“For First Time, Buhari Excludes Ex-Senate President, Saraki, from National Honours”. This was how the ThisDay newspaper of October 3, 2022, reported the story of the 2022 National Honours ceremony scheduled for October 11 at the State House in Abuja. Other newspapers also wrote the story from the Saraki angle. Before the ThisDay report, the media had reported that the Coalition of Northern Groups (CNG) had raised alarm that there was a deliberate attempt to deny Senator Saraki his place in history by excluding him from the National Honours list. The CNG also pointed out that whereas Saraki served as 13^th Senate President of the Federal Republic, and Chairman of the 8^th National Assembly from 2015 -2019, three years later his portrait is not on display in the main gallery of the National Assembly. In the various reports in ThisDay newspaper, The Punch, The Cable, The Sun, Leadership, Blueprint and others, quoting the CNG and also, another group, the Arewa Think Tank (ATT), the suggestion was that Saraki is legitimately entitled to the second highest national honour in the land, namely the Grand Commander of the Order of the Niger (GCON), since the convention had been to honour certain categories of persons for having served in certain capacities. 

It was even clearly stated that Saraki is being denied his entitlement because of his political rivalry with President Muhammadu Buhari. Saraki emerged as Nigeria’s Senate President in 2015, on the platform of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) under circumstances that suggested that he simply outsmarted the party hierarchy that did not want him. He turned out to be a Senate President from the ruling party with a mind of his own. Under his watch, the Senate passed about 201 bills, and claims the distinction of being far more productive than other National Assemblies since the return to civilian rule in 1999.  Saraki refused to act as the ruling government’s rubber stamp. It was therefore a question of time before he ended up leaving the party. He returned to where he came from: the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and to say that his political fortunes have changed since then, especially in his native Kwara State is to state the obvious. 

The way these things go, it was obvious that someone was deliberately pushing the Saraki side of the story to make a point. But what is the worth of a national honour in Nigeria? It is a nice chieftaincy title which comes with a medal, a certificate and a pin on your chest, to which anyone who has ever served Nigeria feels entitled. It doesn’t matter if you were a houseboy in the corridors of power, the thrill of the recognition is in itself the thing, and while the honour does not come with a salary or pension, you can get a seat, and a cup of coffee or tea at the state VIP lounge at the international airport whenever you are travelling and you can flaunt the suffix after your name to show that you are above the ordinary run. Those who want Saraki to be given a GCON have managed to establish that the National Honours List has been politicized.  It has always been so.  I also agree with them that there should be no pettiness in the award of national honours. Other former Senate Presidents got the GCON, there is no reason why Saraki should be denied his, going by convention. Should he, or any one decide to turn down the honour, it should be their prerogative to do so, and not that they have been chosen for deliberate humiliation for partisan reasons.  Every human being craves respect, recognition and relevance, and if they are so deserving, they should be so honoured.  

But the point needs to be made though that Senator Bukola Saraki is not undecorated, nor can a GCON make much difference to his pulse rate. In 2010, he got the CON award: Commander of the Order of the Niger, for his services as Governor of Kwara State. The CON is one of the top national honours usually reserved for Ministers, Governors and Justices of the Supreme Court. Within the established order, however, persons can be promoted from one level to the other. Saraki’s supporters want a GCON, the second highest honour in the land, for him. Perhaps because of the furore that the 2022 National Honours List that was in circulation in the last few days has generated and concerns raised by some stakeholders, the Federal Government has now disclaimed the list of 437 persons on display. A statement from the Federal Ministry of Special Duties and Intergovernmental Affairs stated yesterday, that whatever list that was in circulation was a fake list, and the government was yet to release any list to the public. In the light of this, it would be premature to condemn or endorse the list that has now been disowned. October 11, the scheduled date of the National Awards ceremony is barely a week away. It would be nice if the Federal Government can finalize the process and release the authentic list for public scrutiny and commentary. When the “authentic list” is then released, it would be our duty to compare and contrast, and seek to differentiate between what is fake and true, but before that is done, we can safely make the following observations. 

Nigeria’s National Honour is a creation of the National Honours Act of 1964 with the following established categories: GCFR, GCON, CFR, CON, OFR, OON, MFR, MON and service medals – FSS, GSS, DSS, MSS, CMH and CM for service to the nation and individual distinction, to honour, celebrate, inspire, express appreciation and to promote bilateral relations/international friendship. But the big problem that has been observed with the National Honours Warrant is that it has been reduced to the level of an award of chieftaincy titles whereby anyone with any form of proximity to power is decorated with the highest honours of the land. In other jurisdictions, the Honours List is used to make a statement about values and contributions. In Nigeria, it got reduced to such a ridiculous level, it became an award for any Dick and Harry including concubines and housemaids. Even traditional rulers who are of no value to their own people are routinely decorated with national honours and not a few persons of shady persona go about adding national honours to their names., not to talk of Governors who in other societies would never be allowed to show up in decent company after their tenure of office. In Nigeria, you find all sorts on the National Honours List. The pattern needs to change. 

The closest that the Buhari government has gone to getting things right was the refusal to turn the National Honours ritual into an annual jamboree. In 2018, the administration announced post-humous national honours for Chief MKO Abiola, and Chief Gani Fawehinmi and others. I shall come to that later. Also, when recently, the administration gave out National Honours in mid-September, I thought it struck the right notes by focusing strictly on athletes who did the country proud at the World Athletics Championships in Oregon, United States and at the 2022 Commonwealth Games in Birmingham, UK.   Nobody would question why Ese Brume, Tobi Amusan, Blessing Okorodudu, Favour Ofili and others got national awards. Their example shows commitment, hardwork, excellence, and patriotism. What rankles, and here is my point, is the usual tendency to turn Nigeria’s National Honours into the equivalent of souvenirs at a jollof rice and pepper soup party. It is not right that a Governor of a state whose only notable achievement is the erection of a few electricity poles in the state capital and the digging of a couple of boreholes in his mother’s village, gets a National Honour or that incompetent Service Chiefs who cannot provide security receive recognition as heroes, or that faceless and idle traditional rulers are given the national recognition they do not deserve. The emphasis should be truly on service, honour and values. When the Federal Government releases its “authentic list”, this is what we should look out for. 

The Buhari administration has restrained itself before now from giving out national honours like a jamboree.  But it seems it now wants to do so on October 11.  Why now? Out of pressure? End-of-tenure blues? Whatever it is, a list of 437 honorees as has been suggested is unwieldy.  Elsewhere, the number of persons to be awarded a category of honour annually is capped. We should introduce such a cap to confer more seriousness and dignity on the awards.

Before now, it had been argued that the National Honours Warrant of Nigeria does not accommodate the conferment of the national honour on the dead. In the now disclaimed 2022 list, there were a few post-humous indications – late Abba Kyari, Chief Anthony Enahoro, Professor Bala Usman and late Gambo Sawaba. Section 2 of the law says that the national honour must be received “in person at an investiture held for the purpose.”  The Buhari administration broke the convention when it conferred the national honours of GCON and GCFR post-humously on the late Chief MKO Abiola and Chief Gani Fawehimni in 2018 respectively, citing Section 3 of the same law which grants the President “unqualified discretion” to grant National Honour as he may deem fit. Femi Falana, SAN defended the legality of post-humous national awards at the time in the public domain against the position of Justice Alfa Belgore, CJN, 2006 -2007, and Chairman of the National Honours Committee in 2016, who along with others, had raised the issue then. What is probably required is a simple review of the National Honours Act or an Executive Order to lay this matter to rest and thus remove whatever ambiguity may be attached to the interpretation of Sections 1-3 of the National Honours Act even when the action of the government appears to be in alignment with public expectations as in the 2018 cited cases.  The word “expedient” in Section 3 of the enabling Act may be open to differing interpretations, especially as no one has deemed it necessary to seek judicial intervention.  

The point, at the risk of repetition, is that the National Honours selection process, while a prerogative of the Executive arm of government, needs to be subjected to greater scrutiny in order to protect its integrity.  We must ensure that whoever goes about with Nigeria’s national honour indeed deserves it. It is not only in Nigeria that the selection process attracts controversy. There have been similar arguments such as we have here in Jamaica, India, and Bahamas, and other places.  There is nothing wrong in making the selection process more transparent and participatory. One obvious way to avoid unnecessary controversy is to make the list short and specific, and ensure the greater participation of the civil society. It also seems to me that the usual practice of relegating artistes and performers to the Member of the Order of the Niger (MON) and Member of the Federal Republic (MFR) categories is unacceptable. If indeed their names are on the list, the likes of Damini Ogulu (Burna Boy), Innocent Tuface Idibia, and Teniola Apata deserve a higher placement on the list than many others for having done more to place Nigeria positively on the global map, and for promoting happiness in the land. 

As to the controversy about the list that is in circulation and the Federal Government’s disclaimer, a week to the awards ceremony, just a few questions would be in order: is the published date of October 11 also fake? Did the Federal Government send out letters of award/invitation or not? Is it possible for likely honorees to talk to the media and inform friends and family, if they are not sure that their names are on the list?  Is it true as alleged that some people who are responsible for the continued closure of Nigerian universities, and the agony of Nigerian students are actually on the Honours List? Nigeria at 62: with all the problems that we have- is this the right time for celebration, or shame or reflection? It is not enough to blame “overzealous reporters whose aim is to break news even when such news is fake” as has been said. It won’t be too long before the truth is known.  

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 12:00pm

Guest: Mr. Tunde Oduwole (Quantity Surveyor)

Topic: Nigeria @62 (Independence day)

Date: October 1, 2022

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732
Passcode: 600206

It is a sobering indication of the state of the nation, that as Nigeria prepares to mark the 62^nd anniversary of its flag independence on October 1, the dominant discourse in the land among young Nigerians, apart from politics, and the continued closure of universities centres around such annoying subjects as something called the Big Brother Naija reality show and its annual elevation of unseriousness into a creative endeavour, and the unarguably silly controversy over whether a major priority for the Nigerian government should be the need to ban the consumption of cow skin, better known locally among Nigerians as ponmo, kpomo or kanda. Arguments for and against the latter have consumed so much attention and energy in the last week in such an insufferable manner that recommends the whole exercise as a metaphor for the Nigerian condition. 

But let us begin with Nigeria’s 62^nd anniversary. It would be correct to say that we have never had it so bad. The independence anniversaries of 2020 and 2021 were observed against the background of the COVID pandemic and the international public health crisis which redefined our lives as citizens and as human beings. But there was hope that like all afflictions before it, since the pestilence of Biblical times, COVID-19 would one day be conquered and the world will regain its verve. It has not now disappeared completely, but indeed the world is alive again. As Nigeria celebrates its 62^ndIndependence anniversary, we can joyfully look back on how our people survived the scourge, and can now openly sit together on Independence Day to reflect on the nation’s journey over the decades. 

What we should be celebrating this year is the resilience of the Nigerian people in the face of afflictions – social, economic, governance and psychological. It is therefore appropriate that the Federal Government has chosen to hold a public lecture on the theme of “National Unity” on September 29. The hero of the story of Nigeria is truly none other than the common man and woman: the ordinary Nigerians who, since independence have been disappointed every step of the way by their own leaders. In 1960, as the British Union Jack was lowered, and the Nigerian green-white-green flag was hoisted to herald the birth of a new nation, Nigerians danced. School children marched to the sound of melodies of hope. The march was abbreviated, the dancing stopped; the walls cracked within barely six years later. A civil war occurred and for decades, the military controlled Nigeria, running a command-and-obey structure that further divided the country along the lines of ethnicity, geography and religion. Every measure that has been taken to reunite the country by the military and even their civilian successors has refused to work. Once upon a time, Nigeria was Africa’s richest and most beloved country, it soon became a shadow of its old self. In 2022, 62 years after independence, we seem sadly to have lost so much.

We once lived in a country where teachers, scholars, and students came from everywhere to study and work here. In my days as a young student, we had teachers from the UK, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, India, the United States, the West Indies and elsewhere who were happy to pursue their dreams in Nigeria. The country’s universities were among the best in Africa and the Commonwealth. The then University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University – OAU) was rated as the most beautiful campus in Africa! The same university, along with the University of Ibadan, Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), University of Nigeria, Nsukka (UNN) and the University of Lagos (UNILAG) boasted of some of the best brains in their respective fields. Ibadan had one of the best science and research laboratories in Africa. The university zoo was a tourist attraction. The country’s university teaching hospitals were so good, so well-equipped that patients came from as far away as Saudi Arabia to receive treatment at the University College, Hospital, (UCH), Ibadan. Today, all that is lost. Our hospitals, from primary health care centres to tertiary hospitals have become mere consulting clinics. All the animals in the Ibadan Zoo have either died or have been used to prepare pepper soup. University teachers have been on strike since February 14. In the last three years alone, Nigerian university students have spent more time at home than in school. 

In the 70s and 80s, even the country’s secondary schools were rated among the best in Africa. Today, they have become the target of kidnappers, bandits and rapists. When many old students visit their schools these days, they are shocked that a once beautiful citadel could become so terrible. A senior friend who visited my alma mater about a fortnight ago, called me frantically to tell me that he felt like weeping, because he knew what the school looked like in those days. An old classmate of mine who was with him, and who has lived in the US since we left school told me not to worry. He said there was nothing anybody could do. “This is not the school you and I attended, my brother”, he added. “Where is the government? If Nigerian leaders are not mad, sick and wicked, they would never allow this kind of thing to happen. Even if old students contribute money and re-build the school, who will sustain it? What do Nigerian leaders do with the education budget? In the States…” My old colleague has lived so long in the US, he obviously thinks the same standards can apply here. In those days, our teachers were proud of their chosen career. They were glad to help nurture the future generation. These days, teachers are so unhappy with their lot – no salaries, no promotion, no enabling work environment – they are not in any position to produce happy and capable students. 

The oil boom of the 70s turned the fortunes of Nigeria around. The country became so rich, a former military ruler once boasted that the country did not know what to do with money. The emergent nouveaux riche became so wealthy, they left for Europe every Friday, after close of work, enjoyed their weekend in the most exotic haunts of London and Paris, and took the plane back just in time to be at work in Nigeria on Monday. There was Nigeria Airways: having some of the best trained pilots in the world. Return ticket to Europe was affordable. Today, Nigeria has no national airline. Its aviation industry is almost dead. Only the rich can still afford to travel abroad, but not with that old frequency of weekly indulgence. Oil boom brought a culture of indolence and doom. The world is witnessing yet another oil boom today, as a result of the Russia-Ukraine war, but Nigeria is not benefitting from that. Its refineries are not working. Major oil companies cannot function because of crude oil theft and insecurity. The country cannot even meet its OPEC production quota. The country is heavily indebted. Its debt burden is more than the budgets of all the 36 states of the country in one year. Next year, the country may not even be able to fund any capital project! 

For those who like to quote data, the statistics on the state of the nation are frightening: inflation: 20.52%, food inflation: 23.12%, unemployment: 33%, measured in the reality of staggering poverty and exponential rise in crime. From being a country of giants, Nigeria has become a country of desperate men and women, in whose hearts the fires of hope die-aborning. This is why there is a more strident call for change now more than ever. There are those Nigerians who continue to blame the colonial masters for all of Nigeria’s woes, and such persons recently used the occasion of the death of Queen Elizabeth II to voice out their grievances. Their argument is that the British left bad leaders behind and structured the newly independent Nigeria to fail, after looting our treasures. The proponents of this argument ignore the fact that the British were colonial overlords in other countries too, where things work and progress has been made, and that the errors of our journey can be traced largely to the post-colonial leaders who simply replaced British colonialism with indigenous colonialism and fascism. It is therefore noteworthy that as Nigeria marks its 62^nd anniversary, many young Nigerians are insisting that the country’s general elections in 2023 must provide a great opportunity for Nigerians to elect a new set of leaders who can make a difference, and stop the cycle of failure that seems to have become our lot. They want the glory of Nigeria restored. They are on the streets marching. They are in places of religious worship calling on God to come and help Nigeria as the people of Macedonia once cried out. They ask: why are we so blest, and yet so cursed? From whence will the messiah come? Many persons have had to leave the country to seek hope in other lands. I was at the airport a few days ago – quite unusually crowded - given the high cost of tickets. When I pointed this out to someone at the counter, I was told that most of the people boarding the aircraft to foreign destinations have no plans to return. The true heroes are the Nigerians who have refused to give up on this country and who still believe that Nigeria will be great again. 

President Muhammadu Buhari will, of course, customarily use his Independence Day broadcast to reassure Nigerians at home and abroad that all is not lost. He will try to inspire the nation. He will tell us that his administration has laid a better foundation on all fronts and remains determined to deliver transparent and credible elections in 2023. He would most likely heap the blame for every problem on saboteurs and enemies of the people, who will be brought to justice before February 2023. He would also reassure us that the work ahead is a collective responsibility. It would not matter whether his listeners believe him or not. No President would use the occasion of the country’s National Day to accept blame for any omissions. For President Buhari, it would be his last Independence Day Broadcast as President. Expect some self-praise. As part of the farewell, the organizers of the 62^nd Independence Anniversary have also announced that there would be a National Honours ceremony. This should not become a jamboree or chieftaincy title ceremony whereby every senior government official who has served in the last eight years, as well as traditional rulers, party chieftains and wives and girlfriends of privileged persons are the ones on the Honours list. There would be Ministers, Governors and political appointees all waiting to be decorated with medals for work not done. This year’s Honours List must convey a message of seriousness. Nigeria’s 62^nd Independence Anniversary must not become another Big Brother Naija show! It must not come across like that distraction that I cited as the “ponmo controversy” - a classic case of blaming the victim and missing the point. 

For the benefit of those who may not have followed the story, the ponmo controversy was triggered about a week ago when Muhammadu Yakubu, the Director General of the Nigerian Institute of Leather and Science Technology (NILEST) reportedly said his agency was going to propose to the National Assembly, a bill to ban the consumption of cow skin, because its heavy consumption is precisely the cause of the downslide in Nigeria’s leather industry. Cow hides that should be used by tanneries to produce leather, footwear, bags have been diverted into the food chain, and turned into a special delicacy. Yakubu added that “ponmo” has no nutritional value. Nothing represents the lack of seriousness at the highest levels in Nigeria’s governance and democracy than this. Not many have heard of NILET or its DG, and then the first time, anything would be heard, the DG puts his foot in his mouth. His declaration is not based on any data. What is the amount of cow hide that has been smuggled into the food chain to threaten the leather industry? And who told him kpomo has no nutritional value? And why of all things, a government agency is talking about ponmo in this country today?  

Mr Yakubu should be reminded that ponmo, a regular sight at parties, usually marinated in well-curried pepper, is a gourmet’s delight particularly when the ponmo and the pepper touch the palate, the softer the ponmo the better, and best when supported with a cold glass of wine, or beer to wash it down the gut. It is a low fat, low-calorie food recommended for persons who want to lose weight. Dietitians tell us that “a 100 kg of boiled, thick cow skin contains essential amino acids, micronutrients and collagen - 224.65k calories of energy, 680g of carbohydrate, about 43.9g of water, 46.9 g of protein, 1.09 g of fat, 0.02 g of fibre, iron – 4.3 mg, magnesium -12 mg, zinc- 6.79 mg and calcium -6.1 mg.”  Food inflation has taken ordinary sources of meat beyond the reach of the ordinary Nigerian: fish, meat and other sources of protein have become so expensive. Ponmo is not so cheap either, but it is the only kind of meat that is still within the reach of the common man, their only hope of chewing something during a meal. Yakubu, DG NILET says there should be legislation to ban its consumption and further punish the poor and rob people of jobs. Yakubu is not recommending bills to initiate policies that will make foreign exchange available for the tanneries, access to necessary raw materials, development of the livestock sector to increase supply of cow hide, training and research in the industry… no, he is blaming the victims. 

He forgets that this country once had a thriving leather industry: Bata, Lennards, and flourishing tanneries in Kano, Kaduna…but even that failed because of this obsession with unserious matters by Nigerian leaders. The leather industry will not be revived by banning the consumption of kpomo. Wale Ojo-Lanre has dismissed Yakubu’s suggestion as a case of “shallow thinking, empty and gross laziness”. I agree. It is in addition, provocative. It could trigger a spontaneous million-man march in every state of the Federation, and evoke such anger similar to that of an old attempt to ban the sale and consumption of stockfish in Nigeria. 

Nigerians deserve better leadership in 2023, a new cadre of governors at all levels who will focus on what is right, and learn to think straight. 

Yesterday would be remembered for long in history even by generations yet unborn, as a historic moment in the 21^stcentury, the day, Elizabeth II, embarked on a journey to the Eternal Realm, after 70 years of reign as Monarch of Great Britain and leader of the Commonwealth, the grandmother of many across the world and “the rock upon which Modern Britain was built” to borrow British PM Liz Truss’s words. I was impressed by the symbolism, the culture, the tradition, the pageantry, the inter-generational links, the grandeur with which the British, paying attention to every little detail turned that into a tribute to the value of constitutional monarchy, national pride, and the history of a people. There has been so much said in the last ten days, but now that Elizabeth II has gone to be with the Lord, there is a lot more to be said about lessons and the future, and the rest of us who would forever share a connection with the United Kingdom, at cultural, historical, diplomatic, bi-national and individual, polemical, levels. In the end, what was shared was the humanity that connects the entire population of the world, and the subtle differences and disregard for a rules-based international order that divides us. Elizabeth II is gone. The Lord is Her Shepherd…/She has passed beyond the mists that blind us here/Into the new and larger life/Of that serener sphere.”  May she travel well.  A new era begins. 

At the historic occasion, Nigeria’s President Muhammadu Buhari was represented by the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo and Nigeria’s High Commissioner to the UK, Alhaji Sarafa Isola. Nigeria was not one of those countries that were asked to stay away from the funeral: Russia, Belarus, Myanmar, Syria, Venezuela, and Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.  The Russians have complained that their exclusion is “particularly blasphemous.” I can’t figure out how. The British were determined to make a diplomatic statement, and play politics with the Queen’s burial and they did so. Some countries were grudgingly allowed to attend through their ambassadors: Iran, Nicaragua and North Korea. China sent its Vice President, Wang Qishan. But the American President, Joe Biden, the French President Emmanuel Macron and the Prince of Dubai, were treated preferentially – allowed to travel in their own means of transportation, with the US President going to Westminster Abbey for the state burial in “The Beast”, while others were conveyed in buses provided by the British hosts. 

As it were, the funeral of Queen Elizabeth II was one of the biggest diplomatic gatherings in decades, the first state burial in the UK since two-time Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill’s passing in 1965, and one of the biggest security operations that anyone has seen for decades: 4, 000 military personnel, 10, 000 policemen on duty, 142 naval officers manning the gun carriage that was last used in 1952 for the burial of King George VI, father of Elizabeth II,  drone-blocking technology, a Bank Holiday that  placed the entire UK on pause, 4.1 billion people watching across the world, the pomp was a clear indication of how majestic Elizabeth II was in life and death. The British used the occasion to advertise strength, tradition, seamless institutional capacity, and continuity.          

The Elizabethan Age is a specific reference in the teaching of English history and culture, and world-view, which in literary scholarship has provided a benchmark for the introduction of students in the humanities to an understanding of the British Renaissance between 1558 and 1603, during the Tudor period.  It was the golden age: the time of William Shakespeare and his contemporaries, the Spanish Armada (1585 – 1602) and the emergence of the royal union with Scotland. As someone who once taught the literature of the Elizabethan Age, specifically  Shakespeare and His Contemporaries from Shakespeare himself to Ben Jonson, Thomas Kyd, Christopher Marlowe and John Lyly, up till the Anglo-Irish Theatre of the 19^th Century from W. B. Yeats to Lady Gregory, John Millington Synge and Sean O’Casey, I would not be surprised if literary scholars begin to explore the constructs for a second Elizabethan Age in the 20^th and 21^st centuries given the range of Elizabeth II’s  reign across culture, science, and politics. Such was the import of the significance of her leadership. 

Many Nigerians who attended the Queen’s lying-in-state, or funeral, physically, or virtually, whatever may be their misgivings about the truth-telling, expiatory, cathartic moment this may represent about the legacy of Empire and colonialism, may well have been reassured by the fact that Nigeria was not one of those countries banished from attending the funeral of the world’s grandmother whose burial yesterday was even celebrated in rural Cameron, with an elaborate thanksgiving service! VP Yemi Osinbajo represented President Muhammadu Buhari. But there is a problem here that I would like to throw up, thinking aloud, for general interrogation. As the Vice President’s delegation jetted off to London on Sunday, Nigeria’s President, Buhari also left town for the 77^th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA). The country’s two principal leaders of the Executive Arm of Government at the Federal level, travelled out of town the same day to go and attend events.  In those days, Sahara Reporters and Omoyele Sowore would have raised an alarm over the number of persons on the Vice President and President’s delegations, and how that indicates sheer lack of prudence in managing public resources. This time around, Sowore, an anti-monarchist by the way, has missed an opportunity to soro soke!

But my concern is as follows: whereas there is no law that says the President and the Vice President must not leave town at the same time, I still do not think that it is politically expedient that they do so. I also do not think that it is cost-efficient, at a time Nigeria’s Finance Minister, the National Assembly and international observers are complaining about a terrible revenue problem that calls for an urgent review of the country’s corruption vulnerabilities, the civil service, competitiveness and fiscal framework.  Nor is it administratively convenient either.

What does the 1999 Constitution say? Section 145 of the Nigerian Constitution deals with, “the temporary absence of the President” while Section 146 expatiates on circumstances under which the Vice President may discharge the functions of the President, but nowhere in both instances do the framers of the law envisage a situation whereby the President and the Vice President could both abandon post and leave the country the same day, even if on two different state assignments. None of the rules of interpretation – literal, golden, mischief or the ejusdem generis rule would seem to resolve the dilemma in my view. But perhaps, simple common sense would help.  I can understand President Muhammadu Buhari deciding to attend UNGA 2022. With Nigeria’s next general elections fixed for February 2022, and his two-term tenure as Nigerian President due to expire in May 2023, this would be his last attendance at the UN General Assembly as President. 

It makes sense if he wants to show up to bid his brother Heads of State farewell. UNGA begins formally today with the statements of Heads of States, so it probably would have been a bit stressful for him to attend the Queens’ funeral on 19^thSeptember and then immediately make the long trip to New York. But then, there were other Heads of State at Westminster Abbey yesterday who will depart London, and go straight to New York. What is the matter with us?  The Vice President didn’t even need to go to London. Nigeria could just have been as ably represented by the country’s High Commissioner to the UK, as some other countries - Iran, Nicaragua and North Korea were represented by their ambassadors. Only African Presidents go to every UNGA, almost every year for a jamboree. Countries can even be represented by their Ministers of Foreign Affairs or their UN Ambassadors, the only concern would be the order of protocol. In other words, President Buhari himself could have stayed behind, he really doesn’t need a hollow farewell tour.   

The argument can be made that the two trips not falling under the intendments of Sections 145 and 146 aforementioned are in a special category of their own, especially as the Vice President could be back in the country before this newspaper reaches the newsstands, and that in any case the President going to UNGA for a few days can still run the country with the aid of phone calls, text messages, or zoom from wherever he is, or better still, through any of his aides back home. The only problem with this is: the Nigerian Constitution does not say that Nigeria can be governed through telephony from a foreign location. The problem now is: should the President and the Vice President both leave town the same day for whatever length of time, no matter how short, or do we need to amend the Constitution to address this? Yesterday, Nigeria had no Commander in Chief on the ground! Both the President and the Vice President were not only out of the country, even key Ministers were either in one entourage or the other. I was compelled to ask the question, as Nigerians would say:who dey shop oh? 

As it happened, yesterday turned out to be a momentous day in Nigeria. Nigerian students under the aegis of their umbrella body, the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS) decided to stage a protest in Lagos in solidarity with the union of Nigerian university teachers, ASUU whose members have been on strike since February 14. NANS had blocked expressways – the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, last week and also threatened to shut down the country’s airports to make the ruling elite feel the pains of parents and students, and to compel the Federal Government to accede to the demands of the university teachers. On September 19, as the President arrived New York, and the VP attended the Queen’s funeral in London, aggrieved Nigerian students, defied early morning rainfall, and blocked access to Nigeria’s main international airport. Travellers could not access the airport for hours. NANS accuses the Federal Government of “crass irresponsibility”. The Chairman of the association’s National Taskforce on #EndASUUStrikeNow has threatened that its members would also shut down the Nigeria Ports Authority and the Third Mainland Bridge. The traffic gridlock on the way to the airport was kilometres-long. 

When the students shut down the Expressway the other week, many motorists and commuters groaned in pain. NANS has the support of the striking university teachers. Federal Government officials have however threatened that it is a criminal offence to disrupt movement and inflict pain on innocent civilians. The Nigeria Police Force has also threatened to deal with the students. On Sunday, the Lagos State Police Command reportedly said the students “were free to come out and see what awaits them”. The students ignored the threat. They came out as promised. We can only hope that the security agencies would not do anything stupid and further aggravate the delicate situation in the country. Incidentally, the Nigeria Police Force is under the direct command of the Nigerian President and he is away in New York. His Deputy is in London. 

For more than 200 days, aggrieved Nigerian students in public universities have been at home. Their anger is understandable. The agony of their parents too. It is not just a whole academic session that has been lost, the future of university education in Nigeria is endangered. Many university teachers have left the country to seek employment elsewhere. Many students have either started afresh in private universities and those who do not have the privilege of being sent to other schools by their parents have abandoned the dream of university education. We have read stories of university teachers who have taken up new careers as petty traders, personal assistants to politicians, or as roadside hawkers of bean cake. The Federal Government has taken ASUU to the National Industrial Court (judgement is expected in the matter tomorrow, Wednesday, September 21), but the university teachers are resilient. They have given minimum conditions: the revitalization of universities, the payment of earned allowances and arrears, review of salaries and payment systems, implementation of agreements and Memorandum of Action reached with ASUU, and outright rejection of the Federal Government’s “No Work No Pay Rule”. What is required is a complete paradigm shift, and a proper re-construction of the idea of the university.  Even if ASUU calls off its strike tomorrow, the Federal Government would only have further postponed the crisis, if we fail to address the core issues at stake, the interpretation of which is now a function more of emotions rather than actual knowledge. 

Yesterday, Nigerian students were able to get the support and approval not only of ASUU, but also of Omoyele Sowore, a former students union leader, now a Presidential candidate as well as a number of non-governmental organizations including the Social and Economic Rights Accountability Project (SERAP) and Enough is Enough (EiE). With the manner in which Nigerian Students are mobilizing, what began as an industrial dispute with university teachers could very easily snowball into a repeat of the youth protest of 2020, that is the #EndSARS protests. It is not in anyone’s interest to allow another degeneration of the social space, especially as Nigeria prepares for a major political transition, due to begin with campaigns by political parties on September 28.         

It is important that Nigeria’s leaders and other stakeholders pay attention. Someone must begin to engage the Nigerian students, and not just allow them to do their worst. The Buhari government may soon effectively become lame-duck, but that inevitability should not be compounded with a lackadaisical attitude.

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 12:00pm

Guest: Umar Sani (SSA TO FORMER VP, NAMADI SAMBO)

Topic: PDP: THE CALL FOR PARTY CHAIR'S RESIGNATION

Date: September 17, 2022

Join Zoom Meeting

https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732

Passcode: 600206

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 12:00pm

Guest: ABIODUN ADENIYI, PHD, PROFESSOR AND HEAD, MASS COMMUNICATION, BAZE UNIVERSITY, ABUJA

Topic:THE LIFE AND TIMES OF QUEEN ELIZABETH II, 1926 - 2022

Date: Saturday, September 10, 2022

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz09

Meeting ID: 928 7714 1732
Passcode: 600206

On August 9, the people of Kenya went to the polls to elect a new President, the incumbent President, Uhuru Kenyatta having completed the constitutional two terms in office. There were elections at other levels -governorship, parliamentary and at county levels but the main focus was the Presidential election with four main candidates:  Deputy President, William Ruto, 55, of the United Democratic Alliance (UDA)/Kenya Kwanza Alliance, Raila Odinga, 77, of the Orange Democratic Movement/Azimio One Coalition, Professor George Wajackoyah, 63, of the Roots Party of Kenya and David Mwaure Waihiga, 55, of the Agano Party.  On August 15, the Independent Electoral and Boundary Commission (IEBC) announced victory for William Ruto with 7.1 million votes (50. 5 %), followed by Raila Odinga, with 6.9 million votes (48. 9%). Wajackoyah scored 0.44% of the votes and David M. Waihiga, 0.23%. 

The result was rejected by Raila Odinga and his running mate, Martha Karua and their supporters who threatened that the result will be challenged in court. This was Odinga’s fifth shot at the Presidency of Kenya. At 77, losing the election means he would not achieve his dream of becoming President. He would be 82 years by the next Presidential election. He refused to congratulate William Ruto, nor did he acknowledge Ruto’s offer of an olive branch to run an inclusive, people-focused government. Odinga was not alone. He enjoys the support of incumbent President Uhuru Kenyatta who has never hidden his disdain for his Deputy. Kenyatta openly supported Raila Odinga, resulting in the characterization of the Kenya Presidential election as a battle between hustlers and the products of dynasties, that is - between poor Kenyans and big, influential families. Kenyatta’s father and Odinga’s father are historical figures in Kenya. Ruto describes himself as “the son of a nobody”, “a chicken seller”– whose mother sold by the roadside but who is determined to lead Kenya. Kenyatta has also refused to congratulate his Deputy, as of the time of this writing. The Deputy’s offence was that he refused to support Kenyatta’s plan to violate the Constitution and do a third term in office!  

Yesterday, both Kenyatta and Odinga were further humiliated when the Supreme Court of Kenya, in a seven-man panel led by Chief Justice Martha Koome, in a unanimous decision, ruled that the election of August 9 was validly won by William Ruto of the UDA. The Court had three options before it: to declare and validate the election, and hence allow it to stand, to rule that William Ruto did not score up to the 50.5% announced for him, and hence declare a run-off, or to cancel the election altogether and order a rerun. The Court held that Ruto won. The other winner is Wafula Chebukati, Chairman of the Kenya Electoral Commission, who insisted on the integrity of the election conducted under his watch. As he announced the results on August 15, four of his commissioners walked out on him, led by Juliana Cherera, the vice chairperson of IEBC, and went on to announce their own verdict at a different location. Cherera and co rejected the results, saying it was “opaque”. Chebukati received death threats. The two remaining Commissioners who stood by him were beaten up. Odinga’s supporters were restless, and there were fears that Kenya could slip into another round of electoral violence as happened in 2017, when the Supreme Court overturned the Presidential election, and ordered a new election which led to an orgy of violence that claimed 1,100 lives and the displacement of thousands. 

In 2022, the Supreme Court of Kenya received a total of nine petitions, eight of which challenged Ruto’s election, while one supported his victory.  The Court chose to strike out two of the petitions and consolidate the remaining seven into one. It then further reduced the issues for determination to nine viz: Did the technology deployed by the IEBC meet standards of integrity? Was there interference in the transmission of Forms 34A? Were there significant differences between the physical Form 34A and what was loaded on the IEBC portal? Did the President-elect get 50% + one of the votes cast? Were there discrepancies in the results? Where were the irregularities alleged by the petitioners, if any, and to what degree? Did the IEBC act in accordance with the law?  Did the postponement of Mombasa and Kakamega governorship elections and other polls result in voter suppression? What relief and orders should the Supreme Court consider? In the course of the 14 days during which the petitions were considered, Odinga’s lawyers insisted that the IEBC election technology was tampered with, and that election servers were pre-configured by mercenaries from Venezuela who intercepted and manipulated results.

The Supreme Court of Kenya, in determining the nine issues identified, ruled entirely in favour of William Ruto and the IEBC, and dismissed the claims by the petitioners. They found that the petitioners did not prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, that there were no discrepancies, no interference in the verification, uploading and transmission of results, that there was no evidence of pre-configuration of results or conspiracy to taint the transmission process. The Court also upheld the authenticity of Form 34A, and accused the petitioners of pushing sensational information, hearsay evidence, and actions bordering on perjury, while blowing hot air, and going on a wild goose chase. Thus, along those lines, the Supreme Court of Kenya confirmed the election of William Ruto as the fifth President of Kenya.  

Their Lordships of the Supreme Court of Kenya deserve applause for giving a ruling that addresses the issues pointedly, promotes stability, and acquits the Court honourably in helping to protect democracy.  Days before the ruling, there had been speculations in Kenya that the Supreme Court had been intimidated and bribed by the President and the ODM candidate, Odinga, and that attempts had also been made to bribe the Chairman of IEBC, Chebukati. In the course of the election petition, there had been so much disinformation and misinformation with persons pushing all kinds of conspiracy theories on social media. The big issue in the 2022 Kenya election would seem to be the distrust between the people and their institutions. The petitioners fuelled that divisive factor by simply insisting that there was no way their man could lose. The whole matter got messy when John Githongo, Kenya’s corruption czar whose story has been told most eloquently in Michela Wrong’s book - It’s Our Turn to Eat - backed Odinga’s campaign and reported that he had information that indeed a 56-member hacker team manipulated Forms 34A. 

What the Supreme Court ruling has done is to confer legitimacy on the results as announced by Chebukati on August 15. Future reviews of the ruling may well indicate that the Court downplayed some of the limitations of the election, while focussing heavily on the sensational and conspiracy-laden submissions by the petitioners, but the position of the law today is that Ruto’s election stands. For Ruto’s supporters, this will strengthen their belief in Kenya’s democracy that it is indeed possible for the child of the poor to aspire to the highest position in the land. Except that Ruto had long ago moved from being a poor hustler, without a dynasty to a ranking member of the Kenyan establishment. For establishment figures like Kenyatta and Odinga, they are now under pressure to act like statesmen. As the Supreme Court delivered its ruling, anxious young Kenyans watched the proceedings on big screens on the streets of the Rift Valley of Eldoret and in Nakuru and Mt. Kenya: strongholds of the main gladiators.

On Sunday, both Ruto and Odinga promised to respect the decision of the Supreme Court. They must now be joined by President Uhuru Kenyatta and others in doing so. Shortly after the Supreme Court verdict, Martha Karua, Odinga’s running mate, wrote on Twitter: “The court has spoken. I respect its decision, but disagree with the findings.”  Her principal Raila Odinga said more or less the same thing. He too disagrees, and accuses the Supreme Court of using “unduly exaggerated language.”  But it is democracy that has won. It is time for Kenya to move on. Next week, William Ruto will be sworn in as next President of the Republic of Kenya. His victory has been hard-fought and hard-won. It is particularly instructive that ethnicity has not been a major, problematic factor in this election. Even in Bondo town, the Opoda home of Raila Odinga, there have been no protests. There have been no celebrations either.  The people say they are ready to work with the new President but he must not sideline the region. Raila Odinga should listen to his own people.  At the inauguration of the President next week, Kenyatta, Odinga, and all the other key figures in the election must project an image of unity, attend the occasion and show solidarity because Kenya is more important than their individual ambitions. William Ruto is not the “thug” or the “tanga tanga man”, Kenyatta says he is. He is the choice of the people of Kenya who certainly trust him to move their country forward.  

Congratulations, President William Ruto. It is now time for work! The issue of the legitimacy of the election may have been settled by the Supreme Court but there is the remaining issue of how to build trust in government and promote unity across Kenya. You promised to eschew the politics of vengeance, and run an inclusive government. You recently invited Odinga to come have a cup of tea and a conversation. You should extend that invitation again not just to Odinga, but also to Kenyatta and others. Your wife, Rachel Ruto has been quoting the Bible and talking about destiny. She is probably right: William Ruto would be the first Deputy President in Kenyan history to succeed his principal, and the second Kalenjin after Daniel Arap Moi, to become President. Both the burdens of history and office place a great responsibility on Ruto’s shoulders. He must proceed with maturity and wisdom in the best interest of the people of Kenya who are painfully weighed down by the high cost of everything from petrol to national sovereignty and security. And for us Nigerians: here is a lesson: Look at how the Presidential election petitions in Kenya were swiftly determined – all within two weeks, before swearing-in. In Nigeria, we delay so much and allow the declared winner to use state resources and institutions to determine outcomes.  We need to reform that aspect of our electoral process, to avoid unnecessary delays and manipulation of institutions, and to encourage our judges to be courageous, by conferring the Supreme Court of Nigeria with original jurisdiction in Presidential election matters since in any case, they are sui generis. 

On Monday, September 5, Mary Elizabeth Truss, 47, Liz Truss for short, was proclaimed the new leader of the UK Conservative Party, thus making her the new British prime Minister replacing Bris Johnson who resigned in July after his government was hit by what became known as the Party-gate scandal.  The Returning Officer for the election said Truss got 81, 326 votes - 57% while the runner up, Rishi Sunak got 60, 399 votes representing 43%. A total of 172, 437 Tories voted, turn-out was 82.6 %, only 654 votes were voided. It was a much smaller margin of victory than was predicted (just 18%) - which means that Truss as PM would have a lot of work to do to carry other party members along. Rishi Sunak certainly was not disgraced, and he has been most gentlemanly in promptly congratulating the winner and asking the party to unite behind her. He deserves praise for his courage and his refusal to drop the ball even when all pundits predicted a Truss win. His ideas may well still find accommodation in the new administration. 

Today, September 6, Truss and Boris Johnson will travel to Balmoral in Scotland together for Boris Johnson to take his leave, and for Truss to receive the Queen’s authority to form a government in line with the UK’s unwritten Constitution and the Queen’s role as Head of Government. They will depart from the Queen’s presence as a combination of the old and the new, and the beginning of a new momentum in Great Britain. In her acceptance speech, Truss praised Boris Johnson: “Boris, you got Brexit done, you crushed Jeremy Corbyn, you rolled out the vaccine, and you stood up to Vladimir Putin. You are admired from Kyiv to Carlisle.”   These are very kind words, and history may indeed be kind in the long run to Boris Johnson’s legacy, but it would also be remembered of him that he ended up as the first Prime Minister in UK history to have broken the law while in office. Truss is now the third woman to assume office as British Prime Minister after Margaret Thatcher and Theresa May before her. She says she is a modern-day Thatcherite: she wants to cut taxes, address the cost-of-living crisis, address the concerns of households and businesses, and deliver in the next two years and also deliver victory for the Conservative Party in 2024. But can Liz Truss be trusted to move from political rhetoric to action and truly deliver?  Her critics insist that she is a master of political convenience and chameleonic politics. With a political beginning as a Liberal Democrat who once advocated for the abolition of the British monarchy, she has shifted so ideologically along the political spectrum, between 2010 when she got elected to parliament till this moment, when she would lead Her Majesty’s Government. 

For her, it must be the best of times personally, but the worst of times to be Prime Minister. She is practically inheriting an “economic catastrophe” in the UK. Inflation is over 10%, the highest in 40 years. The cost-of-living crisis is so bad that families now skip meals and companies like Lewis Partnership are promising free meals for staff during winter. Even pub owners are saying, without government help, they may have to increase the cost of beer by 500% per pint, making it 20 pounds per pint! Many families can’t afford gas for vehicles or for their homes. Truss has not given any specific details as to what she would do, but certainly, this is no longer time to play to the gallery. 

Nigerians should watch the UK space closely as we prepare for the 2023 general election. Liz Truss is the product of a well-honed internal party democracy system, which we do not have in Nigeria. The Tory election was issues-driven. Here, our politicians don’t even understand the issues enough to talk coherently. Today, Liz Truss is likely to announce her cabinet. Tomorrow she will face PM’s Question Time in parliament and slug it out with Keir Starmer. She was born in 1975. Whoever wants to become Nigeria’s President in 2023, must pay attention, and learn the best lessons from other jurisdictions.         

Matthew Hassan Kukah, the Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese who turns 70 tomorrow, August 31, deserves celebration for his service to church, community, nation, and humanity, for his achievements as a true citizen who has used his priestly circumstances, boundless energy and prodigious intellect to promote the causes of justice and the common good. He stands shoulders above many of his contemporaries in his many engagements in the last four decades. He has been a priest for close to 50 years, but his range of influence goes beyond the pulpit to include scholarship, public intellectualism, civil society advocacy and the courage to provide leadership even in the most difficult situations. He is easily one of the best-known faces of the Catholic faith and priesthood in Nigeria. He remains an admirable advertisement of the virtues of Catholicism and the Church.

I am not a Catholic but I admire the Catholic Church, owing largely to my interaction over the years with Catholic priests like Bishop Kukah. I like the fact that the Catholic Church in Nigeria invests heavily in the training and education of its priests. It is mostly in the Catholic Church that you would find such exemplary priests that are usually educated to the highest levels possible. Many Catholic priests parade Ph.Ds as if it is a minimum qualification, in most cases Catholic priests display other skills, with language, research, public engagements and an unusual hunger for knowledge. The Anglican Church over time has also shown a similar commitment to the education of its priests, but the Catholic Church remains far ahead. In a country where many pastors and priests are at best spellbinders, hypnotists and clownish motivational speakers, and petty merchants with very little knowledge of the Holy Book, it is ever so refreshing to attend a Church or listen to a priest who speaks from an abundance of insight and talent. Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah belongs in this category. In the late 80s, the 90s and till date, he has been a shining star of the Catholic Church of Nigeria, who through his example inspires the younger generation, within the priesthood and the general Nigerian community.

I first met him on the pages of newspapers through his writings. In those days, the opinion pages of newspapers were dominated by persons of high intellect, most of whom dissected issues of the day, in beautiful prose, and with great erudition. Fr. Matthew Kukah, as he then was, was one of the most prolific, churning out essays, week after week. Those were the days of intimidating columnists sand contributors on the op-ed pages: to have your essay published on the same page with a Matthew Kukah, Pat Utomi, Herbert Ekwe-Ekwe, Chinweizu, Sonala Olumhense, Odia Ofeimun, Olatunji Dare, Edwin Madunagu, Biodun Jeyifo, Wole Soyinka, Femi Osofisan, Pini Jason, Andy Akporugo, Stanley Macebuh, Fred Onyeoziri, Emevwo Biakolo, Amma Ogan, Sully Abu, Effiong Essien, Ashikiwe Adione-Egom…was like winning a jackpot. Many of us framed the pages, and looked up to the big names.  The times are different today. Our newspapers have stopped serving culture and society and the reader as spaces for great intellection, the tradition of old has been replaced by “opinionitis”, a very dangerous disease which pushes just about anyone to think they can inflict bad prose and thoughts on a vanishing breed of readers anyway. Matthew Kukah’s contributions to public discourse was frequent, and often well-received. He was not afraid of debates or intellectual pugilism.  In those days, one subject on the pages of a newspaper could result in months of rigorous debate, from a multi-disciplinary perspective, by persons who respected each other’s intellect but nevertheless had the capacity to weave words into prose and good sense. This was the tradition that we grew into, from university to the field. Kukah was a major source of inspiration and a good sport. Many of his opinion pieces and extended essays remain timeless. 

Bishop Kukah’s stature began to flower, even more so in his position at the Catholic Secretariat of Nigeria: he was first a Deputy Secretary General, then he became the Secretary-General of the Catholic Secretariat, located in Lagos, directly opposite Tafawa Balewa Square or Race Course as it was originally known.  Under his watch as leader of that Secretariat, it became an important intellectual rendezvous for civil society groups and public intellectuals in the entire Southern Nigeria. Kukah built a very strong relationship with the media, promoting, most actively, both the Catholic Church, and the activities of the Catholic Bishops Conference, focusing on issues of justice, peace and development. When Nigeria descended into chaos in 1993, with the annulment of the June 12 1993 Presidential election, church and society rose against the impunity of the military establishment, and called for an end to military rule and respect for the people’s sovereignty. The majority spoke with one voice that military absolutism had defeated the purpose of good governance and that it was time for the Nigerian military to go. The Catholic Church spoke truth to power on the pulpit and on the streets. Leaders of other churches – the Anglican, the Methodist and Pentecostal Churches also joined the protest.  The. Catholic Secretariat in Lagos served the Catholics as an intellectual power house. Kukah had able lieutenants: Fr. George Ehusani, his then Deputy who would later succeed him as Secretary-General. There were others too: Rev. John Uba Ofei and Rev. Fr. Iheanyi Enwerem. 

On a regular basis, the Secretariat issued press releases and also organized seminars and conferences on various topics of interest with stakeholders brought together to chart the way forward for Nigeria. I was a familiar participant at those Sunday evening sessions. Many of us became so close to the Catholic priests, we began to also talk about liberation theology. Nigerians had been so badly treated many priests felt it was their obligation and ecclesiastical duty to help free the people from the shackles of of oppression. Even when there was no seminar, the doors of the Catholic Secretariat were always open. I later developed the habit of stopping by whenever I was in that part of the city. On a good evening, there was always sumptuous dinner. And the fridge was always full. Beer, wine…And there was Fr. George often twanging away on his guitar, trying out a new song, or reading a poem. He would later succeed Kukah as Secretary General and indeed that period – the Kukah-Ehusani - could be remembered as the golden years of the Catholic Secretariat of Nigeria. Kukah left behind a legacy that raised the profile of the Secretariat and the Church. 

Beyond his public intellectualism and duties as a priest, Bishop Kukah has also been very active within the general community as an agent of peace and promoter of good governance and the common good. He is a compulsive bridge-builder, with friends in virtually every corner, and so well established is he among the political and private sector elite of Nigeria that many of his critics try to take pot-shots at him that he would still need to make up his mind whether he wants to be a priest or a politician. In recent years, through his major project, the Kukah Centre, he has been working in Nigeria’s post-military dispensation to promote the cause of peace, good governance, and stability. The Centre in collaboration with General Abdusalami Abubakar, Nigeria’s last military ruler up until 1999 to date, has jointly promoted a National Peace Committee, which gets politicians before elections to sign peace accords and give undertakings that they would embrace peace, as well as promoting peace in Nigerian communities. Kukah was a member of the National Human Rights Investigation Commission, Nigeria’s equivalent of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, also known as the Oputa Panel 1999 – 2001, Secretary of the National Political Reform Conference under the Obasanjo administration in 2005, Chairman of the Ogoni-Shell Reconciliation Committee since 2005, and member of the committee for electoral reform, 2007 – 2009.  

In addition to this, Bishop Kukah is a strong advocate for inter-religious harmony, using every opportunity to promote tolerance and peace. For his efforts, he has been appointed to the Pontifical Council for Inter-Religious Dialogue at the Vatican and as Chairman of the Commission on Inter-Religious Dialogue of the Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria. He has also enjoyed a level of visibility and influence that many priests can only dream about. He has probably given as many homilies at events organized by other churches as he has done on Catholic occasions. Political leaders seek his counsel. The intellectual class and the commentariat respect him as one of their own. The establishment at state and national levels seek his attention and counsel because they know that he can be trusted to say the truth without fear or favour. He is not a prosperity or attention-seeking priest. He and others like him including those that I mentioned earlier are cut from a different cloth. Priests of his type present a different model from that other Catholic priest: Fr. Ejike Mbaka of the Adoration Ministries in Enugu. It is a measure of the diversity of the Catholic Church that it is even possible to mention an Ejike in a tribute to Bishop Matthew Kukah. As it were, virtually every Nigerian government has learnt to respect Bishop Matthew Kukah. The only exception has been the Buhari administration whose agents and spokespersons recently developed a passion for harassing the priest. He has challenged them to an open debate. They have not been able to take on that challenge. Meanwhile, Kukah has remained unrelenting in his chosen task of speaking truth to power and exposing chicanery, hypocrisy and the stupidity of hegemons no matter how dandified.   

It is not surprising that Kukah is a much sought-after public lecturer. He has given lectures on virtually every important platform in Nigeria, from convocation ceremonies to funerals to anniversaries. He stands out as a consistent man of intellect, with a transparent public spirit. He likes to tell stories: his usual style is to tell a story, catch the attention of his audience with some humour, of course except he is discussing such grim subjects as the killing of his kith and kin in Zango-Kataf in Southern Kaduna or members of his diocese in Sokoto state, or any form of religious persecution, or the failings of the power elite, having learnt the art of choosing his topics with purpose. To mark his 70^th birthday, Bishop Kukah is announcing his plans to build a befitting edifice for the Kukah Centre, one of Africa’s leading policy think-tanks. He and the Centre deserve every possible support on a sustainable basis.  The Centre would be a major legacy offering from a priest who is on way easily to becoming a legend. Ahead of tomorrow’s event, he recently released a book titled Broken Truths: Nigeria’s Elusive Quest for National Cohesion. Author of many articles in academic journals, Kukah remains conscious of his training and exposure as an academic: diploma, University of Ibadan, B.A., Pontifical Urban University, Rome.  M.A., Peace Studies, University of Bradford, (1980), Ph.D, Political Science, University of London (1990), Edward Mason Fellow, Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government; Rhodes Fellow, St. Antony’s College, University of Oxford, Honorary Fellow, Nigeria Academy of Letters. The harvest from his fecund mind has been rich and impressive including some of the most authoritative books on aspects of Nigerian history such as: Religion, Politics and Power in Northern Nigeria (1993) – perhaps his most seminal work, Religious Militancy and Self-Assertion: Islam and Politics in Nigeria (1997); Democracy and Civil Society in Nigeria (2001); Witness to Justice: An Insider’s Account of Nigeria’s Truth Commission (2011), and Broken Truths (2022).

At 70, Bishop Kukah can reminisce with a strong measure of contentment that he has been able to impact many lives, using his chosen vocation of priesthood to make a difference in the lives of those to whose spiritual health he ministers and the larger community of men and women who have drawn inspiration from his wealth of knowledge, humility and accomplishments. As a person, Bishop Kukah is friendly, kind-hearted and always ready with a listening ear. Nobody has given him any national honour. He probably does not need it. Nigeria’s security agencies have stalked and questioned him. He has been abused and threatened for his no-holds-barred homilies. He has been labelled a religious bigot. He is, however, not afraid of authority figures because of his own commitments to a higher cause and his understanding of the dynamics of power. Those who use power and position to oppress the harmless, do so only for a while until they are reminded of the ephemerality of their advantages. Whatever may have been his travails, Kukah’s critics lay the blame at the doorstep of the ambivalence of his insider-outsider relationship with power and politics. But it can be said of Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah that he has lived a life entirely of service and that is the best kind of life. He deserves to be celebrated. What we will be celebrating is not material things and the celebrant is not likely to be decked out in flowing babariga or agbada, the accent would be on service, innovation, ideas, goodness, justice, peace and humanism. I join others in wishing Bishop Kukah many happy returns of the day. He is one of the few redemptive figures in a community of pastors and priests where sometimes it is difficult to truly know what has happened to Christian leadership in our land.  To Bishop Kukah: 70 Hearty Cheers!  

City FM is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.

Programme: CITY TALKS WITH REUBEN ABATI

Time: 12:00pm

Guest: Sunday Asefon (NANS PRESIDENT)

Topic: ASUU and the prolonged Strike

Date: Saturday, August 27, 2022

Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/92877141732?pwd=VEJWb29OL2VVekZUTHRpdWYxK0xxZz