Opinion

Dr. Bisi Adeleye Fayemi: Breaking The Chains Of Patriarchy Through Feminism

Published

3 years ago

July 19, 2021

NewTimes

Professor Ademola Dasylva At 70: A Labourer In The Vineyard

Toyin Falola

The patriarchal paradigm of the society marginalizes and even dehumanizes women, particularly in Africa. Culture, religion, and tradition all have a role in this. Society continues to place women under men. In places where equality cannot be achieved, women have sought to contend with the notion of equity. However, men are not the only problem towards feminine marginalization in the patriarchal society; women are also one of the same challenges to their fellow women.

Regarding this, Osonye Tess Onwueme, a Nigerian playwright, poet, and scholar of gender studies and discourse, expresses in her book Go Tell it to Women that “Women are the obstinate oppressors of themselves.” Validating this, Professor Peyi-Soyinka, during the interview with the First Lady of Ekiti State, Erelu Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi, hints at how women criticize one another in Nigerian politics when mistakes and instances of corruption are brought to light. She made a convincing argument about how women treat one another harshly in cases of misconduct while the men pat themselves on the back. This statement provides an overview of the notion that feminine marginalization is not only determined by the masculine gender. Society has found a way to turn women against one another.

In contemplating how to overcome patriarchy in the Nigerian society, it is important to recognize the subtleties of feminine apathy. The interview referred to Dr. Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi’s book titled, Where is Your Wrapper?, in which she illustrated that for women to overcome patriarchy, every woman must hold tight their wrapper and use it to protect other women like them. This wrapper signifies compassion, kindness, empathy, and support for fellow woman. According to the First Lady, the book was written from her experience some years back at an African Women Leadership conference at Makerere, Uganda. Narrating the story, she said:

There was a story one day about an incident that occurred in one of the local marketplaces. Unexpectedly, one of the women at the market gave birth. There appeared to be no time to bring her to a nearby hospital or clinic, so the women in the area acted quickly. Some of them frantically searched for sinks, hot water, towels, and razors. A couple of people grabbed her hand and encouraged her to keep going. The majority of the women in the area took out their wrappers and held them up in front of the woman, forming a protective ring around her and protecting her from prying eyes. This scenario occasionally occurs in different markets around Africa, and the response is almost always the same – women bring out their wrappers to protect one of their own.

Dr. Adeleye-Fayemi’s illustration becomes a wake-up call to women to do what they can in their own environment to alleviate the conditions of other women, to extend compassion and sympathy, to elevate and not denigrate other women, to protect one another and to triumph against patriarchal conditions through mutual solidarity and strength.

With this, it is obvious that overcoming patriarchy has been part of the feminine struggle from the beginning of time. Culture and religion have been set to marginalize women and make them believe their influence is limited to their households. This has been the misconception about their roles and functions as women from time immemorial. Even though feminism is a recent development and traceable to the early 20th century when the first wave of feminism sprouted, gender inequality in itself is as old as mankind. The Abrahamic religions justify this, and in the Christian religion, Genesis 2:18 denotes the creation of women as a “helpmeet.” A semantic analysis of this depicts that women were created as a support system for men. Having realized this, there has been a continuous struggle to correct the horror of patriarchy and women’s domination. About this, the First Lady recommends that women should be steadfast in lending their voices to agitations calling for a level playing field for themselves and the girl-child who has been born into the system.

In further discussions during the Toyin Falola Interviews on how to overcome patriarchy, Chimamanda Adiche’s book, We should all be Feminists, was examined. Adichie makes a clarion call to both women and men to stand up and speak to patriarchal societies. Quoting her: “We teach girls to shrink themselves, to make themselves smaller. Girls, we tell them, they can have ambition, but not too much. You should strive for success, but not excessive success. You’d be threatening the man if you did. I’m expected to want to marry because I’m a woman. I’m expected to make all of my life decisions with marriage as the most crucial factor in mind.” In other words, marriage has become a trap sociologically constructed by society, and how much a woman is revered in the society is attributed to her marital status.

Reference was made to other First Ladies who support the patriarchal governments and collaborate with them by using their office to promote their husband’s policies and to entrench gender inequality in programs that do not transform society for women. Dr. Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi is a contrast to this narrative. Her voice is embedded in Adiche’s advice calling out women to stand against every form of patriarchal suppression and domination. She called out for the anger in every feminist as this would provide an avenue to fight harder the horrors of the society backed up by cultures and traditions aimed towards taming the average girl-child. However, she emphasized the need to be careful not to engage in misandry, which is an intense hatred for men.

Dr. Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi called on government to adopt affirmative action policies in ensuring women are well represented in politics. Affirmative action produces role models for other women as women become more visible in the public space. Seeing women in positions of authority can inspire others to pursue positions of leadership confidently. Affirmative action also encourages diversity and expands opportunities for other categories of marginalized people. It can reduce the likelihood of conflict by bringing members of society closer together politically, economically, and socially. According to her, when this representation happens, women would be able to propose and establish policies tailored towards women empowerment. Thus, creating space for women in political institutions through gender quotas and reserved seats is a must, as this is another way for women to benefit from all their hard work in political mobilization and other public functions.

Over the years, there has been an increase in the number of women appointed to political posts all over the world. For Nigerian women, however, this is not the case. Reference was made to countries like Namibia, Uganda, Rwanda, and South Africa that have created enhanced opportunities for their women to be actively involved in the politics of their society. In Rwanda, for example, women occupy more than half of the political posts. But in Nigeria, women are underrepresented in political and leadership positions. Women make up only seven of the 109 senators and 22 out of the 360 members of the House of Representatives. With this illustration and statistical question, the one billion naira question is, “Why do we have lesser women in leadership positions?”

Responding to this, Dr. Adeleye-Fayemi highlighted several factors. She noted that some are linked to political party structures and systems. The expensive cost of politics, for example, precludes women from running for office. Women frequently lack the financial means to pay for the requisite expressions of interest and nomination papers that political parties require to run for seats on their agendas. She also mentioned how expensive political campaigns are.

Moreover, the lack of access to education means a lack of employment opportunities. Women are also less likely to pay to go through the process of obtaining leadership positions due to unpaid labor, unequal inheritance rights, and open discrimination. With this, she suggests the concept of godmothers just like the male counterparts have the godfathers who sponsor political aspirants. Engaging this, Dr. Adeleye-Fayemi noted that women make up about half of the population; therefore, their participation will create a power balance between the sexes. This is a measure of how far society has progressed.

To overcome patriarchy in the society, recommendations are made that feminists need to address oppression from the root. It is ridiculous that even in the 21st century, women are still forced to live the way the older generation lived. Wives are the first suspects in their husbands’ deaths, and widows are forced to practice the rites of widowhood. This narrative needs to change, Dr. Adeleye-Fayemi said, as this is one of the immediate steps towards ensuring a fairer society for the girl-child. In order to maintain a robust and lasting democracy in Nigeria and for women to be fully engaged and benefit from the advantages accruing to women in politics, their involvement in politics is essential. Female participation in policy formation is necessary to advocate the interests of other women and assume their proper position as intellectuals, rather than being confined to only domestic duties.

Providing a clearer glimpse about the fate of the girl-child, a young teenage girl, Idaniloju Sotunsa, was selected as one of the interviewers at the Toyin Falola Interviews. She asked about the worldview regarding gender imbalance for a young girl of her generation. The interviewee responded to the question by highlighting the various policies and measures set out by women leaders working towards a better future for the girl-child. In Ekiti, for instance, there is a law against gender-based violence, and its implementation is monitored by women’s rights organisations and civil society groups. It addresses the issues of survival and access to justice. There are treatment centres and shelters for violated women.

When overcoming patriarchy is discussed, maintaining a child’s education no matter the challenges faced was at the forefront of the discussion. The first lady recommends that even if a girl-child becomes pregnant while still in school, she should be given fair treatment as the male child to complete her studies. This submission was in response to a question by one of the interviewers, Mr. Olusegun Adeniyi, a Nigerian journalist. However, the First Lady, Erelu Bisi Fayemi, solicited and entreated schools, men and policy makers to show empathy to the girl-child as she did not impregnate herself. Thus, being told to drop out from school would be a punishment for the girl-child while the boy or man who impregnated her continues his life.

A significant portion of this edition of the Toyin Falola Interviews was devoted to the empowerment of the girl-child. They are the future of tomorrow, and in order to successfully tackle misogyny, they must not suffer the fate of their mothers, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers. The interview ended on the notion that men have to be actively involved in the fight to overcome patriarchy because they are the creator and guardians of the “rule of the father.”

(This is the third of three reports on the interview conducted with Dr. Bisi Adeleye-Fayemi on June 27, 2021). For its entire recording, see https://fb.watch/6oxK6nvXx7/)

Read more authentic news on our social media platforms

Opinion

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

Published

8 hours ago

December 22, 2024

NewTimes

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

Opinion

Fear Of Witchcraft And Politics In Zambia

Published

1 day ago

December 21, 2024

NewTimes

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.

Opinion

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

Published

3 days ago

December 19, 2024

NewTimes

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.