It was almost impossible not to be infected by the joy writ large on the face of the One-party state Villa-fawning group this past week. It was akin to winning a tombola. The Mauritanian-Nigerian ex-spokesperson for the Arewa Elders Forum and until of recent, Special Adviser on Political Matters to the President, Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, would not allow these elated countrymen the benefit of a hard-earned Saturnalia. Momentarily, he made sitting comfy on a stool a punishing exercise for the group. As he tendered his letter of resignation from government, fire billowed from Baba-Ahmed’s mouth like Sango, the Yoruba god of fire. In a  viral video interview, the Mauritanian – beg your pardon – the Nigerian, reached for his ancient Arewa pouch and brought out an insinuation of the North’s oft-mesmerizing demographic talisman.

If the North’s foe in Aso Rock Villa was gloating about a power of incumbency, he should remember that the North is a behemoth that anyone could ignore only at their peril, he reminded the president, until of recent his boss. “No politician can become president without northern support, making the region’s stance crucial to any aspirant’s success,” he warned, garnishing it with the usual obstinate northern threat, “If they plan to rig the election, they should be careful. It won’t be good for Nigeria.” As if the north had always been a saint when it comes to rigging. How come this same north closed its eyes when the ruinous Muhammadu Buhari almost ran Nigeria aground in eight years?

In a recent piece I did, I warned that, in the headship of today’s Nigeria, Nigerians had never met the kind of political wiles and deadly political machinations that are in the hands of the current occupiers of Aso Rock. Citing evergreen Yoruba Juju music superstar, King Sunny Ade’s imperishable line, “We m’ẹni o kò, Paddy…” I told the Nigerian world that by the time the current Taskmaster is done with us, we would be worn thin. So, last week, an ignited political bomb exploded. Governor of Delta State, Sheriff Oborevwori and his EFCC-harangued predecessor, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) vice presidential candidate in the 2023 elections, Ifeanyi Okowa, shamelessly decamped from the PDP to the All Progressives Congress (APC). An equally shameless Akwa-Ibom State governor gave indication that he would stay within the PDP and rock its boat. Both moves were replicas of same act some 2000 years ago by that notorious man who asked for 30 pieces of silver to betray our Lord Jesus Christ. Political watchers say this political Iscariotism is a tip of the iceberg. More opposition party governors, they said, many of whom are first-termers, are having their buttocks placed on scalding-hot pressure cooker in the bid to make them leave their parties for the president’s. Chief among these, they say, are governors of Kano, Osun, Plateau, Rivers, Taraba, Akwa Ibom and Zamfara states.

The gleeful repertoire of conquest narratives from the presidency and the Villa fawning group fill the stratosphere.The glee was so thick you could cut a handful and swallow it. The defection fever threw National Chairman of the APC, Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, into a spasm. Reminiscent of Vincent Ogbulafor’s punctilious proclamation some years ago who, in his moment of uncontrollable drunkenness with the intoxicating wine of power, said the PDP would rule Nigeria for 50 years, Ganduje, last Thursday, traveled same inglorious route. He surveyed the political horizon and was so titillated by what he saw that he announced that APC’s 2027 project was a done deal. Thumping his chest like one who had just won a jackpot, the party chair, who is still embroiled in allegation of fraud while governor of Kano State, assured that more defections of governors from the opposition parties were afoot. His infelicitous boast came while he formally received defectors from the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Kano state chapter.

In Nigeria today, the man whose wily stratagem is known to have incubated these defections is being garlanded with epithets. Like maggots brimming round decaying meat, the salutes to his wiles are so aeonic that they qualify to rival the biblical “This is the voice of a god, not of a man!” Students of the bible will remember that  the crowd at Judea made that remark in response to Herod Agrippa 1’s considered superlatives. The epithets showered on the man who is considered to have broken the spinal cord of Nigeria’s opposition in such magisterial manner range from, “the enigmatic Master Strategist has struck again!”, to “The man who pocketed Lagos State in the last 25 years has added Nigeria to his state-pocketing craft.”

For the Yoruba, their naughty son with amoeba-shaped buttocks, who deserves their waist-beads and not an outsider – an “at’ohunrinwa” – the celebration is even more infectious. From their proverbs pouch, the Yoruba pulled out an ancient saying to justify and enable the perceived routing political craftiness of their son. To them, the rout is a perfect reply to the Mauritanian boaster. So, they say, “as it is on the day set for cultivation of a large farmland that the urgency to own a sharp cutlass becomes imperative, so is it gladsome to have a belligerent child when there is a declaration of war” (Ọjọ́ a ba pa’juba l’aa níran àdá, ọjọ ogun bá lè làá níran ọmọ líle). Only the man who is ensuring that opposition governors decamp to the APC can vanquish their centuries-old northern political foes who, at every drop of a hat, flaunt nebulous demographics as political weapon in electoral contest. The North’s snake has met its waterloo in its bid to swallow the Yoruba shrew.

For me, however, an eerie feeling of foreboding has since last week enveloped my reading of the projected epidemic of decamping opposition politicians.  My mind immediately dashed down to eponymous Yoruba thespian, Alagba Adebayo Faleti and his sagely takes on Pyrrhic celebrations, the type that Aso Rock and its fawners are currently taking to the bank. With songs, sang in the cadences of an elderly’s, Faleti drilled down the surface of today’s clanking of champagne glass and saw a melancholic tomorrow. His cameo role in Saworoide, a satiric brainchild film of unarguably one of Nigeria’s most talented cinematographers, Tunde Kelani, provided Faleti an opportunity to penetrate this dense outer surface. Acting the role of Baba  Opalaba, (a piercing broken bottle) an elderly palace staff, Faleti deployed music as tool to foretell, reprimand and correct. While the chiefs became a combine of evil, fascinated about immediate riches in a new king, and plotting against the tomorrow of the people, Baba Opalaba warned, singing, “Yes, they are unaware of their action’s repercussion/Tomorrow, they will” (Kò í ye wón, yíò yé wọn l’ọla ).

In another of his warnings, Faleti deployed a proverb to foretell doom: “The wretched wearing torn clothes dances like a king at nocturne, as if unaware that daybreak is nigh (Alakisa n jo l’oru/Bo pe, ile a mo l’ola). If only the Aso Rock/APC celebratory crew was aware of the wiles of their Mephistopheles, they would see what happened last week and what is projected to happen, as moments to, like biblical Israelites did when there was doom, decorate themselves in ashes and soberly mourn what lies ahead. The doom is also popularized by the song of Yoruba Sakara music great, Yusuff Olatunji. He sang of a hawk playing with the pigeon and the pigeon is filled with excitement, unbeknown to it that death lurks in the horizon (Asa nb’ẹyẹlé ṣeré, ẹyẹlé nyọ, ẹyẹlé nfi’ ikú ṣeré ). Is this celebratory gang aware that it is cultivating a fertile ground for Mephistopheles to reign in Nigeria, for the nourishment of a one-party state, with all its attendant evils? One feels like telling this lot celebrating inanity what Hamlet told Ophelia: “Get thee to a nunnery and stop breeding fools into the world.”

Naomi Mitchinson’s “One Party Rule In Africa” The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs  (2008) gives an intellectual foretaste of this hawk/pigeon mutual excitement. So also did Peter Anyang Nyong’o, in his “Africa: The failure of one-party rule,” Journal of Democracy, Volume 3, Number 1, January 1992. Nyong’o particularly saw doom ahead for the people in what is being cobbled together by the APC. According to him, while it was good news that the peoples of Africa are awakening from years of slumber under authoritarian rule and taking their future in their own hands. The bad news, he said, is that, regimes which enjoy absolute power over “terrorized natives” are sprouting in Africa. These are regimes which, in reluctance to allow themselves to be liquidated out of office and let go of power, “are doing all they can to hold back the rising democratic tide.”

One-party state regimes emerged in Africa during the decolonization period. They thereafter began to spread, with many of them adopting it as a means of consolidating power and, in their claim, promoting national unity.

In its manifestations, one-party state is indeed the holding back of Africa’s democratic tide. Margaret Monyani of the University of Witwaterstrand once defined it as a political framework “where a one/single political party forms and runs the government.” This can happen in two ways: “the activities of the opposition may be completely outlawed such that even the opposition leaders are not allowed to participate in elections” or “the chances of the opposition to clinch power are thwarted by the unfavourable legal framework that is in place… in some cases, a dominant political party that is in power only allows other less dominant parties who are allied to it to exist, while completely outlawing the opposition parties.”

While the establishment of a one-party state in Tanzania and Kenya was done through the parliament, making the formation of another party illegal, in some other countries where the one-party state structure was adopted, it is the voluntary dissolution of the political parties that makes it a one-party state. In this, the leaders and supporters of the parties are absorbed into the one-party state structure. In the words of Peter Wanyande, writing with the title, “Democracy and the One-party state: The African experience” (1987), published in the book, Democratic Theory and Practice in Africa (Y. O. Oyugi and A. Gitonga eds.), this structure of one party-rule makes such countries de jure one-party state, rather than de-facto.

Our African nationalist forefathers sold this system of governance to Africa as holding hope. Kenya, Ghana, Zamabia, Mali, Senegal, Burkina-Fasso and Tanzania were some of the countries that first adopted the one-party system. Among others, the nationalists’ justification for a one-party state was that it is the only form of governance native to Africa while multi-partyism was an alien construct. According to them, a one-party state promotes national unity and in it, national efforts would be solely directed toward nation building, rather than on fruitless politicking. Similarly, they reasoned, in the words of Nyong’o, whatever differences that might emerge among the people of a single political party “could be freely settled… for democracy would be practiced and human rights respected.” Tanzania’s former president, the Walimu, Julius Nyerere, was one of the early proponents of one-party regime. While foisting one-party rule on Tanzania in 1965, Nyerere lauded it thus: “where there is one-party state and that party is identified with the nation as a whole, the foundations of democracy are firmer than they can ever be (in a situation where) you have two or more parties each representing only a section of the community.”

Kenya under successive one-party governments, not long after, degenerated into authoritarianism. The economic development which the likes of Jomo Kenyatta and Arap Moi envisaged became a mirage. Kenyatta’s Kenya African National Union (KANU) fused with the main opposition party and became one single party. In 1964, Kenyatta then led the legislature to write into the constitution the office of the president with him as the leader.  Not long after, this one-party state morphed into a bud of corruption, disregard for merit and a system where loyalty to the Fuhrer was rewarded. Those who did not pledge full loyalty to the party and the president were hounded.

Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah, which began the one-party system in 1964, became a dictatorial and authoritarian government. It repressed voices of dissent under the facade of maintaining unity. Nkrumah fatally wounded multi-party system of government by labeling it as divisive and thus not fit for the newly independent African states. What was needed, he said, was a unified energy and enthusiasm to move Africa forward. These African countries practicing one-party state system then ended up choosing socialism as a system of governance. In Tanzania, its own one-party state was the Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), a political party which was in power from the inception of the country’s independence in 1961. This same fusing happened in Burkina-Faso following the election of President Yaméogo in 1959. Opposition leaders fused together shortly after the 1959 election with Yaméogo proclaiming a ban on any other political parties, thus making his Union of Voltaic Democrats (UDV- RDA) to become the country’s one-party state.

One unique feature of the one-party states in all the above-named countries is that, as butterflies are attracted to nectar, those states always attracted military putsches. One by one, all the one-party system countries were dismantled by violent military takeovers. This is due to resistance and rebellion against their authoritarian rules.

So, for the celebrating  Villa-fawning group that is shuffling its feet in acrobatic dance to the Bata drum as the group careens Nigeria towards a one-party state, the above examples are my own re-calibration of another of Baba Opalanba’s song. The sage sang: “The bird doesn’t just perch on the patio, it has ears and hears.” He rendered this thus, “Ọrọ l’ẹyẹ gbọ, ẹyẹ o dédé bà l’òrùlé o, ọrọ l’ẹyẹ ngbọ o”.

For us as a collective, this gale of defection is more than a political chess-game. It is ominous. For those who know, it has high flavour of despotism, which is a by-word for the Fuhrer’s brand of politicking. Many one-party states’ helmsmen eventually morph into life presidents of the Gnasingbe Eyadema hue. While many see a mild, Cockney English accent-flavoured-speaking Villa boss, beyond this veneer is a totalitarian for whom “No” can never be an answer. Many of the first-term governors are currently being held on tenterhooks, their second term used as bait by Aso Rock. A case is a governor whose godfather was manifesting traits of dissent. Suspecting that the governor might go the way of his godfather, Aso Rock immediately began to sponsor a SWAGA Lord as countervailing force to run against him in the soon-to-be-held gubernatorial election. A few days ago, both the governor and his godfather addressed a press conference announcing their support for Aso Rock 2027!

There is the tendency for anyone to see an impending one-party state in Nigeria as too remote. There is also the tendency to say, all that is foul is fair in politics. Or that, others before the current occupiers of the Villa did worse. In the allegory of the hawk and the pigeon, it was only when the pigeon landed inside the hawk’s abdomen, with its entrails as gourmet meal, that the warning made sense.

Dr Mike Adenuga Jnr. is like the proverbial elephant whose revelation to different persons is according to their perception of him. To thousands of people who feed off his ingenuity as a business magnate, he is their life-saving force. To the philanthropic world for which he is a phenomenon, he is their sustaining breath. Ad nauseam, Nigerians have spoken about him as a manifestation of the beauty of a national as a business anchor who would have empathy of his people. To the rest of Nigerians whose knowledge of him is the Globacom communication empire, his entrepreneurial wizardry is a stuff for legends.

But, who exactly is Mike Adenuga? Yes, I am aware that, to the business world, he is the octopus magnate whose boardroom acumen is a tale that is told across continents. Having never met him, what arrests me most are stories of his humility in the midst of his humongous wealth. More exciting to hear are the lessons of his humble beginnings.

As the story is told of how he rose by dint of hard work, a can-do spirit of the Barack Obama kind, I am still pursuit of understanding who he is. Yes, though aware that he is unique, I have heard his riches pursuit from the beginning, especially his persuasion, from the very beginning, that his place was not that of a small-timer but as one of the foremost men to impact his world. I am also aware that Adenuga’s unexampled life evokes lessons of the limitless border of the human spirit.

But, who is Mike Adenuga? I read a recent testimonial to his philanthropy where he rebuked a benefactor of his for showing gratitude. He struck me as an enigma whose life is an unusual curve from the maddening crowd of benefactors. During his 70th birthday, I also read a gale of shows of gratitude from across the world to a man whose life was wrapped around giving. I am knowledgeable enough to know that such characters are far between in a world of survival of the fittest. The glean of the Adenugas of this world I have is that, if you want to asphyxiate them, stop their earthly assignment of philanthropy. On the reverse, a crop of other humans exists whose earthly brief is to do evil. If there is indeed rewards for the two earthly assignments, it would be glad to see them both take the fruits of their calls.

As he turns 72 on Tuesday, I continue to marvel at the sort of man who does good unseen and loathes being thanked by the benefactor. The Holy Writ talks about a cheerful giver who is God’s friend. The totality of what the world says about Adenuga is that he is an embodiment of that scripture. He is God’s friend.

This page was somewhat prophetic last week when we discussed the topic, ‘Nigeria’s opposition, letting democracy down’. With the benefit of hindsight and in view of the massive blows that landed on the cheeks of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the Labour Party (LP) and the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) in the middle of last week, I am pressed to take a fresh position. Rather than heap all the blames of poor democratic culture on the opposition figures, I can now see that the political party system that we operate should take the lion share.

As you are aware, the PDP experienced one of its heaviest hemorrhages of the Fourth Republic last Wednesday, when the entire structure of the party in Delta State called it quits with the party, as they defected to the ruling party All Progressives Congress (APC).  A sixth-term member of the House of Representatives, from Osun State, Hon. Wole Oke also announced his resignation from the PDP. Feelers from his camp indicate that he is on his way to the APC, while days before the Delta and Osun drama, the governor of Akwa-Ibom State, Pastor Ume Eno had openly announced his decision to back President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for the 2027 election, same way the embattled Rivers State Governor, Sim Fubara, had in a statement to the people of the state asked them to continue to support the administration of President Bola Tinubu.

As the week ended, the PDP was practically left with empty shells as it was certainly returning to the its state in 2014, when seven of its governors took up arms against their own government, formed what they called the new PDP, with four of them eventually teaming up with the legacy parties that formed the APC. Losing the long standing South-South stronghold is a big blow to the PDP.  But the cloud gathering around the PDP this time appears thicker and probably more ominous than the 2014 situation.  That is despite the assurances from the Acting National Chairman, Iliya Damagum and the President of the 8th Senate, Dr. Bukola Saraki. When we heard Dr. Saraki declare that there was cause for alarm and that the leaders would rebuild the PDP, I got some mixed feelings because I know that it is beyond the optimism of the former Senate President. How many of his compatriots in the party are ready to build a formidable structure that can withstand the test of time?

The danger for the PDP this time seems to be looming large. In 2014, the party was in Aso Rock, with President Goodluck Jonathan as the Commander-in-Chief. This time, the party has the APC to contend with. The new ruling party is unlike Jonathan, who would say that the enormity of presidential power was too much to be deployed on either the citizens, or the opposition.

Several reasons have been adduced to the fall of the PDP from power in Delta State, 26 years after and its imminent fall from some other South-South states. Some PDP leaders want to blame alleged coercion from the APC at the centre, while others have claimed that PDP’s structures were being “harassed”, others have alluded to the push by President Tinubu to solidify his hold on Southern Nigeria ahead of the 2027 battle against a perceived resolute North. Whichever side of the argument you want to belong, it is better to avoid the simplistic conclusion. If anyone would complain about harassment, you may wish to ask whether Tinubu himself did not face serious harassments from former President Olusegun Obasanjo between 2002 and 2007. How did he survive and why did he not buckle under the presidential jackboot?  Why was his experience not turned into a case study by the current opposition? If Tinubu had thrown in the towel under the excuse of being “harassed”, will he become the leader of the APC and eventually the President of Nigeria in 2023? But the excuse of Southern solidarity looks plausible.

While the fullness of the reasons that informed the defection of Hon. Wole Oke and the Delta PDP caucus are yet to come into the open, what one can see in the whole scenario is a failure of party leadership.  Former ranking Senator James Manager alluded to that when he spoke on the defection. According to Manager: “I have been with the PDP from the very beginning, so this is a very emotional moment for me. But when a ship is sinking, you don’t stay onboard out of sentiment. We had extensive consultations and today marks the climax of those discussions. What we have now is a collective and unanimous decision to chart a new course.”

He added: “You have just been told about some of the things that have been happening in the PDP Delta State. Some consultations have been going on and the climax of these consultations is what you are seeing today. We have discussed and have disagreed to agree, and it is a unanimous agreement. I am the pioneer state chairman of the PDP. But you cannot be in a boat that is already capsising because I am a riverine man.

“Looking at issues the way they are, we have come to the inevitable conclusion to do something else. It is a collective decision for so many reasons. Few days ago, there was a resolution taken by the PDP Governors Forum at Ibadan. Almost all the governors were there, and they resolved that they are not going into a coalition with any other party.

“But as disadvantaged as the PDP is now with 11 governors, how do you go into a contest with an incumbent president? You think you can win? That resolution killed the spirit of so many PDP members. We lost election in 2015 because of 0a merger which even included splinter groups from the PDP. There are also other reasons. “Today Senator Anyanwu is the National Secretary of the party; tomorrow it is another person. The party must be positioned to go into an election to win. So, it is becoming very funny. The PDP is truly in trouble.”  Without even going into the excuse of the change in taste of the PDP palm wine provided by Charles Aniagwu, Commissioner for Works in Delta State, what Senator Manager said is enough to know that the PDP is indeed in trouble. Whoever wants to blame Tinubu for the development in Delta needs only to read the lines by Manager. Lawyers would describe this PDP scenario as a prima facie case.

From inception, the PDP looked like an overfed spoiled brat, who got into position of authority with little or no effort. What usually evolves in such a situation is unmitigated misconduct and gross incapacity to hold the fringes together. Maybe President Olusegun Obasanjo tried to pull it in one direction and made it a behemoth between 1999 and 2007 when it controlled 27 state governors and a clear two-thirds majority in the Senate, especially between 2003 and 2007.  After Obasanjo, the party continued to self-destruct, with internal squabbles, rather than opposition’s machinations its undoing. Between 2010 and 2011, some chieftains of the party were spewing fire over the perceived shortchanging of the North by the decision of President Goodluck Jonathan to contest the 2011 elections. To them, Jonathan should have only completed the remainder of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua’s tenure such that he would allow the North to do eight years in power in line with PDP’s zoning pattern which recognised a North/South arrangement. That agitation laid the foundation for the party’s disintegration, eventually leading to the 2014 defections and Jonathan’s ouster in 2015. Prior to that time, no opposition was strong enough to confront the PDP.

Apart from internal squabbles, the party also started planting the fruits it is harvesting right now since 2003, when it allowed incumbent governors enormous powers to control party structures and determine candidates for Senate and House of Representatives seats as well as members of the state Houses of Assembly and then their successors. With badly conducted elections across most of the states, the governors were able to retire themselves into the Senate and plant their lackeys in the Government Houses in the states. Most of the time, they supplanted party structures and sentiments to impose successors, thus weakening the party and rubbishing party supremacy. Within a short time, real time politicians or let me say politicians of the old school were replaced with businessmen in politics and then vote buying became the order of elections. Even in the South-West, where the people rejected PDP’s moneybags in the 1999 elections, to vote for Alliance for Democracy (AD) leaders as a sign of reverence to politicians who stood by the late MKO Abiola in the June 12 struggle, the tide has since changed with dibo k’o se obe (vote and get a pot of soup) becoming the new singsong on election days.

When a political followership is based on nothing other than power grab and that situation is further worsened by a complete absence of structured funding patterns, the party is doomed.  The NPN, UPN and other parties of the Second Republic had funding patterns that aided the preservation of party structures. Senator Femi Okurounmu once told me he served as UPN’s administrative secretary in Gongola axis. He was a paid staff of the party.  Where a party is at the mercy of governors or the president, its future can only remain at the mercy of the wind. Since 1999, the PDP has failed to find a sustainable funding system.  The same for all the registered parties of this era. Where a state has no governor, the responsibility for picking the bills is rested on a magnanimous governor nearby. Party dues are hardly collected and where members pay, that confers no advantage on them. I once saw the example of a hardworking former commissioner who had spent all his time in office attracting dividends to his community and was asked to contest the House of Representatives seat of the constituency. Though everyone recognised he worked hard for the community, that, however, did not stop the people from collecting d’ibo k’o se obe money from a man they later dubbed Yahoo, Yahoo on election day. The sad aspect is that the so-called ‘Yahoo man’ completely abandoned the constituency after he was sworn in.

So, it is easy for those who are desperate for power to conveniently hang in there or pump in money at the last minute, grab power and run with it. Rather than blame Tinubu’s politics for the myriads of defections, we may have to look at the severity of other issues. If nobody would stick out his neck to build political parties the way our Second Republic leaders did, we can as well conclude that this Republic has not seen the last of jeun soke politics.

Waiting for an African Pope” by my brother, Azu Ishiekwene, made an interesting reading. Azu’s immense fecundity, as usual, his flawless prose, and free-flowing minting and weaving of words will always be a delight any day. “Waiting for an African Pope” ended while I was still enjoying it! Did Azu argue or canvass for an African pope at this point in time? Not really, in my own opinion, although he gave reasons that can support or justify the choice of one. Since the late Pope Francis was the first Jesuit and cardinal from the Americas (born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to be specific) “to rise to the top of the papacy”, this, posits Azu, “raises hopes that the next one may come from Africa or Asia”. Another cogent reason given by Azu is that Africa “is the largest growing region for the Catholic Church, with about 20 percent of the church’s 1.4 billion population”, thus giving hope that we may not be far away from seeing “the first Black pope in modern history”. What that means is that there had been Black popes in the past, but that was a long, long time ago, in the 5th century or the Roman-era Africa. The office of the Pope had since been dominated by three European countries – Italy, Germany, and France – giving the impression (my own interpretation, please!) that this may be another form of (religion) colonialism or imperialism! According to Google, “there have been 266 popes throughout history, of whom 4 in 5 were from Italy.”

In this Digital Age and Free World, an office as important as that of the Catholic pope should also be democratised. God, being no respecter of persons and the Holy Spirit also not discriminating among tribes and tongues, what is good for the Caucausians should also be good for the Asians and Africans. Azu also argues that since the deceased pope pitched his tent with the poor, championing a lot of reforms that deliberately made advocacy for the poor a legacy, there is no better way to protect, preserve, advance, and concretise that legacy than to choose the next pope from among the poorest of the poor. This is debatable, though, because a man’s ideology, more than his place of origin or the colour of his skin, is likely to determine where he pitches his tent between the haves and have-nots. Azu, however, highlights a drawback of the African Catholic church – it is a poor church. Says Azu: “The African church may have the fastest-growing flock, but it is also the begging bowl. In a world where money is the bicycle of the gospel, the African church is the largest recipient of many forms of financial aid.” These days, though, the gospel no longer thrives on bicycles but on custom-built supersonic jets, especially where Nigeria’s Pentecostals are concerned!

 Other obstacles listed by Azu include that African cardinals have faced less scrutiny compared with their other colleagues; and then there is the politics of the conclave (where popes are chosen). Since man is intrinsically a political animal, there is politics everywhere you find human beings. And where there is politics, a lot of factors – subjective and objective – come into play. The colour of one’s skin, the region where a candidate comes from, and his ideology will certainly come into play. How many of the cardinals who fought the deceased pope tooth and nail over his reforms, especially his fight against corruption, incompetence and conservatism, will want to see a continuation of the same policies?

 In the end, will a Black pope emerge after the white-coloured smoke funnels from the top of Sistine Chapel, signalling that a choice has been made? Again, why is it a white-coloured smoke that signals success while a black-coloured smoke signals that no decision has been arrived at? Azu does not think a Black pope will emerge because, according to him, the road to change is usually long! And he is right! Jamaican reggae artiste Jimmy Cliff says the road is not only long but also hard. But isn’t 16 centuries a long and hard enough wait for Africa – except, here again, it is a wait for Godot? “The odds, this time, favour yet another Italian pope”, concludes Azu. Each time prophets, pastors, and preachers take such a risk as Azu’s or soccer buffs predict who wins in a football match and fail, I shudder at the perils of making predictions!

 As if Catholic Rev. Father Oluoma Chinenye John had also read Azu, he was quoted as saying that getting an African pope was not something Catholics in Africa were clamouring for. Did he say it was not desirable? No! He only wanted whoever emerges to have been so chosen by God, arguing that getting an African (simply because he is an African – my own addition, please!) to succeed the deceased pope will make no difference.

His exact words: “We are not praying for an African pope. We are praying for a good and holy pope who will shepherd the people. He can be an African, American, European or Asian… Una don hear, ba? All those agitating and clamouring for an African to be the next pope, you miss the point completely. Popes are not chosen on racial sentiments. Even if an African becomes the next pope, it will not give Africans any advantage over others and vice-versa”. Poking fun at Nigeria, he noted that there is nothing like “emilokan” or “it is my turn” in the selection of a pope! Father Oluoma is a person I respect so much for his candour. I always love to listen to him as he makes very serious statements in a light-hearted manner. Another such fellow is Professor PLO Lumumba.

 But this time around, I want to disagree with Father Oluoma while agreeing with Azu. Whatever criteria are applied to choose the next pope – by God or human beings – nothing should stop an African from making the mark. Why should Blacks always fall behind Whites in the pecking order in all things and at all times, even in things that pertain unto religion, which is touted as our forte in Africa? When will Africa “come of age”, to quote the assassinated Nigerian Head of State, Gen. Murtala Muhammed?  

 That said, the life of Pope Francis should be a challenge to church leaders worldwide. Can the following report about the pope be true? He should have been buried yesterday (Saturday). It goes thus: “Some reports indicate that Pope Francis died leaving only 100 dollars. Yes, a hundred dollars. Less than 90 euros. No house. No bank account. No investment in his name. And yet, he was the head of the Catholic Church. A post that could have earned him about €340,000 a year. But he refused that money. Every year. Since 2013. Why? Because he was a Jesuit, and the Jesuits take a vow of poverty.

 “Rather than living in the luxurious Vatican apartments like his predecessors, he chose to move into the Casa Santa Marta, a simple, modest residence. No gilding. No personal servants. Just a bed, a desk, and his faith. He wore his old worn-out black shoes, refusing traditional red moccasins. He moved in a small Ford Focus while other religious leaders were driving in limousines. He ate with the Vatican employees, not in a private dining room. He simply dressed, without special adornment, just his white outfit and an iron cross. An invisible wealth…

“While some cling to their property… Pope Francis has chosen to own nothing to offer everything. No millions. No complex wills. Just 100 dollars… and a powerful message: ‘It’s not what you own that matters. That’s what you are. What you do for others.’ The world is shocked… but inspired. At a time when wealth often becomes an ultimate goal, Pope Francis leaves an eternal trace without ever having sought to enrich himself. He did not bequeath any material fortune. He left a moral fortune. A lesson in humility. A vision of service.

“He wasn’t a luxury Pope! He was a Pope of The Heart. A man who has proved that to live simply is to reign differently. What about you? What will you leave behind? Money? Things? Or a real inspiration?”

 It is difficult not to notice the difference between the religion-preneurs here and the true followers of Jesus Christ as depicted by Pope Francis. Yet, the Bible says in St. Luke 12: 15:  “Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man’s life consists not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth.” Matthew 6: 19 -21 says: “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

 For a moment, please pause and Google “The 10 top richest pastors in Nigeria” and marvel! Tell me, where are folks taking all the riches? Heaven or hell? What with so much poverty – grinding poverty, multi-dimensional poverty – in the midst of their congregation? Why can’t they divest themselves of their stinking riches and give to the poor, like Jesus Christ admonished the rich, young man in Matthew 19: 21-24? Building state-of-the-art cathedrals is not a substitute for taking care of the poor.                        

 Pope Francis is dead – by the time you are reading this (on Sunday), he would have been buried the day before (on Saturday). He would have taken nothing with him – only his soul went with him. I counsel our church-preneurs to listen to Tracy Chapman’s “All that you have is your soul.” Permit me to take just a few lines from it: “Oh my mama told me/Because she say she learned the hard way/Say she want to spare the children/She say don’t give or sell your soul away/Because all that you have is your soul/Don’t be tempted by the shiny apple/Don’t you eat of a bitter fruit/Hunger only for a taste of justice/Hunger only for a word of truth/Because all that you have is your soul/ Why was I such a young fool/Thought I’d made history/…Thought I’d made something that could be mine forever/Found out the hard way one can’t possess another/And all that you have is your soul…”

Can anyone, from his or her grave, beat God’s words in Psalm 39:6? Or nullify Mark 8: 34 -38?

 Fare thee well, Pope Francis! The thoughts of your patron saint, the Italian Saint Francis of Assisi (Giovanni di Pietro di Bernardone: 1181 – 3 October, 1226), have also had a profound influence on my worldview.