The Nation Newspaper

Category: Editorial

  • Off the table

    Off the table

    •Mr Cameron should be told in clear terms that Nigeria won’t go back on same-sex marriage

    We are not averse to foreign countries making inputs on policy matters in Nigeria if they must because no country is an island unto itself. Moreover, the world has become a global village and one in which policies made in one country could have consequences far beyond its borders. To this extent, countries should be amenable to constructive criticisms of their policies and programmes by other countries. But it is something else when such criticisms or suggestions border on meddlesomeness.

    This is exactly our concern about the statement by British Prime Minister David Cameron, that Britain would seek audience with its Nigerian counterpart on the same-sex marriage bill already passed by the National Assembly. The legislators spoke the minds of Nigerians by prescribing 14 years imprisonment for same-sex offenders. All that is required is the president’s assent for the bill to become law.

    Apparently, Mr Cameron has forgotten that Nigeria and Britain have no cultural affinity; otherwise, he would not be recommending that Nigeria toe the line of Britain in matters relating to same-sex marriage. Indeed, his country’s proposed engagement of the Nigerian authorities towards swaying them on the stance of the National Assembly on the matter is taking meddlesomeness too far.

    “With countries like Nigeria, where we have a very good relationship, a very strong relationship, nothing should be off the table”, the prime minister said. He added: “So, when we meet with Nigerian politicians and Nigerian leaders, we should be very clear about those things that we agree about and very clear where we disagree.” Mr Cameron said further that the UK has a “very good record on equal rights for lesbian and gay people”, adding: “we believe that’s right for every country in the world.”

    This is where the British prime minister missed the point. How can he assume that what is good for Britain should be good for Nigeria, or other countries for that matter? If same-sex marriage is food for Britons, it could be poison for Nigerians. As a matter of fact, contrary to Mr Cameron’s belief that “nothing should be off the table”, same-sex marriage is off the table”. And this is the point that Nigerian officials must make clear to him whenever his proposed ‘consultations’ with them take place.

    In Nigeria, nay Africa, we cannot “have proper equality for lesbian and gay people”; it is only in Mr Cameron’s imagination that such rights (that is if at all that is a right) “should apply everywhere in the world.” That is the height of ethnocentrism which Nigeria should not take, whether from Britain or any other country for that matter.

    As we said earlier, there is nothing basically wrong in one country seeking policy change in another country, but it must give convincing reasons to justify its position. Mr Cameron has not told us how Nigeria’s same-sex bill will affect either his country as an entity or its citizens; here we are talking about enlightened self-interest. It is insufficient to hide under a nebulous concept of ‘fundamental right’. Even if Nigeria’s position is going to affect whatever comes to it by way of British aid (because Mr Cameron made a veiled threat when he linked the issue with aids), we have to stick to our position. In any case, it is better to be rid of Mr. Cameron’s aids than to be slapped with the AIDS of sodomy, which the West, the modern day Sodom and Gomorrah, now deodorises as “same-sex marriage”. If on that score Britain and its fellow travellers are beyond redemption, Nigeria is not. So, President Goodluck Jonathan must make the point that we cannot trade virtue for money by assenting to the bill, immediately.

    Nigeria is a sovereign nation, and this fact has to be respected by other countries, the same way Nigeria should respect the sovereignty of other countries. To compare sexuality with religion, race or lifestyle, as Mr Cameron has done, is disingenuous. If the British do not care about whether people are gay or straight, we do. And that is also a fundamental right that should be respected.

     

  • Fund your faith

    Fund your faith

    •Report that the FG may stop sponsoring pilgrims is cheering

    OFFICIAL funding of pilgrimages has become a distracting influence on the polity and sadly, an avoidable drain on public till. We are however elated by the report that the Federal Government may stop annual funding of pilgrimages. Though not yet conclusive, the initiative is quite belated.

    Ike Ekweremadu, Deputy Senate President, at a recent stakeholders’ summit organised by the Nigerian Christian Pilgrims Commission unveiled: “…we have a challenge facing us, as there are indications that the Federal Government may stop funding pilgrimage activities… This is understandable given the need to separate religion from the state. Pilgrimage is a personal and spiritual matter.’’

    To us, religion, like pilgrimage, is a personal issue between God and man and such affairs, especially in a secular state like Nigeria, should not be allowed to overburden her governance. But at the current rate, the reality is that a sizeable chunk of public funds at federal, state and local government levels is devoted to servicing annual pilgrimage – at the expense of other salient challenges.

    The late Chief Obafemi Awolowo started the idea of sponsoring pilgrimages in the old Western Region, with a small fraction of the populace as beneficiaries, unlike now that the number of recipients is alarmingly high. Later, the northern regional government emulated the initiative for basically Muslim pilgrimages. It was subsequently extended to include Christian pilgrimages across the country. But there is need for a rethink of the matter since governance is suffering on many fronts.

    It is shameful that Nigeria, of all the countries that observe the yearly spiritual ritual, reportedly has the highest number of pilgrims to Saudi Arabia and Israel, a large percentage of them on government sponsorship. Yet, crime rate and corruption daily loom large in the country: Worse is the fact that most pilgrims are not imbibing the right values. Thus, trips to these holy lands seem not to be achieving the desired spiritual cleansing necessary to bring to bear the fear of the Almighty in governance and other public facets.

    We are not in any way averse to people embarking on holy pilgrimage. What we loathe is for such adventures to be predominantly at the expense of the state. Such conspicuous public consumption, under the guise of religious patronage, cannot be justified in this nation where majority of the people live on less than a dollar per day.

    The continuing sponsorship of pilgrimages is inconsistent with the intent of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) in section10, to wit: ‘The Government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State Religion.’  Apart from the two prime religions of Islam and Christianity, there are other fringe religions in the country. We ask: why are governments at all levels giving patronage to pilgrimages from the two religions, against the constitutional provision that Nigeria is a secular state? This act, apart from being an infraction of the law, can equally create a rancorous situation, especially at this point that religion has proved to be a great source of tension in the country.

    Sponsorship of pilgrims is unnecessary because only Islamic religion encourages adherents to go on Hajj, with a proviso – once in a lifetime by those that can afford the trip. The Christian religion is silent on this, which means such journey is not compelling.

    Rather than religious sponsorship, the government should create an enabling administrative atmosphere that could guarantee hitch-free pilgrimage by those that can afford it. What is of importance to Nigerians is for governments to serve them better by providing for their needs or putting in place the environment to facilitate such.

     

  • Madiba and a nation’s pride

    Madiba and a nation’s pride

    •That ailing Nelson Mandela is in a South Africa hospital underscores the confidence that country’s elite has in its health system

     

    Since June 8 when he was rushed to the hospital for reported lung infections, news coming from the ward of Nelson Mandela, the iconic first democratic president of post-apartheid South Africa, has been mixed.

    The latest bulletin talks of a “critical condition”. Earlier reports talked of improvement in his condition. Other reports said his health was “stable”. There were even wild rumours of his “death”, which later turned out to be hoaxes, to the relief of most: not because, at 94, the near-universally loved Madiba is too young to die, but because his bitter-less essence and regal spirit is too rare in a world of dog-kills-dog.

    All through all of these, there has not been even a whimper to suggest Mr. Mandela must be “flown abroad”, as the elite here often emptily crow, “for better treatment”.

    Even with the latest not-so-reassuring medical bulletin on the former South African president and hero of colour-blind new Republic of South Africa, President Jacob Zuma’s comment was instructive: “The doctors are doing everything possible to get his condition to improve,” the president said in response to the latest rumours that Mr. Mandela had suffered alleged cardiac arrest, “and are ensuring that Madiba is well-looked after and is comfortable”. He, President Zuma emphasised, “is in good hands.”

    Now, how many Nigerian presidents, governors or even the money and privileged class can talk so confidently about this country’s health system, which the president and governors are charged to develop, and which the moneyed and privileged class are supposed to help build?

    Indeed, a disturbing revelation by a retired army medic alleged many of Nigeria’s medical victims, proudly rushed abroad for “better medical treatment”, were actually despatched to death, faster than their time, no matter how grave their conditions were perceived.

    Brig-Gen. Otu Oviemo Ovadje, retired from the medical services of the army and internationally medical inventor, suggested that President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, who died in office after an abortive stint in a South Arabia hospital, could perhaps have gotten a better medical deal had his condition been stabilised before despatching him abroad. Gen. Ovadje claimed because of this mismanagement, the late president’s condition became irreversible. He died.

    The army medic also spoke of a former military governor who was rushed post-haste abroad, despite his professional advice that the man be held back for stabilisation. By the time the doctor rushed to Lagos to get his travel documents, having committed to travelling with the patient to build confidence, the patient had been rushed abroad. He died too – rather prematurely.

    The Nigerian elite lack of innate confidence, in institutions (health and others) the power segment of this elite is charged to fix, is scandalous. If those in government have no belief in local hospitals (and that rings true of local schools, among others), how would they commit to investing scarce resources to make these hospitals provide world-class services?

    And if they are so sure the local health facilities are useless, how would they not fritter away scarce resources on health tourism, thus creating double jeopardy for the longsuffering people. They have no access to good medical facilities and are forced to pay, from the public purse, for the costly medical tourism of their prodigal leaders, even with no guaranteed result?

    South Africa has made a point: other things being equal, a country is best placed to care for the medical needs of its citizens, starting with the president to the lowest and humblest of citizens. Nigeria must follow suit.

    But for Nigeria to attain this patriotic height, a radical change of thinking is called for. Jumping abroad at the latest medical threat is no high fashion. On the contrary, it is the height of dumbness.

  • Maltreatment of children

    Maltreatment of children

    •We agree with UNICEF that the plight of the African child needs special attention

    Despite the fact that the Day of the African Child has been celebrated annually since 1991 when the then Organisation of African Unity (OAU) initiated it in honour of those who participated in the Soweto Uprising in South Africa, the plight of the African child remains deplorable. The day was set aside to raise awareness of the continued need for improvement of the education given to the African child.

    This was a fitting remembrance for the uprising in which about 10,000 black school children marched in a column more than a mile long, to demand high quality education as well as the right to be taught in their mother tongue. The protest which began on June 16, 1976 continued for about two weeks, during which hundreds of the students were shot, the most talked about being Hector Peterson. More than 100 people were killed and a thousand others injured during the protests.

    This was a huge price to pay for education by the African child. The tragedy though is that more than 37 years after this sad incident, education is still far from becoming a right of the African child. And this is true of many African countries. Rather, the children are subjected to all kinds of harmful practice, including those involving violent discipline in schools and daycare centres. There are also economic crimes, the most common of which are child labour and parents selling their children for financial gains. Social crimes are most common in child abuses, like turning children into slaves by foster parents and caretakers; some of these sadists have been reported to have put hot iron on the bodies of children, or sometimes beat them to death on flimsy excuses, even after the children had been starved almost to the point of death. Children who have been denied education often turn out to be street hawkers and street beggars who are easily amenable to rape and form the majority of hands that terrorists and other criminals recruit for their operations. There is also the social crime associated with female genital mutilation, and the branding of children as witches who are sometimes tortured or stoned to death, to name a few.

    We agree with the United Nations Children Fund (UNICEF), that communities, irrespective of their religious or traditional beliefs have a major role to play in eliminating these practices. Its director of programmes, Nicholas Alipui, hit the nail on the head when in commemoration of The Day of The African Child stressed the need for communities to lead in the campaign against the continued dehumanising of children, noting that nothing is as powerful as the communities themselves seeing the harm being done to their own children and making a strong decision to stop the harmful practices.

    But this does not in any way imply that governments have no role to play to reverse the trend. Indeed, the escalation of these crimes against children is a perfect demonstration of government’s nonchalant attitude towards all sorts of harmful practices against children. This is an area where the civil societies must sharpen their swords to wage war against harm being done to children. The governments must wake up and take decisive actions through appropriate policy reforms and legislations that will not only put the would-be offenders under severe censure but also prescribe heavy punishments for any person or groups of persons caught in these harsh, harmful and primitive acts of subjecting children to dehumanising experiences.

    The world will be a pleasant place if more care and attention can be paid to the children who are leaders of tomorrow. A situation where the African continent has many children out of school is ominous, not only for tomorrow, but even today.

     

  • Needless impasse

    Needless impasse

    THE Federation Accounts Allocation Committee (FAAC) is in recent time riddled with avoidable turbulence. The toga of rancour in the assemblage of 36 states’ commissioners of finance and officials of the Federal Government has been unduly overheating the polity. Sometime ago, commissioners from the states staged a walkout on Yerima Ngama, Minister of State for Finance, over unresolved differences in revenue sharing, including the delay in the distribution of arrears of N160billion outstanding monies since February.

    Mr Timothy Udah, Chairman of Forum of Commissioners of Finance of Nigeria (FCFN) puts it succinctly after the walkout: “We are aggrieved over the non- implementation of decisions and resolutions taken at FAAC plenary sessions in the past. The most recent was the one held in May, 2013, which by all implication still remained inconclusive. As the arrears of February remain unpaid, we are yet to be briefed and no clue is given…”

    We deprecate a situation where the Federal Government will treat the component states as worthless appendages. The essence of the stipulation that FAAC should meet monthly is to allow the federal and state governments, through their commissioners of finance, consider and share revenue accruals to the three tiers of government. Why should FAAC refuse to implement resolutions reached at such meeting?  Nigeria is not a unitary but a constitutionally guaranteed federal entity where the component units have outlined duties and responsibilities to perform. It is ultra vires the powers of the Federal Government to arbitrarily determine when to give the states their legal shares from the consolidated revenue account that belongs to the entire country.

    Although the matter is reportedly being resolved, we consider as lawless the delay or outright denial of revenue-sharing rights of the states. The states are not beholden to the Federal Government, and as such should not be treated as mere subordinates whose rights can be trampled upon with impunity. It is unfathomable that the said February agreement was reneged upon. This is the second time that the commissioners, for incongruous reasons by the Federal Government, would be compelled to stage a walkout at FAAC meetings.

    We are aware that issues have been raised over the correct amount that the nation generates because the states usually do not get carried along in such matters. What they know of, especially on oil export, is what the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) unilaterally declares, without any means of verifying its figures. The same applies to other money-spinning areas of the economy.

    Under such circumstances, it would be difficult to believe assertions that a shortfall in government revenue is delaying arrears owed the states. Who determines when there is a shortfall? The decision of whether or not a shortfall occurs should be that of two parties as against the current practice of one. Despite this anomalous situation, the Federal Government still, surprisingly, pretends to be operating an ideal federation.

    It is sad that the Federal Government is using the FAAC to fight its battle in the Nigerian Governors Forum (NGF). Unfortunately, this is not done in the collective interest of the nation but merely to satisfy the interest of President Goodluck Jonathan. But the president should note that he is not above the law, and as such should not play politics with what is due to the states.

  • Sleaze incorporated?

    Sleaze incorporated?

    NIGERIANS are no doubt familiar with the dysfunction in their government, the paralysis of its institutions and the criminal impunity that is commonplace; what continues to be confounding is the sheer novelty of every act. That is the context in which to view the latest heist allegedly perpetrated by banks and their agents in the ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), said to cost the nation a fortune in unremitted revenue.

    A memo from the Coordinating Minister of the Economy and Minister of Finance, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala alerted the nation to the humongous heist. The memo accused some unnamed revenue –generating agencies of the Federal Government of colluding with some banks to withhold monies which ought to have been remitted to the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF), contrary to what the law prescribes. The minister puts the amount involved as N58 billion.

    More worrisome, according to the minister, is that the practice has persisted despite the efforts of the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to get the agencies and the affected banks to do the right thing. The minister would further charge that the affected agencies and banks have resorted to all manner of legal subterfuge to ensure that the monies are not remitted to the coffers of the Federal Government.

    Okonjo-Iweala gave June 17 deadline after which the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation will close the accounts of agencies involved in this practice in all banks. To underscore the resolve of the finance ministry, the memo concluded that the “process of systematic closure will continue until all monies that should be in the Consolidated Revenue Fund are retrieved.”

    The memo obviously raises troubling questions. The first is that the ministry is convinced that relevant laws have been broken. The second is that the practice has persisted in spite of attempts by the Office of the Accountant-General of the Federation to bring the matter to the attention of the offenders for remediation.  The third is an alleged ploy by the banks, through their lawyers, to frustrate the transfer of the funds into the nation’s coffers.

    We consider the development unfortunate: a case of impunity writ large.

    To us, the pertinent issue is whether the infractions could have taken place had the relevant institutions done their work as they ought to. No less worrisome is the suggestion that the infractions somehow escaped the eyes of the examiners – the auditors. We dare to ask: what is the role of the Office of the Auditor-General of the Federation in all of these? Who authorised the opening of the accounts in question? Was it done with the knowledge of their boards or those of their executive management? Did the affected agencies obtain the mandate of the Accountant-General of the Federation before the accounts were opened? And the banks – were the rules of account opening for public institutions adhered to scrupulously?

    We do not accept closing of the agencies’ accounts as a fitting punishment for the crimes, which the minister herself seems persuaded, could range from criminal collusion, abuse of public trust to outright heist. In the circumstance, the measure seems to us as only a necessary first step. We expect the roles of the executives of the agencies and the colluding banks to be determined.  Those who broke the law for personal gains deserve appropriate punishment; the same applies to those who were negligent in the performance of their duties. That is the only way to curb the festering culture of impunity.

  • Brazil’s protests

    Brazil’s protests

    Everyone is struggling to understand Brazil’s occasionally violent street protests, the country’s biggest in two decades.

    Although sparked by a 20 cent increase in bus fares, they are not, at heart, about economic issues: incomes and employment remain high. Nor are they political, a tropical version of the Arab spring or Turkish protests. President Dilma Rousseff remains popular, for now.

    Rather they have formed out of a leaderless social movement, fed by Twitter and Facebook, that expresses a diffuse set of grievances, from corruption and public mis-spending to the cost of living. This is also in tune with a perhaps more worrying investor zeitgeist: one which suggests the Brazilian model may have reached its limit.

    Brazil has enjoyed a spectacular 10-year run of economic growth, thanks to the commodity boom and steroid-like injections of consumer credit. Some 30m people, who have risen out of poverty as a result, can now buy consumer goods like never before. But social changes elsewhere have not kept up with the demands of this newly entitled, if still precarious, middle class. The result is a disconnect: between the bad old’ Brazil that Brazilians are told they have left behind, and the glorious new one the government says they live in.

    For example, cultivating Brazil’s global image by spending $12bn on football stadiums for the 2014 World Cup is all very well. But not when life for the majority is so hard. They pay developed world taxes for still shoddy developing world public services. Overcrowded buses and thick traffic make the daily commute an expensive and time-consuming grind. Government corruption is rife. The disconnect is especially large when it comes to unreformed institutions, such as the police. Their thuggery against protesters really set national indignation alight.

    This disquiet that “new Brazil” may be little changed from the “old Brazil” is not unique. All over South America, citizens are fed up with being told how good things are. In prosperous Chile, it is over outrageous university bills and lack of social mobility. In more revolutionary Argentina, it is over a government that is out of touch and riddled with corruption but piously declares otherwise.

    All these social protests cut across the political spectrum; no leader is immune. In many ways, they are akin to growing concern in financial markets about emerging markets as a whole. Both are warnings that the political salad days and easy money of the past decade may be drawing to a close.

    – Financial Times

  • Etete’s tale

    Etete’s tale

    Another dent on Nigeria’s anti-corruption war

    The Dan Etete story is just one more humiliation, out of several, that successive corruption-complicit regimes have foisted on the country. By his own confession, the former Minister of Petroleum Resources committed sundry crimes against his country, yet, he is not standing any trial. Conversely, over the same issues, Etete was convicted and sentenced to three years imprisonment in Paris in 1997, for aggravated money laundering. To make matters worse, the current Minister of Justice and Attorney-General (AG) of the Federation, Mr. Mohammed Adoke, in 2011, aided Mr. Etete to claim a staggering $1.1 billion from a smelly oil deal, which an associate of President Goodluck Jonathan, and several other top officials, allegedly benefited from.

    The putrid and sordid tales of Mr. Etete and his company, Malabu Oil and Gas Ltd. started in 1995, while he was Minister of Petroleum Resources under the General Sani Abacha regime. As a minister, he was accused by major oil companies of demanding huge kick-backs from oil companies, before they could renew their licenses or win any oil contract. He also awarded one of the most endowed oil wells, OPL 245, to Malabu, which he originally co-owned with Mohammed Abacha, few days after it was formed, for $20 million, out of which the company paid only $2 million. When, however, Abacha died, and Olusegun Obasanjo became President, the Federal Government took back the ill-gotten oil well in 2001, and subsequently re-awarded it to Shell Petroleum in 2002.

    Malabu contested the re-allocation in court, and petitioned the House of Representatives, which, strangely, decided the matter in its favour. The Obasanjo government subsequently restored Malabu’s rights in 2006, and the benefiting oil majors in turn resorted to international arbitration and the courts. To justify his questionable part in the deal, the Minister of Justice claimed that the Federal Government acted as an ‘obligor’ to resolve the dispute in 2011, for which Malabu received the sum of $1,092,040,000, for the same oil block that the company made a paltry down payment of $2 million in 1995. Mr. Adoke, however, did not tell Nigerians what happened to the huge rip-off, paid by the oil companies to Malabu; a sum that ordinarily would have been paid directly to Nigeria’s coffers, instead of a self-serving, personal company of Mr. Etete.

    According to Mr. Etete in his defence before the French court, what he received was what he called ‘sponsors fee’, stating boldly that it was a common practice in the petroleum sector. He stated in 2002 that what happened under him had been happening before, and was still happening in the industry. To our common shame, the French court found him culpable and punished him for money laundering. His claim that corrupt inducement is a common practice in the industry has been confirmed as recently as in 2011, under the watch of President Jonathan; with the deal that his Attorney-General helped Mr. Etete to perfect. According to the findings of several foreign agencies, various companies subsequently shared the loot paid to Mr. Etete.

    One of the alleged beneficiary companies belonged to one Abubakar Aliyu, who is closely associated with Mr. Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, former President Musa Yar’Adua and President Jonathan. Other companies which had no working relationship with Malabu also received large chunks of the money paid by Shell and ENI to Malabu. To justify these payments, Mr. Etete claimed that: ‘Malabu shareholders decided to spend their money the way they deemed fit’. He claims he only got $250 million from the deal. On his part, the Attorney-General, in defence said: “from the foregoing, the role played by the Federal Government, its agencies and officials in relation to Block 245 was essentially that of facilitator of the resolution of a long-standing dispute over the ownership and right to operate Block 245.”

    Interestingly, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), before it decided to stay clear of the trail of the Malabu filthy lucre had reported: ‘Investigations conducted so far reveal a cloudy scene associated with fraudulent dealings. A prima facie case of conspiracy, breach of trust, theft and money laundering can be established against some real and artificial persons.” Yet, the anti-corruption agency opted not to pursue the money to its ultimate destination, despite its finding that crimes have been committed against the state.

    It is also worrisome that the previous House of Representatives could urge the Federal Government to restore the ownership of Malabu over Block 245, when it conducted its investigation, despite the glaring criminality. The greatest tragedy, however, is the possibility that a minister could award such a humongous national resource to himself.

    All said, however, there is the need to bring the culprits to justice.

  • So long, Rolling Dollar

    So long, Rolling Dollar

    After vicissitudes of life that ended on a happy note, Fatai Olagunju passes on

    As he lay dying in a Lagos hospital, with flashes of his chequered life and musical career coming and going before his eyes, Fatai Olagunju, known as Fatai Rolling Dollar probably sensed that the show was over for him. Three days before his death on June 12, his daughter, Mrs Adejumoke Badmus, reportedly said, “He kept saying it was time for him to go but he wouldn’t say where he was going to.”

    Succumbing to lung cancer, his final departure at age 86 marked the close of a life that was as eventful as it was full of lessons. He survived a touching wilderness period that lasted almost three decades to reclaim his creative talent and reach a height that surpassed even the relative success and fame of his early years as a musician. “I stopped for 28 years,” he said in an interview, recounting a turbulent interval that saw him working as a security guard and church guitarist, among other forced jobs that he took up in desperation.

    By a fascinating fate, the electrifying stardom of his latter years rested principally on a song he had released before he fell on bad times. He was in his mid-seventies when, in 2003, with the support of appreciative promoters, his Highlife hit song seized the airwaves and thrilled music lovers far and wide.   Won Kere Si Number Wa, a bouncy melody with a ring of taunting hubris, relaunched his comatose career and thrust him in the spotlight after years in limbo.  Indeed, his terminal illness first manifested during his well publicised tour of some prominent cities in the United States, namely, New York, Maryland, New Jersey and Texas. He could do no more after performances in the first two cities, and had to return to Nigeria.

    Possibly the most instructive statement projected by his story is the truth that success can come to a person at any stage of life. Of course, the converse is equally true as evident from his past failures. His miraculous musical renaissance was sweetened by another significant miracle when the then governor of Lagos State, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, came to his rescue as he faced eviction from his rented residence. Tinubu surprised him with the gift of a flat at Oko-Oba, Agege, Lagos; it was the icing on the cake for the guitar-playing lyrical maestro.  For a performing artist who was active for about 15 years from his beginning in 1953, inspiring and mentoring a number of talents that grew into big names in the country’s musical circle before his troubles, it was rather puzzling that he had to wait for so long for turning-point assistance, which in the end even came from outside the sphere. “Asiwaju Tinubu changed the end of my life for better,” he told an interviewer.

    What about his well known bohemianism and freewheeling life style? No doubt, there are also important lessons to be drawn from those aspects of his personality.  Sadly, outside his musical acclaim, many did not consider him a positive role model when it came to drinking, smoking and womanising. It is food for thought that he continued to father children well into his advanced years. However, his publicised vices, even though disappointing, can be seen in the context of the moral challenges that come with earthly life.

    In an enlightening reflection on the course of his life, he didactically attributed his eventual accomplishment to three things: patience, perseverance and prayer. It is noteworthy that this formula, indeed,   worked wonders for him. There was an undeniable inspirational quality to his life that was not only valuable within the scope of music but was also relevant in every sphere of existence. After a colossal collapse, he providentially got a second chance that made the past inconsequential. The sheer magnetism of his tale will remain irresistible and give hope in the midst of despair.

  • Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji

    Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji

    A woman of substance departs at 96

    Few women dominated the public consciousness like the late Alhaja Abibatu Asabi Mogaji,  Iya Oloja of Lagos, President-General, Association of Nigerian Market Women and Men, and mother of former Lagos State governor, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, did for the better part of five decades. As one of the most significant figures in trade and business, her influence on the well-being of the citizenry, especially in Lagos and south-west Nigeria, was profound.

    Born on October 16, 1916, Alhaja Mogaji first came to public prominence as the vocal leader of the powerful market-women’s association in Lagos State. It was in this role that she demonstrated the outspokenness and media savvy that was to endear her to the populace. She did a great deal to change popular perceptions of market-women as exploitative and ignorant by enunciating the challenges and hopes of her constituency with a clarity that was remarkable for the time and even now.

    One of her first successes was the way in which she contributed to ensuring that the lucrative retail trade in Lagos Island, hitherto dominated by Greek and Lebanese merchants, came into Nigerian hands. This she did through the effective mobilisation of indigenous traders and her ability to convince them of the need to ensure that they were not discriminated against in their own country.

    When other issues like high prices, the scarcity of goods, street-trading and struggles for positions arose, the efficacy with which she helped arrive at workable solutions made her indispensable to successive administrations in the state. Working with them, she oversaw a tremendous expansion in the size, quality and sophistication of markets in Lagos. As environmental sanitation became increasingly important, she ensured that traders were properly enlightened on their role in ensuring that the state was kept clean, peaceful and prosperous.

    Alhaja Mogaji’s honesty of purpose and good sense were also put to fruitful use in mitigating the worst excesses of military rule. She developed a good working relationship with General Ibrahim Babangida when he was in office, and was famous for the lack of obsequiousness which she displayed in her public interactions with him. Where more intellectually-sophisticated arguments failed to influence him, it was Alhaja Mogaji’s homely words of wisdom which often swayed the then Head of State.

    In an era when ethical flexibility was the order of the day, Alhaja Mogaji stood out in the bluntness with which she spoke out on public issues. She did not claim to be a politician or a technocrat, and indeed neither sought nor wanted public office, but she always strove to emphasise the distinction between good and bad policies, and did so with a forcefulness that made many people sit up and take notice.

    It is heart-warming that Asiwaju Tinubu represents a worthy continuation of the ideals that distinguished the life of Alhaja Mogaji. He displays the same grassroots instincts, the same populist ethos, and the same forcefulness of speech and personality that characterised his mother. There can be little doubt that if more citizens demonstrated similar traits of public-spiritedness and social concern, the country would be a better place.

    As the nation mourns the passing of Alhaja Mogaji on June 15, it is to be hoped that her qualities of consistency, commitment and honesty percolate more deeply into national life. Her lifelong activism on behalf of those who did business in markets was a model of self-sacrifice that the nation’s politicians in particular would do well to imitate. She did not allow anything to stand in the way of speaking truth to power, nor did she allow her acquaintance with the rich and powerful to cut her off from her roots.

    May her soul rest in perfect peace.