Opinion
Citizenship
Published
10 months agoon
By Toyin Falola
The African Humanities Research and Development (AHRDC) is holding its 2024 conference on the theme of “Citizenship” from February 19 to 21 at the Alex Ekwueme Federal University, Ndufu-Alike. Although it is being held in my honor, an urgent diplomatic errand has prevented my participation, but this is for the good of our region and the continent. AHRDC has chosen a powerful theme, and we all await the publication that will emanate from this conference. Here is a statement that I prepared for the occasion.
Scholars and political thought leaders worldwide and over several eras have viewed citizenship differently. Several political scientists have seen nations like human beings reacting and acting within and outside the spheres of social stimuli. I agree with these metaphoric innuendoes. So, I believe that the soul of every nation is its citizenship; the instinct and the muse define the fundamentals of social cohesion, orderliness, governance, relationships, cultures, and public policies. It is the focal point of nations’ essential existence and underlying values.
Aristotle supposes that “a man is by nature a political animal.” This view on politics marries the political orientations of society to the level and status of its citizenship. It is the core of justification and criticism of politics and political stakeholders. It means everyone is a politician, and nominating political representation is the concentration of some people’s political natures and orientations. In straightforward terms, it is called an election or selection. In whatever ways the political nature of every person in a society is conjured in a head, office, person, or family, the truth is that that political head or officeholder reflects what the people stand for.
Citizenship illuminates the idea that asks whether a government can be better than its citizens and whether citizens can be better than its government. Where the political institutions of any nation are running contrary to the political tolerability of any citizenship, it invokes evolution. This explains the ideas of revolutions and political reformations that have happened in history. It has brought about the change of political styles of nations and solidified some political practices. The idea is that problems that are supposed to have been caused by political officeholders are only directly or indirectly permitted by the citizens.
When the “commoners” in the French Revolution were tired of elite oppression, they declared their assembly. They demanded a political revolution to bring about a constitution reflecting equality and equal representation. Social instabilities, political upheavals, economic downturns, and other factors were the muse that set the tone of citizenship against the existing political structures. Citizenship and its leadership must align with each other; if not, there must be a readjustment that would make such leadership reflect the primary orientation of its citizenship.
Taking a cue from Nigeria, the perennial problem of corruption that has affected the basis of Nigeria’s democracy and development rests solely on the permissibility of the citizenry. Out of 180 countries put into perspective in the world, Nigeria is the 154th least corrupt. The corruption in Nigeria is systemic and is beyond the activities and greed of leaders. It has been shown that every parastatal of the Nigerian government and at every level has shown a high level of corrupt practices. It goes to the roots like the police, the educational system, the transport system, trade, and all imaginable sectors of Nigerian society. These ramifications are controlled and operated by the citizens; hence, the radiation of corruption is from the antics of the citizens who are either employed in those portfolios or interact with them. Many Nigerians harbor the instinct that bribery and corrupt practices could accelerate acquisitions and needs due to desperation. This instance shows that the Nigerian citizenry reeks of corruption, and it is only logical for the leadership to mirror it.
Understanding citizenship as the basis for leadership defines the society’s culpability in its governments’ shortcomings. It posits that for a long-lasting solution that would survive time, the orientation of the people must change, and they must be ready to instigate changes mirrored by their leadership.
In another stretch, citizenship is the abstractive definition of the social contract. The contract defines the following relationships: the relationship of the government with its citizens, the relationship between social institutions and the citizens, and that between a citizen and another. The social blueprint allows social philosophies, standards, duties, responsibilities, and rights to be safeguarded by each party in each of the relationships. The default in the obligations of any of the parties or the breakdown of any of the connections is equivalent to surmounting the cores of the society’s citizenship.
In the first relationship, citizenship is the conception of what the government thinks of its duty and authority towards the citizens and the ideological contextualization and expectations the citizens have of the government. The understanding of the definition of the idea of citizenship in a country defines governance. For instance, in Africa, the people’s expectation could be to make policies that favor the poor and provide free education and access to food and water. However, that may not be the primary expectation in some advanced European countries. More so, the global blocs express this view. For instance, citizens’ expectations in a capitalist state would tilt towards the economic independence of the people, while those of socialist states would tilt towards state ownership or high regulations.
Another relationship is that of citizens to societal institutions. For instance, the social expectations of Police, traditional leaders, and other social institutions defer from society to society, although there are generic expectations. In this instance, the principle of cultural stakeholders is another strong inference and is essential in the trajectory definition of citizenship. The last relationship is the interaction of citizens with each other. These deeds regulate social cohesion, tolerance, understanding, and predominance of norms.
Seeing citizenship as the norms exacted in social contracts extends its relevance to social cohesion. The understanding of citizenship and the perception of it defines the characteristic glues in every society. It describes attitudes to social responsibilities, respect for collective subscriptions, individualism, ethnic tolerance, and nationalistic projection. It makes an Igbo man see another person from his village as a brother, and on a larger scale, it makes an Igbo man see a Yoruba man as a fellow son of the same soil. It forms focal points for understanding cohabitation, segregation, minorities, majorities, and relativism.
Social cohesion is the instinct behind social similarities, shared trauma, and the ability to relate with the status of others; it is the basis of the building of patriotism and nationalism. If citizenship must come from the social glue that binds us if being bound together towards the same goal of societal development means nationalism, it is logical to conclude that citizenship is the basis of nationalism. The dilemma in Nigeria is, with the contemporary problems faced by the citizens, to know if one could say that there is nationalism at the level that would transform into national development. Would one say that citizenship is afforded its orientation respect to incite it to gear towards national development? Can we say that there are still Nigerian Nationalists in the present era?
We understand there is no citizenship, no social cohesion, no nationalism, no accelerated national development. This is because people tend to take individual interests above national interests without regard to the direct or indirect marginalization and victimization of others. It would mean the nation is left in the dry without anyone convinced to express sacrifices for the good course. Disrespect to citizenship is a mockery of any idea of patriotism.
One must ask what might be strong enough to shake citizenship that would challenge a high sense of nationalism. When the citizens are temporally having their hopes and expectations dashed, when they are subjected to ethnic biases and hegemony, when poverty rocks their boat, and when they are constantly abused, the citizenship is shaken and tempted. The resultant effect is the loss of nationalism and patriotism. Would one say that Nigeria can convincingly display nationalism when the relationship between the South East and many parts of the nation has not been on an advantageous status? Would poverty let one respect others in social and personal endeavors?
The messages above allude to the fact that a nation must not lose the radiation of the lights of ideas of citizenship and must endeavor to strengthen the fibers that build it. Otherwise, there would be challenges to popularity and peace and order. One step to building strong citizenship is to make vital social welfare. Cicero states that “the welfare of the people is the ultimate law.” Where the people’s interest is poorly managed and respected, it would only invite a break in the cohesion built by citizenship. In addition, the government of the day must be ready to ensure that the constitution reflects the temporal dispositions of the people, as the constitution must be a codification of the people’s intentions no matter how many times they change.
Citizens must be intentional about building surviving acts of citizenship. This is made in the context of understanding others and accepting their differences. It also extends to maintaining political grounds for the betterment of the nation. Because citizenship, no matter how abstract, is important to the developmental trajectories of any nation.
I offer my heartfelt congratulations to the organizers, notably Professor Sunday Oge Elom, the Vice Chancellor of Alex Ekwueme University; Professor Egodi Uchendu, the President of AHRDC; Dr. Chukwuemeka, Vice-President of Research and Publications of AHRDC; Professor Mukhtar Bunza, the Keynote Speaker, and the specialized lecturers (Professor Samuel Fury Childs Daly, Professor Benjamin Kofy Nutor, and Professor Lorelle Semley)
You may like
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.
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.
By Leo Igwe
Recently, I facilitated a critical thinking workshop at the Bay Wreath Schools in Lagos. The theme was critical thinking and teacher development. As the theme stated, the workshop was on teaching, about teaching, and for teachers. It highlighted the pedagogical value of critical and reflective inquiry. The workshop exposed teachers to critical mental habits and skills. It emphasized how critical thinking would enhance expertise in the learning and delivery of subjects in classrooms.
I used the opportunity to discuss questionstorm as a method of teaching and learning. Questionstorm is a way that I operationalized critical thinking for primary and elementary schools. Questionstorm is the ability to interrogate all objects and materials. It is a habit of questioning ideas and experiences in all areas of human endeavor. Simply put, questionstorm is a question-driven inquiry. Children are naturally curious. They thirst for knowledge and understanding. Unfortunately, the school system kills children’s curiosity and dampens their interrogative appetite. The school system places much emphasis on rote learning and memorization. It makes the generation of answers not questions or problems the test of knowledge, and the determinant of intelligence. Teaching is largely a drudgery, a monotonous exercise, and a process of depositing knowledge on passive recipients, the students. Teaching entails dumping information on learners whose duty is to cram and reproduce during tests or examinations.
This teaching praxis has been criticized and blamed for the poor performance of students post-school (college and university) and their inability to think independently, creatively, and innovatively. Other teaching methods have tried to address these gaps and limitations. There have been suggestions to make teaching and instruction more active, and more student/learner/child-centered. One such method is the Montessori method. The Montessori method discourages grades and tests as ways of measuring achievement or determining intelligence and excellence. It emphasizes hands-on learning and the development of real-world skills. While the Montessori method stresses the practical approach to learning it says very little about the authoritarian teacher-to-student approach that is the mainstay of teaching and learning in classrooms. Teaching follows a pattern that leaves students and learners in the margins and unable to question and contribute to the learning process. Teachers present what is to be learned such as a text, and then generate questions that students respond or address to demonstrate knowledge of what has been taught. The student’s or learner’s main job is to answer questions, to look for or find answers or solutions. The teacher’s work is to get students to look for, and provide answers, and reproduce what they have been taught or told. But students are answer-depots. Students are not memory banks or reserves. They are active minds and thinking agents.
With questionstorm as a teaching method, the mode of instruction would change. Teaching becomes a cooperative endeavor that actively involves teachers and students. What is taught in the classroom is a collaborative note, not the teacher’s note, not a handout to students. Teachers present or generate texts or objects for learning, in response to intense questioning of the object or material by students, teachers provide information as required for that subject, topic, level, and time frame. No two instances of teaching – of the same topic or subject- are or should be the same because the input of students and teachers is not predetermined.
This is because of an overlooked principle in teaching and learning, that I call the “uncertainty principle”.
The uncertainty principle underlies questionstorm because knowledge is not fixed. Learning is a fluid process. All that is to be learned is uncertain, it is unknown and never determined. No teacher can say beforehand what is to be taught or learned because no one knows exactly the questions and answers or replies that would arise when a topic is presented or taught in a particular class. A topic or learning material elicits unique responses and exchanges that both teachers and students cannot exactly know or predict a priori, before the fact.
Teaching is a shared task and responsibility. Class notes are fluid materials. They are not texts cast on educational stones and delivered by teachers to students to copy, cut, and paste as is often the case. Class notes are not written or produced by teachers for students but by teachers with students. Teachers’ notes are incomplete and insufficient. They account only for a part, not a whole of the learning process and material. Students’ input completes and complements the teaching material and learning process. Thus every class note is unique because it is a product of a specific collaborative endeavor, a product of particular teaching and learning agents and circumstances that cannot be repeated or replicated.
Thus, as a teaching method, questionstorm is set to facilitate teacher development and improve the quality of instruction in schools. Questionstorm will help realize a paradigm shift in education and learning. I hope educators, teachers, and school managers will embrace this method of teaching and learning.
Dr Igwe directs the Critical Thinking Social Empowerment Foundation.
Inline image
NEW TIMES CULTURE
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
Tinubu Congratulates Civil Service Commission Chair Olaopa As He Turns 65
Top Stories
-
Latest News23 hours ago
Black Saturday As 10 Confirmed Dead, Others Injured In Abuja Church Stampede
-
Opinion21 hours ago
Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia
-
Opinion3 days ago
Burning Issues: (FCT Minister And Paulosa) (2)
-
Metro3 days ago
AfAW Decries Court Acquittal Of Suspected Murderer Of Alleged Witch In Enugu
-
Latest News5 days ago
Why We Set Up Kojola Dry Port – Abiodun