Idris Wase is the Deputy Speaker of the Nigerian House of Representatives. There is a video in circulation that shows him presiding over a session of the House of Representatives in the absence of the Speaker of the House, Femi Gbajabiamila. The matter before the House was the attempt by Rep. Mark Terser Gbilah representing the Tiv Federal Constituency to present a petition by his constituents writing under the umbrella of the Mutual Union of Tivs in America (MUTA). These concerned citizens in the said petition sought to register their protest about the maltreatment, utter neglect and the wanton violation of the fundamental human rights of their kith and kin back home in Nigeria who as a result of the attack on their homesteads and farmlands by herdsmen have been rendered homeless in the past few years and are now stranded in refugee camps in the Middle Belt. Members of MUTA want their people’s plight to be addressed by the Nigerian government and their seized lands returned to them.

You need to watch the video. The evidence is compelling. The content is horrid. The Speaker in session, Idris Wase, did not even allow Rep. Gbilah to make the presentation. He dismissed Nigerians living in Diaspora as a company of ignoramuses who do not know what is going on in Nigeria. Really? In this age of the internet? He said he would rather listen to a petition coming from Nigerians living in Nigeria, but not anyone in Diaspora. Thus, Wase robbed Diaspora Nigerians of their right of expression and even their citizenship! He even argued that these are people with dual nationality. Here is a lawmaker, a No. 2 member of the House of Representatives who is supremely ignorant of the fact that the Nigerian Constitution allows dual citizenship. “Do they really know what is going on if they are in America? Do they have dual citizenship?”, Wase asked with astonishing arrogance. He eventually asked Rep. Gbilah to be so advised and sit down. And poor Gbilah took the advice like a -beaten chicken and put down the petition he was about to read. The evidence is graphic. It leaves Wase no opportunity to claim hereafter that he was quoted out of context or that the video was “doctored”. Other members of the House in attendance at that session looked as if the matter at hand was not their business. Are we surprised? No.

I was indeed so shocked that I had to rush to the internet to double-check Wase’s profile. He is described as a graduate of Plateau State Polytechnic! It was hard to believe. He actually spent some years in a school of higher learning? And wait for this: we are further told he is also a graduate of the Kennedy School of Government at the University of Harvard, United States. Wase went to Harvard! “How? as what?  as a tourist?”, I wondered. And yet he sounds like that? He is on top of it all, a fourth-time member of the House of Representatives and he has been either a member or Chair of various committees of the House since 2007. The Idris Wase video should be circulated widely. It is a perfect illustration of the crisis of leadership that Nigeria faces and the failure of the country’s leadership recruitment process. The Nigerians in Diaspora Organisation (NIDO) representing the entire Nigerian Community in Europe, the Americas, Asia, Oceania and Africa has jointly expressed its outrage in a letter dated March 14 and addressed to the Speaker of the House, Femi Gbajabiamila. NIDO definitely has every right to ask whether the only thing its members are good for is Diaspora Remittances!

Idris Wase owes NIDO and MUTA an apology for speaking so rudely and contemptuously about a group of Nigerians who continue to represent some of the very best that the country offers on the global stage. And Abike Dabiri, CEO of the Nigeria in Diaspora Commission must visit Idris Wase, post haste, to take him through a quick tutorial on the significance and relevance of Nigerians in Diaspora, and the folly of his cow-brain, dishonourable comments. Whenever House Speaker Femi Gbajabiamila returns, he must ensure that Rep. Gbilah gets the opportunity to present the petition of the Mutual Union of Tivs in America (MUTA) - with Idris Wase in attendance!      

On March 8, 2021, the Vanguard newspaper online in a story titled “Delta Committee makes all-inclusive recommendations to end Idumuje-Ugboko crisis” by Emma Amaize reported that a committee set up by the Delta State Government which investigated “the kingship tussle and land acquisition crisis at Idumuje-Ugboko Kingdom, Aniocha North Local Government Area of Delta State has concluded its assignment and made far-reaching submissions to the state government on how to bring lasting peace to the troubled domain. In October 2020, some concerned stakeholders reportedly approached Senator Ifeanyi Okowa to intervene to ensure peace in Idumuje-Ugboko, an agrarian community in Delta Ibo part of Nigeria that has not known peace since the death of its former monarch in 2017. The main conflict is between Prince Ned Nwoko and Prince Chukwunomso Nwoko on one hand, bitterly opposed to each other over land acquisition issues, and between the latter and other stakeholders who are challenging his right of ascension to the throne. Idumuje-Ugboko has thus been gripped by a fratricidal, filial conflict that has affected the entire community. Cases have been filed in court. There have been accusations of murder, threats of assassination and the spread of bad blood in the community.  

The details of the committee’s recommendations have not been made public, but Senator Ifeanyi Okowa must be decisive in dealing with the situation. Peace should be the main target, and getting the various gladiators to sheathe their swords. Idumuje-Ugboko is like a typical Nigerian community where a few persons think that they are more important than others just because they have a fat bank account or their palm kernels have been cracked for them by benevolent spirits. They should be told to heed Chinua Achebe’s advice in Things Fall Apart and be humble. Such persons often fail to realise that the people who suffer at the end of the day when they embark on ego conflicts are the ordinary people as has been the lot of the ordinary people of Idumuje-Ugboko in the last four years.

Prince Ned Nwoko whose stories and engagements I follow closely in part because of his marriage to Nollywood star and beauty queen, Regina Daniel is a key actor in the Idumuje-Ugboko story. He wants to build a university and a golf course. He wants land and more land. It is alleged that his cousin, Prince Chukwunomso Nwoko, heir to the throne, thinks he already has more land than he needs. Prince Nomso wants to ascend the throne. He is having issues because according to some accounts, Prince Ned Nwoko, a man of no small means and influence is blocking him. Without Ned Nwoko’s support, Prince Chukwunomso may not get the endorsement that he needs and a staff of office. There have been public fights in the kingdom. People have been arrested. Prominent members of the community like Dr. Gabriel Ogbechie have been dragged into it. In one public intervention (Vanguard, May 23, 2019), Dr, Ogbechie of RainOil sued for peace. He says Prince Ned Nwoko is his friend.  Prince Chukwunomso is also his friend. But in the community, no one trusts the other. The Idumuje-Ugboko Development Union (IUDU) is divided down the middle. The matter has gone so messy that even Edgar Joseph, my Akwa Ibom brother, had to write about it in this newspaper. Can you imagine how the people of Idumuje-Igboko not being able to manage their own affairs are attracting busy-body attention from everywhere?  Even a man from Akwa Ibom is now trying to make peace in Idumuje-Ugboko!

These are the kind of village square fights that show us the other side of Nigeria, and they cannot be taken for granted.  In the 21^st Century, Nigerians are still fighting over land and traditional stools, and who is the biggest man in the clan. I think Idumuje-Ugboko is blessed but the people are behaving badly. It has prominent sons like Prince Ned Nwoko and Dr. Gabriel Ogbechie of RainOil, and many others in a state that is richly blessed with some of the most prominent Nigerians in the world today. Senator Ifeanyi Okowa, the Governor of Delta State, should step in and stop the reign of madness in that kingdom. A Delta Ibo from neighbouring Ogwashi-Uku, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, just got a job as the Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Some of her contemporaries are busy back home fighting over ancestral land and title and they are so determined about it.  Some people are just shameless.

The people of Idumuje-Ugboko deserve to have a king that is their choice according to tradition. Ned Nwoko wants to build a university. He should be encouraged to do so. He must put the community’s interest first. If Gabriel Ogbechie wants to build a refinery in Idumuje, why not? He too should be encouraged to do so. If Prince Chukwunomso wants a staff of office, the kingmakers should look into it and ensure that justice is done. They must all stop fighting and give peace a chance. For Prince Ned Nwoko’s benefit, I will like to recommend a story titled “How much land does a man need?” by Leo Tolstoy, with best wishes to Regina.                             

On April 14, 2014, 276 Nigerian female students of the Chibok Girls Secondary School were abducted by Boko Haram terrorists. It was a very disturbing moment for Nigeria and the rest of the world. Most of the abducted girls were Christians. Six of them reportedly died. About 57 escaped subsequently, but till date, more than six years later, many of the Chibok girls are still in captivity. Four years later, on February 19, 2018, history repeated itself. About 110 school girls were abducted from Government Girls Science and Technical College, Dapchi, in Yunusari Local Government Area of Yobe State. Following negotiations between government and the abductors, 104 girls were released about a month later, on March 21. One of them Leah Sharibu, is still in captivity because she refused to renounce Christianity. She is a prisoner of faith and victim of the Nigerian problem.

In December 2020, more than 300 boys were abducted from the Government Science Secondary School in Kankara, Katsina State. 344 boys eventually regained freedom. The Katsina State Government had to negotiate with the bandits. There was also Kagara, Niger State. On February 16, 2021, 27 children were kidnapped in a night-time raid on a boarding school, along with 12 of their relatives and three staff members.  On February 25, 2021, the terrorists struck again. They kidnapped 317 girls from the Girls Science Secondary School, in Jangebe, Zamfara State. 279 girls have since regained their freedom.  There have been in-between many other cases of abduction of boys, girls, men and women in parts of Northern Nigeria, but the aforementioned specific examples have been cited because of the recurrent pattern that they present. Altogether, they paint a picture of anguish, and the tragedy of the failure of the state to protect young, vulnerable Nigerians, and even the old, and all citizens generally, from the menace of terrorism.

Boko Haram, the name by which the local terrorist group in Nigeria is known is propelled by the ideology that “Western education is a sin”. This clearly explains the focus on schools, particularly boarding schools. In each of the cases - from Chibok to Jangebe, the terrorists targeted boarding schools, and abducted young children between the ages of 11- 18. In terms of numbers, young girls have been the majority of victims. They are dehumanized, raped, subjected to the most inhumane conditions possible, turned into sex slaves or even forcibly put in the family way by their abductors. They are carted away over long distances, and security agents are unable to intercept the unholy movement by gun-wielding criminals. After a pattern, the authorities suddenly raise an alarm when the incident has occurred, only to embark on the same routine: assurances that the students will be rescued, reports of negotiations with the bandits, eventual release of some or all of the abducted students, reunion with their parents, and shallow promises that the government will take every step to keep our schools safe. Oftentimes, indeed, in virtually every case, there are discrepancies in the reported numbers. Nigeria is one country where a human being can disappear, say from a school, and there will be no record, absolutely no trace of that person’s existence on the register. I mean, yes, literally. What do you expect in a country where population data is unknown and identification is a problem?   

This is tragic. The North is the most educationally disadvantaged part of Nigeria. Most of the over 15 million children that are out of school, are from the North. And now the ones that are in school face the constant threat of abduction. No one should be surprised that some of the students who recently regained their freedom declared that they would rather not go back to school. They are traumatised. Their parents are scared. Boarding schools have become unattractive. School itself has become a place of fear and danger. Every school that has been a target of terrorist attack, is said to be without perimeter fencing and adequate security. Terrorists stroll in, pack the children and a few teachers like chicken and lead them into the forest. The terrorists may be opposed to Western education, but they seem to be more interested in science schools (Dapchi, Kankara, Kagara, Jangebe). In a country where science education should be encouraged, terrorists are turning science students in the North into objects of trade. No state government, not even the Federal Government has ever admitted that ransom was paid to the kidnappers, but it is very obvious that kidnapping has become a source of livelihood for those we call bandits. It is the new big business, not just in the North, but across Nigeria. Widespread unemployment, poverty, hunger and bad beliefs and choices have turned kidnapping into a lucrative option. Just carry a gun, abduct a few persons, children are easy targets because they are defenceless, then negotiate with government and smile to the bank. Official spokespersons would step forward to make the usual noises that no ransom was paid and that government will not tolerate any act of impunity. Just like that. Lori iro!

Governors of the Northern states, according to a report in ThisDay newspaper, March 8, are now taking steps to “tighten security to curb abduction of school children.”   In total, 11 states are said to be adopting measures including the merger of boarding schools, provision of security, perimeter fencing, operational vehicles for the police, sensitisation of school authorities to be more security conscious and so on. I am sceptical. I hope this is not one of those usual excuses to award contracts and profit from other people’s agony. The Northern elite have been holding meetings about how to develop and promote education in the North since 1959. They meet. They talk. Nothing happens. In May 2014, the Nigerian Government embarked on a Safe Schools Initiative in collaboration with the UN Special Envoy for Global Education, former UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the Global Business Coalition for Education and another NGO - A World At School. This was in response to the Chibok girls’ abduction. The Federal Government of Nigeria committed a sum of $10 million; seven years later, not much has been achieved. The schools remain unsafe. The Jonathan administration also built 165 primary schools across the North – what became known as the almajiri schools with the primary goal of getting children off the streets, and back into classrooms. Many of those schools have been abandoned by the state governments. The children are still out of school. President Buhari most recently stressed the importance of the Safe Schools Initiative. Keeping the schools safe should indeed be a top priority at all levels of government.  But is anyone doing so? If terrorists succeed in instilling fear in children who have a whole future ahead of them and drive them away from the classrooms, then they would have won a major psychological war, with far-reaching implications for the future.

There is a lot that government can do to provide security. But the Northern elite must embark on serious introspection. The security of the North lies in education, and that requires ensuring that the emerging generation is given every opportunity to go to school, and acquire skills that can fit into a world that has become more competitive. The Northern elite must be ashamed that right in the first quarter of the 21^st Century, - the age of Artificial Intelligence, electronic vehicles, space science and high-end tech -  it is more preoccupied talking about cattle rearing and nomadism! The real revolution that the North needs is greater investment in education and the people. The Governors should stop making empty promises and get to work. Otherwise, when next another boarding school is attacked and school children are kidnapped in any part of the North, we would remind them of their own criminal negligence.

It is most unfortunate that the proposed appointment of new judges for Nigeria’s Court of Appeal has been controversial since the announcement of a shortlist in December 2020. The President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Dongban-Mensem has now found herself in an uncomfortable situation where she has to defend the integrity of her Court and the process that led to the emergence of a list of 20 preferred candidates and a list of additional 20 reserved candidates. To have the judiciary dragged into the mud of Nigerian politics and the usual culprits: ethnicity, religion, Federal Character and nepotism playing a prominent role in the matter, is disheartening. Why is it so difficult in Nigeria to have at least one sacred institution, a special symbol, that no one can desecrate? As it is, that seems increasingly impossible.

I asked this question as I read over the weekend, a statement attributed to the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Dongban-Mensem in which she had cause to protest that persons who have been complaining about the alleged manipulation of the ongoing process of appointing Judges for her Court are seeking to destabilize and scandalize the judiciary. She argues that the appointment process has so far followed “due and usual process” and that the allegation of “favouritism” is a false campaign of calumny: “A total of 80 nominees were shortlisted and recommended for the appointment of 20 Justices to fill the existing vacancies. I state on my honour that any of the 80 nominees could be appointed”, she writes. “It is unfortunate that some people have elected to go to the press without hard evidence which are readily available to those who seek to know. I hereby state that the current recommendation pending determination by the National Judicial Council was done without any preference for tribe, creed or association.”

The problem here is that many stakeholders and interested parties do not think so, Mi’Lord. Shortly after the list was made public, the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum (SMBLF) was one of the first groups to cry out in protest. The group alleged that the published list favours only Muslims from the North and does not in any way reflect the fact that Nigeria is multi-ethnic and multi-cultural. Thirteen out of the 20 preferred judges are from the North, including three Sharia Judges. The SMBLF asked to know if there is no Christian judge at all from the North and the Middle Belt who can be considered good enough to be a Judge of the Appellate Court! Along the same lines, a civil society group, the Global Integrity Crusade Network (GCIN) petitioned the Chief Justice of Nigeria to ask that the National Judicial Council should not go ahead to approve the “fraudulent” list before it. Stakeholders from the South East of Nigeria also cried foul. In a petition to the President of Nigeria and the Chief Justice of the Federation, the Alaigbo Development Foundation led by Professor Uzodinnma Nwala pointed out that the proposed list of new Court of Appeal Justices is meant to deny the South East its quota in the Court of Appeal based on the principles of Federal Character as enshrined in the 1999 Constitution.   

The ADF  puts the matter thus: “…it is very unjust and unfair for only one Justice to be appointed from the South East out of twenty (20) justices that are being appointed from the six geo-political zones, whereas the other zones were allocated as follows: North West (8), North East (3), North Central (2) South West (4), South South (2)”. Before the ADF, the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) also found it necessary to express “ïts feelings of sadness, disgust and anger at the insensitivity demonstrated by the FJSC in compiling the list.  It seems undeniable that the recklessness displayed by the FJSC suggests a steady and gradual descend (sic) to a process of Islamising the Judiciary of Nigeria...”

It is possible to dismiss all of these as rather too familiar: the typical Nigerian response to appointments and processes in the public sector but it must be noted that protests such as this speak to a major crisis that Nigeria is now grappling with on a daily basis: the menace of ethnicity, religion and geography. For this reason, nobody believes that the country is fair to anybody. There is a crisis of trust between the government and the people, and among the people themselves. More than 60 years after independence, Nigerians have reduced every institution of state to the politics of proximity and advantage. There is a prolonged and unending struggle over who gets what, and who controls power. The effect is that this dominant tendency brings out the worst in all of us. The educated man in the North who is a first-class intellect is likely to defend a bandit who kills and maims just because he thinks that by doing so, he is protecting his kinsman against other Nigerians, of different ethnic and religious extraction, who are insisting that justice must be done.  Similarly, a Southerner of the same pedigree would defend his own kinsman against the Northerner for no reason other than the fact that they both speak the same language or belong to the same region or religion.

This is the ugly drama being played out in Nigeria. It is not new but the melodrama is now tragic. What is disturbing is that the judiciary, the last refuge of the common man, and the expected bastion of the rule of law is now these days, dragged into the crisis of nationhood in a manner previously unseen. Before now, the Nigerian judiciary faced the challenge of military rule and the abbreviation of its Constitutional rights. It survived. Today, the same judiciary is now accused of everything from nepotism, to mediocrity, corruption, incompetence, complicity in the Nigerian mess and if care is not taken, eventual irrelevance. The last point is the main reason caution is advisable.

The judiciary must stay above dirty politics, very far away from it. Its gates must be locked against politicians by all means possible. Nigeria already suffers from too much politics: the politics of ethnicity, religion, difference and mischief. But whereas the involvement of the legislative and executive arms of government in cut-throat, dirty politics may be excused on the grounds that these two arms of government are dominated unavoidably by products of partisan politics, there is cause for worry when the third arm of government, under the doctrine of the separation of powers, becomes a pawn in the hands of politicians, or becomes even so openly mired in politics that its neutrality becomes a subject of analysis, speculation, and even protest. It is worse when the judiciary is accused of partisanship and desperately so. The court, the work-place of the judiciary, is expected to be a temple of justice and everyone who works therein, an honest, untainted officer.

It is the duty of the judiciary to interpret the law and ensure justice, and provide a refuge for all persons whose rights may have been violated, and at the same time, punish according to the law, those errant characters in society who violate the public order and return society by their conduct to the state of nature as defined by Thomas Hobbes. The law exists therefore, to restrain animal conduct and remind all of us of the need to be human. The judex are at the apex of the ladder. Given the privileged position that they occupy, they are expected to be above board, unimpeachable in terms of integrity, most deserving of their positions and of such moral and professional competence to be able to deliver justice without prejudice. When the judiciary however, becomes a target, subject, victim of partisan politics, or rank emotionalism, this goal cannot be achieved. A politicised and compromised judiciary is a threat to the same rule of law that it is required to uphold and enforce.

This re-affirmation is necessary against the background of what looks like the current politicisation of the proposed appointment of additional Justices for Nigeria’s Court of Appeal. Justice Monica Dongban-Mesem is in order to defend her Court. The Court of Appeal is too important in the hierarchy of courts to become a playground for public prejudice and suspicion. Men and women who sit on the Appeal Court must be seen to merit their positions on the basis of their accomplishments and experience. Trust and confidence in the “due and usual process” of the appointment of judges is relevant to the subsequent level of confidence in their performance in office. But with due respect, Her Lordship’s rebuttal does not go far enough. The “hard evidence” that she talks about in terms of what is available in the public domain and what is known contradicts her own declarations. It provides a strong justification for an interrogation of the queries that have been raised and why the National Judicial Council must review the list of proposed Judges before it takes any action.

A review of all the complaints so far would suggest that the Court of Appeal indeed followed “due and usual process” in the screening of the judges that applied for appointment into the Court of Appeal, but problem arose after the President of the Court forwarded the decision of the Committees to the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC). The key allegation is that the FJSC turned the list upside down and ignored the recommendations of the Court of Appeal. Is the President of the Court of Appeal defending the FJSC? Would she be willing to publish the original list that she submitted to the Judicial Service Commission to provide greater clarity and allow the public to compare and contrast? And just in case the list that is in circulation is incorrect, no one has said so.  The hard evidence that is currently in circulation is that 13 out of 20 nominated judges are Northerners and Muslims. The 13 Muslim Judges are from Niger, Plateau, Adamawa, Yobe, FCT, Kano, Kaduna, Kebbi, Sokoto, Zamfara, and Katsina, the home state of the incumbent President, which has two nominees. The entire South East is represented by one Judge from Imo State. The South South has two slots: Bayelsa and Delta State. The entire South West has 4 – Ondo (2) plus Ogun, and Lagos. The reserve list of 20 follows more or less the same pattern! By what criteria on earth did the FJSC arrive at such a list which can only fuel the anger about how under the present dispensation, there is an alleged deliberate attempt to grant undue advantages to a section of the country – from cattle rearing, to public appointments?

It may be argued that ordinary people have no business raising questions about the appointment process in the judiciary. But that would be a terribly wrong thing to say. Judges are first and foremost human beings. They are part of society. They have rights too. A lawyer who has chosen a career on the Bench expects that he would be promoted according to his ability. If he is denied the opportunity for advancement and self-actualization, just because his kinsman is not in power or he does not know people in high places, he would be disturbed. He or she will be demoralized. We expect the judiciary to dispense justice, but should such an institution also promote injustice and unfairness within its ranks? However, where are the judges who believe that they are qualified to be on the preferred list? Why are they not the ones writing petitions? Civil society groups may crow as they wish, but their efforts will ultimately raise the question of locus standi? Should judges who push this same principle be seen to be sleeping on their own rights?

There have also been snide remarks about the competence of some of the judges on the FJSC’s proposed list. I have no “hard evidence” in that regard. Elsewhere in the United States for example, there will be open access to the judgments that judges about to be elevated have written, their positions on key judicial matters and their contributions to the development of the law. Here in Nigeria, there is so much politics and secrecy. Judges who think that they are more deserving are bound to feel discouraged. Last year, there was so much controversy over the appointment of the Federal High Court Judges in Abuja. This year, we are at the same point with the appointment of Justices of the Court of Appeal. At other times, there have been issues over the appointment of Chief Judges at the state level, and the thorny issues have been more or less the same: merit, ethnicity and religion (re: Kebbi, Adamawa, Cross River). Who will judge the judges? It has also been said that the current list before the National Judicial Council does not include senior members of the Bar and persons from the academia whose inclusion in line with the enabling Guidelines can broaden the scope of the Court of Appeal, and provide needed depth.

Finally, the President of the Court of Appeal is a Christian. Right under her watch, we have this controversial issue of 13 nominee-Justices of the Court of Appeal out of 20 who are Muslims and Northerners? Whatever she says, it will be recorded that the deed is hers. Was she intimidated or influenced? What other “hard evidence” do we need? What else would she be willing to defend on “her honour?” These are issues that the NJC must consider.

The biggest piece of happy-ending news in Nigeria in the month of February 2021 is the endorsement of Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as the next Director General of the World Trade Organization (WTO) by the United States. The South Korean candidate for the position, Yoo Myung-hee whose candidacy had enjoyed the backing of the United States under the Trump administration, withdrew and the South Korean authorities have since pledged their support for Dr. N.O. Iweala. The South Korean’s earlier refusal to step down had made it difficult for Dr. Iweala to be confirmed by consensus when she got the majority of the votes at the end of the selection process in October 2020. The WTO chooses its Director General by consensus. The Trump administration rejected Iweala on the grounds that she did not have requisite experience in “trade negotiations”. The process had to be kept on hold until after the US Presidential elections of November 2020.

Luck is a very powerful factor in human affairs. As it turned out, Donald Trump lost the election. His loss is not a gain for the Democrats and Joe Biden/Kamala Harris alone, it was also a major gain for Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala who has now benefitted from the change in the United States, as a globalist, liberal President emerges in the White House. One of Biden’s earliest tasks in office was to undo the damage left behind by his predecessor, and a resolve to re-establish America’s leadership in the international order, especially with regard to such issues as climate change, and America’s role and place in the world through such multilateral institutions as the UN, the World Health Organization and the World Trade Organization. On Monday, February 15, the WTO officially announced Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as the next Director General of the WTO (March 1, 2021 – August 2025). You should have been in Nigeria or on Nigerian Social Media on that day.  

Nigerian Twitter exploded with shouts of excitement and expressions of delight. Nigerians did not talk about luck. (But imagine if Trump had won and that guy called Robert Lightizer had remained US Trade Representative). They talked about the history made by a great Nigerian ambassador, a woman of destiny, and an accomplished person. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s triumph was the stuff of history: the first woman to emerge as DG of the WTO, the first African and also the first Nigerian to assume that office. This means a lot to the people. In a country where ethnic sentiments run deep, nobody talked about Okonjo-Iweala’s ethnic group. Nobody talked about her religion. Her achievement was something far more significant, a subtle projection of the fact that the same Nigerians that promote mediocrity routinely, appreciate and applaud distinction when they see it. As a people we indulge in mischief and unproductive wrangling for selfish reasons. But Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s making of history was far too iconic and legendary to be reduced to such base instincts. The joy that was expressed revealed a gift of humanism that is often masked in the Nigerian character. Congratulations. Congratulations. Congratulations.  

It is early days yet under the Joe Biden administration but the new US President has signalled that there is now a new dawn in the United States and the world. Within the same period that the US dropped its opposition to the candidacy of Dr. Okonjo-Iweala, President Biden earlier expressed his readiness to work with and support the African Union. President Trump, before him, was not too enthusiastic about Africa. He dismissed some of our countries as “shithole countries.” Nigeria was identified as one of such countries. Today, four Nigerian-Americans are in the Biden/Harris team. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala has also been endorsed. The Biden administration would do well to build on the goodwill that it currently enjoys in Africa. In addition, African leaders deserve commendation for the solidarity that they demonstrated with their support for Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala’s candidacy.

As we have seen in the case of Dr. Tedros Ghebreyesus as DG of the WHO in 2017, and Dr. Akin Adesina’s re-election as AfDB President in 2020, in the face of again, Trump-America’s opposition, when African leaders unite around a goal, they can be more assertive within the international community. Back home, Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari also deserves praise for the statesman-like, non-partisan support that he has given Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala and before her, AfDB’s Dr. Akin Adesina. In June 2020, President Buhari nominated Okonjo-Iweala for the position, and withdrew the earlier candidacy of another Nigerian, Ambassador Frederick Agah. In October 2020, as the Americans tried to become a cog in the wheel of WTO progress. Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala visited President Muhammadu Buhari in Abuja to thank him for his support and to ask that Nigeria should continue to mobilise support for her candidacy. “Mr. President, put a smile on my face. I am very proud of my country”, she said.  President Buhari told her: “I assure you that we will do all that we can to ensure that you emerge as the Director-General of WTO, not only because you are a Nigerian, but because you are a great Nigerian. You deserve this…I did the same for Dr Akinwunmi Adesina for President of the African Development Bank. Both of you served the country under the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).  You are both highly qualified. We will continue to support you. I will immediately make those calls.” President Buhari has kept his promise. We are impressed. This is an act of mature leadership that we will recall positively.

NOI is of course eminently qualified for the position that is now hers. Twenty-five years at the World Bank as a technocrat, rising to become Vice President and Managing Director of the global body. Two-time Minister of Finance of Nigeria. One-time Minister of Foreign Affairs. Board Member, Twitter. Chair, GAVI Alliance. Special Envoy on COVID-19 to the African Union. Author. Public Intellectual. Ph.D, Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Development Economics, with proven distinction in learning and character. Recipient of many awards and distinctions. Eminent global citizen. Even with the best of credentials, nonetheless, anyone seeking the leadership of a strategic body like the 164-member WTO would need a lot of support. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala got this in great supply.  The return of the United States to the WTO fold, and the home support that she enjoys in Nigeria and Africa will make her assignment more manageable in many respects. Even more so would be the folk hero status she now enjoys among the African populace.

Last week, many of her compatriots took to the social media to celebrate. You may have heard of the Hillary Clinton pantsuit campaign or the Kamala Harris single strand, coral necklace celebration. The pantsuit is Hillary Clinton’s signature costume. During the 2016 Presidential campaign, her female supporters donned the pantsuit to demonstrate their solidarity for the then US Democratic Presidential candidate under the social media hashtag: #PantsuitNation. They were all over Facebook too as they projected the pantsuit as a symbol of Hillary Clinton’s messages: power, equality and a level playing field. Conservative and formal in her pantsuit, Hillary Clinton cut the image of a professional who could hold her own a in a room full of male politicians. She thus highlighted the connection between psychology and clothing. In 2020, we saw this on display again with the emergence of Kamala Harris as first female, first Asian, and first Black woman Vice President of the United States. On inauguration day, January 20, 2021, her admirers also wore her signature pearl necklace - not just a piece of jewelry, but a symbol of power, sisterhood and solidarity. They also created a Facebook page: “Wear Pearls on January 20, 2021”.  In the last week, the new WTO DG has had her own costume moment.

Ngozi Okonjo Iweala is famous for her signature costume: the African wax two-piece attire, also known as “Ankara” capped with a head tie popularly known as “gele” in the South West of Nigeria. She probably in her younger days wore the regular female attires, pantsuit, skirts and blouses, but since her days as Nigeria’s Minister of Finance under the Obasanjo administration, Nigerians cannot remember seeing her in official capacity in anything other than the Ankara dress and gele. The head tie is a major fashion statement among African women, and the usual styles are quite flamboyant. Tying the gele in itself is an art. a thriving small-scale enterprise exists around it. Many men and women earn a living from helping to tie the gele, in very artistic. creative styles, the most striking for me being the multi-deck, layered, skyscraper type, or those types that are meant to make onlookers turn their heads to take a double look. Compared to other fabrics, the African wax is considered cheap because it comes in various shades of affordable grades, often difficult to distinguish in terms of cost or class by simply looking at it. In the early 2000s, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala adopted the African wax as her formal wear to official functions. Her adopted head tie style, which she said she stumbled upon by mistake, not knowing how to tie the gele properly, was often the butt of jokes – a flat wrap- around, strewn together bunch of cloth, like a male cap, with a knot at the back, what Yoruba women refer to as “osuka”. I don’t know the English word for that, sorry. In this signature two-piece, African wax costume, and the accidental gele, she made a powerful statement about simplicity, identity, authenticity and power. This same costume has now made it to the mainstream. It is hilariously remarkable.

On February 15, 2021, Ms Temi Giwa-Tubosun (@temite) wrote on Twitter: “Ladies and Gentlemen, it’s tomorrow! #NOIgoestoWTO. We are giving away N100k to the best dressed! Dress up like NOI and send her a message of support as she goes to WTO!” This caught on like wildfire, and was shared under different hashtags: #AnkaraArmy, #NgozigoestoWTO, #BeLikeNgoziChallenge and #JustlikeNgozi. The Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala Ankara skirt and blouse soon became ubiquitous on all social media platforms, with the gele of course tied in the same manner, and some of the participants adding the NOI eye-glasses for effect. The interesting part of it is that some men actually joined. In Africa, at least in our part of it, it is unusual for a man to tie the gele, such an appearance could be interpreted as a sign of malady. But her male fans could not be bothered. They joined the women and the young ladies. I do not know when the winner of the prize was announced or who the winner is. I have not bothered to find out. We were all so consumed with the Ngozi-mania, the celebration and the euphoria, it did not matter who won and who did not.

My favourite entry, however, was posted by Tolulope Adeleru-Balogun (@tolulopeab} showing her daughter dressed like NOI, head to toe, tipping down her eye-glasses imitatively as she said: “Congratulations, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.” The #NOIchallenge will continue as promised on March 1, the day Ngozi goes to the WTO.  If the Swiss authorities would be willing to give out visas as requested, to every African, many will follow Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala to the WTO to announce her arrival!  They should therefore be prepared for a colourful Ngonization of the WTO headquarters because as the saying goes, “Naija no dey carry last”. One more thing: the symbolism of it all is inspirational.  

Despite the many achievements, historical and contemporary, of the African woman, there are still many institutional, religious and cultural barriers, very resilient and damaging, which limit the potential of the African girl-child and woman. This dilemma has been well written about in literature, as in Tsisi Dangarembga’s Nervous Conditions, Buchi Emecheta’s The Slave, Second Class Citizen and The Bride Price.  Add Zulu Sofola’s Wedlock of the Gods; in politics as in the discrimination and marginalization of women in public life despite years of rhetoric about affirmative action; in business and governance as evidenced in continuing inferiorization and commoditization of the African woman and the wanton feminization of poverty. The likes of Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala shattered the glass ceiling long ago. She is a successful career person, a mother, a community leader and an international citizen, who inspires other Africans with how she has successfully managed to balance many goals. Many parents want their daughters and sons to be like her.

One Swedish newspaper however, referred to her as a “grandmother”: “This Grandmother will become the boss of the WTO” (Luzerner Zeitung): How sexist and crass! The reference to her feminism and reproductive status is entirely misplaced. They make it sound as if she is going to the WTO to baby sit: what Igbos in Nigeria’s South East call “Omu Ngwo”. But come to think of it: perhaps that is exactly what the WTO needs: a grandmother’s instincts to straighten an institution that some bad, errant boys have spoiled over the years. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala says she is going there with “clear eyes and ears.” We are beginning to see the signs. She is going to the WTO to save the organization, and the rest of the world. Africans have high expectations too. What does her new status mean for Africa, Nigeria and African trade in the context of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AFCTA), beyond the symbolism of her African-ness?

She goes to Geneva as an African but as a global leader and citizen. And there is a lot to do. She has given a signal of what to expect with her initial statement about the threat posed to internationalism by “vaccine nationalism”. She says “no one is safe until everyone is safe.” That is precisely the kind of clarity that the world needs right now

Lawyer and political activist, Dele Farotimi, claims that his aim was to organise a well-planned and calculated demonstration at the Lekki toll gate.

The decision made by Justice Doris Okwuobi's panel regarding the Lekki Toll Gate has become the focal point of the #OccupyLekki demonstration.

In an exclusive interview with Reuben Abati on City Talks, which was closely monitored by Abati Media on February 13, 2021, Farotimi made a bold statement. He expressed his intention to bring the operation of the Lekki toll gate to a complete standstill when they attempt to resume operations.

As per his statement, it appears that the plan is to drive the cars up to the toll gate and park them there on a daily basis. This action is expected to result in their arrest, but it seems to be a deliberate move to disrupt operations at the toll gate.

According to the source, they had meticulously planned to prevent the toll gate from starting operations by investing a significant amount of time in precision every day.

According to Farotimi, the toll gate appears to exclusively benefit private individuals, potentially leading to their enrichment.

According to the Advocate and Solicitor, there seems to be a sense of discontent among the residents of Lekki who are paying tolls. The reason behind this discontentment, as stated by the Advocate and Solicitor, is not because these individuals are wealthy, but rather due to other underlying factors that warrant further investigation.

He declared, "We will reveal the identities of those involved when the appropriate moment arrives."

Farotimi claims that the residents of Lekki are well aware of the malevolent forces at play and have made a collective decision to protest against the reopening of the toll gate.

According to the individual, they were able to drive without experiencing the usual frustrating traffic congestion that plagues their daily commute.

The claim made is that Lateef Kayode Jankande constructed roads over three decades ago that have never been subjected to tolling. It appears that a group of individuals who have recently taken positions within the government are pushing for the implementation of tolls on a particular matter. The matter in question has been in existence for 21 years and has not previously been subject to tolls. Further investigation is needed to determine the motivations behind this push for tolls.

Farotimi has made a statement regarding the reopening of the Lekki Toll Gate, stating that there will be resistance.

On Sunday, February 14, the Nigerian Presidency in a statement signed by spokesman Garba Shehu reportedly affirmed that President Muhammadu Buhari is determined to ensure the protection of all religious and ethnic groups in the country, whether majority or minority, “in line with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.” The statement added that the government “will not allow any ethnic or religious group to stoke up hatred and violence against other groups.” As if to give effect to this, the office of the National Security Adviser (NSA) announced that the NSA, Major General Mohammed Monguno, was scheduled to meet with seven Governors of the North Western part of the country on Monday, February 15 as part of a “whole-of -government and whole-of-society” approach to address the recent spike in cases of insecurity across the country. The NSA and other security chiefs agreed on a series of Town Hall Meetings, to assess the national security situation, generate feedback, and build a synchronization framework with various stakeholders in order to find a pathway to sustainable peace and stability.

It all sounds so good, except that it is also so eerily familiar and formulaic. The Presidency needs not  issue a statement to remind us that the Buhari administration will protect all of us, whether we are from the majority or minority stock, or adherents of whatever faith. This is the primary responsibility of government in the first place. It is the job that President Buhari signed up to as spelled out in Section 14 (2)(b) of the same 1999 Constitution. The President swore to uphold this Constitution, and in Section 5 thereof and elsewhere, he is given enormous powers to so act and to recruit persons and deploy resources in pursuit of the directive principles in Chapter Two. The fact that the Presidency needs to restate its commitment to its own primary assignment, five years after the fact, is an indication of how there has been a gross omission in this regard.

In 2015, ahead of the first Presidential election that brought this government to power, the Buhari campaigners argued that he was the best man for the job, if not for any other reason, he, being a former military chief will know what to do, to address the crisis of terrorism, especially in the North East, and ensure stability across the country.  At the time, Boko Haram and the al Qaeda forces seeking to destabilize Nigeria were at the peak of their offensive. Many Nigerians embraced the Buhari option as the most attractive proposition: the war-tested General and military tactician whose very presence in power was expected to instill fear in the enemies of the state. But things have not turned out that way, as expected. If the dominant security challenge in 2015 was Boko Haram, the security situation in Nigeria since then has worsened.

Despite the government’s assurance that Boko Haram had been “decimated” or “technically defeated”, we all saw the terrorists gaining more in audacity and ferocity, with soldiers fleeing from the battle-front out of frustration, mocking their commanders, and protesting about their poor conditions of deployment. Nigerians thought the President should change his Service Chiefs, to inject fresh blood, but public opinion in that regard was ignored until the President finally decided to let them go on January 26, 2021. While the team of Service Chiefs led by General Abayomi Olonisakin remained in charge, the country had to face other challenges on other fronts in the shape of banditry, kidnapping, wanton criminality, ethnic conflicts, farmers-herders conflicts, and attacks on places of religious worship. Ordinarily, it was the duty of the Nigeria Police Force to protect lives and properties within the country, but the police were so disorganized, so poorly equipped, they couldn’t handle the situation.

Nigeria ended up deploying soldiers to do police work. They didn’t do much better. The Nigerian military was over-stretched, from fighting terrorists and insurgents in the North East to police check point assignments in the South South and South East. Somehow, everything got muddled up. The same security problems that the Buhari administration set out to resolve merely increased. In a cancerous manner, they metastasized.  Pro-government campaigners would argue that insecurity in Nigeria is being fueled by “fifth columnists” and the “political opposition” even when they have no concrete evidence to support their claims. Anti-government analysts would rather argue that Nigeria has become insecure because the government failed to do what is right, which is to simply deliver on its constitutional mandate – the same mandate that the Presidential Villa has now suddenly re-discovered!  When the people cried out that the Boko Haram was getting stronger and bolder, they were told the terrorists had been “technically defeated.” The Federal Government even brandished a seized Boko Haram flag. The terrorists have since made another one! When Governors in the North West later pointed out that the madness had spread from the East to the West, they were told that they were the Chief Security Officers of their states and should stop whining, even when they were not so empowered. The poor Governors of the North West decided to negotiate with the terrorists and gave them money but it turned out the criminals were not willing to sell their struggle. The curse of violence, crime and banditry soon spread from the North to the Middle Belt. One or two Governors wept openly. They were told to wipe their tears and expect a miracle. No miracle came.

By the time the crisis settled down in the Middle and Central parts of Nigeria, it had now taken on a primordial dimension: Muslim vs Christian; farmers vs herders. Religion and ethnicity are the two most divisive factors in Nigeria. Both have helped to expand the country’s fault lines in the last five years - negatively and dangerously. In the Middle Belt and Southern Kaduna, there were complaints about churches that were set ablaze. Communities were attacked and the security agencies were accused of looking the other way, in a striking demonstration of complicity, criminal negligence and indifference. Religious leaders including priests were abducted and killed. The major blame for the mayhem was heaped on the head of one major ethnic group: the Fulani. It is the seeming failure of the state to check banditry and other acts of impunity that has promoted the politics of ethnic profiling, and the consequential demonization of the Fulani.

The crisis soon crossed the River Niger and found another location in the South East. With a group known as the Independent People of Biafra (IPOB) and its leader Nnamdi Kanu, young Igbos found a rallying point for their grievances against the Nigerian state and the place of the Igbo in its geo-politics. Young Igbos asked Northerners to stay in their North. They did not want any cattle to be grazed on Igbo soil. But rather than treat the delicate situation with the caution that was required, the Federal Government deployed soldiers to the South East. Operation Egwu Eke (Python Dance) I and II. Operation Atilowgu Udo. The confrontation that followed between state agents and IPOB was like setting the roof of the house on fire. On the question of cattle grazing, government added further petrol to the raging fire when it decided to set up a National Livestock Transformation Plan which a livestock settlement programme  called RUGA as its main offer. This merely ignited further division in the country, and widened the gap between North and South.

It did not take long before the crisis crossed the Niger again, this time to the Western part of Nigeria. The drummers of hate had taken over the beat and the main tune that they offered was the rhythm of hate. The drummers have been in frenzy, the dancers are drunk and yet no one can talk to the other because the music is in people’s heads throwing them into different patterns of spatial paroxysm. In the South East, the governors and the people have objected loudly to cattle grazing in their region. They have a group called the Eastern Security Network (ESN), to enforce this, very much like the Amotekun in the South West. In the North, the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) accuses President Buhari of setting the country on fire. They are asking him to ensure that all Nigerians, wherever they may be, are protected. The Northern Youths Council of Nigeria has called on the Northern Governors to evacuate Northerners from the South. They want Sunday Igboho, one of the by-products of the latest crisis, declared a terrorist. But will his people agree? Among the Yoruba, Sunday Igboho, the de facto Generalissimo of the Yoruba, is considered a very courageous man, Nobody knows exactly what he does for a living, but he is a respected able-bodied man, who stepped forward when it mattered most for his people.

This is the way Nigeria is at the moment. Every group nurtures and grows its own Igboho: Men who can lead them to battle. The problem is that this does not advance the cause of unity. Last Saturday at Shasha market in Ibadan, there was wanton destruction just because a Fulani trader and a pregnant Yoruba woman had a minor disagreement. In Ogun state, in the Yewa Division, Yoruba villages have been attacked. In some other Yoruba towns, traditional rulers have been abducted and killed. Can you imagine a Southerner killing a Northern Emir?   

Nigerians have lived together for centuries. Virtually every major town has a Sabongari where other ethnic groups live. The Fulani have interacted with the people of the South for more than a century. There are Southerners whose ancestors have also lived in the North almost forever. The people of Nigeria have thus shared history and culture across generations, but when government fails to promote the values that bind us together, language, ethnicity, and geography become tools of conflict.  It must be noted that no ethnic group targeted the Hausa-Fulani when Southerners were Presidents of Nigeria between 1999- 2015. Nobody did so either during the Yar’Adua administration. Certainly not in the kind of manner we now see. So what happened? Why is it that all of a sudden the friendly Northerner who has always been a partner of the Southerner has suddenly become a person to be suspected? Why should any group feel superior to the other or become a problem to the other just because his “kinsman” is in power?  I have seen some videos in circulation showing the scope of the division among the people.

What we are facing is frightening. It is shocking. It is disturbing. Yorubaland is divided. The traditional rulers are even fighting among themselves. The country’s only Nobel Laureate is threatening to become a mai suya should any herd of cattle trespass across his compound again. In Ogun, Ondo, Oyo and elsewhere, a thousand Igbohos are springing up, determined to defend their region. Igbos have served notice that they are no cowards on the battlefield. The North is not afraid either. How did we get here? It wasn’t nearly as bad in 1966? Can we have a nation if every group is mouthing the rhetoric of violence and threatening the worst possible?

No, and that is why it is not enough for the President to issue a statement telling us what we already know: that it is his job to make Nigeria safe. Is the appropriate response the Town Hall meetings being organized by the National Security Adviser. I have nothing against dialogue. The office of the NSA can gather a lot of useful intelligence through its “whole-of-government” and “whole-of-society approach” but this may not go far enough. The Federal Government needs to take pro-active steps to compel the drummers of hate to drop their sticks.  The way they are beating those drums, they may soon tear them apart, and the drunken dancers may graduate from their bibulousness to psychosis. What balm can government apply? Government needs to change the narrative. This is the right time to give the people something to occupy them, an assignment that will offer them hope, an opportunity to draw them back into the fold. Nothing keeps Nigerians more engaged than the opportunity to talk about Nigeria and its future. This will require a more structured platform than Town Hall meetings.

I therefore recommend that whereas the Buhari government may not like the idea of a National Conference, whereas it set aside the findings of the 2014 National Political Conference, and whereas this same government has shown much disregard for public opinion, the way forward lies in precisely that same direction. The attempt to suppress the people’s opinion or disregard it is in part the catalyst for the state of anomie in which the country has found itself. The Buhari administration needs to convene forthwith, a Conference of the Nigerian People. It can be given any other label: Conference of National Reconciliation, Conference of National Unity and Reconciliation, Conference of National Peace and Unity… Such a Conference will take the debate off the streets. It will rescue the Nigerian debate from the hands of Sunday Igboho, Nnamdi Kanu and their followers. Is it not disturbing enough that even senior lawyers and Professors now quote Kanu and Igboho as national philosophers? The people should be tired of living a lie. If President Buhari really wants to make a difference, he must provide an opportunity for a re-tabling and re-negotiation of the key issues at the heart of the Nigerian question: restructuring, federalism, constitutional review, state police, derivation, governance… 

The rancor that occurred, Saturday, February 6, at the sitting of the Lagos State Judicial Panel of Inquiry investigating the shootings and alleged killings at the Lekki Toll gate in Lagos in October 2020, in addition to reported cases of police brutality is most unfortunate and disturbing. It will be recalled that the clampdown on protesters at the Lekki Toll Gate, the widespread mayhem that followed, in the shape of attacks on police men and police stations, the assault on warehouses where COVID-19 palliatives had been detained by unconscionable politicians, the attack on homes and businesses of both politicians and innocent persons, in general,  the needless loss of lives - attracted mass outrage. 

A meeting comprising the 36 state Governors, the FCT Minister, the Inspector General of Police and the Human Rights Commission  in October 2020, chaired by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo resolved at the time that all state governments should set up panels of inquiry and organize public hearings to establish the truth and ensure that justice was done, and victims duly compensated. Most states promised to set up the panels of inquiry, 29 did eventually, but some did not. As at January 30, 2021, the following states: Borno, Jigawa, Kano, Kebbi, Sokoto, Yobe and Zamfara had refused to set up any panel of  inquiry. Kogi state announced that it had also constituted a panel of inquiry, but that panel has not met for even five minutes to date. 

In some of the states where the panels exist and have been sitting: Plateau, Nasarawa, Kaduna, Ekiti, Ogun, Edo, Ondo, Rivers, Delta, Cross River, Abia, Bayelsa, Anambra and the Federal Capital Territory, the pace of work has been rather slow and inconsistent.  In Oyo State, the panel commenced sitting in January 2021, two months after its inauguration! The panels in Niger State, Katsina, and Rivers have since concluded sitting.  But of all the states, Lagos State has been the most responsive, the most active, and one of the very first states to commit to doing a thorough job of ensuring justice and establishing the truth. The nine-member Lagos Panel of Inquiry and Restitution, as announced, was set up on October 16, 2020. Justice Doris Okuwobi (rtd) was named Chair of the Panel. It began sitting on Tuesday, October 27, 2020. The Okuwobi panel has received more coverage than any other panel in the country, perhaps because of its consistency, its proximity to the Lagos-Ibadan media, the international media as well, and the fact of the Lekki Toll Gate being the epicentre of the #ENDSARS protests.    

In October 2020, the Lekki Toll gate and its satellite, the Ikoyi Bridge Toll gate managed by the same company, the Lekki Concession Company (LCC) were the primary  locations of the protest against police brutality in Nigeria, with specific focus on the notorious Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS). The protests soon spread to other parts of the country, even if the Northern parts of the country adopted another label and were significantly different in orientation from the protests in the South. Nigeria’s Southern protesters talked about an end to police brutality. Northern youths who would later be joined by Governors of the North and traditional rulers called for an end to insecurity. Both groups were linked by a common thread – the crisis of insecurity in Nigeria, the failure of the security agencies and the urgent need for government to deliver on its mandate under Section 14(2) (b ) of the 1999 Constitution, to wit: the responsibility to protect the people and ensure their welfare. Nigeria thus found itself in the grips of a movement: an organized, but decentralized rebellion against the Nigerian state and its ineffectuality, more desperate than the youth protests of 1962 against the Anglo-Nigerian Defence Pact and far more incendiary than the Ali-Must-Go-Protests of 1978. It was youth revolt in ebullition against mis-governance, bad politics, poor leadership and elite greed. The youths had five specific demands. The battle was fought on the streets and social media. The youths called for reform. They demanded change. They even asked for better welfare for policemen.  But then everything went out of hand. 

The Nigerian Government’s expressed commitment to accede to the five demands and to investigate the reported killings and acts of inhumanity and ensure justice gave intimations of hope. In the course of its proceedings, the Lagos Panel of Inquiry offered useful details that kept that hope alive: all those stories about the number of persons that died or were shot, whether or not live bullets or blank bullets were used, how and why anyone asked for the deployment of soldiers to confront harmless, unarmed and defenceless protesters, and shoot in whatever direction, the role of the police, the state government, state officials… Every week, testimonies and revelations at the Lagos Panel of Inquiry provided useful insights. But all of a sudden, that panel is now in disarray, and that is what is disturbing. Last Saturday, it must have been common sense that retrained members of the panel from engaging in fisticuffs.  How sad 

But the signs of impending chaos were foreseeable. Earlier in the year,  the Nigerian Army stopped appearing before the panel. Army counsel disclosed that their mandate with their clients, that is the Nigerian Army, expired in November 2020 and the panel had been so informed. Justice Okuwobi however, affirmed the rights of the panel, appropriately under the Tribunals of Inquiry Act, and adjourned the date for the response of the Army to already issued summons to February 27. I am not too sure any soldier will show up to respond to those summons. After the embarrassment that the Nigerian Army has received with its testimonies over whether or not its officers used live bullets and killed persons at the Lekki Toll Gate, the military hierarchy may have opted for the option of decided contempt in the face of and away from the face of the panel, knowing of course, that the likely penalty may be inconsequential. 

To worsen matters, the Lagos Panel of Inquiry degenerated into near-chaos on Saturday, February 6, 2021. The source of confusion was the decision of the panel announced by five panel members, including Justice Okuwobi, to approve the re-opening of the Lekki and Ikoyi Bridge Toll Gates by their managers, the afore-mentioned LCC. Four members of the panel objected to this resolution and immediately made public their position in a now widely-circulated Dissenting Opinion signed by Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN. By the weekend, the same panel hitherto praised for being an exemplar, had become a divided house. The video of the proceedings that is in circulation is embarrassing to say the least. We saw  members of the panel having a shouting match. I do not want to re-hash the arguments: about whether or not a quorum was formed, the right of the civil society representatives to be in attendance and whether or not they were, the fact that a civil society member - Segun Awosanya (aka Segalink) is on the Chairperson’s side in the matter, and the reasonableness or not, of the dissenting quartet apparently led by Ebun Olu Adegboruwa SAN who has been accused of adopting tactics that would be considered strange in a Court of Appeal procedure even if the Okuwobi panel is quasi-judicial. The legal correctness of the proceedings of the panel, and the dissensions within would require a closer scrutiny of the facts to which we are not full seised but it is sufficient to express alarm about how a process that was meant to calm nerves and promote truth and reconciliation has now become a catalyst for conflict. By Monday morning, the matter before the Lagos Judicial Panel of Inquiry had spilled back onto the streets, with implications for public safety.

For, by the morning of Monday, February 8, a coordinated protest against the decision of the Lagos Panel of Inquiry to grant the Lekki Concession Company the permission to re-open its toll gates had gone viral on social media with such hashtags and banners as #RevolutionNow, #OccupyLekkiTollGate and a protest is purportedly planned for Saturday, February 13 at 7 am. The LCC had approached the Lagos Panel to ask for permission to resume operations. The two toll gates under its management have been shut down since October 2020.  The position of the dissenters  is that a reopening of the toll gates will compromise evidence and forensic analysis and hence, the status quo should be maintained until the work of the panel is concluded. The Okuwobi Five argued that the forensic investigation had been concluded and there was no justification to continue to shut LCC out of business indefinitely. Outside the panel,  those who want to #OccupyLekkiTollGate on February 13 are convinced that re-opening the toll gate will derail the course of justice. Whichever way you look at it, another Lekki Gate protest is not an encouraging prospect. The way the arguments are packaged on both sides, every proposition sounds and looks plausible and ominous. But I guess this is the time to advert our minds to a number of fundamental issues.  

One –in principle, the investigations and judicial inquiry emplaced by the state governments of Nigeria over the 2020 #EndSARS protests were meant to reassure the people and demonstrate government’s readiness to respond to popular yearnings. The Lagos Panel in particular had proved promising. Now, that it is divided, it is difficult to see how its objectives have not been compromised, and how this has not provided a bad example for other states where the panels have been slow and non-committal. Will the panel still be able to work as a team?   

Two - those who argue that the Lekki Toll Gate is a crime scene that should be left intact till the conclusion of the work of the panel may be missing the point. That toll gate is no longer a crime scene.  It was never treated as such. Elsewhere, crime scenes are preserved, cordoned off, to protect the integrity of evidence and investigations. This so-called crime scene was never protected. It was in fact subjected to a thorough clean up, and whatever was hidden was picked up by visiting inspectors and trespassers, including a certain camera, the content of which has not been disclosed.  Vehicles and motorists have been passing through, glad that they have not had to pay any tolls for more than three months. Whatever has not been established before now, may be difficult to prove again. The dissenters in the panel may have the legal right to hold a different opinion, but they risk being accused of sabotage and fuelling another round of protests.

Three- the Lekki Toll Gate is a public-private partnership scheme. The investors have to pay back loans, maintain the staff who have been kept at home for months, process insurance claims and fix the offices and infrastructure destroyed during the #EndSARS protests. But majorly, they are  paying a price for identity politics. Most of the protesters are angry in part, because of deep-seated suspicions about the ownership of the toll gate. Even in the absence of verifiable evidence, the Lekki Toll gate has become a symbol of power, oppression and graft in the eyes of many. Does it belong to the Lagos State Government or some oppressors? Whatever the truth is, the managers of the Lekki and Ikoyi Toll Gates have had to pay so much. They have lost money and time. They have been vilified. Their brand has been dragged in the mud. What if on top it all, they are truly innocent? How about their staff who have been jobless for months? Even in the worst of circumstances, the toll gates would still be re-opened anyway at some point.

Four – But will the re-opening sabotage the investigations? May be not. The US Congress was attacked by a domestic terrorist mob on January 6, 2021. Five persons died on that occasion. Congress has since re-opened and continued its work, but that has not stopped the investigations. What we are actually dealing with in our case, is a terrible lack of trust in the Nigerian process. Nobody trusts the government. The people would rather trust anybody who is willing and ready to attack the government or raise doubts about its methods. This alienation is self-inflicted by government itself. Here is an example: During the October 2020 #EndSARS protests, the Nigerian government promised to accept and address the five demands by Nigerian youths. But shortly after, the same government clamped down on the protesters. Bank accounts belonging to known leaders of the protests were frozen. The airports of Nigeria became a no-go-area for such persons.  Even now, the Central Bank of Nigeria’s decision to ban financial institutions from cryptocurrencies has been linked to an attempt to cut off financial oxygen for protests. Here is another example: the Governor of Lagos State was accused of lying to the public! The combination of these factors has ignited the anger of the average Nigerian youth again. The flame of that anger could result in an inferno that we do not need. The fire this time could be worse than the explosion last time. 

Five – will the Lagos panel of inquiry reverse itself because of the threat of a resumption of protest on February 13?  I doubt. But I worry more about the damage that may have been done to the Okuwobi panel. Nothing must be done to derail the work of this Panel of Inquiry. Its original mandate should be preserved: to investigate, to unmask the truth, to make recommendations that will ensure justice, and to ensure the compensation of victims. 

Nigeria lost so much last year. To shut down Lagos again and initiate another round of chaos is difficult to imagine. The security agencies, whatever the provocation, must not behave like goats this time around. The Lagos State Government must act and think wisely, must not tell lies, and take steps to prevent further trouble at the Lekki Toll Gate. 

Many Nigerians were understandably shocked, surprised, if not alarmed last week, when they suddenly heard the news that the President of Nigeria, Muhammadu Buhari had finally decided to relieve the service chiefs appointed in 2015 of their appointments. The popular response was couched in such phrases as “oh… at last... finally”, “better late than never” – general expressions of relief about a security team that many Nigerians concluded could not deliver on the President’s promise to make Nigeria a safer and better place for all or at best, tackle the menace of insurgency, terrorism and banditry. The Service Chiefs led by General Abayomi Olonisakin (Chief of Defence Staff) – Lt. General Tukur Ibrahim as Chief of Army Staff, Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Ibok Ekwe Ibas and Chief of Air Staff, Air Marshal Sadique Abubakar were generally considered inefficient and incompetent by many Nigerians. This has to be put in context. 

When President Muhammadu Buhari assumed office in 2015, and  during the Presidential elections that preceded his emergence, his managers sold him to the Nigerian electorate as a man who would put an end to Nigeria’s security woes especially in the North Eastern corridor where the Boko Haram and the Islamic State held sway. Buhari had been an Army General, a civil war veteran, a soldier.  He talked about fighting corruption and fixing the economy, but his unique and strongest selling point was the proposition that he would address the country’s security challenges. Even his most ardent critics had great expectations in that regard. He appointed Olonisakin and co. and gave them the assignment of stamping out terrorism and insurgency.  But this would soon turn out to be a major source of frustration for Nigerians. Rather than abate, insecurity worsened. 

It became cancerous. Every measure that was introduced only brought more problems, and the cancer of terrorism assumed new forms, mestasizing, mutating like corona virus, from terrorism to banditry, worsening insurgency, kidnapping, communal strife, and open madness on the part of criminals who were determined to sabotage the country. The government and the service chiefs adopted the strategy of telling Nigerians that the Boko Haram had been “technically defeated”. Later, the narrative was that they had been “degraded” or “decimated”. This was sustained by unending public perception management schemes that amounted to nothing more than motion without movement, empty rhetoric and  the overt politicization of military strategy. More military operations were launched in the last five years than at any other time in Nigerian history, including the Nigerian civil war: These include Operation Lafiya Dole, Operation Crocodile Smile I and II, Operation Python Dance I and II, Operation Sharan Daji, Operation Harbin Kunama I and II, Operation Dokaji, Operation Egwu Eke, Operation Karamin Goro, Operation Ayem Akpatuma, Operation Last Hold, Operation Ugwu Eke, I – III, Operation Cat Race, Operation Positive Identification,  Operation Atilogwu, Operation Rattle Snake, Operation Ruwan Wuta I- III… In all, there were over 40 such Operations under the watch of General Abayomi Gabriel Olonisakin and his team. Whoever was in charge of the naming of the Operations enjoyed himself so much, there was nearly no animal in the forest that he didn’t blackmail as part of the government’s attempt to find a solution to the crisis of insurgency in the country. I must say this though: they cleverly managed to avoid naming an Operation after the Tortoise! The Nigerian military even set up what it called “Super Camps”. The truth is that there was nothing “Super” about those camps.

Nigerians saw through it all. They saw images of killings and insecurity, and waste and wanton destruction. They saw Governors like Professor Babagana Zulum of Borno State openly challenging the Nigerian Army for adding to the people’s woes. In the Middle Belt, the Governors cried out for help. In other parts of the country, herdsmen wreaked havoc as they destroyed farms, lives and livelihoods. In the South East, the Nigerian Army was labelled an army of terrorists. Within the military itself, the stories were sordid. In the course of five years, many soldiers deserted the war-front. In one famous case, a soldier said he was tired of service and he would rather go and take up a traditional rulership position! At the war front, soldiers reportedly fled in the face of superior Boko Haram fire-power. Generals complained about the realization that terrorists fighting the Nigerian state had better equipment and appeared more motivated than Nigerian troops. The rank and file recorded videos in which they abused their Commanders and Generals. In another notable video, a General was recorded complaining about the weakness of the Nigerian Army. Nobody is even sure how many soldiers Nigeria has. 

For five years, the same Nigerian military that had issues at the battle-front, was very vocal on social media. At a point, I was tempted to think that the Nigerian military was more of a social media army rather than  a critical force on the battle-field. You only needed to make a critical comment and their trolls would descend on you, with lies and blackmail. As a form of military strategy, that was a terrible demonstration of sloppiness and I hope the first thing that the new Army Chiefs would do is to get rid of the loafers in charge of military communications who have reduced anti-insurgency operations to Twitter tittle-tattle. The Nigerian Army’s comeuppance came with the #EndSARS protest of October 2020, and the abduction of the Kankara Boys. Before then, Nigerians, stupefied, overwhelmed, and bewildered, had called on President Muhammadu Buhari to change his security team. From the groundnut seller by the roadside, to leaders of socio-political and cultural groups, and the two Houses of the National Assembly, Nigerians demanded that the security chiefs should be sacked. The people wanted new ideas. They talked about a new security architecture – in fact that phrase became a cliché as every Nigerian became a security sector bricklayer. It was up to the President to listen and act. He alone has the power to hire and fire. The Constitution gives him broad powers to choose his own team as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. Now and then, the President would invite the Security Chiefs and give them “marching orders”. Now and then, the Presidency assured Nigerians of the determination of the government to put an end to terrorism and impunity.  The statements were so frequent, so formulaic, the people no longer thought anything of them. I have been accused of putting in place a Rapid Response, automatic answer Robot in the Presidency when I led the Presidency’s Communications team. My critics say so. I plead not guilty. 

And so, in the statement announcing the exit of General Olonisakin as Chief of Defence Staff along with other Service Chiefs, we were told that the President had accepted their offer of resignation and retirement. Truth is they were fired. Sacked! As recently as November 2020, the President had expressed confidence in their abilities. For 5 years, he kept them beyond their retirement, exit date.  And he didn’t disgrace them out of office though. He talked about their “overwhelming achievements”. “Overwhelming” is a two-sided word. It can be positive or negative. Was the President “overwhelmed” by the performance of the service chiefs in a positive sense? Were the people of Nigeria, overwhelmed by their under-performance? We have it on record that during the handing-over ceremonies last week, former Chief of Defence Staff, Abayomi Gabriel Olonisakin said that under his watch, the Nigerian military rescued 20 out of 26 Local Governments that had been taken over by the Boko Haram. The then Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai was also quoted as saying he transformed military operations and improved professionalism in the military. I think the former Service Chiefs are in a hurry to assess themselves and control the narrative. They should relax. They should  learn to enjoy their retirement. They have been to the war-front and back. Many who started the journey with them died at the battle-field, but they got to the very top and have been pulled out of service alive. They are going home in one piece. Not every soldier enjoys such grace. Concerning their performance, they should leave that to us, the Nigerian people, history and posterity to judge. 

They have the option of writing their memoirs, of course, when public service rules permit, and they can tell us all the stories on earth, including that undisclosed story about how Lt. Gen. Tukur Buratai was almost sacked by President Olusegun Obasanjo 21 years ago, when he was just a Major in the Army. Buratai made it to the very top, spent 40 years in the Army, but as he handed over the flag to his successor – Major Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru, the true irony of the moment was lost on him. He talked about Obasanjo. He missed the irony of the moment.  In 2017, he had also tried to push Major General Ibrahim Attahiru out of the Nigerian Army. The guy survived. He took the flag from him. How truly ironic! 

But it is not enough to move the flag from one pair of hands to another. Nigerians have very strong expectations. They expect that the change of personnel will bring new dynamism and better results. There is now a new team in place: Maj. Gen. Lucky Irabor as Chief of Defence Staff, Maj. Gen. Ibrahim Attahiru as Chief of Army Staff,  Rear Admiral Awwal Gambo as Chief of Navy Staff,  and Air Vice Marshal Isiaka Amao as Chief of Air Staff. I am told that some rigour went into the selection of this new team. Okay. I am also told they are tested hands within the system. We can all see that. They are also friends who may not have any problem working together. I hope so.  When they met with the President last week, Lucky Irabor was reported as having said that he and his team are determined to “add value”.   

And as it happened, on Sunday, January 31, Irabor and his team went on a visit to Borno State and they engaged with stakeholder-communities. Irabor must have been watching Western movies, and what it means to “hit the ground running”. Good James Bond move! Except that in this matter, Nigerians are not looking for actors and movie addicts. They want action and real performance. This  is an  important assignment  and I assume we do not need to give Irabor and co a tutorial on the politics of power seeing that they have paid their own dues in their chosen line of work. President Buhari says they must pay attention to the welfare of the rank and file. We have seen videos of Navy and Army rank and file celebrating the exit of former Service Chiefs. Those videos may have been isolated, sponsored, video-shopped attempts at blackmail. But the new Service Chiefs must be attentive to their environment. They cannot make any difference if they are leading a demoralized, trigger-happy, undisciplined and unprofessional  military that is likely to take to its heels in the face of Boko Haram only to escape to the nearest pepper-soup joint or short-time joint! Nigeria deserves a disciplined military, that is well-motivated, well equipped and energized to deliver on its constitutional mandate. 

The public perception of the Nigerian Army has been created by the Army itself: Do you expect anyone to respect soldiers who discredit their own institution? Soldiers who lie openly to the people? Generals who run away from the war-front? Military commands that spend more time on twitter, wasting resources on mentally challenged trolls, fighting ghost enemies? Major-General Irabor needs to change the orientation of the Nigerian Army. We also need to know the actual capability of the Nigerian military? If we were to put up a fighting machine tomorrow to confront any form of external aggression, do we have the wherewithal? Irabor and his team must start with a very honest audit.     

The military must also  withdraw from police work. This was a shameful legacy from the recent past. It got so bad Nigerian soldiers joined the police at checkpoints to extort money and oppress citizens, especially vulnerable women. If the Nigerian Police is weak, and yes it is, the Nigerian government must address that challenge and make the institution more credible and useful. For General Irabor and his team, there is  also the unresolved matter of the military’s refusal to appear henceforth before the judicial panel of inquiry on the #EndSARS protests in Lagos. Justice Doris Okuwobi, Chairperson of the panel, has given the Nigerian Army a new date of February 27 to respond to already served summons.  Maj. Gen. Irabor should look into that and make it clear that the Nigerian military is not above the laws of Nigeria!  Finally, President Muhammadu Buhari has one more Service Chief to appoint: the Inspector General of Police as the incumbent IGP Muhammed Adamu ended his tenure on Monday, February 1. He must choose wisely. We wait. We watch.  

In the past week, in the South Western part of Nigeria, we have been treated to stories of conflicts in Ondo and Oyo States between herdsmen, identified as Fulani, and the Yoruba owners of indigenous communities. In Ondo state, the issue at stake is the conversion of the state’s forest reserves into a criminal space by herdsmen who violate the integrity of the reserves and a hide-out for kidnaping, extortion and killings. Governor Rotimi Akeredolu affirming his powers as the Chief Security Officer of the state gave a seven-day ultimatum to the herdsmen in the forest reserves to vacate the place immediately. He also directed that the open grazing of cattle on main roads and within the city has been outlawed. The Governor further asked for a proper registration of all herdsmen within the state. Governor Akeredolu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria has been praised for his courage and assertiveness by Yoruba socio-cultural groups and leaders of thought. He has been condemned by groups and stakeholders from the North of Nigeria who classify his objection as a case of ethnic cleansing. The Governor insists however, that his directive is based on security considerations. His ultimatum expired yesterday, the same day that a meeting of South West Governors, their counterparts from Kebbi and Jigawa, and the leadership of the Miyetti Allah Cattle Breeders Association of Nigeria (MACBAN) was summoned by the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, to chart a path for peace and reconciliation. 

In neighbouring Oyo State, the people of the South West were faced with a similar situation in areas identified as Ibarapa East, Ibarapa North, Igangan and the whole of the Oke Ogun area. Whereas in Ondo State, the Governor led the protest against the menace of the so-called Fulani herdsmen, in Oyo State the state Governor, Seyi Makinde sounded more accommodating.  Despite reports of wanton killings and destruction by herdsmen in parts of the state, the loss of valuable lives and properties, the Oyo State Governor chose to toe a safe, acquiescent path. He ignored the yearnings of those who asked the government – state and Federal- to stop the killings and come to the people’s rescue. He in fact was on record as having asked the authorities to arrest and sanction anyone who raised any objections to the situation in the troubled parts of the state. With the state Chief Security Officer, from whom empathy and action was expected, behaving in such manner, the people of Oyo State found solace in a certain Chief Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Sunday Igboho. Igboho is from Oyo state, precisely from a community known as Igboho. He grew up in the Modakeke part of Ile-Ife. He was reportedly involved in the intra-ethnic conflict between Ife and Modakeke in the 90s, as a warrior on the Modakeke side. Over the years, he acquired quite a reputation as a very powerful man. His critics describe him as an able-bodied man for politicians as he once was for Alhaji Rasheed Ladoja, the bi-lingual former Governor of Oyo State, or they dismiss him as a land-grabber, a label he vehemently denies.  Igboho’s admirers regard him as an ethnic patriot, a defender of the Yoruba nation, a man of justice, an activist and a freedom fighter, who has chosen to stand up for the rights of the oppressed. 

The Igboho phenomenon deserves some close attention. Sunday Igboho showed up in the fight against criminal herdsmen in Oyo State because of the shocking absence of leadership. The state Governor failed to defend the people’s interest. He did not stand up to the truth like Governor Akeredolu of Ondo state. He provided a vacuum which a Sunday Igboho decided to fill. The failure of leadership from the right quarters has its consequences and this is what we are seeing in Oyo State. In Ondo state, there may be other Sunday Igbohos, with as much fire in their bellies, but they did not step forward in a similar fashion, because they could see the man they voted into power making an effort to put the people’s interest first. Akeredolu was challenged by the Federal Government, indeed the Presidency in a statement through Garba Shehu, Presidential spokesman,  tried to teach the Ondo Governor some elementary Constitutional Law. This was widely interpreted as an attempt by the Buhari Presidency to defend Fulani interests. Akeredolu stood his ground. In so doing, he got broad support, from lawyers, community leaders and major Yoruba stakeholders. By the time his one-week ultimatum to those who had seized control of the Ondo forest reserves expired yesterday, the Oodua People’s Congress (OPC) already offered its services to help enforce the Governor’s directives. Governor Makinde may well in the long run pay a heavy political price for his apparent cowardly mishandling of the current crisis in his state. He is perhaps being careful, but there are certain moments that demand sincerity. He failed the test. 

Sunday Igboho took full advantage of the situation. On his own, he visited Igangan and Ibarapa East Local Government Area, without any governmental authority behind him. He had the support of the youths of the area, and also the backing of traditional rulers, one of whom had to pay a ransom to get his son released by kidnappers. Igboho was reportedly shot at, but bullets we were told could not penetrate his heavily fortified body. An axe was raised against him, but again, they said it had no effect. He confronted the Seriki Fulani in the community, and asked him to produce the herdsmen who were terrorizing the people so the law could take its course. He gave a seven-day ultimatum. If the criminals could not be produced, he expected the Fulani community to leave the territory. And he promised to return in seven days. And he did. His demands were not met. The result was mayhem. The home of the Seriki Fulani was set ablaze. His vehicles were torched. He and his family ran into the bush. The Seriki is said to have fled all the way to Ogun State, where we are told a group of herdsmen backed by the military recently lined up recalcitrant traditional rulers and gave them the beating of their lives, for having the audacity to say they do not want Fulani herdsmen in their community. Igboho, the latest strong man in Yoruba politics is a product of myth, history and the failure of the Nigerian state. 

How on earth would any individual openly boast that nobody, not the Governor of the state, not the Inspector General of Police not even the state Commissioner of Police can arrest him, and get way with the temerity?  During the weekend, Garba Shehu using the platform of the Presidency, announced that the Inspector General of Police had ordered the arrest of Sunday Igboho.  Igboho laughed it off. He said he was waiting for anyone to dare arrest him. In the end, nobody did. In fact, the Oyo State Commissioner of Police who should have carried out the directive, ended up having a meeting with Sunday Igboho! He proved untouchable. This merely deepened his myth. The man and his supporters talk about Igboho’s formidable spiritual prowess. He even wears a coat of amulets to Church. He can command guns to appear and disappear at will.  Nobody knows how much of that is true or not, but Igboho has managed to capture the public imagination. He won’t be the first of his type. When the state fails the people, people like Igboho emerge to provide leadership. He is again a symbol of the mistrust at the heart of the Nigerian arrangement: like Isaac Adaka Boro in the Niger Delta in the 1960s, Odumegwu Ojukwu defending the interest of the Igbos  in 1967 and beyond, Ken Saro-Wiwa leading Ogoni nationalism and the cause of environmental justice in the 90s, Dr. Frederick Fashehun and Ganiyu Adams of the Oodua People’s Congress (OPC), Nnamdi Kanu of the Independent People of Biafra (IPOB), and all the aggrieved persons from Southern Kaduna the Middle Belt, Adamawa and elsewhere who believe that they have been served badly  by Nigeria, for both ethnic and religious reasons. 

Of all the many ills that afflict Nigeria, the most prominent recently has been the conflict between indigenes and settlers, and specifically, between pastoralists and farmers, and the animosity between both over land and access to resources. It is an old, historical problem tied to ethnicity, religion, the politics of space and primordial sentiments. This conflict has caused so much mayhem in the past, exactly at those moments when the state was complicit in promoting one side against the other, and when the politics of proximity was privileged over the national interest or the objectives of peace and stability. It is a double-edged sword, for those who end up playing the politics of proximity end up short-changing their own people. The Fulani question which is now being played up is related to this. The people of Fulani stock have lived across Nigeria, in different communities for more than a century. Cattle rearing is not new. Cattle herders have lived amongst other Nigerians for as long as anyone can remember, and so attractive is the business that there are closet cattle owners among virtually every Nigerian group. The real owners of the cattle are not the stick-wielding, now gun-wielding herders, who add banditry and kidnapping as side vocations, the real owners are the big men in high places – and they are not all Fulani- for whom the ownership of cattle is business, and a source of prestige. How does this cross-ethnic elite class behind the modern mutation of the business fuel the conflicts? This is a question we need to interrogate. Who provides the arrogant and criminal-minded herdsmen with guns, or state protection or the kind of oxygen that blows into their heads and grants them the confidence to boast that they are in charge of Nigeria, every land and every resource? 

Nigeria’s history has been one of constant tension between push and pull factors, centripetal and centrifugal forces which often threaten to tear the union apart. It will be remembered, no matter what government spokespersons say that the Buhari administration has managed to create an impression that it is pro-North, pro-Islam, and pro-Fulani and that anything to the contrary is not likely to attract the same empathy. This is the crux of the matter. In Igangan, Sunday Igboho was told that only President Buhari can ask the herdsmen  to leave Oyo state. In Ondo state, similar sentiments were expressed. To an average Yoruba audience, this is bound to throw up primordial attachments about the ownership of land. The Yoruba have not forgiven the Fulani and  Afonja, who betrayed the Yoruba race, for the implantation of a Fulani Emirate in Ilorin. The battle of Osogbo (1840) which was where the Yoruba, led by the Ibadan army, put an end to Fulani incursion into Yoruba territory is still referred to as if the war was fought yesterday. 

Any talk about the Fulani laying claims to space and authority in Yorubaland is  bound to cause enormous tension. It should be understandable therefore why Sunday Igboho has received praise from key Yoruba figures,  Governor Akeredolu has various socio-cultural groups behind him and the Alaafin of Oyo has penned an open letter to President Buhari. Those who criticize the Buhari administration for openly supporting the Fulani agenda have a lot to point to:  the seemingly open and undisguised support for Miyetti Allah, the aborted RUGA settlement idea, the justification of grazing routes, which has now been countered afresh with a detailed reference to a 1969 judgement by late Justice Adewale Thompson of the Abeokuta Division of the High Court (as he then was) and the repeated failure of the government to bring errant herders involved in criminal conduct to book. The arrogance of certain commentators has not helped matters either: how dare anyone claim so insensitively that every piece of land in Nigeria belongs to the Fulani? Perhaps there are certain elements out there stoking the embers of  crisis for their own purposes. It is also not impossible that there are so many cattle herders out there, who are not even Fulani, but who hide under the ethnic label even when they cannot speak a word of Fulfulde. But when government fails to deal with the obvious challenges of poverty and criminality, and considers the defence of an ethnic group a major priority,  this is what happens - it widens the gaps among the people, and encourages the kind of resort to self-help that is represented by the Igboho phenomenon.  It has been said that Sunday Igboho has political ambitions which  probably explains the opposition to him by the incumbent Governor of Oyo state. And that is part of the problem: we play politics with everything in this country.  

But those who lost their loved ones will not remember the politics of it. They will remember their loss and the pain that they now live with: the women who were raped, the children of late Fatai Aborode, Ph.D who have lost a father, the farmers whose farms were destroyed by cattle-rearers, the families that paid ransom and still had to pick up the corpse of their loved ones by the roadside, the many untimely widows and orphans in Ondo, Igangan, Imo, Southern Kaduna and elsewhere. Will they ever get justice?