Chief Tom Ikimi, who is the latest mani festation of the virus of political vagrancy in Nigeria, deserves commendation for at least rigorously, meticulously and logically attempting to justify and rationalise his decision to quit the All Progressives Congress (APC). His treatise, titled ‘My Reflections’, is no doubt a valuable document for students of Nigerian politics. Of course, like all analysts and historians, he tells his story from his own perspective based on certain assumptions, facts and values that others may consider biased, selective, self-serving and jaundiced. But that is no sin. After all, others can also write their own version of history in which they are puritans, saints and principled heroes no matter the depth of their ideological and moral bankruptcy. Ikimi is a rebel with a grouse. His pain is that he was prevented from emerging as National Chairman of an APC that he believes he worked harder than any other person to bring into being.
Chief Ikimi writes with passion about his commitment and sacrifice towards constructing an alternative political platform to challenge the PDP for power. His vision is that of a Nigeria in which power oscillates periodically between two dominant parties through the ballot box. But what would be the ideological content of such political platforms? Would power simply rotate between the two alternate parties for its own sake? Should the APC seek to replace the PDP only to continue with the same bankrupt neo-liberal and excessively centrist political and economic policies that have spelled disaster for Nigeria since 1999? Ideology hardly features in Ikimi’s lengthy treatise on party construction. He thus does not see the irony when he writes that “It is not a coincidence to me that the prominent members of APC targeted by Bola Tinubu such as Alhaji Attahiru Bafarawa, Senator Ali Modu Sherrif and myself as former NRC member are those perceived as conservatives”. Pray, what are professed conservatives doing in a supposedly progressive party? As the APC Chairman, Chief Odigie-Oyegun rightly noted as regards the on-going party defections and counter defections, “What is happening really is that the PDP and APC are being purified. All the birds that ought to flock together are beginning to fly together. That is a good thing for the country; it is good for the APC and the PDP”.
Unfortunately, the rigour and quality of Ikimi’s analysis is blunted by his obsessive preoccupation with the person of Tinubu. As far as Ikimi is concerned, Tinubu is the alpha and omega of his woes in the APC. Adopting crude ‘bolekaja’ tactics, he employs rumour, innuendo, unproven insinuations and even gossip in an attempt to savage Tinubu’s reputation. For instance, he asserts that Tinubu boasts that he is the sole financier of the APC. He does not tell us where and to whom such claims were made. In any case, Tinubu has been known to have given strong financial support to whatever political causes he believes in right from the pro-democracy struggle that resulted in the present political dispensation. Wondering about the source of Tinubu’s wealth, Ikimi alludes to “whispers in the inner circles of the party” that “Tinubu is the recipient and dispenser of bags and bags of party funds” as well as “the beneficiary of most of the lucrative contracts in all the ACN states without exception”. The respected chief does not give a scintilla of concrete evidence to support these insinuations. In any case, Ikimi is himself a man of immense wealth and there is no evidence that his riches “derive from any stupendous inheritance, ancient or modern”.
Utilising one’s financial resources to further set political objectives is no sin. Chief Obafemi Awolowo was able to found and run viable political parties in the first and second republics as well establish as the country’s oldest private newspaper in the country because he had the means to do so. This is why the vindictive Coker Commission of Enquiry accused him of building a political empire around himself based on financial wealth – the same kind of allegation levelled against Tinubu today. When the defunct National Concord newspaper mischievously published that Awolowo owned 360 plots of land in Maroko in 1983, the sage famously noted that “if a poor man is fighting for the poor, he is accused of being jealous of the rich and if a rich man fights for the poor, he is asked to first of all go and commit class suicide!” He wondered how he could have sustained his political struggles if did not have a solid financial base. MKO Abiola’s wealth was a key factor in enabling him to build the national political network responsible for his decisive victory in the June 12, 1993, presidential election.
According to Ikimi, Tinubu boasts that “he has control of all the votes from South West Nigeria”. We are not told where or when such an absurd claim was or to whom. Yes, Tinubu and the tendency he symbolises has become a major force in the politics of the South West. No one familiar with the politics of the Yoruba will ever claim that he is the custodian of “all the votes” of such a proud and politically sophisticated people. Ikimi apparently underrates Tinubu’s intelligence. There is a major contradiction that runs through Ikimi’s otherwise rigorous analysis. On the one hand, he creates a superhuman image of a Tinubu who dominates the APC and can manipulate and steer the party in any direction he wants for his selfish interest. On the other hand, he brilliantly paints the picture of the APC as an emergent dynamic party with contending and countervailing interests that are simply too volatile and unpredictable for one man to dominate.
Some of the contending forces at play within the APC, as rightly noted by Ikimi include regional caucuses, legislative caucuses, the influential governors’ forum as well as caucuses built around such powerful individual politicians like General Muhammadu Buhari and Alhaji Abubakar Atiku. Given the vitality and vibrancy of these interests, it is impossible, for instance, for one person or tendency to unilaterally determine the colouration of the party’s presidential ticket. The final decision will be the outcome of intricate and delicate negotiations, balancing, compromises and trade- offs. At the end of the day the party’s saving grace will be transparent, free and fair primaries conducted in strict fidelity to the party constitution. Going by Ikimi’s own logic, for instance, Tinubu would have wanted Chief Bisi Akande to continue as National Chairman because of his alleged preference for a “weak national leadership” that could be easily manipulated. At the end of the day, Ikimi writes, Tinubu and others had to reach a compromise that resulted in the emergence of the current APC leadership. That is the beauty of democracy. It completely makes nonsense of Ikimi’s attempt to portray the APC as a one-man party.
Ikimi is unhappy that Tinubu “parades himself as party leader and leader of opposition”. That Tinubu is a notable leader of the APC and has been at the forefront of political opposition since 1999 is beyond dispute. It is impossible for Ikimi to re-write history. His insinuation that Chief Bisi Akande and Chief John Odigie-Oyegun are ‘weak’ leaders vulnerable to external manipulation is completely misguided. A core and unrepentant Awoist, Akande is as principled and spartanly disciplined as they come. His perceived rigidity on principles is a major reason why he lost the 2003 governorship election in Osun despite his sterling performance in office. Ace columnist, Professor Olatunji Dare, who is not flippant with praise, has attested to Oyegun’s character, competence and ability. Given his years of experience in politics and the tireless efforts he contributed to the merger that resulted in the APC, Ikimi should look beyond Tinubu for his failure to emerge as the party’s national chairman. It is not impossible that he is being haunted by the moral burden of his political past.
