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.
