Connect with us

Opinion

Voice of Emancipation: The Toxicity of the ‘-ocracy’

Published

on

By Kayode Emola

Looking at the way Nigeria is being governed today, one will ask if we truly are practicing democracy or military governance. Some people will say we are practicing a military government in a civilian outfit. Nigeria is not the only country bedeviled in the ocracy toxicity as several countries around the world are either suffering from one form of this ocracy syndrome. Perhaps, let me take time this week to really summarise the different kinds of governmental systems around the world and we can deduce from it what Nigeria is really practicing.

There are many forms of governing systems practiced throughout the world, with varying opinions both from the people living under them and those looking on from the outside. It is difficult to find one that is universally considered ‘good’, and all too easy to find a way of corrupting to one’s own ends whichever system is currently held. I do not claim to be a student of philosophy nor of political sciences, but I would like to offer my own views here as food for thought.
Looking at autocracy, it is a system of government where one person holds absolute control. This may be in the form of a monarchy, where the monarch rules with absolute power; or in the form of a dictatorship or tyranny. It can be easy to pick out the potential flaws of such a system: having one person who makes all the laws can therefore make themselves above the law, and easily manipulate the system of government to their sole benefit at the expense of their subjects.

Perhaps, deeper consideration can suggest a counterpoint view to this, that having one person making all the decisions frees the rest of the population from the burden of doing so. It also provides a single person to settle disputes, thereby eliminating disparities. The autocratic ruler will have their future implicitly entwined with the future of their state over which they are ruling – this gives them a vested interest in ensuring the future survival of the state in order to ensure the future survival of themselves.

In aristocracy, it is perhaps a more familiar term, though one which today is often used to define a particular social class rather than a system of governance. In its purest form, the term means governance by a ruling elite who hold a higher class or status than the rest. When the term was originally coined by the Ancient Greeks, they suggested that these elite should be comprised of the best of the citizens chosen by careful selection, and was held in contrast to any form of hereditary rule. In modern times, this system espoused by the Greek philosophers would be more likely considered a form of meritocracy, and aristocratic status is largely passed on through family lines.

This, again, has some fairly obvious pitfalls, in that it leads a small, elite group of people to believe that they are somehow above everyone else and that they have the right to rule based purely on an accident of birth. History has clearly shown us that the son of a wise and judicious ruler does not always go on to become a wise and judicious ruler himself. Moreover, when a person is taught from birth that they are superior to those around them, it can lead to a disregard for the ‘common’ people’s wellbeing; as ‘inferior’ beings, they matter less and so their sufferings are less important.

In the case of technocracy, it describes a system of government whereby people are given positions of responsibility based on their expertise in that area. This may, for example, lead to the position of minister for health being given to a medical doctor, minister for education being given to a teacher, minister for justice being given to a lawyer, and so forth. There are many people who believe that this would lead to better policies, as those creating and implementing the policies would have had first-hand experience of what it is like to be in the role of those whom their policies will directly affect. There are three flaws to this thinking. The first is, the qualities that make someone a good doctor (or teacher or lawyer) are not necessarily the same as those qualities that will make them a good leader or policy-maker. One may be an excellent surgeon but have such a terrible interpersonal manner that no one can stand to be in the same room. Or perhaps be an inspiring teacher, but lack the assertiveness to push through unpopular, but necessary, proposals.

The second flaw that I would like to posit is encompassed by the old adage that “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. Once the doctor, lawyer or teacher has been removed from their working environment and placed in a governing position, they may begin to lose touch with the realities of day-to-day working life. One can become insulated, and consequently become insular. They no longer make reforms that will be perceived as beneficial to the ground-level workers but instead pass those that increase inefficiencies in the system or make life harder for said workers.

Finally, these differing areas of governance are not capable of functioning independently without an external body having oversight and coordinating them together. Imagine, the minister for health wants to ban all alcohol and tobacco, whilst the treasurer does not wish to lose the income that taxes on such products provides. If left to function individually, each will be trying to undo the other’s efforts. They require one mediator or ultimate decision-maker. In a technocratic society, where each position is filled by an expert in the subject over which he is appointed to preside, what type of expertise should be sought for the one with the ultimate oversight?

For timocracy, it is a system whereby only those who own property may participate in governmental affairs. A form of this, where only landowners had the right to vote, persisted in the United Kingdom until as recently as 1884, and in the state of North Carolina in the US until 1856. This clearly excludes a large proportion of the population from representation, and can easily slip into a form of plutocracy, where the ruling class is limited to those who are in possession of great wealth or assets.

Since the human condition as it relates to ownership of money and power is to naturally seek more, a plutocratic society engenders a situation where those who are in power because they have significant wealth seek to manipulate the system to increase their wealth. This further secures their position as eligible to rule, creating a positive feedback loop where more money leads to more power, which in turn leads to more money, and so on. Since money and resources are finite, it is inevitable that as those in power will inevitably seek to gain more of them, and causing those not in power to become more impoverished.

In meritocracy, it is often touted as the most desirable system, where people are given position and power based on their merit: talent, effort and/or achievements. Very few countries practice this system of government and in places where it is being practiced, it improves the standard of living of their citizens.

Theocracy is a system whereby rulers are deemed to have been given their position by a deity, and oftentimes hold concurrent positions as head of state and head of the predominating religion. Since the ruler is considered appointed by God, whatever decisions they make are considered to be the divine will, and as such cannot be questioned or held up for scrutiny by the population.

In the case of democracy, it is ostensibly a system where every person has an equal stake in representation, either directly participating in decisions regarding legislation, or by electing representatives to do so on their behalf. Winston Churchill, Prime Minister of the UK from 1940-1945 and 1951-1955, is credited with saying, “Democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried.” It is the most common form of governing system across the western world, held up as the gold standard to be imposed on all other societies, either by negotiation or by force. However, even a cursory look at many of these ‘democratic’ countries would suggest that it has not been the panacea that its proponents suggest.

After all, there are many examples of where a leader has been democratically elected and gone on to impose detrimental legislation upon their subjects – Adolf Hitler and Robert Mugabe spring to mind as two particularly extreme examples of this.

In the case of Nigeria, it purports to be using democracy, but from what I have observed, I would say that the general situation is more one of a theocratic meritocracy and I will explain what it means.

What do I mean by this? Simplistically, the general belief is that God is in control of the fates of all people, and He apportions to them accordingly as they deserve. If someone is in power, it is because God has placed them there because they have proven worthy. On the face of it, this appears to be a good thing, but let me unpack why I think this combination has been toxic for the average person in Nigeria.

There can be no dispute that Nigeria is a country whose society has deep roots in religion. Whether that religion is Christianity, Islam, or traditional religion, there are few in this country who can claim to have no religious affiliation at all. For those who subscribe to one religion or the other, it colours every aspect of their life. When something goes well, it is a blessing from God. When something goes badly, it is a lesson or a reprimand from God. The rulers that are in place are considered to have been put there by God. This is often accompanied by two opposing perspectives: either that the rulers are God’s chosen men (and therefore must be good) or they have been placed over the country to punish it for its transgressions.

Equally, there is a prevailing view that if you have something, whether that is money, possessions or power, it has been given to you by God because you ‘deserve’ it. Therefore, it is the people who are ‘worthy’ that God bequeaths power, money, status, security etc. However, these beliefs carry a dark reciprocal.

A theocratic meritocracy, where it is believed that what you are given by God is whatever you deserve by virtue of your ‘good or bad deeds, says that if bad things are happening to you, it is because you deserve it. If you are living in poverty, it is not because those in power have failed to implement measures to alleviate it, but because you have failed to pray enough, to believe hard enough, or simply to be good enough. It divests responsibility for the wellbeing of the general population away from those in power and places it equally in the hands of God and of you.

It says, “I am where I am because I deserve it because God has seen my good works and has rewarded me. You are where you are because you deserve it. You have not tried hard enough to succeed, you have not worked hard enough, you have not prayed hard enough, you have not given enough money to the church, you have not been good enough. Your situation is therefore your own fault, and so it is the responsibility of you alone to amend it.”

This implicit belief is widely prevailing throughout Nigerian society, though I believe that few realise it is so. It allows the oppression of the general populous both by the ruling classes and by the religious elite and the religious leaders can manipulate this mindset to swell their ranks: “Attend my programme and you will receive God’s blessing!” “This year will be your year of prosperity! Declare it aloud to yourself and to your neighbour, bring your neighbour to the programme and you will prosper!” It also allows them to swell their coffers: “God blesses those who bless others! Give to Him and He will give back to you ten-fold!” “Who will come forward for ₦10,000 worth of blessing? Come, give God the ₦10,000 and He will bless you accordingly! Don’t accept only ₦5,000 worth of blessing. God is worth it, bring it to Him and He will make you a millionaire!”

The ruling class can also use this to their own gain and to maintain their rule. When they become rich by embezzling public funds or by impoverishing their constituents, a meritocratic mindset allows them to say, “I got this by working hard. If you work hard, you, too, can achieve all that I have achieved and own all that I own.” A theocratic mindset allows them to say, “I have what I have because God gave it to me. You cannot blame me for having abundance whilst you lack, because it is not in my control, it is all down to God.”

I should say that I do not purport to put blame either on God or on a belief in Him, but rather on those who have been given the stewardship of the country. It is not a criticism of God that men have twisted and warped His Word to meet their own ends. The responsibility must be placed firmly at the feet of those who have been placed in power over the country, whether one believes that they have been placed there by God or by man or by some combination.

The rulers must be held to account for the way they have managed their position of responsibility – for that is what authority is. Authority is not a statement of worthiness or of being better or superior. It is a position of responsibility, where one takes on duty of care for those who exist under his rule. True authority should be about prioritising the needs of one’s charges over the desires of oneself. But we can only hold our rulers to this standard once we have recognised the lies that we are taught by the system, and thrown off the yoke of believing them. Will Nigeria ever operate a true meritocratic system? I doubt, given that the present leaders live life, all for themselves without caring for the people. With the current levels of campaign for Biafra & Yoruba Nation, it is my hope that the new emerging nations will embrace a system that is fairer to all in order to build a viable society.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

President Trump’s Transformation of the Democratic System

Published

on

By

By Magnus Onyibe

President Donald J. Trump is actively reshaping the global political landscape, navigating the tension between globalization and fragmentation to establish a new order in the United States and, by extension, the world.

Before delving further into this discussion, I must disclose that I am an unapologetic supporter of the 47th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump. My support stems from my belief that he is undeniably a catalyst for change.

Many, including Democratic presidential candidates in the 2024 elections,ex president Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris, have accused Trump of seeking to dismantle democracy. However, a more accurate assessment is that he is challenging the status quo in Washington through radical policy shifts. While Democrats frame his actions as a threat to democracy, I see this as a misleading narrative,because changing the dynamics of democracy does not equate killing it.

Despite the alarm raised by his opponents, American voters prioritized economic concerns—rising inflation, the high cost of living, soaring housing prices, and the influx of undocumented immigrants—over the warnings about imminent death of democracy. It was these pressing issues that motivated voters to support Trump’s return to the White House.

The more than 77 million Americans who voted for him did so because they believe he was on a mission to address what they see as a “woke” and financially struggling America. According to the Oxford Dictionary, “woke” refers to those who are socially aware but is often used pejoratively to describe individuals perceived as self-righteous or overly dogmatic in their advocacy.

True to his promises, Trump wasted no time in implementing his agenda. During his inauguration, he took a strong stance against “woke” ideology by affirming that the U.S. Constitution recognizes only two genders—male and female—a direct challenge to the LGBTQ+ community. He has since followed through on his pledges by signing a series of executive orders aimed at radically reshaping America.

So, from my perspective, Trump is simply fulfilling the commitments he made during his campaign. The backlash from those negatively affected by his policies is therefore unsurprising, yet it should not overshadow the fact that he is delivering the change that millions of Americans willingly voted for, believing it will restore the country’s greatness.

As someone who embraces change, I am excited to see a leader who challenges the status quo in public leadership finally take charge. That leader is Donald J. Trump, who has now assumed office in the White House, the seat of U.S. political power.
Given President Tinubu’s huge appettite for change which has wrought on Nigeria in the past 2O months,he may be said to be cut from the same cloth with Trump, literally speaking.

Mr. Trump as the leader of the free world- U.S, exerts enormous influence on global affairs, reinforcing the popular saying: when America sneezes, the rest of the world catches a cold. This is evident in Trump’s decision to impose tariffs on key trading partners—25% on Mexico, 25% on general goods plus 10% on Canadian oil, and 10% on China—primarily to curb illegal immigration and combat the flow of fentanyl, a deadly drug ravaging American communities.

Before Trump even took office, his threats of tariff hikes caused global concern. However, World Trade Organization (WTO) Director-General Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, speaking at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, urged caution: “I am concerned, but my approach is to stay calm. Let’s wait to see what policies are actually enacted before overreacting.”

Despite this advice, some countries affected by the new tariffs —especially Mexico and Canada—have already announced retaliatory tariffs, raising fears of an all-out trade war. Meanwhile, China has opted for a legal approach, filing complaints against the U.S. through the WTO.

As the head of the WTO, Dr. Okonjo-Iweala will play a crucial role in resolving this looming global trade conflict. Given her extensive experience—including her tenure at the World Bank and her ongoing second term as WTO chief—there is hope that she can help de-escalate tensions.

Anticipating the economic impact of the trade war, President Trump has urged Americans to brace for temporary hardships, acknowledging that tariffs might contribute to inflation. However, he remains confident that the outcome will ultimately benefit the country, declaring: “This will be the golden age of America. Will there be some pain? Yes. But we will make America great again, and it will be worth the price.”

This sentiment is reminiscent of Nigerian President Bola Tinubu’s remarks when he removed the long-standing fuel subsidy and floated the naira, leading to economic hardship for Nigerians. He reassured the nation, saying: “I understand that our people are suffering, but there can be no childbirth without pain. The joy of childbirth is the baby. Relief comes after the pain. Nigeria is being reborn.”

Remarkably,Trump’s policies signal a fundamental shift away from globalization—a concept introduced between 1870 and 1914 and later popularized in 1983 by economist Theodore Levitt in his essay titled “The Globalization of Markets.” The current global order, shaped by decades of economic integration, now faces disruption under Trump’s America First doctrine, which prioritizes national interests over international cooperation.

Interestingly, Trump’s long-held stance on tariffs is not new. In a resurfaced 1978 interview with Oprah Winfrey, he expressed similar views, making it clear that his current trade policies have been decades in the making.

While trade wars typically harm weaker economies (when elephants fight, the grass suffers), Africa might stand to benefit from this geopolitical shift. As tensions escalate among major trading partners—U.S., Canada, Mexico, and China—Africa, historically seen as merely a source of raw materials, could emerge as an alternative manufacturing hub.

For instance, Nigeria’s oil exports to the U.S. declined significantly under President Barack Obama, with Canada and Mexico becoming America’s top crude suppliers. However, if the trade war leads to disruptions in North American oil exports, Trump may turn back to Nigeria, currently the 8th largest supplier, to fill the gap.

So, rather than viewing Trump’s policies as purely negative, it may be worth considering the potential opportunities they create for Africa. As a matter of fact , instead of getting caught up in narratives of doom and gloom, could this be a moment for the continent to reposition itself as a key player in the evolving global trade landscape?

I would argue that it is time for the world to recognize that Africa is not a problem to be solved but a vital part of the global solution. Thats owed to the fact that the continent holds vast reserves of critical minerals essential for the energy transition that the world desperately seeks. Rather than being viewed merely as a supplier of raw materials, Africa should be seen as a prime destination for investment and industrial partnerships.

There is a well-known economic principle that a rising tide lifts all boats and yachts. In that spirit, industrialized nations like the U.S. and China must acknowledge that Africa—home to 54 countries and a population of approximately 1.5 billion, larger than China’s 1.3 billion and rivaling India’s 1.4 billion—is not a charity case but an investment opportunity.

As a long-time advocate for Africa’s economic resurgence, I have consistently argued that the continent needs trade, not aid. So, it is imperative that major global economies shift their perception of Africa from a passive recipient of aid to an active economic partner. Historically, Africa has been exploited—most notably through the partitioning of the continent at the 1884–1885 Berlin Conference, where European powers divided African territories for their own benefit. As a result, Africa has remained marginalized in global trade, accounting for less than 3% of total global trade, despite having 18% of the world’s population.

To secure a greater share of global trade, Africa must be integrated into the evolving international economic order. Without disruptions to the existing system—such as those triggered by President Trump’s policies—meaningful change is unlikely. Given the resistance Africa has faced in its bid to gain a permanent seat on the UN Security Council, a fundamental shift in global power structures, like the one Trump is advocating, may be necessary for Africa to be taken seriously as a key player in international trade.

At this moment in history, the world may actually benefit from the tensions between defenders of the entrenched old order and leaders like Trump, who are determined to shake up the system. Since assuming office on January 20, 2025, Trump has been implementing the bold changes he promised during his campaign. In my assessment, the mandate given to him by American voters provides a unique opportunity to push for a rebalancing of global trade and governance.

Throughout history, transformative change has always required bold action. If astronauts had not pushed boundaries, Neil Armstrong would never have walked on the moon in 1969, a breakthrough that reshaped human understanding of the universe. Similarly, astronomer Galileo’s discoveries challenged the belief that the Earth was flat, while it is actually cylindrical paving the way for modern scientific thought. It is this same drive for progress that appears to be fueling Trump’s disruptive approach to governance.

Keyu Jin, a professor of economics and author of The New China Playbook, recently highlighted a growing shift in global trade patterns, noting that China and other nations have been diversifying their markets away from the U.S. even before the current tariff wars. Therefore,Trump’s policies are merely accelerating this trend. In Europe, for instance, we are seeing a rise in nationalist-leaning leaders, particularly in France and Germany, who are also prioritizing domestic interests over globalism.

This geopolitical realignment is further evident in the expansion of BRICS—a coalition of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—which has recently welcomed new members like Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Egypt. As more countries join BRICS in an effort to counterbalance U.S. influence, and attempts to reduce dependence on the U.S. dollar in global trade may intensify. The general belief is that if America continues using tariffs as a tool to pressure its trading partners, it risks pushing them further toward alternative alliances, potentially diminishing its own economic influence. But would that really be the case?

For Africa, this shifting landscape presents an opportunity. If trade flows are redirected away from the U.S., Africa could gain a larger share of global commerce—but only if the continent positions itself strategically. With the establishment of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA), headquartered in Ghana, Africa is already laying the groundwork to take advantage of this new world order.

While Trump’s critics have valid concerns about the potential risks of his sweeping policy changes—particularly the hardship caused by the deportation of undocumented immigrants and disruptions in U.S. aid to Africa( which was later restored) it is also worth considering the potential long-term benefits of a restructured global economy.

The changes unfolding in global trade could open up unprecedented opportunities for Africa. If the continent plays its cards right, it could emerge as a major beneficiary of the ongoing shake-up. So, instead of viewing Trump’s policies solely through the lens of crisis, perhaps it is time to explore how Africa can leverage this moment to secure a more equitable role in the global economy.

A US based Nigerian Professor Ndubuisi Ekekwe describes Trump’s leadership as a “tsunami-earthquake-storm” approach, highlighting the unprecedented nature of shutting down USAID. According to him, this move signals a clear message to the world—that America has no obligation to fund or influence other nations through soft power. However, he suggests that this could actually be a positive development if African leaders step up and take responsibility.

He further explains how foreign aid often distorts markets and hinders sustainable development. For instance, an entrepreneur might develop a viable product in healthcare, education, or agriculture, only for an aid agency to introduce a similar product for free. This forces local businesses to shut down, and once the aid funds disappear after a few years, communities are left worse off, having lost both the external support and the local solutions that were once in place.

Rather than panicking over these funding cuts, Professor Ekekwe urges African governments to seize the opportunity by creating systems to identify and assist citizens in need. He argues that without external interference, local businesses can step in to fill market gaps, and governments can provide targeted support to those who truly require it. He points out that Africa has a long history of self-reliance and should return to indigenous solutions rather than depending on unpredictable foreign aid.

This perspective aligns with the arguments earlier made by economist Dr. Dambisa Moyo in her ground breaking book “Dead Aid”, where she contends that Western aid has done more harm than good in Africa.

Considering Trump’s repeated assertion that his second term marks a “golden age” for America, it is possibly a golden age for Africa too as the continent could benefit—if it strategically positions itself to take advantage of the shifting global order being shaped by Trump’s policies.

Magnus Onyibe, a public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, (2003-2007) sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

To continue with this conversation and more, please visit www.magnum.ng.

Continue Reading

Opinion

EFCC in the Eye of the Storm!

Published

on

By

By Ayo Oyoze Baje

With comments such as ” embarrassing”, “shameful” and ” disturbing” trailing the recent revelations that not less than 27 officers of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC were reportedly dismissed for acts of misconduct and fraudulent activities in 2024 alone, the clarion call for full-fledged investigations into what really happened has become a necessity. This is compelling because the alleged acts of fraud span from Lagos to Kaduna Zonal Commands. And given the delicate duty hinged on the matching mandate of the EFCC he who comes to equity must do so with clean hands.

But sadly, according to the spokesperson of the federal government agency, Dele Oyewale as revealed on January 6, 2025 the EFCC has started investigating ” a trending $400, 000 claim of a yet – to – be – identified supposed staff of the agency against a sectional head”. But that was just a tip of the iceberg. Some two days later, precisely on January 8, of this year 10 officers of the Lagos Zonal Command were detained over the theft of operational items.

Listed amongst the missing items are gold bars valued at over N1 billion. That is in addition to some precious jewelry and cash of between $350,000 and $400,000. Though the agency is yet to speak on what took place at the Kaduna Zonal Command, an officer simply identified as Polycarp allegedly stole a humongous amount claimed to be over $30,000 in addition to other valuable items.Such an embarrassing situation certainly triggers some flaming questions.

For instance, how do we explain the scandalous scenario that an anti-graft agency of the stature of the EFCC could not provide adequate security for expensive exhibits, including gold and mouth-watering amounts of raw cash? How would any officer, trained to fight for and recover stolen materials and money blame the prevailing poverty and high cost of living in the country as the factors of temptation for his shameful and unpatriotic act? Good leaders do not give excuses for dereliction of duty. Not at all. Rather, they should muster the moral courage to rein in the insidious urge to attempt to convert what does not belong to one as his, for whatever reason. That brings us to the nitty-gritty of the Act which established the EFCC.

Propelled by the Establishment Act first enacted in 2002 and subsequently amended in 2004 the matching mandate of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC is to frontally combat both economic and financial crimes. To bolster its performance the Act enables the Commission to prevent, investigate, prosecute and penalize economic and financial crimes in their various shades. Good enough, the EFCC is also charged with the responsibility of executing the provisions of other laws and regulations that are related to economic and financial crimes.

In its distilled essence, these laws are embedded in Section 7(2) of the Establishment Act 2004. These include Money Laundering Act 1995, Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act 2004 as well as Advanced Fee Fraud and other related Offence Act 1995. Not left out are the Failed Bank Act, 1994, the Criminal Code and the Terrorism Act 2011. But the recent revelations of odious acts of deliberate criminality carried out by officers of the EFCC run against the grains of the fight against corruption. They must therefore, be brought to the public sphere for proper scrutiny while the agency should beam a brighter searchlight into its inner structures to plug the widening loopholes.

Beginning with its recruitment process, it has become expedient for a more thorough assessment of the moral standards of any Nigerian citizen presenting himself for any of the available posts before he is employed there. Also significant is the need to guarantee the safety and security of all forms of exhibits -be it gold, jewelry or cash-preferably in bank vaults. Doing so will cut off any access to them.

From the point of view of security experts it amounts to unprofessional act not to have mechanisms firmly in place to ensure both safety and accountability of the exhibits. And if the EFCC decides to keep them within its purvey they should be well secured with multiple layers of protection provided. With such a guarantee it means that if the court finally decides in favour of the defendants, or those alleged to have stolen the recovered items they would be fully returned, without spurious claims of such to have been stolen by operatives of the EFCC. That brings us to what punishments should be meted out to the culprits.

Beyond their outright dismissal from office, they should be prosecuted and made to face the full wrath of the law. If perhaps, they have relocated outside the country the use of biometrics on record will be handy to trace and track them down.That would send the right punitive message and serve as a form of deterrence, to others with similar inclination to steal. But then, the question on the lips of concerned Nigerians is why all these acts of malfeasance are coming up at this point in time?

While some observers of the goings on at the EFCC have applauded the Chairman, Olanipekun Olukayode for mustering the leadership will to ensure probity and accountability in the operations others are not impressed by the method of night raids. Also, with the viral video of one Idris Okunaye, aka Bobrisky who claimed that some operatives of the agency collected N15 million from him to absolve him of the charge of money laundering, though later denied, the image of the EFCC is currently at stake.

But we urge Olukayode to continue with the internal cleaning up process, go ahead with the auditing of the recovered items on Zonal Command basis and ensure their security. He should review the night operations that have led to some deaths of the officials, strengthen oversight functions while doing away with problems traced to political interference.

As the Centre for Anti-Corruption and Open Leadership has rightly demanded for the internal cleansing should be holistic and devoid of manipulations from the corridors of political power.

Indeed, to restore public confidence in the EFCC it must free itself from the antics, sentiments and threats from the executive arm of government at the state and federal government levels. That would also reinforce the standard of morality in the nation, which has been rubbished by the crass, crude and criminal culture of impunity. With some of those who have pilfered the national treasury dry still walking our streets as free men and women, it is hard to discourage our rudderless youths from all forms of fraudulent practices. But we cannot continue to tread that path of perfidy. Not at all.

Continue Reading

Opinion

How Wike Benefitted from Dele Momodu’s Expertise and Conflict Resolution Skills

Published

on

By

By Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba
ssbaba.pys@buk.edu.ng

Let me begin with this beautiful quote by Benjamin Franklin that “The doorstep to the temple of wisdom is a knowledge of our own ignorance.” Indeed, some people lack the knowledge of their own ignorance. Earlier this morning, Aare Dele MOMODU posted multiple pictures of him and his friend, the former Governor of Rivers State as he used to do from time to time in his busy social media pages. Immediately I saw those pictures, it reminded me of how CHIEF DELE MOMODU contributed immensely to WIKE’S popularity by showcasing the then Governor’s projects, an event that marked the origin of his nickname “Mr Project” all over Nigeria.

I would always say that WIKE’s popularity in Nigeria especially in the North was not as a result of his failed attempt to cling his party’s presidential ticket during the May 2022 presidential primaries or the events that followed, rather as a result of how the OVATION MEDIA GROUP demonstrated to Nigerians, Africa and many parts of the world that a Governor like Wike actually existed in Nigeria due to the volume of projects he was able to put in place in Rivers State which probably overrode all history of governance at state level in Nigeria. Unfortunately, some ignorant people threw their usual tantrums under the comment section, saying that MOMODU betrayed WIKE, which in my humble opinion is the other way round. Follow me patiently as I make a few points to that effect in a jiffy, keeping in mind the fact that Governor WIKE’s multiple work in Rivers had been undervalued, under-reported, or, let’s say, eclipsed by politics until the OVATION media group intervened in late 2020.

Furthermore, in my own understanding, a journalist has to be fair and ready to listen to the other side of any story. Governor WIKE turned out to be amongst the top beneficiaries of this Momodu’s rare quality as a veteran journalist. Let me take a step back a bit to the best of my knowledge as a meticulous follower of Ovation Media Group. Momodu had interviewed MAZI NNAMDI KANU, the leader of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) weeks before, specifically on the 29th October, 2020 and his fans were very happy. It was the mother of all interviews because both the interviewer and respondent knew their onions. The brilliant Nnamdi Kanu himself tweeted the following day expressing his satisfaction with Momodu’s comportment and describing him as the Larry King of Africa, which was largely true in my opinion. In fact some called him the man with magic fingers because of his enormous wisdom and prolificness in writing.

Thereafter, many Nigerians at home and in diaspora, his fans and mentees including myself requested him to interview GOVERNOR NYESOM WIKE. In fact, when I called him about that, he said “Dr Baba, I will! I always believe a journalist must hear and ventilate the other side of any story…”. So willingly and by popular demand, DELE MOMODU made it happen.

A few days later, he announced the acceptance of the then Governor WIKE to join him for a chat on one of his Instagram live sessions. That was one of the must watched interviews that set all social media streets agog. The interview went well, and he answered very interesting questions as candidly and as boldly as he could, not mincing words about his sharp disagreement with Mazi Nnamdi Kanu and the IPOB he leads, while MOMODU maintained his usual neutrality as much as possible. Momodu also asked the Governor some important questions about his developmental projects because the session was not just about his altercation with Kanu.

Moving fast forward during the interview, Governor WIKE threw a challenge by immediately inviting the Ovation Media Group to visit Rivers and see things for themselves. He was confident that given the infrastructural development Rivers State had witnessed under his watch though unpopular, Ovation would require over two weeks to cover his projects. Momodu accepted his challenge and headed to Rivers, prepared as always, regardless of what was on ground. They were pleasantly surprised. Two weeks and counting, Ovation team was still in Rivers State. There was simply so much to be seen and it was as if the governor had captured them permanently. He was enjoying their stay in Rivers while the whole country was resonating wondering what the Ovation crew were revealing from Rivers state. That was in my best understanding what brought the Governor WIKE’S massive achievement in Rivers to limelight in Nigeria and beyond. They travelled extensively and traversed the length and breadth of Rivers State, given the Governor WIKE all the machineries he needed to brag and beat his chest about the massive development he brought to his own state.

The other face of the story was even more interesting because some people who are extremely loyal to Kanu got angry. They said Wike was lying. They said he was the one who ordered the killing and mass murder of the people in OYIGBO/OBIGBO. They immediately challenged Momodu to go to the town and see the level of destruction and devastation. Some immediately began to rain insults and abuse on the Momodu’s platforms. I still remember clearly some of the false accusations and allegations by the same people who were happy before. Indeed this is not new to any journalist who chose to deploy ethical standards and neutrality. This also reminds me of the atmosphere when CHIEF DELE MOMODU interviewed the former Nigeria minister of petroleum DIAZENI ALLISON MADUEKE in London.
Coming back to the main epistle, DELE MOMODU also accepted the challenge and decided to visit OBIGBO town in Rivers State, a place where all the media spaces in Nigeria have likened to GAZA, PALESTINE where killings and human rights abuse became the order of the day. Momodu’s visit to OBIGBO is also a different story on its own, yet very interesting because what came out of it was totally contrary to a place where everyone believes it was under military siege. Everyone was ready to see the possible bloodbath and devastation that he/she was reading about constantly on social media. It was showcased LIVE in all Momodu’s platforms as the visit was ongoing in OBIGBO town.

In going to OBIGBO, Momodu employed and deployed his vast experience in the last three decades in promoting peace in West Africa and visiting war torn areas. In a sense, he was returning to familiar turfs and terrain. There were times MOMODU had to come down from the car to walk around a bit and interact with the people based on requests, instructions and directions from the INSTAGRAM LIVE feeds. He felt comfortable and very much at home amongst the indigenes and residents of Obigbo and the people welcomed the Ovation crew and freely expressed themselves. He also asked directly from the people about the murders and wanted to know if killings were still ongoing. Everybody he spoke with confirmed what had happened, but they all said the situation was under control, contrary to what the media was falsely and unjustly promoting. Normalcy had been restored substantially, in the town. Markets were bristling with the usual hustle and bustle of a boisterous community and it was live for all viewers to see. Momodu also listened to the Local Government Chairman, Prince Gerald Oforji, and the Chiefs for their own version of the story.

To my surprise however, some people kept raining abuses during the live broadcasts despite Momodu’s open, transparent work and apparent selflessness. He remained unperturbed because obviously he was not out to impress anyone but to do his job as professionally as he knows best.

In my own understanding, that was how most Nigerians naturally exonerated Governor WIKE from the alleged massive killings in OBIGBO as some believed he masterminded everything like a Bollywood director.

Who now is the ultimate beneficiary of these Momodu trips and interventions? Who benefitted from Momodu’s uncommon conflict resolution skills?

Continue Reading

Trending