He started off as a young, promising political reporter in the journalism profession which he cherishes a lot. By dint of hard work, perseverance, consistency and intellectual prowess, he has meticulously and meretriciously risen, through the years, to the pinnacle of his profession. Today, Olusegun Adeniyi, is the chairman of the Editorial Board of Thisday newspapers. A one- time presidential spokesman, Adeniyi has featured at several academic and professional fora within and outside the shores of Nigeria. He is also an author with many titles to his credit.
Adeniyi surely knows when and how to arrest the attention of the public after major events that need to be put in historical perspective for both the living and unborn Nigerians in particular and the larger humanity in general. Last Friday, April 28, was yet another eventful day for Adeniyi as he brought together some heavyweights in the nation’s political firmament at the launch of the latest addition to his repertoire of intellectual works.
His new book, a 204-page treatise titled: Against the Run of Play, chronicles, blow by blow, the account of contemporary political developments in the country that culminated in a gargantuan disgrace for a hitherto formidable political party that had all along prided itself as the biggest party in Africa. Not only this. The behemoth of a party had openly boasted to high heavens that it had the capacity to rule Nigeria till eternity. But, in spite of this confidence and boisterous assumption, the party was roundly defeated at the presidential election of 2015, after only 16 unbroken years in power.
This well-choreographed book which has since become the topic of major discourse everywhere has revealed the roles of most of the major political actors and dramatis personae in the build-up to the 2015 presidential election. It also laid bare, the intricate factors, human and institutional, that led to the defeat of former President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan in his bid for re-election in 2015. The experiences of some of the major actors at the time which form part of the author’s narrative helped in no small measure to give the book a good mileage in authority and credibility.
But then, as they say, success has many friends while failure is an orphan. For Jonathan, a man whose good luck was shattered by the 2015 presidential election and was left to leave Aso Villa like an embattled hare with its tail tucked behind its hind legs, the memory of the loss still haunts till date. From his recent utterances, he is clearly still very bitter that those he trusted to make it happen at the presidential election, actually worked against his interests, accounting for the colossal failure at the polls.
Even before the book was launched and following the launch, the former President had been in the news. Jonathan has not hidden his discomfort over the account given in the book about events that led to the 2015 presidential election that sacked him from the formidable fortress of Aso Rock Villa. The former President has blamed everybody, with the exception of himself, for his failure at the polls.
He also blamed certain foreign governments and personalities including David Cameron, former British Prime Minister and Barrack Obama, former American President, for removing him from office. Jonathan believes that the narrations of some individuals in the book were distorted. And in order to put the record straight, he said that he will come out with a true narrative of what really transpired during the electioneering period.
He reinforced this by posting a series of tweets on his Twitter handle. Part of the tweet read: “I have just read Segun Adeniyi’s new book, ‘Against the Run of Play’ which has so far enjoyed tremendous reviews in the media. My take on it is that the book as presented contains many distorted claims on the 2015 Presidential election by many of the respondents”.
“There will obviously be more books like that on this subject by concerned Nigerians. However, I believe that at the right time, the main characters in the elections including myself, will come out with a true account of what transpired either in major interviews or books.”
This is the crux of the matter. It is obvious that nobody can tell the story of how Jonathan and his octopodal party, the People’s Democratic Party, PDP, were uprooted in the 2015 presidential election by the alliance of four major political parties, namely; Action Congress of Nigeria, ACN; Congress for Progressive Change, CPC; All Nigeria People’s Party, ANPP and part of the All Progressives Grand Alliance, APGA, which all came under the umbrella of the All Progressives’ Congress, APC.
Like Jonathan rightly observed, many players in that election will surely come up with various accounts of that election. Many of them will write to justify the position they took during the election. In that case, there could be some additions or subtractions, whatever the case may be, to achieve desired results. Now that he has hinted that he might put pen to paper to narrate his own experience, we must encourage him to do so. Doing so will afford the reading public the rare opportunity to hear directly from the horse’s mouth.
Although they say those who watch football matches see much more of the pitch than the actual players on the field of play, it will be a good thing for Jonathan to document for posterity not only his experience during the 2015 presidential election, but also his tenure as Deputy-Governor, Governor, Vice-President, acting President and President, spanning many years. This will afford him the opportunity to explain his contribution in governance (if any), the type of decisions he took, why he took them and why some decisions were not taken even when they were absolutely necessary and all that.
However, an unsolicited advice for Jonathan is that he should be mindful of the type of wishy-washy biography recently written by General Ishaya Bamaiyi. Instead of promoting his image, the book ended up soiling him. He simply wrote an autobiography to denounce himself. Therefore, in putting together his own memoirs, Jonathan should stick to the truth and nothing but the truth if he is to extricate himself from the cobweb of doubts about his capacity to govern a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural, multi-religious and politically pluralistic society as ours.
As things stand now, many people within and outside Nigeria believe the former President’s tenure as President was riddled with endemic corruption, visionlessness and like a two-time governor once put it in a private conversation I had with him, “Jonathan was bedevilled by lack of capacity to rule”, even though he was the first PhD holder to ever rule Nigeria.
As somebody who closely observed him right from the time he was Deputy Governor in Bayelsa State‘ to his exploits in Abuja, Jonathan comes across as someone who is very nervous, jelly and easily makes enemies or is quick to tag someone as an enemy once all the flotsam and jetsam of people around him concoct any story against anybody they perceive could easily outsmart them. This was probably why he lost the confidence of many of those who could have helped him to succeed as the first minority President in Nigeria while he pandered to the whims and caprices of political entrepreneurs and commercial friends that ran rings around him at the Villa. And of course, Patience, his audacious wife, also contributed a fat premium to his ouster.
Jonathan’s major undoing was that in 2015, he entrusted his campaign more in the hands of political scavengers, charlatans and known rogues. They were pariahs in their various communities who succeeded in hoodwinking him to believe that they were capable of delivering the votes, even though they knew quite well that they were not credible mainly because of their ignoble past.
Tag: Jonathan
-
Write, Jonathan, write!
-
Jonathan’s blues
It is indeed curious President Muhammadu Buhari has re-nominated for Senate screening and confirmation, 82 year old Sylvanus Adiewere Nsofor (rtd) as a non career ambassador. In a letter to that effect dated March 29, the President was silent on the reasons for Nsofor’s re-nomination.
When the nominee appeared before the Senate on March 23, he was rejected due to his refusal to respond appropriately to questions posed to him during the screening exercise by members of the committee on foreign affairs. The committee chairman, Senator Monsurat Sunmonu had then said Nsofor was not rejected because of his age even as he walked in looking frail and was supported as he was not able to walk on his own.
According to him, “his responses to issues raised were either not answered or devoid of details and mostly satirical. When we asked him to recite the National Anthem, he said we should have sent him a syllabus”. A member of the committee asked him if he knew about IT. He asked what is IT and I told him Information Technology and he said “it’s for your age and not mine”. Also when asked if he was not too old, he said we should go and ask Mugabe who is still working.
For this inability to respond to questions in the appropriate manner for reasons best known to him, the Senate refused to approve his nomination for the ambassadorial position. Now that the President has re-nominated him, what assurances are there that he will not again ask to be sent a syllabus when asked to recite the National Anthem, refer them to Mugabe when issues are raised about his age and tell the committee that information technology is for their age and not his?
Even if a new set of questions are asked him by committee members, what guarantee is there his responses will not toe the same evasive pattern? This poser has been raised to underscore the inappropriateness of his re-nomination by the President. From all indications, Nsofor is neither prepared for the job nor is his age best suited for it. At 82, and given the committees’ characterization of his appearance, it is obvious he has no business with that job. Perhaps, he knows that too well and that may have accounted for the manner he responded to questions posed to him by members. A nominee who felt so confident to tell the Senate committee members that information technology is for their age and not his has no business taking up appointment either as a career or non-career ambassador.
But more importantly, at 82, it is ridiculous that somebody is still considering the retired judge for such appointment. There are other ways of helping him if someone is interested in his welfare rather that make a mockery of that sensitive office. The situation is even more disconcerting when it is recognized that such appointments are made on representative basis.
Imo State which he is being appointed to represent has a surfeit of high level, energetic and well-qualified manpower for such positions. It is a slap on the collective psyche of people of that state that a retired 82 year old judge is the person found fit and proper to fill its slot at the ambassadorial level. What a shame!
So the issue is not just about his inability or refusal to address questions posed to him in the appropriate manner. Even if he was able to answer the questions to the satisfaction of the committee members, his age cannot possibly permit his approval for that position. The Senate should not hesitate to reject him on account of old age even if he now answers questions to their satisfaction.
President Buhari should be asked to nominate a more suitable candidate from Imo State for that position. We cannot continue recycling people who have served out their terms in their chosen fields in the face of the spiraling unemployment challenges that pose the greatest challenge to order, peace and stability in this country.
The re-nomination of Justice Nsofor is a sad reminder to the controversy generated by the re-nomination of the acting chairman of the EFCC Ibrahim Magu who was equally rejected for non-satisfactory performance during screening in addition to the damning report on his credibility to lead the anti-graft war. Since the second rejection, we have been made to believe that a proper interpretation of the constitution shows clearly that the President does not really need the approval of the Senate to appoint the EFCC chairman.
Yet, in the past, that tradition had been followed without any adverse consequence. We are not looking at the overall intendment of the act setting up such bodies in stipulating that their heads should be approved by the Senate. We now show scant interest in the principles of separation of powers, checks and balances and their overall capacity to check abuse of power which corrupts absolutely.
In a bid to find escape route, we had to scrutinize the constitution to find a way out. And our researches paid off in section 171 of the constitution which they said empowers the President not to seek Senate approval for Magu’s appointment. We are now only interested in working from the answer so long that answer enables us achieve a predetermined end. That is the interpretation of the legal opinion offered by Femi Falana and copiously adopted by the Vice President Prof. Yemi Osinbajo that the EFCC chairman does not need Senate confirmation.
But, Magu’s name had been sent to the same Senate on two consecutive times and rejected. Had he been confirmed, perhaps nobody would have cared to search the constitution to seek and explore loopholes. Given the above, it could be safely concluded that the whole idea is to have Magu on the EFCC seat by all means. But the interpretation of that part of the constitution by Falana and its adoption by Osinbajo is still not the end of it all. The final resolution of the matter lies with our courts.
It is true that when any law clashes with the constitution, the latter takes precedence. But that is not the only issue that will be taken into account when the matter comes before the courts. The courts will also consider issues of public interest, what stood to be gained or lost by subjecting such appointments to Senate confirmation. They may also consider the dangers inherent in having the executive solely appoint heads of such sensitive bodies on the overall assignment they have to prosecute.
Besides, it has been argued that section 60 of the 1999 constitution (as amended) empowers the Senate and the House of Representatives to make rules to guide their activities. It is further being contended that section 60 is not inferior to section 171 and that the rule of the House is subsidiary legislation deriving its powers from the grand norm, which is the 1999 constitution.
The above point underscores the contention that the interpretation proffered by Falana and adopted by Osinbajo is still largely provisional as it cannot be the final position on the matter. The issue should be challenged in the courts for us to get to know the true position.
But then, should we undertake all this trouble just because Magu is involved? Must he stay in that office by all means? These are the issues to ponder especially given the valuable energy dissipated on this singular appointment. Even if he does not need Senate approval to retain his job, has he cleared himself of the damaging allegations against him by the DSS?
This poser is germane given that Babachir Lawal, former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, SGF who was earlier cleared by the President together with Magu on the allegations made against him has now been suspended from duty and being investigated. If the government has seen reason even very belatedly to suspend Lawal, it needs to revisit the Magu saga instead of exploring loopholes in the constitution to retain him by all means.
-
I did not ambush Jonathan, others, Adeniyi
•Raises alarm on how online hackers hijacked new book
The Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, yesterday said he did not ambush ex-President Goodluck Jonathan or any respondents in writing his book–Against The Run of Play.
He said Jonathan went through the text of the interview he had with him line-by-line.
He asked other leaders to join him in writing their own accounts to have the complete story of the 2015 presidential election.
But he expressed regrets that hackers have succeeded in breaking the code to the online edition of his book and are already circulating it online.
Adeniyi made these clarifications in a statement in Abuja against the backdrop of the Jonathan’s claims that there are distortions in his book.
He said: “For the record, after my first conversation with President Jonathan, I asked for his email address and promised to send him the raw text of our conversation which he could then amend as appropriate.
“ I sent it to him that very day. When I went for a second meeting, I took along a printed copy which we both went through line-by-line. Whatever he wanted removed, reworked or rephrased was done while in some areas he provided further context to what he said.
”Incidentally, a few hours after our second conversation, President Jonathan called me that he felt uncomfortable about a certain response he gave to a particular issue. He told me what to do and I reflected it immediately.
“I went into all that length because he is a man for whom I have tremendous respect and my intention was/is not to embarrass him or anybody. I just wanted his side of the story told in a way he is comfortable with.
”I went through this same process with former President Olusegun Obasanjo, former Senate President David Mark, APC National Leader, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, Governor Nasir el-Rufai of Kaduna State, former NGF Chairman and current Transportation Minister, Mr Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, former Niger State Governor, Dr. Muazu Babangida Aliyu and a few other principal actors who all have in their emails the raw text of our conversations.
”The reason I did that was so I would not misquote, misrepresent or distort the views of any of the people who spoke to me on trust.
“My intention was not to ambush or set up anyone. This is why I gave them the opportunity to go over what they told me again before putting it in print.
“ Fortunately, none of them has come out to say I distorted their views. Besides, I left out so many things in my book so as to avoid unnecessary controversies.
“ For instance, President Obasanjo made some strong remarks about former Vice President Atiku Abubakar which I decided to remove even after he (Obasanjo) had approved it for publication.
“I did the same to some of the things others told me that I believed could raise unnecessary dust or distract from the story at hand.
”Therefore, I did not distort President Jonathan’s view and he did not say I did. Now that he has reaffirmed what he told me that he is writing his own account, I will enjoin Nigerians to wait for his book.
“I hope others will join him in writing their own accounts so that we can have the complete story of the 2015 presidential election. The more accounts and the more perspectives we have, the better for our education and learning.
“In the same vein, I will also implore all the key actors in the major historical junctures of our national life to document their experiences for the present and for posterity.”
He insisted that he did not distort Jonathan’s views in any manner whatsoever.
He said: “Yesterday, President Jonathan said: ‘I have just read Segun Adeniyi’s new book, ‘Against the Run of Play’ which has so far enjoyed tremendous reviews in the media. My take on it is that the book as presented, contains many distorted claims on the 2015 presidential election by many of the respondents. There will obviously be more books like that on this subject by concerned Nigerians. However, I believe that at the right time, the main characters in the election including myself will come out with a true account of what transpired either in major interviews or books.’
”The respondents President Jonathan was referring to are the people who spoke to me and whose claims he apparently disputes or disagrees with. This should be clear enough to those who did not choose to read his statement with a tendentious accent. But apparently it is not. President Jonathan did not say I distorted his views and the fact that others may have presented him in ways he doesn’t like cannot be taken as an indictment of me or of my work.”
-
Jonathan is not to blame
Books have a way of shedding light on things that need illumination. Take the new book by the Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, launched on April 28 in Lagos. Tendentiously titled “Against The Run of Play,” the book offers a thought-provoking insight into the mind of former President Goodluck Jonathan. In other words, it gives a picture of how Jonathan thinks and what he thinks.
For instance, Jonathan said in the book: “The main problem I had was that the media and the civil society had conspired against me.” This is how Jonathan saw his unprogressive era that was brought to an end by an electoral red card in 2015. He didn’t see, and perhaps couldn’t see, that he fell because he failed to perform. It is absurd that he is blaming others for his failure. One question: Was he voted out of power by the media and the civil society? Another question: Was he not booted out of power by the electorate?
Another example shows how Jonathan still can’t see his obvious minuses that ultimately led to his unrealised re-election dream. He also said: “President Barack Obama and his officials made it very clear to me by their actions that they wanted a change of government in Nigeria and were ready to do anything to achieve that purpose…I got on well with Prime Minister David Cameron but at some point, I noticed that the Americans were putting pressure on him and he had to join them against me. But I didn’t realise how far President Obama was prepared to go to remove me until France caved in to the pressure from America.”
So, Jonathan also blames America, Britain and France for his emphatic electoral defeat by Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC) who succeeded him two years ago. Rather than blame foreign powers for his fall, Jonathan needs to look inward. Does he really believe his performance as president should have earned him a second term? If he really thinks so, then he probably needs help in two areas: logical thinking and objective thinking.
Jonathan’s Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is currently facing a crisis of survival, following its historic loss of federal power. It would appear that the party needs to rethink its existence. Jonathan’s self-righteous thinking on why he lost the presidential election and why his party lost its political dominance doesn’t help matters.
This new book has further revealed how delusional thinking contributed to Jonathan’s great fall and the PDP’s mighty fall.
-
2015 : I’m coming with my own account, says Jonathan
•Dismisses ‘many distortions’ by respondents in Adeniyi’s book
Former President Goodluck Jonathan is clearly not enjoying the many barbs fired at him by his erstwhile political allies in the book ‘Against the Run of Play’, written by Olusegun Adeniyi, a former special adviser on media and publicity to the late President Umaru Yar’Adua.
He feels challenged by the development to give his own “true account of what transpired either in major interviews or books.”
And he wants others to do likewise.
Jonathan, in a sequence of tweets yesterday branded as distortions, the opinions of some of the respondents in the book about what caused his defeat in the elections.
He mentioned no names but the most stinging flak for him are from ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo, former Senate President David Mark, National leader of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, former House of Representatives Speaker Aminu Tambuwal, former Governor of Rivers State, Mr. Rotimi Amaechi, former deputy Speaker of the House, Emeka Ihedioha, Governor Kashim Shettima of Borno State and ex-Governor Babangida Aliyu of Niger State.
Some of them do not spare Jonathan’s wife, Patience, for her public utterances and conduct.
Jonathan said: (1) I have just read Segun Adeniyi’s new book, ‘Against the Run of Play’ which has so far enjoyed tremendous reviews in the media.
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) April 29, 2017
(2) My take on it is that the book as presented contains many distorted claims on the 2015 Presidential election by many of the respondents
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) April 29, 2017
(3) There will obviously be more books like that on this subject by concerned Nigerians.
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) April 29, 2017
(4) However, I believe that at the right time, the main characters in the elections including myself
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) April 29, 2017
(5) will come out with a true account of what transpired either in major interviews or books.
— Goodluck E. Jonathan (@GEJonathan) April 29, 2017
Jonathan himself in the book claims his defeat was caused in part by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), whose chairman at the time, Professor Attahiru Jega, he said failed to make adequate preparation for the polls.
Of Jega, he said: “I was disappointed by Jega because I still cannot understand what was propelling him to act the way he did in the weeks preceding the elections.
“As at the first week in February 2015 when about 40 per cent of Nigerians had not collected their Permanent Voters Cards (PVCs), Jega said INEC was ready to go ahead with the election. How could INEC have been ready to conduct an election in which millions of people will be disenfranchised?”
He also accused the chairman of his party –Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) at the time of the election, Mallam Adamu Mu’azu of joining “in the conspiracy against me.”
“For reasons best known to him, he helped to sabotage the election in favour of the opposition.”
Jonathan said election results from much of the North were manipulated against him, while the former American President Barack Obama mobilized UK and France to cause his defeat by the opposition.
He accused his successor, President Muhammadu Buhari, of harassing his family, instead of correcting “whatever mistakes I may have made and then carry on from there.”
His former godfather, Chief Obasanjo said Jonathan “from day one was too small” for the office of president as he kept looking at otherwise national issues from only Ijaw prism.
He said the Jonathan government mishandled the kidnap of the Chibok school girls and turned the fight against the Boko Haram insurgency into an Automated Teller Machine (ATM) to enable his cronies have an unrestricted access to public funds.
Tambuwal who is now Governor of Sokoto State recalled a particular telephone conversation he had with Patience sometime in 2012.
It was in the thick of the faceoff between the Jonathan Presidency and the House of Reps led by Tambuwal.
The ex-First Lady allegedly started by ranting: “You this Hausa boy, you want to bring down the government of my husband; you want to disgrace him out of power? Una no fit! God no go allow you.”
For about five minutes, Mrs. Jonathan allegedly railed against Tambuwal, who was accused of harbouring a sinister agenda against the Federal Government and the President.
Tambuwal said he uttered no word and when she paused, he asked: “Are you done, Ma? Thank you very much.”
He dropped the call.
Tambuwal approached then Senate President David Mark to mediate.
Mark took him and Ihedioha, Tambuwal’s deputy to the President for a meeting where they gave assurances that they would cooperate and work with the government.
It never resolved the crisis as suspicion grew in the presidency that Tambuwal nursed a presidential ambition.
Mark said: “I guess she had the same fear about me even when she never said it to my face. She once accosted Senator Joy Emordi to say, ‘Joy, I hear you are the manager of David Mark Presidential Campaign Organization’, which was a baseless accusation. I had to meet the President to clarify issues with him. So, I would say it was President Jonathan and his wife who radicalized Tambuwal and turned him into a political foe.”
Mark said he drew attention to the imminent defeat of Jonathan but his voice was drowned by sycophants around Jonathan
“I saw it and at different times, I pointed out to him and the party that the projections being made by some people around the president about what the voting pattern in the north would be were wrong,” Mark said.
On his part Ihedioha said Jonathan did not “trust many people and he was suspicious of those who meant well for him. And perhaps for that reason, it was difficult to ascertain who was in charge during the election while team efforts were very weak. There was no coordinated campaign programme and he also unwittingly empowered his enemies.
“The people fighting Tambuwal and myself were PDP members who considered themselves to be foot soldiers of President Jonathan, even when Tambuwal and I discharged our duties patriotically. Besides, it was a wrong way to pay us back for the help we rendered him and the nation at a most defining moment.”
Amaechi who was governor of Patience’s home state of Rivers had a running battle with the former first couple because, according to him, “I could not surrender my mandate to a woman in Abuja, even if such a person was wife of the President.”
He added: “Also, I could not possibly grant questionable demands that would make me betray my oath of office. I won’t say more than that for now since I am also writing my memoir, but that basically was my sin with Dame Patience Jonathan.”
Governor of Niger State, Dr. Babangida Aliyu says the people of the North have not forgotten how the ex-First Lady kept insulting the North.
He recalled a statement by Patience at a political campaign where she said: “Our people no dey born children wey dem no dey count. Our men no dey born children thro-way for street; we no dey like the people from that side.”
And at a campaign in Lokoja, the Kogi State capital, she said in pidgin: “Wetin him (Buhari) dey find again? Him dey drag with him pikin mate. Old man wey e no get brain, him brain don die patapata. What does Buhari want again? He is jostling for power with someone young enough to be his son. Old man whose brain is completely dead!”
‘Against the run of play’ chronicles the events leading to ,and surrounding the 2015 presidential election.
It contains interviews with key players in the elections including ex-Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Jonathan, former Senate President Mark, National leader of the ruling APC, Asiwaju Tinubu, former House of Representatives Speaker Tambuwal, former Governor of Rivers State, Amaechi, former deputy Speaker of the House, Ihedioha and Governor Shettima of Borno State.
-
Jonathan reminisces about 2015, Obasanjo and Buhari
APART from bemoaning how things had come to such a pass for his family under President Muhammadu Buhari’s anti-graft war, ex-president Goodluck Jonathan also managed in one fell swoop to relive his 2015 election defeat by making extraordinary claims about his own sagacity and his enemies’ mischief and betrayal. He should have left well enough alone. Time was healing the country of the injuries his presidency inflicted on it, and memories were becoming distant about how he frittered away the beautiful chances nature and providence endowed Nigeria at a time of great oil wealth and wonderful opportunities. Even though his statements come from interviews published in Segun Adeniyi’s book, Against the Run of Play, and are therefore not a deliberate or calculated attempt to stoke passion once again, perhaps the time was not ripe at all for any serious reflection from him about his presidency.
But the genie is out of the bottle, and Dr Jonathan must now contend with the fury of his countrymen, many of whom have been quite profound and forthcoming in disparaging his five years or so in office. He must also endure the scorn of top politicians, including ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo, some of whom have been characteristically unsparing. Dr Jonathan had begun to mix well with his grieving party and to let his hair down in the midst of world statesmen, many of whom still genuinely laud his effortless concession of defeat in 2015. Then, this. Now, sadly, he must return to the starting block to discover new meanings to life, politics and the essence of things. He seemed to many of his supporters to be made of finer mettle than anyone had given him credit, but given the excoriation of the past few days following his defensive and rather bewildering assessment of his presidency, some of those supporters will wonder whether that mettle has been matched by any intellect, intuition or judgement on his part.
Dr Jonathan all but characterises his successor’s policies and measures as objectionable revisionism, and the anti-graft war, at least that part that touches on him and his family, as harassment. President Buhari’s spokesmen assert that no one is being unfairly targeted. The law, they say unconvincingly but probably rightly, will be allowed to take its course. It is understandable why Dr Jonathan feels belaboured and besieged. The late Gen Sani Abacha investigated and compiled a dossier on his predecessor, Gen Ibrahim Babangida, but was unable to go through with a private pledge to dock him and neutralise him. Had he been alive, his successor, Gen Abdulsalami Abubakar, would have been lacking in courage to expose and ridicule him. Chief Obasanjo inquired into the affairs of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) over which a less than salutary dossier was compiled, but even he, as plucky as he claims to be and sounds, was unable to initiate a process of calling the then retired Gen Buhari to account. Had the late Umaru Yar’Adua summoned the courage to pore through Chief Obasanjo’s presidency with a fine-tooth comb, it is doubtful whether the Owu, Abeokuta chief would be as flippant as he is today.
To the public, perhaps the most offensive part of Dr Jonathan’s defence of his presidency, as contained in Mr Adeniyi’s book, is how he sought to justify his 2015 electoral loss. He explains away his lethargy in fighting corruption by suggesting that meticulousness naturally and beneficially slows down such a campaign and disentangles it from the dramatic frills with which his successor has festooned it. The evidence against his favourite minister, Diezani Allison-Madueke, was weak, he says, without explaining why he thinks the gargantuan edifice to corruption allegedly erected by the dashing minister should be discountenanced. He downplays the fact that graft was said to be rife in his presidency, and prevaricates over the abduction of more than 200 Chibok, Borno State, schoolgirls, perhaps the main reason the world rejected him for his slow response, complicit tardiness, and monumental lack of empathy.
It is not in a book such as the one written by Mr Adeniyi that Dr Jonathan should have defended his many theses about his presidency, why he lost the election, what he thought of corruption, the so-called international conspiracy against him and his presidency, his poor response to both the Chibok abductions and the Boko Haram war, and the allegations of clannishness levelled against him. It was poor judgement, given how unpopular he had become months before losing office, to embrace a constricted space to explain what perhaps needs more than two books to defend. His defence, however deep and copious he made them, were bound to receive poor response from distraught Nigerians angered by the slothfulness of his government and riled by the widespread ease with which many public functionaries helped themselves to public funds. Making amends will now be infinitely more difficult for Dr Jonathan, especially since Nigerians are no longer ignorant of the objectionable theses he will try to explore and promote in a subsequent book.
But whether the Buhari presidency should seize upon Dr Jonathan’s indiscretion in remonstrating with his successor to commence investigation and prosecution of the former president is controversial. This column had in the early days of the Buhari presidency denounced the new president for taking a softer stand on Dr Jonathan. The waste and financial malfeasances of the past should be dealt with, the column wailed, and if Dr Jonathan had a case to answer, must be called to account. The column made references to other parts of the world, and asked the new president to ensure that no one was above the law. But the president is today hamstrung by poor health and probably low attention span, and a cabal has allegedly seized control of the levers of power in the midst of a ruling party unable to get its act together, and a populace so tense and calcified by sectarian and ethnic bigotries that it is doubtful whether the system can withstand the kind of jolt Dr Jonathan’s prosecution will elicit.
Unlike other nations which have structurally come to terms with their heterogeneity, and others stabilised by their homogeneity, Nigeria has remained a mere ‘geographical expression’, apparently incapable of the wisdom and courage needed to remould the country. Neither the grouching Dr Jonathan nor any of his predecessors and successors have attempted to restructure the country into a truly federalist entity where ethnic or religious considerations do not stand in the way of peace, unity and progress. Dr Jonathan elevated clannishness to a dangerous height such that even the self-centred and narcissist Chief Obasanjo noticed and growled. President Buhari himself has been spectacularly insular, producing a kitchen cabinet from only one part of the country — one that speaks with one voice, one language, and one anachronistic and depressing world view. Whatever he does to Dr Jonathan, no matter how legally and constitutionally justified, will sadly be interpreted as persecution and probably subverted.
Moreover, with a security system deliberately structured to be dominated by the North, a Department of State Service (DSS) now unfortunately embroiled in allegations of clannishness in recruitment, a presidency that flouts judicial decisions at will, detains suspects without trial, and overall seems so edgy and poised to clamp down on the media and adverse reporting and essays, President Buhari seems to have his plate full. Had he the appetite to eat what he has served, and the ability to masticate with poise and elegance without literally chewing the cud as he has done in the case of the former National Security Adviser (NSA), Col Sambo Dasuki (retd.), perhaps the country would have the satisfaction and temper to absorb his foibles, help him along in his politics and anti-graft war, and tolerate his peccadilloes.
However, the suspicion is that the Buhari presidency has lost both the momentum and the initiative to do something major and substantial about bringing his predecessor to book. He didn’t promise to do that before assuming office, and perhaps has stayed true to his intentions. In the early days of his presidency, had he desired to investigate and prosecute Dr Jonathan, he probably would have had sufficient goodwill and energy to withstand the fallout. But nothing is ever foolproof. He wisely sidestepped that complication and left Dr Jonathan severely alone. There were, after all, Boko Haram to attend to, a shrinking economy threatening to slide into recession, and a troubled citizenry unnerved by crisis in the Niger Delta and kidnappers on rampage. To seek to satisfy the public now by dragging Dr Jonathan before a court will be nothing but brinkmanship. President Buhari will sensibly let that cup pass over him, not because it is right or lawful, but because it is probably expedient.
If President Buhari will not take Dr Jonathan’s unwise and insensitive bait, the impetuous Chief Obasanjo possesses enough chutzpah to take on the challenge. Also interviewed for the Adeniyi book project, the former president and retired general discloses a number of disturbing details about how Dr Jonathan was foisted on the country. Many of the details tear Dr Jonathan’s image to shreds, but they also indict Chief Obasanjo himself, showing how appallingly small-minded he is, how inconsiderate and selfish he is whenever he examines or engages himself with the concept of Nigerian leadership, and how opinionated, conceited and self-righteous he has always been. Indeed, going by Chief Obasanjo’s statements and arguments, it is hard to determine who is worse or more malevolent between him and Dr Jonathan.
Chief Obasanjo may be right to have described Dr Jonathan as someone overwhelmed by the office of the president. Even then, the latter would probably have embraced a more disciplined and successful approach to governance had Chief Obasanjo laid the right and enduring democratic foundations for the country. The former general says he worked tirelessly to get Dr Jonathan to reject Mrs Alison-Madueke as Petroleum minister without saying why. Though he failed, the minister nevertheless turned out to be an unmitigated disaster. Chief Obasanjo speaks glibly of Dr Jonathan repudiating an unsigned agreement with the North to serve for only one term, and how he cajoled presidential aspirants to forswear their interests in 2015. But the former general himself repudiated an unsigned agreement with shadowy interests in the North to serve for only one term, and compelled those who were to contest against his favourite pick in 2007, Mallam Yar’Adua, to drop out of the race on pain of being drawn and quartered, so to say.
In addition, Chief Obasanjo says in the book that he denounced Dr Jonathan for pardoning former Bayelsa State governor, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, insinuating that the forgiveness probably had something to do with the offender’s ethnic background. But the former general also inexplicably pardoned former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Salisu Buhari, and failed to disclose to Mr Adeniyi that his opposition to Mr Alamieyeseigha was a long-standing and personal one, nothing connected with morality or law. Surprisingly, as smart as Chief Obasanjo likes to see himself, he nonetheless failed to see the irony and lack of sincerity in defending his imposition of Mallam Yar’Adua despite the latter’s poor health. The former president says he asked the late Katsina State governor to produce a medical report of himself, which he showed to a medical doctor who confirmed that the governor did not have kidney disease. Here was a president who controlled the secret service, Federal Ministry of Health, and many other agencies which could have given him all the information he needed on the sick governor; instead, he chose to dissemble and later defend his untruths and flagrant betrayal of the country. The same Chief Obasanjo does not balk at engaging lustily in finding fault with Dr Jonathan’s pretences and betrayal of Nigeria.
The book will doubtless have its highs and lows, and strengths and weaknesses. But this piece is based solely on the few published excerpts from the book, which interpretatively showed how unfit for leadership most Nigerian leaders are. The victory of the APC and President Buhari in 2015 may have been explained to a large extent in the book, and the Ondo-Akeredolu conundrum that obfuscated last year’s governorship election may also have been resolved. Despite these, other books will still come to shed more light on the disputed claims regarding the last general elections and other major national issues. Whoever their authors, and whatever the subjects, the enduring leitmotif will always be that somehow, Nigeria keeps producing incompetent leaders unfit to preside over the affairs of a complex and modern multi-ethnic and multi-faith country, leaders so mentally and philosophically barren as to be amply incapable of building and unifying a great and thriving nation.
The excerpts show the author, Mr Adeniyi, as fairly detached and not judgemental. Hopefully the entire book will substantiate that authorial and magisterial detachment and scrupulousness. When the curtains are drawn on the Buhari presidency, it is doubtful whether the ambitious authors readying themselves to do justice to the period between 2015 and 2019, presumably, will be able to sustain any level of detachment. They will be cruel and merciless, for the angst already roused by the abominable failures of the Obasanjo and Jonathan presidencies have triggered a passion and temper so incendiary that President Buhari will be lucky indeed if there should remain one or two of his legacies not singed by the authors’ furies. -
Jonathan has himself to blame for 2015 defeat, says Waku
Northern leaders yesterday reacted to allegations of betrayal against them by former President Goodluck Jonathan, saying he failed to do his home work ahead of the election.
Former Vice Chairman of the Arewa Consultative Forum (ACF), Senator Joseph Waku told The Nation on phone that the former President did not do his research before trusting those he now accuses of betraying him, adding that “authentic northern leaders” made it clear from the beginning that they were not going to vote for him.
Waku, a chief of the All Progressives Congress (APC) from Benue State who initially declined to comment on the allegation because “I am not one of those he is talking about” said: “why should I comment on his allegation? He knows ab initio that I was not for him and so could not have said I betrayed him.
“He knows the northern leaders that he liaised with that betrayed him. I was not involved in that. So next time, when any southern president or any northerner or Nigerian president wants to meet with northern leaders, they should do their research and know the people to deal with that will not betray them.
“It is not every northern leader that supported him. Some of us took our stand ab initio that we were not with him. But those he trusted betrayed him.
“He did not do his home work thoroughly and so got into the wrong hands because we, the authentic northern elders and leaders, had already made up our mind that we were not going to give him any vote and we stuck to it. Those he trusted were Nobody and so he should have himself to blame.”
Spokesman for the Northern Delegates to the 2014 National Conference, Mr. Anthony Sani said the former President failed to understand that the body language of the north in the run up to the elections was that they needed a change of leadership because of the impression that he was not willing to crush the Boko Haram uprising.
Sani who is the immediate past National Publicity Secretary of ACF said that the uncomplimentary remarks by handlers of Jonathan’s public outing also did not help matters as their comments added to an already bad situation.
He said: “the former president did not seem to take the pulse of the politics at that time serious. Otherwise he would have known that in the North at that time, the generality of the populace felt the government was dragging its feet on the fight against Boko Haram which was becoming ubiquitous in the Northern states and making the whole North unsafe even among farmers, thereby inspiring fear among the populace.
“What is more, the delay by the then president to order an immediate chase of the abductors of Chibok girls until after some 72 hours exacerbated the apprehension in the North that the government was not determined to bring Boko Haram under control. And therefore there was need for change.
“Also, you would note that the movements of the economic indices of the GDP, the foreign reserve, the Excess Crude account, the value of the naira to the dollar from May 2010 when the regime took over to 2015 tended to signal a down turn of the economy. This engendered fear among the people of the impending economic Armageddon which needed a change in leadership that could stop it.”
He added that it was the same north that made it possible for Jonathan to defeat the same Buhari in 2011.
-
Buhari to Jonathan: I allow the law to take its course
The Presidency yesterday denied that President Muhammadu Buhari was harassing members of former President Goodluck Jonathan’s family.
Buhari spoke through his Special Adviser on Media and Publicity, Mr. Femi Adesina. He was reacting to the story, “Buhari’s govt harassing my family, says Jonathan” published in yesterday’s edition of The Nation.
Dr. Jonathan made the allegation in a new book, “Against The Run of Play”, written by the Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi.
Jonathan was also reported to have criticised the Buhari administration’s style of fighting corruption.
Adesina’s statement reads: “We make bold to state unequivocally that President Buhari harasses nobody; he merely allows the law to take its course.
“For the umpteenth time, we say that anybody without skeleton in his or her cupboard has nothing to fear about the bared fangs of the anti-corruption initiative. Fear belongs only to those who have abused trust while in office.
“Anybody who feels aggrieved is free to approach the courts to seek redress or justice. President Buhari believes in the rule of law and that is why his campaign against corruption is anchored on that plank.
“With regard to President Buhari’s anti-graft style, which the former president deprecates, given the scale of revelations and recoveries so far by the anti-corruption agencies, it is obvious that corruption had an uninhibited course during our recent past.
“In any case, time will give the verdict on whose style of fighting corruption ultimately yielded the most dividends. For now, President Buhari is resolute and single-minded in the fact that his crusade against graft is not targeted at any individual or group.”
Buhari, the statement said, firmly believes that national interest must always be placed above personal interest, no matter who is involved.
-
Buhari’s govt harassing my family, says Jonathan
Ex-president criticises anti-graft war
‘Mua’zu, Jega disappointed me’
former President Goodluck Jonathan believes that his family is being hounded by the President Muhammadu Buhari administration.
He said he lost the 2015 election because he was betrayed by the former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Adamu Muazu and some Northern leaders in the party.
Jonathan, who made his feelings known in a book, “Against The Run of Play”, written by the Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, said Buhari could still fight corruption using a different style.
He said: “I feel sad about the way my family is being hounded.”
“Society is like a building. You build it one block at a time. If every president decides to go in to dismantle what his predecessor did, society will never make progress. I expected President Buhari to correct whatever mistakes I may have made and then carry on from there.
“But a situation in which people go into exile for political reasons is not good for us.”
“His style of fighting corruption is different from mine and since most Nigerians apparently prefer his style, it is okay. There are steps you take that will help in retrieving ill-gotten wealth and punish offenders while restoring confidence in the system. But there are also things you can do to damage the system.”
The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) got the court to freeze $5,842,316.66 (about N1.7billion) belonging to Mrs Patience Jonathan in Skye Bank. Justice Mojisola Olatoregun on April 6 unfreezed the account. The EFCC appealed but yesterday withdrew its application for a stay of execution of the judgment.
The Presidency declined to react to former president’s claim on the anti-graft crusade.
Presidential spokesman, Mr. Femi Adesina told The Nation that he could not comment on the contents of a book he has not read.
On the 2015 poll, Jonathan said: “I felt really betrayed by the result coming from some northern states. Perhaps for ethnic purposes, even security agents colluded with the opposition to come up with spurious results against me. You saw the way the Inspector General of Police, a man I appointed, suddenly turned himself into the ADC to Buhari immediately after the election.”
“How could we have lost Ondo, Benue and Plateau states if our people were committed to the cause? If you examine the results, you will see a pattern: in places where ordinarily we were strong, our supporters did not show enough commitment to mobilise the voters.”
“What happened was very sad not for me as a person, but for our democracy.”
“Take, for instance, the PDP National Chairman, Alhaji Adamu Mu’azu. I believe he joined in the conspiracy against me. For reasons best known to him, he helped to sabotage the election in favour of the opposition.”
-
Jonathan: I lost re-election to U.S., UK, France, local forces
Two years after, former President Goodluck Jonathan has spoken on the loss of his Presidency. He said he lost the 2015 elections to local and international conspiracies. He named the United States, Britain and France as the conspirators.
He blamed it all on former United States President Barack Obama, ex-British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Francois Hollande for aiding President Muhammadu Buhari’s victory.
Dr. Jonathan also said he was disappointed by the conduct of the immediate past Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Attahiru Jega, in the weeks preceding the elections.
He said he conceded defeat to avoid bloodshed in view of a similar experience after the 2011 poll.
He, however, claimed that he did not take disciplinary action against ex-Minister of Petroleum Resources Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke because the evidence against her was weak.
He plans to reveal the nature of his relationship with ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo soon.
Jonathan reminisced on his defeat in a new book, “Against The Run of Play”, which is authored by the Chairman of ThisDay Editorial Board, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, who is also an accomplished Politics Editor.
The book will be presented on Friday in Lagos.
Jonathan also revealed that he was betrayed by those he relied on to defeat Buhari.
He said: “President Barack Obama and his officials made it very clear to me by their actions that they wanted a change of government in Nigeria and we’re ready to do anything to achieve that purpose. They even brought some naval ships into the Gulf of Guinea in the days preceding the election.
“I got on well with Prime Minister David Cameron but at some point, I noticed that the Americans were putting pressure on him and he had to join them against me. But I didn’t realise how far President Obama was prepared to go to remove me until France caved in to the pressure from America.
“But weeks to the election, he had also joined the Americans in supporting the opposition against me.
Asked of Obama’s grouse against him, Jonathan added: “There was this blanket accusation that my body language was supporting corruption, a line invented by the opposition but which the media and civil society bought into and helped to project to the world. That was the same thing I kept hearing from the Americans without specific allegations.”
The ex-President expressed disappointment with the former Chairman of INEC for allegedly acting American’s script.
Jonathan said: “I was disappointed by Jega because I still cannot understand what was propelling him to act the way he did in the weeks preceding the election.
“As at the first week in February 2015 when about 40 per cent of Nigerians had not collected their Permanent Voters Cards (PVCs), Jega said INEC was ready to go ahead with the election. How could INEC have been ready to conduct an election in which millions of people will be disenfranchised?
“Of course, the Americans were encouraging him to go ahead yet they would never do such thing in their own country. How could we have cynically disenfranchised about a third of our registered voters for no fault of theirs and still call that a credible election?
“The interesting thing was that the opposition also supported the idea of going on with an election that was bound to end in confusion.”
Contrary to the general perception, he insisted that it was right for his administration to have postponed the election based on security reasons.
“When the military and security chiefs demanded for more time to deal with the insurgency, the reasons were genuine. As at February 2015, it would have been very difficult to vote in Gombe, Adamawa, Borno and Yobe states.
“But the moment all the arms and ammunition that had been ordered finally arrived, the military was able to use them to degrade the capacity of Boko Haram.”
Although Jonathan faulted the results of the 2015 presidential election, he said he conceded defeat to avoid bloodshed.
He added: “Go and check the results from Kano. The Presidential election and that of National Assembly happened on the same day and same time. The National Assembly result reflected that about 800,000 people voted but that of the presidential reflected a vote of about 1.8 million. I had reports of what happened but I decided that for such to be accepted, it meant that those who called themselves my supporters must have colluded. I was betrayed by the very people I relied on to win the election.
“In 2011 when Buhari did not campaign anywhere and could not have won the election, there was a spontaneous violent reaction that led to the death of several innocent people, including Youth Corps members.”
“I asked myself: what would happen in a situation in which there was already internal and international conspiracy in his favour? I could not bear the thought of anybody dying, so I told myself I had only one option and that was to concede.”
On whether or not his renege of a one-term agreement accounted for his defeat, Jonathan said he never made any such commitment to anybody or party.
He said his comments in Addis Ababa in February 2011 on tenure were grossly misinterpreted.
He added: “I had made a proposition for a single term of seven years. That was the context in which I spoke in Addis Ababa that if the idea was accepted, I would not run again. It was not the context of a second-term of four years.
“Of course, at that period, the issue of one term was brought up several times at different meetings and some people took it upon themselves to pledge on my behalf but I never said I was going to spend only one term…the question was always usually randomly asked and I never made any such commitment to anybody.
“In any case, you can make a political promise and change your mind, so long as it is within the law.”
The ex-President denied shielding a former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Mrs. Diezani Alison-Madueke from being accountable for the alleged rot in the oil and gas sector when she was in charge.
He said he investigated allegations against Mrs. Alison-Madueke and others but there was no fool proof evidence.
According to the former President, the report of the Nuhu Ribadu Investigative Committee was “discredited”.
He said: “We commissioned a report which I believe this administration is using. It deals with undervaluation of the crude oil and gas being declared between what was lifted and what was discharged by the vessels. It was a comprehensive report that dealt with issues of oil theft in Nigeria and how much we lose as a result of it.
“Look at what we did when the allegations became strident. We established four committees to investigate different aspects of the oil and gas sector, including the one headed by Nuhu Ribadu. If I had anything to hide, would I do that?”
“On the day the report was being submitted, there was open disagreement between Ribadu and Steve Oronsaye. How could we use a report that was discredited by its own member?”
“I am from Niger Delta, I have no single oil block and my government never gave out any. Nor did we allocate the marginal fields. In the agricultural sector, I blocked the fertiliser trade. These areas one could make easy money and I blocked those loopholes.”
Jonathan said he was not weak in fighting corruption but he chose to investigate allegations against his ministers or public officers before acting.
He said when the allegations against former Minister of Aviation Stella Oduah were confirmed; he removed her.
He said: “I have been told that I should have made scapegoats of some officials so I would be seen to be fighting corruption, I usually subject them to investigations.
“You know Stella Oduah played a prominent role in my campaign in 2011. But when the investigation I ordered was carried out and the indictment was confirmed, I had to relieve her of her position,” he added
“Up till today, Stella hates me for her removal. No doubt, it was a very hard decision for me to take because I see her as a friend as I take all the people who work with me, but that was what leadership demanded.”
”We live in a country where people fabricate stories about even those they don’t know, where rumour mongering is a national pastime. I have heard stories about me that I find very shocking, stories that are untrue. Therefore, as a leader, it is my responsibility to verify stories before I act. That is why I am deliberative in what I do. The main problem I had was that the media and the civil society had conspired against me.”
On the abduction of the Chibok girls, Jonathan maintained that he did his best but admitted that there was a better commitment against Boko Haram insurgency now.
He said: “What is happening now with regards to Boko Haram was the same thing that happened to me regarding Niger Delta militants in 2007.
“I did my best and so did the military, though I can understand if there is greater commitment to the fight now than in the past. In my time, Boko Haram said they were fighting an infidel government. That naturally has to change since they cannot also call Buhari an infidel.
“There is a feeling of ‘our man is there now’ that you cannot discountenance. It was the same feeling with me with the Niger Delta militants at the initial stage in 2007.
“I recall that immediately he won the election in 1999, before he was even sworn in, Obasanjo had visited Niger Delta to hold meetings. Meanwhile, the first time I would be meeting Asari Dokubo, Ateke Tom and other militants was years later in Aso Rock at a meeting (Obasanjo) called to find a solution to the problem at a period I was Deputy Governor in Bayelsa State. Despite all those efforts, Obasanjo failed to resolve the problem until the late Yar’Adua came with the Amnesty Programme. Should we then hold Obasanjo accountable for the Niger Delta problem?
”The allegation that I didn’t care was false. Immediately I was alerted, I called the military and security chiefs for a briefing after tasking them to get to the root of the matter. Information was initially hazy and there were things that did not add up”
“More than 200 girls were reportedly abducted from different hostels and then put on an open trailer that had no railings. In the same trailer, according to reports, Boko Haram fighters loaded foodstuff. The girls were said to have been abducted by people claiming to be soldiers. The military people were on ground and I relied on the information I could get from them. Of course I cared and charged them to find the girls but every effort we took was twisted against me to score cheap political points.”
Jonathan debunked insinuations that he said stealing is not corruption.
He said he was never the author of the statement ascribed to him.
He said: “I invited the leadership of the National Assembly and the Judiciary as well as heads of anti-corruption agencies. I recall that aside the Chief Justice of Nigeria, the President of the Court of Appeal and Chief judge of the Federal High Court (were also present). I also invited Chief Judges from one state in each of the geopolitical zones. I specifically requested for Lagos and Anambra to represent their zones. My choosing Anambra was because that is one state where every political aspirant goes into election with at least two court orders in his pocket. You cannot fight corruption without dealing with such issues.”
“That was what the then CJN said which I was explaining, but the opposition latched on to it. A prominent member of the opposition who is now a governor of his state even sponsored someone to write a book titled, ‘Where stealing is not corruption’. The book was supposed to be launched in the days preceding the election though for some reasons, that never took place but I have a copy of the book where I was lampooned and called all sorts of names.”
“That was what was important to me. I would not go outside the country and say Nigerians are the most corrupt people because not only is that unhelpful, I am also indicting myself. Take the oil industry.
”Yet, people make all the noise about corruption. If the problem is that I failed to label Nigerians as fantastically corrupt, then I don’t think I should apologize for that.
Jonathan said that what those who romanticize the issue forgot was that “when you destroy your country, you are also destroying yourself”.
While dismissing the allegation of “Ijawnisation” of his administration, Jonathan said he will soon disclose the nature of his relationship with ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo.
“That is the same accusation President Obasanjo levelled against me in his letter. In my memoir, I am going to reveal the nature of my relationship with President Obasanjo, beginning from 2007 when he nominated me to be running mate to the late President Yar’Adua to 2011 when I wanted to run and the real roles he actually played before, during and after the 2015 election.
”How many Ijaw people were in my government? One thing people forget is that Ijaw may be a minority ethnic group in Nigeria but Ijaw people actually straddle six states: Ondo, Bayelsa, Rivers, Delta, Edo and Cross River.”