The Nation Newspaper

Tag: supremacy

  • Supremacy of Agemo cult

    The Agemo cult is one of the highly regarded cults by Ijebu indigenes of Ogun State. They are sub-divided into two groups: Ijebu and Ijebu Remo that cover towns, such as Epe, Shagamu, Ijebuode, and Ijebu Remo.

    Agemo cult was a supreme deity with all other deities as subordinates. Some Ijebu myths claim that Agemofought other deities and over-powered them thus making an Ijebuman to be referred to as Omo Alagemo i.e. (Agemo child) or Omo Alare. All he has belongs to Agemo. But, Agemo origin is said to be derived from two narrations.

    The origin is linked to Obanta, who is supposed to be the founder of Ijebu. He is also the founder of the Awufile dynasty. The cult Obanta organised around his personal god grew into Agemo cult. Obanta appointed Tami (leader of Agemo cult) as his middle man. Tami performs human sacrifices every fifth day in those days and this brought scandals against Tami and he has to leave Ijebu Ode. But before leaving he appointed 15 soldiers and mount them in strategic locations around Ijebu land and annually meet at Imosan – the site of Agemo grove.

    The second version linked Agemo cult to Oloko of Imushin. It was said that Agemo priests were the middle men of the Oloko who came together to form the cult and Oloko’s senior wife controlled the priests.

    Agemo masquerade uses costumes that are made of raffia strips and it covers all over the body head to toe. Such raffia strips are dyed in various colours. The Agemo masquerade consists of head dress and it has chameleon as the central figure, and it was said that the chameleon represents the power of the Agemo deity. There are reasons why chameleon played significant role in Agemo cult. – It is said to be vital in making of very potential medicines.

    Oral tradition states that chameleon defeated his enemy by using his power of transformation. Chameleon is known for making a hiss when threatened, the Ijebus interpret it as a powerful course.It has large eyes that seem to see and know much.

    Chameleons’importance reflects on the Yoruba saying: “No matter how hungry one is, one never eats the meat of a chameleon.” The chameleon on the hair dress is surrounded by other animals, human being etc.The cult is made up of specific families. It has sixteen principal priests in Ijebu land and they each live in a village or town not too far from Ijebu Ode.

     

    Imosan, the centre for the  yearly festival and location

    Each town or village has a district or local Agemo grove supervised by the principal priest who has a subordinate Agemo priest. The subordinate Agemo priest does not take part in the general Agemo festival and ritual at Imosan and Ijebu Ode. The priest is also to oversee the market, guard against intrusion from enemies and maintain peace in the land, so the alagemo is also called ‘Oloja’.

    Tami of Odogbolu is a known leader of the group. He dances for the Awujale at Ojafa during the festival. He does not take part in washing of Agemo deity and not doing so and taking care of the grove made the priest at Imosan to sometime to claim leadership of Agemo cult.

    This yearly festival takes place in July and lasts for 13 or 17 days. “Ireku” is the formal opening of the gate for Agemo deity and it takes place a month before the festival. It is done by Imosan priest with sacrifices. The day after the Ireku ceremony is done, message will be sent to the Awujale that the ceremony has been done.

    Then “Idojo” comes up and the duration of the festival is determined by consulting the deity. This is also done with sacrifices at Imosan and is done by the 16 Alagemos (Agemo priests). The next day the priests return to their villages to prepare for the remaining part of the festival.

    The priests reassemble at Imosan towards evening for the next ceremony. They return separately with their entourage. There is excitement all over the town as people move around in hundreds. The Awujale dances three times the same evening toward Ipebi where the ancestral home is located. At the sound of the ‘gbedu’ drum, he dances towards sacred spots and perform ‘Ikose’ three times. After his second dance someone will shout “Eke e biren ma iwoooo” At this point, all the women disappear from the scene because they are forbidden to view certain parts of the festival. Kolanut can also be put on the ground as sign for woman to quit the scene. Message will be sent to the priest to enter Imosan that women had left.

    The luggage carriers with the Alagemos will enter Imosan. The Luggage is called ‘eru’ and is said to contain charms and other personal effects. The Oba conclude his third dance and goes back to his palace without looking back. The Agemo priest on arrival, camp separately and play his own music till late in the night.

    The following day each priest returns to wash his leg in the concoction, used to wash the Agemo Orisa. They wash the left or right leg depending online through which each became a priest that is either through the paternal or maternal line. The dancing festival starts around 3pm at Imosan in a large area cleared for the festival. Spectators stand around cleared area.

    Two of the priests Lijagbon and Adie do not dance for the reason best known to them. Another interesting dance is performed by Agemo and Eleni, he performs in raffia mat instead of raffia strip. He is surrounded with mat near the ground to make sure that no one sees him.

     

     

    The annual sacrifices are made that night with different types of animals like rats, fish, goats, dogs etc. the major animal that is the cow to be used will be provided by the Awujale.

    The last part of the ceremony takes place at Ijebu ode in three spots, this involves dancing on the fifth or ninth day after their offering of sacrifices. The first spot of dancing is in front of the Oba’s ancestral home, the second spot is at Ojofa where the Oba and Tami dance and at one point both come together protected from spectators view to reveal their faces to each other.

    The third spot is at Ishua grove and the festival ends after the dance here.

    The Oba may organize a feast for the priest that came for the ceremony the following day and same day marks the appearance of new yam in the market.

     

    *Adeseri is Asst. Chief Museum Educatiion Officer

    Education Unit, National Museum, Onikan, Lagos

     

     

     

  • Supremacy of the rule of law. Excerpts from the judgement delivered in the case:MILITARY GOVERNOR, LAGOS STATE & ORS. V CHIEF EMEKA ODUMEGWU OJUKWU (1986)

    Kayode ESO, JSC: [P. 1798, paras. D – E]

    “ANOTHER very important matter emanates from the act of the applicants. They have no right to take the matter into their own hands once the court was seised of it. The essence of rule of law is that it should never operate under the rule of force or fear. To use force, seek the court’s equity, is an attempt to infuse timidity into court and operate a sabotage of cherished rule of law. It must never be!”

    Andrews OBASEKI, JSC: [P. 1799, paras. C – E]

    “In the area where rule of law operates, the rule of self-help by force is abandoned. Nigeria, being one of the countries in the world, even in the third world, which profess loudly to follow the rule of law, gives no room for the rule of self-help by force to operate. Once a dispute has arisen between a person and the government or authority, and the dispute has been brought before the court, thereby invoking the judicial powers of the state, it is the duty of the government to allow the law to take its course or allow the legal and judicial powers of the state (…) it is the duty of the government to allow the law to take its course or allow the legal and judicial process to run its full course. The action the Lagos State Government took can have no other interpretation than the show of intention to preempt the decision of the court. The courts expect the utmost respect of the law from the government itself which rules by the law.”

    Andrews OBASEKI, JSC: [P. 1802, paras. B – E]

    “I will be doing injustice to the course of the rule of law if I grant this application and allow the eviction of the respondent to stand. The Nigerian Constitution is founded on the rule of law, the primary meaning of which is that everything must be done according to law. It means also that government should be conducted within the framework of recognised rules and principles which restrict discretionary power which Coke colourfully spoke of as “golden

  • Nigeria, Ghana battle for supremacy

    The battle for the leadership position in the ongoing ICC World T20 Africa Qualifier gets hotter today as Nigeria confronts Ghana in the second match of the day.

    Earlier in the day, third and fourth place teams – Sierra Leone and Gambia will slug it out as the two teams are yet to win any match in the competition.

    Nigeria is topping the table after their emphatic victories over Sierra Leone and Gambia.

    On Sunday, Nigeria continued its good run, overcoming The Gambia by 55 runs, at the Tafawa Balewa Square Cricket Oval in Lagos.

    In a statement by the ICC Tournament Director, Kuben Pillay, the Nigerians again batted first, and they piled on the runs, eventually notching a formidable 176 for five in their 20 overs. The star for the home side was Ademola Onikoyi, who blazed an undefeated 75 off just 55 balls. There were two massive sixes and nine fours in the free-spirited knock, as the number three took Nigeria to a place of comfort. Skipper Chimezie Onwuzulike continued his fine form, with a quick-fire 34 off just 18 balls.

    The total was always going to be a massive test for The Gambia, who had lost their opening match to Ghana by 58 runs. They again breached the 100 mark, thanks in main to a belligerent knock of 29 off just 16 balls by PA Hassan Faye. He struck three sixes for good measure.

    Nigeria sits on top of the standings, but is joined by neighbours, Ghana, who also made it two from two matches on Sunday. The Black Sticks were pushed by Sierra Leone after they batted first and racked up a total of 140 for eight. Simon Ateak was the mainstay, striking a composed 57 off 42 balls.

  • 2019: Buhari support groups battle for supremacy

    There is tension in the political camp of President Muhammadu Buhari and the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), over a looming face off amongst groups of political organisations supporting the president and his administration.

    The Nation learnt that the Coalition of APC Support Groups and a new body, National Committee of Buhari Support Groups, recently put together by Senators Ibrahim Lawal and Habu Ibrahim, are at the centre of the looming crisis.

    Reliable sources claim the president is unaware of the crisis as he is yet to be briefed by those concerned. But a presidential aide from the Southwest, worried over the possible effect of the looming crisis on Buhari’s political future, has allegedly sent a report on the matter to the presidency through the usual official channel. “But it is yet to be seen if that too got to the President,” a source said.

    The Nation gathered that although the issues that led to the current face-off have been on for a while, trouble burst open last week following the hosting of the National Committee of Buhari Support Groups in the Villa by President Buhari. The development, it was gathered, angered the leadership of the Coalition of APC Support Groups, which accused Senator Ibrahim and some presidential aides of trying to supplant the coalition with the new group ahead of the 2019 elections.

    It was further gathered that the leadership of the coalition, under Ambassador Lawal Mohammed Munir, Mazi Peter Okorapo and Mallam Danjuma Dattijo, as Chairman, General Secretary and Organising Secretary respectively, had before now, accused some aides of the President of denying the coalition and its members, access to President Buhari, in spite of several efforts made to secure audience with him.

    They similarly accused the unnamed presidential aides of conniving with Senators Lawal and Ibrahim to float a rival organisation with the intention of supplanting the coalition with the new outfit. The Nation learnt the leadership of the coalition, which was inaugurated by the leadership of the APC shortly before the 2015 general election, had on several occasions reported the matters to the national chairman of the party.

    “Not only had we reported the activities of the senators and their backers in the presidency to the national chairman of the party, several letters and petitions have been sent to the national Youth leader and national Organising Secretary of the party on the issues. But little or nothing was done until we were shocked to see these Senators leading a group of people to Aso villa rock to be introduced to the president as leaders of his support groups.

    “That, to us is the climax of all the nocturnal activities we have been complaining about. Our coalition is not just a group of people supporting Mr. President. It is an accredited and registered organisation put in place and inaugurated by the party leadership itself before the election that brought President Buhari into office. We do not think it is proper for a group of people to just brush that aside and come up with a new one,” a leader of the coalition said.

    Unable to bear what it interpreted to be an attempt to force it out of the Buhari political camp, the leadership of the coalition, through Dattijo, its Organising Secretary, wrote an open letter to president, detailing the disenchantment of the leadership and members of the various groups that make up the coalition with the turn of events since the APC won the presidential election in 2015.

    In the letter, a copy of which was obtained by our correspondent, the coalition hoped that issues raised would be addressed with mutual understanding for the APC to achieve greater success in governance and of course for the support groups to be given their due recognition. The coalition cautioned against the ongoing attempt by some presidential aides to subvert its interests at all cost.

    In part, the letter, which is now generating controversy within the party, reads, “Friday last week; 27/10/2017, we saw how Senator Ibrahim Lawal and Habu Ibrahim came to your office parading some people as members of the “Buhari Support Groups”. Sir, these Senators are liars, they do not own a group, all they did was to use the list of APC Support Groups bearing the names and phone numbers of respective coordinators to send text messages that they are a presidential committee set up by you to screen the groups (I have such messages in my phone as prove).

    “In fact when those that went in desperation and belief that they were truly set up by you discovered how they visited governors, zone by zone, to collect money in your name, and they all left them. They are just one big re-energised axis of evil, seeking relevance in order to perpetrate the continuance of the traditional conception and institutions of high level corruption rather than a vehicle for cultural democratisation and experimentation with new altogether wider institutions geared towards social, moral and welfare reconstruction.

    “It was the letter our secretary Mazi Peter Okorapo, wrote seeking your audience for the coalition, which briefly explained what we want to do for the groups and how we intend to do it, that was hijacked by someone in the admin section of your office and passed over to these senators who tried to implement it. The truth therefore, remains that we are APC Support Groups, who worked and campaigned for the party that brought you to power and our loyalty remains with your government which of course remains the government of our party, the APC. I would not be wrong to assume that Mr. President will not hope to outlive the party.”

    The coalition also complained that its leadership and members have been abandoned by the President. “The Coalition of APC Support Groups is in structure and practice necessarily the only strong arm of APC with jurisdiction and modus operandi to constantly counter these challenges and bring in system relevant behaviours to both our party and government but, the wheel of both leadership of CASG and coordinators of all groups is left rusty and abandoned.”

    Reacting to the allegations raised by the Coalition, a member of the National Committee of Buhari Support Groups said it is not true that the new organization is meant to supplant the Coalition. Our source, a chieftain of the Committee from Oyo State, said the organisation came aboard primarily to work towards Buhari’s re-election for a second term in 2019.

    “It is seriously out of place to say we are created to push some people out of the party. They are APC Support group, we are Buhari Support group. Where is the clash? We both want to support. Why are they raising dust? Our own aim is primarily to ensure the re-election of President Buhari in 2019. What is their own current mission? That is what they should openly say and not raise unnecessary dust,” he said.

    Efforts to reach Senators Lawal and Ibrahim yielded no fruit but The Nation gathered that worried by the unfolding drama between the two groups, the national leadership of the party may have waded into the matter with a view to resolving the differences before the matter gets out of hand. “The party is on top of the matter. It will all be resolved amicably soon,” a party official told The Nation.

     

  • Supremacy battle: Committee defends monarch

    The Yoruba Obas Conflict Resolution Committee has described as laughable, baseless and empty, the four-day ultimatum issued by the Olojudo of Ido Osun, Oba Aderemi Adedapo, to the Olugbo of Ugboland, Oba Fredrick Akinruntan that he should retract his claim that he is the head of monarchs in Yorubaland.

    In a statement issued on behalf of the committee in Ibadan by the Assistant General Secretary of the committee, Oba Sunday Daodu, the Oluyani of Iyani Akoko, Akoko North West, Ondo State, said the ultimatum was an advertisement of ignorance about the peopling of Yorubaland before the arrival of Oduduwa, regarded as the progenitor of the race.

    He said it would not have been necessary to join issues with Oba Adedapo on his “recent unbridled vituperations and unwarranted affront on the Olugbo of Ugboland. However, it is expedient that his false claims be debunked by putting the record straight, to avoid unsubstantiated comments that portray the ignorance of the Olojudo on historical matters.

    “Yoruba kings are still baffled by the statement credited to Oba Adedapo. Even a dog will not receive payment to venture into the den of a lion, but the Olojudo has acted much lower than his status by issuing an ultimatum to the Olugbo for a retraction of a statement made by him.

    “The Olugbo is telling the history of his kingdom, and dynasty, and he is not in contention with any kingdom, people or institution. Of course, any person who is averse to Olugbo’s claims of Antiquity in Yorubaland should take the path of scholarship and write the history of his own people rather than issuing empty threats like the laughable Olojudo.”

  • Nigeria’s democracy: Whither party supremacy?

    Nigeria’s democracy: Whither party supremacy?

    The inability of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to broker a truce in the face-off between the Presidency and the National Assembly has impeded the administration’s resolve to work towards fulfilling some of its campaign promises. As a party that has control of the two arms of government, the APC’s failure to rein them into accepting its authority has put a question mark on its cohesiveness. This was the focus of a recent seminar at the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, Kuru, Plateau State, TONY AKOWE reports. 

    One issue that has occupied public discourse in recent times is the need to return to the era when political parties had firm control of the affairs of its elected representatives, both in the executive and legislative arms of government. Since the return to civil rule in 1999, political party supremacy has eluded Nigeria’s democratic practice. The parties, especially those with elected representatives, have been at the mercy of those they sponsored to political offices. The parties have been under the firm control of the executive and the cabals that call the shots from behind the scene.

    The lack of party supremacy is more evident today than any time in the nation’s political history. Appointees of President Muhammadu Buhari have suffered humiliation at the Senate, which is dominated by the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC).

    In a bid to expand the discussion and offer solution, the nation’s foremost policy think-tank, the National Institute for Policy and Strategic Studies, brought together experts and political actors to discuss the issue and chart a way forward. Setting the stage for the discussion, its Acting Director-General, Jonathan Juma, said unfortunately the concept of party supremacy has been interpreted to mean so many things, including placing the political parties above its members, democratic institutions and even the national constitution.

    He said: “There is no doubt that the cohesiveness of each political party in parliament would contribute to efficient and effective government. Parties can help to articulate group aims, nurture political leadership, develop and promote policy alternatives and present coherent policies pectoral alternatives. Politicians within the same party tend to be more responsible to one another than.

    “However, the influence of political parties tends to encroach into the parliamentary standing orders or even what is laid down in the letters of the law. The scale of this influence may differ, depending on the party’s impact on the work of the parliament and in the conduct of its members. Proponents of expanded intra-party democracy seek to move parties in the direction of more inclusive decisions. Parties with high degree of intra-party democracy are generally highly institutionalised, because they have rules that spell out the qualifications for participation.”

    The Country Director, the International Republican Institute, an arm of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Sentell Barnes, said party supremacy is only relevant if there is a smooth-working relationship between political parties and the legislative arm of government, which is considered the bastion of representative government. He said political parties, having provided the channel for the election of lawmakers, are expected to develop a framework which will ensure that they enact laws and policies towards fulfilling the party’s electoral promises.

    But, former Senate President Ken Nnamani said the problem in Nigeria stems from the fact that the party system has not developed as it ought to. He said: “Many legislators don’t understand how to be good party members and remain effective legislators. The concept of a legislator as a trustee can help us develop a framework to harmonise the idea of an independent legislator who is also a good party man. In other words, parliamentary independence is not incompatible or conflictual with the notion of the supremacy of the party, so far as we understand the proper workings of the two concepts.”

    Nnamani added: “The supremacy of the party does not mean that the party bureaucrats should dictate to the legislators how he should do his work. This will obviously undermine an important pillar of constitutional democracy — the independence of the legislature. It does not mean that the leadership of the legislative house should be annexed to the headquarters of the political party such that the members of the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) should determine proceedings in the legislature. The ‘legislator-as-a-trustee’ means that at every moment, the legislator should employ his best reason to determine how he votes in the chambers.

    “But, in making up his mind on the issues in the chambers, the legislator may consult the leadership of the party for major decisions and insights. This is why there are party caucuses in the legislative house. It is from the leadership of the caucus that the party influences the legislative chamber. It is not a matter of issuing diktats and reading riot acts. This is why we need resourceful and skillful managers in the leadership of the party. The party leaders should be persons who command respect among party members, such that legislators from the party will naturally look up to them for guidance. The role of the Whip in the legislatures is to ensure coordination and direction of members towards the legislative agenda in the ruling party and the opposition party. In this regard, the problem is not necessarily the disobedience of legislators as mu h as the absence of a clearly-defined and well-communicated legislative agenda.

    “The relationship between legislators and their party leadership is not based on personality or personal issues. It is based in the party’s policy platforms which become the ruling party’s legislative agenda. Where such agenda is robustly promoted by the leadership of the party, there will be little room for disagreement between the party and its legislators. If there is no such agenda and harmonious relationship is promoted on account of personal feelings and opinions, it is not going to be sustainable. Legislators will easily resist the idiosyncrasies of party leaders, but will be very amenable to well-argued party policies and programmes.”

    Former Speaker of the House of Representative, Ghali Umar Na’Abba said party supremacy refers to a principle where the interest of a political party supersedes that of a member. He said: “It presupposes that even in the legislature, one must act according to the dictates of his party. It is pertinent to note here that in all the above narrative, there had been no involvement of any political party. This was the type of system we practice. Party supremacy in the legislature cannot work. Party supremacy is inconsistent with the constitution. The constitution has delineated power for each branch of government. It is however desirous that a political party be able to work hand-in-hand with its congressional members.

    “In our desire to make our system work, we must define how much of checks and balances we require that can guarantee human rights, liberty and good governance. There is the public perception that the executive branch at all levels seeks to always have a legislature that is pliant and subservient and thus easily controllable. It is foolhardy and short sighted in a democratic regime to govern with a legislature that is not autonomous and independent.”

    Former Deputy Senate President Ibrahim Mantu said while party supremacy means the party has the final say in the administration of its affairs, this is premised on the fact that the party is supreme over its constituents and that every member is subjected to the supremacy of the constitution of the party represented by its various organs. He said even though all the political parties in Nigeria have party supremacy enshrined in their constitution, the leadership of the parties have hijacked that supremacy from the people and the organs.

    Mantu said: “From 2003, governors cutting across all political leanings took over total control of party affairs, particularly in giving people tickets for various elective offices. If one is not on the governor’s line up, no matter how infectious his popularity may be, he would not see the light of the day. People would queue up in the hot sun or in the rain for a whole day without food and water, voting for candidates of their choices only for those they elected to be dropped by the governors and replaced with their surrogates. So, supremacy of the party becomes supremacy of the governors.

    “The party must be seen to achieve positive results that no individual can achieve. The people will recognise and appreciate the party supremacy with the evidence of its positive development of the agenda. The Nigerian nation has seen the worst of all sorts of bad governance. We acknowledge that there is corruption all over the world, but our type of corruption is uniquely different. There is element of greed in our brand of corruption. In other words, we are greedily corrupt. As we approach 2019, we must put our house in order. We, the politicians have sinned against Almighty God, the giver of power and have sinned against the very people God used to endorse His anointment by voting us into power. Our sins have reached saturating point and the natural law of gravity would bring everything down to ground zero. We must therefore purge ourselves and be on our knees to ask Almighty God and the good people of Nigeria for forgiveness.”

    However, Prof. Jibrin Ibrahim of the Centre for Democracy and Development, Abuja, believes that Nigerian democracy is suffering from a series of accountability challenges that has made consolidation of constitutionalism and good governance difficult. He argued that political parties are not accountable to their members who voted for them. He said: “Since 2011 elections, the integrity of the vote has been improving in a remarkable manner. The direct implication of the emergence of credible elections is that citizens matter because it is their vote that determines who gets into power in the executive and legislative branches.” He placed the problem facing party supremacy in the country today at the doorstep of former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

    He said: “One of the most serious challenges in our democracy is that party bosses have very little or no control over their elected members in the legislature and executives. The original sin was committed in 1999 when the then newly elected President Olusegun Obasanjo declared himself the leader of the party, thereby usurping the power of the party chairman. Once he did that, sitting governors in the state declared themselves party leaders at the levels. Party executives then became simple figureheads without real power or influence.”

    Also blaming Obasanjo for the problem between the legislature and the executive, Na’Abba who had a running battle with the former President and failed to secure re-election thereafter, said the quest to have a legislature that is subservient led to the current state of affairs. The former speaker said Obasanjo’s decision to impose a leadership on the National Assembly and the resolve to fight back by the lawmakers is responsible for the relationship that has existed between the two arms of government since 1999. He traced the origin of the crisis to Obasanjo’s decision to change the date of the inauguration of the National Assembly from June 3, 1999 to June 6, to allow him ample opportunity to manipulate the election of the Senate President, thus paving the way for the emergence of Evan Enwerem as Senate President, instead of Chuba Okadigbo that was preferred by most senators.

  • Selective supremacy

    Perhaps only Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, the All Progressives Congress (APC) National Chairman, and those who think like him, understood what he meant when he boasted that the party had succeeded in re-establishing its supremacy, despite the activities of challengers of party primacy.  He was quoted as saying: “What is important is that it has finally happened. What is important is that the APC Caucus in the Senate is now a one united body. The APC Caucus in the Senate will now take full charge, full control and full dominance as the governing party and the majority party in the Senate.”

    Odigie-Oyegun continued: “What is right is what is right and it is now clear that the authority and the supremacy of the party have finally been recognised, which is a critical ingredient to the smooth-functioning of the apparatus of governance. Today, we can stand up and tell the whole world with full confidence that these things they used to refer to as crises within the APC are now on the way to fully and permanently put behind us. Today, we have a united party, a united Senate, and a Senate that is firmly under the control of the APC.”

    Perhaps he was just speaking like a politician, meaning he was playing to the gallery. He spoke when the new leadership of the APC Senate Caucus visited the party’s National Working Committee. The background: Senator Mohammed Ali Ndume of the APC who represents Borno South Senatorial District was removed as  Senate Leader and Senator Ahmed Lawan (Yobe North) replaced him in dramatic circumstances on January 10. Ndume’s removal was plotted and perfected by the APC Senate Caucus which communicated the development to Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki in a two-paragraph letter entitled “Notice of change of leadership.”

    Ndume’s reaction: “This is a parliamentary coup because many of my colleagues said they were not aware of any Caucus meeting. But so be it. God gave me that position and if that is His wish that I should leave, I have left everything to God. Had it been that I was found wanting of any allegation, I will not be surprised. All I know is that God will fight back for me.”

    Ndume added: “I did no wrong, except the issue of the confirmation of the Acting EFCC chairman, Mr. Ibrahim Magu, which brought up some issues. There was a disagreement on Magu beginning with my fight with Sen. Dino Melaye. Based on legislative procedure, I said Magu had not been rejected by the Senate. Shortly after that, there were rumours of collection of signatures to remove me. Even at that, we met at the Senate leadership level on Monday; there was no complaint against me. I was not aware that the leadership was not happy with me. There was no allegation against me at all. Certainly, it is a coup.”

    When a democratically elected legislator says he lost his leadership position in the legislature as a result of a coup against him, his choice of words deserves attention. When did legislators in a democracy begin to plan and carry out coups?

    Certainly, it did not begin with Ndume’s ouster. Indeed, Ndume himself benefited from what may be called a coup when he was installed as Senate Leader in a move that defied the directive of his party’s leadership. A June 23, 2015, letter to Saraki by Odigie-Oyegun had named Lawan for the position of Majority Leader among the “names of principal officers approved by the party” for the 8th Senate. At the time Ndume emerged as Senate Leader contrary to his party’s position, he did not see it as a coup against the party. It is said that what goes around comes around.

    It is curious that Odigie-Oyegun interpreted the APC Senate Caucus leadership change simplistically.  It is a misinterpretation of reality to suggest that Ndume’s removal means that the APC has achieved party unity and party supremacy.

    The reality is that as long as Saraki remains at the helm of the Senate, it does a great disservice to the idea of party supremacy. This is a legislative commander that emerged in an ethically inappropriate manner, and whose emergence was coloured by a colourless subversion of his party’s position. Only a dysfunctional decoding of the concept of party supremacy can accommodate an ascendancy he actualised through an unapologetic defiance of his party’s desire and decision. A functional interpretation of party supremacy must be informed by the logic of supremacy. Supremacy is supreme.

    It is noteworthy that the same warped twist resulted in a queer combination and cohabitation at the helm of the Senate. With Saraki of the ruling APC, a party elected to power on the premise of progressivism, and Deputy Senate President Ike Ekweremadu of the unprogressive Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the 8th Senate has a leadership that is ambiguous and confusing.   Saraki made matters worse by rubbishing his party’s list for Senate leadership posts, which is how Ndume became Senate Leader in the first place.   Additionally, the allegation that Saraki and Ekweremadu benefited from forged Senate rules remains a blot on their positions.

    The question is: How can the APC reassert itself and its supremacy in the circumstances? It is clear that Saraki wants his controversial emergence as Senate President to be treated as a fait accompli. As he approaches his second anniversary in the saddle, it looks like he might get away with the disruptive behaviour by which he got the position. If that happens, it would amount to a big disgrace to party supremacy.

    To put it directly: Saraki must not be allowed to get away with what may well be described as a coup against his party.  APC supremos must save party supremacy, and they must find their own way of doing so.   The conflict over party supremacy in the APC is nothing short of a domestic war, and the war cannot end with Ndume’s removal. There is no doubt that Saraki’s matter is a more complicated complication. However, it must not be regarded as a complication beyond correction.

    Party supremacy should not be selective, meaning the APC can ill afford to believe it has resolved the burning issue by putting Ndume’s case on the front burner while Saraki’s case remains on the back burner. Restoring party supremacy based on party discipline, party cohesion and party integrity must not be done selectively; it must be done inclusively.

  • ‘Supremacy battle’ over Ibadan chiefs

    ‘Supremacy battle’ over Ibadan chiefs

    The face-off between Oyo State Governor Abiola Ajimobi and Olubadan of Ibadan Oba Samuel Odulana Odugade 1 over the promotion of nine high chiefs caused a stir before it was resolved by the ancient town’s elders.  BISI OLADELE writes on the debacle which many observers described as unexpected.

    The Olubadan of Ibadan, Oba Samuel Odulana Odugade 1, will go down in history as a monarch whose tenure witnessed open confrontation with two sitting governors. First was in July, 2010 when the traditional ruler snubbed Alao-Akala, who was on a private visit to his Monatan, Ibadan Palace. Second was alleged promotion of nine high chiefs without approval of Governor Abiola Ajimobi on January 1, this year.

    Akala had gone to the palace on a private visit while returning from a routine weekend stay in Ogbomoso, his birth place, on Sunday, July 7, 2010.

    But the monarch refused to receive the governor as he claimed that Akala did not book an appointment for that visit.

    The governor, who was accompanied on the visit by one of his top aides, was said to have left in anger after waiting for about 45 minutes in the palace.

    This time, the traditional ruler is in the “fight” to uphold the promotion of nine high chiefs who were elevated on January 1, this year.

    While the Oyo State Government insisted that the promotion and installation were in defiance to its earlier order to subject the chiefs to security and medical examinations as required by the Chieftaincy Laws of the state, the monarch insisted that he did not receive the letter conveying the order. Besides, he said promotion of chiefs does not require approval of the governor.

    But the government handed down a 24-hour ultimatum on Monday,  January 4 to the Olubadan to reverse the promotion or face sanctions. The development took the state by the storm, raising many questions.

    Conversely, some also wondered why the Olubadan-In-Council ignored an order for the chiefs to observe the law in the promotion of the chiefs.

     

    What the law says

     Part 2, Sections 6, 7, 10, 14, 15, 16, 17, 19, 20 and 21 of the Chieftaincy Law, CAP  28, Laws of Oyo State,  2000 specify the procedure for appointing chiefs.

    According to the law, the council (now Olubadan-In-Council) is empowered to notify the local government (Ibadan South East in this case) in writing on the vacancies that existed by reason of the deaths of chiefs  Sulaiman Omiyale, the Balogun of Ibadan and Omowale Kuye, the Otun Olubadan, in November last year.

    According to the law, the council is to seek the approval of the governor for the appointment of those to replace them and others to move up the chieftaincy ladder.

    In the current debacle, the process was followed. But the governor wrote back, ordering the nine chiefs to obtain security and health clearance to ascertain their fitness for the new and higher titles in line with Section 14 (2) of the Law.

     

    Crux of the matter

     The Law states: “No person shall be qualified to be a candidate for a recognised chieftaincy who: (a) suffers from serious physical infirmity; or (b) has, under any law in force in Nigeria, been found or declared to be a lunatic or adjudged to be of unsound mind; or (c) has, in any part of the Commonwealth: (1) been sentenced to death or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years; or (ii) been convicted of an offence involving dishonesty and sentenced to imprisonment therefore, and has not been granted a free pardon.”

    The security and health clearance requested was expected to serve the purpose of establishing that the chiefs were suitably qualified for the promotion as required by law.

    While health clearance would ensure that they are mentally okay, the security clearance was to confirm that they have not been convicted or sentenced for a period longer than two years anywhere in the Commonwealth.

    Section 19 of the Law also states: “As soon as practicable after the declaration of an appointment, the Secretary of the competent council shall inform the Governor thereof, if the consent of any person is required to the appointment, whether that consent has been granted or withheld.”

    Section 20 (1) states: “Subject to the provisions of this section, the Governor may approve or set aside an appointment of a recognised chief. (2). The Governor shall not approve or set aside an appointment within the period of 21 days after notification in accordance with Section 19, and during that period: (a) an unsuccessful candidate; or (b) a ruling house in respect of the chieftaincy which alleges that the proper order of rotation has not been observed, may make representations to the governor in the manner prescribed that the appointment be set aside.

    The sections as well as Section 21 also stipulate the steps to be followed in approving or setting aside an appointment.

    Section 20 (3) states: “In determining whether to approve or set aside an appointment under this section, the Governor may have regard to:

    (a) whether the provisions of section 15 or section 16 have been complied with;

    (b) whether any candidate was qualified or disqualified in accordance with the provisions of section 14;

    (c) whether the customary law relating to the appointment has been complied with;

    (d) whether the kingmakers, in the case of a ruling house chieftaincy, had due regard to the ability, character or popular support of any candidate or (e) whether the appointment was obtained corruptly or by the undue influence of any person.”

     

    Political interpretation

    Observers within and outside the state largely believe that the issue was more political than traditional or procedural.

    Analysts also pointed out that Governor Ajimobi was allegedly behind the move to enforce scrutiny because of inclusion of some members of the opposition in the group of nine chiefs. They are chiefs Rashidi Ladoja of Accord Party, who has contested against Ajimobi twice and was defeated, and Chief Lekan Balogun, who is a chieftain of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Ladoja is currently at the Supreme Court challenging Ajimobi’s victory in the April 11, 2015 governorship election.

    Again, some observers wonder what damage Ladoja’s and Balogun’s promotion could do to Ajimobi after winning election twice.

    But a source close to Ajimobi brushed aside the idea. The source insisted that the governor was only bringing orderliness to the system. “He only wanted due process to be followed,” the source said.

    According to the source, the recent issue assumed political dimension only because of the politician involved.

    According to him, when Ladoja was elevated along with others on August 23, 2013, Ajimobi did not raise any highbrow. He gladly approved it because there was no reason to fault the process. “So, that is to show you that the recent action of the governor was not in any way political,” the source said.

    While addressing the state civil servants during the inter-faith thanksgiving service on Monday January 11, Ajimobi lampooned those accusing him of trying to stop Ladoja from moving up the ladder. He said having prevented him from becoming governor twice by defeating him at the polls, what on earth would make him deny Ladoja his rights to move closer to becoming Olubadan. After all, he stressed, he was not interested in becoming the Olubadan. He insisted that his administration had to take the step to inject sanity into the system.

    The governor emphasised that the issue was purely procedural. He also expressed gratitude to Ibadan elders who waded into the crisis and resolved it amicably.

     

    Intervention of Ibadan elders

    Ibadan elders, under the auspices of the Ibadan Elders’ Council (IEC) waded into the debacle 24 hours after the governor’s ultimatum to save the situation. It called a meeting between the two parties at the home of Ambassador Lou Saanu.

    After two rounds of meetings, the crisis was amicably resolved with Ajimobi granting provisional approval to the promotion pending the time the chiefs submit their security and health clearance.

    A source close to the meeting confided in Southwest Report that it was tough for the elders to broker peace as Ajimobi insisted on not shifting grounds on the strength that the palace willfully ignored his office in the promotion exercise by going against his order for the chiefs to comply with the law.

    Conversely, the chiefs were said to have argued that the law did not clearly stipulate that the monarch cannot promote after 21 days of writing to inform the governor on intention to promote.

    But after much persuasion, it was learnt that the palace did not do it to spite him but that the two parties interpreted the law differently.

    In the end, there was a mutual agreement to satisfy both parties with the provisional approval and the chiefs complying with the law.

  • Kogi: See who’s talking party supremacy!

    Kogi: See who’s talking party supremacy!

    SIR: In the murky waters of politics in Nigeria, to give the dog a bad name in order to hang it is commonplace. This is what is playing out in Kogi state with the declaration of an election in which an outright winner emerged as inconclusive. It remains the 8th wonder of the world that the hard-won votes of a candidate in a free and transparently conducted election would be inherited by another candidate who never featured in any of his party’s campaigns for the election, including the one held in his hometown which saw the Vice President of the country in attendance.  What is happening today in Kogi is a confirmation of this 8th wonder of the world.

    The genesis of the imbroglio is no longer news to Nigerians. The flag bearer of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Abubakar Audu passed away during an election whose result was already made known to the whole world only for INEC to turn around to declare it inconclusive.

    Rather than declare the co-winner on the APC ticket, James Abiodun Faleke as governor-elect, the electoral body opted for a supplementary election which at the end of the day not only resulted in wastage of both human resources, but the outcome of which, as already known to all and sundry, would not make any difference to the status quo in terms of the margin between the winning APC joint ticket and the runner up – the incumbent governor and candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Idris Wada.

    Under normal circumstances, APC as the winning party should have been in the forefront in protecting Faleke’s mandate as the governor-elect. But this was not to be owing to some behind-the-scene scheming by some powerful elements in the party leaving Faleke the option of seeking court declaration of the election as conclusive and therefore a winner-producing one.

    When it comes to party supremacy and loyalty, Hon James Faleke is not the kind of politician to be tutored on the subject; he cannot be faulted or found wanting in his quest.  His political clout has established him as a politician of note whose steadfastness, absolute loyalty and unalloyed support for party supremacy is beyond question.

    Faleke that Nigerians know very well would never have veered to another political party for losing at the party’s primary.  He would never have worked against his party to the extent of losing in his own polling unit, ward and local government to a rival party in a crucial election such as governorship election.

    Those who see Faleke’s option of going the court for redress as disregard to party supremacy are either too enmeshed in political partisanship, ethnicity bigotry or are ignorant of their fundamental rights under the constitution.  The fact remains that all those who are familiar with the behind-the-scene political maneuvering and intrigues stemming from outside interference in the state politics and which is still lingering in the state today are in the position to understand and have a better grasp of the true cause of the political imbroglio in the state.

     

    • Odunayo Joseph,

    Mopa, Kogi State.

  • Ooni: Why I won’t play supremacy politics

    Ooni: Why I won’t play supremacy politics

    THE Ooni of Ife, Oba Adeyeye Ogunwusi, has said he would not pursue supremacy politics with any traditional ruler because it would threaten the unity and development of Yorubaland.

    Ooni Adeyeye, in an exclusive interview, said he did not believe in any supremacy battle because only God is the Supreme Being.

    He argued that traditional rulers ought to work for the well-being of their subjects and collaborate in any area that would benefit their kingdoms.

    In pursuit of unity, the monarch pledged to extend hands of love to fellow traditional rulers, stressing that he would seek them out whether or not they like the idea.

    His words: “I like to walk the talk. Number one, there is nothing like supremacy; it is only God that is supreme. He is the King of kings, higher than anyone. There is no parent who would not pray that his children should be greater than him. It is all politics. When I was a prince, so many kings had me as their son. For me, it is very easy for me to reach out to them. When I ascended the throne, I reached out to all major Yoruba kings and obviously we are united. United we stand. So the Yoruba are gradually coming back, together.

    “There is no supremacy; everybody has his strength. In Oyo Kingdom, there is strength; they have even contributed to Ile-Ife, many years ago, just the same way Ife kingdom has contributed to the development of Oyo kingdom.

    “The Ijebu Kingdom has contributed. So everybody has made their own contributions. The most important thing for all of us is to come together and continue to do great things. The biggest and largest economy in the world starts with ‘United’ (referring to the United States of America).

    “It was possible because they were united. It is easier for me. If they don’t come to me, I will go to them. If they don’t want to see me, I will go to their doors and I have started.

    “So, the most important thing for me is to focus on the youth. I love to get them something to do. We should stop this habit of supremacy. No! They should focus on the youth and unity. The youth are getting frustrated. I am a youth, I feel their pulse; I have been there. We have to get them something.

    “We need to unite all our royal fathers. I am very happy I am extremely close to the Sultan of Sokoto. He is a prominent traditional ruler from the North and he has fully pledged to work together with me. He personally came to the inauguration of the Ife Grand Resort; he spent two days with us in Ife. What else is more than that?”

    The Ooni yesterday rounded off his over one week-long coronation with a thanksgiving.

    Standing on the pulpit to address the congregation at the St. Paul’s Anglican Church, Ayegbaju, Ile-Ife, Oba Ogunwusi thanked God for making it possible for him to become the king.

    He prayed to God to give him the wisdom to lead the people.

    The traditional ruler asked the congregation to sing along with him as he led  several praise songs to God whom he said had kept him alive, made him the king and made the coronation a huge success.

    In his sermon, the Bishop of Ife Diocese, Rev. Oluranti Odubogun, described Oba Ogunwusi as a conqueror.

    He likened him to King Solomon in the Old Testament, saying he had been ordained  king from the womb.

    Dignitaries at the event include the Orangun of Oke-Ila, Oba Adedokun Abolarin; Obawara of Iwara, Oba Olayiwola Adereti; Adagba of Iyanforogi, Oba Adebolu Fatunmise; Alara of Ara-Osi, Oba Segun Layade; Basorun Adeniyi Adeoye,  ace footballer Obafemi Martins, the Obasewa of Ife, Chief Agboola Odeyemi, the king’s father, Prince Oluropo Ogunwusi, Prof. Adeyemi Adeoye Aderibigbe and a host of others.