Category: Open Forum

By Seye Oladejo

Dr Festus Adedayo’s column in the Nigerian Tribune of Sunday, December 20, 2020, titled: ‘Tinubu, Please Run, Run From The SWAGA Gang’ makes interesting and most times amusing reading. Although he admits that Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a former governor of Lagos State and one of the leaders of the All Progressives Congress (APC), “has not told anyone he is interested in the presidency”, Dr Adedayo goes on to adumbrate at length not just on why Tinubu is unqualified to run for Nigeria’s presidency in 2023 but why the South West should not support his aspiration if he decides to run. The peg for his article is the unveiling of a group of former Senators and House of Representatives members under the aegis of South-West Agenda ’23 (SWAGA), who last week in Ibadan and Oyo, historic political entities in Yoruba land, publicly sought to mobilize support for Tinubu in the South-West should he decide to run for President in 2023.

Luckily, Adedayo does not suggest that this group does not have the right to mobilize support for any potential candidate of its choice just as the columnist has the liberty to fulminate against them no matter how pedestrian or ridiculous his logic. Anyone familiar with the social media will know that there are several groups that have been canvassing support for Tinubu’s anticipated presidential ambition from different parts of the country just as I believe others are doing for various potential presidential aspirants. Perhaps SWAGA caught Adedayo’s fancy because of the caliber of politicians involved. A doctorate degree holder in Political Science, Dr Adedayo engages in intellectual flights of fancy, which is the luxury of the theory class to quote the late Professor Billy Dudley.

For instance, the columnist quotes a brilliant political scientist who in a book on the politics of the South-West reportedly asserts that “Tinubu has a fancy for ideology but a fierce commitment to power”. On the basis of this debatable proposition, Adedayo submits that while the great sage, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, played ‘ideologically-driven politics’, Tinubu is actuated by ‘power driven politics’. But then what is the role of ideology in politics? It is to provide a philosophical framework and intellectual anchor for the fashioning out of specific policy and programmatic agenda that the politician who adheres to it believes is in the best interest of the majority of the people in any given political jurisdiction. But then, does any politician play ideological politics simply for the sake of it in what would be the equivalent of unproductive intellectual masturbation? Certainly no.

The fervent ideologue politician who is not just playing games but is intent on seeing that his ideas benefit society must also be determined to acquire political power in order to achieve his goals. That is why Chief Obafemi Awolowo, for instance, fervently and uninhibitedly, sought to lead Nigeria either as Prime Minister or President in order to utilize his brilliant ideas to accelerate the modernization and transformation of the country just as he had done for Western Nigeria during his tenure as Premier between 1952 and 1960. And the great Awo was not as politically and ideologically inflexible as Adedayo presumes in his lifelong earnest quest to lead Nigeria.

Thus, in 1983, for instance, Awo’s UPN entered into a working agreement with a faction of the Northern political class who furnished him with his running mate, Alhaji Mohammed Kura, for the 1983 presidential election. This was unlike 1979 when Awo had unilaterally picked his running mate, Mr. Phillip Umeadi, from the East thus leaving out the entire North on the UPN’s presidential ticket. It is indeed the PDP interests that Adedayo is serving now that play the politics of power for its own sake and even have their party slogan as ‘PDP! Power!’

Obviously with reference to Tinubu, Adedayo writes: “Politicians have started a race ahead of God to the year 2023; and they do not appear to mind stepping on the blood and the corpses of their brothers into that office they covet so badly…Being humans, can any sprinter be sure they will see self-same 2023?” How this applies to a man whom Adedayo admits has not told anyone he is interested in running for President is baffling. As I noted earlier, Awo actively sought to lead Nigeria either as Prime Minister or President in the first and second republics to utilize the office for the public good. In fact, he had entries in his diary affirming frequently that he would succeed in his mission of leading Nigeria. If everyone were to follow Adedayo’s strange admonition, no one, not even Adedayo, the skilled political necromancer, would aspire to anything because no one can wager that he will still be on this side of eternity either in 2023 or even tomorrow.

Although admitting that Tinubu has not declared any political aspiration towards 2023, Adedayo mischievously insinuates that “he has embarked on some gallivanting of recent to the North which some readers of Nigeria’s political barometer labeled political moves ahead of 2023″. It is unfortunate that a doctorate degree holder in Political Science here exhibits such pedestrian intellect. Tinubu was recently in Borno State to commiserate With Profesor Babagana Zulum, the governor of the state, and empathize with the people of the state on the murder by insurgents of 43 rice farmers at Zabarmari Village. Does a purported and unstated political aspiration deny him the constitutional right of freedom of movement? As Mr. Tunde Rahman, Tinubu’s Media Aide, has asked, how many politicians even with 2023 on their minds will summon the courage to dare visit Borno State or anywhere else in the North-East at this time? If we are to stretch Adedayo’s warped logic further, can we not conjecture Agbekoya Parapo that Tinubu masterminded the murder of the rice farmers so that he could have an opportunity to visit Borno State in pursuit of a political agenda? Was it with 2023 in mind that Tinubu was honoured with the title of Jagaban Borgu almost 20 years ago?

For a scholar in the analytically rigorous field of Political Science, Adedayo has a penchant for telling diversionary tales that have little bearing on whatever subject he is interrogating. For instance, he tells the story of the Revolt of 1968-1969 and how Chief Awolowo was the only one able to pacify the peasant farmers where all others had failed and helped to restore peace. What has that got to do with Tinubu or the politics of 2023? Adedayo contends that Tinubu’s intervention could not put a halt to the #EndSARS protests at the Lekki Toll Plaza. For a specialist in comparative politics, Adedayo embarrassingly takes two disparate events – Agbekoya riots of the late 1960s and #EndSARS protests of 2020 – and goes ahead to compare oranges and apples. One event took place under military rule, the other in a democratic dispensation. One event was confined to some parts of a single region, Western Nigeria, the other had national ramifications. Awo had presided over the Western Region that comprised the present South-West states including the old Mid-Western Region and thus had a deserved larger than life profile across the West. Tinubu was only a two –term governor of Lagos State and his profile in the South-West grew incrementally not only because of his accomplishments in Lagos but because even after leaving office in 2007, he was at the vanguard of winning back all South-West states lost to the PDP in 2003 to the progressive fold.

Indeed, so deep is Adedayo’s animus toward Tinubu that he gleefully and malevolently refers to similarities in targets of destruction of property by the Agbekoya peasants and the properties destroyed in Lagos by the #EndSARS protesters. Here is a PhD holder and lawyer to boot celebrating the destruction of public and private property – the intellectual as Agbero analyst? How tragic! It does not occur to Adedayo that the object of the anger of the #EndSARS protesters was the Special Anti Robbery Squad (SARS) established and controlled by the Federal Government while the properties and facilities targeted for destruction in Lagos belonged either to the Lagos State government or to private individuals like Tinubu. Should that not arouse the curiosity of a genuine intellectual? The protests in Lagos were clearly hijacked and utilized for partisan political purposes through patently false propaganda by political elements whose interest Adedayo is serving under the veneer of superficial intellectualism. Or else how does one explain Adedayo’s mischievous insinuation that “Tinubu owns half of Lagos”?

Should a columnist of Adedayo’s caliber make assertions predicated on rumors and peddle cheap gossip as gospel truth? Is Adedayo aware that in the run-up to the 2015 election, AIT ran a documentary titled “Lion of Bourdillon” which disseminated this kind of falsehood against Tinubu? When charged to court, the AIT sought out of court settlement and tendered an apology. This time round, the lie was that Tinubu owns the Lekki Toll Plaza and had invited soldiers to shoot at protesters because he was losing money for as long as the road remained closed. Tinubu has since denied in a widely publicized statement any interest, involvement or ownership of the Toll Gate and asserted that his income is unaffected maybe one or 100, 000 vehicles pass through the gate. There has been no evidence-based rebuttal of Tinubu’s confident claim, not even by Adedayo – scholar, lawyer and journalist – who resorts to rumors rather than facts unearthed through diligent investigation.

Adedayo contends that the Senator Dayo Adeyeye – led pro-Tinubu group, SWAGA, cannot now credibly canvass for a South-West united front behind Tinubu for the 2023 presidential race when the Tinubu-led Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN) thwarted the ambition of a Yoruba woman, Honourable Mulikat Akande-Adeola, to be Speaker of the House of Representatives in 2011. Rather, he argues, the ACN supported Hon. Aminu Waziri Tambuwal from Sokoto State who emerged as Speaker. Surely, such political permutations and joggling is neither unusual nor uncommon given the ideologically fluid nature of our politics. The ACN emerged through painstaking backbreaking work after the PDP electoral blitzkrieg that swept away the defunct Alliance for Democracy (AD) in five of the six South-West states except Lagos. Since it did not have the numbers to produce principal officers itself, one wonders how Adedayo can fault the ACN’s exploiting fractures and fault lines within the PDP to enhance its own interest and weaken the hegemonic faction within the PDP. That is not illegitimate in politics.

So strongly does Adedayo feel about this Mulikat Akande-Adeola affair that he vehemently asserts that, should Tinubu seek the presidency in 2023, it will be payback time as the Yoruba will avenge the fate that befell the woman even though she incidentally became Majority Leader of the House of Representatives. This is amusing. The Tinubu-led tendency has had the upper hand in most elections in the South-West in all elections between 2007 and 2019 even though the PDP remains a strong factor in the region. The issue of the Yoruba having long memories and seeking to pay Tinubu back in his own coin thus only exists in Adedayo’s fecund imagination. Even then, as a political analyst, did Adedayo bother to ask himself what concrete gains would have come to Yoruba land had Honourable Mulikat Akande-Adeola become Speaker of the House in 2011? Was Dimeji Bankole not Speaker for four years? What were the gains or benefits for the average Yoruba man or woman? In the same vein, nobody should canvass for the presidency in 2023 simply on the basis of where he or she comes from. Competence and proven track record of performance must be accorded priority.

Listen to Adedayo: “As we trudge towards 2023, Yoruba will remember those who had sacrificed the so-called Yoruba interest on the altar of self-ambition in the past. They amusingly watch how same people who sold them for ten shekels of silver now appropriating the moral right to call them to queue behind them in 2023 “for the sake of Yoruba race”. Here again, the political scientist in Adedayo disappoints – appallingly. He arbitrarily asserts rather than demonstrate his claims logically and empirically. In what ways were the Yoruba sold for ten shekels of silver? Is that insinuation not itself a brazen insult on the intelligence and character of the Yoruba who are well known for their political sophistication and astuteness?

A central thrust of Adedayo’s piece is that Tinubu’s politics is power-centered rather than ideologically focused. In his words, “Power here is euphemism for the end that justifies the means of that deadly French theorist, Niccolo Machiavelli”. Incidentally, Machiavelli was Italian, not French. But if Adedayo’s postulation is true, how come that as the lone governor standing in the South-West after the loss of the other five AD South-West states in 2003, Tinubu decided to stay in opposition and was at the vanguard of clawing back all the South-West PDP ‘captured’ states to the camp of the progressives? Would it not have been more in line with the extant political culture for Tinubu to simply cross over to the PDP, which controlled the gravy-laden centre? How come that much earlier during the IBB transition programme, Tinubu spurned the opportunity to contest for the Senate Presidency in order to enhance the chances of the South-West winning the SDP presidential ticket? Rather, he supported the emergence of Professor Iyorchia Ayu Benue State in the North Central as Senate President. How come that Tinubu was one of the more than 20 signatories from Lagos of a full page advert in the Nigerian Tribune denouncing Chief Dapo Sarumi as their leader following the latter’s acceptance to join the Chief Earnest Shonekan-led Interim National Government (ING)?

Hear Adedayo again: ”Till today, Tinubu is held to be the one who single-handedly dissembled Afenifere and literally destroyed the Yoruba group”. What we have at work here is political necromancy or witchcraft, not disinterested and dispassionate political analysis. Adedayo surely has the intellectual skills to analyze objectively and incisively the immediate and remote causes for the rise and fall of Afenifere. If he had not indulged intellectual laziness, Adedayo would not have arrived at the simplistic conclusion that Tinubu singlehandedly ‘dissembled’ Afenifere. True, the crisis that led to the diminution of Afenifere had its origin in Lagos. The principal cause was the adamant and unrelenting opposition of Chief Ganiyu Dawodu, AD Chairman and Afenifere leader in Lagos State to Tinubu even after the latter had emerged as governor of the state and made ceaseless efforts to pacify Dawodu who had openly supported Funsho Williams in the AD party primaries.

In his riveting book, ‘Reflections of a Public Man’, Alhaji Olatunji Hamzat, Lagos State transportation commissioner in the Alhaji Lateef Jakande administration, founder of the influential group, Justice Forum, as well as prominent member of AD and Afenifere in Lagos State, writes as regards the Dawodu-Tinubu rift in Lagos: “Throughout all this, the leadership of Afenifere equally intervened in ceaseless, exhausting meetings desperate to cobble some kind of compromise and workable unity. Even at this time, the Afenifere leadership itself showed signs of partisan preference and identity with Ganiyu Dawodu. While Chief Abraham Adesanya clearly reposed in unimpeachable neutrality and progressive rallying, Chief Ayo Adebanjo and Chief Olanihun Ajayi were clearly supportive of the Dawodu group. The imbroglio in Lagos State would eventually affect the already widening dispute at the national hierarchy, rivening the national front into the infamous balkanization of the year 2000 National Convention of the AD that witnessed two different conventions in Abuja”. There is no space here to go into the crises that resulted in the current moribund state of Afenifere but it is not as simplistic as portrayed by Adedayo.

Adedayo makes the specious argument that what the Yoruba need at this time is restructuring of Nigeria and not a President of Yoruba extraction come 2023. The truth of the matter is that there can be no restructuring without a President in office who believes in restructuring and is prepared to utilize the weight and authority of his office to push through fundamental amendments to the constitution to deepen federal practice in Nigeria, and this essentially is what restructuring is about. It is astonishing that Adedayo assumes that a restructured Nigeria can simply leap through probably from Planet Mars without the requisite leadership that believes in the cause. Is Adedayo aware that even among the Yoruba political elite, there is no unanimity of views or ideas on what a restructured Nigeria should look like? For instance, while some advocate a return to the regional structure of the First Republic or a merger of ‘unviable’ states, the 2014 National Conference actually recommended the creation of additional states to bring the total number of states to over 50!

Chief Obafemi Awolowo sought to be President of Nigeria inthe Second Republic under the 1979 constitution. Referring to the 1979 constitution, the great sage had famously noted that most of its provisions had been articulated in his books particularly ‘Thoughts on the Nigerian Constitution’. Awolowo would have been an excellent President and delivered on his electoral promises had he been elected President in 1979. The UPN governors performed exemplarily under this constitution in the Second Republic. The extant 1999 constitution is a near total replica of the 1979 constitution. Nigeria can flourish under this constitution with a competent, committed and visionary leadership that can summon the will to push through necessary amendments that will remove the road blocks to genuine federal practice that exist in the constitution. As serious as current national challenges are, this is no excuse to jettison the extant constitution wholesale and embark on an ill-defined restructuring journey with an unpredictable outcome. Adedayo speculates about Tinubu’s health in a reckless manner without proof. Here, he plays God. Who tells Adedayo that he himself is in perfect and robust health or does he know the terminal date of his own tenancy on earth?

• Oladejo is the Publicity Secretary of Lagos APC Caretaker Committee.

By Lai Mohammed

Our attention has been drawn to an ‘investigation’ by CNN, entitled ‘How a Bloody Night of Bullets Quashed a Young Protest Movement’ and aired on 18 November 2020, in which the international news organisation said it had ”uncovered that Nigerian security forces opened fire on unarmed protesters” at the Lekki Toll Gate in Lagos, Nigeria, during the #EndSARS protest.

We write to put on record that the report did not just fall short of journalistic standards, it reinforces the disinformation that is going around on the issue, it is blatantly irresponsible and it is a poor piece of journalistic work by a reputable international news organisation.

In the first instance, the report did not live up to the most basic of the core principles of journalism – balance and fairness.

According to the website www.ethics.journalists.org, ”balance and fairness are classic buzzwords of journalism ethics: In objective journalism, stories must be balanced in the sense of attempting to present all sides of a story. Fairness means that a journalist should strive for accuracy and truth in reporting, and not slant a story so a reader draws the reporter’s desired conclusion.”

Rushing to air such a momentous story without presenting the government’s side is inexcusable and indefensible. CNN said it contacted over 100 protesters and family members, but did not speak to one official of Nigeria’s federal government. While CNN said there was no response from the army and that officials of Lagos State would not speak in view of the Judicial Panel that is investigating the matter, it did not say what effort it made to speak with any official of the federal government.

The truth is that CNN did not even attempt to reach the federal government. Nima Elbagir, who presented the report and most probably led the investigation, is conversant with the Minister of Information and Culture, who is also the Spokesman for the Federal Government of Nigeria, yet did not say that she even tried to reach the Minister. It is therefore strange, to say the least, that she would rush to air such an important ‘investigation’ report without getting the government’s side. In other words, Nima, and by extension CNN, breached the most basic of the core principles of journalism – balance and fairness.

Another serious breach by CNN, in its ‘investigation’, is that the network relied heavily on unverified footages it harvested from social media. CNN was not present at the Lekki Toll Gate on the night of the incident. Neither its reporter nor cameraman was there, but it relied on eyewitnesses. Well, this is fraught with danger. While experts say eyewitness testimony is a potent form of evidence, it is also subject to unconscious memory distortions and biases, Unlike CNN, a reporter from the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) Pidgin Service, Damilola Banjo, was at the Lekki Toll Gate on the night in question, and was quoted as saying soldiers shot sporadically into the air and not at the protesters –  a direct contradiction of the position taken by CNN who relied on second and third-hand information.

In airing its ‘investigative’ report, CNN conveniently forgot that on Oct. 23rd 2020, it emphatically tweeted, from its verified twitter handle, that the military killed 38 people when it opened fire on peaceful protesters on Tuesday, Oct. 20th 2020. Almost a month later, the same CNN – after a supposedly exhaustive investigation – is now reporting only one death from what the world was made to believe was a massacre. Is CNN not embarrassed by this sharp climbdown? Has CNN owned up to this and apologized for its faux paus?

It is also interesting that while CNN obtained footage showing when the vehicles carrying soldiers left their barracks and arrived at the Lekki Toll Gate, it could not obtain any footage showing the bodies of those supposedly killed in the ‘massacre’. After all, forensic ballistic experts will most likely testify that firing military grade weapons into a crowd will not leave anyone needing a microscope to look for blood or bodies at the scene.

CNN has said it stands by its story, and that ”our reporting was carefully and meticulously researched”, This is baffling, considering that the story lacks fairness and balance, as we have pointed out, and that the organization relied heavily on manipulated social media videos. This resort to an escapist cliche seems more like a face-saving measure by an otherwise respectable news network caught in the blinding glare of ‘fake news and disinformation’ headlamps. Or how else does one explain the arrogant defence of an international news network that would not even respect the most basic principle of journalism?

One of CNN’s star eyewitnesses in its ‘investigative’ reporting is DJ Switch. Unknown to CNN, DJ Switch’s story on the Lekki Toll Gate shooting has changed several times. From claiming she counted 78 bodies of protesters who were supposedly killed by soldiers on the night of the Lekki Toll Gate incident, she has twice, at least, changed the casualty figure from 78 to 15 and then to 7, without a shred of evidence. CNN cannot pretend not to know that for anyone to act as a witness, his or her credibility must be unimpeachable. DJ Switch’s credibility does not meet that threshold.

In one of social media videos of DJ Switch that was used by CNN (see attached link 1), the lady (DJ Switch) claimed she and some unnamed persons carried dead bodies and dropped them at the feet of the soldiers. She also claimed she spoke to their Commander before the soldiers threw the bodies into the vans. Curiously, for someone who was streaming live on Instagram during the Lekki Toll Gate incident, there was not a single video or picture of the dead bodies. Not even Godson (Uyi), another CNN star witness whose video was also used by the network, or any of the hundreds of protesters, all armed with smart phones, at the scene recorded a video or shot a picture of dead bodies being carried away by soldiers.

Talking of Godson, despite claiming to have analysed hours of footage, it is curious that CNN conveniently left out key parts of Godson’s 57-minute, 5-second video . For example,13 minutes, 40 seconds into the video, there were voices, in street lingo, in the background telling Godson that the gunshots were not from the soldiers (na boys dey shoot, that na local gun sound….it’s boys, meaning touts and hoodlums, who are shooting. That’s local gun). Some 20 minutes,14 seconds into the video, Godson confirmed that the boys had brought out their guns and were shooting (local okah, he called it). Some 23 minutes, 14 seconds into the video, Godson said ‘wait, all these boys dey shoot’ (meaning gunshots rang out from the touts/hoodlums). CNN, in its rush to nail soldiers and tell a ‘radically different story’, conveniently left out these parts of the Godson video, which could have shown that armed hoodlums invaded the Lekki Toll Gate that night, and could have hit any of the protesters as they shot sporadically. This is clearly a ploy by the CNN reporter/presenter to manipulate viewers of its ‘investigative’ report and force them to draw the reporter’s desired conclusion! Another video showing an armed protester at the Lekki Toll Gate (see attached link 3) was apparently not among the footage reviewed by CNN!

It is shocking that all through its ‘investigation’, CNN did not for once mention the fact that six soldiers and 37 policemen were killed during the #EndSARS crisis, which also left 196 policemen injured, not to talk of the monumental destruction of government and private properties across the country. Instead, the network is fixated on the massacre that never happened. Are security agents not human beings too? Are they not entitled to the protection of their human rights?

For the record, this is not the first time that CNN has carried an inaccurate or hoax story about Nigeria. In February 2007, Nigeria accused CNN of staging one of its reports from the country’s Niger Delta region, showing gunmen holding 24 Filipinos hostage. Of course, CNN and its then Africa Correspondent Jeff Koinange flatly denied the charge, saying the network did not pay for any part of the report. Later, in an email reportedly sent to a friend, Mr. Koinange was quoted as saying: “Of course we had to pay certain people to get the story… You do not get such a story without bribing.”  So much for denials!

As a form of remediation, Nigeria’s Federal Government demands an immediate and exhaustive investigation from CNN into its ‘investigative’ report on the Lekki Toll Gate incident to determine, among others, its authenticity, whether or not it met the basic standards of journalism and also the selective use of unverified social media videos to manipulate public opinion. While it is up to CNN to accede or not, please note that the Federal Government reserves the right to take any action within its laws to prevent CNN from aggravating the #EndSARS crisis with unprofessional, irresponsible, one-sided, inciting and sensational reporting that is capable of pitching Nigerians against themselves and setting the country on fire.

• Olatunji Dare At Home Abroad will return next week

Sunday Dare

PROTESTS have occurred across the country. Few saw this coming except with the aid of hindsight. However, the protests are here and we must be cognizant of the reasons why. Every society, every nation has its imperfections and challenges. Some of them are of high consequence while some of them minor in scope. No nation escapes this reality. The mark of a great nation is not that it does not have challenges and flaws, the mark of a great and hopefully compassionate nation lies in how it resolves its inconsistencies and social tensions.

Nigeria is a democratic republic established to ensure its people enjoy the benefits of good governance and the quiet enjoyment of their lives through the observation and protection of their fundamental human rights, including the rights to exist and to move about the nation freely as long as one moves about peacefully.

This is the ideal to which we as a nation and to which this government both strive. Yet, the protests show that we have not achieved this ideal. It is now painfully apparent that something undermining this noble goal was taking place and was taking a harsh toll on our people, especially our youth. The youth endured indignities, ranging from petty harassment, extortion, to beatings and killings at the hands of those who had been given a commission to protect them from such brutal criminality. That which was meant to protect you was distorted in too many instances to torment you. Once a good and functional ideal, SARS became a burden on the people.

Here, I must say that a few SARS officers are good, decent police officers trying their best in often challenging conditions. I say this not to cover or condone the wrongs done. I say this that we not unduly taint all for the bad acts of some. However, I also am not attempting to downplay the severity of the misconduct or to give some false solace or consolation to those who have suffered unduly.  The activities of the bad SARS officers had violently undermined the reputation and function of the squad. This is a national disgrace turned into unfortunate tragedy by the harsh mistreatment of innocent youth and other Nigerians.

Police brutality is neither a hallmark of democracy nor is it the stamp of this administration. Yet, something went wrong. Your courage and commitment to organize and then carry out peaceful protests brought this grave issue to the attention of the highest levels of this government.

Your protests made the government focus on your concerns. Once government investigated the matter and understood the gravity and veracity of the protest claims, government moved with dispatch and resolved to abolish SARS. Government has also moved with sincerity, committing itself to working on several other important demands raised by the protests. Here it is important to continue to act based on the premise that we all want the best for Nigeria and that the other person is motivated by good faith.

During this situation, some people have lambasted the protesters as troublemakers intent on bringing down the government. This was unhelpful. We cannot move forward if we taint everything as fundamentally motivated by partisan political coloration. A few things transcend political bickering. Also, those claiming that government was harsh and intolerant were wrong. Like any committed government, this administration does not want see innocent citizens brutalised by the police. There is no good that can come from such a policy as such a stance is morally and political bankrupt and counterproductive. The President and his government care for the people.

While we may have policy disagreements with others and have a different political perspective, no one should question the good faith of this administration and its commitment to the Nigerian people. It is an unfair and unfounded assertion to allege that we care not for the people and want to see them harshly treated. Such allegations are not born of sincerity but come from those seeking to gain political capital from the current situation.

Yet, all in all, the youth-led protests have done the nation and its people a service.   Good police action helps all of us but police misconduct adversely touches Nigerians of every demographic. By demonstrating for an end to brutality you have enhanced the liberties and freedoms of all Nigerians.

Thus, I salute the courage of the Nigerian youth for finding their voice, for mobilising, for staying on message by keeping the peace during your protests that we may have even more peace. Your demands for action, and deep-rooted reforms, including adequate funding of our Police, show that you are seeking pragmatic solutions to real problems. In essence you had the fruitful insight to seek aid for the very Police that have inflicted hardship on you because you realise that only an improved police will better serve you. In essence, you seek not to destroy but to build better than before.

Government is nothing but a public service. Leadership must respond to the agitations and valid yearnings of society. In this case, this Government is doing that. The demands are being met as swiftly and practicably as possible. SARS has been dissolved, and will not come back. A multi stakeholder committee to address youth demands and relevant issues is already in place.

Shortly after the protests began, President Muhammadu Buhari issued a public broadcast vowing that police reforms have started with the dissolution of SARS.

Beyond dissolution of SARS, the police as an institution will undergo a reform process intended to promote community-police cooperation and to weed out unqualified and bad officers. Our youth, who constitute over 60 percent of the population and are often wrongly profiled, harassed and brutalised for no justifiable reason at all and this must stop.

Institutional change and reform are coming and government will fulfill this solemn promise. Yet, we must also realise that the changes and reform will take more than one day to effectuate. We are talking about changing the behavior and ideals of an institution that have been operating in a certain way for decades.

This episode is a dual lesson to us all. First, it instructs us on how law enforcement is not to act. Second, it also shows on how citizens can peacefully relay their grievances to government that it may take curative action. In this vein, the right to protest is part of the fabric of a responsive democratic setting. Protests are one of the legitimate ways people can lay their petition before government. Thus, the people have a right and duty to protest peacefully in order to raise serious grievance or call for important government action. And in the face of sustained protests, government has the duty to listen and the responsibility to respond to and resolve legitimate issues to the extent possible.

The people should never be afraid to protest as long as their cause is just and government should never be frightened by such protests but should accept that the protests are peaceful call by the people for government to help them create a better society and a better life. For protest to make any sense the protests implies and the protesters must believe government has the requisite good faith to listen and to act.

Thus, amidst these considerations is another important one. Genuine protesters must be careful not to allow those with nefarious motives to hijack their protests and steer them into violence or into conduct that actually undermines constitutional democracy instead of enhancing it. The line between legitimate protests and improper attack against the democratic order may not be the broadest but it is there and relatively clear. Yet, it is possible to be taken across that line if you do not remain disciplined and focused. Always be mindful that others with agendas contrary to your altruism will infiltrate the protests and will seek to exploit your constructive efforts to stir conflict and tension that cannot be resolved except through even more conflicts. Protests to build and improve society. Yes. Protests to foster chaos and disorder to tear down society, No.

As Youth, you seek the path of a new more just Social and Political Order but that better order can never be born or emanate from disorder and chaos. Better to seek the path of reform that builds on the extant democratic foundation, that recognizes initiatives this administration has already commenced but will also not hesitate to push and urge government to move faster and further if you believe that will better serve the nation.

Thus, government and the youth must embrace dialogue.

This President and his administration will speak to you frankly and in good faith. There will be honest dialogue but no false promises on one hand or unfair suppression on the other.

The youth must be sufficiently fair minded to assess the facts and the situation. Do not swallow the ugly narratives peddled with malicious intensity by organizations that politically oppose the President.  They seek to paint him as uncaring and hateful toward you. This is an unfair lie. The President cares deeply. He profits nothing when an innocent Youth or Nigerian is hurt, harassed or killed by those hired to protect them. He is personally insulted when the police act against safety and proper order. He is engaged in a dogged battle against vested interests that had literally hijacked the soul of the country over decades and are intent on avoiding accountability. This means, he is more than willing to dialogue with you because you both seek reform albeit sometimes in different ways with different priorities. As a father figure, the President has always maintained that his actions will ultimately prove that he always saw the youth as our greatest assets.

We must now be concerned that even protests can be subjected to the hurricane winds of manipulation to the extent that many would claim nothing is being done for the Nigerian youth. As the Minister responsible for this portfolio, I can say categorically that this is simply not true. For the first time in Nigeria’s history, a specific ring-fenced investment fund, the Nigerian Youth Investment Fund (NYIF) was approved by Government.  The President’s belief is that we must make substantial and meaningful financial investment in our youth if we truly want them to become creators of wealth, employers of labor and architects of a better Nigeria.

When Youth Corpers lamented the inadequacy of their allowances, many raised the competing needs for resources as a reason why increments would not be possible. This President ensured increment from N19, 800 to            N33, 000 naira monthly, even above the minimum wage. This pool is the single largest concentration of youth in the country annually.

The Social Investment Programme (SIP) of this government has won international acclaim. An enabling environment for youth-run Fintech companies to thrive has been created with a special license category created by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

The Buhari administration continues to make massive investments in every facet of Nigeria’s life so the country can have the infrastructure it needs for rapid economic development.

Still in the youth spectrum, we have established a roster of youth-focused programs never seen before, under this administration. The N-Power Youth Empowerment Programme has benefited over five hundred thousand (500,000) youth and remains the largest such youth program in sub-Saharan Africa. And there are countless stories of impact. The next batch of four hundred thousand (400,000) youth will soon take advantage of this initiative. The Bank of Industry (BOI) oversees the $20 million fund for Youth Tech Innovators and Entrepreneurs (YTIE), Youth Entrepreneurship Support Program (YES-P) among others. There is the National Young Farmers Scheme under the National Agricultural Land Development Authority (NALDA) aimed at encouraging and supporting thousands of young farmers across the country.  There is also the Graduate Internship Scheme (GIS) from which over        50,000 youth have benefited. Training in Mobile Device Repairs, Digital Skills Acquisition, Business Training and Support for SMEs are being undertaken by various Ministries, Departments and Agencies (MDAs) of Government.

As Minister of Youth and Sports Development, every youth-focused request I have made has been greeted with the undivided attention of President Buhari meeting his approval. It is clear that Government needs to do more and we and we know this. We are not finished. Thus, I urge you to join us and when needed to prod us to do even more and go even further.

We must however know when to pocket an achievement and we are at that point. Government is ready for greater engagement with youth. The protests have brought your grievances to the forefront and thus have fulfilled their stated objective. Now we must continue to discuss and work out solutions to these matters.

You have only one country and the President is positioning it for greatness through the institution of deep sometimes painful but needed reforms. Yet, he is ceaselessly assaulted by powerful vested interests who have skeletons to hide.

This is a country of youth in the century of the youth.  These protests have earned the youth a well-deserved place at the table.  So, take your seat in order to continue the progress and reform you have called for.

From the protest, it is time for the next phase – dialogue. Identify trusted leaders and have them come forward. Any movement without leaders becomes rudderless and susceptible to being hijacked by people with agendas inimical to the very reasons behind the protests.  The youth have a unique opportunity to help write a new chapter in our journey to a more compassionate and benign society and a greater nation. Don’t let this historic chance pass through your hands. You deserve this moment, as does the nation we love.

We have a committed President who has the will power to get difficult things done. We have that in President Muhammadu Buhari.  I urge you to have the confidence and fortitude to have this conversation with him. You will find in him a listening ear and a ready partner. I say to the youth – Your time has come.  History now waits for you to turn protest into dialogue and grievance into solution.

 -Sunday Dare is the Minister of Youth &Sports Development, Nigeria.