Headline

Friday Sermon: Parable of the Patient Dog

Published

7 years ago

October 25, 2019

Eric

By Babatunde Jose

“O ye who believe! Obey Allah, and obey the Apostle, and those charged with authority among you. If ye differ in anything among yourselves, refer it to Allah and His Apostle, if ye do believe in Allah and the Last day: That is best, and most suitable for final determination.” (Quran 4:59)

Islam makes no sharp division between sacred and secular affairs; it expects governments to be imbued with righteousness. Likewise Islam expects Muslims to respect the authority of such government for otherwise there can be no order or discipline. This however, is the bane of religious precepts in a secular environment. It is not in consonant with participatory democracy and the qualities desired from followers in modern democratic society. This is the origin of the proverbial docility, acquiescence and unquestioning acceptance of leadership and the ‘rankadede’ syndrome; an unquestioning obeisance of leaders. The above verse of the Quran is based on the assumption of a theocratic state. Modern nation states demand a different set of qualities from followers among which are; willingness to assume responsibilities, competence and self-management, efficiency, political engagement, readiness to be mobilized and lending a voice to protest bad leadership and of course, demand for accountability. Unfortunately, most of these qualities are wanting in the followership in our society; hence the absence of a culture of protest.

As followers we are too timid and complacent. We do not make forceful demands on our rulers. We acquiesce and resort to self help. We do not make them accountable and limit our complaints to rancorous discussions at the beer parlor or at social events over plates of jollof rice and Coca Cola. In the words of Prof Wole Soyinka: “I have become increasingly convinced that, between leadership and the led, there is only a very thin dividing line, often nearly indistinguishable. There is no question in my mind that, most often, the so-called led are their own worst enemies, even to the point of self-betrayal and treachery to their own existence. . . . .” Wole Soyinka: ‘Handshake Across History’. The key role of citizens in a democracy is to participate in public life. In other climes they protest and riot over increase in the price of bread or rice, fuel and other issues that impinge on the welfare of the people. Here we are content to accept all that they throw at us with equanimity. What have we done about the fantabulous take home pay of our legislators? Nothing! We do not protest the potholes on our streets or the delay in refuse disposal. We make little or no demands on our leaders and do not hold them responsible for our degradation. Political apathy can lead to low voter turnout as we witnessed during the last elections and stagnation in government.

The case of Lebanon illustrates the matter. In CNN’s Fareed Zakaria’s Global Briefing, Bilal Y. Saab writes at the Middle East Institute, citizens of the fragile country (where civil war raged from 1975 to 1990 and where power is still split, for the most part, between Christians, Sunnis, and Shiites) did not take part in the Arab Spring. But, that has changed recently as Lebanon has joined the club of countries facing mass demonstrations. In the vein of Chile’s transit-fare hike, Ecuador’s end to fuel subsidies, and Hong Kong’s extradition bill, Lebanon’s proposed $6 monthly tax on WhatsApp calls touched off a movement. As in other cases, it’s about much more: “This is not about a messaging app,” Saab writes. “This is about less than half the people in Lebanon being connected to official water supplies, a tiny minority getting full electricity coverage, more than a third of the country’s youth being unemployed,” among other grievances. “My only surprise is that it has taken so long for the anger to spill on to the streets,” Roula Khalaf writes in the Financial Times, noting that reforms passed at “lightning speed” in response may not be enough.

The situation in Lebanon exemplifies our condition in Nigeria where untold hardships are being face by the people. It is left to us to extract commitments and action on issues from our political leaders before giving them our vote. “This is a duty we must not shirk. It is a duty to us and to posterity. But, considering all that has gone before, and threatens to kill the future of this nation, you have a responsibility to go further and say, ‘Enough’ of unchangeable casts of mind whose possessors only re-cycle themselves either directly or by surrogation. It is time to disarm the entire political scene and re-arm the visionaries. The nation needs new players, new minds. It is time that a united opposition seize the bull by the horns and make a determined effort towards total transformation.”

It has been argued that religion; in particular Islam is a contributing factor to the situation of political docility and lethargy of its adherents. This perhaps account for the proverbial acceptance of some of our brothers in the faith for the misrule of their leaders and why they have remained a-political. This thesis is however faulted in the light of the ‘Arab Spring’ and other uprisings and protests in patently Islamic climes. It is therefore not Islam or Christianity that makes a citizen apathetic, irresponsible to his political duties and obligations; rather it is the political culture of lethargy and de-participation.

Despite the suffering and challenges we face, we lack the culture of protest and rejection of bad governance. People are not prepared to make sacrifice on the barricades and as such resign their lives to fate. There are however instances in the stories of the Prophet and the Caliphs of the importance of followers asking questions and making demands on their leaders. A person cannot be a functioning member of his community if he or she lacks knowledge and wisdom. Equally a follower is expected to be courageous. According to Mohamed “courage is a quality of the soul, its heart’s strength against shock and composure when experiencing fear.” (Mohamed, Y. (2006); The Path to Virtue: The ethical Philosophy of AlRaghib Al-Işfahani: International Institute of Islamic Thought and Civilization, p 275) The earliest followers in Islam were credible, honest and courageous. Therefore, they established themselves as independent, critical thinkers whose knowledge and wisdom are dependable. Bashir bin Sa‘ad (r.a) was a courageous follower during ‘Omar’s (r.a) regime. He was bold enough to tell Caliph ‘Omar that they will straighten him as they do with their arrows if he fails to properly perform his duties as a leader. Caliph Omar said, “It is the duty of the leader and followers to listen to each other and to voice out their concern.” He added, “When followers do not participate and provide input, they are not contributing something useful. And we are not useful if we do not consent to their contributions.” (Ali, A.J. (2005), Islamic Perspectives on Management and Organization. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. P 135)

In the parable of the patient dog, we learn that’ the patient dog starves to death’. There can be no virtue in patience under naked hunger and suffering.

Barka Juma’at and a happy weekend

+2348033110822

Headline

FBN vs GHL: Supreme Court Voids Appeal Court Judgment, Orders Immediate Handover of FPSO Tamara Tokoni Crude Oil to General Hydrocarbons

Published

1 day ago

July 3, 2026

Eric

The long drawn legal tussle between FirstBank of Nigeria Limited and General Hydrocarbons Limited over the ownership of the crude oil aboard the FPSO Tamara Tokoni, may have come to a conclusive end as the Supreme Court of Nigeria delivered its judgment.

The Apex Court, on Friday, ordered the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal and the Admiralty Marshal to immediately hand over the crude oil aboard the FPSO Tamara Tokoni to General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL), bringing to an end a legal dispute over the asset.

In a unanimous judgment delivered by a five-member panel of justices, the apex court held that the suit instituted by First Bank of Nigeria (FBN) was contractual in nature and not an admiralty matter.

The court consequently ruled that both the Federal High Court and the Court of Appeal lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the case.

The Supreme Court accordingly allowed the appeal filed by General Hydrocarbons Limited and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, describing it as perverse.

Justice Abiru, who read the lead judgment, announced the unanimous decision of the panel comprising Justices Uwani Aba-Aji, Salawa, Agim, Uwa and Abiru.

Headline

GbajaGate: I’ve Done No Wrong, Govt Playing to Shut Me Up – Adeyemi Matthew Speaks from Hiding

Published

2 days ago

July 2, 2026

Eric

Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, the man alleged to have forged government appointment letters and falsely paraded himself as the Director-General of the alleged Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC) and Presidential Economic Advisory Council, has denied the allegations against him, claiming the Presidency is attempting to silence him.

Speaking with PREMIUM TIMES from an undisclosed location on Thursday, Adeyemi insisted he had done nothing wrong and described the government’s actions as a “defence mechanism.”

“You know the government we have. They are just playing a defence mechanism to shut me up. My organisation was set up in 2024,” he said.

Adeyemi declined to disclose his whereabouts, saying he had gone into hiding because his life was under threat.

“They are now after my life. I have gone into hiding. I’m underground,” he said.

When asked whether he had fled the country, he declined to respond directly.

“I will not be able to disclose any information now. I don’t consider myself safe,” he added.

The embattled suspect also declined to provide his alleged appointment letter or any document to support his claim that he was legitimately appointed, saying his lawyers had advised him not to discuss the matter publicly.

“I just decided to speak to you out of respect. My lawyers are working on something. Whatever they say, I will let you know,” he said.

The Presidency has accused Adeyemi of forging appointment letters and other official documents while falsely presenting himself as Director-General of the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council and the Presidential Economic Advisory Council, agencies it insists do not exist.

Presidential spokesman, Bayo Onanuga, said Adeyemi and two others have been charged before the Federal High Court on an eight-count charge bordering on forgery, impersonation and related offences.

According to the Presidency, concerns first emerged after the Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission reported that another body appeared to be performing functions similar to its statutory responsibilities.

The Chief of Staff to the President, Femi Gbajabiamila, subsequently petitioned the Department of State Services and the Nigeria Police Force, alleging that forged appointment letters bearing fake signatures, official seals and reference numbers had been used to create the impression that the suspects were presidential appointees.

The Presidency said investigations revealed that Adeyemi and his associates allegedly operated from an office within the Federal Secretariat Complex in Abuja, held meetings with Nigerian and foreign officials and sought diplomatic support from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for visa applications.

According to the Presidency, police arrested Adeyemi on October 27, 2025, after which searches conducted at his office and residence allegedly yielded forged government documents.

Investigators also alleged that financial intelligence uncovered 34 bank accounts linked to Adeyemi, including accounts allegedly opened in the names of purported government agencies.

The Presidency further claimed that Adeyemi used forged documents to open an account with the Central Bank of Nigeria in the name of the alleged agency, although investigators found that no public funds were paid into the account.

Onanuga also dismissed allegations that Gbajabiamila demanded money from Adeyemi, saying the accusations surfaced only after the suspect was granted police bail.

The case is scheduled to come up before the Federal High Court on July 27.

Headline

Court Dismisses Abejide’s Suit, Upholds Mark-led Leadership of ADC

Published

3 days ago

July 2, 2026

Eric

The Federal High Court in Abuja on Thursday affirmed Sen. David Mark’s leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Justice Musa Liman, in a judgment, also dismissed the suit filed by Rep Leke Abejide challenging Mark and Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola as national chairman and national secretary of the party for lacking merit.

Justice Liman upheld the preliminary objections filed by ADC, Chief Ralph Nwosu, Mark and Aregbesola which challenged Abejide’s suit.

The judge held that the court lacked the jurisdiction to dabble in the internal affairs of ADC, as the suit was non-justiciable.

He also held that Abejide lacked the legal right to have instituted the suit, having failed to show to the court that his rights had been violated in any way as a result of the emergence of Mark-led leadership.

He equally held that Abejide, who is a member of the House of Representatives, failed to explore the party’s internal mechanism for dispute resolution.

Justice Liman also resolved the three issues in the substantive suit in favour of the defendants.

On whether Mark, the former Senate president and Aregbesola, who was the former Governor of Osun, emerged as leaders of the party in compliance with the enabling laws, the judge resolved this against Abejide, the plaintiff in the suit.

He held that the handing over of the leadership of the party by Nwosu to Mark did not violate the provisions of the party’s constitution.

The judge agreed that the disputed July 2, 2025, meeting of the party was a stakeholder meeting which preceded the party’s National Executive Council (NEC) meeting held on July 29, 2025, which produced Mark and Aregbesola as the party’s leaders and was monitored by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

Justice Liman, therefore, declared that the emergence of Mark and Aregbesola as leaders of ADC was valid and in accordance with the constitution, the Electoral Act, 2026 and the party’s law.

The judge consequently awarded a fine of N2 million each in favour of all the defendants which shall be paid by Abejide.

He also awarded a N10 million fine against Abejide’s lawyer in compliance with the Electoral Act, 2026.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Abejide had instituted the suit to stop the Mark-led leadership of ADC.

In the originating summons, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, filed on Feb. 15 by Idris, the lawmaker sued ADC, Ralph Nwosu, Mark, Aregbesola and INEC as 1st to 5th defendants respectively.

NAN reports that Nwosu was the former national chairman of ADC who stepped down for Mark, the ex-Senate president.

Abejide, among the eight reliefs, sought an order nullifying Nwosu’s handover or transfer of ADC’s leadership to Mark and Aregbesola as interim national chairman and interim national secretary respectively on July 2, 2025, at Shehu Musa Yar’adua Centre, Abuja, for being illegal, unlawful, null and void.

He sought an order of perpetual injunction restraining Mark and Aregbesola from parading themselves as leaders of the party “as their purported appointment, selection or election was unlawful, illegal, null and void.”

He also sought perpetual injunction restraining INEC from recognising Mark and Aregbesola as ADC’s interim national chairman and interim national secretary.

He alleged that their appointment, selection or election did not meet the requirements of Section 82 of the Electoral Act, 2022, among other prayers.

NAN