The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Afenifere

  • Afenifere and its politics of contraditions

    Afenifere and its politics of contraditions

    There is disquiet in the fold of Afenifere following Sunday’s resignation of its leader, Pa Reuben Fasoranti. Group Political Editor EMMANUEL OLADESU and ENITAN SERIKI look at the consequences of the exit of the octogenarian politician. They write that this is not the best of times for the pan-Yoruba socio-political organisation.

    SHOCK and disbelief were the expressions on the faces of notable Afenifere chieftains yesterday. It was over the resignation of Pa Rueben Fasoranti as the leader of the pan-Yoruba socio-political group.

    They content that the resignation of the octogenarian will create a leadership vacuum, which may ultimately stir a crisis within the group.

    But, to the Publicity Secretary of the organization, Mr. Yinka Odumakin, there is no cause for alarm as the situation remains under control. According to him, chieftains of the organisation would soon meet to deliberate on the issue and on other matters germane to the welfare of the Yoruba race.

    Acknowledging the resignation, he said: “Consultations are still on among members of the organisation. We are going to meet soon over the matter. We will come out with a position. We are on top of it.”

    Odumakin has an ally in Afenifere chieftain, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, who said there is nothing strange in Fasoranti’s resignation.

    Announcing his resignation on Sunday, Pa Fasoranti, said he was calling it quit with the group because the goals of its founding fathers “are gradually being eroded.”

    However, Adebanjo, disputed the claim and insisted that Fasoranti stepped on account of old age. According to him, it was untrue that the group is enmeshed in crisis, maintaining that there is nothing unusual about the resignation.

    Adebanjo said: “He (Fasoranti) is old. He is 89. That is why he resigned. Papa Ajasin and Adesanya did not attain that ripe old age. Pa Fasoranti said the youths don’t listen to elders again and that you behave as you like. When Ajasin was weak, he asked Adesanya to act. When Adesanya took ill, we appointed him (Fasoranti) as leader. There is nothing unusual about that. We have no crisis. The man has been sick (ill) of late. He just left the hospital few days ago. The job is rigorous. We hold a lot of meetings. Go and read his statement.

    “We will meet and appoint a new leader. When we get to the meeting, we will attend to the vacancy. When we meet, we will appoint a new leader. I can’t tell you how a new leader will emerge until we meet at the meeting.”

    Fasoranti,  a Second Republic Commissioner for Finance in Ondo State, joined Afenifere at inception in 1951, under the leadership of the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo. He succeeded Senator Abraham Adesanya, who passed on eight years ago. He was selected as the acting leader by a section of the organisation when the leader took ill.

    When the organisation split into two, following the ‘Akure Declaration’ by Fasoranti that Senator Mojisoluwa Akinfenwa, and not Chief Bisi Akande, was the National Chairman of the Alliance for Democracy (AD), aggrieved Afenifere chieftains, including Akande, Aremo Olusegun Osoba, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, Senator Biyi Durojaye, Pa Olatunji Hamzat, Prince Tajudeen Olusi, Otunba Niyi Adebayo, the late Alhaji Lam Adesina, and Chief Michael Koleoso, picked a Second Republic Senator, Pa Ayo Fasanmi, as the deputy leader.

    Fasoranti was later proclaimed as the leader by the faction. Key members of the Fasoranti faction include: Sir Olaniwun Ajayi, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Senator Femi Okunrounmu, Basorun Sehinde Arogbofa, Chief Korede Duyile, Dr. Fredrick Fasehun, Senator Mojisoluwa Akinfenwa and Chief Olu Falae.  The division between the two camps was exhibited during the burial of Pa Adesanya at Ijebu-Igbo when the chieftains were locked in a bitter struggle for supremacy.

    But, the younger elements, led by Mr. Wale Oshun, a Third Republic House of Representatives Chief Whip, formed the Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), which tried in vain to reconcile the two factions led by Fasoranti and Fasanmi. ARG members include: Dr. Kayode Fayemi, Mr. Ayo Afolabi, Mr. Segun Odegbami, Mrs Toke Benson and Mr. Kunle Famoriyo. A prominent member of the ARG, Mr. Jimi Agbaje, left the group, following his defection to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

    As the leadership crisis that engulfed the organisation in post-Adesanya era escalated, other Afenifere intellectuals and compatriots – Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi, Dr. Dapo Fafowora, Gen. Alani Akinrinade – quietly distanced themselves from the crisis in the fold and embraced other platforms for raising the national question germane to peaceful co-existence among the diverse ethnic groups making up the heterogeneous country.

    Hope of reconciliation between the two camps was bright during the preparations for the anniversary of Pa Adebanjo’s 80th birthday. But, a highly inflammable media interview granted by the combative politician in which blamed the crisis on Tinubu, Osoba and past Allinace for Democracy (AD) governors, aborted the reconciliatory moves. No a few chieftains in the Fasanmi faction, believed the tone of Adebanjo’s interview bungled the effort.

    Afenifere’s National Secretary, Arogbofa, who was reluctant to comment on Fasoranti’s resignation, urged calm, saying that there is no crisis in the group. The renowned educationist and author said: “We should be patient. We are discussing. We are consulting. I won’t say more than that.”

    Falae, former Secretary to a Federal Military Government and one-time Minister of Finance, also declined comment. He said: “At this stage, there is no comment. Give us some time. We are sorting some matters out. There is no need for comment at this stage.”

    Fasoranti gave three reasons for his resignation. Apart from citing old age, he chided the chieftains for disloyalty. The octogenarian also lamented that the organisation has derailed from the vision of its founding  fathers, including  Awolowo, Chief S.O. Sonibare, Chief Michael Ajasin, Chief Bola Ige, Pa Solanke Onasanya and Pa Emmanuel Alayande – all deceased.

    Unlike other ethnic nationalities, Yoruba have lacked a united and cohesive socio-political group for interest articulation since the death of Chief Adesanya. Consequently, many observers believed that the once vibrant mouthpiece has been battling with a fading influence in the polity. During the last election, the organisation, against the run of public opinion, adopted former President Goodluck Jonathan, the candidate of a conservative PDP, for a second term, thereby mocking its pedigree and antecedent as a progressive mouthpiece.

     

    The place of Fasoranti in history

     

    Fasoranti will be remembered as a gentleman who became the leader of Afenifere at a very challenging period. Some chieftains, loyal to the Fasanmi group, alleged that he could not easily resist the manipulative tendency of vocal and influential members, whose activities and combativeness led to the split in the organisation.

    Although he joined the group at its inception, Fasoranti, a pioneer student of the University College, Ibadan, where he joined the Action Group (AG) Youth Association, combined his teaching profession with grassroots politics. He was a councillor at the old Akure Local Council. As he served as school principals in Oyo, Iwo, Osogbo, Ado-Ekiti and Iju/Ita-Ogbolu. He was an active member of the Committee of Friends, which metamorphosed to the defunct Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). Although, Ajasin wanted to make him his running mate in 1979, the late Awolowo advised him to give the role to the late Chief Akin Omoboriowo for ethnic balancing. In Akure, he is a great community leader held in high esteem. He is a patriot and incorruptible leader.

    As the factional leader of Afenifere, Fasoranti used the platform to articulate the Yoruba interest. He flayed the Jonathan administration for the marginalisation of the race in the distribution of federal appointments. He also lamented the implications of the disunity in Yorubaland, particularly among Afenifere members, although he could not muster the strength to foster harmony.

    “We have now been relegated to the sidelines precisely because we have lost our unity and focus, and others no longer think they will lose anything, if they do not reckon with us,” he said. Ironically, he later threw his weight behind the immediate past administration, saying that the former President promised to implement the report of the National Conference.

    Collectively, Afenifere members are united by its fundamental goals. These are even beyond the promotion of the narrow Yoruba interest. In his book titled:”The kiss of death: Afenifere and the infidels,” Oshun listed the objectives to include the fight for true and sustainable federalism, resource sharing based on derivation, respect, equality and equity for all nationalities, greater autonomy reflecting in the creation of state police and the power to determine the development priorities of their respective people.

    According to observers, there is no evidence that the split in the Yoruba group has ideological connotation. Ajayi, Adebanjo, the late Chief Wumi Adegbonmire, Okunrounmu, Fasanmi, Durojaye, Akande, Adesina, Koleoso, Osoba, Tinubu, Oshun, Hamzat, Segun Adegoke, and Akin Omojola are advocates of federalism and restructuring. The point of departure is the endless personality clashes.

    This decade has been turbulent for Afenifere. What is worrisome is the lack of crisis resolution mechanism within the organisation. The bane of the group may also be its lack of consistency. In 2008, Fasoranti declared: “We have now decided to throw the membership of Afenifere open to all Yoruba people above 18 years, regardless of party affiliations, provided they accept the Afenifere credo of making the welfare of the individual citizen the main purpose of government.”  Many picked holes in this new approach.  The issue then was the difficulty of political habitation in Afenifere by members of the progressive and conservative political parties.

    A source said that Fasoranti may be persuaded to withdraw his resignation letter. But, prominent Akure indigenes doubt the possibility of a u-turn.

     

    Challenges for

    Fasoranti’s successor

     

    No doubt, Fasoranti’s successor would inherit the same challenges that confronted his leadership. These are the strife and rancour in the larger Afenifere, its loss of ideological purity and clarity, lack of crisis resolution mechanism, lack of forgiving spirit among its leaders and perception of the umbrella group as a weak mouthpiece for the Yoruba nation.

    Can Fasoranti’s successor unite Afenifere, breathe a new life into the organisation and relaunch it as a credible, trusted and tested regional mouthpiece? Only time will tell.

    From a foundation of forthrightness to tradition of inconsistency

    AFenifere of yore had a beautiful history. The miracle of development under the late political sage Chief Obafemi Awolowo in the old Western region is traceable to the group. During the military rule, it opposed dictatorship. From its base in the Southwest, the group fired salvos at the soldiers of fortune. Afenifere leaders were rugged nationalists. They were steadfast, committed democrats and unbending pro-democracy crusaders. Many of them defiled the military bullets. Their leaders were harassed, detained and exiled by the power that be. But they did not desert the battle field out. They were men of principle and conviction.

    The late chiefs Adekunle Ajasin, Abraham Adesanya and other compatriots were thorns in the flesh of the military neo-colonialists, who held the country to ransom. The group was not deficient in honour, integrity and credibility. The apex leadership also commanded the respect of the six geo-political zones.

    But, shortly after the restoration of civil rule in 1999, the group lost its common voice.  And since then, Afenifere has been in a fix. Things appear to have fallen apart and the centre could no longer hold. The once thriving, potent and vibrant umbrella organisation, which had its ascendancy in Awolowo political school of thought, has become a shadow of itself. The cord in the family has been severed. The chieftains are today scattered across the political parties. They are locked in the battle for power. To say that the group is in disarray would be an understatement. The group has lost its bite and nobody longer catches cold whenever it sneezes. To observers, the pan-Yoruba group has become a toothless bull dog.

    Afenifere would have lost relevance long ago but for the management of the self-induced stress when the late Adesanya held the forte. The Ijebu-Igbo-born lawyer deployed his wisdom and wielded the two blocs – Ajayi/Adebanjo and Ige tendencies in unsteady cohabitation. It is ironic that the group that fought for democracy failed to manage the achievement.

    In 1999, the group installed five governors in the Southwest under the umbrella of the AD. By 2003, only Tinubu, who was viewed by the group as rebel survived the tremor by retaining Lagos. His governor colleagues – Adesina (Oyo), Osoba (Ogun), Adebayo (Ekiti) and Akande (Osun) and Adebayo (Ondo) – lost the battle for second term despite the support they got from the organisation.

    Afenifere leaders also made a political mistake in their support for Chief Olusegun Obasanjo’s second term bid. The General dealt a terrible blow to Afenifere/AD in the Southwest, where he unseated all the AD governments but one.

    According to observers, the intra-group crises were in phases. It finally culminated in polarisation. Two irreconcilable factions have wobbled on in inexplicable antagonism. The first group, backed by the residual class of “Ijebu Mafia,” is led by Fasoranti. At a time, the faction was backed by former Ogun State Governor Gbenga Daniel. The second faction is led by Fasanmi, an Awoist. Both Fasoranti and Fasanmi were not only compatriots but contemporaries in the old AG. Fasanmi’s faction is the majority Afenifere. But, no regular meeting of the faction takes place. But, Fasoranti’s faction has never failed to hold regular meetings.

    The 2011 governorship election was a litmus test for the two factional leaders. The Fasoranti camp campaigned for candidates running on the platform of Daniel’s Peoples Party of Nigeria (PPN). The  Fasanmi’s group campaigned for ACN candidates.

     

    Where things went wrong?

     

    How did Afenifere lost its steam to become a weak vehicle? The group has been battling with internal crisis since Awolowo days. The internal wrangling manifested in the bitter succession battle into the stool of Awolowo, the leader of the group. One of the contenders, Ige, nicknamed Arole Awolowo by admirers, was nearly rusticated from the group in 1982 at the Yola congress of the defunct Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). Historians dubbed it the night of long knives.

    In this dispensation, Akinyemi, whose illustrious father, Canon Akinyemi, was a member of the old order, dissected the group, doubting that the organisation’s openness to new ideas. The former Foreign Affairs minister faulted the old method of running the group. But, the old men fired back, labelling them as too young to know the details of the credo. Reflecting on the fate of Afenifere, Akinyemi declared: “Nigeria and Africa have been plagued with the tensions arising from making a transition from political systems dominated by founding fathers to systems managed by first among equals.”

    He also pointed out that some of the dramatis personae may not have elevated Afenifere interest above personal interest.

    Oshun pointed out that the protracted crises in Afenifere had their roots in the Bola Ige/Ayo Adebanjo personality clashes and Ganiyu Dawodu/Bola Tinubu battle for supremacy and survival. Right from Awolowo days, Ige and Adebanjo had not enjoyed total cordial relationship, although they remained fiercely loyal to Awolowo. When Ige lost the AD presidential ticket to Falae, hell was let loose. As minister, Ige urged his former commissioner when he was governor of Oyo State, Koleoso, to challenge Adebanjo’s bid to retain his position as the AD national vice chairman. The party was destined for two parallel convention – one at Eagle Squares and another at Abuja Gardens.

    In Lagos State, Dawodu never hid his dislike for Tinubu. He was locked in supremacy battle with the governor in the Lagos AD. Tinubu acted fast by building a solid political structure that could survive without Afenifere, ahead of 2003 elections. When Dawodu, backed by Afenifere leaders of Ogun State origin, moved against Tinubu machinery, following the rejection of the 60:40 formula for the sharing of elective and appointive positions in Lagos State, the group crashed.

    When Afenifere ran into turbulence, its lack of crisis resolution mechanism compounded its precarious situation. When AD deputy governors – Kofoworola Akerele-Bucknor and Iyiola Omisore – were at loggerheads with their bosses, when governors Adefarati and Adebayo were at war over Ondo/Ekiti joint property, when leadership tussle in AD between Akande and Akinfenwa got to the peak, when aggrieved Afenifere/AD chieftains were defecting from the party to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the political family became more vulnerable. Some Afenifere leaders called for the restructuring of the group, but the proposal was shot down.

    To observers, Afenifere failed to resolve its “D’Rovans debacle.” The AD presidential convention was expected to be a coronation of a sort for Ige, was Afenifere’s deputy leader. When he lost out, his ego was bruised. A fighter, Ige vowed to revenge. To spite his colleagues, he accepted to serve in the Obasanjo’s cabinet at a wrong time and contrary to the mood of the Southwest. He never returned alive.

    Later, the late Ven Alayande and Justice Adewale Thompson rallied other eminent Yoruba elders outside Afenifere to form the Yoruba Council of Elders (YCE). There was the suspicion that the new group enjoyed the backing of Ige, whose membership of Obasanjo government became an issue, unlike the appointment of Adebanjo into the tiny constitution review committee and the appointment of Senator Cornelius Adebayo as a minister.

    When Ige died, his camp became divided. Two associates of Ige – Akande and Akinfenwa – decided to contest the AD chairmanship. Those opposed to Ige in Afenifere queued behind the senator. But, Tinubu, Adesina, and Adebayo rooted for Akande’s chairmanship. The Mamman Yusuf/Ahmed Abdulkadir scenario was reenacted, with the AD becoming factionalised to its roots. It was evident that the AD was about to be liquidated. The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) was tossing around the AD by giving recognition and withdrawing the fame from Akande and Akinfenwa. The former leader, Adesanya, could not resolve the imbroglio before his demise.

    Had Fasoranti declined to make the famous Akure declaration, may be, the hope of reconciliation would not have dimmed.

     

  • Afenifere has derailed, says Fasoranti

    Afenifere has derailed, says Fasoranti

    •Octogenarian leader quits over members’ ‘disloyalty’

    PAN-Yoruba socio-cultural organisation Afenifere leader Pa Reuben Fasoranti yesterday parted ways with the group, claiming that its founding fathers’ goals “are being gradually eroded”.

    In a letter signed by him, Fasoranti said he could no longer reconcile himself with how the group is drifting.

    Fasoranti, who became the group’s leader after the death of Chief Abraham Adesanya, said he has resigned forthwith.

    The socio-cultural group was formidable in the past until its polarisation led to the emergence of the Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG), under Mr Wale Oshun.

    In the letter addressed to the group’s Secretary-General, Chief Seinde Arogbofa and other leaders, including Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Sir Olanihun Ajayi, Chief Olu Falae, Chief Supo Sonibare and state chairmen, Fasoranti alleged that some members were not loyal.

    The letter reads: “Our organisation, Afenifere, was formed in 1951 under the leadership of our leader, Chief Obafemi Awolowo.

    “The organisation was formed to serve as an umbrella to be used to actualise the dream of a great nation and the Yoruba.

    “Over the years, the Yoruba have tried to focus on a common goal. Chief Awolowo tried to ensure the oneness of our people with a lot of efforts, notwithstanding challenges he faced in the process. Unfortunately, he passed on without actualising this dream.

    “I joined Afenifere from inception with the following leaders; Pa Onasanya, Alhaji Ganiyu Daodu, Pa Abraham Adesanya, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Sir Olanihun Ajayi, Chief Sam Sonibare, Chief Bola Ige, Chief Wunmi Adegbonmire and others.

    “The mantle of leadership fell on the late Pa Adekunle Ajasin , the late Pa Adesanya and me. As events unfolded in the past years, the focus and goals of the founding fathers were gradually eroded.

    “This made it a Herculean task for members to work in unity. Several efforts were made to ensure actualisation of our goals, but it appeared we have not succeeded. This is basically due to reasons best known to members.

    “Let me state clearly that the issue of adoption of the National Conference report had always been the focus and goal of our people in Afenifere even long before the National Conference  was set up.

    ‘’The support of a leader, who promised to implement this report was not a mistake and inevitable despite all public insinuations.

    “Considering my age, efforts and selfless dedication to my country, my state (Ondo), my parties, my past leaders and members in Afenifere in Nigeria and the Diaspora, I inform you all that I have decided to step aside as leader of Afenifere.”

  • Re: Deji, Afenifere and Ndigbo Akure

    My last week’s article which came under the above title attracted a deluge of reactions. Issues raised have been diverse. But one thing that stands out from these views is that, all the facts to the Akure controversy have not been availed to the public. I said that much in the article under reference and my views have been reinforced by some of the contributions. Perhaps, lack of full disclosure accounted for the prominence which disrespect to the culture and tradition of the Akure people assumed on the matter.

    It is neither my intention to re-open issues nor to answer some of the questions that have been posed. But suffice it to say that at the centre of disagreement seems to be leadership and sundry fees at the Mojere market. The alleged disrespect is a fall-out of this misunderstanding. I have devoted this column today for some of the views of my readers. Please read on!

    You are entitled to your opinion. Have you forgotten the era of Jonathan when it was said that Lagos is no man’s land during the election period. Then, the Oba of Lagos was provoked. Which other tribe can try that in Igbo states? Ndigbo must stop it now. Nobody has monopoly of rascality. Don’t take Yoruba for a ride again. It will be resisted at all costs. 08094763002.

    I am surprised that you did not add in your write-up that Akure and indeed Ondo is no man’s land, the traditional refrain of the Igbo with which they insult their host communities wherever they go. But I want to remind you that other tribes in Nigeria live in Ondo peacefully without rancour. Why can’t the Igbo call themselves to order? Instead you are helping them to stoke the embers of disharmony to further provoke hostility with your pedestrian narrative. Very disappointing of you as a platform writer! From Dele Ogundele –Lagos

    You confirmed you do not have the details of the genesis of the disagreement between the Igbo and Deji, yet you went ahead to insinuate unfair treatment of the Igbo. The fact is that no one can expel any one from anywhere but everyone should conform to the rules and regulations of where one finds himself. If Eze Ndigbo is unable to control his people, he should be removed and replaced. 08033001942.

    In as much as your write-up is close to being objective, what the Igbo are doing in other clime can never be tolerated in Igbo land. The title of Eze Ndigbo outside Igbo land is an aberration. It should be dropped and condemned by all right thinking individuals devoid of ethnic consideration. 09036991185.

    There is nothing absolutely wrong with the Igbo having Eze outside Igbo land. The Igbo people should have (Ezes) outside Igbo land. Why should one million Igbo outside Igbo land not have an Eze? Who mandated the sending of the 10-man committee to Lagos? Were the Igbo asked about it? If those Eze at home really care about Igbo people, they would not have engaged in the dance of shame. From Reginald Ekeanyanwu.

    The last sentence of the second to-the-last paragraph cannot be right. We still read about persons in the Igbo speaking states who were banished from their own villages/communities for running foul of their culture and tradition. The Yoruba revere their Oba. Yes you are free to live anywhere in Nigeria. However, it behoves on us to recognize the original settlers/indigenes of those areas-their culture and tradition so as to promote peaceful co-existence. As visitors and migrants, we should not ride roughshod over issues people hold dear. Nation building and integration have remained a mirage if not, why do we take our notable dead back home for burial? 08034726625.

    What is your take on the Eze Ndigbo title holder telling the Deji that he cannot prostrate to greet him because he too is a king? He disrespected our king. From Seyi A. 08106140234.

    Your write-up is punchy, direct and well balanced. May this country never know civil war again! From Charles Emmanuel, Lagos.

    The simple answer to your argument is to ask you to name any Yoruba crown Oba in the eastern or northern part of this country. All you can get is the chairman/president of Yoruba residing in those places. It is an indisputable fact that out of the three major tribes in the so-called unity in diversity, the Yoruba is the most liberal and accommodating and this is the cause of her ordeal in the hands of others. If it is true that we are one entity, let us all imbibe the principle of do unto others as you would expect others to do unto you. From B I. Aguda Iloro-Ekiti.

    Good article but wrong conclusion. Why is it that the Igbo are the only people in Nigeria who feel that they are foreigners in their own country? Nigeria has been more than fair to the Igbo. Igbo should learn how to show respect to their hosts. Igbo should learn how to respect our culture in Yoruba land. They should learn to behave like Romans when they are in Rome. From Tola Mayomi.

    I think you got it all wrong. He issue is about culture and not that of indigene/foreigner. I lived in the East for 18 years and as a Yoruba man I dared not break kola nut while in the midst of Igbo elders even though I am an elder. It is the culture of the people and I respected that. The Igbo do not have a culture of kingship, we Yoruba people do. Why then should they come to Yoruba land with a strong kinship? What an insult and what an abomination? That is the issue. 07036869868.

    Check and cross check your facts before publication. There was never a time we were threatened with expulsion from Akure. Can a Sarikin Hause in Onitsha, Enugu or Umuahia put on beaded crown in any of those towns? Please advise the so-called Eze Ndigbo to adhere to the directive of the Ohaneze by adopting the title of Onyendu Ndigbo. In any case, the various president generals of Ndigbo in the various states outside Igbo land are enough as paramount Igbo leaders. From Dike

    I would start by commending your attempt at disabusing the minds of the people on the baseless allegation of disrespect and insubordination to the Deji of Akure land by the Eze Ndigbo, Gregory Iloehika and the abuse of Yoruba culture and tradition by the Igbo in Akure. I marvel at your sense of judgment because even though you did not and still do not have detailed facts on what actually happened, you have been able to at least, use your common sense in arriving at your opinion on the issue. If I may ask, how do we justify the decision of the Deji that only Akure indigenes will occupy the post of chairman in the Mojere spare parts market irrespective of the preferences of the traders? How does the rejection by the Igbo traders of the demand for the payment of N50,000 fee for any new apprentice mean disrespect to the tradition and culture of the Akure people? From Secretary Igbo community.

    The new Oba should not hide under other excuses to show his hatred for the Igbo. What offence did the Igbo commit for their leaders to be beaten up and disgraced in his palace under his eyes? The Ezeigbo was crowned in the same palace for the Igbo by the former Deji of Akure. Why the actions of the new Deji if not personal hatred for the Igbo?  Please let us call him to order. From Engr. Maduka, Igbo Political Union, Warri. .

    You are as guilty as the Deji. Which resources do you have in Igbo land that is not in Akure? 08033227983.

  • Afenifere: Still on that threat of secession

    Afenifere: Still on that threat of secession

    With a raging Boko Haram war, an economy just getting out of the woods and an imperilled security situation, it was not the best seeing Afenifere threatening not only to expel Nigerians from other parts of the country but also suggesting it might lead her own people  out of Nigeria. 

    “Since the federal government is obligated to protect the life and property of every citizen, urgent steps should be taken to avert further killings and destruction of farmlands by herdsmen. If the Buhari administration does not discharge its constitutional duty by stopping the unwarranted civil disturbance, we shall not hesitate to pray the Federal High Court to compel it to act responsibly in the circumstances by ensuring the protection of the fundamental rightso f every farmer to life and property” – Femi Falana, SAN.

    The front line lawyer and activist, Femi Falana, SAN,  who authored the epigram to this piece, will not be the last to give us the benefit of his views on the troubling problem of the Fulani herdsmen which recently got exacerbated by that totally irreverent treatment to which Chief Falae was subjected by some Fulani urchins. Indeed, as soon as the highly regarded Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, whose guest I was this past week as he hosted society’s crème de la crème at a reception for his son, and new silk, Dr. Oladapo Olanipekun, SAN,  read my article on the subject, he called to discuss the issue with me.  Although he was beside himself with rage at Chief Falae’s macabre experience and how, unchecked, it could make peaceful co-existence extremely difficult, he nonetheless agreed with me that finding a lasting solution was the important thing. That, indeed, is precisely what I advocate. Indeed, the situation could only worsen if, as the Arewa Consultative Forum has now met the Afenifere threat with theirs, government, at all levels, do not move proactively to find that modus vivendi.

    One of the points I made in my first intervention is exactly what Mr. Falana has also done. Afenifere is an organisation of highly regarded Nigerian elders, patriots, in fact, who have more than paid their dues. Afenifere has all it takes, and is, indeed, in a pole position to put President Muhammadu Buhari to task on giving this problem all the seriousness it deserves with a view to arriving at a comprehensive solution. The president should be able to do this in collaboration with stakeholders and elders, as well as with governments at all levels and in all parts of the country. If in the past, as an ordinary Nigerian, he had championed the cause of his ethnic compatriots, irrespective of whatever they did, especially as in the then Oke-Ogun case, this is the time to put the fire to his feet with a view to making him demonstrate that he is now a national leader, indeed the President of the Federal Republic.

    For the warring groups, this is no time to play the politics of any assumed ethnic superiority or one to gift some abrasive young men the opportunity to drag Afenifere into pulling their chestnuts out of the fire for them, repeating all those names they called the Hausa/Fulani during the campaigns when it was trendy for them to be seen, in cahoots with Mrs Patience Jonathan, in demonising northerners and rubbishing their culture. On either side, there are things we do not expect elders to indulge in. Countries go to war but at the end of it all, they sit round the conference table, winner and loser alike, to iron things out and agree the peace terms. With a raging Boko Haram war, an economy just getting out of the woods and an imperilled security situation, it was not the best seeing Afenifere threatening not only to expel Nigerians from other parts of the country but also suggesting it might lead her own people  out of Nigeria. I believe that with all the good they have done the country, with the ingenious way they ensured that the goggled one could not kill the Yoruba in their millions, even if he succeeded in killing some and driving others into exile, our elders must be eager to leave behind legacies we can all be proud of. Peace is nowhere an easy commodity. We must therefore work assiduously for it and we expect our elders, God keep them, to lead in our continuing search for same. Nor can we forget that, as Professor Bola Akintehinwa put it in his robust  intervention, survival is the core  issue on both sides which then means it is a much more sensitive issue than the young Afenifere members could attempt to latch on to play a ‘Moses’ for the Yoruba people.

    Worse than all the above, however, is the belligerency we have seen demonstrated by both senators Musa Kwankwaso  and Shehu Sanni; two otherwise respected Hausa-Fulani senators who have shown such crass insensitivity and uncharacteristic illogicality that you begin to wonder if they are worth the respect usually accorded them on account of what we thought we knew about them. Their most unaccustomed sabre rattling, seeing only the rights of their murderous compatriot Fulani herdsmen, and feeling total unconcern for their victims, many of who are murdered or raped, apart from their destroyed farms, go a long way to suggest that it is men like these, Fulanis of power and of means, who provide these murderous hordes with their lethal arms. It further shows how ordinary Nigerians, across board, must never put their lives’ hopes and aspirations in the hands of unreflecting politicians. Why is it so difficult for these two senators to see beyond narrow ethnic considerations, knowing, full well, what a menace the Fulani herdsman has become all over the country but especially in states like Plateau, Benue, Nasarawa, which they have turned to killing fields and Ondo, Ekiti but with Oyo bearing the brunt of their compatriots’ mindless gangsterism? Why is it beyond the politician to think national or even be rational for once? And why, as senators, has neither men raised the matter as one of urgent national interest in the hallowed red chamber?  Must politicians only think of the next election?

     In the contribution from which the epigram to this piece was taken, Femi Falana further suggested, and I quote: ‘states with large livestock population should take advantage of the Land Use Act to acquire land for the establishment of grazing reserves adding that in view of the increasing incident of cattle rustling, security measures should be put in place to police the grazing reserves which should, in turn, be phased out and replaced with ranches and abattoirs.” These, in my view, are very positive contributions but I was particularly impressed with what our much despised Nigeria police did this past week in Oyo State in order to secure a meaningful rapprochement between the two infernal enemies.

    As reported in The Nation of Monday 26, October 2015, the Oyo State command, as part of concerted efforts to curb the perennial conflict between Fulani herdsmen and farmers in the Oke Ogun, Ibarapa land, Oyo, Ogbomosho and other parts of the state, the Commissioner of Police, Lere Oyebade, summoned a peace meeting between the two warring groups at which representatives of traditional rulers and other stakeholders were present and far reaching decisions taken. In the advertised communiqué,  we learnt there would now be screening of  incoming herdsmen, apparently as a means of ensuring that undesirable elements do not infiltrate their ranks, that herdsmen should no longer threaten, intimidate or molest the farmers and members of their family, that incoming Fulanis will now be screened and recommended for settlement within particular local government areas by their own older compatriots. It is also now forbidden for herdsmen to carry firearms like AK47.  Additionally, herdsmen will ensure that movements of their flock are controlled at night, possibly by tying them to stakes, and elders of both sides are to monitor the lifestyle of their younger ones. The two obviously most critical decisions, however, revolve around the Fulani herdsmen ensuring that their flock do not graze on farm settlement or forest reserve and that on no occasion should either party resort to violence, no matter the level of provocation. This agreement, in my view, represents a fantastic template which the federal government, and government at all levels, elders and all peace-loving Nigerians should now further develop and made to work until large, and enough, number of ranches are established all over the country.

  • Between Ohaneze, Afenifere and Arewa, I ask again, where is Nigeria?

    Between Ohaneze, Afenifere and Arewa, I ask again, where is Nigeria?

    In this circumstance, Nigeria as a country is stillborn while Ohaneze lives, Arewa lives, Afenifere lives … You must agree that this is a crying shame

    A while back, I put forward the proposition that we have somehow contrived to get Nigeria lost somewhere in the thick folds of starched agbadas donned by our politicians. Many of you read the report and responded; I thank you indeed. To many of you who read it and merely grunted as if saying, tell us something we don’t know, I also grunt my thanks. To those of you who did not read the article, I shake my fist at you. Just be sure it does not happen again.

         In particular, I am giving a reply to someone who raised a question arising from one of my statements that getting Nigeria lost is neither a crying nor a laughing matter for the country. The reader had asked, what then should we do? Well, let me first explain what I mean. We cannot laugh off the fact of the loss because it is heavy. It is a little like a company running a deficit of billions of Naira and the chief executive blithely tells the shareholders at the AGM that the deficit is not something that cannot be laughed off. Well, yeah, if the company has credits of trillions and trillions. Even then, I can imagine some intrepid shareholders bursting their veins at the thought of such heavy drains on their profits.

          We also cannot sit and howl our heads off. As they say, life must go on. Just because we are howling does not mean that other people’s or nations’ lives will stop. They may stop momentarily to watch us howl but they will move on to continue their inventions. Believe me, it is because they are not stopping to watch nations howl that the industrialised world has now invented arm chairs for people to sit on (imagine this!) and even foldable arm chairs you can take with you to your village (imagine that!).

         So yes, we should neither laugh nor cry, but we can reassess our approach to national development. Right now, one of the strongest approaches we are adopting in Nigeria is regional affiliation. This affiliation is so strong that people do not identify themselves as Nigerians but according to their regional body. Unfortunately, the existence of these bodies is directly antithetical to the existence of the corporate body. This is why Igbo, Hausa and Yoruba people (as well as the other hundreds of minority groups) exist as concrete entities while ‘Nigerians’ only exist as an abstract entity. So, when we find ourselves outside the country, we present ourselves in this abstract sense as ‘Nigerians’; within the country however, we are content to live this big, fat lie.

        The lie began with the old Nigerian anthem that went ‘Though tribe and tongue may differ/ In brotherhood we stand’ and continues in this present anthem with words like ‘compatriots’, ‘fatherland’, ‘one nation’, etc. In practical terms, however, we are neither ‘compatriots’ nor do we ‘stand’ in ‘brotherhood’. How do I know this?

         To start with, do you know how many cries of marginalisation we have had to endure over the years? Let’s see now. During the years of Obasanjo and Jonathan, the Arewa north, the Afenifere west and the Ohaneze east never tired of singing tunes of being marginalised by the government in the distribution of public posts and amenities. Barely into this present era of Buhari, we have now been having earfuls of Ohaneze’s loud tunes on how the eastern areas have been marginalised in the distribution of national or public perks (i.e., public office and social amenities). And the beat goes on; but it is mostly off tune, off key and staccato.

          From my observation, and I am willing to be corrected, Nigeria is only a pretend country; in reality, it is the three regional countries within it running things. Fifty-five years after independence, the citizens have not evolved to see themselves first and foremost as Nigerians who happen to have come from a locality. Rather, what we have are citizens who have evolved first and foremost into regionalists who happen to reside within the place called Nigeria. Within this circumstance, Nigeria as a country is stillborn while Ohaneze lives, Arewa lives, Afenifere lives, and all jostling for domination, along with their religions and traditions.

            You must agree that this is a crying shame. Just imagine the parts of the body and where they are all coming from. The body can surely not survive where the arm fights for what it can get for its own components (arm, hand, fingers, nails, etc.); the limb does the same for its own group (leg, knee joint, toes, nails, etc.); and the torso does the same for its own group (body, shoulders, head, etc.). Each one will only succeed in drawing the life out of what it is designed to protect and reduce it to a skeleton if it looks out only for its own interests.

            In the present constitutive Nigeria, each region appears homogeneous, which it uses to advantage when seeking the things of itself. Need more representation in government? Cry as a region about marginalisation. Need to protect a son or daughter hounded for embezzlement or misappropriation? Cry wolf as a region. Need more money pumped in your direction? Sing as a region about how no one is paying attention to you. Need more food pumped your way? Why, cry crocodile tears as a region…

           Call me naive, but I do not think any country can survive where the intent of its so-called citizens is to garner as much as they can for their own little corner of the earth. To start with, it jeopardises the most essential ingredient to national development: PATRIOTISM, PATRIOTISM, PATRIOTISM. Oh yes, it also makes everyone sound like a broken record. We have jokingly said many times that a national cake that is only eaten and not baked or replenished will soon run out. When people insist on just taking, sooner or later, they will reach the skeleton.

            Ladies and gentlemen, we have now reached the skeleton of Nigeria I am afraid; people are not ‘doing for’ Nigeria what they should, they are ‘taking from’ Nigeria what they should not. I just look at our lightless situation (e.g. my house enjoys two hours of electricity in twenty-four hours on good days) and shake my head. I am told a story of how someone stopped a national agricultural project from being carried out because it would not benefit his part of the country. Projects are now executed at ten times their cost because someone insists it must be located in his corner of the earth or it must benefit someone else from his locality… I’m sure you know one or two of such stories.

    I ask, how long do you think even a skeleton can keep standing while it is being scavenged? Nigerians are busy now ravaging this skeleton to benefit their various regions and, magically, they also expect it to continue standing and live in good health. How can that be? I think the logic is simple. The continued good health of these regions will spell doom for Nigeria; the continued good health of Nigeria must also spell the doom of these regional interests. We cannot eat our cake and still hope to have it.

          By normal thinking, each region should have been made into or left to evolve as a country at the beginning by Britain. But in Britain’s wisdom (or lack of it as we all appear to have agreed), the units were yoked together. These homogeneous units must then decide which they would rather prefer to survive: their regions or the country. We all need to have been born somewhere; but those places need not be placed above the interests of the nation.

  • Deji, Afenifere and Ndigbo Akure

    Igbo traders in Akure, Ondo State capital shut their shops a couple of days ago to protest alleged moves by the Deji of Akure, Oba Aladetoyinbo Aladelusi to dethrone the Eze Ndigbo of Akure, Sir Gregory Iloehika.  They were also piqued by alleged threats from the Oba to expel them from the ancient city.

    Reports had it that Iloehika had gone to the Oba’s palace with some of his chiefs to honour his (Oba’s invitation) only to be attacked on arrival by some youths who removed his crown, tore his dress and were about to manhandle him further but for the intervention of policemen.

    Initial reports were hazy on the cause of the disagreement. But there were insinuations that the Oba had accused the Eze Ndigbo of insubordination and disrespect to the tradition and culture of the land.

    However, the Oba came out days later through the Asamo of Akure land, Rotimi Olusanya to provide some insight into the episode. He accused the Igbo of violating the tradition and culture of the land; insubordination and disrespect to him.

    He further alleged that Igbo traders at the Moferere market recently contravened the rules guiding the market and that the Eze Ndigbo refused to carry out his order to eject illegal traders from the market. He equally made reference to the embarrassment the Eze Ndigbo caused him and his cabinet during his last visit.  But the clarification did not provide the needed evidence of what constituted the acts of embarrassment by his invitees especially given their allegation that their leader was attacked and disgraced at the palace.

    We needed to know what really happened when the Eze Ndigbo and some of his chiefs arrived at the palace. Given the issues that have been canvassed, the Oba ought to have come public with details of aspects of their conduct that constituted disrespect and insubordination to his throne? The inability to give a comprehensive account of all there is to the issue did not help matters especially in view of its sensitivity.

    For now, it is difficult to fathom any concrete evidence of insubordination and disrespect for the culture and tradition of the Akure people as alleged. The only discernable clue may be found in the refusal of the Eze Ndigbo to expel illegal traders (whatever that means) from the Moferere market. How that would warrant all the incendiary allegations, threat to dethrone and sack Igbo residents in Akure remains largely curious.

    It would appear the controversy is an administrative matter undeserving of the threats and bad blood it has generated. It concerns the source of livelihood of some people. Even as the details of the alleged illegality of the traders remain cloudy, its handling would ordinarily require some caution. It is an issue all those concerned should sit down and trash out taking into account the peculiarity of the situation.

    The Igbo people in Akure have said they respect the culture and tradition of their hosts and there is for now, no evidence to controvert that. There is also no reason why they should not obey the culture and tradition of their hosts. Neither the alleged existence of illegal traders at the Moferere market nor the refusal or inability of the Eze Ndigbo to eject them would suffice as blatant evidence of insubordination and disrespect for the culture and tradition of the Akure people.

    Again, even if there were actions or lack of it on the part of Iloehika that offended the Oba, it was unfair to lump all Igbo residents together and accuse them of blanket malfeasance with threats of expulsion. Good a thing, Ondo State Governor, Dr. Olusegun Mimiko has waded into the matter with a view to resolving it amicably.

    But the intervention of Mimiko and a statement from the Afenifere Renewal Group seem to have opened the lid to the crux of the disagreement. The conditions given by the Oba for the resolution of the matter which required Iloehika to drop the title of Eze Ndigbo in addition to not wearing the crown appear to be the main issue.

    The Afenifere corroborated this when it denounced what it called an “unrelenting desecration of Yoruba culture by Igbo communities’ obsession with having a crown king in Yoruba domain”. They consider it an expansionist agenda that connotes territorial influence and ownership. The group alleged that in Akure, the Eze Ndigbo believes that he has powers to invest people with chieftaincy titles that are traditional to Yoruba kingship system.

    Perhaps, these are some of the issues that have not gone down well with the Oba. If that is the connotation the Eze Ndigbo title conveys within Yoruba land, their worries can be understood. But such conclusion is faulted by the position of the South-East Council of Traditional Rulers on the matter.

    Not long ago, a 10-man delegation of the council led by its chairman, Eze Cletus Ilomuanya visited Oba Rilwan Akiolu of Lagos and urged him and the state government to disregard those who parade themselves as Eze Ndigbo because it is an abuse of the culture and tradition of the Igbo people. They made it clear that the “Eze Ndigbo title was a corruption of the Eze-ship system in Igboland” and those parading themselves as so outside Igboland are “unknown by the Igbo in the locality they reside and not chosen and recognized by anybody”.

    Given the above, Afenifere’s interpretation of the import and connotation of the Eze Ndigbo title was highly exaggerated and therefore guilty of the fallacy of hasty generalization. Those so addressed were at no time enthroned by an assemblage of the Igbo in the localities they reside. So the issue of territorial expansionism and ownership do not have any foundation. Not even when the council of traditional rulers has been having a running battle with those who parade such titles.

    Those that accord them recognition for some expediency should share vicarious responsibility in the matter. Igbo people know their leaders outside their ancestral homes. And such leaders have nothing to do with the Eze Ndigbo title. It is therefore wrong to conclude that those who go by that title do so at the behest of the Igbo for influence and expansion. Ironically, such warped profiling accounts for the quick resort to hold all Igbo residents liable for errors of omission or commission by the so-called Eze Ndigbo title holders.

    The Akure incident brings to the fore all that is wrong with the Nigerian state. Threats to expels non-indigenes at every slight disagreement, is at the root of the subsisting difficulties in nation-building. The impression that those living outside their ancestral homes are being done a favour by their hosts is a patently misplaced one. They live there as a matter of right and not at the whims and caprices of the natives. They are bona fide members of this unity in diversity that appropriates resources from one part of the country to develop others.

    If those from whose backyard much of the resources for the development of the less advantaged parts of the country are fetched, have not claimed exclusive rights, why should the rights of citizens to reside in any part of the country be an issue? It is wrong to seek to abridge or threaten that right under any guise including such issues as disobedience to culture, tradition and insubordination.

    Of course, there are laws, rules and regulations guiding organized conduct to which all are expected to abide. But recurring reminders to citizens that they are foreigners in their own country, will for a long time continue to impair efforts at nation-building and integration. It may turn out the greatest undoing of this country.

  • Rep. berates Afenifere over attack on Buhari

    A member of the House of Representatives representing Akoko South/East federal constituency, Kolawole Babatunde, has berated leadership of the pan-Yoruba socio-political group, Afenifere, for its criticisms on President Muhammadu Buhari’s style of governance.

    The group led by Chief Reuben Fasoranti at its last meeting in Akure, the Ondo State capital, had accused Buhari of being too slow and running the country like a military dictator.

    But Babatunde, who spoke with reporters in Akure, described the Afenifere leaders as selfish individuals only leaving on past glory and not acting in the interests of the Yoruba people.

    He noted that the statement was a calculated attempt to distract Buhari in his mission to reform various sectors of the nation, particularly in the fight against corruption.

    The lawmaker urged Afenifere to offer constructive criticisms and useful suggestions that would assist the government in addressing the various challenges confronting the country.

    The All Progressives Congress (APC) chieftain, who expressed satisfaction with the various steps taken so far by the Buhari-led administration in combating insurgency in the North-East region, further charged the President not to relent in his agenda of fighting corruption to a standstill without fear of intimidation by any individual or group.

    Babatunde also advised the Publicity Secretary of Afenifere, Mr. Yinka Odunmakin, to desist from what he described as his “inglorious style of running down Yoruba leaders while hiding under the name of Afenifere.”

     

  • Our grouse against INEC chair, by Afenifere, Mimiko

    Our grouse against INEC chair, by Afenifere, Mimiko

    THE Yoruba social-cultural group, Afenifere, and Ondo State Governor Olusegun Mimiko yesterday explained why the acting Chairman of Independent National Electoral Commission, Mrs. Amina Zakari, must not be confirmed.

    They noted that Mrs. Zakari, besides being a close ally of President Muhammadu Buhari, was also from the same geo-political zone with him.

    Afenifere spoke through a communique issued after its monthly meeting at the home of its leader, Pa Reuben Fasoranti, in Akure, the Ondo State capital.

    It was read by its spokesman, Yinka Odumakin.

    The group said Mrs. Zakari’s affinity with Buhari would rob future elections of its credibility.

    The communique reads: “The appointment of the acting chairman is known to be controversial. The president is urged to form a full-fledged government by appointing his ministers as stipulated by the 1999 Constitution.

    “There is no provision in the constitution to run the country as a sole administrator. Inclusiveness and consultation are necessary and vital ingredients of our democratic order.”

    The group urged the president to set the necessary machinery in motion toward appointing an acceptable INEC Chairman.

    It urged the president to remember that Kogi, Edo, Bayelsa, Ekiti and Ondo governorship elections are around the corner, adding that there “is no enough time for anybody supervising the election to prepare”.

    “The constitution is clear that the role of the president is to nominate the INEC Chairman in consultation with the Council of State and forward the name to the Senate for clearance.

    “The constitution does not envisage the condition, where the president would either go to the INEC to either remove or appoint somebody in acting capacity, who has not been cleared by the Senate.

    “He should ensure that he looked for a credible Nigerian, who he will nominate for the Council of State as the Chairman of INEC,” the Afenifere said.

    Mimiko, who spoke at the meeting of Southern Nigerian Peoples Assembly in Akure yesterday, condemned Mrs. Zakari’s appointment.

    He said past electoral commission’s chairmen did not come from the same zone with the reigning president since the First Republic, saying the Buhari administration should not be an exception.

    “Mrs. Zakari is a close relative of Mr. President. This has never happened in the history of the country. In the past, the independence of INEC is not in doubt. We are already concerned. The electoral body must not be partisan.”

     ‘It’s too early to criticise Buhari’

    THE Ekiti State Chapter of Afenifere, the pan-Yoruba socio-political group, has declared that it is too early for a section of Nigerians to criticise President Muhammadu Buhari, who is barely three months in office.

    The body said Nigerians must support Buhari’s efforts to rid the country of corruption and clear the mess allegedly left behind by former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration.

    It, however, faulted the position of the Afenifere leader, Chief Reuben Fasoranti, who accused Buhari of ruling like a dictator and running a one-man show by not forming a cabinet since coming to power.

    The state chairman of Afenifere, Chief Ibidapo Awojolu, who spoke in Ado-Ekiti yesterday, said Buhari has given the country the right direction and showed that “he possesses the ability to offer quality leadership”.

    He maintained that the people of Ekiti State and the Yoruba were not opposed to Buhari, saying they remain important stakeholders in his administration and would never antagonise a government that was determined to take Nigeria out of the woods.

    Awojolu said the impression created by Fasoranti was incorrect and not in tandem with expectations of majority of Nigerians, who were happy with Buhari’s vision in enthroning probity, accountability and transparency in governance.

    He said: “Criticising Buhari is premature and too early in the day. He is not up to three months in office. How can you be criticising somebody who has four years to spend in office and be assessing his performance within three months?

    “The criticism is part of the inbuilt prejudice and antagonism they have against him, which started from the election period.

    “The Yoruba are not against Buhari and we want to say that nobody either as a person or a group should make other Nigerians believe that the Yoruba are against President Buhari.”In Ekiti State, majority of the people are in support of President Buhari and what he (Fasoranti) wants the whole Nigerians to believe is that the Yoruba are against Buhari and this is not true.

    “Buhari has performed creditably well in three months, we are not opposed to Buhari and Ekiti Afenifere with Senator Ayo Fasanmi as our leader will actively support the Federal Government under Buhari.

    “The impression being created by the national leader should be corrected. We are not opposed to Buhari. This is our government and we will give him all the support he needs to turn around the fortunes of this great nation.”

     

  • It’s too early to criticize Buhari – Afenifere

    The Ekiti State Chapter of Egbe Afenifere, the pan-Yoruba socio-political group, has declared that it is too early for a section of Nigerians to criticize President Muhammadu Buhari who is barely three months in office.

    The body said all Nigerians must support Buhari’s efforts to rid the country of corruption and clear the mess allegedly left behind by former President Goodluck Jonathan’s administration.

    It, however, faulted the position of the Afenifere Leader, Chief Reuben Fasoranti, who accused Buhari of ruling like a dictator and running a one-man show by not forming a cabinet since coming to power.

    The Ekiti State Chairman of Afenifere, Chief Ibidapo Awojolu, who spoke in Ado Ekiti on Tuesday, said Buhari has given the country the right direction and showed that he possesses the ability to offer quality leadership.

    He maintained that the people of Ekiti State in particular and the Yoruba in general are not opposed to Buhari, saying they remain important stakeholders in his administration and would never antagonize a government that is determined to take Nigeria out of the woods.

    Awojolu said the impression created by Fasoranti was incorrect and not in tandem with expectations of majority of Nigerians who are happy with Buhari’s vision in enthroning probity, accountability and transparency in governance.

    He said: “Criticizing Buhari is premature and too early in the day. He is not up to three months in office, how can you be criticizing somebody who has four years to spend in office and be assessing his performance within three months?

    “The criticism is part of the inbuilt prejudice and antagonism they have against him which started from the election period.

    “The Yoruba are not against Buhari and we want to say that nobody either as a person or a group should make other Nigerians believe that the Yoruba are against President Buhari.

    “In Ekiti State, majority of the people are in support of President Buhari and what he (Fasoranti) wants the whole Nigerians to believe is that the Yoruba are against Buhari and this is not true.”

  • Afenifere, OPC, no longer relevant in southwest —Agbekoya

    Two socio-political and cultural groups in southwest region of Nigeria, Afenifere and Odua Peoples Congress (OPC) have lost their relevance in the region, renowned farmers’ pressure group, Agbekoya Society has said.

    The group said its assessment was based on the inglorious role which Afenifere and OPC played in the build up to the recently concluded elections, when they drummed support for the re-election of President Goodluck Jonathan.

    In a statement jointly signed by two chieftains of the group, Messrs Ade Ogunlana and Ajibola Salau, the group said: “Due to the misguided and unpopular support which Afenifere and OPC gave to the outgoing President Goodluck Jonathan in his failed bid to return as president, the two groups have lost their relevance, popularity and influence in the southwest region of Nigeria.

    “Since the death of Afenifere leader, Pa Abraham Adesanya, Afenifere has been disorganised and divided into many factions. Likewise OPC, which always claim that they were fighting for the Yoruba but now fight for their pocket by openly campaigning for Jonathan and indulging in partisan politics.

    Our group remains the only organisation that Yorubas reckon and we have been championing the cause of the people of southwest since our establishment in 1938.”