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

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.