The Nation Newspaper

Category: Mobolaji Sanusi

  • Will APC be PDP’s nemesis?

    The late John F. Kennedy, 35th president of world’s most powerful country – the United States of America – in one of his widely reported statements, once said: ‘Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.’ This quote aptly captures the mood in the polity as more previously doubting Nigerians are now struggling to identify with the All Progressives Congress (APC), the newest political party in the nation’s political firmament. The party was formally registered two days ago by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The road leading to the eventual registration of the APC was littered with doubts arising from the ruthless antecedent of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) to always circumvent seeming new viable democratic initiative. The path was strewn in prickles aimed at stagnating the progressives’ efforts of ensuring the birth of a formidable political party to wrest power from obviously bungling PDP.

    Personally, l doff my hat for those progressive leaders of APC for their selfless pursuit of their party’s registration to a fruitful end: They sacrificed their self-interests and endured personal discomforts. When it looked as if the set goal of registration was impossible; when their political hecklers were already jubilating that they had reached a dead end, they remained unrelenting. They must have strategised day and night to lay the unassailable foundation, through APC, for the imminent dethronement of PDP’s impunity in the governance of this country. Now that the APC has been registered, it is pertinent to ask whether the new party is ready to restore confidence of the people in their government if it wins the presidency in 2015. Or will the APC be another rabble-rouser in power like the current ruling party?

    From this moment, all eyes will be on APC. And what the new party’s detractors might be saying do not count; what really matters is what the party does rightly to rescue the nation from the siege of PDP before the next general elections. Mr. Kofi Annan, former United Nations (UN) Secretary-General once observed that “good governance is perhaps the single most important factor in eradicating poverty and promoting development.” What Nigeria lacks for several years of democratic rule is good governance. The PDP in barely over 14 years has shamefully succeeded in enthroning graft and visionless leadership on the nation. And Nigerians are waiting in the wings to see whether APC would deliver on this if given the opportunity to govern so that poverty and retarded development could be banished from the country.

    The attainment of this lofty goal cannot be by mere rhetorics. The new party with its array of tested and accomplished political leaders must earnestly unveil its manifesto to the Nigerian public. Nigerians desire a manifesto with rigour/empiricism: A manifesto that has intrinsic and extrinsic correlations with people’s basic needs over time. Nigerians want good roads; they want affordable education; functional and effective healthcare system that is currently a charade under this PDP led administration. Nigerians want inexpensive and safe housing; they want gainful employment and a country that is safe for all to live in.

    The people of this country want to see a well developed agricultural sector that could guarantee a situation where food items would be the cheapest things after inhaled air. With the deplorable state of federal roads across the country, it has become clear that the lives of Nigerians plying those roads mean very little to the government at the centre. For instance, the Lagos/Ibadan Express road remains a death trap since 14 wasteful years of PDP tyranny over the nation. The healthcare system, as typified by the debilitating state of most federal hospitals, is in shambles. A visit to the National hospital, Abuja would give credence to this reality.

    This PDP government seems confused over the state of insecurity in the nation. Also, the administration of the ruling party has embarked on more actions that would increase unemployment rate than those that could promote employment generation. The pursuits of selfish political ambitions by members of the ruling party have relegated general public interests to the background. The touted mileage in agriculture has remained a paper thing with no direct impact on the production and prices of agricultural produce.

    The Nigerian public has increasingly become weary of sustained on-going trend of ineptitude in the running of the country’s affairs. They desire long over-due change of political baton from the on-going inglorious routine of misrule and systemic corruption. That is why yours sincerely thinks that with proper planning; a vision driven by a mission and resolve to think less of selves by the leadership of the APC, the days of PDP in power might just not exceed 2015.

    What the country needs most at this crucial period is a party that could inspire the country to do what she is capable to be what she could be. A party that would throw up principled leaders of courage to occupy salient positions; let us have a party that is not only about techniques but also above average in traits of character and public spirited restraints. So far in the south-west, the laudable governance skills of Governor of example, Babatunde Raji Fashola, is a pointer of what to expect in APC. The other governors in the southwest including the focussed and principled Abiola Ajimobi in Oyo state; the astute precursor of renowned ‘Opon-Imo’ and high performer, Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola of Osun State among others, are not doing badly in their various jurisdictions. Their performances have set the template and teasers of what to expect from the newly registered APC.

    Is APC the long awaited party that would checkmate the long excruciating run of PDP in power? There is no doubt that public expectations are very high on APC and it is believed that the party will not disappoint Nigerians. The indefatigable strategist leader of the APC and former governor of Lagos state, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, has assured that the formal registration of the party will usher in ‘an irreversible cause of positive change and people oriented development’ in the country. Indeed, the new dawn is perhaps around the corner.

  • Yesterday in today’s Nigeria

    Yesterday in today’s Nigeria

    ‘Those who refuse to be guided by the radar of history shall eventually be thrown out by the rocks.’’ ——Winston Churchill.

    Nigeria’s yesterday is haunting her today. The radar of history, apologies to Winston Churchill, is no longer her guide. Events of today are nothing but a re-enactment of the sordid experiences of yesteryears. The failures of the past still pervade the seats of power. The children and youths of Nigeria’s independence are the architect of her misfortunes. The youths of her early independence days are still the domineering forces in today’s polity- and without commensurate intensification in wisdom and virtues. For this, Nigeria, the rhetorical giant of Africa is nearly going berserk. And the pregnancies of her independence and subsequent births are the victims.

    Nigeria’s current leaders are making ‘gods’ out of former times’ leadership failures. At the current pace, they might succeed in making errant leaders of the past our collective nemesis. What a pay-back time because these past aberrant leaders nurtured the emergence of most of the current leadership. Just last weekend, four northern governors reportedly held close-door meeting with ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo at his Hill-Top residence in Abeokuta, Ogun state capital. The same type of meeting was also subsequently held in Minna, Niger state capital with ex-dictator, Ibrahim Babangida and co-traveller in military incursions in power, General Abdul-Salami Abubakar. Possibly, those northern governors would have discussed the state of the nation, especially in their summation, the theatre of absurd unfurling in Rivers state House of Assembly. What nonsense!

    Besides his voluntary relinquish of power in 1979, Obasanjo has never been a model in leadership studies. As if he regretted his voluntary handover of power as a military ruler, his second coming as a civilian president was marred with his forceful pursuit but eventually aborted Third Term ambition that crashed in the face of his shameful ego. The erstwhile president might even be called a liar because he publicly denied ever nursing that agenda because according to him there was never anything he asked from God that He never did for him. That further exposed his lie for even a dunce knew at that period that he was mendacious. His open-secret desire to rule the nation till eternity was at the time apparent for all to see. The rest is history! Obasanjo as civilian president inflicted as successor, an ailing Umaru YarÁdua on the nation and appointed a seeming apathetical Goodluck Jonathan as his running mate. What Jonathan is unleashing on Rivers state at the moment is a product of what he learnt from Obasanjo, his god-father. It is now laughable to see these northern governors consult Obasanjo on the misnomer of political rigmarole going on in the nation as we approach 2015.

    What about Babangida who, through the insane annulment of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election won by MKO Abiola, destroyed the future of genuine democracy in the country? Babangida’s regime devalued the naira, introduced abracadabra economy, and prosecuted the most treacherous transition ever which led to his departure from power unceremoniously- with the polity left behind already in total quandary. He was instrumental to the second foisting on Nigerians of Obasanjo as president in 1999. Obasanjo and Babangida with their notorious antecedents in power circles of the country are both symbols of pervasion of ideals, of meaningful aspirations and lofty national dreams. Abdul-Salami Abubakar, in the brief period he spent as Head of State, merely brought to fruition the devilish plot of ensuring that Obasanjo emerged as civilian president in May, 1999. If the acceptable definition of patriots can be viewed from the myopic prisms of these three men masquerading as genuine statesmen, then the nation is far from getting things aright.

    The trio are nothing but a true representation of everything bad in the nation’s yesteryear. They typify a period of ignominious decades of military rule; a period when the pump price of petrol was arbitrarily increased; a period where the freest and fairest election was criminally annulled while its winner was ‘murdered’ in a grand international conspiracy; a period where the freedom of the people and that of the press was encumbered; a period when rigging was elevated to a national policy; an epoch when to show dissenting voice was an invitation to exile; a period where lives of credible Nigerians were wasted; a period where the value of our once powerful Naira witnessed unabated depreciation; Indeed, yesterday as typified by the trio represents a period of political anarchy, economic stagnation and social upheaval. How can they now be good advisers in a democracy they deliberately master-minded its injurious foundation?

    What the nation is seeing today in the form of political lawlessness and unprincipled governance are products of the deliberate mistakes of these trio and it is worse that their current protégés in power around the north and even in the south still erroneously see them as repositories of panaceas to their unravelling machinations. The trio sowed the seeds of democratic upheavals, social insecurity with incessant unrealistic official pronouncements regarding the arrest of such avoidable situation. Their eras began the trend whereby governments think more of selfish political interests than the general wellbeing of the nation that is currently under harsh realities. They and even the current leadership of the country forget the aphorism of that great economist, Adam Smith, in his book: ‘The Wealth of Nations’ when he affirmed. ‘No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable.’ That is the yesterday which Obasanjo and the duo of Babangida and Abdul-salami foisted on and still forcing on the nation through their meddling in goings-on around the country.

    Nigeria needs to shed the toga of yesterday’s inimical features from her polity if meaningful progress is seriously desired. A situation where discredited leaders of yesterday remain the precursors of today’s agenda setting leaves nothing to be desired. The beginning of this democracy on May 29, 1999 was described by revered Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka as a day of ‘patriotic compromise’. That nationalistic compromise would have been wasted if these past leaders with ignoble regimes are allowed to further engulf the polity with more ruling vices and visionlessness. Already, it is beginning to look as if the country had learnt nothing from our recent history.

  • Justice without humanity

    Justice without humanity

    ‘Justice must be rooted in confidence and confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking: The judge is biased’ – Lord Denning (MR) in: Metropolitan Properties Co. Ltd v. Lennon (1969) QB557@559,

    The above inimitable quote of immortal Lord Denning (MR) has been affirmed mostly on a number of occasions through inimical criminal court judgments to the detriment of the society and the entire legal system. This aspect of law, in mostly unforgivable manner, had made mincemeat of this legal juggernaut’s statement. This, no doubt, is creating in the court of public opinion, a difficult comprehension of the cobweb called law – albeit criminal law.

    In this area of law, any slight oversight on the part of the prosecution to convincingly prove an element in his case is taken to the advantage of the accused. The prosecution in a criminal case over the ages is expected to prove his case beyond every reasonable doubt. Failure to achieve this aim has led in many glaring criminal case instancesm to the exculpation of an accused standing arraignment. Yes, in criminal matters, nothing is sacrosanct until the court finally gives its judgment. And the judgment is determined by the rigour of investigation, the degree of evidence adduced and their deployment by an intelligently smart advocate (usually called a barrister) with good understanding of legal and criminal procedures.

    In other jurisdictions, for example in Britain, the paper work relating to first point of contact with the accused, seeking for and weighing of evidential value, preparation of relevant substantive laws among others, are done and prepared by a solicitor. The solicitor gets all the relevant information and evidence, including cases to be cited in a case file and merely handed such over to an advocate that goes before the court to argue the matter. This allows for compartmentalisation of duties and efficient quick pursuits of cases.

    It is still astonishing why a nation like ours that inherited the British common law system is not adopting this system almost 53 years after attaining independence. The legal trend in the country today remains the fusion of the jobs of both the Barrister and Solicitor. And the country’s legal system is the worse for it as typified by the last appellate court’s judgment discharging and acquitting Major Hamzat al-Mustapha, former CSO to despotic General Sani Abacha and Lateef Sofolahan, his spy ally for lack of proof of evidence.

    If the al-Mustapha’s case had been promptly dispensed with, about ten years ago, it is likely certain that the outcome of the judgment would have been different, despite the initial judicial filibustering of the defence counsels and at a later point the covert conspiratorial inclinations of some unseen powerful elements in government that compelled star witness, Barnabas Mshiela (a.k.a Sergeant Rogers) and others to recant their earlier confessional statements regarding the persons that sent them on the alleged journey to kill Kudirat Abiola. A solicitor investigating such matter would have exemplified more adroitness by being more professional in retrieving statements from Rogers and others in such a way that recanting on such would have been near impossibility at a later date.

    However, since the current legal fad is for police investigative police officer to probe a criminal matter, most criminal cases have suffered delays while most times, shoddy investigations are carried out and presented before the court to the detriment of the entire criminal justice system of the federation. The shoddy job done could not have been the problem of the justice ministry that merely acted on the file sent to it by the police. While acknowledging that the Nigeria Police has so many lawyers as Investigating Officers (IPOs), the fact still remains that the right attitude and good work environment are absolutely missing in the discharge of such an important and fundamental function.

    The country’s legal henchmen and women must adopt a reform that would separate the currently fused jobs of a barrister and solicitor and perhaps allow the latter to do more of theoretical and investigative jobs to aid the broadening of the frontiers of criminal law practice, while the barristers handle the advocacy aspect as is being done in Britain and other countries. Apart from allowing graduates of law to be gainfully employed, it will also avail those of us that have gone to the Law School the option of institutional specialisation. One thing is also certain: a solicitor involved in investigating a criminal case will be more justice-conscious than an IPO that is not only under-paid but grossly ill-trained and hungry to pay due attention to societal interests.

    Though very painful, the Court of Appeal cannot be entirely blamed for exonerating al-Mustapha and Sofolahan for lack of evidence in the humble view of the learned three female justices of the court that heard the appeal. Whatever evidence exists outside the court in a criminal matter must surely be brought and proved before it; otherwise, the matter will be thrown out. In this case, the recant by Rogers did a fatal blow. However, the judgment will forever continue to generate intense debate and acrimony in the polity for as long as the injustice of annulling the June12, 1993 Presidential Election remains un-redressed and the question regarding who killed Kudirat Abiola not answered by the Nigerian system. The matter will continue to further blow ill-will in victims of that inhuman regime, their families and other Nigerians with conscience and good sense of history.

    The al-Mustapha/Sofolahan appellate court acquittal judgment might be legally defensible; but like the Stanford, Florida’s United States’ court murder case judgment of Trayvon Martin by George Zimmerman, it has eroded public’s confidence in the judicial system having left majority of right thinking men to think, as observed by Lord Denning (MR) that the appellate court justices are biased. Another name for this kind of scenarios is justice without humanity – courtesy of the temple of justice.

    Madiba at 95

    Nelson Mandela, the gift of God to Africa and humanity was 95 yesterday. In contemporary epoch, it is doubtful whether there has been universal consensus over the greatness of any living creature. But on Mandela, the world in unison proclaimed him a ‘saint before man and God.’

    He has been an inspiration to billions of people around the world: A model and champion of good governance, especially in a continent riddled with tyrants and leaders with infinitesimal regard for democracy. Here is my unflinching goodwill wish for this man of global reverence at 95.

  • When a revolution becomes bastardised

    When a revolution becomes bastardised

    ‘Revolution means democracy in today’s world, not the enslavement of peoples to the corrupt and degrading horrors of totalitarianism.’—President Ronald Reagan

    Revolution means democracy in today’s world, not the enslavement of Since Egypt’s military coup of last week that witnessed the summary sack of democratically elected President Mohammed Morsi from power; barrages of condemnations have trailed that incident that is nothing but a military usurpation of power. That occurrence, now euphemistically referred to as a ‘revolution’ was a consequence of the alienation of several Egyptians by Morsi’s Islamic Brotherhood led government. The people of Egypt are now being compelled to celebrate what history has proved to be their country’s meretricious military leadership.

    Yours sincerely in this column took a swipe at incorrigible Egypt, bemoaning in the process, the fact that that Arab country had become the newest casualty in the field of globally loathed military adventure in political power. Most of my readers sent abusive text messages asking why l was weeping louder than the ‘bereaved’ Egyptians that protested and gleefully demonstrated against the reign of Morsi. Some tagged the putsch as a revolution that Egypt really needs at this point in her history.

    They seem to have forgotten that the first military coup in Africa, master-minded by late Gamal Abdel Nasser happened on July 23, 1952. That coup that could not achieve anything for Egypt was erroneously tagged the ‘ revolution of July 23rd.’ But sixty-one years after, it is sad to note that Egyptians still rely on the same military to rescue their country from their own avoidable tyranny when the entire world is drastically moving away from such infamous interventions.

    Like yours sincerely observed last week, military coup has become the nemesis of most countries and people that had the misfortunes of witnessing it. It becomes worse whenever it emerges as a false revolution akin to what is currently happening in Egypt today. Let me, at this juncture; ask what distinguishes a revolution from a coup?

    The word revolution, put more concisely, means an elemental change of power occurring within a somewhat pithy period. The human history is replete with revolutions varying only in terms of motivating ideology, modus and time-span. It could be described as the ultimate social leap emanating from condensed mass sullenness and rage of the subjugated in a society which usually ruptures into a mass movement meant to overturn existing social order and replace such with a new epoch.

    It has been historically proven that a few days of revolutionary upheavals could dismantle brusque rulers and systems that hitherto seem unconquerable and immovable. The impact of the word revolution could possibly be felt as far back as the 15th century when the coinage “The Glorious Revolution” was famously used to describe the removal of King James II of England: “The French Revolution” for the overthrow of the French Monarchy and “The American Revolution,” for the winning of America’s independence from Britain.

    Unlike a military coup, a revolution is not an aberration which is why most informed men still lustfully relish some revolutions around the world including the American revolution of 1776-87, French revolution of 1789-94, the US Civil War of 1861-65 and the European revolutions of 1848. Also being talked about till today is the Russian revolutions of 1905 and 1917, the German revolution of 1918-23 and that of China that occurred from 1925-27 among others.

    The positive transformations that happened in these countries have led to increased clamour for more revolutions believed to be capable of truly liberating the oppressed people in tyrannised societies across the globe. The revolutionary clamour by the aggrieved class in the society who are colossally poor and officially trampled upon with impunity is what some people are misconstruing to be calls for military intervention. This is a gross misconception of what revolution stands for and also a sharp contrast to what a coup means.

    A coup d’état, also known as a putsch, is an illegal and furtive deposition, usually by the military, of a legitimate government. It is considered successful when the usurpers establish their forceful dominance. Thus the emergence of the new phenomenon described as “democratic coup d’état” by so called military usurpers that purportedly respond to popular uprising by toppling perceived unpopular civilian regimes for doubtful purposes of holding free and fair elections for civilian leaders is anachronistic.

    What happened in Egypt is unfortunate and should not be a yardstick for encouraging military interventions in power around the continent. The Egypt’s case is particularly sad because when the once marginalised Islamic Brotherhood under disgraced Hosni Mubarak’s system, through Morsi, finally had a chance to rule, they blew it forgetting that they were elected into power on a slim majority. It is equally regrettable that Morsi and his brotherhood family in government forgot the essence of national unity and reconciliation that should have been paramount on their now ousted regime’s agenda.

    Morsi naively sequestered power for his Brotherhood family members and refused to share it with any group, not even with other Islamist groups in that country. Despite these obvious pitfalls, the removal of Morsi from power should have been better handled through constitutional means such as impeachment and others- not through military intervention.

    How can one be sure that the current interim prime minister who is a protégé of the Western powers and new interim president, a former Chief Justice of a constitutional court that is disparagingly presiding over a country without constitution and their bravado displaying military cohorts will not further plunge Egypt into deeper totalitarianism and economic ruin? Egypt needs reforms to fix her decrepit and corrupt institutions that Morsi glossed over contrary to the key demands of the January 2011 revolution in Tahirr Square.

    The countries in Africa do not need a coup which overtime merely creates new gluttonous bureaucratic and power elites without necessarily fixing systemic rots and the prevalent endemic corruption. Military usurpers mask their malevolent and egotistic intents by portraying their usurping actions as a temporary and unfortunate necessity. They promised heaven and earth but ended up disappointing the people in the end. In Africa and particularly Nigeria, virtually all military governments came into power forcefully under people’s ululation but quit the stage infamously.

    This must have informed the experience and observation of that great Nigerian nationalist, Papa Obafemi Awolowo(1909-1987), when he said: ‘Democracy is in my humble view the best form of government and the rule of law, man’s triumph against arbitrary use of power.’ What this means is that the military only understands dishing out orders that are antithetical to democracy and the rule of law. Most societies have encountered disappointments under military dictatorships. Whatever the condition, let us all have faith in periodic elections during which inept and corrupt leaders can be voted out of power.

    What Africa needs is genuine electoral reforms that could engender electoral revolution that is capable of compelling civilian leaders to govern well- not the military induced civilian leadership being encountered presently in Egypt.

  • Egypt as incorrigible scapegoat

    Egypt as incorrigible scapegoat

    “For the sake of Egypt and for historical accuracy, let’s call what is happening by its real name: Military coup,” —— Essam al-Haddad (President Mohammed Morsi’s foreign policy adviser on his Face book page.)

    Just some few days ago, Egyptians witnessed a new political reality when their military overthrew the country’s first democratically elected president whose government was only a year in office. President Mohammed Morsi’s government was a consequence of a 2011 Arab Spring uprising in Tahrir Square that upstaged the dictatorship of embattled and ailing Hosni Mubarak. Tahrir Square is the epicentre of the globally famous 2011 uprising.

    As customary in every coup d’état situation, the new military hegemony suspended the constitution while the head of the constitutional court has been sworn-in as interim president to lead a ‘temporary civilian government’ sequel to a new transition to electoral democracy. The absurdity of the entire process in Egypt is how to reconcile a scenario where a country with a suspended constitution will be led by Adly Mansour, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court. This is another military concocted aberration that manifested some days after President Barack Obama left the African soil after an official visit to some countries in the continent. The question: Can an army-installed administration lead to real democracy?

    What the military has done in Egypt is synonymous with what the military in Nigeria were used to doing in their aberrant hey days in government. The Babangida administration at the twilight of its reign came up with a contraption called Interim National Government(ING) that was headed by a Babangida hand-picked person and that man was mischievously surrounded by inordinately ambitious military generals that included late General Sani Abacha. This scenario is the type that is unfurling in Egypt today and its unpalatable consequence awaits Egypt in her new found system that in political parlance is designated diarchy. This abracadabra is being done at the expense of genuine democracy. How forgetful are Egyptians with an ambitious military that were in-charge when Hosni Mubarak was removed but could not do anything meaningful with power until global outcry compelled them to conduct an election in which Morsi was democratically elected as president by the people.

    Whether in Egypt, Senegal or Nigeria, the military institution is the same. They are always very greedy and tenacious when it comes to the issue of power. Yet, our people in the African continent have refused to learn from history as they erroneously see their interventions in power from the messianic prisms. And in tandem with people’s regrettable reactions during such periods, jubilant opposition in their millions celebrated the latest Egypt’s putsch with fireworks at Cairo’s Tahrir Square, where men and women reportedly danced with shouts of “God is great” and “Long live Egypt” renting the air. Nigerians once toed this path. However, while this was going on, President Morsi’s Islamist supporters equally embarked on rallies in support of their ousted leader said to be under house arrest at a Presidential Guard facility. These noticeable divisive power blocs may for a long time mar the peace of Egypt.

    Quite typical of the tyrannical military during such misplaced interventions, the Egyptian army took control of state media and sealed up Television stations operated by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood TV station and Islamist TV networks forcefully went blank. Security forces also stormed the studio of Al-Jazeera Misr Mubasher and detained the staffers there. This is just a tip of an unpleasant appetiser that further clampdown of the media is imminent.

    Yours sincerely agrees that Egyptians have a right to despise a situation where rather than squarely tackle their country’s economic woes, Morsi was reportedly busy concentrating power in the hands of his Muslim Brotherhood and others. But is military coup that has bastardised the polity of virtually all African countries the solution? Is it not apt to ask whether there was an external influence that goaded the military to upstage Morsi? The question becomes pertinent especially when president Barrack Obama of the United States (the US being Egypt’s military’s greatest ally since the 1979 Israeli-Egypt peace accords) visited the African continent? What an ironical coincidence! Why then is it so difficult for the US government to call a spade by its original name by publicly acknowledging that what happened in Egypt was nothing but a coup d’etate against the electorate of that Arab country.

    The hypocrisy of the US clamour for global democracy would become glaring if it could not muster the desired courage that is necessary for her to suspend the huge yearly foreign aid of $1.3 billion in military and $250million in economic assistance to Egypt as a form of sanction. Afterall, the US law permits the country to give aid to nations that are democratically governed-not one administered by military coupists and few hand-picked collaborative civilians such as Mohammed El-Baradei, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate and the former head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency; Sheik Ahmed el-Tayeb, a top Muslim cleric, Mahmoud Badr, one of two representatives of Tamarod, that youthful group that organised the current uprising and Coptic Pope Tawadros II, as well as opposition activists and some members of the ultraconservative Salafi movements.

    The precedent had been set by the US in this regard. When Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was ousted in June 2009, Washington temporarily suspended aid, but did not cut about $30 million in assistance for that country until more than two months later. In April 2012, the United States suspended at least $13 million of its $140 million in annual aid to Mali following a coup in the West African nation. That of Egypt should not be different until Morsi returns to power to complete his term in that Arab country.

    What is unfolding in Egypt today is the beginning of a chain of events, the end of which no one can predict. The world should keep tab on that country’s Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Abdel-Fattah El-Sissi that announced the coup to see whether indeed he or one of his close military allies would not forcefully transmute into a civilian president. The way he dished out ultimatum of 48 hours to defiant 62-year-old Morsi to relinquish the legitimate mandate given him by 51.7 percent of Egyptians in June 2012 was despicable. It is sad that a democratically elected government, against the provisions of the constitution, can be removed via military ultimatum. This is a sad commentary in not only Egypt but Africa’s political history.

    Military men that remove elected officials of government are nothing but coupists, and contrary to El-Sissi’s conjured postulations, can not be truly acting on the will of the people to clear the way for a new leadership in Egypt or in any other country. What manner of leadership can a military leadership give birth to? The sad Nigerian military example is a classical lesson that incorrigible Egypt is not ready to learn from.

  • UK’s cash-bond: The world is watching

    ‘Discrimination is a disease.’

    ———Roger Staubach

    In this contemporary period, there is no rationale that can sufficiently justify a discriminatory policy. A bigoted action plan will largely be perceived by the public as excessive – something to be sentenced to the gaol of people’s resentment. No wonder, that famous American footballer, Roger Staubach, in utmost exasperation of the society he lives in, described discrimination as a disease-and I add-that must not be allowed to become contagious.

    That is why the bug of discrimination that seems to be creeping into Britain’s diplomatic policy against some developing countries including Nigeria, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Ghana, Pakistan and India must be condemned before other countries such as the United States, Germany and France among others catch the costly bug. Britain wants first time visitors to her territory from “high risk” countries that are vulnerable to immigration and systemic abuses to commence payment of £3,000 visa bond from November when the pilot scheme was to start before Prime Minister David Cameron reportedly halted the controversial plan.

    Theresa May, Britain’s Home Secretary, sees the policy as one that would cut immigration and systemic abuses. She puts it succinctly: “In the long run we’re interested in a system of bonds that deters overstaying and recovers costs if a foreign national has used our public services.” The affected countries were reportedly picked based on their high number of visa applications and what the British Government sees as relatively high levels of especially immigration infractions and fraud.

    It would be wrong for anyone to fault UK government’s valid concerns about people illegally overstaying in its country. For instance, Nigerians can go to any length to get a UK visa or visas of most developed countries of the world. Since the late eighties when the foundation of Nigeria’s economic problems became pronounced, most youths have taken delight in seeking greener pastures abroad, and at whatever cost. Most Nigerians, including parents can sell anything they own to send their wards abroad and if yours sincerely knows the character traits of fellow country men and women, then, this expensive bond will not be any serious impediment in their way to leave the country by any means. If Nigerians could pay an amount that is as high as N500, 000 bribe to get employed in government establishments, then they would sadly go extra mile to pay double to abscond from the nation.

    Unfortunately, it is only when they get abroad that they realised that pound sterling is not picked free on the streets of London nor dollar freely sprayed on the streets of New York. Over there, one would need to work hard, and getting a job to earn a pay is dependent on whether one is armed with requisite papers which majority of those that overstayed do not possess. This is one major reason that most of them take to crime.

    It is also true that most Nigerians and citizens of other affected countries claim undeserved benefits which have so far become burdensome on the British government. But what it ought to have done is not to take or contemplate recourse to expensive visa bond but to embark on conscious efforts to reinforce existing system of law to deal with such illegal immigrants. Does it mean that Britain can no longer secure her territory against illegal immigrants? The UK’s government should concentrate on how to weed out people staying in her domain illegally rather than on making that unpopular cash-bond against visitors from evolving countries around the world. It is important for Cameron’s government not to lose focus on how to apprehend those nationals that have so far overstayed their welcome in the UK. Some analysts may be quite correct to have argued that even if Britain is witnessing any form of cash crunch, the best approach would not be to vent her spleen on travellers desirous of visiting her jurisdiction.

    The yet to be finally approved bond at this period is not opportune. For as long as its payment remains selective against some countries, it will never be auspicious. This is importantly so at this crucial moment that most people from Third World countries are beginning to lose trust and confidence in Western countries’ genuine interest in their wellbeing: Yet, those nationals still troop there because of their insatiable search for the elusive greener pasture. For such discriminatory diplomatic policy to be foisted on people from developing parts of the world is to say the least, insensitive and contemptuous.

    But can we blame the British government for coming up with this policy? Absolutely no! Perhaps if successive leadership in the country had built a workable system and infrastructure, the nation would have been conducive for the citizenry to live in today. One can only imagine what was in the mind of Dr. Andrew Pocock, British High Commissioner to Nigeria when he had a meeting with Ambassador Olugbenga Ashiru, Nigeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs over the contentious policy. Pocock must have been innately laughing at the argument and subtle threat of a minister whose country cannot provide for her citizens unlike what obtains in Britain. Yes, the doctrine of reciprocity is allowed in international law but even if this cash-for-visa policy stands and Nigeria applies the same measure, how many British citizens will be willing to part with such exorbitant bond just to visit Nigeria? The truth is that any visiting Briton to the African continent will prefer other better organised countries in the continent to Nigeria that overtime has been befuddled by challenges of insecurity and unbelievably high graduate unemployment not to talk of unstable power supply and ravaging poverty that are becoming more pronounced under President Goodluck Jonathan.

    Certainly, this UK’s cash-bond-for-visa policy, though temporarily in abeyance, is not well thought out even when nobody can fault a sovereign country’s free will to toe a particular direction considered to be in her own interest. The decision or the thought of it is extremely bad public diplomacy for the UK. Perhaps, the way the bid by South-African government to slam deportation fees of N100, 000 on Nigerians was stopped should be the way this cash bond must be fought. Cameron should think twice before signing off details of this policy if at all he has to do that. This policy is a disease that should not be allowed to spread.

  • Why Asiwaju must take heart?

    Why Asiwaju must take heart?

    A mother is the truest friend we have, when trials heavy and sudden fall upon us; when adversity takes the place of prosperity; when friends desert us; when trouble thickens around us, still will she cling to us, and endeavour by her kind precepts and counsels to dissipate the clouds of darkness, and cause peace to return to our hearts – Washington Irving

    Lagos State, the ever-boisterous former capital of the federation – and till now, the commercial nerve centre of the country – has been playing host to men and women of power and more importantly, those with unquestionable high status in the society. They came not on business trips or relaxation as most of them usually do in their expensive edifices in choice locations, since Lagos is home to many Nigerians, irrespective of their tribal/ethnic affiliations.

    They came with soft pillows of sympathy and ample condolences upon the death of Alhaja Abibatu Asabi Mogaji, the quintessential President-General, Association of Nigerian Market Women and Men, who died last weekend at age 96. Mama is the mother of that inspiring man that is universally recognised beyond the shores of Nigeria and Africa as Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Her death has brought top government officials from across the Niger and partisan political divides together. This, indeed, is something that is rare in this part of the world.

    Yes, the departed President-General of Nigerian market men and women lived a good life and left legacies worthy of future leadership studies across the nation’s citadel of learning. It is equally incontrovertible that Alhaja was, during her life-time, a revered businesswoman cum activist and a revered market leader/organiser since the 1960s under General Aguiyi Ironsi’s tenure as Head of State as corroborated by the current Sultan of Sokoto. She was a philanthropist of immense aptitude. This could be gleaned from the continued outpour of profuse panegyrics heaped on her by individuals and institutions whose paths crossed hers. Members of especially her constituency – the market women and men – will forever remember her for protecting and giving utmost priority to their causes while she lived.

    In the pantheon of great women in Nigeria and Africa in general, Alhaja has a reserved place. Nigeria’s history is replete with that of great women of valour who ignored opulence at their beck and call, and chose to be on the side of the people. Madam Tinubu, a stupendously rich but courageous Lagos business woman deployed her resources to fund good causes against British imperialists, leading to her being banished to Abeokuta, where she emerged as the ancient city’s first Iyalode of Egbaland. In appreciation of her invaluable imprints, Tinubu Square on Lagos Island was named after her. Moremi Ajasoro, a pre-colonial Yoruba great woman will forever remain indelible in the annals of great women. Reason: She rescued Ile-Ife from rampaging invaders.

    Another equally brave woman is Queen Amina of Zaria, known for her military exploits despite her blue blood, being a queen of Zaria. She is fondly remembered for building the famous fortress walls of Zaria which still stand today. The nation cannot easily forget Mrs Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti, a women’s rights activist who led several protests against oppressive female poll taxes in Ijebu that the British initiated in 1914. She was virulent against oppressive official acts as reflected in her widely reported February 1948 physical fight with a district officer. She was also the first Nigerian lady to drive a car. Margaret Ekpo was a frontline woman politician since the defunct NCNC days. She consistently advocated for increased participatory role for women in democratic dispensations. Queen Kambassa of Bonny, Omu Okwei of Osomari (Ossomala), Inpki of Igala and Duara of the Hausa were great women that acted as liberators of their people and domains from oppressive governance.

    In contemporary Nigerian times, women have broken the jinx of tradition by doing things hitherto reserved for men. Lady Kofo Ademola, in this regard, became the first Nigerian woman to receive a university degree from Oxford University. Grace Alele Williams also became the first Nigerian woman to obtain a doctorate degree and later became the first female Vice-Chancellor in the country. Professor Bolanle Awe, through her vast knowledge of history, has brought more recognition for the country. Fortunately too, Asiwaju’s mother, Mama Mogaji’s organisational prowess and exemplary nature, no doubt, account for why she remains the longest serving leader of market men and women in Nigeria’s history. She led the men creditably, too.

    The glorious lives of these other mentioned great Nigerian women and that of Mama Mogaji, though in the minority, in an African cum Nigerian cultural setting where women’s place is believed to be in the kitchen, is a classical ironical exception. More instinctively, Professor Ali Mazrui, the great intellectual, in his 1991 Guardian Newspaper lecture entitled, ‘The Black women and the problem of gender: Trials, Triumphs and Challenges,” corroborated the gloomy stratification of women to wit: “A woman can be at the centre without being empowered, a woman can be liberated without being either centred or empowered…. The strategy of redemption needs to go beyond liberation and beyond centering towards genuine power-sharing between the two halves of the Black world, male and female ….in real life, motherhood leaves the African women at the centre but not necessarily in power’’

    In contra-distinction to Mazrui’s position, most highly achieving women in contemporary times, despite the challenges of motherhood, are not just at the centre but also in power in whatever spheres they are operating from. Even in the past and now, most women that have found their ways to the top and do know their onions, have a psychological way of better influencing power, erroneously believed to be an exclusive preserve of men. Mama was not just at the centre of market governance in Nigeria, she was effectively in charge. This is, however, not to deny the fact that a vast majority of women, though educated, due to cultural prejudices, could still not get to the centre let alone get power. This has to change and that is the lesson from the life of Mama Mogaji, a mother in a million and the dear mother of Asiwaju Tinubu, former Lagos State governor and in contemporary times, a most influential politician ever produced by the Southwest and Nigeria after Obafemi Awolowo and MKO Abiola.

    How lucky can one be in life than to live a fulfilling life as a famous parent and leave behind, at old age, a positively famous and inspiring offspring like Asiwaju Tinubu? Mama must be smiling today. She lived a rewarding activist life and mentored countless beings. She was exceptionally privileged to have a son in Asiwaju Tinubu whose brain, brawn, achievements and awesome popularity have been acknowledged outside the shores of the country. Nigerians acknowledge Mama’s memorable life, but she is better celebrated in death today even by President Goodluck Jonathan and other foremost government functionaries that are not in the same political camp with Asiwaju Tinubu, her iconic son, whose indelible political imprints and influence across cannot be ignored by even his greatest political adversaries. This is enough consolation for Asiwaju Tinubu for how many children could boast a mother like Mama Mogaji and vice versa. May Almighty Allah continue to grant Asiwaju requisite wisdom, resources and good health to lead his political flock. Amen

  • Is Nigeria fair to MKO Abiola?

    Is Nigeria fair to MKO Abiola?

    In over 52 years of Nigeria’s sovereign existence, the only time the nation could boost of free and fair election was on June 12, 1993 when Nigerians came out to vote for Aare MKO Abiola as the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. And what was the outcome of that election? The then military ruler, Ibrahim Babangida, a despotic retired military general, with no conscience and for no rational reason annulled that election before he was later forced to step aside as from the high pedestal of a self styled military president on August 27, 1993.

    When the next military regime headed by the autocratic late Sani Abacha pushed aside the Interim National Government head, Ernest Sonekan, he tried to compellingly transmute into a democratic government until death knocked him off power. It was during the tenure of Abdul salami Abubakar that an international conspiracy orchestrated by the United States through the United Nations during a visit of its secretary-general wiped out Abiola from the surface of the earth. To those that murdered Abiola, that incident marked the end of the political logjam that rocked the country then. But they got it wrong for it marked the beginning of a festering sore that will continue to haunt, hound and cause insomnia to those that benefited from the selfless sacrifice of the symbol of that June 12 democratic struggle.

     Between 1999 and 2011 when the supposedly new dawn beckoned, the nation has had four democratic transitions spanning a period of over fourteen years. However, in over fourteen years of democracy and 20 years after the annulment of the June 12 presidential election, no president has ever deemed it fit to honour the immortal symbol of that struggle. Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, a kinsman of Abiola from Abeokuta spent eight years in power without ever deeming it fit to honour the man that sacrificed his life so that someone like Obasanjo can get to power. Even when the then national assembly

    raised a motion to name the Abuja stadium after MKO Abiola, the Balogun Owu led administration circumvented the move. Obasanjo behaved as if Abiola never existed even though he was the pioneer beneficiary of the toil of that symbol of democratic rule in the country. Late President Umaru YarÁdua also ignored the importance and significance of Abiola and the symbolism of June 12, 1993 election as watershed of democratic struggles in the nation.

    So far, President Goodluck Jonathan has not shown any keen interest or deep understanding of the significance of that annulled election date. This is further aggravated by his timidly unsuccessful naming of University of Lagos after Abiola. Any reasonable and studious student of history will recollect that Abiola’s election was not a regional or sectional thing. He won not only in Yoruba land where he hails from but also in the eastern, northern and other parts of the country. Abiola won in Kano, Imo and Oyo states among others; he also won in the military barracks, the primary constituency of the man that annulled the best and freest elections ever in the annals of this country just because the electorate saw him as a pan African man that genuinely had the interest of the common man at heart.

    Abiola used his wealth to cater for the common man and actually died in the battle to broaden the horizon of improving living conditions of the hoi polloi. During that election, religious, ethnic and tribal sentiments were jettisoned which was quite unheard of in the history of the land. Nigerians for once came together in unison to elect one good man, Bashorun MKO Abiola, as president of the federation. He was never sworn-in while agents of

    retrogression then and even successive administrations have carried on as if that important June 12 chapter never existed in the political history of our great country.

    What has MKO done to those holding the levers of power at the centre that they all in succession continue to behave as if that fine man never existed? Are previous and present occupants of the seat of power in Aso-Rock not aware that without the political selflessness of Abiola, there probably would not be today for them to enjoy? Why are the powerful men in Nigeria not hearkening to the popular voice of reason and wisdom demanding that Abiola

    should be post humously declared president of this country? What stops them from naming inauguration day across the federation as MKO Abiola Day? What is bad if they name the national assembly complex or even Aso-Rock as Abiola House?

     The truth of the matter is that nobody can obliterate the name of this great Nigerian from the political history book of the nation. Afterall, governments in the south west states at a time under the reactionary People’s Democratic Party (PDP) gave pretentious acknowledgement to the importance of Abiola. In his home state of Ogun, he had a polytechnic and a stadium named after him. In Lagos and perhaps other south west states, monuments have been named after him.

    But, the significance of Abiola as it relates to democratic struggle in the land should not under any circumstances be regionalised. Abiola fought for the liberation of all Nigerians from military yoke and oppression irrespective of tribal or ethnic affiliations. The people stood by him but his elite friends not only diminished but denied him the mandate freely given to him by 14 million Nigerians on June 12, 1993.

    Even among the progressive Nigerian elites, whether from the south west or the north, the question must be asked; how many still relate with the legacy left behind by the late democratic icon? It is sad that Nigerians and Nigeria are fast losing their sense of history. Twenty years after that inhuman annulment by Babangida, it is unfortunate that not only are most of the elites in power pretending as if nothing happened; even students in higher institutions today lack better grasp of what actually transpired at that period. It is too bad to contemplate that such is happening within two decades of such monumental occurrence.

    On the Abiola issue, it is so far officially bad as no semblance of acknowledgement and appreciation have been shown by those enjoying the fruits of his toil today. It is not late in the day an issue for President Jonathan to address for it is better late than never. Nigeria indeed has not been fair to Bashorun MKO Abiola and history will not forgive those that are behind this historical aberration. Let those people in the leadership of the national assembly, the executive arms and the judiciary know, according to Thomson James, that ingratitude is treason against humanity. That is the truth.

    NB: This piece was first published in the Nation newspaper, precisely this space, on June 6, 2011, some few days to the eighteenth anniversary of June 12, 1993 Presidential election. . Due to its topicality, I am with very slight modifications, re-publishing it today, to mark the 20th anniversary of that epochal election.

  • Of Maku’s flippant outburst

    Of Maku’s flippant outburst

    Lies run sprints, but the truth runs marathons – Michael Jackson

    By sheer force of destiny, Mr Labaran Maku is a card-carrying member of ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP) and a former deputy governor of Nasarawa State. He currently occupies the position of Minister for Information. By virtue of this position, he is the spokesman for the administration of President Goodluck Jonathan. As spokesman, everybody expects him to always embellish truth. Reason: The government he speaks for has allowed inanity rather than purposefulness to becloud its actions and policies. And it would be puerile for anyone to exempt him from the ‘infection’. One would have expected him to clearly articulate the policies of this administration during his recent 2013 ministerial press briefing. But no; he rather chose to unleash his misplaced incisor on the administration of Governor Babatunde Fashola of Lagos. Everything Maku says about Lagos is a lie and everything he claims the centre administration owes in the Centre of Excellence is stolen. For the indubitable fact that Maku cannot tell the truth about the administration he represents, he should not be expected to say same about other administrations, especially the one governed by the opposition.

    One thing that Maku must remember is that power is transient and if it is impossible to remain in power forever, then the ultimate goal of any occupier of public positions should be to create things that will outlast him positively. Is he doing this at the moment? He should not forget easily that there was a Chukwumerije and perhaps an Ofonagoro in this country, who used the platform offered them by government to propagate lies against the people. If Maku were to be given the task of writing the history of their epoch, what would he write about these two men?

    The public is watching as this Maku on Lagos has chosen to delude himself about the brilliant performance of the Fashola-led administration, which is a reality that even if people like Maku stop believing in, for mischievous reasons, such good deeds would still not go away. For goodness sake, how can Maku say that Lagos is the luckiest of all the 36 states in Nigeria as it has benefited so much from Federal Government’s infrastructure? He mentioned one other state in the south-south. Hear him: “Lagos too rests on federal infrastructure; the governor of Lagos has nothing significant to do aside environmental sanitation; Lagos state is the luckiest state. Even the BRT lanes are on federal government roads …”

    Obviously, Fashola and the governor of that other state rejected to foot the bill of Maku’s ill-conceived projects-monitoring jamboree called Nigeria Good Governance Tour (NGGT) across the states of this warped federation. Only a mad man in dire hallucination would say that despite an avalanche of verifiable achievements of Fashola, that he has ‘nothing significant to do in his state than mostly environmental and traffic maintenance.’

    Rather than seize the occasion of the ministerial platform to redeem the abysmally low image of the Jonathan administration, he took an unwise swipe at the high-performing governor of Lagos State, leaving open in the process, his flanks of crass ineptitude and misgovernance at the centre. For want of something to engage in, Maku contrived a conduit pipe through which he can drain public till when he came up with the NGGT through which at least carefully chosen 120 officials of ministries/parastatals, civil society groups and favoured journalists visited states of the federation. The initiator of the “good governance tour” allocated bogus all expenses government bill including undisclosed estacode, Duty Tour Allowance (DTA), transportation, feeding and accommodation. Two questions: What has the tour of states by Maku’s NGGT achieved? Let him come out and tell Nigerians how much was spent on those frivolous tours and how far that would have gone in rescuing the 20,000 Nigerians that reportedly died of hunger everyday? Maku should stop his attempts at using cotton wool to blur the eyes of his fellow countrymen across ethnic divide that celebrate Fashola’s achievements in Lagos everyday.

    Yours sincerely has read reports about the barrages of criticisms by notable Nigerians and even political parties against the observations of Maku regarding his warped judgement of the state of governance in Lagos. Except he chose not to know, he must realise that the modern state is one with a beautiful environment and one where movement is made less cumbersome through free flow of traffic on very good and mostly well maintained roads. These are some of the things that Fashola has done in a cosmopolitan mega-city like Lagos. Maku should tell his master in the Villa to provide Nigerians with stable electricity and fix decrepit federal roads across the country. It is only when these two are successfully done that a man like Maku can conveniently say that the proverbial Maku has conquered the fear of what the Yoruba calls abiku in 2015.

    Finally, Airtel returns my line

    Precisely on April 5, l procured a special line from Airtel mobile network. Less than two weeks after my Sim card registration, the line went off again and before l realised what was happening, a hacker had swapped my line and the rest is history.

    Today is not meant to recall those excruciating moments that l went through or how l had planned to take legal action against the company but for the entreaties of the few among its good staff. I am using this opportunity to admonish the network provider to always ensure protection of customers’ information which was lacking in my own case. There are some fraudulent employees of the company who conspire with outsiders to defraud customers – as in my case.

    However, the company owes these courteous staff a lot of gratitude for calming down my frayed nerves. They include the pleasantly humble and exemplarily serviceable Erhumu Bayagbon of the company’s PR department. He assured me that the matter would be resolved amicably and was never tired of picking my calls and even calling me to allay my fears about the line. He assiduously discouraged me from taking the company to court. Thank you, my brother. With an employee like your, the sky is the limit for the company. Osigbeme Modigie and Grace Henshaw proved to be capable of taking the company to greater heights too. Their exceedingly humane approach to issues is inspiring. Blossom Isika, right from the day she was directed to restore the line last Thursday evening, had been wonderful and so humble on phone whenever l had anything to complain about. Indeed, thank you, too. And to Ada Mbuno, I really appreciate you for being a good and dutiful staff of Airtel.

    However, one James, also of the company’s PR department, is not deserving of these encomiums. He was so insolent on phone and disdainfully evasive of customers. Mr Segun Ogunsanya, the Nigerian CEO of the company must beware of a staff like him for he lacks the disposition of a relationship person. Nevertheless, my line is back and l hope that a repeat will not occur as the company had promised me.

  • Jonathan’s war against democracy

    Jonathan’s war against democracy

    The portentous cloud of absolutism hanging over the country should arouse serious concerns of men of valour. Such men are expected to stand up and challenge the budding cabal of exploitation that is sprouting in Abuja before they gain enough stability that could send most of us back to the trenches. The activists must wake up from their sleep: All writers of conscience must gather more ink and get their thoughts ready for the battle with one sole aim: To rescue democracy from the fistic grip of men that failed to learn from history. We all need to talk, agitate and possibly kick, if only to let the slaves of power realise that today is not forever.

    Edmund Burke, that Anglo-Irish statesman and philosopher that served for many years in the British House of Commons as a member of the Whig party once rebelled against King George III and Great Britain during their taxation-induced disputes with the American colonies. The face-off eventually culminated in the American Revolution that brought an end to British colonial rule over the United States’ territory. The English thinker and parliamentarian of repute remarkably observed in that turbulent period that ‘All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.’ This noteworthy statement was made to rouse patriotic activism against the despotism of that epoch. Nigeria needs such arousal from true mentors of conscience in our midst.

    Nigeria under President Goodluck Jonathan is currently building up a culture of tyranny that has made dissenting voices its prime target. Most reasonable Nigerians are bothered not because the nation has not passed through this path before but because history is replete with examples of leaders that clamp down on Nigerians long after they begin to enjoy too much power and freedom only to fall later into ignominy. Will Jonathan learn from recent history of despots like Olusegun Obasanjo, Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha, that all left power in disgrace?

    The Nigerian Governors’ Forum’s (NGF’s) election that held recently bears eloquent testimony to Jonathan’s feeble historical memory about how not to use power. The NGF in that election got its incumbent chairman, Governor Rotimi Amaechi of Rivers state re-elected. Thirty-five votes from equal number of governors present were cast. One governor abstained. Governor Amaechi in the transparently conducted election where the ballots were counted openly scored 19 votes to Governor Jonah Jang of Plateau State, his main challenger’s 16.

    Since the election result was announced, the centre could no longer hold as it became apparent that the presidency felt slighted by the outcome of the election. Foot soldiers of President Jonathan including Governors Godswill Akpabio, Seriake Dickson and Segun Mimiko of Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa and Ondo states respectively have been inexorably challenging the result that was against Jonah Jang, their mentor’s obvious preferred choice. The president can say to the marines that he had no preferred candidate in the NGF election contest – certainly not to discernible Nigerians!

    But one thing is clear to keenly observant public, there is no love lost between the president and the Rivers state governor. Amaechi has so far stood up to the Abuja power drunken inclination. Rivers State’s reported two million votes is strategic to Jonathan’s 2015 re-election ambition in the South-South and he has shown through his open secret fight with Amaechi that he cannot stand an enemy of his ambition to be in charge in that state. But Amaechi is a student of activism. The pursuit of crusades has taken him thus far in life. He battled and crushed all enemies on his path of becoming the governor of that state. So, he is back in his familiar terrain of justified confrontation. To further complicate the president’s woes in Rivers is Amaechi’s reported wonderful performance in the delivery of democratic dividend to the people.

    The PDP has suspended Amaechi from its fold for celebrating his NGF election victory considered by hawks in the party to be an embarrassment to President Jonathan. The body language of the president has goaded the plot to cause further incensed political rumpus in that state. The PDP has never been a party with any sense of etiquette and whatever act of dishonour coming from it should not be a disappointment to anybody. What should bother us more is the fact that the party is trying to introduce its do-or-die politics into the affairs of an NGF with governor-membership that cut across different major political parties in the country.

    Equally more frightening is the fact that a body of governors that are individually acknowledged to be leaders of their various states could be so vulnerable to anti-democratic inclination. How else can one describe the effrontery of Jang in proclaiming himself a winner in an election that he openly lost? Why should he set up a parallel NGF secretariat when a de jure chairman is in place? Is this not an invitation to anarchy? Could it then be concluded that entrusting our present and future in the hands of democratically dishonourable men like Jang and cohorts is injurious to the political stability of this nation? With what has happened during the last NGF election, should Nigerians expect to see anything different in the coming 2015 elections to be anchored by these mostly democratically challenged governors?

    Where is President Jonathan leading the country to? The country is not getting it right under the current dispensation and it would not be wrong to say that this democracy because of the president’s ambition in 2015 is not steeped in realistic footing. Under Jonathan, like we had under previous PDP leadership, we have two democracies: One for the rich and the other for the poor. The PDP government since the advent of this democracy teaches the people by its feral democratic example not to believe in the Nigerian system. And the danger in this is that if the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law and it is indirectly inviting every man to become a law unto himself. And anarchy is the end result.

    With the way things are going, anarchy is looming ahead due to the daily injustices suffered by the people not only in Port-Harcourt but across the country. Nigeria needs a new political orientation and; an army of sincere and unrelenting advocates for the poor. This is because except there is a new state of mind, the country lies on the rim of precipice because tyranny and anarchy are twin brothers. Let us all say a word or do something symbolic to show our utmost disdain for the way of political perdition that Jonathan and his team of jesters are leading this country. This is very important so as to nip in the bud early, the injurious war against democracy by our president. Speaking out and acting at the right time has positively helped in other nations where people like Edmund Burke once lived.