Category: Tuesday

  • Season of hysteria

    “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity — W.B. Yeats, “The Second Coming”

    This week’s is no ode to aphorisms.  But even this famous opener, by Irish poet Yeats, is incomplete to adequately do the job at hand.

    Ace radio sportscaster, Ernest Okonkwo (God bless his soul!) always offered his electrified audience a golden advice, from the mid-1970s through the 1980s, when Nigerian football was well and truly domesticated.

    “When you cheer a goal, you’re only reacting to an impulse,” he would remonstrate, his dramatic way of urging the fans to cheer the national team non-stop. “But when you cheer every movement that leads your team to score, you’re part-creator of that goal.”

    Back then stars, with Okonkwo-exclusive monikers, like “Chief Justice”, Adokiye Amiesimaka, “Mathematical” Segun Odegbami, “Chairman” Christian Chukwu, “Block Buster” Alloysious Atuegbu, “Quicksilver”, Slyvanus Okpala, among others, were in full flight.

    Yet, a third aphorism is part of the teaching infrastructure of creative prose.  ”You never know the true character of a man,” goes the saying, “until he is in crisis.”

    These three sayings about capture the current Nigerian season of hysteria, in which the unwritten code is yak to no end as to the Armageddon to come, when common sense dictates reasonable quiet, lest a fatal distraction, of those trying to fix this economic miasma, which has worsened Nigeria’s crisis of nationhood.

    In this theatre of din, natural or contrived, the sane voices are mute; hopelessly drowned by the passion of loud vacuity, as it was in Yeats’s Ireland of 1919, in the chaotic run-up to the war of independence against Britain (1919-1922)

    That Ernest Okonkwo charge: better to rally as part of a solution, than staying aloof for the sweet blame game, is true of the ball fans of his days, as of present-day Nigerians, on the political front.  To both generations, the appeal has fallen on deaf ears.

    Not a few expected Muhammadu Buhari, the Leviathan to, “open sesame”, snap his magical fingers; and send vanishing all the systemic rot he inherited!

    That has not — and couldn’t have — happened.  But that it hasn’t has birthed a loud lobby of finger-pointers, hell-raisers and wilful demonizers,  with a queer epiphany: the new demons are not the old crooks that sacked the common till but the braves now working hard to fix the problem; with Buhari himself as demon-in-chief!

    That is why Goodluck Jonathan, that best-forgotten presidential bumbler, would merrily vomit the rubbish he did at the PDP Abuja circus, and still expect right-thinking people not to squirm.  No surprise there — Jonathan’s child, from his eternal infantile blather, is always the supreme father of his man!

    Of course, that you know the true character of a person, when in crisis, is as true now as it was in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies, the 1954 novel in which the best of British public school boys (metaphor for the best of western civilization) descended into feral brutes, just because they were marooned in a strange environment for a few days.

    This Lord of the Flies analogy is especially piquant.  It would appear even the best of Nigerian media commentariat (symbolic of the best of polite minds in the polity), lexical flourish and all, has succumbed to this gripping hysteria with, of course, different motives and motivations!

    A rich media medley, indeed: the plain paid-to-bleat mischief-maker; the gross ethnic baiter and supremacist to boot; the “restructuring” neophyte, all worked up to a tizzy, growls it’s his newfound faith, with its sure quick-fix, or Armageddon, in a fit of fatal fixation; and, ode to hysteria — the sheer pest of blogosphere and cyberspace, which just yaks, yaks and yaks, with neither rime nor reason!

    This screeching dissonance, fired by a falsetto of high emotion, is a neat tie-back to Yeats: “The best lack all conviction, while the worst/Are full of passionate intensity”!

    Yet, when the history of this troubled era is written, an ugly profile of the Nigerian elite would leap off the books.    Indeed, today’s elite are not unlike a grotesque Shakespearean drama, where Roman patricians become the rabble, and the rabble become the patrician — such is the tragic descent of temper, in the Nigerian media.

    Nigerians griped, as Jonathan and gang pawned the last family silver, on the altar of benumbing greed.  Yet, for ethnic, religious and even clannish reasons, this same people now shun a common rally, to nail corruption, the common vicious enemy.

    Sadly, the signals were early enough — of a self-abdicating elite over a nation-slaying monster (simply because that elite is so rotten it knows no other way); and a media that merrily surrenders its sacred historic duty to that elite’s profane hysteria.

    Father Matthew Kukah, Catholic Archbishop of Sokoto, fired the first salvo by cooking a controversial broth.  He claimed, with great sophistry, that fighting corruption, on such frontal scale, was mutually exclusive to running sound governance.  He called on Buhari to forget the past and move on!

    Christendom Nigeria — at least, the vocal minority — took the cue: culpable indifference. Both holy father and sacred bastion echo the holy cant in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar:  Brutus killed Caesar not because he hated Julius but because he loved Rome!  Father Kukah doesn’t hate corruption less.  He only loves Jonathan more!

    But pray, after the Jonathan debacle, what was more lethal to the polity than corruption?  And shouldn’t the Church be the unapologetic partner-in-chief in that war?

    Then, Nnamdi Kanu’s IPOB came with its searing, equal-opportunity hate; and the best a distracted media, arrayed in ethnic combat formations, could do was face the looming danger from the one-shoe-fits-all prism of self-determination — no crime to be sure!

    But IPOB’s right to “self-determination” has pushed others’ right to the same principle: in an Igbo quit order and ultra-dangerous anti-Igbo song in Hausa, reportedly circulating all over the North! Hate begets hate. Hysteria begets hysteria.  Cynicism trumps cynicism!

    The latest hysteria is the “restructured” utopia to come.  That utopia, in magical post-Nigeria, would purify the most corrupt former Nigerians, and make them white as snow in their new ethnic homelands!  Call it the political equivalent of the biblical transfiguration!

    No wonder, separatists are speaking in a rich range of tongues, under the broad canopy of “restructuring” — secession, balkanization, disintegration, regionalization, greater autonomy for states, etc.

    Pray, on which spot, on this long and hazy continuum, do you and your lobby stand?

    On the restructuring front, a Yoruba Gerontocrat Army decrees an attack on the Igbo, by the “North”, is an attack on the entire “South”.  Yet a counter order, from this great Southern Army: by October 1, every Yoruba and northerner must quit the South-South!

    Great southern solidarity there!  It doesn’t get more bathetic, does it?

    Unfortunately, in this fit of high hysteria, Nigeria loses the historic opportunity to rebuild a saner polity, from the ashes of Jonathan-era ruins.

    Still, the culprits are less the PDP-era crooks, bitterly licking their wounds; but more the starry-eyed romantics, doubled over in sweet lamentation over the present, in a quixotic voyage to a magical future!

  • A preface to the silly season

    A preface to the silly season

    Half-way into President Muhammadu Buhari’s term, the silly season has begun in earnest. The line-up for the succession may change, but it is already well-defined.   Some aspirants  have been more forthcoming than others, but none of them or their proxies can be accused  of coyness.

    Buhari has been hobbled for the past three months.  Present indications are that he is making a slow but steady recovery.  The prognosis is uncertain, however.  But that has not stopped the national chairman of the ruling APC Chief John Odigie-Oyegun and other stalwarts of the party from literally dragooning him into the race. The party’s ticket, they say, is his by right and performance, should he desire it.

    A great deal will depend on the state of his health in the coming months.

    Lately, former Vice President Abubakar Atiku has sought, through judicious lectures, signed newspaper articles and other interventions to come across as a progressive statesman who has thought deeply about the country’s problems and has the endowments to fix them.  The fact that he is more a candidate of habit than of conviction takes nothing away from his quest.

    Where else but up can Senate President Bukola Saraki go in the scheme of things?  Given the way he vaulted himself into his current position, and the Faustian bargain he made along the way, it was clear that he was out for the top job.  Meanwhile, he is doing everything to look   the part.

    He may not have suborned the fellow senator who moved a motion the other day calling for the Senate President to be declared Acting President in the absence of the Acting President and substantive Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, who was away in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, on official duty.  But since Saraki knows what his colleagues will do un-suborned, why would he suborn them?

    Saraki has never concealed his disdain for Osinbajo anyway.  Told while he was perfecting his scheme to assume the Senate presidency through the backdoor that Vice President Osinbajo had summoned members of the APC Senate caucus to a meeting, he reportedly quipped: “Osinbajo?  Who does he think he is?  When I was Governor of Kwara State, he was an ordinary commissioner in Lagos State.”

    Apparently, Saraki was unaware or conveniently forgot that while he was yet an unremarkable Budget Adviser in President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration, Osinbajo was busy transforming the Lagos judiciary into the most enviable one in Nigeria and chalking up success after success in court battles to wrest back tangible assets and prerogatives that an overbearing Federal Government had usurped from Lagos State.

    It is entirely in character that Saraki recently sought to arrogate to the Senate over which he presides the power to amend the Constitution without the president’s assent.

    It will be interesting to see how he will fare when subjected to the kind of scrutiny he never had to endure in Kwara.  He has removed a potential source of embarrassment, assuming that anything can embarrass him, by returning to the Kwara Exchequer the payments he continued to receive long after he had left office, even while taking home a salary and hefty ancillary payments from the Senate.

    To nobody’s surprise, Governor Ayodele Fayose, the Conqueror of Ekiti and of all that is decent, honourable and of good report, is asking for a chance to replicate on the national level  all the wonders he has wrought in Ekiti, not the least of which is his universally acclaimed Stomach Infrastructure Programme.

    A source close to one of his principal strategists tells me that his first order of business on taking office as President will be to reprise the Ekiti Integrated Poultry Project in each state, so that by the end of his third month in office, every family will be guaranteed a turkey in its soup pot and a dozen eggs on its breakfast table.  Everyday, mind you; not just on festive occasions.

    Fresh from court coronation as national chair of the PDP, former Kaduna State Governor Ahmed Makarfi has also been mentioned as an aspirant,  But first, he will have to re-unite and resuscitate a party still reeling from its comprehensive sandbagging in the 2015 general election.  His quiet mien and general blandness may be just what the PDP needs, after all those riotous characters who brought the self-designated “largest political party in Africa” into disrepute.

    It is indeed a sign of the times that Dr Goodluck Jonathan, who led the PDP to its doom in the 2015 election, has found his voice and has come out to rally the stragglers.  He is threatening that the PDP will return to power to fulfill the yearnings of Nigerians – a mission it failed signally             to accomplish during 16 unbroken years in office and in power.

    Not even the comprehensive pillaging of one of his homes in Abuja has dampened Dr Jonathan’s enthusiasm for his new assignment.  The place was stripped bare by the policemen deployed to guard it. Fixtures, fittings, door frames, window frames, roofing sheets, plumbing, personal effects, furniture, appliances – everything that could be hacked was hacked, carted away and auctioned.

    Only the walls were left standing.

    Heartless people.  Was this their own way of acquiring the “dividends of democracy”?  Even if Dr Jonathan has many other homes, even if he had as many as his former Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison-Madueke, that would still not justify the pillage.

    Dr Jonathan’s sense of duty in the face of heavy loss is all the more commendable.

    Former Kano State governor, Senator Engineer Dr Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso , never one to conceal his hand, says he plans to run again in 2019, having lost the race for the APC ticket to Buhari in 2015.  Of all those who have declared or are expected to declare, he is the only one around whom a Movement has coalesced.

    Called Kwanwasiyya, it is rooted in the Talakawa ideology of the Northern Elements Progressive Union of the First Republic and its Second Republic offshoot, the Peoples Redemption Party, both founded by Malam Aminu Kano.

    Watch out in the coming months for the white garments and red caps, the dress code of the faithful.

    I gather that Himself the Ogidigboigbo, James Ibori, most recently a special guest of Her  Britannic Majesty, is consulting widely with his people who accorded him such a rapturous welcome back home the other day and weighing his options.  His friends and associates have meanwhile set up an Exploratory Committee to look into the prospects of an Ibori Presidency. It will no doubt be enriched by lessons from the UK.

    The foregoing is by no means an exhaustive list of those aspiring to be president.  By the time the game really gets going, we may have as many as 240, if not more.

    Those I have not featured here should not feel ignored.  As more aspirants declare, I will update the list, to create a level playing field.

    But this much is clear:  We are set to embark on almost two years of raw politicking during which, given the fears and the passions and the threats and the rage, the ethnic baiting and the hate-mongering convulsing the country, a great deal of ugliness is guaranteed.

    As the game gathers momentum, almost everything else will be suspended.  Everything else will be subordinated to winning.

  • A nation in free fall

    If anyone needed any barometer to gauge how much as a people we have sunk, it is the on-going but systemic displacement of law and the mores as we know it by the rampaging brigade of self-helpers across the land. Today, it seems part of the striving to reconfigure the new-normal in our ethically-challenged society is the deadly contest between elements sworn to champion society’s regression into unimaginable barbarity and the brigade sworn to dispense with the niceties of due process as they set out to mete summary justice. While neither side is necessarily guaranteed to win, the rest of us – the orderly society – are the assured losers.

    I start with the discovery by residents of Ijaiye, Ahmadiyya and Abule-Egba areas of Lagos State of a ritualists’ den in the early hours of Tuesday last week. Using The Guardian report as guide, the matter is said to have started with a horrific cry from an underground tunnel linked to a canal – a shrill cry which apparently drew the attention of a female sweeper. By the time passers-by drawn to help locate the fellow behind the cry entered the canal, the victim had been reportedly killed – allegedly by the ritualists – although her little baby was reportedly found still alive. A follow up sweep by security men would yield a man said to belong to a 28-member gang operating under the canal. The residents, by now incensed stormed the scene ostensibly to rescue more victims and possibly apprehend the ritualists. The efforts reportedly paid-off with two suspects brought out only to be whisked off by the police. Thereafter, it became a case of the mob taking charge as two more suspects brought out from the underground were burnt alive by the mob who overpowered the police and other security agencies.

    Another scene would play out two days later along the busy Lagos-Abeokuta expressway by Ile-Zik Bus Stop, Ikeja where again, two men, suspected to be kidnappers were similarly set ablaze. It is something like a scene from a movie.

    It is a familiar story. The big part is supposed to be  the  cold, ruthless killers on rampage. Whether it is the ritualists or the Mafiosi-styled killer cult – Badoo –operating from their Ikorodu redoubt, the fear of the merchants of human parts has since become the beginning of wisdom. The bigger story however is the scandal of a society on fast regression into savagery; a scathing testimonial of the boundless contradictions of our thoroughly diseased and astoundingly superstitious society; a society where science and rationality are in full flight; where religion trumps reason and religiosity is in full ascendance.

    There is however another angle to last week’s discovery that is arguably a fitting testimony the dual character of the Centre of Excellence; a city that is arguably the most progressive on the continent; yet is one where superstitions of the most heinous kind not only inhere but thrive. A city with the highest number of religious houses on the continent yet is the bastion of some of the most fetish, syncretistic practices.  It is a story of a state which although aspires to a world-class status, yet insists on manifesting some of the more malevolent features of prehistoric society.

    Say what we may of the cult of Badoo or those of ritualists, they did not chance upon us. Those in the group are no ghosts; they live among us. Their wives shop in the same market with ours, their children the same school with our children. That they have grown to become a menace to the rest of us is to be put squarely to the uncaring, indifferent society that we have nurtured.  In other words, the situation, at the very basic level, is a symptom of failure of citizenship. I say this borne of conviction that only an indifferent people would permit the swathe under which such anti-social groups would thrive. While we know enough to blame the leadership – from the traditional to the government –  for the failure to secure the public space, the problem is that the failures of our basic humanity is what comes back to haunt us in a spiral of tragedy.

    Today, there are enough stories to illustrate how most Nigerians, despite their pretensions, are light years away from modernity. Is it not interesting that the same Nigerians that are only too ready to spread the fable about some toxic GSM numbers said to induce heart attacks when picked cannot find the use for the same tools in moments of emergency? How often do Nigerians get those silly solicitations so inelegantly baked as it were from the mythical mill?

    Yes, while the government is encouraged to do its part by providing modern security infrastructure, what about the citizens who couldn’t be bothered about the age-long values or accept the basic duty of being ones brother’s keeper?

    It is something for those pushing for reworking of the national architecture to think about.

    Now, that takes yours truly to the massacre at St. Patrick Catholic Church in Ozubulu, Anambra State in the course of an early morning mass. The story – although still largely unofficial –of a business gone sour has all the elements of the underworld gang wars. While preliminary account tends to suggest a clash over money and power, it comes basically to the story of individuals who have not only renounced the values that bind the collective together, but sold their souls to the devil.

    That some loony would slaughter 12 unarmed innocents for whatever reason is as evil as it is unimaginable. Of course, those mouthing sacrilege only because the church suffered savage violation of its hallowed precincts miss the point: mass slaughter for any reason or no reason at all is bad; unjustifiable. Taking the turf fights into the church – the symbol of the moral community, is although indicative of a society in free fall, hardly makes it worse.

    For the church, the lesson must be to continually denounce evil; to condemn, relentlessly, the crass individualism that has taken over the gospel; to eschew the gospel of mammon that guarantees the followers a one-way ticket to hell.

  • Nigeria — ever ripe for anything?

    The ripest fruit was saddest,” crowed the rebellious “Abiku”, in Wole Soyinka’s version of that poem; even as the plaintive parent’s plea, of J.P. Clark’s version, melted the heart.

    With a casual poetic linkage, brimming with no less irony, could one then hold that Nigerians would always consider their country “not ripe” for anything?

    Remember, Nigerians were once adjudged the happiest in the world.  So, are they ever wary of “ripeness”; so as to avert the sure sadness to follow — at least in the poet’s book?

    That cliché, “Nigeria not yet ripe,” filled The Nation’s Boardroom, as if on a theatrical cue.   The Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Ibrahim Idris, was in the house on a courtesy call, with a raft of Police rednecks in tow.

    No prize for guessing right: the subject was state police — and the unanimity, on the police front, was so total you would think it was some received wisdom.

    Traducer-in-chief was Sam Omatseye, chairman, The Nation Editorial Board, who then fresh from vacation, seemed sworn to debating the IGP, till kingdom come, on the state police question.

    But the avuncular IGP, and his legion, were ready — not to debate Sam per se, but to flaunt the received wisdom (“not yet ripe”, went the golden cliché), which appeared fired by near-divine finality!

    That “unanimity” was newly reinforced, courtesy of a new intellectual charter, a public lecture entitled “Providing strategic solutions to emergent security challenges: the essentials of synergy amongst security agencies and civil populace”.

    The lead speaker, Prof. Etannibi Alemika, a professor of criminology and sociology of law, at the University of Jos, would appear to know what he was saying, given his excellent track record in criminology and allied fields.

    Not so, the rest of the field of speakers, even if they were also a bevy of cerebral and distinguished Nigerians: Lt. Gen. Abdulraman Dambazau, sitting minister of the Interior, Oba Rilwanu Akiolu, Oba of Lagos, Alhaji Yahaya Abubakar, the Etsu Nupe, Musiliu Smith and Sunday Ehindero, two former IGPs, both of who served under former President Olusegun Obasanjo, among others.

    Despite the brilliance, the exposure and the eminence of this great ensemble, why would they not be in a position to postulate “Nigeria is not ripe for state police”, thus gifting sitting IGP Idris his newly reinforced “unanimity”?

    Simple: with all due respect, being former top police officers, they would appear too close to the problem to realize its full gravity. Worse: they are too protected by the system, to realize perhaps other less privileged citizens are far less protected.

    And perhaps, worst?  They are too sucked into the ultra-centralist thinking, that has always shaped the Nigerian ruling class, to think there is any other way.

    Such thinking vaulted the former IGPs in the group to the acme of their police careers.  Such thinking, even after retirement, has stuck them at the core of affairs, which has guaranteed them some gilt-edge privileges, all-life long — privileges so rare to their compatriots, to the point of near-impossibility.

    Besides, look closely at the security profile of the “Nigeria-is-not-ripe-for-state-police” orchestra.  None perhaps is serviced, at any time, by less than five police guards.

    Contrast that to citizens with absolutely no direct security cover — like the luckless denizens of Ikorodu and suburbs, victims of Badoo cult killings, who the Police just told to vacate their abodes, if the area is too secluded!  In another breath, the same Police, plagued with wilful delusion, would crow it is up to par in its duties!

    Besides, the lobby that endorses the present police system live in secure and prosperous neighbourhoods nationwide, which experience near-zero crime rates.

    So, if it is not an ego question to retain the status quo, it is simply a honest ignorance of what obtains in the “other world” of fellow citizens.  That is why the state police claim, in the face of mounting crime rates, jars on less privileged citizens.

    Or, on current public officers, whose shoes on the job painfully pinch; and are therefore obliged to disavow the merry orchestra of false security, when indeed there is roaring fire on the roof.

    That best explains why Akinwunmi Ambode, the sitting governor of Lagos, disagreed with the IGP’s “unanimous” conclave on state police.  The governor should know.

    First, the raw statistics.  According to the governor, represented by Dr. Idiat Adebule, his deputy, the Police is spread too thin, when linked to the teeming Lagos population. “Lagos State, with a population of over 22 million,” the governor claimed at the event, “has less, than 30, 000 police officers.”

    Ambode has adequately followed up on the Fashola-era security solution, in the hugely successful Lagos State Security Trust Fund (LSSTF).  Among many other successes, LSSTF has all but banished day-time robberies in Lagos.

    That has inspired other states to copy the initiative.  Even better: there is a proposed initiative, which the IGP just announced, to instal a similar body in Abuja, to galvanize public-private sector partnership, to improve funding for the police.

    Still, from its halcyon days, of almost a reasonably crime-free Lagos, crime in Lagos has spiked.  Among its recent virulent strain, is what ace columnist and essayist, Prof.  Adebayo Williams, would call the “ritualization of poverty”, with Lagos all but drowned in ritual kidnapping and killings; and ritual dens discovered in the unlikeliest parts of the sprawling megalopolis.

    Yet, LSSTF has continued to fund the federal police.  But the result is clearly with diminishing returns.  Why?

    The answer is simple: the scale of crime has so much broadened that an entirely new paradigm is called for — bigger, deeper and far more vigorous than the present rather limited canvas of central police.  That is the attraction federalization of the police holds, under which rubrics is state police.

    Federalization of the police!  That is a logical result of the federal doctrine.  But shorn of its esoteric sounds, it simply posits that if a federal state harbours essentially different peoples, policing and general crime fighting must be built on these differing cultural, sociological and even anthropological blocs.

    This is a far more fundamental approach to “community policing”, the alleged failure of which current central police chiefs have dismissed state police.

    Federalizing the police attacks crime from the very roots.  Imposing “community policing” on the current central system is attacking the problem from the top.  That perhaps explains the alleged disastrous results.

    But that doesn’t invalidate the imperative of federalizing the police, even with the spectre of possible abuse from local potentates — as it was in the 1st Republic (1960-1966), and as is likely, with some present and future gubernatorial misfits.

    It only exposes, in full Technicolor, the conceptual vacuity of a federal sop on a unitary architecture.  It is fated to end in misery.

    Federalizing the police is key to securing Nigerian citizens.  And let no one continue to mouth the cliché, “Nigeria is not ripe” — ripe for anything at all!

    It is nothing but a cliché — and the hallmark of clichés is the spontaneous absence of thinking.  Yet, effective policing demands vigorous — and fresh — thinking.

  • Who is afraid of a new Constitution?

    Who is afraid of a new Constitution?

    Last week, the House of Representatives adopted 27 of 33 proposed amendments to the 1999 Constitution.  The Senate adopted 29 of the same number of proposed amendments.  The process was more than five years in the making.

    It reached a high point on December 10, 2012, when all 360 members of the House fanned out across the country to their constituencies to stage town hall meetings at which various “stakeholders” deliberated on 43 extant provisions of the Constitution they think should be reviewed.

    Discussions at the sessions were not merely free and robust, they were resoundingly “participatory,” Emeka Ihedioha, a stalwart of the ruling PDP, deputy speaker of the House of Representatives at that time and coordinator of the scheme, exulted.   “We have kept faith with Nigerians.”

    Votes were taken thereafter and recorded in full view of all the participants.  Each member of the House then presented a report, incorporating voting results from his or her constituency and backed by video evidence, to the secretariat of the ad hoc Committee on the Review of the Constitution.

    The reports were deposited with the secretariat of the Constitution Review Committee, which again invited representatives of “stakeholders” to join with its staffers to collate the findings.

    The outcome of this process, unveiled before the House of Representatives in April 2013, categorically represents “the voice” of the Nigerian people regarding what changes they would like to see an amended Constitution, Ihediora said.  The process might not be perfect but it marked, Ihediora claimed, “the first time in the history of this country that the people have been made part of the Constitution Review Process in a practical and transparent manner.”

    The process was nothing of the sort.  In conception and execution , it was just as flawed as the 1999 Constitution it was supposed to modify.

    For one thing, what the nation needs is not a trainload of amendments to a Constitution that  may not be a grand forgery as some leading authorities have called it, but is so shot through with errors and omissions, and so constricted in its underlying assumptions, that it cannot serve as a useful guide for resolving the conflicts convulsing the country.

    In undertaking to re-work that document, Ihedioha and his colleagues in the House were laboring under a misapprehension.

    For another, those whom House members railroaded from their constituencies into attending the town hall meetings were for the most part self-selected or induced by the prospect of free food and drinks and gifts from the abundant perks – the constituency and hardship allowances, among others — of the Honourable Visitor from Abuja.   In no sense can they be said to represent the political tendencies or shades of opinion in the constituency, much less in the country.

    For yet another, there was no independent verification of the “collation” that followed each town meeting.  The House member who staged the meeting and had a vested interest in showing that it was a “robust” grassroots deliberative forum, the kind of which Nigeria had never witnessed, was responsible for the “collation.”  Nor can “video evidence” presented with the report authenticate an exercise that was at bottom a mockery.

    Or “a sham and a monumental failure,” as High Chief  Rita Lori-Ogbebor, the influential minority rights activist called it, in a withering critique of the town hall meeting held in her Delta State constituency of Warri.

    It took place the day President Goodluck Jonathan was visiting to join in the birthday celebrations of the televangelist, Ayo Oristsejafor.   Scheduled to start at 9 o’clock in the morning, it did not begin until 4 p.m.  By then, many of those who had gathered for the   event had walked out.

    Only one minute was allowed for indicating “yes” or “no” to 43 questions on the template. That was the sum total of the “discussions.”

    “How on earth do you expect people of my calibre and age to just answer ‘Yes or No’ about a matter that was not previously discussed?” Lori-Ogbebor asked in indignation.

    Even if the House had a mandate to review the 1999 Constitution, the way it went about it belies Ihedioha’s claim that the outcome represents the “voice” of the people. For one thing,  the people had no hand in preparing the agenda.  They certainly took no part in designing the “43-item template” that constituted the substance of discourse – assuming it is not a case of unnecessary dignification to call what took place a “discourse.”

    Not all the public hearings across the country were as shambolic as the one in Warri. But even where they were better organised, one cannot in good faith call them  “consultations.”  Asking members of the audience to answer “yes” or “no” to the questions on the template cannot be called “consultations” without doing great violence to language.  Nor could it be honestly claimed that the outcome represented the “voice” of the people.

    What a good-faith exercise requires is a forum at which persons elected for the purpose of re-writing the Constitution meet over a period of time – certainly not one day – and deliberate, no options foreclosed, on a wide range of significant national issues in a spirit           of give-and take, and come up with a document that reflects a broad national consensus on which a healthier union can be founded.

    The town hall meetings provided no such forum.

    Yet they were the primary source of the documents that more or less constituted the substance of last week’s debate and discussion that led to the adoption of major amendments to the 1999 Constitution.

    Over the decades, Nigeria has steadily retreated from federalism – the bedrock principle on which the country was established — to the point that Nigeria today is more or less a centrally administered state.

    The so-called public hearings evaded that issue altogether, or sought to perpetuate it.  Five years later, and with the demand more clamorous, the House and the State were just as remiss, voting down a proposal for devolution of powers from an all-powerful Center to the constituent states.

    One of the items on the 2013 template required the audience to indicate by yes or no whether the electoral commissions in the states should be abolished, leaving it to the National Electoral Commission to conduct all polls.  The former would further erode the federal principle

    Five years later last week, the Senate voted to abolish state electoral commissions and to have the National Electoral Commission supplant them.

    Another item on the 2012 template called for a vote on whether the states should establish a police force, without laying out the arguments for and against, and without outlining how potential abuse of the scheme might be averted or curbed.

    Five years later, it is not clear whether the lawmakers seem to have sidestepped the issue of state police, a crucial element in a federation.

    All in all, the House of Representatives and the Senate have for the most part evaded some overarching issues in Nigeria’s existence while pretending to move it towards a harmonious existence.

    The basic architecture of the Nigerian Constitution is incurably defective. The way forward is a new constitution faithful to the federal principle and truly warranted by the preface “We, the People…”

    Who is afraid of a such a constitution?

  • Abuja lords and devolution

    Just when Nigerians were looking in the direction of the National Assembly to push – no matter how superficial or plain symbolic – for the rebalancing of the federation into a more productive one, the body –against reason and good judgment and in a most inexplicable misreading of the public mood – chose to abdicate that historic duty and by so doing postponed the evil day.  The body also made clear to all that while they may have been of us; they are, finally, no longer for us!

    It happened on July 26 in the Upper House – when the Senate shot down the bill which sought to alter the Second Schedule, Part I & II to move certain items to the Concurrent Legislative List to give more legislative powers to states. The very next day –the Lower House, as if by some unwritten agreement to put in abeyance what initially promised to be a realistic, sensible and pragmatic compromise on the factitious debate on restructuring – gave concurrence.

    And now for consolation, a country caught in the vortex of centrifugal eruptions is now forced to rely on the assurances of Senate President Bukola Saraki and House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara for the chambers under them to revisit the matter at the time of their choosing and possibly, convenience!

    As far as I can see, what the National Assembly did on the rejection of the proposal on devolution of power to the states amounts to an unpardonable abdication of leadership more so at a time of a dire national emergency. It is a reflection of the psychology and hence the character of a parliament which, aside losing touch with the people they claim to represent, have virtually scant understanding of the imperatives of the moment. If, as it has been said in some quarters that our parliamentarians’ problem is with the semantics of ‘restructuring’ – which admittedly have come to mean just about anything depending on who is making the case for it and the time the case is being made – this seems to me, precisely the challenge for the leadership – to beam the light on the fog for proper understanding.

    Or is someone saying that parliamentary representation precludes the duty of breaking down such concepts for the understanding of mere mortals? Of course, with most of lawmakers permanently ensconced in Abuja – far away from the daily grind that living has become the lot of the rest of us – expecting our so-called representatives to convoke town hall meetings to take concepts apart while harvesting proper feedbacks would appear an outlandish proposition. Not when there are “oversight duties” and constituency projects that could be undertaken to harvest cash. In any event, why would anyone trouble our Abuja exports with visits to constituencies on roads pockmarked with craters?

    It is of course the portents of their decision that we must worry about. First, only our lawmakers can pretend that the status quo can go on forever. That they will continue to have the pleasure of doing as they please with the annual N7 trillion appropriation – a fifth of which is borrowed money. That the country would somehow magically exit from the grave emergency that have, over the course of the last 26 months, reduced the states to beggarly status – a situation so bad that some 27 plus states have had to rely on some dubious federal financial accommodation to pay salaries and pensions.

    Need one say more?  That they can pretend to be oblivious of the collapse of the economy; to ignore the portents of the perennially shrinking piggy bank in the face of unprecedented infrastructure gap. What about the collapse of our institutions as indeed our national infrastructure currently threatening to take the nation back to pre-industrial age? Or the virtual collapse of the national security architecture that has left the country hostage to all manners of atavistic forces?

    They can – for all the cares in the world – pretend that things can go on like this without an attempt at rebalancing the current structure; moving the country as it were, from the distributive to productive federalism; from the centrist, dysfunctional and patently unresponsive police to a multi-level, more manageable one; from a stifling federal apparatus – one driven by sharing mentality to a competitive, purpose-driven one; from a swathe of prostrate entities that are federation only in name to functional federal entities? And for how long?

    I understand that the process of draining the Abuja swamp (to borrow the Trumpian lingo) will be a most difficult one indeed. For a political class and no less the parliament that is steeped in the base traditions of conspicuous consumption, that would amount to class suicide. Imagine a House of Representatives that has – recession or not –  just shelled out N17 million apiece on choice automobiles (comes to a whopping N6.1 billion for the 360 units) earmarked for ‘utility services’ being required to give up the costs that go with keeping them running on the very highways that they traded off for their constituency projects! Why would a parliament which insists on executing state and local government roads under the nebulous cover of constituency projects be expected to cede more of the power to the states?

    Yet, the folly of the route that the lawmakers would rather not take seems so self-evident. First, current assumptions – or wishes – that things will somehow get better is plain illusory. Second, thoughts that the voices behind the current agitations will somehow peter out is sheer folly – with it the possibility that the country would be permanently in war mode. Third, while it seems unimaginable that the states can continue to remain in their dependency mode, it seems only a matter of time before something gives.

    Let me restate a point that has become so worn that it is now a cliché. It is bad enough that the federal government insists on having a whopping 54 percent from the federation pool; more satanic however is that the people’s representatives will find nothing wrong with federal government sitting on the resources found in the states under the dubious principle of exclusivity. If ever there is something that can be described as grand larceny – that would be it. That our lawmakers cannot recognize it as being at the source of the crisis facing the states, something that needs to be broken if the states would ever find their verve, must be the greatest tragedy of all time.

    I close with a proverb popularized by the late MKO Abiola: There comes a time when even the blind needs no telling that the market is over! Trust me – we are nearly there!

     

  • Army versus Fayose

    Army warns Fayose”, screamed the Nigerian Tribune front page lead headline of August 4.

    Since 1999, that would appear the first time a newspaper would report a seeming headlong clash between the military and any democratic institution.

    After coming a sad cropper under Sani Abacha, necessitating a scramble back to the barracks, the Nigerian military had worn its “submission to civil authorities” like a cloak of garish colours — and just as well.

    From the coup hero, interventionist swagger, that ended the 1st Republic, it had staggered, through several phases, to its professional ruin.

    The early years of innocence came under Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi and Yakubu Gowon.   The mirage of the military as the messiah was raised, albeit controversially, under Murtala Mohammed.  But it was also dashed under Olusegun Obasanjo, his successor after a failed coup, who birthed the Shehu Shagari civilian interregnum.

    Muhammadu Buhari, with Babatunde Idiagbon, boasted the franchise of the military as harsh dictatorship, without the civil pretences of the years of innocence, epitomized by Gen. Gowon.

    But the first steps to eternal disgrace would come during the wayward power years of Ibrahim Babangida, when a hitherto collective junta morphed into a lone, reckless risk taker.

    That, of course, would fire the final institutional burial, in the grave of politics and misgovernment, under the stark Abacha.

    But Abdulsalami Abubakar, the last of the military rulers, would play the army tortoise, leading the soldiers back to the barracks, but not before they had earned utter disgrace!

    Still, the army, at the return to democracy, would endure more institutional buffeting — and rightly so — with elected President Obasanjo purging it of the so-called “political soldiers”.

    Though that entailed severe institutional blood-letting, it was widely acclaimed in the polity — imperative to keep the military re-focused to its core defence duty, from the fatal distraction of politics.

    So, if the military always trumpeted its “subordination to civil authorities”, as imposed by the Constitution, it knew where it was coming from.

    Not so, Peter Ayodele Fayose, second-term Ekiti governor who, with his indecorous conduct, would pass as Nigeria’s most indelicate governor.

    Ironically, the crude Fayose is a creation of Obasanjo’s sweet-and-sour public persona, just as the “civil” military, as constituted today.

    Obasanjo purged the military of political soldiers.  But he also inspired the rise of Fayose, with his PDP’s garrison-like take-over of the South West in 2003, after drawing electoral blanks in 1999.

    Indeed, the earliest manifestation of Fayose, as the most virulent strain of gubernatorial unreason that Nigeria ever knew, started when he put second-term Lagos governor, Bola Tinubu, with other esteemed guests, under virtual house arrest.

    That was in the Iyin Ekiti country of home of the late Gen. Adeyinka Adebayo.  Tinubu and co were there for a social event.  It was 2003.

    That was clear outlawry.   A sitting governor, by the 1999 Constitution, is free from arrest or any form of restriction.  Yet, because it was against the opposition, the Obasanjo presidency, which controlled lawful coercion, looked elsewhere.

    Today however, Fayose, Obasanjo’s Frankenstein, anti-opposition monster of yore, is busy pouncing on and running his mouth on the old man.  Indeed, what goes around comes around!

    Though Fayose exited in a blaze of odium in his first coming (2003-2006), he has, in his second coming, broken every basic etiquette of polite society; driving his high office to the sewers.

    His morbid electioneering newspaper advert, predicted the “death” in office, of the then APC presidential candidate Buhari, should he win; simply because President Umaru Yar’Adua died in office, and the trio of Abacha, Murtala and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, all northern leaders, also did.  That was well and truly shocking.

    In his high morbid fever, though, he conveniently forgot President Shehu Shagari, from the same political geography, didn’t only survive his tenure, he is today alive and well.

    Still, if Fayose’s sewer manners could be excused by his crude verbal spits, it was even more shocking that news media that claim to be epitome of decency, for whatever windfall, could stain their front pages with such lunacy.

    Now Fayose, with Femi Fani-Kayode, are caught in their own warp of malice, on the Buhari health question.  The more they pine, to fulfil an evil prophesy, the more the Almighty Himself appears to decree they labour in vain.  Problem is, they seem too consumed by hate to listen!

    It is this penchant to bristle and bustle; and yammer whatever absurdity off the subconscious, that has pushed Fayose to his latest, if needless, military controversy.

    Though not many appear to notice it now, that flippancy has ruptured the delicate protocol between the civil authorities and the military; prompting the military to tell Fayose to go smash his head against the Olosunta rock in Ikere-Ekiti, instead of dabbling into defence matters he knew nothing about.

    “Governor Ayodele Fayose should stop politicizing the military and military op(eration)s; seek other avenues for your relevance,” the army riposted in a brutal putdown.  That portrayed the governor as an idle busybody.

    That the army, which should be seen and seldom be heard in a democracy, should treat a governor with such contempt, should normally alarm anyone.

    But no one appears alarmed in Fayose’s case.  That is indicative of how low he has crashed his high office.

    In his usual garrulous manner, Fayose had alleged, mimicking Transparency International (TI), widespread corruption in the anti-corruption war.

    “The fight against Boko Haram,” Fayose claimed by a release by Lere Olayinka, his media factotum, “has become a cash cow for some top military officers and corrupt politicians in the Buhari government, with the creation of fake defence contracts and laundering the proceeds abroad in the UK, US and elsewhere.”

    But the snag is the TI charge is so open-ended you couldn’t say it was referring to the present, or the Jonathan military command!  Besides, must an elected governor run his mouth over hazy defence matters?

    Sadly, indecorum ruptures the order of things faster that most would admit.  When the Murtala regime barked “with immediate effect”, it elicited thunderous cheers.  But that military impunity, creeping then, but entrenched before long, not only ruined the military themselves, but also smashed state institutions.

    A military-elected governor confrontation, which the flippant Fayose has sparked, cannot be good for our democracy.  Indeed, it is a dangerous call, which should alarm everyone.

    That is why Fayose must cease blighting his high office, while the military too should resist any provocation to play in the Fayose sewers.

    Nigerians should honour and respect the military for their supreme chore to die, so the rest of us can live.  But the military too should live by the democratic code of total subordination to civil authority.

     

  • PMB:  The scramble for visiting rights

    PMB: The scramble for visiting rights

    Policy-makers everywhere, and especially in Nigeria, must find it deeply frustrating that there is in the population a hard core of citizens that will keep on believing whatever it chooses to believe, despite indissoluble evidence to the contrary.

    How do you reach anything resembling a consensus in such a polity – the consensus without which it is impossible to build enduring common purpose?

    Back when there was media consonance, the task was challenging enough. In the age of media fragmentation, when anyone who has access to a computer and can work an electronic mouse can publish by word, sound or image his or her fancies and fantasies and prejudices and abiding hatreds to thousands of undiscriminating Internet users dispersed across the world, that task becomes well-nigh impossible.

    To this day, more than 30 percent of Americans still believe that the late dictator Saddam Hussein had a stockpile of “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq.  No such weapons existed; none were ever found.  Yet the existence of such weapons was the advertised reason for an invasion in which hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians were killed and the most advanced country in the Arab world destroyed.

    Going by the Internet traffic, you would think that President Muhammadu Buhari’s formal education ended in primary school.  The more generous commentators allow that he might have attended secondary school  but certainly did not qualify for the West African School Certificate.  To them, he remains the “Certificate-less  One.”  The West African School Certificate (Division II) that bears his name is to them a forgery protected by the Federal Might.

    And so, it is no surprise that all kinds of stories have been circulating about the state of his health.  The more benign has it that he can no longer talk or eat, and has to be fed intravenously.  The more sensational has it that he is in a vegetative state, tethered to a life-support machine.

    In mediaeval times, and even as recently as the time of Dr Kamuzu Banda in Malawi, it was a capital crime  to compass the death of the king or the chief of state.  But we live in a democracy, where some have argued that freedom of thought and speech, including the freedom to compass and canvass the death of chief of state, is constitutionally protected.

    To be sure, the moral law within us forbids such conduct, and so does the hallowed tradition of our people. To the hard men and women engrossed in this game, however, it is realpolitik pure and simple.

    And so, even after a delegation of the Federal Government and the ruling APC Governors visited the President where he is convalescing in the UK and returned with reports that he was hearty even if not hale, the dark rumours and dark wishes persisted.  The picture that came with the story of the visit did little to resolve the matter; it had been taken a while back, in Nigeria, at a different occasion, they said.

    Plus, why was there no video? And if there was nothing to hide, if the authorities were actuated by transparency, why were members of the political opposition not included in the delegation.

    And so, in the spirit of democratic transparency, a delegation of the political opposition went to the UK,   saw the president and on its return corroborated the report of the earlier delegation.

    But this recourse, I gather, has elicited only murmurs in local government circles, the third tier that caters to the grassroots.  The first delegation and the second were drawn from the first and second tiers.  It is emphatically the turn of the third tier, spokespersons for local government chairmen have been saying.

    Not so fast, says the Judicial Branch.  The delegations aforementioned were drawn from the Executive and Legislative branches.  What of the Judicial Branch, which is co-equal with the other branches, and has at least as much stake in the president’s health and well-being.

    Surely, the president would welcome a comprehensive brief on the state of the rule of law and the fight against corruption, both of which are very dear to his heart.  And which Branch is best placed to do the briefing?

    “First things first,” the police high command weighs in.  Law and order come before everything else, and those charged with maintaining law and order cannot be expected to defer to any other group when it comes to presenting a true and accurate picture of the state of the nation and the attendant challenges to the president.

    To which the Joint Chiefs of Staff, barely suppressing a snicker, rejoin:  “The police? This democracy thing has gone too far. Who do they think they are?”

    Were it left entirely to them, the Joint Chiefs would have gone to visit the President immediately on the return of the Vice President.  Esprit de corps demands it.  After all, he is their Commander-in-Chief.  He needs to know how the war against a resurgent Boko Haram is being waged, with what results and constraints. The military in turn will draw fresh inspiration from the meeting and profit from his personal experience in the area of strategy and tactics.

    The two delegations that had gone see the President had no strategic purpose, the Joint Chiefs maintain.  The jamboree has to end.  It is now their turn to meet their C-in-C, they insist.   The point is not negotiable.

    “Foul,” the Committee of Vice Chancellors of the 42 federal universities is crying out.  The President is their Visitor, and they need to bring him up to date on the state of the universities in particular and higher education in general. Discussions will explore but will not be confined to such perennial issues as funding, cultism, proliferation of first-class degrees especially in private universities, and implementation of protocols long agreed.

    Our monarchs, royal majesties in their own rights, have been told that it would strain the capacity of British diplomacy and Buckingham Palace to have so many of them descend all at once on those sceptred isles, and have graciously agreed to stay in their domains for the time being.

    But civil society groups, cultural associations, professional and occupational groups, and student bodies are pressing the authorities to arrange for them to meet with the president at the earliest opportunity.

    While the debate rages as to who has the most compelling case for visiting the president,  First Lady Aisha Buhari is reported to have expressed concern about the effect of further visits on his  health and prospects for full and complete recovery

    Personally, I understand her anxiety, since those “jackals and hyenas” still lurking in the corridors of power — operatives whose goodwill cannot always be taken for granted — play a large part in determining who gets to see President Buhari.

    Meanwhile, speaking on deep background, meaning that I can use the information only in outline but must under no circumstance attribute it to an identifiable source, well-placed insiders tell me that the most insistent and most demanding request for clearance to visit President Buhari has come jointly and severally from Ekiti Governor Ayo Fayose and Femi Fani-Kayode, most recently spokesperson for former President Goodluck Jonathan’s groundbreaking re-election campaign.

    They say they want to see Buhari with their own eyes, talk to him with their own mouths and touch him with their own fingers.

    They plan to take along at their own expense, a panel of experts from the World Health Organisation to establish with scientific finality what they have known and have been saying all along, namely, that the creature purporting to be President Muhammadu Buhari is a transparent clone.

    Given Fayose’s and Fani-Kayode’s iron-clad reputation for probity and veracity, to say nothing of rationality, who will be foolish enough to bet against them?

  • Onagoruwa: And the man died

    Onagoruwa: And the man died

    “The evil that men do live after them; but the good are interred with their bones” —Mark Anthony in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar.

    This Mark Anthony quip, at the felling of Julius Caesar, may well drive the memory of Olu Onagoruwa, SAN, the fiery-angel-turned-devil in the books of many, as he finally exited these plains.

    Dr. Onagoruwa was a brilliant lawyer; and a piercing forensic mind to boot.  But he didn’t earn his stripes and fame with those twin-traits alone.

    He earned them as an acute public conscience, always on the lookout for the common good, in those early years of military rule.

    Though not many realized it back then, military diktat was leading Nigeria on a free fall to perdition.  Onagoruwa, with Gani Fawehinmi, SAN, SAM, his best friend turned bitter foe, were among the few, in their generation, that swore such wouldn’t happen under their watch.

    Among the others were Prof. Wole Soyinka, Nobel Laureate; the late Tai Solarin, radical and unorthodox teacher; the late Prof. Ayodele Awojobi, restless academic and engineering genius; and of course, Fela Anikulapo-Kuti,  maverick musician, unfazed iconoclast and nemesis of the Nigerian military-in-government.

    Indeed, Fela and Gani, thanks to their gripping social crusading — the one with biting and irreverent music; the other, with the Law, aided by explosive media play — earned the rare distinction of first-name terms with adoring Nigerians.

    Onagoruwa and Gani, brilliant lawyers both, leveraged their immense media penetration, in their endless battle against creeping military dictatorship.

    Onagoruwa took many brilliant steps, well cheered by his appreciative compatriots. But he also took one wrong and fatal step, which condemned him as the Moses of Nigerian democracy — his Abacha debacle.

    Moses, the iconic prophet, spearheaded the great Jewish exodus from slavery in Egypt, all through 40 years across the Red Sea, through the wilderness, to the Promised Land of Canaan.

    Due to extreme provocation by the stiff-necked Israelites, however, and a rather harsh reaction from the prophet, Jehovah condemned Moses to just glimpsing the Promised Land, but never reaching there.

    Onagoruwa’s Achilles heel was the fatal error of joining the Sani Abacha government, the starkest military despotism Nigeria ever knew.

    Until he died on July 21, he survived the oppressive Gen. Abacha, and 18 years of restored democracy.  But from the vibrant military-era conscience of the people, he had become no more than a ghost of his old self, aside from being partly paralyzed by stroke.

    Yet, he worked more than most in his generation, not only to put the military in check, but also to push the democratic ethos of the rule of law, the very antithesis of military impunity.

    How did Onagoruwa get to that terrible pass?

    It was during the June 12 debacle, after Gen. Ibrahim Babangida had annulled MKO Abiola’s presidential mandate.  The crisis consumed IBB, earning him a forced exit.  But Abacha, the taciturn one not a few called the Khalifa (successor) in the IBB court, somewhat sold a dummy as a so-called “people’s general”.

    Abiola was said to have bought the dummy, believing Abacha would restore his mandate.  He reportedly advised people of conscience, among the progressive rank, to join Abacha to legitimize his government, as a prelude to revalidating the mandate.  It was a dummy skillfully sold and dumbly bought!

    But that was only one leg of the snare.  The other leg was the reported pitch by Gen. Oladipo Diya, Onagoruwa’s Odogbolu, Ogun State, co-native, who emerged the regime’s No. 2 man, to the lawyer to join the new government.

    Still, despite Diya’s high-falutin cant on the earnestness of the Abacha regime, the general almost lost his head at the end of it all, just as Onagoruwa lost his immaculate reputation, in the progressive community, during that regime’s earlier phase.

    Nevertheless, Diya was a soldier. If soulless military power raised him, fair game that crass opportunism also broke him. Still, he got somewhat lucky.

    Yes, he got ridiculed and humiliated and terrified, by the military equivalent of the valleys and the shadows of death — saved only from execution, for alleged coup plotting, by the sudden death of Abacha himself, Diya’s traducer-in-chief.

    But at least, he escaped with his head on his neck, even if tragically bowed; though as the living relic of the starkest and most brutal Nigerian military despotism ever.

    Not so, Onagoruwa.  That was a goodly man consumed by the evil of military rule; which often thrived because of the naivety, if not outright collusion, of a venal civilian elite; always on the look out for the military era wealth-without-work; and privilege-without-responsibility, which, 18 years after military rule, still leave the country prostrate.

    But for the late Onagoruwa, even that would appear less personally jarring than his sensational fallout with Gani, his friend and forensic comrade-in-arms against military rule, benign or malignant.

    Gani, the charismatic but famous loner, had warned Onagoruwa to beware of Abacha’s subversive charm.  So, when Onagoruwa fell, Gani sensationally disowned his friend, mocking his stumble with a serves-you-right, I-told-you-so gloating.  That must have hurt deep!

    The final straw came with the murder of Toyin, Onagoruwa’s brilliant lawyer-son, by suspected agents of the brutal Abacha state — perhaps because Onagoruwa had the temerity to walk out of his Federal Attorney-General job, on account of some stiff decrees the Abacha junta rolled out, but which the embattled minister of Justice publicly disowned?

    Indeed, Onagoruwa was a practical manifestation of the leitmotif of Classical Greek drama — that only the dead are well and truly happy; for the malevolent gods think little of blighting life-long bliss with devastating end-life tragedies.

    Or the imperative of the Christian prayer for people, particularly public figures, to end well.

    Here was a true patriot, that held his own in a stellar class of giants of public conscience, when Nigeria still boasted genuine heroes and true role models — Wole

    Soyinka, Gani Fawehinmi, Tai Solarin, Ayodele Awojobi: Titans that fought against civil and military rascality, to save their country from avoidable ruin.

    Yet, his Abacha-era stumble may condemn this brave, in the books of not a few, as some loathsome collaborator with the vilest military junta in Nigerian history.

    That would not only be monumental injustice to his sterling memory but also great disservice to his doughty labour, as rare moral and legal guide, to save the Nigerian military from its own hubris.

    But like the stark Abacha, the very epitome of the nadir of military misrule, the Nigerian military was the tortoise in the Yoruba tale, sworn to tarrying on its power journey of perdition, until it earned total disgrace.  Tough luck — and monumental irony — Onagoruwa somewhat ended as part of its collateral damage!

    But that should, and cannot, define his place in history.

    Still, the Onagoruwa personal debacle should teach the collective wisdom that military quick-fixes can never be an option, even in wobbly polities like Nigeria.

  • A doughty sentinel departs

    A doughty sentinel departs

    In 1986, I wrote an article for The Guardian criticising a Nigerian Television Authority series on the media in particular, and its programming in general. NTA struck back in a prime-time special that reeked with libel on a grand scale. Stamped all over it was what American case law calls “actual malice.”  Stunned speechless as I watched the broadcast at Rutam House, I knew I would have to file a defamation lawsuit.

    Halfway into the broadcast, I was summoned to Editor Lade “Ladbone” Bonuola’s office to take a phone call.  It was Dr Olu Onagoruwa on the line, saying that the content of the broadcast was defamatory through and through, and that if I was minded to pursue the matter at law, he would handle the case free, except for filing fees.

    The day the case opened, I had in my corner a team of six lawyers led by Onagoruwa.  When it became clear that the other side would be represented by relatively junior counsel, he handed the case to his nephew,Tokunbo Onagoruwa.

    I will never forget the consummate skill with which the younger Onagoruwa subdued a principal witness for the NTA and one of the tin gods there at the time.  In the face of withering cross-examination, the fellow cut a pathetic figure. Even I the plaintiff began to feel some pity for him

    As I narrated the proceedings to Onagoruwa later that day at his chambers, a broad smile spread across his face. That smile signified the joy a master gets from knowing that his pupil has mastered the trade.

    We won the case, and N30,000 in damages.  A few days after NTA paid up, I received a cheque  in that amount from Dr Onagoruwa’s chambers, together with a copy of the court’s judgment.

    I had no claim whatsoever on his generosity.  Before he represented me, I had met him only occasionally, in company of the late Kayode Awosanya, editor of Gbolabo Ogunsanwo’s news-magazine New Nation, of which I was a contributing editor.  Previously, Awosanya was Onagoruwa’s protégée at the Daily Times, where he was a senior reporter and Onagoruwa was Editorial Legal Adviser and a doughty sentinel-at-large of press freedom.

    But the Press and human rights were his twin constituencies.  Wherever freedom of the press was being derogated and human rights abused, there you found Onagoruwa always in the victim’s corner, always formidably prepared, a profile in forensic brilliance as he expounded recondite points of law.

    He seemed foreordained, therefore, to serve as lead counsel in the civil suit that the Nigeria Union of Journalists brought against a senior aide of Rivers State military governor Alfred Diete-Spiff (now His Royal Majesty King Alfred Diete-Spiff) who flogged Minere Amakiri, a reporter for the Benin City-based Observer almost insensate, allegedly on his principal’s orders, and for good measure shaved his head with broken glass.

    Amakiri’s crime?

    He had ruined the governor’s birthday, they said, by publishing a story that teachers in the Rivers State had given notice of a strike to back their demand for unpaid salaries.  The truthfulness of the publication was never disputed.

    The Amakiri case is the subject of a riveting book, in which Onagoruwa expounded the principles of press freedom with magisterial skill.

    It was notorious that, as editorial legal adviser to the government-controlled Daily Times,  Onagoruwa would be an early casualty of an NPN victory in the 1979 general elections.

    His sympathies for Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s UPN were well known. Later, his erudite commentary in signed newspaper articles and pronouncements on the lecture circuit marked  him out as an implacable adversary of military rule.

    I recall sharing a public platform with him during the Buhari-Idiagbon era, at which he declared, within earshot of Government House, Ilorin, and without the slightest tremor of voice or twitch of countenance that, by enacting the infamous Decree Four, the regime had declared war on the people of Nigeria.  It made no difference to Onagurowa that the occupant of Government House was Idiagbon’s local enforcer, Group Captain Salaudeen Latinwo.

    So unyielding was Onagoruwa’s opposition to the structural adjustment programme and other depredations of the Babangida era that the services were mandated to destroy him.

    They went from one media house to another peddling forged documents purporting that he had cheated at the Bar finals in the Nigerian Law School.  They found no takers. They prosecuted him for carrying and using an unlicensed weapon. The “weapon” at issue turned out to be an off-the-shelf spraying device to stun would-be assailants.

    They suborned a relation to file a criminal complaint against him, charging that he had failed to remit some money he had received on her behalf in a land transaction. It turned out that the complainant had sold the property to two different persons, and Onagoruwa was holding the money against the claims that were sure to follow.

    In the dark days after June 12, 1993, when the two official political parties engaged each other in a brutal fight to demonstrate which of them could better assist discredited military president Ibrahim Babangida throttle the popular will, the National Reformation Movement (NRM) led by Chief Anthony Enahoro came closer than any other single organisation to expressing that will with eloquence and commitment.

    Onagoruwa was its irrepressible general secretary.

    This glittering résumé would however be marred by a single misjudgment:  Onagoruwa’s decision to serve as Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice in the military regime of the debauched dictator, Sani Abacha.

    Onagoruwa often contested this view fiercely, insisting that President-elect Moshood Abiola had urged him to accept the appointment; that he had gone into cabinet to help realise the progressive agenda, including the actualisation of the June 12 mandate, and that his presence on the Abacha team had in the final analysis, been beneficent.

    I myself can bear witness that Abiola had indeed urged Onagoruwa to accept to serve in the Abacha cabinet.  I should add, in parentheses, that Abiola was also responsible for the inclusion of Chief Solomon Lar in the cabinet.  A Jos-based mining industrialist was originally penciled for the Plateau slot. But Abiola had demurred, on the ground that the man had a reputation for stinginess and could not therefore be counted upon to display the generosity of spirit the moment demanded.

    The plan, as another member of the cabinet Chief Silas Daniyan stated for the record, was that Abiola’s nominees would go into the Abacha cabinet for a stipulated period, first to help legitimise it in the public consciousness, and then to soften the ground for the validation of the June 12 mandate.  You could accuse them of credulity or perhaps even naiveté, but that was the agreement.

    But with each passing day, it became clearer that Abacha had seized power to entrench himself, not to help validate Abiola’s mandate.  Those who had thought they could do business with him finally saw their error, but not those they had pressed into Abacha’s service.  And so, when the latter were asked to pull out of an agreement that the other party had virtually abrogated, they sat tight, inventing one self-serving rationalisation after another.

    To his credit, Onagoruwa resigned, but long after he should have done so, and arguably not entirely on his own terms.  By then, the damage was already done.

    He had become alienated from the progressive community.  Abacha sent his goon squad to murder his son Toyin, a young attorney full of promise. The regime and its immediate successor used every means at their disposal to block his elevation to the rank of Senior Advocate – an elevation he had earned several times over. Then came the stroke that left him partially paralysed, but thankfully unimpaired mentally.

    It took the intervention of the Chief Justice of the Federation, Mariam Aloma Mukhtar, to break the choke-hold that a cabal in the Legal Privileges and Ethics Committee had kept on Onagoruwa’s translation to Senior Advocate.

    When it finally came, restitution was almost meaningless.  It came virtually as a mere adornment.  It came when Onagoruwa could not profit much from it.  This unconscionable delay was of a piece with the string of persecutions he suffered in a long career marked by great learning, courage, public service, and commitment to justice.

    Gabriel Olusoga Onagoruwa died last week, aged 80.

     

    This article draws on two previous columns written on Onagoruwa’s 70th birthday and on his taking silk.