The Nation Newspaper

Tag: history

  • Yoruba and burden of history in the politics of Nigeria – 3

    During the struggle for power in western Nigeria before independence, political affiliation reflected the fault line of the civil wars in Yorubaland. The Oyo people mostly followed the lead of Alhaji Adegoke Adelabu into the NCNC (National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons), while non-Oyo people in rural Ekiti, Ijesha, Igbomina and Ife voted with the Action Group. In fact the aggressive boisterousness of Adelabu (penkelemesi), sometimes reminded people of the hurly burly days of Oyo domination of Yorubaland. There were however urban areas like Ilesha, Akure, Ondo, Ado-Ekiti and Ikare which largely voted for the NCNC. This may of course be because since 1944, the NCNC had already been planted into the consciousness of the urbanised Yoruba in these towns. The urban areas were also where educational institutions were located and missionary enterprise was at its highest in its impact. Hence, the control and influence of the Obas and traditional institutions were on the wane. This point is important because the Action Group was heavily dependent on the Obas as guardians of the home of Oduduwa. The party itself had sprung out of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa.

    Crisis and division in Yoruba politics

    Crisis seems to be a second nature in politics. Earlier in the politics of Lagos, the NYM had broken up when in 1941 there was a vacancy in the then legislative council of Nigeria and Earnest Ikoli, an Ijaw wanted to contest and he was backed by most of the important Yoruba leaders in Lagos, including the up and coming Obafemi Awolowo based in Ibadan. Nnamdi Azikiwe and others supported Samuel Akisanya who later became Odemo of Ishara. Azikiwe ironically branded supporters of Ikoli as tribalists. It was a complicated story in which Awolowo would end up being branded a tribalist for supporting an Ijaw man against an Ijebu man who was seen as a proxy of an Ibo man. This was to be the harbinger of future political divisions in Yorubaland.

    When the crisis in the Action Group broke out in 1962, it invariably took the form of the Oyo against non-Oyo. This was of course due to the exploitation of history by Chief S. L. Akintola, an Ogbomosho man, who used everything he had to survive a bitter political battle with an Ijebu man. The Ijebu generally attracted hostility to themselves because of their history of blocking for economic reasons, the route to the coast against the Ibadan in the 19th century. Thus, all Ijebu people were seen as closet opponents of the Oyo speaking people. In spite of Awolowo having lived most of his life in Ibadan, he was never totally accepted as an Ibadan man. The same tendency was witnessed during the second republic, when the titans of Ibadan politics like Chief Adisa Akinloye and R. A. Akinjide went against the general trend in Yorubaland of supporting Awolowo and his UPN. This was the continuation of the antagonism between the Awolowo and Akintola factions of Yoruba politics.

    This division seems to have continued until recently. Leading figures of the previous ruling party in Nigeria, the PDP (Peoples Democratic Party), in the South- west were mostly remnants of the Akintola tradition in Yoruba politics. In the current dispensation of the fourth republic, those who found their political home in the PDP could be traced to the NPC and NPN, while those in the AD/ACN/APC, can be traced largely to the Action Group and the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN). The political division and tendency in Yorubaland appears frozen for all times.

    The Ilorin and Fulani factors in Yoruba politics

    The Akintola tendency is seen in terms of a replay of Yoruba politics of Afonja’s betrayal of the Alaafin, and his own betrayal by Alimi and his son Abdul Salaam. Association with the Fulani regarded as Yoruba’s traditional enemies is seen as betrayal of Yoruba cause and interest. This is because of the 19th century seizure of Ilorin by Abdul Salaam, the son of Sheikh Alimi the Fulani cleric, who came to Ilorin as an itinerant preacher and was tolerated by Afonja the Are Ona Kakanfo of Oyo. Afonja was betrayed when the Muslim ummah in Ilorin, led by Abdul Salaam raised the flag of revolt against Afonja and Oyo, during which Afonja was killed and Ilorin became independent of Oyo and became an emirate under the Sokoto caliphate. The Ilorin episode has not been completely appreciated by historians. First of all, the coming of Muslims to Ilorin and Oyo itself during the 18th century, introduced Islam into the empire which undermined the imperial religion of Sango, which was a deification of the 15th century Alaafin. Many people in the empire were converted to Islam thus releasing them from loyalty to the Alaafin.

    The Are Ona Kakanfo Afonja himself may have been a closet Muslim or perhaps he wanted to use the Muslims to bid for the throne himself. He was therefore riding the tiger only to find himself inside it. Some of those who fought with Abdul Salaam were Yoruba generals like Solagberu, who was a Muslim and saw the conflict as a jihad against non-believers. The upshot of the Ilorin episode was that Oyo was destroyed from within by the coming of Islam. Modern Yoruba people, however, see the Ilorin seizure as a humiliation of the Yoruba and any political leader associating with the north was immediately branded another Afonja who allied with foreigners to betray the Alaafin and the Yoruba. This is in spite of the fact that for 16 years, virtually the whole of non-Oyo speaking Yoruba people were fighting against Oyo/Ibadan imperialism in the 19th century. In that fight, the Ekiti Parapo confederacy of the Ekiti, Ijesha, Igbomina, Akoko, and Ife allied themselves with the Ilorin in their resistance against the Oyo/Ibadan forces which were also fighting Ilorin.

    The sense of pan Yoruba feeling was not there yet and it did not really develop until the late 1940s. This had to be deliberately nurtured by Chief Awolowo, through the founding of the Egbe Omo Oduduwa in 1947 which metamorphosed into the Action Group in 1951. Before that time, the ethnic horizon of most Yoruba did not go beyond being Ekiti, Ijesha or Ijebu, Owu, Oyo, Igbomina and so on. We can therefore say politics created the pan Yoruba feeling, but ironically, the living history of the Yoruba undermined that pan Yoruba feeling. The result is that until the brief near unanimity of Yoruba support for Chief Awolowo’s Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) in 1979, Yoruba people have always spoken with several political tongues, thus, reminding one of General Charles de Gaulle’s dismissive description of the French people that if you lock up two of them in a room to form a political party they will come up with three. This is what some have called the curse of politics in Yorubaland. But is it really something to be deprecated in a plural society like Nigeria? Will it not be good for Yoruba people and Nigeria as a whole if we encourage the blooming of a million political flowers in our country? If we all sleep facing the same place, how will we be able to see other directions? There is nothing wrong with Yoruba people coming up with several ideas, options and directions about who to associate with. What we should plead against is violence arising from political differences.

    The sore point of Ilorin’s political and administrative but not cultural separation from Yorubaland need not divide people of the same culture and language. Ilorin province, including the great town of Offa, is however still part of Nigeria and whatever boundary separating it from the rest of Yorubaland is mere administrative convenience. It is not as bad as that separating Sabe, Ajase, and Ketu now in the Republic of Benin from the rest of Yorubaland. In recent times, the people of Yoruba tongue there have found it important to visit and associate with the wider Yoruba world of Ogun State. It is surprising that in spite of French colonial assimilationist policy to obliterate the African culture, the Yorubas in Benin have survived and the institution of Obaship has thrived.

    Under the current political dispensation in Nigeria, in which political forces in Yoruba land and the north are allied, questions have been asked whether this constitutes a break with the past. What is the difference between the opportunistic politics of Akintola, allying himself with the north to survive and Bola Ahmed Tinubu, allying with Muhammadu Buhari now? They ask. The answer is of course that this alliance was presumably negotiated between apparently equal factions of the political elite. Although, the parochialism if not nepotism, characterising most of President Buhari’s appointments gives one concern. The Yoruba should deprecate this tendency and refuse to participate in it, but only demanding what justly belongs to it. Yoruba people’s concept of “Omoluabi” is a belief in fairness and equity. This will not allow them to collude with the Hausas and Fulanis to corner all appointments and resources, without equitable sharing of them with other ethnic groups in Nigeria.

  • Yoruba and burden of history in the politics of Nigeria – 2

    In the late 1950s and early 1960s, the government of western Nigeria knew the importance of history in nation-building and therefore established the Yoruba historical scheme under the late Professor Saburi Biobaku, who was sometimes Registrar of University of Ibadan, Secretary to the Government of Western Nigeria, before becoming Vice Chancellor of the University of Lagos. Those involved in the Yoruba historical scheme included late Professors J.F. Ade Ajayi, Adeagbo Akinjogbin and others. Much has been done in researching the Yoruba past but more needs to be done. Unfortunately, the governments we have had since the military intervention in Nigeria in 1966 abandoned the study of history. It seems they were determined to build a future on an historical void. Or perhaps, they wanted to have no comparative yardstick against which their regimes could be judged. Thankfully the Buhari administration has in 2016 taken a decision to ensure that history is taught at all levels of education in Nigeria.

    The military regime’s apologia was anchored on the need to build a technological and scientific foundation for the future. They were ignorant of the fact that the most technologically advanced countries like the USA, China, Germany, Japan, Great Britain and France have scrupulously preserved their history in well-endowed galleries and museums, as well as funding continuous research into the past and compulsory historical education to build confidence in their people. Knowledge of a glorious past can provide a platform or springboard for take-off for the future. Technological innovation does not depend on the multitude of scientists a country produces, but the effort of a solitary researcher or a group of geniuses, making breakthroughs in inventions or producing knowledge which can be applied to solve problems or to dominate the environment.

    It is sad that most Nigerians know very little about their past and young people suffer from cultural disconnect, disorientation and disorder. Those of us who teach young people are worried that our language and culture are dying, and we may in the future have to seek foreign assistance as usual in solving problems that are within our reach. We need to restore the teaching of history and Yoruba language to all primary and secondary schools in all states in the Yoruba area. All schools including private schools must be involved.

    Ironically, history still plays a big part in Yoruba modern politics. The struggle for pre-eminence among Yoruba Obas in recent times is a variant of how history is alive in Yorubaland. The Oyo Yoruba up to the 19th century were the dominant power in Yorubaland. In fact the Ekiti, Ijesha, Akoko, Owu, Igbomina, Egba and Ife witnessed a period of Oyo overlordship in their parts of Yorubaland. For a long time, this past history of domination was resented and this played a significant role in their political association. This was particularly the case in the rural areas even though urbanisation to a certain extent undermined the hold of history on the people. The fact that the Yoruba people are the most urbanised people on the African continent is not unconnected with the desire to congregate in fortified and easily defensible communities, believing that there is safety in numbers during the incessant wars that lasted a century from about 1793 to 1893.

    When the British came and following their desire to practice the indirect rule system of colonial administration and control which had been hugely successful in the north, they looked for suzerainty comparable with the Sokoto Caliphate. They felt they found it in Oyo and its ruler and they tried to build a new Oyo Empire. They gave the Alaafin more power than he was traditionally used to. The Alaafin might have had power in the past; this was however limited and constrained by delicate checks and balances. Raising taxes in the name of the Alaafin in Oke Ogun in 1916 for example, precipitated rebellion which exposed the British lack of knowledge of the intricate and complex politics of Yorubaland. For long, the Alaafins of Oyo enjoyed primacy in Yorubaland, yet the same British consulted the Ooni when there were disputes about succession to the throne in some parts of Yorubaland.

    Throughout the period of British colonial rule in Nigeria, the British dealt with the Obas in in terms of their order of importance to the colonial administration. The Alaafin took the preeminent position as traditional head of the Oyo-speaking people which included Oyo itself, Oke Ogun, Ibadan, Ibarapa, Osun division including Osogbo, Ede, Iwo, Gbongan and larger part of Ife division (Origbo towns and villages). Important rulers of Ijebu, Egba, Ijesha/Ekiti which included Akure and Igbomina were prominently recognised. Bini was treated as a separate but related kingdom. Apart from their utility value, there was no attempt to rank them in any hierarchical order which would have brought them into conflict with traditional politics and history, because what was apparent was not necessarily real and the importance of a ruler was not directly related to the size and economy of its kingdom.

    For most part of colonial rule, the British ruled largely by force with little or no consultation with the Africans. This was not surprising as it was the nature of imperialism. The majority of Nigerian people were uneducated. The gentlemen of Lagos who had benefited from colonial education through access to mission schools in Lagos, the most important of which was CMS Grammar School founded in 1859 were few. When Sir Fredrick Lugard came to amalgamate the Northern and Southern protectorates and the colony of Lagos, he derided the Yoruba educated elite in Lagos as “trousered niggers” who sent their laundry every week to Bond Street in London for dry-cleaning. The antagonism between him and the educated elite was mutual because they accused him of what they called “rancorous negrophobism” and authoritarianism. The disconnect and chasm between the ruled and the ruler was unbridgeable.

    Events outside Nigeria, particularly the First and the Second World Wars, undermined the colonial regime and the so-called superiority of the white man, with the effect that Nigerians starting from the Yoruba of Lagos, began to demand in the beginning participation in government and later home rule. Nationalist awakening dates back in Yorubaland to the 1880s when Lagos people organised themselves to protest against water rate. Newspapers and broadsheets had proliferated Lagos agitating against one thing or the other. It was therefore not difficult for the educated elite of Lagos after the First World War to demand for self-determination, as was being applied to the subject nationalities of the dissolved Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires.

    Various political parties, the most important of which were the NNDP (Nigerian National Democratic Party) and the NYM (Nigerian Youth Movement), straddled the period 1919 and 1944 when the biggest and most vibrant nationalist movement-the NCNC (National Convention of Nigeria and the Cameroons) was formed in 1944 and headed by Herbert Macaulay, the grandson of Bishop Ajayi Crowther, the Yoruba boy from Oshoogun enslaved and later educated in Freetown and London before becoming the first black African bishop of the Niger CMS mission. Nnamdi Azikiwe, the American educated Igbo man was the secretary of this nascent political organisation. The Ibo State Union was formed the same year and later became a corporate body in the NCNC and began to play significant roles in the party. Obafemi Awolowo, in reaction to this formed the Egbe Omo Oduduwa in 1947 to rally the Yoruba and to protect their interest. This was in response to the Arthur Richards constitution which divided Nigeria into three regions: namely North with Kaduna as its capital, East with its capital in Enugu and West with Ibadan as its capital.

    Awolowo founded the Action Group in 1951, which immediately became the ruling party in the west after an indirect election based on limited franchise. He was later to become premier of the region and to run one of the most successful and forward looking governments in tropical Africa, until he resigned in 1959 with the hope of becoming the Prime Minister after the pre-independence election of 1959. Unfortunately for him this was not to be. His failure was to have ramifications not only for Yorubaland but the entire country. The prominent role of the Yoruba in the political life of Nigeria was second to none at least up to 1944, and this was because since 1886, there were Yoruba lawyers and doctors beginning with the Ijesha Sapara Williamses. Thus, it was natural for them to assume the role of leaders until the whole country began to come together into the mainstream of politics in the 1950s. But as it is commonly said, politics is first local before it becomes national. This was so in Yorubaland.

  • Yoruba and burden of history in the politics of Nigeria – 1

    The Yoruba numbers about 40 million people located in Nigeria in the following states: Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Kwara, Osun, Ondo, Ekiti, Kogi, Edo and Delta (not just the Itshekiri of Warri but the Olukumi of Oshimili LGA). They are also in Benin and Togo Republics and their descendants are found in Brazil, other countries in South America Cuba, Trinidad, Tobago and other Caribbean Islands as well as in Sierra Leone. Their culture has survived in the Yoruba diaspora perhaps because of their late coming into the trans-atlantic slave trade, following the collapse of the Oyo Empire towards the end of the 18th century, or because of the strength of the Yoruba culture particularly their religion, which is widely practiced in the Caribbean and South America even by people of European descent.

    The Yoruba claim Oduduwa/Olofin as their eponymous ancestor. Oduduwa is variously said to have descended from heaven and landed in Ile-Ife. Other variant, more sensible and credible myth of the Oduduwa story says he came from the East, Baghdad or somewhere in Arabia. He is said to have been the son of Lamurudu (Nimrod) who left his homeland following dispute over religious worship and succession to the throne.

    These are myths and myth is not the subject of history. What we can deduce from the myth is that a people of advanced civilisation with working knowledge of iron, displaced possibly Stone Age people living in Ile-Ife, seized the throne and dominated the people. From Ile-Ife, sons of Oduduwa fanned out to found new kingdoms or to overthrow existing rulers in Yorubaland, Bini and related peoples like the Aja and Ga of present day Benin and Ghana republics respectively. This has led to the fact that many rulers in Yorubaland claim descent from Oduduwa. The pre-existing rulers became shadowy kings and priests ministering to the new Oduduwa descendants. We know from the study of archaeology, that Meroe in the present day Sudan was the centre of the diffusion of iron technology to Africa, and perhaps these myths of origin of West African rulers may well be referring to the coming of those who knew how to make iron implements for agriculture and for offense and defence.

    The Bayijjidah legend of the Hausa also possibly refers to the same phenomenon of outsiders serving as change agents in Africa’s ancient history. The myth of Oduduwa as the progenitor of the rulers of yorubaland is however not universally subscribed to by all Yoruba people. Awujale, the paramount ruler of the Ijebu people, claim their people came from Waddai which is in present day Chad but was part of the Kanuri dominated Kanem-Borno Empire. This is not as fanciful as it may appear because there is an extant myth among the Kanuri, who say the Yoruba are their cousins who because of their love of money left for the coast in search of the Golden Fleece. Might this myth be referring to the Ijebu who with the Ijesha share the same facial marks with the Kanuri? We know of a certainty that the dynasty in Benin is descended from Oduduwa through his grandson Oranmiyan.

    The story is well known and it suffices to say that the Benin people sent to Ile-Ife for a ruler, after having gotten rid of their Ogiso kings and finding republicanism unworkable. Ife obliged them and sent the youngest of the grandsons of Oduduwa. After a while, Oranmiyan fathered a son Eweka but left Benin disillusioned that his subjects were too difficult to control and returned to Ile-Ife. From Ile-Ife, he proceeded to Oyo to establish a new kingdom. In this way, the great kingdoms of Ife, Bini and Oyo that were to play important roles in the history of West Africa were historically linked. The Bini now claim that in fact Oduduwa was a Bini prince who was expelled from Bini, got lost in the bush and later found his way to Ile-Ife and because of his knowledge of herbal medicine was made King by the Ife people. Oranmiyan therefore was more or less their grandson who returned home. This interpretation sounds rather convenient. The reason for this new revisionism in Bini is the assertion of independence and non-subservience to a foreign ruler in the past. What is however important up till today is that the cult/court language in the Bini palace is some kind of old Yoruba and the standard greetings in the palace is “How goes Ife (Uhe)”? The mystery surrounding Ife was further complicated by the late Professor Ade Obayemi, a distinguished Professor of Archaeology, when he said the present Ife may not have been the Ife of historical antiquity. He said he had identified seven existing Ifes and that the Ife of antiquity may well be near the rivers Niger and Benue confluence.

    Furthermore and in recent times, the hilly town of Idanre in Ondo state, but which its people call IFEOKE, claims it is the original Ife and that their Oba is acknowledged by the Bini as an elder to Oranmiyan, the founder of their dynasty and they have ancient artefacts to support their claim. Usen which play a prominent role in the coronation of the Obas of Benin share identical dialect with Idanre which further shows that there is a need to examine the role of Idanre (Ireke) in Ife-Benin relation in the past. Professor Alan Ryder in his book Benin and the Europeans, using mostly Portuguese sources claimed that when the Portuguese came to Benin in the 15th century, they were told Benin paid homage to the “Oghene Luhe” North east of Benin. This he felt might be in the same direction suggested by Obayemi. Of course, the Portuguese may not have reported correctly what they were told. Ife Olukotun, located near the area suggested has not yielded any artefacts that could be dated older than those found in Ife that were produced between the ninth and the twelfth centuries. The moat around Ile-Ife, even though most of it has disappeared and the various ancient artefacts found there suggest that the present Ife is the Ife of antiquity. There is much that we do not know and there is room for serious research, because a serious question of the provenance of the founder of ancient Yoruba kingdoms is too important to leave to guess work.

    I want to emphasise that the history of dynasties should not be confused with the history of peoples. For example, we all know that the current Hanoverian dynasty in England is from Germany yet this does not mean English people are descended from Germans. Although, I know that the Saxons, a Germanic tribe, had with the angles over run the Celtic people of England in historic times. Oduduwa may be the ancestor of the rulers of Yoruba kingdoms; it does not mean Oduduwa is the ancestor of all Yoruba people. There were people in Ile-Ife and Yorubaland before the coming of Oduduwa. This is why we have chieftaincies like Obalufe, Obatala, which apparently preceded the coming of Oduduwa. Recent disputes in several kingdoms in Akure, Ekiti land and Akoko where there exists two “Kings” in one kingdom, one active, the other passive until recent times, indicate there were autochthonous people in yorubaland before the coming of the Oduduwa party. The struggle between Olukere and Ogoga, Alakure and Deji, Owa Ale and Olukare and to a certain extent Odio and Ewi and the struggle between the Oba of Benin and a chief Ogiamien claiming his ancestors were the rulers of the kingdom before Oranmiyan, are manifestations of the fact that there were not only people but rulers who have now been eclipsed and displaced by much more formidable new comers.

  • Oshiomhole in Edo history

    Oshiomhole in Edo history

    Though continents apart, there are a surfeit of parallels between outgoing US President Barak Obama and retiring Governor Adams Oshiomhole of Edo State. Both are not only southpaw and gifted orators, but also united on account of timing and circumstances of their ascension of office. Eight years ago, the world was confounded by the fairy tale of the son of an African immigrant, raised by the maternal grandparents, who clambered through all the odds to lead the most powerful white-dominated nation on earth.

    The same way the Nigerian nation was enchanted by the legend of a lithe lowly factory worker who wrestled down boardroom giants, survived countless incarcerations, roused the labour movement from docility, and would come from the outside to seize power in Edo from ruthlessly entrenched godfathers. The tidings of Obama’s historic win in November 2008 were still ricocheting across the universe when the news of Oshiomhole’s victory filtered in from a Benin courtroom on November 11, drawing the curtains on a titanic legal duel to retrieve the mandate earlier stolen in April 2007 by the Peoples Democratic Party.

    Just as Obama had to nurse America back from deep financial stupor, Oshiomhole met a state that had technically failed on account of sustained gang rape by a succession of military predators and marauding political godfathers. With despondency spreading like cancer across the communities, Edo, once the envy of Portuguese explorers in the fifteenth century, more or less became the new synonym for the exportation of human flesh to western red-light districts. Now approaching the exit point, though narrowly missing on Tuesday the chance of having his own anointed (Hillary Clinton) succeed him, Obama is still credited with high approval rating – an uncommon phenomenon in American politics. Ditto Oshiomhole who, however, bows out of office tomorrow not only in a blaze of glory but also with the distinction of being able to anoint his own successor.

    Looking back, opinions will certainly be divided on Oshiomhole’s style. While his often abrasive rhetoric would grate the ears of those weaned on the diet of diplomatese, what is however undeniable is his deep passion to improve the human condition in Edo. For instance, with the once voracious floodwater now effectively tamed at the iconic 5- Junction, Uselu axis, Uwelu quarters, Siloko, Teachers’ House, Upper Lawani in Benin City today, the first-time visitor will probably take things for granted. But years back, precisely in 2002, this writer had a rather sour experience.

    One had attended the burial ceremony of Kayode Komolafe’s (Thisday DMD’s) father in Igbara-Oke, Ondo State, and then attempted to connect Benin by road. It was raining and already evening when we arrived Uselu. Expectedly, the resultant flood had made a bedlam of vehicular traffic along that corridor. Before long, not only did the raging flood submerge my car up to the bonnet level, I soon found myself and driver gasping in muddy water inside! My immaculate white agbada suddenly transformed to brown.

    That the perennial flood has now receded in that part of Benin City is partly the benefit of the gargantuan N30b storm-water project undertaken in the past six years. It is indeed a monument to Oshiomhole’s daring of a ruthless history, financial courage in the face of sparse resources. In the times ahead, the comrade-governor’s legacy will easily be defined not just by the massive transformation of Edo’s physical landscape but also the regicide of the old guard. While seeking to unravel possible battle stratagem that enabled Oshiomhole’s triumph over the hitherto fearsome godfathers at a valedictory colloquium in his honour in Benin last Sunday, erudite scholar, Professor Adebayo Williams, alluded to the adaptation of military tactics of reconnaissance and surprise attack. Well, what should be added is subversive diplomacy. Only that could explain Oshiomhole’s uncanny ability to charm the Abuja power-mongers for six harrowing years against yielding to the suffocating pressures from then almighty godfather, Chief Tony Anenih, to deploy federal might to over-run the plucky irritant at the Dennis Osadebey Avenue.

    The Oshiomhole administration was conceived in war in 2008 and had to stay vigilant, day and night, till PDP was displaced from Abuja in 2015. As his Information Commissioner at some point, this writer had the privilege of a ringside seat during some of those dark moments. Federal instruments were mindlessly deployed to intimidate the ACN (now APC) government in Edo. At the godfather’ instance, agencies like EFCC were used to harass and torment government officials ceaselessly.

    By 2014, it is on record that one of Oshiomhole’s commissioners had clocked about 100 trips to EFFC to answer anonymous petitions making fictitious claims! During Oshiomhole’s first year in office, PDP completely dominated the state assembly, thus rendering the governor a lame target for Anenih’s snipers. Not until the stolen seats at the Anthony Enahoro House were recovered one after the other through a painstaking legal cockfight lasting another year did the former labour leader eventually find his caustic tongue and begin to spread his wings.

    To neutralize the conclave of godfathers including Anenih and the Igbinedions, Oshiomhole knew he had no choice than to toil tirelessly. To remind the people of the sordid past when public fund was privatized, a giant bill board screaming “No more for the godfather!” was often hoisted by each school, road or hospital project. Not even federal establishments like police and army barracks were left out of the projects bonanza. So much that when a retired General was fielded by PDP in the 2012 polls, results from the barracks showed that soldiers and their wives voted massively for Oshiomhole.

    The latest person to attest Oshiomhole’s indelible infrastructural footprints is President Muhammadu Buhari. After inspecting and commissioning two of such legacy projects (a 200-bed five-star hospital in Benin and a brandnew university in Iyamo), PMB, ordinarily austere with words, was full of adulations for the outgoing governor. By Buhari’s own account, today’s Benin has almost become unrecognizable compared to the picture of the rustic city he was forced to reside three decades ago.

    Since he became president, outside his native Katsina, Edo should rank as one of Buhari’s most preferred destinations for official visit. Between May 2015 and now, he has visited the state thrice. This, said he, is “only because Oshiomhole has done well. Each time, I always have good projects to commission.”

    The weight those words carry is better appreciated given Buhari’s own involvement in the narrative of the old Bendel State on account of an accident of history. Precisely 30 years ago, a nondescript bungalow at No 8 Commercial Street in Benin GRA became his new detention camp after a stint in Akure following the August 27, 1985 palace coup led by General Ibrahim Babangida.

    Though he would spend the next two years in solitary confinement, Buhari, from the “secrets” declassified these past few days, still found ingenious means to feel the pulse of his immediate surrounding, if not the nation at large. His cook then has since grown through the ranks to become the present chief matron at the Benin Government House. It was, therefore, quite an emotional moment between the former political prisoner and the care-giver after Oshiomhole introduced Mrs. Grace Ilechukwu to the president during the luncheon Monday afternoon.

    Two, while Buhari’s detention lasted, the then military administrator, Brigadier John Inienger, creatively devised a means of getting newspapers to him, at a huge risk with his then commander-in-chief (IBB) in Lagos. The unwitting “smuggler” was no other than Senator Ehigie Uzamere, then a senior architect with the Bendel Development and Property Authority. Inienger, recalled Uzamere to this writer with an impish smile, tersely stated he wanted newspapers supplied daily to “my close relation staying No 8”.

    That was how the then starry-eyed civil servant began to drop off newspapers at the gate of the said house each morning for close to two years, without ever having the faintest clue the recipient was actually the nation’s biggest political prisoner and the immediate past No. 1 citizen. On arrival in Benin last Monday, the president, forever a man of simple taste, preferred to stay in a very modest apartment in the Goldmine, the Guest House inside the Government House complex. The governor and wife had already evacuated their own apartment on the eve of Buhari’s visit but were soon told the august visitor would just be fine with the “small place”.

    BUT beyond the issue of brick and mortal lauded these past few days, more far-reaching is Oshiomhole’s dismantling of the pillars of Tuketuke politics as embodied by the old barons of the PDP. That had meant the disempowerment of the people over the years by a small fraternity of profiteering godfathers.

    While the primaries that produced the flag-bearers for both APC and PDP in the September 28 polls were undoubtedly rancorous, at least there was a consensus among the local political class that intra-party democracy was growing, unlike in the past when the godfather would arrogantly foreclose any contest and unilaterally dictate who got what. In the final analysis, it would be intellectually dishonest not to acknowledge a new concern. Even as the ashes at the funeral pyre of the old order begin to wax cold, some are beginning to express apprehension at the prospects of godfatherism resurrecting in another form elsewhere.

    While such fear is indeed legitimate, let it however be said that such reading abysmally fails to be cognizant of the logic of change. Once the people had already tasted the honey of “one man, one vote”, they are unlikely to easily cower before the forces of imposition next time without a fight. If nothing at all, Oshiomhole already deserves praise for the new culture. So, will the furiously adamant Adams, master of withering wit, the Nemesis of PDP, the conqueror of Anenih and other little political gods and the scourge of Tuketuke politics now step forward and take a bow.

     

     

    PMB, Magu & ‘the cabal’

    Anyone still wondering why the hardworking Ibrahim Magu has not been confirmed EFCC chairman yet, one year on, could not be familiar with high-wire intrigues in Abuja. Statutorily, the Senate confirms the nomination. But the presidency originates the memo.

    But the truth is emerging. Since Magu had the temerity to touch cases where members of the now familiar “cabal” nestling in the presidency had interest, there no no urgency to forward the critical memo to the National Assembly. Then, President Muhammadu Buhari had to be abroad on a short medical trip.

    The acting president, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, a pious man not given to malice but driven only by desire to get results, caused the memo to be sent the Senate. The “cabal” was caught off-guard. Not to worry, on Buhari’s return, they resolved to activate the “network” in the legislature to mount a fresh hurdle.

    Yes, virtually everyone nominated the same time with the EFCC boss has been confirmed. As for Magu, the memo was not enough; he needs to bring DSS clearance as well. There now lies the new “roadblock”. The “cabal” has a foothold in DSS. The Cold War between the “cabal” and the EFCC acting chair played out in the recruitment of DSS to enforce the night raid on the homes of top judges suspected of sleaze.

    Until the president reportedly directed the SSS to allow EFCC take over the matter. It is in this light that the rest of the nation is waiting on President Muhammadu Buhari to take a step further and stop all these shenanigans.

    It is one thing for the political leadership to formulate policies; it is another thing to have a crop of committed disciples to implement the vision. So far, no one can deny the commitment of Magu in providing new vigour to EFCC in the war against corruption. He has demonstrated uncommon passion for his job in the last twelve months. But as things stand today, Magu could not be said to have even an appointment letter. It is really funny.

  • Tinubu and the burden of history

    Last week on these pages, we made reference to the shadowy ‘Kaduna Mafia’ believed to have remotely run Nigeria with a pan-northern agenda since 1966. It is believed that the group imposed Obasanjo in 1999 despite his rejection by his Yoruba people at the polls. One proof of this was Obasanjo’s refusal to revisit the issue of restructuring after articulating same as possible answer to the ‘national question’ in some of his books. Besides the consensus among Nigerians is that fiscal restructuring that allows federating units to keep 50% of what they generate will go a long way in addressing our crisis of nationhood.  Unfortunately we continue to live a lie as a federation which Chukwuma Soludo, a former CBN Governor recently pointed out is the only one of its kind in the world where the centre allocates funds it does not generate to sub units it does not control.

    As we also observed , Buhari could not have been part of this shadowy group since it was the suspected members of the group that removed him from office, incarcerated him for three and half years and later derailed his first three attempts at the presidency until Bola Tinubu’s master stroke. Bewitching the South-west and some restive groups in the country with ‘restructuring’, Bola Tinubu in 2014 carried Buhari on his back around the country proclaiming him as the answer to our crisis of nationhood the same way powerful nations like Britain France and USA at different times in their history reached out to their tested retired Generals when their survival was threatened. Many Nigerians took Tinubu’s statement as commitment to restructuring. Buhari and APC thereafter won with a change manthra.

    For his exploits, it is believed Tinubu, the ‘jagaban’ of Nigeria politics was compensated with Buhari’s ceding of key positions in his government to ‘Tinubu Mafia’ in Abuja. A leading member is Vice President Osinbajo who only last week publicly acknowledged he was a nominee of Tinubu. The president we are told has absolute confidence in him. There is also Raji Fashola, Tinubu’s former chief of staff. He was not ashamed to admit Tinubu was his godfather. He went as far as the United Nations headquarters in New York to inform the world that Tinubu made him governor. As Buhari’s foreman, he controls a number of ministries including Power and Housing. There is also the Lai Mohammed, Buhari’s chief image launderer as Minister for Information and Culture. He was once Tinubu’s chief of staff. He graduated from ACN spokesman to APC information propagandist before emerging as member of Buhari’s inner circle. Of course there is also Kayode Fayemi whose alleged imposition by Tinubu in Ekiti led to a ‘Tsunami’ that tore Ekiti ACN apart with aggrieved party members joining PDP. There are other Tinubu protégés like Femi Ojudu, Abike Dabiri and others in the inner circle of Buhari’s administration. Tinubu as a talent hunter no doubt has confidence in all his products.

    But long after Buhari has handed over critical ministries needed for the success of his administration to ‘Tinubu Mafia’, in order to have time for the battle of his life-war on corruption, fifth columnists who weep louder than the bereaved saw only strained relationship between Buhari and Tinubu. What they have however overlooked is that Tinubu is not immune to the usual vagaries of resourceful politicians who are often misunderstood by the society they are called upon to serve. In most cases they are regarded as venal men who easily sacrifice honesty and probity in pursuit of naked ambition. They daily suffer from betrayals and intrigue of party members who are prepared to trade public interest for personal or group interest.  Yet the survival of society as an organized group depends on the versatility and brinkmanship of politicians like Tinubu.

    And for the mischief makers who are not socialized within the Yoruba culture, disagreement on approaches to set goals between fathers and sons in the face of new realities is an acceptable norm. That in any case was how Tinubu himself achieved the goal that had eluded his fathers for half a century. Although the Yoruba culture impresses it on everyone that a child brought to the world who does not strive to be better than his father is brought to the world in vain, children are also warned that ‘a river that forgets its sources soon dries up’. The empires of Oyo and Benin had their roots in Ife and up to the early 1940s the maximum rulers of both empires took oath of allegiance to Ife before mounting their thrones and had a part of them buried in Ife when they joined their ancestors.

    Tinubu has too much stake in the survival of this government to be detracted by those who do not mean well for the government and those who want relevance after rigging election with slush funds from ‘Dazukigate’. With APC in apparent disarray with no coherent policy on any issue, with the governors collecting security votes, riding bullet proof cars instead of made in Nigeria 405 Peugeot cars and APC lawmakers  neck-deep in padding scandal, what the nation expects of Tinubu is politics of ideas and not politics of ‘who gets what when and how’. The starting point as this column suggested when APC was first inaugurated is building the party into a modernisisng agent. This is not a task for Buhari who probably see it only as a vehicle for winning election to implement his pet project of war on corruption to free millions of Nigerians from economic bondage.

    Besides, this is the first time the Yoruba mainstream political orientation will feature in national politics at the federal level. With the control of key ministries that can make or mar Buharis’ administration controlled by Tinubu Mafia, I think Tinubu’s only  task at the centre is to drive it home to those he had groomed  that the failure of Buhari’s  government is not an option for him and for the Yoruba nation.

    I think the focus of Tinubu should thereafter shift to the South-west where with exception of Lagos and Edo, not much seems to be happening. An area that was once the pacesetter in the 1950s has ceded pride of place to other areas. Salaries of workers have not been paid for months. There is virtual collapse of the education and health sectors while the whole areas suffer from infrastructural decay. The South-west cannot feed its citizens while those who should be in farms constitute themselves into ‘area boys’, terrorizing citizens in town and villages while governors cruise around in armoured cars.

    And finally, I think Tinubu should henceforth surround himself with a think tank of independent thinkers and not office seekers to avoid a repeat of Ekiti tragedy and the do or die battle currently going on in Ondo State between well known members of his think tank. In the final analysis, it is his service to his people that will determine his place in history. If Awo his role model is today worshipped at home and described as ‘the best president Nigeria never had ‘ by outsiders, it is on account of lives he touched at home.

  •  Welcoming History

    •Ordinarily, the subject should not have been removed from schools curriculum 

    Years after removal of History from the nation’s curriculum, the new administration has returned this mother of disciplines to the curriculum. This is a commendable effort to right a wrong that should not have happened in the first instance, were it not for failure of policy.

    Shortly after the formation of the National Policy on Education under military rule in 1969 and subsequent introduction of the 6-3-3-4 school system, History was gradually phased and replaced by social studies, principally a mélange of geography, civics, and a smattering of historical issues. Between 2009 and now, millions of school children have not studied any history—local, national, or global. Such deprivation must have put at risk millions of school leavers’ sense of historical consciousness and the critical attitude that comes with the study of History, an important skill that counterparts of such young Nigerians in other parts of the world must have acquired.

    This paper commends the current minister of education for finding it important to hear the people’s voice on this important issue of heritage studies while thanking professional organisations, the academia, civil society organisations and the media for insisting for years that the only right thing to do in a knowledge society is enrich the study of History for obvious reasons.

    History reminds the individual and society at large about the evolution of the human society in both local and global contexts. It promotes a sense of identity for citizens and understanding of the dynamic character of human and social development. It is not a subject that should be toyed with by policy wonks besotted to or hobbled by short-term gains and a narrow view of human organisation and social development.

    The history of removal of this important subject that holds all the disciplines together and runs through all forms of human knowledge shows a poor understanding on the part of past governments. Most successful federal systems: United States of America, India, Brazil, Canada, Switzerland, etc., recognise the need for national and subnational governments to negotiate the curriculum and customise it to serve local and national goals.

    Had this happened, it would not have been easy to produce many generations of students without a sense of the evolution of Nigeria. The policy inconsistency in robbing millions of children of the study of History in a country that poured at the same time billions of naira into such unification programmes as National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) and Unity Schools represents absence of logic that must not be repeated in the planning of curriculum in the country.

    We congratulate the Federal Government for welcoming citizens’ call for change in respect of returning History to the curriculum.

  • NERDC to introduce History in schools

    NERDC to introduce History in schools

    Prof. Ismail Junaidu, Executive Secretary, Nigerian Educational Research Development Council (NERDC), said on Monday that History subject would be reintroduced in primary and secondary school curriculum from September 2017.

    Junaidu made the disclosure in an interview with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) in Abuja.

    “Hopefully by next academic session, all things being equal, we should start implementing the policy. This is what the country is yearning for.

    “The National Assembly is hundred per cent behind us, so also the Federal Ministry of Education.

    “By next Council on Education meeting, we should be able to table the curriculum itself, and if we have the curriculum, we will start the distribution to the schools.

    “We are hoping by the next academic session we should start implementing the policy.”

    Junaidu dismissed the misconception that removing history from social studies would add a burden on students.

    According to him, the introduction of history subject will not pose any problem as the council will develop effective ways to ensure smooth adjustment in the curriculum.

    “I don’t think so in anyway. In fact let us say that the first thing you need to know as a human being is about yourself and the society.

    “So even in the scale of what is important, I think history should occupy a prime position, getting to know ourselves and where we are coming from.

    “Don’t forget that there are people, who after primary school may not continue to secondary school, and there are those whose education will terminate at the secondary school level.

    “What we are advocating is, after the first nine years of education, a Nigerian child should have some good knowledge of Nigerian history.”

  • Now that history is on the table (2)

    It is not accidental that a typical American and British child in elementary/basic school knows a lot about his country. A deliberate effort is made to ensure they know why things are the way they are in present day. It is therefore not surprising that they grow up patriotic. History is compulsory up to the age of 14 in state schools, some have gone ahead to make it compulsory until 18 years for students.

    Now that history will most definitely be on the table in Nigeria, emphasis should now focus on how to teach it. In doing this, teachers have to know history to actually teach it. One of the major reasons why some students find history “boring” and a callous exercise in regurgitation and rote memorisation is the method of approach and the level of comprehension of teachers.

    But as we go farther into the 21st century, there are certainly lots of tools to ensure the subject isn’t “boring.” For deeper insight into the teaching of history, I find Bruce Lesh’s book “Why Won’t You Just Tell Us the Answer?: Teaching Historical Thinking in Grades 7-12″ quite instructive.

    Lesh offers an array of lessons and case studies, like how to introduce historical thinking through Nat Turner’s Rebellion, chronological thinking and causality through the Railroad Strike of 1877, and historical empathy through the Truman-MacArthur Debate. Throughout, Lesh places a premium not on one’s ability to recall cold facts, but on whether students can read critically, reference appropriate sources, and support an argument with evidence. Over the last fifteen years, Lesh has refined a method of teaching history that mirrors the process used by historians, where students are taught to ask questions of evidence and develop historical explanations.

    “I’m not preparing you to go work in the archives,” Lesh wrote, “I’m preparing you to make a presentation to a client as to why your proposal to build their building is the best one. My job is to teach you how to make arguments. Arguments are based on the application of evidence, and evidence is gained through analysis of information. That’s what we do. We look at historical problems. We build arguments about the questions that we created. We teach you ways to use evidence to support your argument.”

    In a 2014 article written for ‘The Atlantic,’ David Cutler said he starts teaching American history breaking down each unit by making obvious the connections to today. He uses present day events to assist students in understanding the past. Some of these experiences even come from movies the students may have watched. This becomes necessary because it may be challenging for some students to remember anything for long that has little to no direct relevance in their daily lives.

    “In my experience, nothing grabs student interest like pointing out not only human folly, but also how, to varying degrees, history repeats itself. For instance, before teaching about European conquistadores like Hernán Cortés, who in the early 1500s conquered Mexico and the Aztec Empire for riches and glory, I play my favorite scene from the 1987 film ‘Wall Street,’ where Gordon Gekko, an inside trader played by Michael Douglas, delivers his iconic “greed is good” monologue. I then assign students to investigate America’s recent financial troubles, and the role greed played in causing the recession.”

    Can you see the connection? A good Nigerian history teacher can also use this method to look at our economic history and draw a strong nexus between our profligate system and the current recession we are passing through.

    Cutler believes “from there on I have most students hooked. They want to learn more about Cortés, and why and how he went to such lengths. And because students want to learn, they care about retaining and building upon their understanding.”

    He also used this same approach while teaching European history to students about the millions of lives lost in the Belgian Congo under King Leopold II. After cataloguing the long list of horrors students wanted to make a difference. To do that, they created websites dedicated to raising awareness of crimes against humanity. By researching and voicing how to stop violence in Darfur, Uganda, Syria, and Venezuela, students took ownership of the learning – and they didn’t learn for the mere sake of learning. They produced something with their newfound knowledge, all while harnessing essential 21st-century communications skills.

    This – to me – should be the new history, the application of hard theory. History should serve as a conduit to teach important modern competencies like writing, critical thinking, reasoning, and technology skills. This makes the content more relatable, useful, and engaging.

    I’m not suggesting this is the only way to teach the subject; in essence, there’s no ‘best’ way to teach history. Researches have suggested that good history teachers know the content, use a variety of approaches, explicitly teach the skills of historical inquiry and analysis, tailor learning opportunities to suit their students’ stage of development, and encourage deep understanding.

    There will always be room for a range of teaching and learning activities in the history classroom: a story well-told by the teacher, a museum display – actual or digital -, model-making, the construction of timelines, comprehension and source analysis activities, oral history, site studies, simulated excavations, problem-solving exercises, role plays and debates. Activities like these can be tailored to suit students’ stage of development.

    A variety of resources should be used in the history classroom, including documents, photographs, artefacts and even people. Historical places make great resources: museums, monuments and heritage sites – actual or virtual,- particularly in the local area. Film, historical fiction, works of art, history textbooks and history websites offer a wonderful range of resources.

    To teach for historical understanding, teachers need to become familiar with the historical content and concepts they need to teach, understand the skills and methods of historical inquiry, be clear about the learning goal – knowledge and understanding and skills, – plan a coherent learning sequence to enable students to achieve the learning goal, include a variety of activities and resources appropriate for the learning goal, learning styles and the stage of development of students.

    Enthusiasm is the first and most important way to bring life to any classroom. The teacher’s enthusiasm for the topic and teaching is the key to success. Teachers need to be inspired and they need to inspire their students. To be inspired, they must love what they teach. They need to know their subject and learn something more about it each day. And they must make what they teach a part of them. When students see and understand these qualities, they should be inspired and enthusiastic about learning Nigerian history.

    We need to stop thinking of history as battles and wars, kings and presidents and start thinking in terms of tribal coexistence, crime, corruption, class, and gender. Today, these things matter very much in our lives. If we are going to teach tolerance, we are going to have to teach respect for different ethnic groups, classes, genders, and even sexualities.

    Teachers should not rigidly rely on too many history textbooks as the sole authority. The textbook should guide the outline for the course, but teachers should rely on other sources, especially primary sources, as well. Secondary sources are critical for contextualizing and making sense of those rich firsthand sources.

    Finally, some historical development may make a lot more sense to a student if he or she can see a local manifestation of it. Teachers would thus have an onerous task of assessing students on what they can do with what they know, rather than how much they know at any given time. This was the mistake of the past that should not be replicated

  • Now that history is on the table

    Now that history is on the table

    Last week’s announcement by the Minister of Education,Mallam Adamu Adamu calling for the reintroduction of history as a subject in schools is a welcome development, especially for this writer and those who clamoured relentlessly for its reintroduction. While addressing delegates at the 61st meeting of the National Council on Education Ministerial Session, Adamu called for the disarticulation of Social Studies in the curriculum of basic schools. This, according to him, had become imperative given the critical nature of history to the nation’s socio-political development.

    In 2014, Nigeria celebrated – with pomp and pageantry – its Centenary. But to the surprise of many, the organisers of the jamboree which gulped hundreds of millions of naira did a shoddy job of the historic event thereby compelling some groups and organisations to come up with their own versions of what a centenary celebration of this magnitude ought to have looked like. I will focus on two: the Historical Society of Nigeria (HSN) and the Guardian newspaper interventions.

    The Guardian of March 5, 2014 was unique for one obvious reason; it had two covers of the same newspaper. After the centenary fiasco, the editorial team hurriedly put together another cover of 12 pages after the edition of that day had gone to bed titled “The house that Lugard built, 100 years after.”

    In the Editor’s notebook, the cerebral former editor, Martins Oloja wrote: “The so-called grand finale of the year-long centenary celebration, which culminated in last Friday’s award/dinner night in Abuja, was a grandiloquent celebration of mediocrity! As a Nigerian, one had expected to see in the grand finale some historical documents and documentaries on Nigeria in the last 100 years. Was it material poverty or poverty of the mind and ideas that deprived the Centenary Committee from doing and publishing something grand, something historic and historical, something remarkable about Nigeria for the young and old, local and foreign observers to see?”

    Prior to that collector’s edition, the HSN had held a colloquium in Abuja to mark the event. With the theme, “The House that Lugard Built: Perspectives on the Pains, the Gains, and the Agenda for the Future.” According to the distinguished scholars who organised it, was aimed at “setting the record straight” on amalgamation.

    Some of the country’s renowned historians, including Emeritus Professor Ebiegberi Joe Alagoa, Professor of History, University of Ibadan, Professor Obaro Ikime, Professor Monday Y. Mangvwat, former Vice Chancellor University of Jos; Dr. Sati U. Fwatshak also of University of Jos, Professor Siyan Oyeweso, Professor Ibrahim L. Bashir and Dr. C. N. Ogbogbo attended the colloquium. Also in attendance was the former Executive Secretary, Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), Professor Mahmood Yakubu.

    President, HSN, Professor Olayemi Akinwumi, frowned at the relegation of the society in issues relating to the history of Nigeria including the planning of the centenary celebrations.  Even with its marginalisation, the Society said it came together to give what it described as the academic perspective of the amalgamation for the benefit of Nigerians, especially those who see the unification as a fluke.

    ”This is the first academic society in Nigeria,” he said “but we have realised that in recent times, the society was not contacted in anything that has to do with the history of Nigeria such as the Centenary celebration committee. But we think that such was a mistake and we decided on our own to give the academic side of the amalgamation… I read a poem titled, ‘God Punish Lugard,’ and I felt this is the best time to set the record straight. That is the import of this conference, to see how we have fared in the last 100 years, the gains, the pains and the agenda for the future.”

    Giving an in-depth personal perspective of the amalgamation, Prof Akinwumi said it is a blessing. Aside from increasing the size and population, he pointed out it also brought recognition to the country at regional, continental and global scenes.

    ”Personally, I see the amalgamation as a blessing, without it, this great nation would not be recognised globally the way it is now. It has given us big population and large land area and that is the reason everywhere in the continent today, Nigeria is being mentioned. We know there are challenges here and there, but we will overcome the challenges.

    “Many things have been said about amalgamation, some said it was a mistake of 1914, others said Nigeria is a mere geographical expression. Others believe that there was no need for amalgamation and that Lord Lugard made a mistake by uniting us.

    ”These are the issues we want to set straight. Recently, there was an issue that came up, that there was a clause in the proclamation that after 100 years, any group that is interested to secede should do so, but we are saying that there is nothing like that in the proclamation. These are some of the records we want to set straight.”

    I’ve taken time to quote him because of the import of what he and his colleagues said. As distinguished historians, these gentlemen most definitely would have analysed several documents, within and outside the country, to have arrived at their informed conclusion.

    In May 1999, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo came into office for the second time he was confronted with challenges from key parts of the country. In the east, there was a visible resurgence of the Biafra cause championed by Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB). In the West and North, The O’odua Peoples’ Congress (OPC) and the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) were pushing for an Oduduwa and Arewa republics respectively. There were also agitations for “self-determination” and “resource control” in other parts of the country.

    In his wisdom, one of the most distinguished scholars of our time, late Emeritus Professor of History, Jacob F. Ade Ajayi approached former President Obasanjo and pointed out that Nigerians suffer from lack of historical consciousness which was why the event of that time seemed “strange.” He advised the president to think seriously about reintroducing the teaching of history in primary and secondary schools’ in the country so as to always put things in proper perspective. Obasanjo quickly issued a presidential directive to that effect. But sadly that directive was not been acted upon till he left office.

    In one of his public lectures, Ajayi pointed out that: “The nation suffers with no sense of history. Its values remain superficial and ephemeral unless imbued with a deep sense of continuity and a perception of success and achievement that transcends acquisition of temporary power or transient wealth. Such a nation cannot achieve a sense of purpose or direction or stability, and without them the future is bleak.”

    Trying to find reasons for our misplaced priorities, Prof Akinjide Osuntokun – another distinguished emeritus professor of history – said Ade Ajayi did everything in his power to return the learning of History to schools, unfortunately without success. It is not for lack of trying but perhaps because Nigeria is now dogged with the primitive acquisition of resources by members of the governing elite and their surrogates to the denigration of the larger good of society. He concludes that even where executive orders are given by presidents to return the teaching and learning of history to secondary schools, this has been more honoured in the breach than in the observance.

    Going forward, we must encourage an objective pursuit of historical truth by looking back once in a while, especially when confronted with challenges. The present challenges are good case studies. We should be bold to revisit how we lived in pre/colonial times, for instance. Was there a link between the groups the British eventually brought together to form Nigeria? How were they relating with each other? Do they have things in common? Was there trade and cultural links? Etc.

  • Now that history is on the table

    Last week’s announcement by the Minister of Education,Mallam Adamu Adamu calling for the reintroduction of history as a subject in schools is a welcome development, especially for this writer and those who clamoured relentlessly for its reintroduction. While addressing delegates at the 61st meeting of the National Council on Education Ministerial Session, Adamu called for the disarticulation of Social Studies in the curriculum of basic schools. This, according to him, had become imperative given the critical nature of history to the nation’s socio-political development.

    In 2014, Nigeria celebrated – with pomp and pageantry – its Centenary. But to the surprise of many, the organisers of the jamboree which gulped hundreds of millions of naira did a shoddy job of the historic event thereby compelling some groups and organisations to come up with their own versions of what a centenary celebration of this magnitude ought to have looked like. I will focus on two: the Historical Society of Nigeria (HSN) and the Guardian newspaper interventions.

    The Guardian of March 5, 2014 was unique for one obvious reason; it had two covers of the same newspaper. After the centenary fiasco, the editorial team hurriedly put together another cover of 12 pages after the edition of that day had gone to bed titled “The house that Lugard built, 100 years after.”

    In the Editor’s notebook, the cerebral former editor, Martins Oloja wrote: “The so-called grand finale of the year-long centenary celebration, which culminated in last Friday’s award/dinner night in Abuja, was a grandiloquent celebration of mediocrity! As a Nigerian, one had expected to see in the grand finale some historical documents and documentaries on Nigeria in the last 100 years. Was it material poverty or poverty of the mind and ideas that deprived the Centenary Committee from doing and publishing something grand, something historic and historical, something remarkable about Nigeria for the young and old, local and foreign observers to see?”

    Prior to that collector’s edition, the HSN had held a colloquium in Abuja to mark the event. With the theme, “The House that Lugard Built: Perspectives on the Pains, the Gains, and the Agenda for the Future.” According to the distinguished scholars who organised it, was aimed at “setting the record straight” on amalgamation.

    Some of the country’s renowned historians, including Emeritus Professor Ebiegberi Joe Alagoa, Professor of History, University of Ibadan, Professor Obaro Ikime, Professor Monday Y. Mangvwat, former Vice Chancellor University of Jos; Dr. Sati U. Fwatshak also of University of Jos, Professor Siyan Oyeweso, Professor Ibrahim L. Bashir and Dr. C. N. Ogbogbo attended the colloquium. Also in attendance was the former Executive Secretary, Tertiary Education Trust Fund (TETFund), Professor Mahmood Yakubu.

    President, HSN, Professor Olayemi Akinwumi, frowned at the relegation of the society in issues relating to the history of Nigeria including the planning of the centenary celebrations.  Even with its marginalisation, the Society said it came together to give what it described as the academic perspective of the amalgamation for the benefit of Nigerians, especially those who see the unification as a fluke.

    ”This is the first academic society in Nigeria,” he said “but we have realised that in recent times, the society was not contacted in anything that has to do with the history of Nigeria such as the Centenary celebration committee. But we think that such was a mistake and we decided on our own to give the academic side of the amalgamation… I read a poem titled, ‘God Punish Lugard,’ and I felt this is the best time to set the record straight. That is the import of this conference, to see how we have fared in the last 100 years, the gains, the pains and the agenda for the future.”

    Giving an in-depth personal perspective of the amalgamation, Prof Akinwumi said it is a blessing. Aside from increasing the size and population, he pointed out it also brought recognition to the country at regional, continental and global scenes.

    ”Personally, I see the amalgamation as a blessing, without it, this great nation would not be recognised globally the way it is now. It has given us big population and large land area and that is the reason everywhere in the continent today, Nigeria is being mentioned. We know there are challenges here and there, but we will overcome the challenges.

    “Many things have been said about amalgamation, some said it was a mistake of 1914, others said Nigeria is a mere geographical expression. Others believe that there was no need for amalgamation and that Lord Lugard made a mistake by uniting us.

    ”These are the issues we want to set straight. Recently, there was an issue that came up, that there was a clause in the proclamation that after 100 years, any group that is interested to secede should do so, but we are saying that there is nothing like that in the proclamation. These are some of the records we want to set straight.”

    I’ve taken time to quote him because of the import of what he and his colleagues said. As distinguished historians, these gentlemen most definitely would have analysed several documents, within and outside the country, to have arrived at their informed conclusion.

    In May 1999, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo came into office for the second time he was confronted with challenges from key parts of the country. In the east, there was a visible resurgence of the Biafra cause championed by Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB). In the West and North, The O’odua Peoples’ Congress (OPC) and the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF) were pushing for an Oduduwa and Arewa republics respectively. There were also agitations for “self-determination” and “resource control” in other parts of the country.

    In his wisdom, one of the most distinguished scholars of our time, late Emeritus Professor of History, Jacob F. Ade Ajayi approached former President Obasanjo and pointed out that Nigerians suffer from lack of historical consciousness which was why the event of that time seemed “strange.” He advised the president to think seriously about reintroducing the teaching of history in primary and secondary schools’ in the country so as to always put things in proper perspective. Obasanjo quickly issued a presidential directive to that effect. But sadly that directive was not been acted upon till he left office.

    In one of his public lectures, Ajayi pointed out that: “The nation suffers with no sense of history. Its values remain superficial and ephemeral unless imbued with a deep sense of continuity and a perception of success and achievement that transcends acquisition of temporary power or transient wealth. Such a nation cannot achieve a sense of purpose or direction or stability, and without them the future is bleak.”

    Trying to find reasons for our misplaced priorities, Prof Akinjide Osuntokun – another distinguished emeritus professor of history – said Ade Ajayi did everything in his power to return the learning of History to schools, unfortunately without success. It is not for lack of trying but perhaps because Nigeria is now dogged with the primitive acquisition of resources by members of the governing elite and their surrogates to the denigration of the larger good of society. He concludes that even where executive orders are given by presidents to return the teaching and learning of history to secondary schools, this has been more honoured in the breach than in the observance.

    Going forward, we must encourage an objective pursuit of historical truth by looking back once in a while, especially when confronted with challenges. The present challenges are good case studies. We should be bold to revisit how we lived in pre/colonial times, for instance. Was there a link between the groups the British eventually brought together to form Nigeria? How were they relating with each other? Do they have things in common? Was there trade and cultural links? Etc.