• It is impolitic, to put it mildly, for the wife of the president to openly endorse a candidate
The Presidency represents a pristine national institution; therefore its occupants, at any point in time, must put forth utmost good behavior; being standard bearers of national ethos and ethics. The Presidency must be an exemplar of the stellar qualities of nationhood; it must aggregate all that is noble, all that is just and all that is equitable.
Indeed, nothing damages a nation’s moral fibre and concomitantly, its social and economic wellbeing more than the first family behaving in a reckless and licentious manner.
Such was the situation recently when the First Lady and wife of the president, Dame Patience Jonathan openly declared that her preferred candidate in Rivers State in the up-coming election, is already the next governor. Mrs. Jonathan had visited her hometown, Okrika in Rivers State recently for a social event. She was reported to have addressed the Okrika Council of Chiefs, informing them matter-of-factly, whom their next governor would be.
She was quoted to have said to them: “Before you today, is the next governor of Rivers State. He is the former Minister of State for Education, Barrister Nyesom Wike.” This is not the first time she would publicly endorse Wike’s candidacy. The president’s wife’s overt and covert intrusion into the political process across the country has been widely reported most notably, in Kwara, Oyo, Bayelsa and Imo states.
We defer to her right to belong to any political party of her choice and we also recognize that by virtue of her position, she commands some influence and can actually pull a few strings and make things happen if so minded. But there lies the catch: the need for utmost decorum and good sense. As they say, power without control and responsibility is bound to be perilous.
It is meddlesomeness bordering on impunity for the wife of the president to openly endorse a candidate in any political contest. She is expected to be discerning enough to understand she represents a mother to all and that a popular election ought to represent the will of the people and never an individual’s. To insist and seek to foist her choice on the people is uncouth, indecorous and undemocratic.
Further, throwing her weight around across the country and seeking to influence the outcome of primaries and even general elections in no small measure jeopardizes the process and does harm to party politics and by extension, the polity. Her utter disregard for party rules and disrespect for officials could trigger a chain reaction that may reverberate down the line. If the wife of the president gets away with overtly deciding who wins an election, the wives of governors and wives of other party bigwigs could also act likewise thus setting vile precedents and distorting the entire democratic process.
Also remarkable is the fact that Mrs. Jonathan’s crude and forward behavior in desperately trying to subvert the election process must redound most negatively on her husband, the president and cast him in such grim light as one who is not in control of his household and who is too weak to rein in his spouse. What manner of woman would make a public show of the fact that her husband is weak and incapable of getting results without her help? Well, maybe Lady Macbeth in the famous Shakespearian play, Macbeth, but their end in the epic, is calamitous.
The nation has seen Mrs. Jonathan snatch the microphone from an elected governor; we have seen her corral a state governor into appointing her a permanent secretary. We have seen her throw her weight around so mindlessly in manners unbecoming of a First Lady and first mother of the land. What would posterity remember her for, how would history record her. We simply ask that she retraces her steps. he Presidency represents a pristine national institution; therefore its occupants, at any point in time, must put forth utmost good behavior; being standard bearers of national ethos and ethics. The Presidency must be an exemplar of the stellar qualities of nationhood; it must aggregate all that is noble, all that is just and all that is equitable.
Indeed, nothing damages a nation’s moral fibre and concomitantly, its social and economic wellbeing more than the first family behaving in a reckless and licentious manner.
Such was the situation recently when the First Lady and wife of the president, Dame Patience Jonathan openly declared that her preferred candidate in Rivers State in the up-coming election, is already the next governor. Mrs. Jonathan had visited her hometown, Okrika in Rivers State recently for a social event. She was reported to have addressed the Okrika Council of Chiefs, informing them matter-of-factly, whom their next governor would be.
She was quoted to have said to them: “Before you today, is the next governor of Rivers State. He is the former Minister of State for Education, Barrister Nyesom Wike.” This is not the first time she would publicly endorse Wike’s candidacy. The president’s wife’s overt and covert intrusion into the political process across the country has been widely reported most notably, in Kwara, Oyo, Bayelsa and Imo states.
We defer to her right to belong to any political party of her choice and we also recognize that by virtue of her position, she commands some influence and can actually pull a few strings and make things happen if so minded. But there lies the catch: the need for utmost decorum and good sense. As they say, power without control and responsibility is bound to be perilous.
It is meddlesomeness bordering on impunity for the wife of the president to openly endorse a candidate in any political contest. She is expected to be discerning enough to understand she represents a mother to all and that a popular election ought to represent the will of the people and never an individual’s. To insist and seek to foist her choice on the people is uncouth, indecorous and undemocratic.
Further, throwing her weight around across the country and seeking to influence the outcome of primaries and even general elections in no small measure jeopardizes the process and does harm to party politics and by extension, the polity. Her utter disregard for party rules and disrespect for officials could trigger a chain reaction that may reverberate down the line. If the wife of the president gets away with overtly deciding who wins an election, the wives of governors and wives of other party bigwigs could also act likewise thus setting vile precedents and distorting the entire democratic process.
Also remarkable is the fact that Mrs. Jonathan’s crude and forward behavior in desperately trying to subvert the election process must redound most negatively on her husband, the president and cast him in such grim light as one who is not in control of his household and who is too weak to rein in his spouse. What manner of woman would make a public show of the fact that her husband is weak and incapable of getting results without her help? Well, maybe Lady Macbeth in the famous Shakespearian play, Macbeth, but their end in the epic, is calamitous.
The nation has seen Mrs. Jonathan snatch the microphone from an elected governor; we have seen her corral a state governor into appointing her a permanent secretary. We have seen her throw her weight around so mindlessly in manners unbecoming of a First Lady and first mother of the land. What would posterity remember her for, how would history record her. We simply ask that she retraces her steps. he Presidency represents a pristine national institution; therefore its occupants, at any point in time, must put forth utmost good behavior; being standard bearers of national ethos and ethics. The Presidency must be an exemplar of the stellar qualities of nationhood; it must aggregate all that is noble, all that is just and all that is equitable.
Indeed, nothing damages a nation’s moral fibre and concomitantly, its social and economic wellbeing more than the first family behaving in a reckless and licentious manner.
Such was the situation recently when the First Lady and wife of the president, Dame Patience Jonathan openly declared that her preferred candidate in Rivers State in the up-coming election, is already the next governor. Mrs. Jonathan had visited her hometown, Okrika in Rivers State recently for a social event. She was reported to have addressed the Okrika Council of Chiefs, informing them matter-of-factly, whom their next governor would be.
She was quoted to have said to them: “Before you today, is the next governor of Rivers State. He is the former Minister of State for Education, Barrister Nyesom Wike.” This is not the first time she would publicly endorse Wike’s candidacy. The president’s wife’s overt and covert intrusion into the political process across the country has been widely reported most notably, in Kwara, Oyo, Bayelsa and Imo states.
We defer to her right to belong to any political party of her choice and we also recognize that by virtue of her position, she commands some influence and can actually pull a few strings and make things happen if so minded. But there lies the catch: the need for utmost decorum and good sense. As they say, power without control and responsibility is bound to be perilous.
It is meddlesomeness bordering on impunity for the wife of the president to openly endorse a candidate in any political contest. She is expected to be discerning enough to understand she represents a mother to all and that a popular election ought to represent the will of the people and never an individual’s. To insist and seek to foist her choice on the people is uncouth, indecorous and undemocratic.
Further, throwing her weight around across the country and seeking to influence the outcome of primaries and even general elections in no small measure jeopardizes the process and does harm to party politics and by extension, the polity. Her utter disregard for party rules and disrespect for officials could trigger a chain reaction that may reverberate down the line. If the wife of the president gets away with overtly deciding who wins an election, the wives of governors and wives of other party bigwigs could also act likewise thus setting vile precedents and distorting the entire democratic process.
Also remarkable is the fact that Mrs. Jonathan’s crude and forward behavior in desperately trying to subvert the election process must redound most negatively on her husband, the president and cast him in such grim light as one who is not in control of his household and who is too weak to rein in his spouse. What manner of woman would make a public show of the fact that her husband is weak and incapable of getting results without her help? Well, maybe Lady Macbeth in the famous Shakespearian play, Macbeth, but their end in the epic, is calamitous.
The nation has seen Mrs. Jonathan snatch the microphone from an elected governor; we have seen her corral a state governor into appointing her a permanent secretary. We have seen her throw her weight around so mindlessly in manners unbecoming of a First Lady and first mother of the land. What would posterity remember her for, how would history record her. We simply ask that she retraces her steps.
