Category: Olatunji Dare

  • ‘How Lam prevented another civil war’

    ‘How Lam prevented another civil war’

    • Ex-CPS recalls the late gov’s encounter with Buhari

     

    But for the maturity and wisdom of the late former Governor of Oyo State, Alhaji Lam Adesina, Nigeria could have been plunged into a second civil war.

    A former Chief Press Secretary to the late Governor, Chief Kehinde Olaosebikan, yesterday said in Abuja that a conflict between Yoruba and Hausa-Fulani would have thrown the country into another war.

    He told our correspondent that a former Head of State, Gen. Muhammadu Buhari, had led a combative delegation of Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) to meet Adesina in 2000 in his office.

    According to him, “Precisely on the 13th of October, 2000, former military Head of State, General Muhammadu Buhari, in company with former Military administrator of Lagos State, General Buba Marwa, had led a heavy team of Arewa Consultative Forum in a combative mood to the office of the governor in protest against the alleged killings of over 69 Fulani cattle herders in Saki Area of the state.

    “General Buhari whose arrival to the Secretariat complex was preceded by scores of lorry loads of Hausa men and boys said pointedly at the executive council chambers of Oyo State that his team came to meet the governor to seek reasons why the people of Saki should not be dealt with for killing Fulani herdsmen. He did not stop at that, Gen Buhari accused Governor Lam Adesina of complicity in the killings and using his position as governor to pervert justice.

    He quoted the former Head of State as accusing the former governor of shielding the culprits. According to the General, they therefore wanted immediate stoppage of the killings, justice and compensation for the mass killings of the Fulanis or vengeance across the country.

    Olaosebikan added: “As weighty, indicting and provocative as the General’s allegations were against the governor, Alhaji Lam Adesina remained unperturbed as he only fired back with his own well-coordinated arsenals in form of refined strategy, robust explanations and effective engagements.

    “Lam Adesina identified all the points raised by the General and simply asked the heads of the organisations directly involved to respond.”

    He quoted Lam Adesina as saying: “ Before I thank you for this visit, you have come to tell me something, I also want to tell you something and that something is to make an appeal. General Buhari has been a former Head of State, Brigadier Marwa has governed Lagos for some time and with credibility… so you are national leaders of this country. Even though, by accident of birth, you are from the North, so you can be born anywhere, may be next time when I am coming to the world I will be born in the North or the South South.’

    He attributed the manner in which frayed nerves calmed to the level-headedness of the late governor, thus preventing what could have led to another civil war.

     

  • State Assemblies condemn impeachment of Kogi Speaker

    The Conference of State Legislatures of Nigeria (CSLN) yesterday condemned the impeachment of Alhaji Abdullahi Bello, the Speaker of Kogi State House of Assembly.

    CSLN Chairman and Gombe State House of Assembly Speaker, Alhaji Inuwa Garba, addressed reporters in Abuja.

    He said: “Following the crisis that led to the impeachment of the Speaker of Kogi Assembly, the conference set up a six-man fact-finding committee, headed by the Kwara State House of Assembly Speaker Razak Atunwa.

    “Based on available evidence, it is clear that the purported impeachment of Abdullahi Bello was not done in accordance with the provision of the 1999 Constitution, which requires a two-third majority of members to impeach a Speaker.”

    Garba said the Kogi House of Assembly has 25 members and that two-thirds would be 17 members, who are required for an impeachment.

    He said only 12 members sought to impeach the Speaker, adding: “This is a breach of Section 92(2) (e) of the Constitution.”

    The chairman said CSLN frowns at the breach of the Constitution by some members of Kogi State House of Assembly and would continue to address Bello as the legitimate Speaker.

    Garba urged the President Goodluck Jonathan and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) to protect the Constitution by ensuring that the Kogi State House of Assembly returns to the status quo.

    He appealed to the Inspector-General of Police to restore Bello’s security details, because they were “improperly” withdrawn.

    Also, Nasarawa State House of Assembly Speaker Musa Mohammed said the conference was not against the impeachment of any Speaker, if he has been found wanting.

    Mohammed added that as lawmakers, they were concerned about the process that led to Bello’s purported impeachment.

    He noted that the lawmakers, who reportedly impeached Bello, did not follow the provision of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

    The lawmaker restated the CSLN’s commitment to democratic norms and procedure, respect for rule of law, transparency and accountability in governance.

    The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) recalls that Bello and other principal officers of the Assembly were impeached on October 16.

    Bello described his impeachment as illegal because 12 of 25 members signed the petition against him.

     

  • Election USA:   A post-mortem

    Election USA: A post-mortem

    One week after his run for the White House went up in a puff, Mitt Romney and company are still trying to figure out what went wrong.

    Most of the polls that did not give him a slight lead had him in a statistical dead heat with President Barack Obama. Surging crowds filled the venues of his rallies, following his strong performance against a sedated Obama in their first “debate.” From rally to rally he rode on a wave of enthusiasm, whereas Obama’s supporters sulked in quiet resignation.

    In that debate, Romney twisted himself into so many different shapes and sizes that if the contest had been for the contortionist-in-chief of the United States, he would have won it that night for all practical purposes. The one who had made a virtue of being “severely conservative” cut the middle ground from under Obama’s feet with a brazenness that left the usually unflappable Obama utterly confused.

    And it worked, splendidly.

    In another clime, Romney would have been undone by that debate. For he confirmed his public image as a person without a core, a person who would say anything if he thought it would help him win, inauthentic. Not for nothing did one of his opponents in the race for the GOP ticket, Jon Huntsman, compare him to “a perfectly lubricated weather vane.”

    But in America, where politics is a game like almost everything else, where appearance – they call it “optics” — counts far more than substance, Romney’s contortions catapulted him to front runner.

    Nobody remembered anymore his comment about the 47 per cent of Americans who see themselves as victims and have settled for an easy life of dependency, nor the wealth he had salted away in off-shore tax havens, nor yet his sworn determination, in the face of established practice, to release no more than two years of his federal income tax filings.

    Not even Obama’s superior performance in the two subsequent “debates” could arrest the Romney momentum. The race dragged on, oscillating within a minuscule window, leading commentators to project all kinds of possible outcomes.

    One candidate (Romney) might win the popular ballot but lose the Electoral College vote to Obama, in which case Obama would have to contend with a fresh legitimacy issue that would provide fresh ammunition for the Tea Party crowd and its punditocracy that had spent the better part of the past four years trying to de-legitimise him.

    A winner might not be known for several months, and it might fall again to the Supreme Court again, the Republican Party in judicial robes to determine the outcome, according to another scenario. They even conjured up one curious scenario under which Romney would be president, and Obama’s running mate and vice president, Joe Biden, would continue to serve in that capacity in the Romney Administration.

    In these permutations, Obama figured only as a secondary actor.

    One of the few pollsters who came to a different conclusion was Nate Silver, the computer geek and resident statistician for The New York Times. While others predicted an outright win for Romney or a squeaker at best for Obama, Silver gave Obama more than eight chances in ten to clinch the race outright. For this, he was denounced endlessly by Romney’s supporters.

    Then, a deus ex machina that not even Sophocles could have devised supervened. Hurricane Sandy struck across 15 states in the North-east, wreaking devastation on a scale America has not seen since Katrina.

    Hurricane Sandy called to mind another deus ex machina that had supervened at a critical moment in the 2008 presidential election contest between Barack Obama and John McCain. The race was a ding-dong affair. Obama had the crowds and the enthusiasm, but this did not translate into a significant lead in the polls.

    The collapse of the stock market changed all that.

    McCain called off scheduled rallies and headed to Washington DC, saying he was going to help fix the economy. Obama kept his cool, consulted quickly with the experts, and staked a position that Americans found much more reassuring than McCain’s panicked and erratic conduct. The rest is history.

    Hurricane Sandy concentrated national attention on the ruin it had loosed on a vast swathe of the United States and to the efforts to deal with its aftermath. It offered President Obama to do what he does best – uniting the nation at a time of grief, and playing comforter-in-chief. There, on splendid display, and unsullied by the bitterness that has been the hallmark of the campaign – there was the essential Obama.

    But I am not persuaded that it slowed down or arrested Romney’s momentum, as his camp is now claiming. Right up to Election Day, they believed that they had the game in the bag, and their own internal polling and a good many of the independent polls appeared to back them.

    Romney and his inner circle certainly believed it.

    He had written and tucked in his vest the acceptance speech he would deliver moments after Obama would have called to concede. Boats moored along Boston harbor, had been detailed to launch a spectacular eight-minute fireworks to herald Romney’s victory. This was, to be sure, an incongruous move in the major city of a state that had just rejected him overwhelmingly at the polls. But then, nobody has ever accused Romney of subtlety.

    A web site for President-elect Mitt Romney was already up and almost running. Offices had been acquired in Washington DC to house his transition team.

    Romney was set to hit the ground running, as they say here, though he would have to wait until taking office on January 20, 2013, or Day One as he called it on the stump, to abolish “Obamacare,” the health care delivery law enacted by the Obama Administration and affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. It did not matter in the least that it was modeled on the law Romney had enacted as governor of Massachusetts.

    By the time they called Ohio some three hours after the poll closed, it was all over for Romney. Nate Silver, the resident statistician at The New York Times, had it right all along.

    Hurricane Sandy undermined the Romney mantra that big government was an aberration, whereas the private sector is the answer to every problem under the sun. It exploded Ronald Reagan’s oft-cited dictum that there are no words in the English language more terrifying “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”

    But in the end, I think it was Romney’s phoniness that brought him to grief — his lack of a core, his inauthenticity, his cavalier treatment of politics as an amoral game in which winning is the only thing that counts, his belief that he could fool all the people all the time.

    This was what Obama distilled into a powerful closing argument in the final days of the race. “You know me,” the drained and bone-weary candidate seeking re-election said at each stop. “You know what I stand for. You know that I say what I mean. You know that I mean what I say. . .”

    Romney had no answer to that one.

    Former President Clinton, who played a pivotal role in the Obama campaign, drove home the point to teeming admirers who remember his tenure as an era of prosperity.

    The genius that has sustained the United States through the centuries prevailed. A bourgeoning progressive majority that cut across class and color and creed and tongue and gender and sexual orientation saw through the flakiness. It refused to submit to the fear-mongering, the race baiting, the xenophobia, the homophobia, and the demagoguery that constituted the pillars of Romney’s bid for the White House.

     

     

  • So you want to be a  vice chancellor?

    So you want to be a vice chancellor?

    The University of Ilorin recently went through one of the most fraught processes in the calendar of a Nigerian public university: the appointment and transfer of authority to a new vice chancellor.

    The contest is not for the faint of heart. Formal qualifications count, to be sure. An applicant must have an earned doctorate from a “recognised university,” That, I take it, excludes all those “universities” that exist only on the Internet, from which anyone can for a modest fee obtain a degree in any subject under the sun and beyond without taking any course work and without writing any examinations.

    The bachelor’s degree lies at the lower end of the fee scale. The standard doctorate, a Ph.D, costs substantially more. Not surprisingly, a senior doctorate, the D.Sc or LL.D, attracts premium fees. But the cost is well within what Nigerians who patronise the awarding institutions can afford, plus a contribution to the institution’s “development” or endowment fund.

    For his munificence – for it is usually a man – the patron gets by way of certificate a parchment large enough to cover a dining table, inscribed with his name by the finest calligrapher in the neighbourhood, stating how he had not merely fulfilled but greatly exceeded the requirements for the attestation. And it comes with a gold-foil seal as large as a saucer.

    Do not be deceived by all the frippery. In fact, I offer it as a proposition that the greater the tinsel, the more worthless is the certificate it adorns.

    If the patron is the discriminating type, he can ask the president and officials of the university to fly to Nigeria, all expenses paid, to confer the degree on him in his house or at the local community hall, to the pulsating beat of highlife music supplied by a live band, and with the local monarch and his chiefs and the usual freeloaders in full throng to felicitate with the son of the soil whose genius had reverberated across the oceans.

    It is all a matter of cash – cash in hard currency, that is.

    To return to the process of appointing vice chancellors in the Nigerian university system: An applicant must have an earned doctorate from a recognised university. It helps if the candidate has also published in “reputable journals,” those which subject submissions to rigorous peer review before publication.

    But even a solid bibliography will take a candidate only so far. Connections count, of course. But they are no substitute for hustling of the rawest kind, blackmail, intimidation, disinformation, bribery, voodoo – indeed, everything in the toolkit of skullduggery.

    Ask Professor Olu Obafemi, the playwright and dramatist.

    The recent change of baton at the University of Ilorin, I gather, was mercifully bereft of such mago mago. But it nevertheless left some rancour in its trail. The integrity of the process of short-listing candidates has been assailed by at least one of the candidates, who has since proceeded to court to seek relief.

    Professor Rasheed Ijaodola has reportedly filed a lawsuit before the Federal High Court, Ilorin, challenging the selection of Professor AbdulGaniyu Ambali for the top job, saying the process was “irregular, improper, unlawful, null and void.” Other disaffected contestants have since reconciled themselves to the outcome.

    Professor Is-haq Oloyede, the vice chancellor who oversaw process at issue, has handed the reins of office to Professor AbdulGaniyu Ambali, and all seems quiet on campus. There they were, at one of the events marking the change, resplendent in a matching outfit — aso ebi — to call it by its proper name.

    The atmosphere had much more in common with a family ceremony in the owambe tradition than with a momentous transition at an institution of higher learning. But Neither Oloyede nor Ambali should be blamed for this. Blame it, instead, on the casual manner in which appointments to that high office are made, consummated, and terminated.

    Professor Ojetunde Aboyade, the distinguished economist unfortunately no longer with us was driving back to Ibadan from Lagos when he heard on his car radio that he had been appointed vice chancellor of the University of Ife, as it was called at the time. They had sounded him out, it needs to be stated. But he had rejected the offer firmly.

    The great surgeon, Professor Horatio Orishejolomi Thomas, also late, was entertaining guests in his official residence after presiding over the convocation at the University of Ibadan when he and his guests heard on the evening news that he had been dismissed “with immediate effect.”

    If these and many other cases of the same kind were the extreme, even the process of handing a senior academic officer a letter of appointment and asking him to report for duty at such and such a time as if he was a clerical officer is only a tad less disrespectful.

    And yet, there is never a shortage of applicants for the position, and many of them will stop at nothing to clinch it.

    Elsewhere, the assumption of office of university president or vice chancellor is almost like the assumption of office by an elected head of government. It is heralded by an inaugural ceremony lasting several days, a mixture of the academic, the social, and the cultural.

    When a new president was named some ten years ago for Knox College in Galesburg, an hour from my base in Peoria, Illinois, and the birthplace of the historian Carl Sandburg, festive bells rang throughout the area.

    Lectures and symposia that drew participants from near and far were staged. A command performance of Wole Soyinka’s “Death and the King’s Horseman” was staged for several nights, culminating in the attendance on the final night of the Nobelist himself, during which he delivered a lecture that kept the huge audience spellbound.

    It was on that closing night that I met for the first time Dr Abdul-Rasheed Na’Allah, then on the faculty of Northern Illinois University at Macomb, Illinois, and now vice chancellor of Kwara State University. From his seat in the rafters, he delivered a citation on Soyinka, improvised óríkí and all, that set off the proceedings on a strong Nigerian note.

    This, then, was the context in which the new president delivered an inaugural address, in which he laid out his vision for Knox College. It was not just another routine in the university’s life but a milestone in which faculty and students and staff and the neighbouring community participated, one that would inspire and serve as a reference point for years to come.

    That is the way to accord the public university in Nigeria its special place in the scheme of things. After all, it is not a ministry, department, or agency. It is also the way to stamp the office of university vice chancellor with the respect and dignity it deserves.

    Private universities, where the vice chancellor is for all practical purposes the proprietor’s factotum, also stand to gain much by this arrangement.

    The National Universities Commission should lead the way, working through the Council of each public university.

     

  • Ave Iohannes, Cardinal (designate) Onaiyekan

    Ave Iohannes, Cardinal (designate) Onaiyekan

    Among those who know him or have followed his career with interest, the only surprise in the translation to Cardinal of Dr John Onaiyekan, Archbishop of the Catholic Diocese of Abuja, is that it did not come much earlier.

    I belong in both categories.

    Onaiyekan and I were born the same year but six months apart in Kabba, Kogi State, and had our primary education there, he at St Mary’s Catholic School, and I at St Andrew’s Anglican School.

    Our paths rarely crossed, since we lived in different parts of town, and even when we staged the obligatory Empire Day march every year to the Divisional Office, each school maintained its own formation.

    That changed in 1956 when both of us were among a group of primary school pupils specially selected – so we were told — to travel to Kaduna to join our counterparts from other parts of Northern Nigeria to greet Queen Elizabeth and her husband Prince Phillip on their maiden visit to Nigeria. It was during the trip, and our four-week encampment in Kaduna, that I got to know the boy behind the legend.

    His brilliance had long been the talk of the town. Among his peers, he was deemed the person most likely to succeed, not just on account of that brilliance, but also because of his dutifulness, and his impeccable good manners. He had everything going for him, including a handsome, athletic gait that would grow even more winsome in the years ahead.

    His given name Olorunfemi (God loves me) could not have been more prescient: He was prodigally gifted.

    Back then, the best pupils headed to Government College, Keffi, or the Provincial Secondary School, Okene, via the Northern Common Entrance Exam. Onaiyekan had already decided, it would seem, that those prestigious secular institutions would do little to prepare him for the life of the cloister.

    He could have headed to St John’s College, Kaduna, easily the best-known Catholic secondary school for boys in Northern Nigeria and one of the best in the nation. Instead, Onaiyekan chose to go to the little-known Mt St Michael Secondary School run by the Catholic Mission in bucolic Aliade, near Otukpo, in today’s Benue State. There his brilliance and humility instantly endeared him to the authorities and to fellow students.

    A schoolmate two years ahead of Onaiyekan once told me how he would call Onaiyekan to some quiet corner, far from the embarrassing gaze of colleagues, to seek his help with knotty problems in geometry or the proper use of the ablative absolute in Latin.

    In his final year at Aliade, Onaiyekan’s brilliance thrust him – and his school – into the national limelight. He came first in the entire Northern Nigeria in the entrance examination into the two-year Higher School Certificate (HSC) programme to prepare students for university matriculation.

    His prize was the Isa Kaita trophy, donated by Alhaji Isa Kaita, the much-respected Northern Nigeria Minister of Education. This achievement so impressed the premier himself, Sir Ahmadu Bello, the Sardauna of Sokoto, that he journeyed all the way to Aliade to present the trophy to Onaiyekan.

    With that feat, and a performance of the same vintage in the West African School Certificate examination, Onaiyekan stood to receive a government scholarship to study anywhere he pleased. By the time the WASC results were released, he had already enrolled at the SS Peter and Paul Major Seminary, Bodija, in Ibadan, to prepare himself for the priesthood.

    He could have elected to study mathematics or physics or biology or literature or chemistry or indeed any subject at the most renowned institutions in the world, for such was his prodigious talent. He could have become a doctor, a lawyer, an engineer, or an architect. With proper coaching, he could have earned a decent living in professional soccer as a goalkeeper outside these shores.

    In the academy, he would no doubt have changed more than a few footnotes. He might even have played a leading part in changing a paradigm. But his commitment to the priesthood was unshakeable.

    That commitment took him to Rome for further studies, culminating in a doctorate and versatility in Italian, French, and German and Spanish, took him back to Bodija as a professor of Sacred Theology, and saw him shuttling between wherever he happened to be based and Rome to participate in some of the most important deliberations at The Vatican.

    Thus, his translation to the College of Cardinals was a forgone conclusion. The only surprise, as I was saying, is that it did not come much earlier. Something tells me that he has arrived only at a station, not the terminus.

    In Nigeria, Onaiyekan has been a font of inspiration, always appealing to the moral law within us as Immanuel Kant called it, always speaking truth to power in measured terms but without equivocation, always seeking to promote acceptance and deepen understanding, always exhorting those who have taken the destiny of Nigeria in their hands to make it the country that Providence has endowed it most bounteously to be.

    Not for him, however, the shrillness and sanctimony of a great many of the evangelicals and Pentecostals who are forever invoking “holy ghost fire” on those who don’t share their faith or fervour.

    Sometime in 1968, Onaiyekan, then principal of St Kizito’s Secondary School, Isanlu, in Kwara State, came on assignment to Oro, also in Kwara State, where I was teaching at the Grammar School. During the visit, he said Mass at the local Catholic Church.

    Not being a Catholic, I did not attend the mass. But it clings in my memory. A friend who was in attendance told me how young women literally swooned that a man so handsome could have chosen to be a priest of all things, and the older women wondered and wondered how his parents could have allowed him to make such a wrong-headed choice. It must be that he was orphaned in childhood and had no one to give him proper guidance, some of them speculated.

    No, he was not orphaned. His father was warden of the Catholic Church in Kabba, and even if Onaiyekan was his only child, his father would still not have objected to his entering the priesthood. He is not an only child, however. His older sister was one of the first set of students to graduate from Ahmadu Bello University, where she took a degree in chemistry. Nor is she his only sibling.

    While in Oro, Onaiyekan came to my residence on the Grammar School compound. What seemed to engage him the most in my bachelor home was my bookshelf, chockfull of an eclectic collection of which I was really proud. He picked out one volume from the collection and asked whether I had read it.

    It was “The Phenomenon of Man”, by the French Jesuit theologian and paleontologist, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, and I told him rather tentatively that I had read it.

    “Did you understand it?” he asked in the manner of a solicitous family doctor.

    In the book, with an elegant and engaging preface by the evolutionary biologist Sir Julian Huxley, de Chardin combined insights from his study of fossils with insights from sacred scripture to explain the universe and Man’s place in it.

    I told him I found large sections of it tough going.

    “Do you have French?” he asked, again in the manner of the solicitous family doctor.

    No, I told him.

    “No wonder you found it so hard.” He said. “The French original is far easier to understand.”

    That is the image of Dr Onaiyekan that has remained with me ever since: the image of the solicitous family doctor, which translates in clerical terms into the good shepherd, tending his flock ever so solicitously.

    The other image is that of a rather reticent savant, more concerned to guide and to make people better and wiser than to appear clever.

    Ave Iohannes, Cardinal Onaiyekan.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • The news from Scotland

    The news from Scotland

    Last week, UK Prime Minister David Cameron and Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond signed an agreement to put the Union of England and Scotland consummated back in 1707 to the ultimate test: To hold in Scotland, no later than 2014, a referendum to determine whether Scotland will leave to form a separate, independent country, or remain part of the United Kingdom.

    Not a few Nigerians desirous of correcting or revising what the former premier of Northern Nigeria Sir Ahmadu Bello, Sardauna of Sokoto, famously called “the mistake of 1914,” will find this arrangement an attractive model. It is unlikely to happen here in their lifetime.

    But as they contemplate this development, those who are forever declaring that the “unity”of Nigeria is “not negotiable” — those making feverish preparations, no expenses spared, to celebrate and consolidate the “mistake of 1914” — ought to take a deep breath.

    If a Union forged more than three centuries ago among people who have a great deal in common and among whom there is nothing like the mutual execration that is the hallmark of the Nigerian experience, is to be subjected to a referendum, who can in good faith assert that an arrangement foisted by British imperialism on the peoples inhabiting a space the colonialists created principally for administrative convenience and commercial exploitation is sacrosanct and should remain so for all time?

    The Scots may yet elect to remain part of the UK, as indeed most Nigerians are likely to elect, I suspect, if presented with the same choice about their country. Polls suggest that only 28 percent of the population of Scotland favor outright independence, whereas 58 percent favour staying with the UK, with more powers for the Scottish government on defence and the economy.

    But nothing is foreclosed. The exercise will be transparent and wide-open, and both parties have pledged to abide by the outcome.

    Compare that with the charade that major political actors in Nigeria are staging in the name of effecting “amendments” to a Constitution so shot through and through with defects, the best authorities have said, that nothing less than a new one can respond adequately to the needs, hopes and fears of those whose lives will be governed by it.

    The proper forum for preparing such a document is a constituent assembly. President Goodluck Jonathan has chosen, instead, to co-opt a trainload of committees comprising for the most part handpicked members, with a remit to prepare a draft for the approval of a National Assembly whose members are concerned more with the benefits of office than with the attendant duties and responsibilities of office.

    This process will produce, according to Dr Jonathan, a “people’s Constitution,” though “the people” are largely absent from the scheme, invisible. Civil society groups, which Dr Jonathan has hailed as the “true representatives of the people” figure in his scheme only as a notion, and a token one at that. Theirs is not to suggest the way forward, but to lend a patina of credibility to the scheme.

    Even the leadership of the Nigerian news media has been co-opted to lend tacit approval to a process that the news media should subject to searching questioning because it is so manifestly underhanded, as has apparently the leadership of the Bar.

    The best that can be expected is that the exercise will paper over the cracks and conveniently leave fundamental problems of Nigeria’s existence for another time, thus driving existing wounds inward, there to fester.

    A committee of former chiefs of the Nigeria Police Force, now vested with unassailable wisdom despite the unflattering record of their performance in office and of the institution they once headed, says that the police establishment should continue to be centralised in a country that is supposed to be a federation. One of them has even gone so far as to declare that the establishment of state police would lead to a civil war.

    Case closed, based on substantially on the supposed authority of these experts, on the objections of some state governors in the North, and on the claim that it would be “abused.” Is the present centralised system not abused daily, and abused egregiously? In whatever case, what makes abuse by state authorities more objectionable or invidious than abuse by federal authorities? Why not institute measures that would minimise and punish abuse?

    Rejecting the demand for state police on the ground that it will be abused is akin to preventing a child from taking those first, faltering steps on the ground that it would fall and injure itself, perhaps badly. When will it learn to walk?

    It has also been contended that the establishment of state police would also lead to setting up of state prisons. The answer to that is: So what? In the First Republic and in the era preceding it, there were no regional prisons. But there were Native Authority prisons, and they served their communities quite well.

    Dr Jonathan is not interested in a fundamental re-ordering of the governance of Nigeria. The existing set-up is given, and all that can be done is to tinker around the edges. A full-time bicameral federal legislature that consumes a sizeable portion of the nation’s recurrent expenses but contributes very little to the well-being of the public is apparently to remain in place, a return to the parliamentary system that some very thoughtful Nigerians have proposed having been foreclosed.

    It has been argued that the composition of the Senate gives concrete expression to the equality of the states. Thus, Bayelsa has the same number of senators as Lagos and Kano. Can’t a less burdensome arrangement be devised that expresses the principle in ways more beneficial to the and at a much smaller cost?

    There is continuing talk of creating more states even as some states are finding it increasingly difficult to render basic services, much less engineer meaningful development. But there is no thought of providing an avenue for states desirous of doing so to coalesce into larger units that can better meet the needs of the populace.

    This past September, Philip Asiodu, one of a handful of the Yakubu Gowon-era civil servants consecrated by the media as “super permanent secretaries” because of their enormous contribution to, and influence on public policy, presented a public lecture in Abuja that is sure to rank among the most thoughtful, informed, and wide-ranging discourse on public service in Nigeria in recent memory.

    Given its provenance, the discourse was far from radical. Rather, it was a comprehensive agenda for reform, but one that is far more insightful than anything Dr Jonathan’s trainload of committees has produced thus far.

    There was a great deal in Asiodu’s lecture that those who have settled for a review rather than a re-write of the Constitution should have embraced. But did they even bother to read it?

    To them, it is far more rewarding to keep the country on the trajectory of an ever-shrinking circle.

     

     

     

  • After the deluge

    After the deluge

    Despite the solemn warnings of the weather experts, I am hoping that the title of this comment is not a forlorn hope but an expression of actuality; that the deluge is well and truly over, and that the problem ahead is how to deal with the destructive aftermath and the discontinuities it has wrought on the lives of millions of Nigerians in its ravenous wake.

    This column came down rather heavily on it what it saw as its lethargic response to a disaster foretold, the greatest natural disaster to have struck Nigeria in recent memory. Few Nigerians under 60 years of age can recall witnessing anything on the scale of the floods that have overtaken large swathes of 27 of the country’s 36 states.

    Disaster struck well before President Goodluck Jonathan headed to New York to perform yet another ritual of addressing the General Assembly of the United Nations, and to try, with help from Tony Blair (ha!) to cajole all those disobliging foreign investors into setting out without further delay to multiply their fortunes in Nigeria.

    It was therefore understandable that he did not cancel his engagements and return home to take charge of the situation. Yes, take charge. He is the nation’s chief executive. And it is not for nothing that he is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, a designation he takes quite seriously, never missing an opportunity to deck himself out in the ceremonial garb of the office.

    But even after his return, Dr Jonathan did not swing into action. Government business continued at the usual slow tempo. It was as if the nation was not in a state of siege.

    It would now seem that, in the deep recesses of the federal bureaucracy, far removed from the prying eyes of the usual meddlers, officials were busy fashioning out a robust and comprehensive response to the disaster. The plan, outlined last week in Jonathan’s national broadcast and later spelled out in detail, is a product of hard and imaginative thinking, for which the Administration deserves praise.

    Even if the Federal Government were to commit one-half of its 2013 budget to rehabilitating the damaged infrastructure and re-settling the hundreds of thousands — more likely millions — of displaced persons, the task would still not be done. So, it was wise to co-opt the private sector, faith-based, and civil society organisations into the endeavor, and to charge those leading it to seek international assistance.

    Nigeria’s private sector is no longer what it used to be. Military president Ibrahim Babangida’s Structural Adjustment Programme virtually de-industrialised Northern Nigeria. The flight of major manufacturing companies to neighbouring countries where steady electricity is guaranteed and there is a greater sense of personal safety has further denuded the ranks of major private sector players. So has an economy that seems sluggish if not stagnant, despite a reported growth of more than 7 percent for the second or third year running.

    Still, what remains of the private sector should be expected to contribute handsomely to the effort.

    International assistance for disaster relief, I gather, is less constrained by donor fatigue than is Official Development Assistance, or ODA, in the language of the business. Still, with the global recession that is threatening the very architecture of the European Union and convulsing the world’s major economies, expectations from that source should be tempered with realism.

    In the final analysis, the judgment and the prudence that prominent political actors demonstrate in this crisis, and the sacrifices they are prepared to make, will to a significant extent determine the scale and content of international assistance. For that reason, the Federal Government should take another look at its 2013 budget proposals.

    Consider, for a start, the “welfare package” in unspecified items of expenditure by the president, vice president and secretary to the government of the Federation that will cost the exchequer 1.5 billion in fiscal 2013.

    What does each package consist in? Does any of these high officers whose basic needs and much more are supplied by the state really need a “welfare package” in a country where there is no social safety net for a growing army of the unemployed and those driven into destitution by sheer adversity?

    Then there is the roughly one billion Naira provided in the budget proposals as stipend for food and ancillary expenses for the president and vice president over the same period, and this in a country where millions go to bed hungry each day. Does cassava bread and fish pepper-soup cost that much? In whatever case, can’t the president and the vice president pay for their food and catering from their welfare packages?

    Then again, there is the N3.7 billion for overseas trips, a substantial increase over the figure for the current year that the President had promised to cut in the wake of the “subsidy” protests. How necessary are many of the trips usually undertaken under this rubric? Why do so many officials flying Business or First Class and drawing heavy estacodes withal undertake such trips at the slightest provocation, and oftentimes with no provocation at all? What benefits does the nation derive from these jamborees?

    No less worthy of attention is the N2.8 billion for “upgrading “ and maintenance in the Presidential Villa, not forgetting the N120 million in small change earmarked for “modeling” the vice president’s guest house in Abuja.

    And there are other expenditure items that add up to several billion of Naira for landscaping, upgrading or refurbishing structures that were landscaped, upgraded or rehabilitated the previous year.

    Surely, given the disaster encircling the country and the general misery, these projected expenditures can be trimmed substantially, deferred, or even eliminated altogether? Surely, a great chunk of the vast sums set aside for “security” can be diverted to the rehabilitation and re-settlement effort without imperiling the existing security situation? What, in any case, can be a greater priority than the security of the people?

    Members of the National Assembly will also have to make considerable sacrifices if the call for international disaster relief assistance is to win any sympathy abroad.

    In financial matters, that body is as secretive as The Vatican. Nobody knows for sure how much the legislators earn, or rather, how much they choose to pay themselves.

    At a time tens of thousands of beleaguered Nigerians have no clothes other than the ones on their backs, shouldn’t the legislators consider donating their “wardrobe allowance,” reportedly in the amount of N60, 000 a month, toward the rehabilitation of their displaced compatriots?

    And as hundreds of thousands face grinding hardship daily with prospects of more of the same,

    should the legislators not consider donating their “hardship allowance” — the hefty sums they pay themselves each month for subjecting themselves to the arduous task of rubberstamping proposals from the Executive Branch and passing vacuous resolutions and harassing state officials –should they not now donate their hardship allowance toward the resettlement of those to whom hardship has become a constant companion?

    As it is with the Presidency and the National Assembly, so also should it be the state governors and members of state assemblies. There is no better time than now to trim to trim those allowance and commit the proceeds to the daunting task of rehabilitation and resettlement ahead.

    Charity must be seen to begin at home.

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

  • A conclave of freeloaders

    A conclave of freeloaders

    Freeloaders, all. And ingrates to boot.

    Some six weeks ago, they dominated the front pages and the headlines in the national media, from the moment they landed at Abuja Airport until they departed some four days later and even thereafter.

    They were the talk – and indeed the envy – of the town as they were whisked from one event to another in the finest automobiles that ever rolled off the assembly lines of the Bavarian Motor Works in Germany, from lavish breakfast, with judicious helpings of cassava bread, I gather, to sumptuous lunch, and thereafter to opulent dinner, with the choicest victuals in between.

    By one account, one of them could not find her way to Abuja in a manner befitting of members of the conclave. Pronto, an executive jet from the Presidential Fleet had to be dispatched to Lilongwe to fetch her, and apparently to fly her back at the conclusion of the proceedings.

    Practically all of them were heard to remark in their less guarded moments that never had they never enjoyed such a good time, inured from the querulous intrusion of the media back home and the malicious gossip of the domestic staff.

    They came, they ate, and they left, laden with precious souvenirs.

    But not a word of solicitude or solidarity has been heard from members of this conclave, severally or jointly, about their ailing Abuja host who left nothing to chance to ensure that they would forever remember their visit as the happiest time of their lives.

    As far as I could ascertain, they have not sent flowers to her bedside in the German hospital where she is reportedly convalescing, let alone a deputation to comfort her. Nor have they summoned the presence of mind to send a goodwill delegation to her husband through whose office all that munificence they enjoyed had flowed.

    Anyone who has hosted a regional conference, to say nothing of a national conference, knows how exacting the task is. Hosting an international conference is prohibitively more exacting. When it comes to staging a continental conference involving first ladies, the task grows by geometric progression.

    Indeed, so enormous was the stress and strain occasioned by the convening and hosting of such a conference that the convener had to repair to the quiescent clime of Dubai just to decompress. But the damage had been done, and opportunistic complications set in.

    And yet, as I was saying, the African First Ladies Peace Initiative, to come right out with it and call the conclave its proper name, has expressed no concern or solidarity with its chairperson and convener, Dame Patience Jonathan, with her husband, and with the people of Nigeria.

    Whatever happened to ubuntu, that hallowed imperative that enjoins us, Africans, to look out for one another, and in this particular instance summons the first ladies to be their sister’s keeper?

    Where is the solidarity?

    Dame Jonathan even took a shellacking for allegedly muscling her way through the bureaucracy to secure for the organisation’s headquarters building choice land in Abuja — land to which her predecessor claimed to have genuine title. She was called all kinds of names in the media, but she endured it all graciously, unshaken in her commitment to the goals and objectives of the African First Ladies Initiative.

    Is it too much, then, to expect her fellow first ladies to show humane concern for the health and well-being of one who has sacrificed so much and endured so much to advance the organization’s interests?

    When it comes to Nigeria the host country of its most recent summit, the African First Ladies Peace Initiative has been even more remiss. Since that summit, hardly has a week passed without some shadowy organisation carrying out a slaughter of innocents, much of it sectarian, in the northern part of Nigeria.

    The Independence Day massacre of 42 students of the Federal Polytechnic, in Mubi, Adamawa State, is only the latest episode of what Festus Eriye, editor and columnist for the Sunday edition of this newspaper, has with his accustomed perspicacity called a “descent into depravity.”

    If any country not at war qualifies for an urgent visitation from the African First Ladies Peace Initiative, that country, surely, has to be Nigeria, which hosted its most recent summit.

    Yet, there has not been the merest hint of a move in that direction; no appeal to the rampaging bomb-throwers and gunmen to end the slaughter and allow for the kind of mediation that women are uniquely suited to promote, as mothers and wives. They have sent no message of commiseration to the beleaguered, and offered no succour to the most vulnerable casualties, children and older women especially.

    They had better prepare an answer for their serial derelictions, for their chairperson is sure to demand an explanation when she returns to circulation any moment from now. And it had better be a robust one.

    Dr Jonathan will have some explaining to do, too.

    Something tells that if Dame Patience finds on returning to circulation that “First Lady” is no longer reflexively prefixed to her name; that she is now largely seen more as her husband’s wife than as Nigeria’s preeminent woman, and that she can no longer command the kind of attention she used to command, she is sure to demand an explanation.

    She will surely find out that her husband treated her indisposition as a family matter that did not rise to the level of national concern, and that he did not give a damn about the public’s right to know, even if only in outline, what was happening to the woman they had come to regard as Her Excellency the First Lady.

    In the process, he reduced her to an object of tawdry gossip and tabloid titillation.

    She will discover that, by his silence and his secrecy, Dr Jonathan blocked the outpouring of sympathy and goodwill that Nigerians typically manifest toward the indisposed, and that by the same measure, he may have taken her out of public consciousness.

    The video clip aired on national television the other day showing Mrs Jonathan “hale and hearty” with her husband and children at an undisclosed location in Germany did little to clear the air.

    While the reservoir of sympathy and goodwill has not dried up, she will find it no easy task to re-enter the public consciousness in a positive light.

    But one writes off Mrs Jonathan only at one’s peril. I will not be surprised if, the day after her return, she carried on where she had left off unfazed, and unstoppable as ever.

    Still, I don’t envy Dr Jonathan.

     

  • A nation under water

    A nation under water

    It was perhaps just as well that the Federal Government declared several weeks ago that Nigeria’s 52nd independence anniversary would be observed, again, on a “low key.”

    Nigeria is celebrating its National Day literally under water. “Low key” doesn’t get lower than that.

    Those of a decidedly malignant disposition, whom we shall always have among us, may even see the whole thing – the encircling waters and the objects drifting listlessly in the deluge – as an apt metaphor for the national condition.

    From the parched Sahel in the grip of the furiously retreating Sahara desert to the mangrove swamps of the Atlantic, a vast swathe of Nigeria is under water. Swollen by record rainfall and by water said to have been released from dams in neighbouring Cameroun to avoid a looming disaster, Nigeria’s major rivers, the Niger and the Benue, rage as never before, swallowing up houses and washing away bridges and roads and farmlands, sparing nothing in their ravenous wake.

    For four days, the national capital was cut off from traffic from much of the South, portions of the road linking Lokoja with Abuja having been washed away. Lokoja itself, like many other cities caught up in the floods, evoked scenes of New Orleans in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, which our own Poet Laureate Niyi Osundare has memorialised for the ages in epic verse.

    Some 130 persons, most likely a gross undercount, have been reported killed in the floods. At least as many are missing. The number of displaced persons has to be in the millions, and damage to private property must be reckoned in trillions of Naira.

    Given just the dilatoriness, the studied evasion with which Nigerian insurance companies typically handle claims, those who lost their homes and property to the flood cannot rest easy that help is forthcoming. And here I am talking of those who took the trouble and expense to buy insurance cover, or were corralled to do so by a mortgage institution.

    Most of the victims probably do not fall in this category and are entirely on their own. With the sluggish economy and rising cost of everything, and the predilection of the mercantile class for profiting from the misfortunes of others, a good many of them are not going to be in a position any time soon to repair or rebuild their homes.

    The fortunate among the millions of displaced persons will be housed in camps for months if not years, and the rest will have to fend for themselves as best they can

    The National Assembly has not met in emergency session to deliberate on legislative measures to cope with what is without question the greatest natural disaster to have struck Nigeria in recent memory.

    Perhaps its members are waiting for President Goodluck Jonathan to propose a supplementary budget. But what stops a private member from proposing an appropriate bill and shepherding it through the legislature in readiness for the President for assent?

    As for Dr Jonathan, he was half a world away, in New York, addressing the United Nations General Assembly and trying once again to charm those elusive foreign investors into coming to Nigeria to seek their fortunes as the flood waters rose steadily, turned entire cities into flotillas, and cut off Abuja from the south-western part of the country.

    The churlish would say that he should not have travelled out at all, or should have headed back as soon as he was made aware of the enormousness of the unfolding catastrophe. But it may well be that his aides never told him how dire the situation had become so as not to distract him from making the most of a moment on the world’s stage that comes only once a year.

    Besides, the vice president, cabinet ministers and officials Specialised agencies and a sprawling were on hand to deal with any emergencies. And, to his great credit, Dr Jonathan took time off his hectic schedule in New York to direct the designated ministers and officials to take charge. If they did not rise up to the occasion, it cannot be the President’s fault.

    But, wearing another hat, the President is also griever and consoler-in-chief; he sets the mood of the nation in times of rejoicing as well as in times of calamity. It would have been a gesture of enormous significance if, on his return from the United States, he had visited some of the beleaguered communities offering words of sympathy and assuring them that his Administration would do all its power to bring them succour.

    In politics, perception is almost everything. Dr Jonathan needed to be perceived as a President who cared, who feels their pain, and is firmly resolved to translate his concern into practical relief measures. Such a gesture could have bridged somewhat the widening gulf between the general public and his Administration.

    In this respect, time is still on his side, even if not on the side of the beleaguered, who will no doubt see it as a fresh disappointment that their privations rated just four perfunctory sentences in his National Day broadcast.

    It will no doubt be remarked that it was foreign contractors who made the national capital accessible by road from the South-west some four days after a stretch of the Lokoja-Abuja highway was washed away by flood waters.

    And it will be asked: Where were the indigenous contractors? Where, for that matter, were all the hardware that the government relief agencies ought to have stockpiled all these years – rescue vehicles and river craft especially. Where are the mobile emergency health centres? Where are the emergency water-treatment plants? Where was the emergency communication system?

    It will be asked even more insistently: Why was there so little preparation for a disaster so clearly foretold?

    Meanwhile, the Jonathan Administration will have to shed its preoccupation with fringe issues and devote all its energies to coping with this unfolding tragedy. The Weather Bureau says the worst may still lie ahead. This means designing comprehensive measures to deal with the present emergency and proactive measures to contain the coming one.

    I am thinking of food and shelter for the displaced; of schooling arrangements for children, and of their general safety.

    I am thinking of the vast farmlands now under water, and the harvest now lost, and the livestock that perished; the food shortage that is sure to follow, and the high prices everyone will have to pay for a piece of whatever is available.

    At a time like this, the usual posturing will simply not do. It will have to yield to fast-paced, coordinated and sustained action designed to bring relief urgently to communities of the beleaguered across the nation.

  • In lieu of cassava bread and fish pepper-soup

    In lieu of cassava bread and fish pepper-soup

    As Nigeria prepares for its Independence anniversary, I was hoping that the beleaguered Jonathan Presidency would, out of the discontinuities of the year past, diligently search for a common thread around which common purpose can be constructed, to reinvigorate the Administration and move a stalled nation forward.

    A key event in the celebrations, a lecture delivered by Ghana’s former president John Kufour, offered President Goodluck Jonathan a fine opportunity to articulate this common thread and, with it, weave a narrative that can reassure and inspire his compatriots and summon them to greater endeavour.

    Even those who felt that a foreign head of state, serving or retired, was not the most appropriate person to present the lecture on such an occasion, would still have allowed that that it was as good a platform as any for the host to reach out in solidarity and renewal to his compatriots.

    But Dr Jonathan blew the opportunity big time.

    Even if Dr Jonathan is saving his National Day broadcast for precisely the kind of address, charging him with blowing the opportunity presented by the Kufour lecture hardly amounts to a rush to judgement.

    He could have confined himself to some bland remarks on the substance of the lecture and the guest speaker. He could even have drawn some praise – which he surely can use – by claiming it as an instance of the commitment of his Administration to the spirit of ECOWAS and the African Union and the African Peer Review Mechanism that it invited a former head of state from the neighbourhood to deliver the Independence Anniversary Lecture.

    Instead, Dr Jonathan chose to use the occasion to denounce and demonise Lagos residents who staged, in response to his ill-advised decision to end a phantom subsidy on petroleum products last January, one of the most stirring and ennobling protests Nigerians have witnessed in recent memory.

    Lagos, consistent with its status and history, was the epicentre of the protests that went on without loss of momentum for nine days and would have continued if Dr Jonathan had stuck to his vow that there was “no going back” on the issue. He did not go back all the way to the status quo ante, but go back he did, forced to beat a petulant retreat.

    Most parts of the country, except the South-east, were also convulsed by the protests. It is necessary to recall this fact, which Dr Jonathan seems to have conveniently forgotten or deliberately ignored. Rarely had Nigerians been so united, for so long, on a single issue, with such firm resolve.

    In his extempore recreation, the protests had nothing to do with the contentious subsidy; rather, they were a pretext for executing a plot to topple his Administration. The protesters were not actuated by genuine grievances; rather they were “manipulated” by persons intent on preserving a corruption-soaked regime of subsidy re imbursements.

    “Look at the demonstrations back home, look at these areas this demonstrations are coming from, you begin to ask, are these the ordinary citizens that are demonstrating? Or are people pushing them to demonstrate?” Dr Jonathan quipped.

    Then he zeroed in on Lagos, in the manner of someone who had been nursing a bitter grievance.

    “Take the case of Lagos, Lagos is the critical state in the nation’s economy, it controls about 53 per cent of the economy and all tribes are there. During the demonstration in Lagos, people were given bottled water that people in my village don’t have access to, people were given expensive food that the ordinary people in Lagos cannot eat. So even going to eat free food alone attracts people. They go and hire the best musician to come and play and the best comedian to come and entertain, is that demonstration? Are you telling me that that is a demonstration from ordinary masses in Nigeria who want to communicate something to government?”

    Yes, Dr Jonathan; that demonstration was “from ordinary masses in Nigeria” who wanted “to communicate something to government.”

    And what these “ordinary masses” who had put aside the divisions of class and creed and tongue wanted to communicate was this: that they are tired of being victims of serial misrule, of policies that subvert rather than advance public well-being, of cluelessness and lack of vision in high places, of having their names taken in vain, without corresponding adherence to their interests and values.

    This was the same message that rang out loud and clear wherever the protesters staged their rallies.

    Thanks to that N1 billion annual feeding allowance from the public purse, Dr Jonathan was probably too busy eating fresh-baked cassava bread and fish pepper-soup and any victuals under the sun or even beyond it that presidential plate may fancy – to hear what the protesters were saying or see what was really going on.

    But did he not read the “security reports” sent daily to his office by “security agents”?

    If those reports are of any value, they would have recorded that one Friday afternoon at the height of the protests, demonstrators formed a protective ring around their Muslim brethren to enable them say their Jumat prayers in relative peace without constituting a target of opportunity for religious fanatics or agents provocateurs.

    That is the kind of solidarity Dr Jonathan should seek to build upon, not demonise; solidarity born out of common purpose, and of the realisation that we all are keepers of one another.

    The security agents would have told him that no serious crimes were reported while the protests lasted. Their reports would have related that the bottled water that seems to have moved Dr Jonathan to such high dudgeon was provided by some of the civil society organisations that coordinated the protests, and that no “packaged meals” were on offer.

    Perhaps they would have remarked the woman in the Lagos suburb of Agege who ordinarily fried and sold akara by the roadside but gave away her entire ware for one day to the protesters as a mark of her support

    This was the spirit that animated the protests.

    It is therefore an egregious misreading of the events of last January to portray the protesters as the unthinking dupes of unpatriotic manipulators bent on extracting unearned subsidy reimbursements from the treasury even if that meant plunging the country into bankruptcy.

    It is worse: It is a libel, and a gratuitous one at that.

    Now, it is incontestable that the Presidency has the most formidable instruments of manipulation at its disposal – NTA and FRCN, to mention only two. So why didn’t it deploy them to manipulate Pastor Tunde Bakare and Owei Lakemfa?

    If the protesters could not eat fresh-baked cassava bread and other delicacies flowing from the state-of-the-art grill at the Presidential Villa, why can’t they eat akara without being slandered? If they cannot afford the pleasure of downing cocktail after choice cocktail, why begrudge them bottled water?

    Even it they were served “packaged meals,” when did that qualify as conduct deserving presidential censure? When did “packaged meals” become the preserve of the Presidency?

    If residents of Dr Jonathan’s village cannot afford bottled water, whose fault is it? What did he do to empower them to afford bottled water when he was a director of the development agency for the oil-producing areas, OMPADEC, later as deputy governor, and subsequently as governor of Bayelsa?

    Can it be that, as President, he caused a university to be sited in the village with federal funds and corralled a government contractor to “donate” a church to the community but didn’t give a damn about providing something as basic as water for his people?

    If there is any redeeming grace in all this, it is in the revealing glimpse the Jonathan we still don’t know provides into the presidential mind. We now know that he is not in the least intimidated by those seeking to join issues with him, or for that matter by manipulators.

    “For me,” he said at the Independence Anniversary lecture, “if I see somebody is manipulating anything I don’t listen to you but when I see people genuinely talking about issues I listen.”

    So, there you have it.