THE kernel of General Olusegun Obasanjo’s letter to the President is that Dr. Jonathan is parochial and distrustful in his attitude to Nigeria’s unity, in the intention for a second term and in his leadership of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and as well incompetent in the handling of the economy, security, social welfare, corruption and others. More pertinently, General Obasanjo apparently intends to absolve himself of any complicity in the present conditions of Nigeria and in the probable worsening of those conditions.
The issues raised by the General are all germane to Nigeria’s survival. However, he failed to present them objectively and in the proper perspective, but just went for the head of Dr. Jonathan. Jonathan is not the problem as much as the system. The politics of domination, ethnic rivalry, endemic parochialism, corruption and the concomitant propensity to abuse power, take advantage of others and amass wealth — virtually all the issues raised by the General in his letter — have been with us long before the arrival of Dr. Jonathan and, like cancer, are only multiplying, spreading and getting worse and more defiant of cure by the day. That is why the impact of the General’s second presidency (1999 - 2007) was less manifest than that of the first (1976 - 1979) and Jonathan’s best effort further pales. The issues will not disappear simply by getting Jonathan out of the way and replacing him with another prospective stooge.
Therefore, the greater concern should be with the root of the malaise, which is in the fact, that the Nigerian system is not programmed by the colonial master (and most of his successors since independence) to reward merit. A system that does not reward merit will know neither hard work nor accountability. Without both hard work and accountability you can never reap productivity and without productivity you can never have equitable and true prosperity. Without true prosperity, you can never have discipline, justice, peace and security. You will only have predatory relationships where individuals and groups are perennially hunting one another with the resultant chaos, insecurity and instability.
Nigerian political leadership has always emerged by manipulation, right from the days of the colonial master and never by merit of competence or even of free and fair election. The culture of manipulation and disregard for merit has worsened and permeated the system since the demise of the First Republic, rendering the country largely unproductive with those in position essentially predatory. Nigeria has absconded from the imperative marriage between politics and the economy. It has become dependent on oil rents while abandoning the development of agricultural and industrial production of goods and services needed by the people. The dominant sections of the country and most men in position are pre-occupied with battling for a dominant share of that rent and, in that process, trampling on the people. Every leader has fallen captive to this internecine contest and enclave mentality and could not be exemplary. Nothing will change until Nigeria is repositioned from a patronage and predatory system to a merit-based and productive one. If our leaders would not, the people should take their fate in their hand
In this context, the General’s lamentation and call for exemplary leadership are laudable only in form. In substance, he is to be indicted for manipulating the system and foisting the present leadership he considers inept on us. Exemplary leadership remains the best weapon against corruption and the other plagues he highlighted. But it could only emerge by merit of competence and free and fair elections, which would be far-fetched under the current Nigerian system. Exemplary and popular leaders will respect the people and strive to acquit themselves even unto death. General Obasanjo, the accuser, should show us whether Umaru Yar’Adua and Goodluck Jonathan were chosen on merit of competence and by free and fair election under his supervision as President. If not, why the crocodile tears? Will he who rides the tiger not probably end up in the belly of the tiger? Again, if he had not chosen Umaru Yar’Adua, who had been sickly as Governor of Katsina State and who died in term as President, the turmoil in the PDP — which has to do with the implacability of the North West in recapturing the presidency, against the constitutional right of his successor to vie for a second term — would not have been. Why now pretend to side the North? Or, does he really mean that both force majeure and the constitution should defer to the whims of a section of the country? Is it not the primary obligation of a statesman to defend the constitution of his country above any other consideration?
While Jonathan must be blamed entirely for the instances where he has administrative fiat to act, but failed to, do you also blame him alone where he is constrained by the rule of law or partly dependent on other arms of government? What about the laxity of the legislature and the bar and the bench who truncate, decelerate and diminish the fight against corruption through frivolous technicalities, endless adjournments and evidence and procedural lapses, etc? Should he have violated the constitutionally enshrined principle of Separation of Powers, like some of his predecessors did? Why are those who vowed to make Nigeria ungovernable for him not being brought into the equation at all? Or, is it not typical of the prevailing Nigerian system that, finding himself marooned, Dr. Jonathan, rather than buckle, would assert his manhood and that ‘his people’ would rally round him? Who did not do so?
Let us focus more on changing the entrenched permissive, nebulous, system than on lamenting our ‘boxed-in’ largely helpless, leaders. Firstly, the proposed National Conference that can enable the constituent Nigerian ‘nations’ to determine terms of a balanced federal structure for peaceful and productive co-existence must be supported and not impugned. The First Republic was economically successful because of the bottom-up structure and the constitution that was truly federal. The regions had substantial independence and took their fate in their hands. They were the ones feeding the centre and not the other way round. Healthy competition compelled the leadership of each region to be conscious, Spartan and frugal with a sense of mission to make the best use of its endowments for the benefit of the people. They were all committed to quality infrastructure, education, healthcare and everything that would facilitate agricultural and industrial production. Given their astute approach to economic development, Nigeria would have become one of the world’s most developed 20 economies a long time ago. Unfortunately, the determination of the Northern Peoples’ Congress (NPC), which was in power, to overrun the Western Region led to an intractable political crisis and the military intervention of January 1966. Subsequent events completed the ruin of the country both economically and politically. The new structure must make it impossible for any section of the country to monopolise political power. A confederate system is advocated, but whatever balanced federal structure that can put the various regions of Nigeria back in the business of production is imperative before the next general elections.
Secondly, the people must seize upon the emergence of the nationwide and strongest opposition party ever for a revolution of free and fair elections — which is one of the preconditions for the prospect of popular, exemplary, leaders and good governance — going forward. The APC has the national spread, the financial and human resources and the required leverage among the mass media and the intelligentsia to mobilise the people to protect their votes and to frustrate election manipulation. It will be impossible to suppress a nationwide protest of future general elections without complete breakdown of law and order that could consume the government. The ruling party had better known that the cruise is over and prepared for transparent, free and fair elections or risk a conflagration of the country to its doom and to the doom of our democracy by the next general elections. Dr. Jonathan is free to run, but whoever wins this time round must win fair and square, by the votes of the people, to be subject to the people who must themselves be ready to take their fate in their hand. The mass media, the civil society, students’ and labour organisations have to renew their strength of mass mobilisation and awareness creation. The emergence of nationwide parties can also put paid to regional parties, which made tribal rivalry the undoing of the First Republic that was, otherwise, quite economically competitive and productive.
Thirdly, there is urgent need to review the institutions, laws and procedures related to the fight against corruption for expeditious prosecution and deterrent effect. Fourthly, diversified quality education, healthcare, public infrastructure and facilities and other forms of enabling environment must be vigorously pursued, to enable more people and institutions make informed decisions and become productive.
More strands of hope will emerge with time. To the discerning mind, we are actually at the crossing. Things are actually falling in place that could be seized upon by the people to begin to turn Nigeria around. As Shakespeare would write in Julius Caesar, ‘let us take the current when it serves, or lose our ventures.’ Hope can be restored and the looming disaster can be averted ‘before it is too late.’ The people must do away with docility, to take their fate in their hand, if the ruling class would not behave.
To the revered General, it is a truism that all things in life run a cycle. In the case of destiny, when a man has done his cycle and fulfilled it he should quit the stage or risk an anti-climax. And it is better to quit while the ovation is loud. Nelson Mandela knew this. Robert Mugabe does not. General Obasanjo has crossed the threshold and is now inadvertently descending into that anti-climax. Jonathan has started to ignore him. His protégés have started falling out of line. He is not getting by remote control what he could not get directly by the alleged third term project. The letter to the President is actually a letter of protest and an evidence of unbearable affront and frustration. Being too personalised, one-sided and solely addressing Dr. Jonathan to the exclusion of other parties and solutions; the letter is considered unconstructive, inappropriate and infra dig. Wisdom consists in knowing where to stop. The time is now.
No comments:
Post a Comment