Connect with us

Opinion

Has Monguno Served Qualitatively?

Published

on

Drug War: The President Is Right After All!

By
Emmanuel Onwubiko

Mohammed Babagana Monguno has had the fortune to have held some of the most prestigious but highly demanding roles whilst in the Nigerian Military and even after his stint in the Nigerian Army.

Wikipedia says he is a retired Nigerian military general and current National Security Adviser to President Muhammadu Buhari, a position he has held for six years.  He was the Chief of Defence Intelligence from July 2009 to September 2011, and Commander of the Brigade of Guards from 2007 to 2009.

From the above career trajectory, it is not out of place to state emphatically that Monguno is one of the few whose ‘Chi’ (God) benevolently helped to crack their palm kernel (as professor Chinua Achebe would put it).

But his actions, inactions and happenings around his office as the National Security Adviser to President Buhari are perhaps what should bother every rational and patriotic analyst of the precarious security situation in the country of our birth.

Monguno as the National Security Adviser at a particular time that students and children are plucked off their schools by armed terrorists and kidnappers almost on a weekly basis without strategic military-ed effort at safe returns of these terrorized children of Nigeria, is to say the least, a man who has overstayed his welcome in office.

Two other things that have happened with him, around him and about him, go to expose the universal fact that he is not a qualitative National Security Adviser because  if detailed statistics of insecurity are compiled, Nigeria ranks amongst the most troubled and terrorized society in the world. This was perhaps why a former United States Ambassador to Nigeria John Campbell drew a fatalistic conclusion that Nigeria right now under this political dispensation has become a failed state.

The two things I alluded to are the corruption that stinks inside and within the office of the National Security Adviser assuming the investigative reports as published by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission are anything to go by, and the second incident is the confession openly made by  the National Security Adviser that the  Kaduna-based Islamic cleric Ahmad Gumi has the right to meet armed bandits. This claim is preposterous and shows the unambiguous evidence that the National Security Adviser has failed.

This is because, the activities and speeches at public fora by Sheikh Ahmad Gumi directly contradict the terrorism prevention Act, 2013 which is a valid law of Nigeria.

READ ALSO: NSA Denies Accusing Ex-service Chiefs Of Misusing Arms Funds

The following is a run- down of how one of the leading media houses in Nigeria reported the scam inside the office of the National Security Adviser.

The media reports: “Soldiers on Wednesday threatened to shoot officials of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission that came to mark properties seized from Brig. Gen Jafaru Mohammed, the Director of Finance and Administration at the Office of the National Security Adviser.

The EFCC had obtained an interim forfeiture from a Federal High Court in Abuja on March 11, 2021, and proceeded to mark eight properties belonging to the NSA’s aide.

“Our correspondent, who visited Sun City in the Lokogoma area of Abuja on Wednesday, reported that after a team of EFCC officials began marking General Mohammed’s building located on 52 Main Street, Sun City, in red paint, armed soldiers arrived in a white Hilux marked GWA481EA and chased the EFCC officials away. The soldiers took a bucket of water and soap and quickly cleaned off the markings which read, ‘EFCC, Under Investigation, Keep Off!

“Our correspondent, who visited other properties linked to the general, observed that soldiers were on guard to prevent EFCC officials from marking them.

Justice Folashade Ogunbanjo had in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/007/2021 ordered the interim forfeiture of eight properties linked to General Mohammed who is a trusted aide to the NSA, Major General Babagana Moguno (retd.).

“The investigation of Mohammed is part of a wider probe into the finances of the Office of the NSA.

“Other properties affected include: A house at 7 God’s Own Estate, Road 1, Wamba District, a fenced plot at 1 Jubril Aminu Crescent, Katampe Extension, a plot at Kubwa Express Road directly opposite Abuja Model City Gate, a house at Block SD 22, Road 5, Kabusa Garden Estate, Abuja; Plot 15, 21st Crescent, Second Avenue, Gwarinpa, 3 Liverpool Close, Sun City Estate and 25 Osaka Street, Sun City.

“The properties are believed to be worth billions of naira which far exceed the income of a brigadier general.”

On the other leg of the well founded reason why the National Security Adviser has failed to offer qualitative service to the country is his statement that Sheikh Ahmad Gumi can as well meet with armed bandits.

READ ALSO: Coping Skills For Success

Here is what the Terrorism Prevention Act of 2013 said about the strident defence that Gumi continues to advance in favour of kidnappers and terrorists in the North: “Section 5(1) Any person who knowingly, in any manner, directly or indirectly, solicits or renders support
(a) for the commission of an act of terrorism or (b) to a terrorist group,
commits an offence under this Act and is liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term of not less than twenty years.

(2) For the purposes of subsection (1) of this section, “support” includes-
(a) incitement to commit a terrorist act through the internet, or any electronic means or through the use of printed materials or through the dissemination of terrorist information;
(b) receipt or provision of material assistance, weapons including biological, chemical or explosives, training, weapons, false documentation or identification to terrorists or terrorist groups;
(c) receipt or provision of information or moral assistance, including invitation to adhere to a terrorist or terrorist group;
(d) entering or remaining in a country for the benefit of, or at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group; or
(e) the provision of, or making available, such financial or other related services prohibited under this Act or as may be prescribed by regulations made pursuant to this Act.

(3) In this section, it is not necessary to prove that the financial material or information or facilities or financial assistance was actually collected or provided if it can be reasonably established that the person collected or
provided the material, information or facilities or financial assistance to terrorists, or terrorist groups.”

Monguno does not care about the extant law which prohibits the kind of open campaign in favour of terrorists that Ahmad Gumi has been waging but Monguno, the National Security Adviser said Ahmad Gumi has offered to help the government in tackling insecurity.

This is the same Ahmad Gumi who has the backing of the National Security Adviser to go about negotiating soft-landing for terrorists and armed bandits and has added fuel to the fire when he threatened that the kidnapping of student will continue until government accepts the blackmail of these terrorists.

Gumi who has been meeting with suspected bandits terrorising communities in the north-west and in the north-central has likened them to militants in the Niger Delta, and asked that they are not tagged criminals. He has also called on the federal government to grant blanket amnesty for the bandits.

At a state house briefing, General Monguno, while fielding questions from journalists, said he had met with Gumi, and that he was waiting to see how the cleric could help the government.

Hear him: “Sheik Gumi is doing what he’s doing because he believes in what he’s doing. He’s a Nigerian and under the constitution he can talk to anybody. He can deal with anybody,” he said.

“I met with him when I went with the service chiefs to Kaduna, and we spoke generally during the meeting and he resolved to help government. We are waiting for him. That’s all I can say.”

The NSA said the government was not averse to holding talks with bandits, but that it could not negotiate with people who were unreliable.

READ ALSO: Missing $1b Arms Funds Withdrawn From Excess Crude Account – Wike

“While government is not averse to talking with these entities, it also has to fully apply its weight. You can’t negotiate with people who are unreliable and who will continue to hurt society,” he said.

“We will apply the full weight of the government to deal with these criminals.

“These are not people looking for anything that is genuine or legitimate, they’re just out to take calculated measures to inflict pain and violence on innocent people. We must deal with them the way they need to be dealt with. We will fully assert the government’s will.”

Clearly, the Kaduna- based cleric is openly supporting terrorists. Sheik Abubakar Gumi urged the federal government to negotiate with the bandits in order to stop kidnappings in the country. Gumi, who was reacting to the abduction of some school children in Niger State, said the needless kidnappings would continue until there was genuine negotiation with bandits.

According to him, the bandits are only looking for money, hence they resorted to the abduction of innocent students.

In an exclusive interview with The Punch, the cleric stated that there were about 100,000 armed bandits in the northwest alone.

Gumi said the bandits kidnapping school pupils were disappointed that he negotiated with them without the involvement of the federal government.

Speaking on the efforts to rescue the kidnapped pupils of Tegina Islamic School, Niger State, Gumi insisted that until the government engaged with the herdsmen, no school could be safe, especially in the north.

He said: “But we are trying to talk sense to them that these are just innocent schoolchildren. We don’t even have any idea of the condition of the children. We are just saying these are young children trying to study and they did nothing, so why are you trying to take dirty money from their families?”

Gumi, however, said that with good engagement, education and enticements like jobs and other things, the bandits would leave the illegal job, adding that he needed a partner and that the government should understand that individuals like him alone could not do it.

He said: “All those we met (have stopped kidnapping), except for one of them who is kidnapping again, and he told us his reason, that he was neglected and he thought we had the mandate to negotiate.”

Gumi says bandits are tired, want genuine negotiation with FG

READ ALSO: Dakkada: What Difference Has It Made In Six years? (II)

Meanwhile, Legit.ng had previously reported that Sheik Gumi declared that bandits terrorising some states across the country were tired and wanted peace. It was reported that the Kaduna-based Islamic scholar said bandits were ready to lay down their arms if they got a genuine partnership from the government.

Gumi noted that bandits said they were pushed into banditry by circumstances, adding that he had met with about 80% of the bandits.

How then can any rational writer ascribe the attribute of a good National Security Adviser to the occupant of that position in Nigeria when the person does not see anything wrong in providing moral support for bandits and terrorists?

We will conclude by looking at some deep writing about the attributes of a good National Security Adviser so our readers can read them vis-a-vis  the heightened insecurity in Nigeria and draw their conclusion.

From the reference material we consulted, we were told that you know if you can be a successful advisor by seeing the following ten characteristics highlighted below:

1. Have a genuine interest in helping others succeed.  Professionals who are most successful in an advisor role are those truly passionate about working side-by-side with a CEO or business leader who needs a little extra help. Fortunately, advisors are being actively sought out by companies in nearly every industry imaginable, so it is easy to find companies with a mission that aligns with your personal interests.

Plus, being an on-demand advisory work allows you to decide when and how often you engage in opportunities to ensure all participation is meaningful – to both the advisor and  company. On-demand advisors are hired by the hour, on the days and times that best suit their schedule;

2. Have in-depth expertise on a topic(s) in their field.  The knowledge and first-hand experiences that executives possess are extremely valuable to companies who need to fill gaps within their organization. If you have a specific expertise or skill-set that relates to a company’s needs, you become a critical asset in helping them overcome challenges or take on new opportunities;

3. Willingness to share advice and knowledge.
It’s one thing to be knowledgeable on a topic, but it’s another to want to share that expertise with others. Willingness to share advice is one of the most important aspects of being an advisor. As long as you’re open to teaching others what you know, you can play a very influential role in the success of another company;

4. Demonstrates effective communication skills.
Being able to communicate your thoughts and ideas in a way that others can understand is extremely important as an advisor. If the person on the receiving end of your advice doesn’t use the same terminology as you, you’ll need to break it down in a way that resonates with them.

There are also times when advisors have to be the voice of reason or disagree with a CEO for the betterment of the company, and in doing so they need to be straightforward and realistic with their reasonings. A good advisor provides constructive feedback in a way that encourages change or progress.

Digital advisory boards, like those sourced through Advisory Cloud, allow you to communicate directly with companies and CEOs on an ongoing basis to help guide them toward better decision-making and solve their most pressing business needs;

5. Effectively sets and achieves goals.
A major component of being an advisor is helping a CEO or leadership team reach a specific goal or goals. CEOs have a lot on their plates, which can sometimes derail them from focusing on an objective they set at an earlier point. A good advisor steers the CEO back on track to make sure they achieve their goals. In doing so, you need to be fair and objective, as well as able to address challenges head-on.

For professionals looking to diversify their leadership experience, this is a great opportunity to take on new roles and add to your list of accomplishments;

6. Has a positive attitude and can be a positive role model.

Advisors have the unique opportunity to help shape the success of another company, and as a result they also have a unique relationship with the CEO. Many CEOs view their advisors as a personal mentor and role model, helping them to become better overall leaders. A successful advisor leads by example and provides support and a positive outlook during both good times and bad;

7. Leverages a network of peers.

In addition to their in-depth expertise, advisors have something else very valuable to offer – business connections. It may seem simple, but making a few introductions could open new doors and opportunities for a CEO. But don’t worry, you don’t need to give away your entire network, but instead evaluate your connections and decide where your business ties can be helpful to both parties involved – and as an added bonus will strengthen your existing relationships;

8. Ability to listen.

As the person who is more experienced or more knowledgeable on a topic, it can be easier to voice your opinions and ideas. However, listening can be just as helpful. CEOs often need someone to talk through problems or bounce around ideas with, and being an attentive listener will give you insight into their thought processes or direction they’re trying to move toward – which ultimately helps you guide them toward achieving their goals;

9. Passionate about their work.

If you are passionate about the work you do, it will show. The most successful advisors are those who get excited about solving new challenges and eagerly approach new opportunities. If you are genuinely unimpressed by a company’s mission or values, you will be less motivated to perform well as an advisor;

10. Values the opinions of others.
Lastly, a good advisor respects and values the opinions of the people they work with. When you support the ideas of others you are better able to collaborate with them, build off those ideas, and create result-driven objectives. (advisorycloud.com)

Lauren Monsen in 2019 wrote thus:

“The national security adviser participates in meetings of the U.S. National Security Council (NSC) and usually chairs meetings of the council’s Principals Committee with the secretary of state and secretary of defence when the president is not in attendance. The national security adviser offers the president a range of options on national security issues.”

“Among other duties, the national security adviser helps plan the president’s foreign travel and provides background memos and staffing for the president’s meetings and phone calls with world leaders.”

“The national security adviser also prepares the president for NSC meetings, helps draft national security and foreign policy speeches, helps to prepare for meetings with congressional leaders, responds to presidential requests for information, and briefs the president on issues of the moment.”

“Stephen Hadley, who was President George W. Bush’s national security adviser from 2005 to 2009, described the scope of the job in a 2016 speech. He said the adviser needs to advance presidential initiatives within the executive branch of the federal government.”

Although the national security adviser works closely with cabinet members, Hadley said he or she “must be careful not to usurp the role of the cabinet officers — especially the secretaries of defence and state,” who run their departments and have authority over agency budgets.

From the above, there is no doubt that President Muhammadu Buhari needs to dismiss his National Security Adviser without any further delay.

 Onwubiko is the head of the Human Rights Writers (HURIWA) and was a federal commissioner at the National Human Rights Commission of Nigeria.

 

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Opinion

Afe Babalola And Dele Farotimi: On Justice, A Just Society And The Nigerian State

Published

on

Prof. Tunji Olaopa

By Tunji Olaopa

The feud between elder statesman, Chief Afe Babalola and civil rights activist, Mr. Dele Farotimi, is perhaps the most significant discourse that postcolonial Nigerian state has thrown up for the moment, one in a class of those grand defining disputations that surely will gather dust which will take some time to abate. And it is one case that is fraught with all sorts of legal, jurisprudential, moral and political traps and complexities that speak to more than the trivial interventions—leveraged around the David and Goliath motif—that are attending the matter. Those who have been able to go beyond the surface of the case will agree that it goes to the very foundation and founding of the Nigerian society, and the fundamental objective of crafting a good and just society for Nigerians. That the issue revolves around the dispensation of justice immediately alerts us to the deep insinuation about the idea of social justice itself, and how the conception of fairness could be written into the very fabric of the Nigerian society. And yet, the complexity of the case is what makes it a case that is too critical for a public servant like me to dabble in.

(Un)fortunately, my intellectual maturation, my political science education and my professional endeavor in institutional reform advocacy have prepared me to intervene in this critical matter. I have always been involved with Nigeria, and with reflective thoughts about how to reconstitute her greatness. Three learning encounters with three world-historic icons configured my passion for wanting to see that Nigeria becomes a state we all can be proud of. The first came from my reading of Plato’s Republic. There is a reason that the entire treatise commenced with the question, what is justice? Justice was a fundamental issue in the decline of the ancient Athenian democracy that allowed Socrates to be judicially murdered. The second learning derived from Wole Soyinka’s dense prison memoir, The Man Died. And like most who have read it, Soyinka was troubled by the idea of justice: “For me, justice is the first condition of humanity.” By the time I would be coming to Thomas More’s Utopia, I was already apprised of the connections between my political science education, my professional endeavor as a public servant, and the key elements of institutional reform as a cogent framework for transforming Nigeria.

From Plato to Soyinka, we have a trajectory of political reflection that takes justice seriously as the basis for organizing a just society. This is part of the intellectual frameworks for my undergraduate and graduate studies at the Department of Political Science, University of Ibadan. In one of those explosive seminar classes that played some fundamental role in my intellectual maturation in the graduate school, I had proposed an argument through a seminar paper titled: “Is a revolution an option to fix Nigeria?” The topic was meant to titillate the collective yearning for revolution that would serve as the ultimate mechanism for social change that would flush off all traces of corruption and degeneration in postcolonial Nigeria. Revolutions seem to possess some allure for the masses because they constitute a framework of justice that the constitutional justice mechanism might not be able to handle.

However, as Wole Soyinka, Thomas More, Martin Luther and even Galileo Galilei would realize, the need for radicalism is balanced by the force of establishment orthodoxy. The Nigerian predicament has, as a fundamental foundation, a lot to do with the connection between governance failure and injustice in terms of the persistent and protracted class strife between the haves and the have-nots, between the rich and the poor, indeed, in the final analysis between the government and the governed. And in the case between Afe Babalola and Dele Farotimi, the issues boil down to the administration of justice and the entire edifices and institutions of social justice and the rule of law in Nigeria. And so, in outlining the key issues involved in the matter, we must be careful enough to read between the lines and the noises of analysts who are eager to queue behind their favored protagonists.

First things first. Let us remove the surface debris. Indeed, and in this case, the debris points us in the direction to look for the rot within the matter. First, there is the matter of civil defamation and its legal ramifications. And second, there is the issue of the legal and moral protocols involved in dealing with the pursuit of redress by someone who knows and understands the law. Barrister Farotimi has a legal right to seek redress in court. Chief Babalola has a legal right to defend his reputation in court. In raising the specter of legal prosecution against defamation, I see Chief Babalola as being at the forefront of gatekeeping the legal establishment in terms of what is and is not permissible or possible under the law and its conservative tenets. If you are hurt or an injustice has been done to your person, then the best place to seek redress is not the court of public opinion but the constitutional legal establishment.

Unfortunately for him, Barrister Farotimi’s book, Nigeria and Its Criminal Justice System, impugns the entire legal and judicial establishment up to its apex institution, the Nigerian Supreme Court. However, does radicalism preclude moral decency? A book could be written and allegations made without the complement of atrocious language. Or maybe the rot in the judicial system, and the need for a revolution preclude any niceties, especially with those who are allegedly at the forefront of perpetuating and protecting the rot. But then, how to prove what we all consider to be the norm in terms of legal prosecution of judicial corruption remains a hanging question.

No matter how we look at what we are calling the surface debris, we are redirected deeper and deeper into what lies beneath the surface. The ultimate question is that between Chief Afe Babalola and Barrister Dele Farotimi, what we are asked to contend with is the state of the Nigerian judiciary and the corrupt impediment of social justice, especially for an average Nigerian. What Barrister Dele Farotimi said about the Nigerian judicial system is not new. We are all familiar with the rot within the system. Indeed, this is not the first time an alarm would be raised about what we are all familiar with. Indeed, as far back as 1999, The News magazine carried a most unsalutary headline, “Crooks on the Bench: An Expose on the Rot in the Judiciary.” The magazine headlined the names of 47 judges indicted for judicial corruption. What is new is that Dele Farotimi dared to go so far as to mention specific names, and to confront the big players in the legal establishment. And he did this in a most scurrilous manner targeted at getting maximum traction and attention. It is as if Mr Farotimi, through the public sphere, is throwing the gauntlet to every Nigerian and challenging us on our collective responsibility to clean the Augean stable.

If Barrister Farotimi cannot prove his allegations in court, it would not mean that his charges are false. It might only imply that the system which is supposed to guarantee justice has become too corruptly dense to achieve its mandate. But there is also the chance that since the entire judicial system cannot be tarred so broadly with the same brush, Farotimi’s allegation might receive a dispassionate hearing that might deliver justice as we expect it. This might be a tall expectation. Nigeria’s postcolonial predicament has inevitable consequences on the capacity of the judicial system to facilitate the delivery of justice. And this failure also complicates the capacity of the Nigerian state to deliver on its social contract to Nigerians. This is what makes the Babalola-Farotimi case too complex to be decided either in the constitutional court or the court of public opinion. The burdens of postcolonial disruptions that the Nigerian judiciary system carries are enormous: judicial corruption, miscarriage of judgments, executive lawlessness, delayed trial due to insufficient infrastructure, financial dependence on the executive arm of government.

To outline the fundamental challenges of the judicial system in Nigeria this way is not to give in to cynicism and a deterministic mindset that we might be caught in a vice that is inescapable. It is simply to say that the ongoing uproar between the two dramatis personae demonstrates that the court has been given a chance to reflect on the role that (in)justice plays in the fundamental understanding of the Nigerian postcolonial predicament and the capacity of a democratic system to correct itself. When Chief Afe Babalola and Barrister Dele Farotimi are given their day in court, we will have no choice but to trust that same judicial system to deliver unbiased judgment no matter our misgivings about how objective and untainted that judgment could be. This is just a way of saying that though our judicial system is not perfect; it is still the best that we have.

The last words on this reflection on the connection between the ongoing feud between Babalola and Farotimi and Nigeria’s postcolonial predicament must be given to Haile Sellasie, former emperor of Ethiopia: “Throughout history, it has been the inaction of those who could have acted; the indifference of those who should have known better; the silence of the voice of justice when it mattered most; that has made it possible for evil to triumph.”

Olaopa is the Chairman, Federal Civil Service Commission,Abuja, and Professor of Public Administration.
tolaopa2003@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia

Published

on

Witch Burning, Impunity And Abuses Linked to Witchcraft Beliefs In Benue State
Dr Leo Igwe

By Leo Igwe

The Advocacy for Alleged Witches (AfAW) is concerned over the reported arrest of two men accused of being ‘witchdoctors’ in Zambia. The arrest underscores the potency of witchcraft fears and the connection between occult anxieties and the country’s politics. These individuals were accused of trying to bewitch the Zambian president, Hakainde Hichilema. The police claimed that they had charms. They planned to use the charms to harm the president. The report says the two persons have been charged under Zambia’s Witchcraft Act. The Act criminalizes “possession of charms”, “professing knowledge of witchcraft”, and “cruelty to wild animals”. The police found the two with assorted charms, including a live chameleon.

This development is utterly embarrassing and shows that the Zambian government is slowly losing its focus and bearing.The country has many socio-economic challenges. Suspicion of bewitchment or possession of charms should be the least of its worries at this time. There should be no place for witchcraft and possession of charms in modern politics because there is no evidence for these beliefs and practices. Zambian authorities should not weaponize the Witchcraft Act or use it to justify this incident. Zambian law does not recognize witchcraft. Zambia’s Witchcraft Act criminalizes naming or imputing witchcraft. It prohibits accusing or threatening to accuse any person of being a witch or a wizard. In this case, it is the police who are breaking the law.

Otherwise, how did they know the two individuals were ‘witchdoctors’? Did these persons identify as witch doctors? If not, the police are liable because they named and imputed witchcraft and have to prove that these individuals have witch-doctoring powers. The police claimed to have charged these individuals for possessing “assorted charms”, including a chameleon. Really?

The police in Zambia have questions to answer: What are charms? How did they know that what was in their possession were charms, not pets? Is a chameleon a form of charm? What makes possession of a chameleon possession of a charm? When and how does a chameleon become a charm? The police need to answer these questions and more before one takes them seriously.

Again, did the individuals describe what was in possession as ‘charms’? If they did, does confessing or designating something as a charm make it a charm? And if they did not, the police are liable because they need to prove how those possessions translated into charms.

In addition, the police claimed that the duo wanted to bewitch the president. What does that mean? How did they know? Are the police not contravening a provision under the Witchcraft Act by professing knowledge of witchcraft? Can one harm another person using a chameleon? They claimed that the two persons wanted to use the charms in their possession, including the chameleon to harm the president. How did they know that? What is the evidence for that?

The Advocacy for Alleged Witches calls for an end to this state-sponsored witch hunt. There is no evidence of harm through witchcraft or charms. The Zambian government should desist from witchcraft- related infractions and violations including arbitrary arrest, and detention of innocent citizens. These allegations are baseless and absurd. The arrest was politically motivated. This development demonstrates that Zambian authorities are out of sync with their duty and obligation to uphold the rule of law and protect accused persons.

Zambian authorities need to act in compliance with the 2021 UN resolution, which urged states to take measures to combat abuses linked to witchcraft beliefs and ritual attacks. End witchcraft allegations in Zambia. End witch hunts in Africa now!

Dr Igwe directs the Advocacy for Alleged Witches.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)

Published

on

Readers’ Showers Of Encouragement
Prof. Tony Afejuku

By Tony Afejuku

The other burning issue, apart from Farotimi and Babalola’s, which I wish to take a look at – and which I am taking a look at now – relates to what is happening in our capital territory. What is this burning issue – which our human rightists and civil society organisations and personages are surprisingly and un-satisfactorily not inclined to focus attention on and examine as they should? I may be wrong, but it surely seems to me that this issue, this burning issue, which is of more importance than Farotimi and Babalola’s – which has been given undue adulation – is deliberately being neglected and depreciated by proclaimers and heroes and heroines of human rights, justice, equity and equality of rights in your country my country our country. Why, why, why and why, why, why? Anyone who has any iota of patriotic sensibility, feeling and judgment well watered and buttressed by a very great influence upon his or her critical judgment will keep on asking the question I am asking.

Mr. Nyesom Wike, as almost everybody who can read and write a little knows, is the current minister of your, my and our Federal Capital Territory. His post or office is akin to that of a governor of a state. As the immediate past governor of Rivers State who was drafted, after his two terms there expired, to continue in the FCT as its new minister-governor or governor-minister under the auspices of a party he is not a true member of, Mr. Wike cannot but be seen as a lucky man. He is in every possible and impossible way. Minister-Governor Wike is a lucky man and a very fortunate one indeed. No former governor of Rivers State (or of any Nigerian state), as far as I know, has achieved what the famed political rouser of rabbles has achieved in one short gubernatorial life-time, and at a relatively young and fertile age. His dual achievement with and in two different political parties at this delicate point of Nigerian politics indicates to our politicians and us all that there is always time for a reminder that there are ready-made high rewards for arch-angels of betrayals. And Mr. Wike may go down in Rivers and Nigerian history as both an arch-angel and an emperor of betrayal of us all if we attempt to indicate what I have defined here as his dual achievement.

We can roughly divide, briefly, Wike’s political development into two periods. During the first, excluding his lower political positions before he became the governor of Rivers State, he quickly adapted his style to that of an emperor who became a rabble-rouser of rabble-rousers whose gubernatorial efficiency moved from stiffness to stiffness. He did not at any time feel that he needed suppleness to govern Rivers State. “Let the heavens fall if they must fall!” We are not there yet in this attempted analysis of the stiff-hearted and stiff-minded one. True? But he is already demonstrating this characteristic in Abuja. False? Judge and give the answer yourself.

Even after he left Rivers State a short while ago as governor, he is still trying to control happenings there to the political discomfiture of his hand-picked successor, his erstwhile “boy” and “son” – with whom he has fallen out. As the minister-governor or governor-minister of the FCT, Wike is occupied with the other taste of the emperor-juggernaut formulator – doing the work of two key political masters in one room and desk of political jugglery. Since his appearance in the FCT, minister-governor or governor-minister Wike has allegedly attempted to recover or transform for Abuja what is not traditionally or socially Abuja’s, for example, the city’s social idiom and landscape and terrain as well as its environs. In doing this he sometimes over-steps his bounds and mark of human/inhuman decency/indecency and psychological understanding of human nature, if you follow well what I am saying; he has so far become at best not really better than a typical pedestrian Nigerian lawyer and officer of political power: in his explorations so far in the Federal Capital Territory we have come to the realization, as T. S. Eliot would say, that “it is so often true that only by going too far can we find out how far we can go.” But one has to be a very negatively obstinate and self-serving emperor and a thorough-bred arch-angel of betrayal of the people and masses to justify such perilous and perfidious expeditions and adventures.

Last week, I saw on Arise Television “The Morning Show” Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, the dutiful widow of the late Nigerian supreme patriot and soldier, Colonel Ogbebor (of Benin stock) battling, so to say, to wrest the legacy of her late husband from the tight grip of the adventurous FCT minister-governor who has registered his name and signature in the hearts and consciousness of the people as the depriver of their possessions. The three anchors of “The Morning Show” were in their respective ways splendid in their structures of remarks and questions to Chief (Mrs.) Rita Lori-Ogbebor whom I have had occasions in times past to call patriotically Rita A-K 47 on account of her natural right to fire her beautiful tongue at any person, usually an enemy, of just actions. When she made the case she made to protect the estate of Paulosa Nigeria Limited, her late husband’s aforesaid legacy in the FCT, she was in her natural territory, habitat and element where even at age eighty-four, she never ever loses her stability – although she unusually restrained herself in the Arise Television appearance. Dr. Reuben Abati, Rufai Oseni, and Ayo Mairo-Ese clearly explored seriously but delightfully the mind of the mother-hen of Warri – my other coinage and appellation I gave her in my poetry. Her “The Morning Show” appearance enabled me to see the poignant cry de profundis of the FCT inhabitants whose property and residences in different guises have been demolished. She did not say anything that was out of joint. She spoke and came out as a mother, protector and symbol of the people who have suffered – and are suffering – from the state of affliction and anguish Wike’s demolitions have placed – and are placing – the people.

Ojy Okpe in her delicious and delectable “What is Trending” slot on the same show, showed without exaggeration but with further elaboration what people in and outside Abuja/FCT think of the mighty Wike’s demolitions, a burning issue that the Senate has asked “Let Heaven Fall” minister-governor Wike to halt as the committee the Senate set up on the issue starts its work. Of course, we cannot but assume that Chief Rita Lori-Ogbebor, Mrs. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan as well as Mrs. Ireti Kingigbe, the senator representing the FCT in the Senate and other patriotic senators diligently did what they did on the floor of the Senate when the burning issue was tabled for debate with the gracious understanding and authorization of the Senate President.

I need to state further that the “The Morning Show” anchors did well and extremely so by giving the minister-governor the opportunity to air his anti-Paulosa story. His senior special assistant on public communication and social media, Mr. Olalere Olayinka, stood in for him. After he gave the reasons for the clamp-down, his responses to the questions the anchors put to him followed the usual pattern of denials by artificial men in power – denials that they always use to intimidate and betray the people. In fact, Mr. Olayinka’s ploy to ride easily over our dear Rufai Oseni, a wholesome representative of the deprived, that the chap (or is it guy?) and his boss always employ their colloquial speeches and remarks to dishonor, failed. Yes, the ploy failed woefully. In stanza after stanza of the exchanges between Mr. Olayinka and the Arise anchors, he deteriorated – and his deterioration was hall-marked when he unwittingly revealed that the Paulosa land had been acquired by his minister-governor’s close cohort, an act that was nothing short of gross abuse of power and authority.

Because the Senate is already using its authority, power and privilege to resolve the burning issue, hopefully, in a way that the late Colonel Ogbebor’s legacy and family will not be subjected to any kind of degradation, I will utter no more words for now. I trust, however, that the liberties the Senate is taking – or has taken – are for the sake of order to favour the down-trodden.

As for the minister-governor, the PDP emperor at large, here is an immortal quote from Marcus Aurelius, the magnificent and authentic Roman Emperor and philosopher (A.D. 121-180): “If it is not right, do not do it; if it is not true, do not say it.” You lose nothing by giving us a slice of your humanity by your right acts and correct words. Everything changes and passes. Be humane as a human being.

Afejuku can be reached via 08055213059.

Continue Reading

Top Stories