The Nation Newspaper

Tag: arrogance

  • Hubris Vs arrogance

    Hubris Vs arrogance

    It wasn’t exactly like Fela’s immortal “wahala sleep yanga go wake am”.  It was more like Hubris doing provocative struts in Arrogance’s liar.

    That was one wahala doing monkey business with another.  It was fated to be explosive.

    So when Dino (you know who), with the rest of his ad hoc Senate committee on “Economic wastes in the Nigerian Customs Service” in tow (sounds like custom-made senatorial wahala, if you’d permit the pun), started running his mouth about why Customs’ Hammeed Ali didn’t exactly come hopping down to the gate, and prostrate before Dino’s committee members (if you’d excuse a Dino-esque hyperbole), he knew he was fishing for trouble.

    When finally Dino crashed down the gavel, to signal the Senate of the Federal Republic had descended on the Customs, and that the sub-humans there must begin to shiver, that clear act of intimidation was tantamount to waging red flag in front of a raging bull.

    Hammeed Ali, military conceit and all, swiftly called his bluff, and virtually plastered Dino’s face with rotten tomatoes.  He ought to have known: his adversary, who had kept a Senate, distracted over inanities, at bay over the empty battle over Customs uniform, takes absolutely no prisoners!  It is to Dino’s eternal shame that he picked a wrong battle, at a wrong venue.

    The facts?  Dino Melaye, leading his Senate committee to the Abuja headquarters of the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS), accused the Customs boss of breaking protocol, since he met the  visiting committee, not at the gate (as “protocol demanded”) but right at the meeting venue.  He therefore charged Ali with lack of decorum and courtesy.

    Ali lost no time to call his bluff, retorting that since no senator comes over to the gate to usher in any citizen invited to its chamber, the Senate could not, in all good conscience, expect citizens to roll before it, when it goes visiting other chambers.

    The truth is decorum is win-win; and civil society thrives on common courtesies.  But no laws enforce these courtesies.  Only reciprocal respect does.

    So, while it sounded arrogant for the Customs boss to virtually tell Dino and his committee to go jump inside the nearest lake and get drowned, it was the height of hubris for Dino to give such a stentorian, school masterly lecture, on an alleged protocol, no more than a convention, which you cannot legally enforce.

    To Hardball, this is another needless distraction.  While Nigerians, corporate and individual, should hold the Senate and other democratic institutions in high esteem, these institutions too should be wary of standing on their institutional dignity.

    Mutual respect is it.  The Senate is no god to be worshipped, willy-nilly, by the people, on pains of dire repercussions.  It rather should earn the people’s respect, even awe, by its exemplary conduct.

    This particular Senate hasn’t conducted itself with such grace.  Neither has Dino, with his often maverick comments and acts, the decorum expected of a senator.

    Still, now that senatorial hubris has clashed with military conceit, it is hoped both sides have learnt customized (ah, that word again!) humility.

    But democratic ethos demands that both parties work together, not for the hurting Senate, as it is wont, to withdraw into its laager to plot further anti-Customs mischief; and Customs’ Ali, with swashbuckling deering-do, to plot further anti-Senate rebellion.

  • Lateef Raji: Arrogance of death

    One of the most painful experiences anyone could have on earth is the death of a loved one. No doubt about it, death occurs in diverse places and through various means on a daily basis. In fact, man has come to accept with philosophical calmness the reality of death as an integral part of human existence. Such is the audacious brutality of death.

    In spite of the larger than life’s carriage of death, it however takes a sense of personal loss to really come to grapple with the pains that come with the demise of a close acquaintance. When we hear stories about the death of people in far and near places, we just take a casual note, shrug a bit and move on. It is one of those things and life goes on.

    But then, when death decides to pluck from the midst of those you consider as very dear to you, the reaction sharply differs. I had lost a dear brother and it was a very agonizing experience. It is never a tea party to lose a dear one. Though the hurt has healed, but the scar remains. Once in a while, I can’t but ruminate on what life might have looked like if my brother hadn’t succumbed to the cold hand of death. With the experience of my brother’s heart-breaking demise, I had erroneously thought that my heart is now cast in iron and no news of death could ever break me again. How wrong!

    Few years later, death was to strike again. This time around, it happened in a most wicked and traumatized manner and at a most unusual period. February is usually considered as a month of love. It has become a global tradition. Nearly everyone looks up to February in anticipation of a festival of love. But this particular February was a different one. It was a month of thick darkness. Characteristically, with darkness comes deep sorrow. Ironically, it was on a Sunday. Till now, everything had gone perfectly well. We have just had a glorious service at the church and were blissfully heading home. Then, my phone rang! It was a messenger of death! And suddenly, darkness beckoned. Few hours later, we had completed the burial of a dear colleague and her husband who died in a ghastly motor accident.

    It was an awfully tormenting experience that was so hard to fathom. But then, never undermine the capacity of the human heart to absorb misfortune. With time, we got over the shock of the deeply scary episode. Life is like a train in motion, though it stops at various terminals, it must move on. So again, life goes on.

    But then, as earlier affirmed, death is a daily routine in human existence. Few days ago, with the precision of a sharp shooter, death struck again. This time, death was quite subtle in its tactic. When I chatted with Hon. Lateef Raji on a popular social media platform that Saturday morning, I had great hope and immense relief that all was going to be fine. Hope is an essential component of life. Hope is a daily necessity. Without hope, life would be an excruciating torment. Hope has the ability to help people heal faster and easier. But death is arrogant. It has no place for hope. Indeed, death earnestly detests hope. Its primary mission is to turn hope to despair.

    So, barely 48 hours after the chat that ignited great hope in me that Hon. Raji would, indeed, play a fast one on death, the deadly monster struck with the decisiveness of a Supreme Court judge. Very early that bleak Monday morning, the messenger of death was again on duty. The mission was to herald the gloomy news of the demise of Hon. Raji. My heart ached! How does one begin a Monday morning with such devastating news? If he must die at all, must it be on a Monday morning? Such is the arrogance of death. It has no regard for time and place.

    Death meets man everywhere. It is procured by every instrument, and in all chances, and enters through many doors. To some, death come by violence and secret influence while to others it comes by the aspect of a star and the scent of a mist, by the emissions of a cloud and the meeting of a vapour, by the fall of a chariot and the stumbling at a stone. Others encounter death through a full meal or an empty stomach, by watching at the wine or by watching at prayers, by the sun or the moon, by a heat or a cold, by sleepless nights or sleeping days. Others are gotten by death through water frozen into the hardness and sharpness of a dagger, or water thawed into the floods of a river, by a hair or a raisin, by violent motion or sitting still.  Many deaths occur suddenly, like the case of those that recently lost their lives in Sierra Leone after a three day torrential rainfall. You see? Death even hides in rains!

    As I began to process the shocking news of Hon. Raji’s demise, in my distress, I thought: Why couldn’t death spare good people. At least, allow them live longer to reap the reward of their goodness. Hon. Raji was a good man. Initially, as the Special Adviser to the Lagos State Governor (2011-2015), he was naturally my boss. But then, good people aren’t too good at playing bosses. So, he soon became a friend. Later he became a mentor. He loved people and he wanted to make them happy. He ran an open door policy. His ears were ever opened to the yearnings of the people. Though he didn’t have much, but he was willing to share the little he had with people. Unlike modern day’s counterfeits, he was a real comrade who didn’t believe in undue craze for wealth. He had little but was quite contented with what he had.

    As I continued to process the news of his sad and untimely death, the rhetorical question came up in my mind once again: “Why would death not spare good people?” Well, that is what makes death arrogant. It does what it wants and gets away with it. Nothing can tame death. Not science. Not technology. Not even watchfulness. Death will strike when it will.

    As for the departed Hon. Lateef Raji, one would like to remind mourning family members, friends, loved ones and colleagues of the philosophical and immortal words of legendary Williams Shakespeare in Julius Caesar: “Cowards die many times before their deaths. The valiant never taste of death but once”. Death has done its worst. It can’t kill him twice. Adieu, Lateef Raji! You have fought a good fight. As for all aching hearts, with time, they will heal again and life goes on.

     

    • Ogunbiyi is of the Ministry of Information & Strategy, Alausa, Ikeja, Lagos.
  • Ignorant arrogance

    Ignorant arrogance

    •Buhari’s CSO should apologise to The Punch and its reporter 

    At the very inception of the regime in which he served as Nigeria’s military Head of State between December 1983 and 1985, General Muhammadu Buhari had unequivocally alerted a startled nation that his government would tamper with the freedom of the press. The authoritarian and anti-free press legacy of the period was to dog Buhari long after his forced exit from power and no doubt contributed significantly to the negative public perception that resulted in his loss at the polls in three successive attempts to be elected as President of Nigeria in 2003, 2007 and 2011, respectively.
    Buhari’s success in the 2015 presidential election was partly because a critical cross-section of the populace had been persuaded to see him in a new light as a transformed former dictator capable of exercising power within the restraining context of liberal democracy. To be fair to President Buhari, there has been no reason to doubt that he is now committed to the tenets of democracy, the rule of law and a free press since his second coming to power.
    This is why the decision, last week, by the President’s Chief Security Officer (CSO), Mr. Bashir Abubakar, to expel the correspondent of The Punch newspaper accredited to cover the Presidential Villa, Abuja, Mr. Olalekan Adetunji, from covering the beat and even accessing the power precinct came to the public as a rude shock and constitutes a great disservice to the Buhari presidency.
    Constituting himself into the accuser, the prosecutor and the judge in a case of his own making, Mr. Abdullahi literally put the correspondent on trial in his office, demanded a written statement from him under duress and meted out his arbitrary and capricious punishment informed by nothing but prejudice and malice. The Punch correspondent’s crime in the estimation of the CSO was that he had written stories published in his medium depicting the ebb of activities at the Villa since the president’s return from his last medical vacation, as well as anxieties raised in some quarters as regards the implications of Buhari’s ailing health for governance. The CSO chose to arrogate to himself the power to determine which stories are objective, in the national interest and worth publishing, while also impugning the motive, both of the reporter and his medium.
    That the CSO acted unilaterally without the knowledge of the president’s media office reflects not just his impunity but also the confusion and lack of coordination that characterises the inner workings of the presidency. Indeed, Mr. Abdullahi had reportedly met earlier with the press corps at the Presidential Villa, with a view to influencing them to do their jobs from the perspective of the government disguised as objective reporting in the purported national interest.
    The presidential spokespersons, Mr. Femi Adeshina and Mallam Garba Shehu, deserve commendation for dissociating the presidency from the CSO’s atrocious behaviour and also ensuring the recall of the barred correspondent. But that is clearly insufficient remedy for the damage done. The correspondent was not only placed under psychological siege, his rights were abridged, albeit briefly, while his professional judgement and even patriotism were unjustifiably questioned.
    Furthermore, the CSO’s action raised doubts about the presidency’s commitment to a free press and suggested a desire to gag reporting on the president’s health, which is most unfortunate given Buhari’s commendable transparency on the matter. This palpably ignorant, yet insufferably arrogant officer must at the very least be made to tender an apology to The Punch and its traumatised correspondent. That is the best way to demonstrate that his preposterous behaviour does not enjoy surreptitious presidential approbation.

  • Rule of law and arrogance of corruption

    It is no longer news that President Muhammadu Buhari abhors corruption like a plague. He, indeed, made the war against corruption one of the focal points of his electioneering campaigns. At every opportunity, he told Nigerians: “If we don’t kill corruption, corruption will kill us”. That, of course, underscores the endemic and institutionalized nature of corruption in our nation.

    In Nigeria, corruption is worse than any killer disease one can ever think of. From independence till date, corruption has been bad news for our country. It has been estimated that over $300bn have either been outrightly stolen or misappropriated by government officials and their collaborators since the advent of the current political dispensation in 1999.

    Buhari would have none of that. For him, corruption must die for our nation to live. Now, true to his promise and, perhaps, true to type, Buhari has begun to tackle corruption headlong as evident in the various on-going corruption trials and investigations in the country. Revelations from such investigations, as usual, have been mindboggling. Weird disclosures concerning the arms scandal in particular, is quite nauseating.  That a group of Nigerians could boldly divert money meant for such vital national needs as purchase of arms for soldiers fighting insurgency to other use, is a reflection of how low we have sunk as a people. It is, therefore, a welcome development that legitimate means are being used to bring perceived culprits in the arms deal saga to book. The only thing that evil needs to thrive in any given society is for evil to constantly go unpunished.

    But then, for the President to actually succeed in his war against corruption, he has a big hurdle to cross. This hurdle is called the rule of law. Universally, the rule of law operates on the legal theory that law should govern a nation and not capricious verdicts of ‘powerful’ individuals.  The rule of law underlines the power and weight of law within society, principally as a restraint upon behaviour, including that of public officials. Democracy and the rule of law are mutually interwoven. For democracy to sufficiently thrive in any country, the supremacy of the rule of law must be jealously guarded. The guiding principle behind the rule of law is the prevention of anarchy and the creation of a just society where everyone is equal before the law. The rule of law presupposes that no lawbreaker must go unpunished.

    From the foregoing, it could be affirmed, at least in theory, that the rule of law provides a legal framework for Buhari to wage his war against corruption. Since supposed looters of the treasury have actually acted in defiance of the law, the law must take its toll on them. But it is not really that simple as the rule of the law equally protects alleged looters of the nation’s economy from arbitrary persecution and prosecution. This is the beauty of the principle of the rule of law. Since offence allegedly committed by the perceived looters is yet to be substantially proven before a competent court of law, they are presumed innocent until proven otherwise.

    This, however, is the dilemma of Buhari in his war against corruption. Over the years, corruption has found comfort in the provision of the rule of law to strengthen its evil hold on the nation. So, all it takes for an alleged corrupt individual to escape from or frustrate the wheel of justice is to hire a brilliant legal luminary who understands the strength and weakness of the law and uses same to the full advantage of his client. Since corruption has given the alleged looter enormous access to ill-gotten wealth, money is not likely to be a problem in the scheme to subvert justice. On the long run, rather than the law taking care of corruption, corruption takes care of the law. Ultimately, corrupt public officials and individuals become atrociously arrogant as they revel in their above the law status.

    Confronted by the enormous wealth and the smart corrupt public officials and ‘powerful’ individuals, the law simply becomes a mere paper tiger and a toothless bulldog. Of what use is a properly crafted law that cannot be enforced? This is exactly the reason why many of the high profile corruption cases that have been in court for years remain mostly inconclusive. Majority of the former governors and other prominent political figures whose corruption cases were once widely celebrated in the media are now walking free in the society and equally playing vital roles in the nation’s social-political and economic spheres. This has made many Nigerians to become dispirited about the likely outcome of the current onslaught against corruption. Many believe that, characteristically, corruption would have its way, irrespective of what the law says.

    Does it now follow that the law aids corruption? Has corruption become so deeply entrenched in our system that the law has become helpless to hack it down? Though, past experiences point to the fact that the law might no longer be sufficient in the war against corruption, the truth, however, is that corruption is not bigger than the law. There is enough in the law to annihilate corruption from the land. We only need to take decisive steps to reform the administration of justice in the country. The judiciary is, unfortunately, as corrupt as other institutions in the country. Allegations of fraudulent deals and gross misuse of office by judicial officers have continued to increase. Not a few judges have been accused of collaborating with criminals to undermine the judicial process. At every stage in the judicial system, one is confronted with unbelievable monumental acts of corruption. From the Investigating Police Officer, IPO, to other judicial officers involved, at one stage or the other, in a corruption case, one is bound to come face to face with the awesome ingenuity of corruption machinery in the country.

    For the war against corruption to be effectively fought and won, we need to do a total overhaul of the nation’s legal institution. Justice cannot be said to be served in a system that allows ‘small’ thieves to rot in prison while ‘big’ ones walk in absolute freedom. Equally important is the need for accelerated hearing of high profile corruption cases at all tiers of courts. Ordinarily, the trial of such cases ought to be conducted on a daily basis at the Federal High Court, but this is not being strictly adhered to. This is partly responsible for why corruption cases are adjourned for every flimsy and spurious reason.

    Perhaps, more importantly, government prosecuting counsels should brace up to dispel the theory that they sometimes conspire with individuals accused of corruption to go scot-free. An integral part of this theory is the constant filing of amendment of charges after the arraignment of the accused.  Non-appearance in court and unending demands for adjournments are other notable ploys purportedly used by prosecuting lawyers to frustrate high profile cases.

    The law is meant to trounce evil and evil doers. In any society where the reverse is the case, injustice would reign supreme. Sadly, this is the path we have trod for years. Obviously, it has led us to nowhere. Now, if we are to move forward, we must change our ways.

  • Arrogance, power and security

    Leaders  of the two global  power blocs supervising the carnage and murder of innocent citizens in Syria, this week  held  a meeting in Vienna – the old but well  known   home  of  such cloudy  diplomacy for long- this time to determine the fate of Syrian  dictator Bashar  Assad whose  rule has led to  over  half  the population of Syria,  put at about 12m  fleeing or trying to leave the country for Europe. That  such  a meeting could be convened at all beats the imagination given the fact that there is no love lost amongst those who  gathered  in Vienna  for the meeting. It  is even an understatement to say that they are strange bed fellows  as  some  of them loath each  other  even  more  than the opposition in Syria hate their blood thirsty president, who  has refused to relinquish power because he believes  the weight of leadership of Syria can only be carried on his rather  peculiarly   narrow  shoulder and thick  neck. Which  really is not only pathetic  but a great pity indeed as his narrow will and perspective have  prevailed  and dominated his nation so  far,  at such great human cost and the destruction of the  security of his nation which is quite an ancient  country.

    Today  we shall consider the Vienna  talks on Syria  together  with  the result of  the referendum in Congo  Brazaville  which overwhelmingly  gave veteran President Sassou Nguesso the  needed  go  ahead  to contest  for a third term which  the constitution of his country expressly forbid. We  will  round  up with the news  that I have just seen  on  the internet that the Court of Appeal  has  dismissed  by a spilt decision the appeal  by the Nigerian  Senate President  Bukola  Saraki  against the Code  of Conduct  Tribunal – CCT – in which he questioned the jurisdiction of the tribunal to prosecute him  for false declaration  of assets.

    We  shall  look at these issues in the light of the topic of the day. The  import here is to show that when power, legitimate or not,  exceeds  its bounds  and limit, it overheats the socio economic and political environment because to sustain it will require additional political will and drive which  inevitably   affect the peace and sanctity of the  polity, as  legal  authority     recedes   or  is lost   in hubris  and arrogance. Ultimately collective security whether  local  or international  becomes a culprit that takes  flight in the face of the creation  of a violent and  insecure   environment similar to the Hobbesian theory  of ‘ might  is right’ and  where life is’ brutish and  short.’

    No nation illustrates that   vividly  in today’s world  more  than  Syria and  Iraq where Islamic  State –IS  has  taken more  territories  than in any other part or nation  of the Middle East just as  we  know  the participants in the Vienna Talks at  first  treated the issues involved with kid gloves.  Now that they are ready to tackle IS,  it  is as if they are reacting to close the stable after the horses, this  time horses of war, have simply vanished into   the thin air of  Arabia. This  is because those at  Vienna  have very  irreconcilable  differences within themselves and do not even agree on the status of Bashar Assad  the dictator  of Syria and the destroyer  of his nation and people.

    Just  listen to their plea on Bashar Assad. The  US  says  Assad cannot be part of the solution and should leave power although the US has no stomach  or will power so far to execute that fantasy. Russia says he cannot  go because that would create a power vacuum similar to the removal of Saddam Hussein in Iraq which destroyed the sovereignty, peace and stability  which Saddam  assured albeit as a ruthless dictator.  Saudi  Arabia wants Bashar Assad to leave at all costs while Iran, the sponsor of Hizbollah in Lebanon and traditional supporter of Assad  will have nothing to do with the Saudi wish. Indeed  Saudi Arabia will  have nothing to do with not only Assad  but also  Iran, as they are ancient enemies on the brand of Islam they practice stemming from the succession  of the Holy Prophet  ages ago. That the two nations are in Vienna is because the Russians and US are there to  keep them at arms length as there is no way they can back down on their take on  Assad, so boldly and eloquently spoken  and backed with violence so far before their journey to Vienna.  So  on that score nothing good can come out of Vienna over the removal of Assad  from power in Syria.

    That notion is further  buttressed by the acrimony  that has ensued between the US and Russia over  Syria, and the glaring fact  that the Russians  have established a military presence in Syria whose sole aim is to keep Assad in power.  So who is fooling who over the Vienna Talks on Syria? Not  many  analysts and people are deceived on the use of diplomacy to buy time on both sides but  Syrians are not deceived and that is why they  are fleeing their nations in droves, while  confirming the well  known truism that life has no duplicate, no  matter the manner and level  of diplomacy in Vienna.

    With regard  to the referendum giving President Dennis Sassou Nguesso the right to contest for a third  term one only needs  to state  facts  of  the  Congolese president’s  life to show that he has  no intention of dying out of power and I will explain. If  he rules for a third term he will be ruling for 21 years since he has ruled for two terms of 7 years  so far from 2002. Before  that he ruled from 1979  to  1992  when he was defeated in a presidential election.  There was a civil war in his nation before he won the first of the three 7 year terms in 2002. Nguesso  is over 70 and the constitution  has been shunted aside to allow  him to contest as the constitution had a two term limit and age limit of 70 on presidential candidates. Please  reach your conclusions on how  he will ever contemplate dying anywhere other than  in the Presidential Palace in Brazaville.

    Lastly  the  decision  of the Court  of Appeal  that the CCT has  the jurisdiction to try the senate president is a  boost to the rule  of law  in our nation. The  Senate President has said in the dock when his plea of guilty or not was sought that he was being tried because he was president of the senate. Now  the Court  of Appeal  has  ruled he could be tried and the CCT has such jurisdiction. This is a victory  for the rule of law in Nigeria even though  his lawyers  have vowed  to go to the Supreme  Court to contest the verdict of the lower court on the jurisdiction of the tribunal. That  too is a healthy legal  and  political development as nobody  is above the law according to our constitution,  which also states clearly that an accused is assumed innocent until proven otherwise in open  court. This  too is applicable  to our present Senate  President.

    We  wish the Senate President a nice  day in court at the Supreme Court as his lawyers have given  notice as this shows that our separation  of powers is not  only working  but working well. Nigerians are being shown that in our constitution the judiciary adjudicates in disputes  between the executive and the legislative but more specifically this time around between a former governor and the President of the senate from the ruling party  and  the state.  Definitely Nigerians are  watching  to see  that  justice is   not only  done but must be seen to have been done. Again  long live the Federal  Republic of Nigeria.

  • Greed, arrogance caused PDP’s defeat –Bishop Kukah

    Greed, arrogance caused PDP’s defeat –Bishop Kukah

    The Bishop of Sokoto Diocese, Rev. Dr. Mathew Hassan Kukah, yesterday blamed greed and arrogance as the major reasons for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP)’s loss of the 2015 general elections to the All Progressive Congress (APC).

    He said this in Abakaliki, Ebonyi State capital, while delivering a convocation lecture at the Ebonyi State University titled ‘Transition to Democracy: Can Nigeria Ride the Wave?’

    Kukah also identified lack of party cohesion, insensitivity to its supporters and inability to control its stalwarts’ excesses as other reasons for the party’s failure.

    He, however, blamed these on the poor foundation of the party at its inception, maintaining that the party “was really not a party and never worked hard to become a party.”

    His words: “Successful transitions are based on the typology of the transition. Was it negotiated as it was in South Africa or is it an emergency transition? I don’t believe we have a transition in Nigeria, because I followed the circumstances that brought in Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo and I know the story pretty well.

    “But what we had was really an attempt at becoming a democracy. PDP has reaped the ill wind it sowed because clearly PDP was really not a party and it never worked hard to become a party. It became a distribution agency.

    “It is true that these elections could have swung either way. Many would argue that President Jonathan and his PDP could have won the elections had they not succumbed to the hubris that has become the hallmark of the PDP. We all know the story of the peculiar circumstances that brought the party into being.

    “We also know that despite that, the party became an association of takers and buccaneers more than anything else. The party could not deal quickly with the issues of greed and arrogance of some of its men and women in power.

    “The party could not control the excesses of some of its ministers and henchmen/women. It simply saw itself as presiding over a distribution agency.

    “Many would argue that it became insensitive to the needs of its supporters. It had no mechanism for internal cohesion and simply believed that it was the elephant that could not be slain.”

    Bishop Kukah also charged the President-elect, Gen. Muhamadu Buhari, to work hard to restore public confidence in government and politics

  • ‘Jonathan lost because of PDP’s arrogance’

    ‘Jonathan lost because of PDP’s arrogance’

    Dr. Steve Egbo is the All Progressives Congress (APC) governorship running mate in Ebonyi State. In this interview with OGOCHUKWU ANIOKE, he says the party must avoid the mistakes of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to remain popular.

    Why did the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lose to the APC?

    At a point in time, after uninterrupted control of power at the centre, the PDP became over bloated; it became arrogant and pompous. They had no respect, no regard for anybody. Such things were not supposed to obtain in the society at this age. The PDP was the architect of its own downfall. The PDP lost all focus and every form of integrity. So, I really don’t wish to sing ‘Nunc Dimitis’ for the PDP, but what has become has inevitably come to become. They saw it coming, but it was too late. In life certain situations when they occur are not reversible. When a bullet leaves the barrel of the gun, you cannot recall it. It has become a self-propelled magnet and it must find a spot to rest. The collapse of the PDP was like a bullet that has left the barrel of the gun and no magic, no miracle or voodoo could have stopped it from self destruction. Let me hope that the election of March 28 will be a lesson not only for the remnants of the PDP, but for other ruling parties across Africa. I also want to say that the APC must also have something to learn from what happened to the PDP, so that it does no fall into the same trap of delusional invincibility. I know that sooner or later, some of these hawks in the PDP would like to come into the APC and do to the APC what they have done to the PDP. Indeed, if the information available to us so far is correct, their applications are already piling up. So, those of us who laboured to create the APC must be careful to know that we have a contract with the Nigerian people and that contract must at all times be kept with care, tenderness and attention to details. The APC has a job to do and every hand must be on deck to accomplish that job.

    PDP members who purportedly won the National Assembly elections are planning to join the APC for the fear of losing their elections at the tribunals. What are your comments?

    As far as am concerned, there was no election in Ebonyi State on March 28 and our investigations reveal that it was a similar scenario across the entire Southeast and Southsouth. I stand boldly to say that what happened in the state and across the entire former Eastern Region was a grand plan, a well articulated plot to scuttle democracy in the Southeast and the Southsouth, in order create a situation that gives massive victory to the PDP. What we had was allocation of votes. There was no way Muhammdu Buhari could not have attained 25 per cent in most of the Southeast and Southsouth states, especially in Ebonyi, Enugu, Abia, Anambra, Rivers, Delta, Edo, Akwa Ibom and Cross River States. It was an absurdity for anybody to imagine that Buhari could not gain 25 per cent in these states. In fact, the case of Imo State is an embarrassment to everybody. A state that is controlled by a very capable APC governor cannot give APC 25 per cent? The so-called PDP winners should be jittery because the victory they had was stolen. Some of them are not even receiving congratulatory messages because they are afraid of what will happen the day after. APC has a strong foundation and believes in legitimacy and the rule of law. I wouldn’t want to preempt anything, but believe that the courts would be busy in the next few months and would determine who won and who lost. Can you imagine a situation where the APC cannot have a National Assembly member in Ebonyi and some other parts of Ibo land. It is a situation that does not portend well for Ibos because our so-called Ibo leaders have taken us to the depth of the abyss. I believe that the March 28 election was not a reflection of the wishes of the Ibo people. Rather, it was that of those who felt they can mortgage us to achieve their personal interests of greed and avarice. They sold us and have pocketed millions of naira and dollars. But, as I said earlier, there is always the day after and as we walk steadily towards that day. Many people would have a lot of questions to answer.

    What stunned the people was the alleged involvement of the military in the election rigging. What is your reaction?

    Let me say this, in the nation’s history from 1964 after Nigerian first independence elections, the military has always operated as the terrorist wing of the party in power. I want to underline this. It happened in 1964 when the military institution was unscrupulously deployed to do the dirty work of the ruling NPC. In 1983, it was the same show of shame replicated. It has been so since 1999. I believe that with the recent exposure of the military underbelly, there is bound to be a change. When you talk about fear being expressed on the elections of April 11, let me tell you the scenario. What we saw on March 28 will not repeat itself because some people are already looking behind their backs. Already asking; can I do this again? Can I get away with the ones I have done? Is it still the same old story? Can it still be business as usual. The role of the military in the march.28 elections was more orchestrated in the south east and south-south parts of the country and maybe reasonably Ekiti state. But I am happy that despite all they have at their disposal, they were not able to defeat the will of the Nigerian people. I salute the Nigerian people for the courage they have shown. The election of March 28 was Nigeria’s revolution. It was a very quiet revolution. Their ballots have created a new nation. I make bold to say that March 28 is Nigeria’s independence day. If you ask me I will say lets relocate from October 1 to March 28; it was the day Nigeria for the first time in 55 years, gained its independence and freedom. The PDP placed on the head of every Nigerian, a crown of thorns and went a step further to crucify us all on the cross of red-hot iron. We can now say no more crown of thorns and no more crucifixion. I am happy for the country and every citizen that made sacrifices to get us to this beautiful Easter period.

  • Rape and arrogance of law

    Rape and arrogance of law

    The common cliché is that law is an ass. While that may be right, it may, however, be more appropriate with respect to the provisions of the predominant laws on rape in Nigeria – the criminal and penal codes; and also the case laws, to say that, the law on rape is a horse. Otherwise, if one is gender fair-minded, how can one appreciate the highly technical hurdles as have been held by some courts, as necessary requirements for the proof of rape, under our criminal justice system? Worse still, how can one explain or justify the ordeal and rape on human dignity, otherwise called legal trial, that, a prosecutrix (a rape victim) undergoes, under our adjectival legal system, to secure the conviction of a rapist?

    These challenges encourage the incidents of rape, and the time for action is now. Just last week, it was in the news, that one Corporal Anthony Onoja, of the Nigeria Police, allegedly, sexually assaulted a two-year-old girl in Mararaba, Nasarawa State. Leading a debate on the incident in the Senate, Senator Helen Esuene, from Akwa Ibom state, while decrying the cruelty in the instant case, and the insecurity of girl-child, in the country, observed that the alleged rapist was yet to be arraigned for the offence. Expressing angst, many Senators, including Abdul Ningi, Chris Anyanwu, Bello Tukur, Ifeanyi Okowa and many others, called for Corporal Onoja’s head, if the story originally aired by the Nigerian Television Authority (NTA), is true.

    Noticeably, their colleague, Senator Ahmed Yerima, a self-confessed pedophile, was not listed, among the troubled Senators. I believe many Nigerians still remember that the distinguished Senator, recently, was able to mobilise many of his colleagues, in this same Senate, to defeat a proposed amendment of section 29(4)(b) of 1999 the constitution, to alter the definition of girl-child by marriage, instead of by age. So, it is possible that most of the comments and cries in the Senate, by many of the Senators, are mere crocodile tears and opportunity for photo shots. Of course, if the Senate feels offended by this comment, they have a chance to prove skeptics like me, wrong. They can do that, by expanding the provisions of sexual offences in the criminal and penal codes, to include sexual harassments and assaults. In making the amendments, legislators across the country, can also adopt modern and less tedious definitions of sexual offences. The Senate can also pressurise the states, to localise such new amendments and furthermore, comprehensively defeat, Senator Yerima, on the constitutional provision that portrayed them in bad light, recently. That will help convince them that their angst, against Corporal Onoja, is genuine.

    There is also an urgent need for special workshops for judges on sexual and other offences against morality, to help them reappraise their orientations on the requirements for proof of rape and related offences. Regrettably, a few weeks ago, Justice Folola of Osun State High Court freed the Alowa of Ilowa-Ijesa, Oba Adebukola Alli, who had confessed that he a sexual intercourse with a Youth Corps member, posted to serve in his domain. While the Corps member alleged that she was raped, the monarch claimed that the sexual intercourse was consensual. In freeing the alleged rapist, Justice Folola misdirected himself, when he reportedly held that the failure to tender the torn under-pant and bed-sheets, defeated the claim of violence (lack of consent), and as such held that without a proof of violence, the prosecution’s case failed. The judge gave too much weight to the need to tender the entrails of violence, even when there was evidence that the victim called for help, before the alleged incident.

    Even more gregarious in favour of the accused person, in the judgment, was the report that the Honourable Judge, held that penetration was not proved by the prosecution, when the monarch had confessed, in the open court, that he actually had sex with the Corps member on the claim that she is his girl friend. Obviously, the accused, and probably the judge, did not avert their mind to the fact that a girl friend can be raped, once she withholds consent, to the sexual act. To show how bizarre the legal requirements for the proof of rape can be, it was earlier reported that during the trial, the defence lawyer, had asked the alleged rape victim, to show in the open court, her private part, for an examination, to determine whether there are marks or injuries to prove, the ingredient of force, in the definition of rape, as provided in Section 357, of the criminal code!

    For reasons that may likely bother on the sociology of the society, particularly the stuff, that it is a man’s world, the ingredients of rape, has been so restricted, that many view the proof of actual violence, as a necessary requirement for conviction in rape trial. But that is absolutely wrong. Indeed, the provision of the criminal code, despite its limitations, is still not fully called to action, in many trials. In defining rape in the criminal code, what constitutes the absence of consent is the crux of the definition. The Section 357 provides inter alia: “Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of a woman or girl, without her consent, or with her consent, if the consent is obtained by force or by means of threats or intimidation of any kind, or by fear of harm, or by means of false and fraudulent representation as to the nature of the act…” In the oba’s case, the definition of consent appears to have been too restrictive, hinging on actual violence.