The Nation Newspaper

Category: Commentaries

  • Cartoon

    Cartoon

  • Truth about the nation’s crises

    SIR: The first time I came to know that falsification of historical facts by those in power is responsible for the inability of the international community to know the truth and address it as such was when I met a South Sudanese in Leipzig, Germany, in 2009 or so. He said ordinary Sudanese people saw themselves as a people, north-south, Arabs/Africans, and this reflected in the level at which they inter-marry. He was a mixed blood and he saw that the international community was subjected to a kind of invincible ignorance by what it is fed with by those in power.

    Look at what even South Sudanese people are doing to themselves, based on the leadership deficit we are talking about! I also came to know, through some other life experiences that many of those called “diplomats” are usually among the most easily compromised human beings. They rarely tell the truth as it is; they are rarely straightforward; they are made to feel fine by those in power. Yet, Jesus says thee shall know the truth, and the truth shall make thee whole.

    Luru and ashapa are too kinds of soup in Yoruba land. Whenever people want to lump issues together, to create confusion, the Yoruba will say, don’t mix-up luru with ashapa. That is what President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan (GEJ) and his supporters are doing – trying to lump the Boko Haram of the killed Muhammed Yusuf (2009) with the political Boko Haram that emerged in 2011 after GEJ was pronounced the winner of the presidential election, which should have gone to a northerner, if he didn’t truncate rotational presidency.

    Ghana is a peaceful society. But even in Ghana, I heard of chieftaincy crisis; then consider the weight of national presidency, to know the extent a people would go to protect or defend that interest. Some zones felt marginalised regarding Nigeria’s presidency, and rotational presidency was introduced by leaders who cared in 1999. Why truncate it? Throughout 2010 up to when GEJ became the elected President of Nigeria in May 2011, what Boko Haram uprising did Nigeria experience, to justify tracing the terrorism of his presidency to 2009? We had the Maitatsine uprisings in the 1980s with wanton destruction of lives and property, basically intra-Muslim. Did we ever use the term “terrorism” to describe any of the intermittent uprisings?

    Until the Boko Haram of Yusuf was provoked by some of his fellow Muslims in 2009, the group was in seclusion, as peaceful as monks. The seclusion was actually what some Muslims saw as satanic, whereas the group wanted a life away from the corruption which, in their view, Western literacy imported. You may agree with boko haram (book corruption) if you know the extent our oil wealth is stolen through paper-work fraud. But today’s Boko Haram is not Yusuf’s Boko Haram; the current one is out to fight political disorder. Nigeria must mend its cracked political wall.

    • Pius Oyeniran Abioje, Ph. D,

    University of Ilorin.

     

  • The harm in federal character, zoning and regionalism

    Section 14(3) of the 1999 Nigerian constitution says: “The composition of the Government of the Federation or any of its agencies and the conduct of its affairs shall be carried out in such a  manner as to reflect the federal character of Nigeria and the need to  promote national unity, and also to command national loyalty, thereby ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few states or from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that government or in any of its agencies.”

    In full acknowledgement of the good intentions of the framers of the 1999 Constitution, as necessary to address the need for balancing the interests of the multiplicity of ethnicities in our country and the disparate levels of literacy and economic progression, I believe that with the increasing ethnic-based disturbances, continued balkanisation of the country by non-sustainable ethnicity-driven state creation, the acrimonious political discourse that is fuelled not by substance but ethnic or regional considerations, the citadel of incompetence and mediocrity that, for the most part, is the civil and public service today, given the related diminished standards, the time has come for re-consideration of the Federal Character requirements.

    The concept and practice of allocation of federal and state government positions, issues advocacy by zones or regions, political aspiration by zoning, undermine the principle of fair-play and unity that is, seemingly, the objectives of the requirement.  Specifically, mediocrity, continued ethnic rivalry and balkanisation, gerrymandering of political aspirations, regional factionalism, a system that seeks to put geo-political affiliation ahead of performance and qualifications, a polity that is perpetually heated up, are all products of the “fair-play” arrangements of the Federal Character, quota and zoning mechanisms.

    Federal Character requirements may superficially convey the impression that there is a balancing of geo-political representation at the federal Ievel and ethnic or tribal at the state level, but viewed unemotionally, it is a practice that is deleterious to a nation that seeks to be among the first twenty economically developed countries by the year 2020.  How does an allocation of federal government positions ensure that we have the best and the brightest in those positions?  What happens if a particular region lacks persons with the requisite skills, proficiency and expertise to fill its allocation?

    What about the subordinate personnel, from a different region, who has superior qualifications?  How does such allocation foster the competition amongst the regions and states that is necessary to boost literacy and economic levels which, ultimately, should result in the production of personnel who are able to compete with their peers on a national level, or on international level against those countries such as Belgium, that have to be pushed out of the top 20 economies by Nigeria’s economic ascendency.  Do we really want to continue to teach our children that you can study hard (or not) and then leave it to prayers, that when you seek to perform your civic duty, as a federal or state employee, that you have the luck of having geo-political zone balance in favour of your state of origin?

    If our mechanism for recruiting and promoting our current and future policy makers and implementers is already flawed, how can we expect the organs of government to function at a performance level that results in the delivery of the “benefits of democracy?”

    It is frightening when we realise that these individuals make and implement policies that impact all aspects of our daily lives. As Nigerians, we have never shied away from competition.  It is this need to be the best that we can be that is manifested by the professional, academic and entrepreneurial excellence of our citizens in more organised societies. It is also this pursuit of one-upmanship that also fuels the chaos that is our daily lives. Alas, this chaos cannot be constructively channeled, because we are depriving the brilliant performers of the opportunity to contribute to our nation’s socio-economic growth, thanks to Federal Character requirements.

    Contemporary times reflect a nation that has not learned from the horror of its 1966 civil war and is ever more divided along tribal, ethnic, regional and religious lines.  As a nation, we are seeing more events of loss of life caused by tribal or ethnic affiliation. We are subjected to daily bombardment by the news media of political events, activities and shenanigans with underpinnings of tribal, zonal and regional affiliations.  The run-up to the presidential election of 2010 was full of the strife associated with whether or not the presidential slot was zoned to the North and the reverberations of that period continues until now, with ramifications for the upcoming 2015 elections.  Similarly, the various state-level political party structures are caught up in fights as to where succession has been zoned to or the number of times a particular tribe has assumed an office. Has the relatively recent instance of the deportation of economically disadvantaged Anambra citizens from Lagos or the eviction of non-indigene civil service workers from some South Eastern states (supposedly based on the challenge of meeting the minimum wage increase) indicated that we are anywhere close to the promotion of national unity that is specified in Section 14(3) of the constitution?

    I am a firm believer that the tapestry of the Nigerian nation is stronger and prettier because of the diversity of our people. Together, we are better than we are apart.  However, we may never achieve the togetherness if we continue to institutionalize measures that divide us.

    The use of the Federal Character, zoning and quota mechanisms are artificial constructs that remove the fairness principle from how we live and work.  These are heinous mechanisms that put deserving people at a disadvantage to the detriment of our governance structure.  In our constant cry for visionary leaders, we must acknowledge that we will never find those stellar leaders if we continue to utilise a quota system that gives precedent to tribal, state or zonal affiliation, instead of personal attributes of excellence.

    It is my hope that in the forthcoming national discussions, that there is a robust and consequent review of the Federal Character or any such requirements that do not truly foster unity, fairness, meritocracy and nationalism. The iconic American civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King said, in his “I have a Dream” speech (March on Washington, D.C., August 28, 1963), that he dreamt of a nation where his children “will not be judged by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character.”  Our aspiration as a nation should be similarly so, with judgment not on the basis of tribe, ethnicity, zone, but on character and the ability to contribute to nation building.

     

    • Azu Obiaya writes from Abuja

    onweazuka@gmail.com

     

  • Before the national confab begins

    Since President Goodluck Jonathan announced the plan to convene a national dialogue in his last Independence Anniversary address, many Nigerians have been apprehensive about the likely outcome of the exercise that has been greeted with so much controversy due to leadership crisis and distrust.

    While receiving the 4,000-page report of the Senator Femi Okurounmu-led Presidential Advisory Committee (PAC), President Jonathan had promised that the conference would actually hold early this year. Most people were, however, taken aback when the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Anyim Pius Anyim announced modalities for the 492-delegate conference, which fuelled the people’s fears that its outcome might not really reflect the yearnings of Nigerians because of the disparity between the committee’s recommendations and the approved guidelines.

    The committee’s 38-item agenda had recommended that the conference should have no ‘no-go’ area; it is to be managed by 13-member secretariat under an Executive Secretary with two members from each geo-political zone; majority of delegates to be elected directly on the principles of universal adult suffrage; each senatorial zone is to send four elected delegates; each state government to nominate one delegate; the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) to nominate one delegate; the President to nominate delegates for key interest groups; the nominated delegates not to exceed one-thirds of total number of delegates, and the conference to hold for at least three months and not more than six months. The committee also proposed that the conference should hold between February and July, 2014, while President should send a bill to the National Assembly for an enabling law, or alternatively, convene the conference via provisions of Section 5 of 1999 Constitution, while the emergence of delegates is to be based on any of four options.

    In the final template released, the Federal Government will now nominate 20 delegates of at least six women, while state governors and the FCT administration will nominate 109 delegates – three from each state and one from FCT. Bodies like the Nigeria Guild of Editors, Nigeria Union of Journalists, Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria, Nigerian Bar Association, the Judiciary, the Nigerian Society of Engineers, Nigerian Environmental Society, National Youth Council of Nigeria and National Association of Nigerian Students will nominate members.

    Also to have representatives are: National Council of Women Societies, Market Women Associations, the International Federation of Women Lawyers, the National Association of Women Journalists, the Academies of Science, Engineering, Education, Letters and Social Sciences, Civil Society Organisations, religious leaders, Nigerians in the Diaspora, political parties that have representation in the National Assembly and the People Living with Disabilities. The Newspaper Proprietors Association of Nigeria, political/cultural and ethnic groups, among others, will also have representatives at the confab.

    Other nominations include 37 elder statesmen – one per state and the FCT – by the president. These nominees will also include retired military officers, the police and the state security service from each of the nation’s six geopolitical zones. Other delegates will be traditional rulers (two per zone and one from the FCT), retired civil servants (one from each of the zones and the FCT), and the representatives of the Nigeria Labour Congress, the Trade Union Congress and Organised Private Sector.

    Certainly, the primary purpose of a National Conference is to address and find lasting solutions to the problems that have been plaguing Nigeria since 1914. These problems border on the quest for the attainment of economic, social, cultural, religious and political justice and equity. Nigerians have tended to live with so much suspicion that having a national collective aspiration seems more Herculean than ethnic and tribal affinity of the over 300 ethnic groups. The nation’s albatross has worsened with the failure of the constitutions, which had never been people-oriented, to redress the fundamental defects. No wonder, Sir Hugh Clifford, Governor-General of Nigeria between 1920 and 1931, once described the nation as a mere ”collection of independent native states separated from one another by great distances, by differences of history and traditions and by ethnological, racial, tribal, political, social and religious barriers.”

    This fragmentation has continued till date. Even on the conference, a lot of agitations from many quarters continue to trail representations on primordial lines and if these are not addressed, the expectations of the conference may be compromised. The way out is for the various interest groups that feel marginalised to team up to present a common cause. It should be realised that there is no way that the all the delegates can be representative enough to reflect all shades of opinions in a heterogeneous state like Nigeria. What should top the agenda at the conference are burning issues like the devolution of powers, fiscal federalism, local government autonomy, state police, and ensuring appropriate status for the FCT, institutional corruption and so on. To ensure transparency and participation, the government should ensure that proceedings of the conference are transmitted live at every stage!

    On the outcome of the conference, Anyim had said that it would be by consensus but in the case where a consensus is not achieved, it would be by a 75 per cent majority after which, the conference is to advise the government on the legal framework, procedures and options for integrating its decisions and outcomes into the 1999 Constitution and other laws of the country.

    The onus lies on the government to ensure that the delegates discuss under an atmosphere that allows for genuine brainstorming and undue influence. And more importantly, the outcome should be subjected to a referendum, otherwise the whole exercise would amount to a jamboree, a waste of time and resources, as many pessimists believe, based on past experiences. Nigerians cannot forget so easily, President Jonathan’s pre-emptive stance that the report of the proposed conference would be submitted to the National Assembly for ratification. This ought not to be. We should never fail to recognise that the 1999 Constitution confers sovereignty on the people and, therefore, the best that could happen is for Nigerians to merely cede part of their sovereignty to the members of the National Assembly and not for the legislature to subsume the peoples’ authority.

    The duty of the Sovereign National Conference is to address and find solutions to the key problems afflicting the country. It is for this single reason of legitimacy that the people have unrepentantly called for a Sovereign National Conference. The late human rights activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Gani Fawehinmi once said: “The primary concern of Nigeria since 1914 to date is to remove all obstacles which have prevented the country from establishing political justice, economic justice, social justice, cultural justice, religious justice and to construct a new constitutional frame-work in terms of the system of government-structurally, politically economically, socially, culturally and religiously”. This should be the thrust of the confab lest it becomes a missed opportunity. Anything short of this may be useless as many skeptics have been telling us. And who knows whether they will be vindicated at the end of the day or not?

    . Kupoluyi writes from the Federal University of Agriculture, Abeokuta, vide,adewalekupoluyi@yahoo.co.uk.

     

  • Ways of improving Nigeria

    SIR: Nigeria will be better if the leaders and the led change their attitudes, love one another, and turn to God for Him to heal our land. We all need to turn around and embrace righteousness for Nigeria to see better days. Prophetically, I want to assure Nigerians that we should not lose hope in the country, despite the socio-political and economic challenges, but we should always be in fervent prayers, repent of our sins, look unto God and have faith in Him for He will shower His blessings and favour on faithful believers.

    Our economic management team should adopt policies that have human face and embark on effective utilisation of the nation’s resources for the development of the country. The leaders and the led should shun selfish interests. Capitalism is returning Nigeria to the era of slavery and the solution is the abolition of greed and antagonistic competition in our economic system. The federal government should use its political will to tackle the seeming insurmountable power problems in the country to fast-track socio-economic and infrastructural development in our country. Ensuring better Nigeria and its continued unity is in our hands. Nigeria will be great if we do the right things by embracing righteousness. We must be good people to God, listen to His words and those of the Holy Spirit.

    I want to plead that all of us should work seriously towards ensuring that Nigeria remains one united nation. This year, Nigeria will be 100 years; we just have to make it work, as there is power in number … as in China, India, USA and Indonesia. We cannot fold our hands and see our unity shattered. Let us all join hands to see Nigeria work. Also, we must all be concerned about the security of our nation that is being threatened.

    •Prophet Oladipupo Funmilade-Joel (Baba Sekunderin)

    Lagos, Nigeria

     

  • Open letter to Gov. Ajimobi

    SIR: The visible positive changes in Ogun State today are indicative of the mindset of Governor Abiola Ajimobi and his cabinet towards the people of the state and I have deemed it necessary to contribute my quota to her progress as a real son of the soil of the state studying out of the state.

    There is no gainsaying that all states of the federation see through the eyes of the federal government in the area of database for housing and population. But if the federal eye is blind, how can the states see? The population and housing census conducted by the National Population Commission was between the 21st and 27th March, 2006, followed by a Post-Enumeration Survey in June, 2006.

    Thanks to Freedom of Information Act, the details of the breakdown of provisional population total published in the federal government’s Extraordinary Gazette No. 24 volume 94 of May 15, 2009 as statutory instrument No. 23 of 2007 reveals that Oyo State final population total was 5,580,894.

    By this, the state’s population was double those of Ebonyi, Ekiti, Gombe, Kwara, Taraba, and Yobe states; triple those of Bayelsa State and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, and almost triple Nasarawa’s by 9,079. The question is: Does it reflect the true total population of Oyo State as at 2006? If it does, then, where are the housing totals? If it does not matter then, every plan based on such a wrong population figure would be wrong. Then, one can say that the state government has been planning on housing at random all this while.

    But who is deceiving who? Politics of populations and housing has done and will continue to do Nigerians no good if we fail to do the right things. Another question is: “What are these right things”? The right things will reveal the true current situation of education, health, agriculture and food security, housing, reproduction, people with disabilities, labour force, revenue, refugees, etc such that we can truly proffer solutions to problems in the system and reliably project into the future.

    One of those right things for a wise state is to independently build a demographic database of population and housing of residents to reveal the foregoing. Oyo State needs to conduct an independent population and housing census.

    Your Excellency, my mind bubbles with answers to the questions of why, when, how, to conduct such a census.

     

    • Gbemisola Olufemi,

    Student, Department of Demography and Social Statistics,

    Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Osun State.

     

  • What’s the motive of defecting politicians?

    What’s the motive of defecting politicians?

    SIR: Preparatory to the 2015 general elections, political permutations have thrown up an unprecedented trend of defections from one political party to the other. Thirty-seven members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the House of Representatives were the first to cross-carpet to the All Progressives Congress (APC), while eleven other PDP senators are angling to switch to APC. Some members of APC have also defected to Labour Party and PDP respectively.

    This defection blues presently rocking the political space is not new in Nigerian politics, but it has kept tongues wagging. The motives behind defection vary from one person to another. In fact, I can say without any fear of contradiction that most defections these days were borne out of ulterior motives and self-serving agenda of the defectors.

    Defection opens a floodgate of exodus of party members who rightly or wrongly felt aggrieved, short-changed or disenchanted with the way their party was being run, especially in the Second Republic. Politicians who know their onions translate their movement to other parties into victory and success, while others who fail are doomed politically and consigned to the dust bin of history.

    What is the mind of the Constitution and the Electoral laws on defection as it continues to dominate public discourse and raise so much legal and political dust? What impact will this development create in our democracy? The law made it clear that a candidate who is elected on a platform of a given party and defects to another ceases to be a member of that political party. It is, therefore, at the discretion of a jettisoned party to either declare his seat vacant or not. The PDP and APC adjudged to be the strongest today are mostly immersed in this defection fever with the PDP threatening to declare the seats of the defectors from the party vacant.

    The laws of the land should be applied across boards on all defecting elected politicians in accordance with the constitution and the electoral laws. The court should also prove that sentiments have no place in law. If this happens now and justifiably too, a precedent will be established and the issue of defection will be laid to eternal rest.

    It should be noted that the provision for declaring the seat of a defected member of the legislature or executive vacant was to discourage political nomadism. Elected representatives defy the law and defect because the 2010 Electoral Law as amended is not applied accordingly.

    The mass media which should hit the nail on the head has been shy or rather pretentious on this matter. Instead of providing information, education and direction to the most appropriate perspectives on the issue, the fourth estate of the realm decided to throw the issue to the public domain for judgment. So many phone-in programmes and vox pop have been carried out without any of such efforts pin-pointing the exact application of the law. They rather left people more confused than they were before the issue came up. The Nigerian Bar Association is equally standing aloof on this matter.

    In this case, those who should be the drivers of the decision-making process and opinion-moulding have turned out to be pretentious onlookers. An analyst once said that for the fact that one has converted to either Christianity or Islam does not make him or her righteous or guarantee him heaven at last. The character and attitude of the defectors, if not changed, will make no difference in their sojourn in their new parties.

    • Sunday Onyemaechi Eze

    (sunnyeze02@yahoo.com)

     

  • Bankole’s vindication, challenge to EFCC

    Bankole’s vindication, challenge to EFCC

    SIR: The recent discharge and acquittal of Honourable Dimeji Bankole, erstwhile Speaker of House of Representatives, calls to question the efficacy or otherwise of the Economic and Financial Crime Commission (EFCC). In 2011, the commission made a big issue of Bankole’s arrest, creating a mole hill out of nothing by deploying virtually all police personnel available in Abuja to arrest just a single soul. When he was arraigned in court, the road leading to the court and its main entrance were barricaded by fierce-looking riot policemen and other security forces, as if Abuja was under emergency rule. The gun-wielding policemen and other security personnel were everywhere within the court complex. Most Nigerians condemned this show of force to arrest just a single person, as if he is a common felon.

    But EFCC’s “meticulousness” during Bankole’s arrest vanished in the two courts where he was docked. That a man could win in two different courts speaks volume of the inability of EFCC to prosecute cases, but rather engage in media war. While Bankole’s trial lasted, Mr. Olisa Agbakoba (SAN) said he saw nothing wrong if Bankole borrowed to run the House of Representatives, he would and must have the means of payment. The war on corruption cannot be fought on the pages of newspapers but much on practical approaches to issues and not the personality involved, and more importantly is the record time at which this case was pursued. Then, one begins to wonder why the trial of former governors like Joshua Dariye (Plateau), Chimaroke Nnamani (Enugu), Mohammed Abdullahi (Nassarawa), Abubakar Audu (Kogi), etc has remained in a cul-de-sac. If, as EFCC would claim, the former governors are scuttling their trial by employing frivolous applications, is this endless? Or has EFCC lost the steam and/idea to pursue these cases?

    EFCC should rise to the challenge by doing its homework before rushing someone to the court. This will guard against wasting tax payers’ resources. They should not act on the spur of the moment or on rumours. Instead, they should ensure rock-solid evidence that can secure a conviction before arraigning someone in court, and most importantly, not a media war. EFCC should be alive to its responsibilities, and not following the crowd.

     

    • Badejo Adedeji Nurudeen

    Surulere, Lagos State.

     

  • Help, my rights are being violated

    SIR: May I use your widely-read medium to appeal to the Chairman, House of Representatives’ Committee on Human Rights and the Executive Secretary, National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) to officially acknowledge the receipt of the petition I mailed separately to them. When I called the House Committee Secretary, Mr. Ado Abdul Sule (08065276836), earlier to inquire about the processes involved in submitting public petitions to the committee, he asked me to mail the petition to the NHRC and I promptly did.

    I duly mailed the petition alongside all relevant documents to the House Committee on Human Rights and the Zonal South West Office of the NHRC via DHL Express. The sworn affidavit was accompanied with a cover letter in each case, explaining my complaints and prayers. I equally provided my email for official acknowledgement of the receipt of the petition. The mails were appropriately delivered and acknowledged verbally. Similarly, I sent a text message and also called Mr. Ado Sule who confirmed verbally that the mail was received. I appealed to him that I would appreciate if the receipt of the mail is officially acknowledged.

    The official acknowledgement of a public petition makes it clear to the petitioner that the presented case would be looked into. Similarly, the petitioner should be provided with information on progress being made on the petition. We must begin to show our citizens that they are duly respected and counted worthy by agencies established to protect their rights. This is the only way other nationals will begin to respect us and the culture of impunity will gradually become a thing of the past in our polity.

    I have lived in the United States of America for a few years and my rights were never violated even as an international student. However, right in my homeland, my fundamental human rights were not only trampled upon but grossly violated and sustained with an orchestrated blackmail. The observed anomalies have continued without being resolved. This is the basis for appealing to the House committee and the NHRC to come to my aid and help protect my rights as a Nigerian citizen. Once again, I urge both bodies to officially acknowledge the receipt of my petition and act appropriately by investigating my complaints.

     

    •Akinlolu, Abdulazeez Adelaja

    University of Ilorin

     

  • The return of ‘Azikiwe’

    The return of ‘Azikiwe’

    One of the most confounding ironies in politics is that budding politicians always desire to be associated with political heroes of yore but they never seem to be able to make the sacrifice or reenact the virtues that defined these great people. It is like wanting the crown while shunning the cross. The result of course, will remain ephemeral and dismal making the new age politician nothing but an upstart who huffs and puffs and soon fades away like the morning mists. Now why is Hardball speaking in so much riddles, spewing some roadside philosophy?

    Well the other day, President Goodluck Ebele ‘Azikiwe’ Jonathan was in Owerri, Imo State, to welcome some party renegades back into the PDP fold. The result was laughable; a colourful agglomeration of snakes, scorpions and stingrays in one small pond. Having ‘reconciled’ the Imo PDP, one of the most fractious, if not carnivorous, in the land in a gay ceremony, Jonathan on his return journey stopped over at the palace of the Obi of Onitsha, Igwe Nnaemeka Achebe. Why he chose Achebe over the Owerri monarch, Eze Emmanuel Njemanze, who is equally influential and a natural host beats Hardball but that is another story for another day. The gist of this winding piece is that at a reception in Achebe’s palace, Jonathan had food for thought to last him another four years.

    According to a Channels TV news clip from the Onitsha event, Igwe Achebe, tall, lanky, debonair and well spoken had the microphone and of course the floor. “Your Excellency,” he started in his learned and well culture voice, smiling: “In 2011, you came here and promised us a number of things one of which is the 2nd Niger Bridge. You told us that it would be completed before the end of four years— (the monarch stumbled here, he smiled some more and continued) or end of your tenure. But we have not seen any work going on there.” A din of approval rent the air.

    The microphone switched to President Jonathan in response to the Achebe’s remarks, to the effect that: your highness, yes I remember I made such a promise; a bridge is a complex engineering work, I assure you that work will soon start. “Remember I also told you that an Azikiwe built the first Niger Bridge, an Azikiwe will also build the second one.” Applause, applause; ceremony over and everyone dispersed.

    Now let us overlook Igwe Achebe’s confusion over the ‘small’ matter of tenure; we all are. But what is this Azikiwe gambit once again? Recall that during the 2011 electioneering, President Jonathan had told the world, particularly Ndigbo that his old father had been so enamored with the activities of the great Zik that he also named him Azikiwe. Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe was of course an Igbo and a foremost Nigerian politician of the First Republic who played an active role in Nigeria’s independence struggle from the British colonialists. He was a liberal nationalist, a charismatic speaker and master of the rostrum; he had a rich academic record and brought a deep philosophical bent to politics.

    Since Jonathan became president in 2011, the Azikiwe tag virtually varnished, perhaps for lack of space. Now that political campaigns are about to begin again, will ‘Azikiwe’ regain its prominence? Now how would the inimitable Rt. Hon. Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe feel seeing all this mimicry; how would he feel knowing that even his mausoleum in Onitsha, his resting place, is in utter dereliction nearly two decades after his demise?