To sympathize or to crucify Sen. Ike Ekweremadu? This is exactly the question, I’m very sure, that, at the moment, will be wandering on the minds of those who have been following the story of the helpless David Ukpo, a 21 year old street hawker and Sen Ike Ekweremadu, the former deputy senate president of the federal House of Assembly
Sonia Ekweremadu, the daughter of the senator, who was studying for a masters degree at Newcastle University had to put a stop to her study owing to her battle with kidney problem.
Her parents, Ekweremadu and wife, Beatrice, both who wanted the best for their daughter thought it would be a shame if they were unable to save Sonia, their daughter, from her ailment. Their daughter must live by all means. Of course that was exactly what would preoccupied the minds of loving and responsible parents who wanted their daughter to live.
David was a young man in the street of Lagos whose parents had no wherewithal to help their son to have good education – the entitlement he deserved from the government which Sen Ekweremadu was involved. But because of the failure of Ekweremadu and other political leaders, David had no choice but to resort to hawking phone accessories from a wheel barrow around the streets of Lagos.
Considering the wide gulf between the privileged and the underprivileged in Nigeria, no one would ever expect Sonia and David to meet, but nature at times, is unpredictable. Both eventually met, but they didn't meet to share their thoughts, or deliberate on issues. They met because one must be exploited for the survival of the other.
No human being born of a woman like to suffer. The life the poor boy, David, was living wasn’t his making for he wasn’t a lazy youth, he was only unfortunate to come from a poor home. Nature did not smile to him like it smiled to Sonia, who was blessed with good things of life even right from the womb.
Unaware of what was coming, David, after that particular day's work in the noisy Lagos, received a message of an offer to travel to UK without providing any financial means from his end, even with additional gift of some amount of money. Like an average underprivileged Nigerian would do, the poor boy, without hesitation, jumped to accept the offer.
Now the thought of becoming somebody in life overwhelmed David. “Thank you, God. So, I won’t do this dirty and strenuous job forever. So, I’ll also have a decent life to live…”. This was the mental picture that preoccupied the mind of David the moment the news of traveling abroad reached him. The poor boy eventually met his benefactor, and arrangement was made.
David would donate one of his kidneys to a lady in the UK with a reward of some amounts. He would act as Sonia Ekweremadu’s cousin since the UK embassy would not grant a visa to a donor, who had no close relationship with the patient.
Though David, according to the hospital where the surgery was to take place, was informed of what he was going to UK to do, he was never told of the negative effects or the pains he would go through throughout his life after the harvest of his kidney. Even David cared less to have any knowledge of the aftermath as long as his journey to the UK was guaranteed.
On getting to London for the kidney transplant, the Royal Free Hospital discovered that David was not properly informed about the risk he was about to take, and they believed the poor boy had no financial capacity to handle the lifelong pains the surgery normally caused to donors. Hence, he was declared unfit to undergo the kidney transplant. And this was the beginning of the drama.
Ekweremadus, on discovering that they could not convince the London hospital to go ahead with the organ harvest, had to turn to Turkey to find another donor. They had to transport David back to Nigeria since he was no more useful for the purpose he was brought to the UK. But the poor boy was afraid to go back to the streets of Lagos after he had already bidden the rough life in Nigeria farewell. “Going back to Nigeria to do what? I rather die here than to go back to that unsettled and hopeless county”. These were the thoughts that obsessed the mind of David Ukpo. After thinking of what to do to escape being taken back to Nigeria, he eventually turned himself to London police; reeled out and exposed what had transpired between him and the Ekweremadus.
The London police frowned at this for, according to the UK law, the donation of any part of the organs becomes criminality when a donor is oferred a reward or rewards for doing so. They believe the donor must act altruistically. And as a result of this, Ekweremadu, his wife, Beatrice, and the doctor, Obinna Obeta, who helped to facilitate the criminal act, had to face the full wrath of law.
The three were charged to court. They were found guilty because the court believed that the poor David was planned to be exploited for his kidney by Sen Ekweremadu. The senator was convicted of organ trafficking which was a serious offence in UK. The court also ruled that David was treated as a ‘disposable asset – spare part’ like most of our politicians treat many Nigerians. Though Sonia Ekweremadu was free of blame over the whole process, Sen Ekweremadu, his wife and the agent doctor were found guilty by the court.
Now that the three had finally been sentenced for being guilty of organ trafficking, shall we say that Sen Ekweremadu acted out of ignorance? Sen Ekweremadu is a lawyer of repute. He’s a lawmaker, and he was part of legislature who helped draw up Nigeria’s laws against organ trafficking. I don’t think he was unaware of the offence he and others attempted to commit.
Again, shall we believe that Sen Ekweremadu acted out of love to save his daughter’s life? Of course as a loving parent, no one will like to watch his/her child dying while he/she lives. But what I think is if truly Sen Ekweremadu and his wife really wanted their daughter to live, why wouldn’t one of the two donate one of their kidneys to save their daughter?
If Sen Ekweremadu and his wife were truly loving parents, why would they submit the life of another parents' child, who had already been exploited to give their daughter good things of life, to an agony he might battle with for the rest of his life? What is really always on the minds of the Nigerian leaders to the poor masses they lead? What do they take us for? Is it true, like the UK court described it, that we are seen as ‘disposable assets and spare parts’ in the eyes of our leaders?
This story between the Ekweremadus and David Ukpo is exactly a reflection of the relationship between the Nigerian leaders and the Nigerians they lead.
I believe that the Ekweremadu’s trial and conviction of exploiting the poor David will serve as a lesson to other Nigerian leaders who still hold the idea that the common Nigerians are tools they can use for their selfish ends.
Of course this, I believe, will also serve as an example to the Nigeria police and the judiciary both which almost all Nigerians have lost hope in their handling of criminal matters that involve who is who in Nigeria. And the question is: If this incident had happened in Nigeria, would David Ukpo, the underprivileged hawker, have gotten the deserved justice?