their organisations. Since I first posted a part of this article on facebook last week, I have read various responses with some saying it may be better not to share anything online. The solution is not about staying offline. No one who wants to be taken seriously in this age should. What is necessary is a lot of caution in deciding what we should and should not publish online. Google must be able to say something about you however little. The issue what will it say about you. The option is yours.

    The next time you’re online, remember you are documenting for scrutiny the kind of person you are. My advice: Know what to post online. It could make or mar your opportunity to get that job or position you desire or retain your present one.

  • Awo Laureate Professor Wole Soyinka: Only the deep can call to the deep

    Awo Laureate Professor Wole Soyinka: Only the deep can call to the deep

    Professor Soyinka wrote two books, ‘THE MAN DIED’ and ‘Ake: The years of Childhood’, right within the prison walls. 

    Leadership in the currently troubled regions of the nation has been remiss. I have lamented, on numerous platforms, the delinquent silence of religious and community leaders where the religious rights of others were trampled upon, often terminally, where again and again martyrdom became commonplace – yes, the genuine martyrdom – made up of innocents, singly, in sectors, often brutally but always with the confidence of immunity. … there is also the issue of leadership of wrongful silence and inertia; the folding of arms and the buttoning of lips when leadership – and not merely localised – was desperately needed to lead and inflict exemplary punishment on violators of the freedom of belief, and existence of others. The examples are too numerous and depressing, and this is hardly the occasion for a recital of human derelictions that only stir up negative memories’ -Professor Wole Soyinka in ‘WINDING DOWN HISTORY’ – a lecture delivered on the occasion on his being awarded the maiden AWO PRIZE FOR LEADERSHIP.

    As far as reputations are concerned, those of Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Professor Wole Soyinka are already cast in stone. Soyinka, like Awo, is your quintessential epitome of integrity, credibility, discipline, selflessness as well as visionary leadership and people-centredness; the very categories the Obafemi Awolowo Foundation prescribed when it decided at its July 2011 special dialogue on Transformational Leadership and Good Governance that the prize is ‘established to encourage, recognise, reward and celebrate excellence in Nigerian leadership’. Without a scintilla of doubt, Professor Wole Soyinka stands shoulder high, over and above any other Nigerian, however, eminently worthy of consideration in these regards.

    On December 19, 2012, at a media briefing at which the columnist was present, the selection committee unveiled the recipient of the maiden award of the prize in the person of the Nobel Laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka. The prize, the committee said, is an initiative of the Obafemi Awolowo Foundation, which was set up in April 1992 to serve as the custodian of Chief Awolowo’ intellectual legacy. The Foundation, it went on, was established as an independent, non-profit, non-partisan organisation dedicated to immortalising the democratic and development-oriented ideals of the great Nigerian leader.

    The prestigious biennial prize is structured to follow a rigorous process of nomination and subsequent screening by a selection committee made up of some of the most outstanding Nigerians. And for purposes of assuring cynical Nigerians whose first reaction will be to doubt the veracity of that claim, the membership of the committee is as follows: Chief Emeka Anyaoku, Chairman, Mr Justice Mohammed Uwais, Professor Akin Mabogunje, Sir Olaniwun Ajayi, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Olorogun Felix Ibru, Professor O.O Akinkugbe, Bishop Emmanuel Gbonigi, Bishop Matthew Kukah, Professor Adetokunbo Lucas, Professor Ladipo Adamolekun, Professor Anya O. Anya, Mr Bola Akingbade, Professor (Mrs) Funmi Soetan and Mr Niyi Adegbonmire.

    In line with the relevant guidelines, nominations for the maiden award were invited between June and September 2012 at the end of which, we were informed, an impressive number of nominations were received. These were then subjected to very rigorous and careful consideration after which Professor Wole Soyinka emerged the individual adjudged to have demonstrated, and continues to demonstrate, many of the core values associated with Chief Obafemi Awolowo.

    Chief Obafemi Awolowo we know only too well as one for whom there was no higher purpose than the growth and development of the people he was called upon to lead. For him, the raison d’être of governance is the happiness of the greater majority of the people, and for that reason, he continues even in death, to inspire and to motivate serious leaders to work in the service of the people they lead. However, as much as we know Papa Awo, none of us can seriously ask the question: Professor Wole Who?

    Who then is Awo maiden laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka?

    Respected globally much more than many an African President , Professor Wole Soyinka, celebrated Nigerian playwright, poet, polyglot, social critic, teacher, moral crusader and political activist, is one man you can neither pidgeon hole nor compartmentalise. A man of impeccable integrity, first African recipient of the Nobel Prize for Literature (1986), Professor Soyinka wears his lifelong battle for justice like his birth suit. And in this regard, it was fascinating to hear his friend and classmate at the Government College, Ibadan, some sixty-something years ago, Professor Ladipo Akinkugbe, say at the award night, that free or in harness, the awardee can be trusted to fight for the cause of justice. Incidentally, Professor Soyinka wrote two books, ‘THE MAN DIED’ and ‘Ake: The years of Childhood’, right within the prison walls.

    Whether in trenches or at the barricades in Nigeria where he is the nemesis of tyrants and absolutists, or whether he is fighting for racial and political justice in Europe or for gender equality and religious justice anywhere else in the world, you can bet your last dime, it is with the same seriousness and commitment.

    Professor Wole Soyinka is truly a world citizen.

    For him, therefore, the award night was one not to be missed in drawing attention to the many demons presently tearing at our very existence as a country; be it an in-explainable First Ladyism’s gluttony towards the ‘appropriation of public funds to feed her phantasmagorical projects, her illusions of power, delusions of grandeur and allied obsessions’ or ‘those who threaten the very existence of the inhabited world with their own agenda of eliminating its humanity – unless it adopts its own warped reading of reality’, gloating unashamedly: ‘We shall win, because we have nothing to lose. When any of us is killed, we rejoice, since we know he has gone to join the ranks of the martyrs, but when we kill the other side, they go into mourning’.

    The laureate’s harsh words for those who, out of fear, were tongue-tied and demonstrated what he called ‘wrongful silence and inertia; the folding of arms and the buttoning of lips when leadership was desperately needed to lead and inflict exemplary punishment on violators of the freedom of belief, and existence of others’. Nor did he subscribe to those fanciful and escapist theories ‘in which we can comfortably bury our heads, taking refuge in propositions that all we have to do is eliminate poverty,eliminate unemployment, eliminate class distinctions, eliminate alienation, eliminate illiteracy to achieve that smooth paste in which all granules are atomised and attain the harmonious ideal’.

    Much as this shopping list of contradictions must form a background consciousness of what is desirable, he holds that they only ‘provide us a cosseting picture of the totality’. It is, he says, an understandable tendency in human nature to concentrate on what seems performable: what seems beyond immediate solution had better be accorded proportionate space and attention’.

    While Professor Soyinka was not so quick in declaring religion an enemy of humanity even though,’ time and again, it has proved a spur, a motivator, and a justification for the commission of some of the most horrifying crimes against humanity despite its fervent affirmations of peace, he affirmed, without the slightest hesitation, that ‘it is time that the world adopted a position that refuses to countenance religion as an acceptable justification for, excuse or extenuation of, crimes against humanity’.

    In concluding, even though the ever graceful and reticent Dr (Mrs) Olatokunbo Awolowo Dosumu will loathe this, the piece will be incomplete without due mention of her untiring and totally commendable commitment to the Awolowo Foundation, a cause to which, without a doubt, she has committed her all since inception in 1992. Located in a serene part of town, the Foundation resides in a squeaky clean and absolutely inviting, tastefully manicured premises that can simply intoxicate with joy. This is where she daily coordinates the activities of a Foundation that so uncannyly represents the man Awo.

    It was from here she put together the Maiden Awo Leadership Prize award night; an event that had in attendance the crème d la crème of the Nigerian political and business class, the academia as well as the spiritual and traditional.

    It was obviously a night to remember at the well appointed Harbour Point, off Ahmadu Bello Way, Victoria Island, Lagos. It was an event that is certain to spur other eminent Nigerians to great works that should make them worthy nominees for the next award in 2015.

  • The PIB can of worms

    The PIB can of worms

    One of the arguments that Northern politicians have deployed for so long to frustrate passage of the Petroleum Industry Bill (PIB), is that it gives too much to the Niger Delta – the region which for over half a century has hosted the exploitation of Nigeria’s crude oil with all attendant devastation.

    A typical argument was made on the floor of the Senate last Tuesday, by Senator Ahmed Lawan of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP). He said the Niger Delta states did not deserve additional funds, having received N11 trillion from derivation, the Ecological Fund and other sources since 1999.

    Waxing eloquent, he claimed that various state governments in the oil-producing belt that had been receiving 13 per cent derivation had virtually nothing to show for the cash inflows. Putting the extra burden of more money on the people was unacceptable he argued.

    Positions similar to that advanced by Lawan have been canvassed in the past by the likes of Governors Rabiu Kwankwaso of Kano and Babangida Aliyu of Niger. In fact, the governors did make the point that what one or two of the Niger Delta states receive from the federal purse dwarfed what accrued to the entire North.

    Each time those arguments were made they not only came across as insensitive, but also irrational. Now, in the light of the recent revelations about the ownership of oil blocs in the country, they have been exposed as fraudulent and hypocritical.

    In the face of boisterous Northern opposition to the PIB, Chairman, Senate Committee on Business and Rules, Ita Enang (Akwa Ibom North-West), changed the tenor of the debate at last Wednesday’s plenary when he accused influential northerners of being owners of 83 per cent of the entire oil wells in the Niger Delta!

    For those who may have missed the report, I reproduce here Enang’s list. Those to be found there include Alhaji Mai Deribe, Borno State, who owns Cavendish Petroleum – operator of OML 110 with an average revenue of N4billion monthly.

    Seplat/Platform Petroleum, operators of the ASUOKPU/UMUTU Marginal Field has Mallam (Prince) Sanusi Lamido of Kano, as major shareholder and director. This Sanusi is not the same person as the Central Bank Governor.

    Another well-known name is General T. Y. Danjuma of Taraba State. He established South Atlantic Petroleum Limited (SAPETRO). He is also chairman of Eni Nigeria Limited. SAPETRO partnered with Total Upstream Nigeria Limited (TUPNI) and Brasoil Oil Services Company Nigeria Limited to become operators of the OPL 246.

    AMNI International Petroleum and Development Company is owned by Alhaji (Colonel) Sani Bello of Kontangora , Niger State – another ubiquitous player in corporate Nigeria. They operate OML 112 and OML 117.

    According to Enang, former Petroleum Minister and former OPEC Chairman, Rilwanu Lukman, manages AMNI oil blocks “with very key interest in the NNPC/Vitol trading deal.”

    Among other disclosures are that Oriental Energy Resources Limited, a company owned by Maiduguri-based multimillionaire, Alhaji Mohammed Indimi, runs three oil blocs – OML 115, the Oldwok field and the Ebok field.

    Alhaji Aminu Dantata’s Express Petroleum and Gas Limited, operates OML 108. OML 113 allocated to Yinka Folawiyo Petroleum Limited is owned by Alhaji W.I. Folawiyo. Alhaji Saleh Mohammed Gambo, North East Petroleum Limited, is the holder of the OPL 215 Licence.

    North East Petroleum was awarded blocs OPL 276 and OPL 283 and sealed a Joint Venture Agreement with Centrica Resources Nigeria Limited and CCC Oil and Gas.

    INTEL is owned by former Vice President Abubakar Atiku, the late Gen. Shehu Musa Yar’Adua and Emir of Kano, Ado Bayero. It is believed to own substantial stakes in the oil exploration industry in Nigeria as well as Sao Tome and Principe.

    Among the few Southern-owned business interests on the list are Mike Adenuga’s Conoil – the oldest indigenous oil exploration company with six blocks. OPL 291 was awarded to Starcrest Energy Nigeria Limited, owned by Emeka Offor and later sold to Addax Petroleum.

    Without question these revelations must have caused considerable disquiet and embarrassment in certain circles. The lopsidedness of the distribution tells the story of Nigeria in the last 52 years. Clearly, the pattern of distribution of the blocs is down to the fact that for the bulk of our years as an independent nation the North has produced leaders at the center whether under military regimes or in civil dispensations.

    Knowing what we now know we can return to the central point of Senator Lawan’s argument which is that the Niger Delta states have received too much money – over N11 trillion from various sources since 1999 to use his figures. We may not even make an issue over how much is too much. But perhaps Lawan may wish to enlighten us about how much accrued to northern states in the same period so we can have a reasonable discussion.

    He also makes the moot point that the states have not been able to manage – such that they have very little to show. Nigeria’s reality, however, is that governments whether at federal or state level have not been able to manage Nigeria’s resources in a way that would have transformed our fortunes. No region – not the north or even Lawan’s home state – can claim to have done better.

    If such performance were the basis for revenue allocation, I dare say many states and regions will receive zero allocation.

    Now we have a situation where these influential Northerners who own 80% of Nigeria’s oil blocs are receiving more revenue than the entire region from which they come. We have no information as to how long they have owned these assets. The question we should ask is how these billions have benefitted the North?

    The whole plank on which Northern opposition to the PIB has rested for so long is equity. What is equitable in a situation where a section of the elite corner these oil blocs and not a single name from the Niger Delta appears on that list? It goes beyond being inequitable; it is downright embarrassing for this country.

    Of course, there’s no guarantee that if the door of the elite oil bloc owners association is opened a crack to let in one or two persons from the Niger Delta it will change much for the poverty-stricken masses in the creeks. Still, this distorted ownership structure cannot be allowed to remain.

    The Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) has called on the government to investigate Enang’s claim. I absolutely align myself with that suggestion. We should establish how these blocs got into the hands of those who own them. We must then revoke all licences and establish a more equitable way of distributing them to ensure better balance – east, west, north and south.

    The PIB is not perfect and those who argue that too much power is concentrated in the hands of the President and Petroleum Minister may have their point.

    But all those who are still nitpicking over 10% of oil company profits going to host communities need to balance their greed and envy with an understanding of the uncommon ecological damage that these communities have suffered, and continue to suffer. Perhaps, one month of legislative oversight in the creeks – under the shadow of a gas flare – will change the perspective of the Abuja bunch.

  • The joy of the birds, bees and flowers (2)

    The joy of the birds, bees and flowers (2)

    When social, political and domestic violence congregate to batter the woman, the strength of the nation is weakened and severely compromised.

    Last week, dear reader, we tried to draw attention to the fact that women too are entitled to a life well lived. This means not only that women should become free of the abnormal burden of carrying the home, children, husband and societies’ responsibilities, but that they should even be helped to see so much joy in existence they will refrain from having headaches. Did the men take any notice of this whining? No sir, not so much as a grunt. Nevertheless, we must plod on, for just last Friday, March 8, the world celebrated this year’s International Women’s Day. Ah ha!

    According to the website page on the celebration, it is a day to honour the work of suffragettes, celebrate women’s successes and remind us of what inequalities to redress. This year, the theme is ‘Time for action to end Violence against Women.’ And I thought, how very appropriate, this. For, sometimes, it does appear to me that the world has taken violence against women so much for granted it has become part of the (ab)normal run of things.

    Take the streets for instance. Just check: close to seventy per cent of the population of beggars in Nigeria are women who are often dragging along their children. Those toddlers make up close to half of the remaining percentage. Of course, on the streets, the women are open to all kinds of abuses – from men, sun, rain, stars, and all. The men rape them; the sun beats down on them; the rain drenches them; and the stars … Oh yes, the stars can contribute to their plight too. Just try moving around by the light of the stars.

    On the more serious note, the violence that women suffer during war times is a shameful slap against the faces of men. Indeed, this war weapon is so dreadful that I believe it sinks the war leader who sanctions it below the mud that is beneath his soldiers’ boots. But that is not all. The society that throws its women into the teeth of war is done, all done.

    Then, there is the all-time great, domestic violence. This is such a constant in so many women’s lives that it just does not bear mentioning. To begin with, one great violence against womanhood is managing the home on little or no funds at all. But, don’t get me wrong. In many cases, the fault is with the men who probably do not realise that depriving the home of sufficient funds is some kind of violence. I blame them because with such men, their cars, motorcycles and bicycles are more important.

    In many other cases, there are men who do try their best and give as much as they can. They have little and they give little. No problem there as long as they give it in love, peace and harmony. Truly, they are not to blame. Rather, in such cases, I poke my stubby little digits in the eyes of the government leaders who are not creating the enabling environment for people to do honest work for honest pay. I have always said that if the focus of any governance is not directed at the betterment of the average home which does not consist of little greedy mouths and fingers, then that government is lost. If governance does not begin the day’s business with the price list of the country’s foodstuff perpetually behind its decisions, then I make bold to say that that is not governance, to use the famous cliché. So, yes, insufficient funds in the home can be serious violence against women.

    Ah, yes, there is also physical abuse. Now, that is a difficult one to track, for physical violence against anyone or thing is simply the loss of governance of the central controls of one’s corporate being. Seriously, raising one’s hands against anyone or anything should be a serious call for help, not by the victim but by the assailant. It is the assailant who is really crying, ‘Help me, I can no longer govern my senses. I deserve to be put on the funny farm.’ Unfortunately, the level at which this kind of abuse goes on in this country (oh yes, and the world too) is incredibly high, and sadly, with no governmental interference around here. This is why women are getting beheaded (as happened recently somewhere in a south western state over an argument) or simply killed. Yeah, well, what’s the difference?!

    Really, these gory conclusions are exactly that, conclusions to acts that often begin with what you would tag ‘ordinary beating’. I have heard a woman tell another woman to take heart; all that her husband did to her was just to beat her. In other words, he has not yet killed her. Oh people! Where are the laws against domestic abuse? When can a woman in Nigeria walk up to a police station and report that her husband beat her and the police would not bend down behind the counter and laugh their heads off but would march up indignantly to the said batterer, jab at his chest with some hefty fingers and ask him to try them (the police) for size? When, eh, when? Meanwhile, the women continue to suffer violence, like the kingdom of God.

    People, these episodes of sufferance call for definitive action, on everyone’s part. Let us start with the government. When a nation’s focus is forever turned on asking, praying and even craving for even mildly tolerable leadership, no worthwhile achievements can be made. Social structures suffer, the very atmosphere is puddled, and the homes bear the brunt. When we say home, we mean women. The burden of the absence of good governance in Nigeria, I tell you, is being borne by women. It is the women who stand between the children and starvation; between the children and insane activities such as playing with guns and killing each other in the home (as happened recently too somewhere in the southeast) and between God and men. Oh yes, it’s the women preventing God from punishing men for what they have done to this country.

    Anyway, the government has got to take governance a little more seriously. Everyone knows that the strength of a nation is in the health of the family. The strength of the family in turn rests in the health of the home and the home is a good woman’s focus. Therefore, the strength of the nation is in the well-being of her women. However, when social, political and domestic violence congregate to batter the woman, the strength of the nation is weakened and severely compromised. Good governance must be ensured by all means to end violence against, and strengthen, the women.

    I think the time has come to strengthen the legal actions made against domestic violence. Obviously, women are not made of the same physically stern stuff as the men are, so why kit them out in the same boxing gloves? When a woman is regularly battered, it is natural that she would either grow a thick skin against it or don gloves. I know, you and I have seen women boxers on the screen, but I tell you, they look downright ugly there. Those gloves look most unnatural on them. The women are putting their bodies to unnatural uses and I intend to tell the World Boxing Federation, just as soon as I am done here. Besides, they provide nothing but merriment for the men. In clearer words, they make the men laugh. No, bring sterner laws against domestic violence and you’ll see changes. Headaches will disappear, peace and respect will come in, and the joy of the birds, bees and flowers will follow. Happy Women’s Day once again!