Our values as a people have broken down. There is no better place to witness the madness than the social media where apparent cowards hide behind digital anonymity to cast aspersions on the integrity of their betters.

It was sad seeing the kind of insults some misguided elements were flinging at Prof Wole Soyinka over his recent tv interview at which he addressed a number of national issues on his return from an overseas trip.

Wole Soyinka is probably the most violated public figure in our recent history. There is a whole industry devoted to misattributing various sentiments to the Nobel Laureate on virtually every subject under the sun.

In the run-up to the recent elections in Nigeria, some candidates resorted to name dropping and outright fake endorsements to hoodwink the public. Soyinka’s name featured prominently in the many endorsement tracts circulated by candidates who couldn’t even manage to compose such endorsements in Soyinka’s inimitable style. Imagine a string of ill-composed sentences violently standing logic on its head with the name Wole Soyinka at the end as the author!

Prof Soyinka had issued rebuttals on many occasions. But these never-say-die nonentities are so committed to their evil pastime that they compound their insolence with even more odious impudence. Last year, when cyberwarriors assembled by one of the presidential candidates issued a barely literate statement in the name of Prof Soyinka endorsing their candidate, I warned that they were taking their desperation too far.

Soyinka had been out of the country. On his return he reiterated that he had not endorsed any candidate in the elections. He described the 2023 elections as “not exactly the most edifying exercise that we’ve been through.”

“On arriving”, he said, ”I was bombarded by the most horrendous narratives both pre and after the elections. Since then, I’ve also read columns; I’ve seen Nigerian papers for the first time in months and I didn’t like what I read at all… My trust has broken down completely … and even the minimum restraint that we’ve learnt to expect from seasoned politicians have been jettisoned completely.”

He noted that the nation was moving towards a situation, which was not planned, but one that happened fortuitously, where the existing mould would be broken “despite die-hard opposition to the breaking of that mould”. He was not enamoured of the do-or-die style of politicking in Nigeria, advocating instead for a celebratory kind of ballot exercise in which elections are like festivals of democracy.

Prof Soyinka noted that the comments of the Labour Party Vice Presidential Candidate, Datti Baba-Ahmed, on Channels Television were unacceptable and capable of alienating supporters. Senator Babe-Ahmed had said the decision of the Supreme Court must be favourable to the Labour Party and that swearing in the man declared by the electoral commission as the President-elect, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, would truncate Nigeria’s democracy. Of all the things Soyinka said, the only part singled out for excoriation was his comment on the recent interview of Datti Baba-Ahmed.

Many people who fancy themselves as ‘more obidient than Peter Obi’ have reduced the discourse to a feast of diatribes and an exhibition of ill breeding. I do not expect us all to have the same reactions to the same stimuli. However, I will never get tired of repeating that in Africa, we do not insult our elders the way some of these hyperactive activists do. One could disagree with Soyinka on matters of fact or principle, but that cannot be a licence to insult a man with Soyinka’s pedigree.

Soyinka has been a beacon, not only for his generation, but for several generations since he burst onto the national scene with his play, A Dance of the Forests, which was staged as part of the celebration of Nigeria’s Independence in 1960.

When the civil war broke out, at a time when it wasn’t fashionable to associate with anything ‘Biafran’, Soyinka took the risk to try and broker some sort of truce between the federal and Eastern sides. He sneaked into Biafra to meet with Ojukwu, a visit which the erstwhile Biafran leader shared with me during a MONTHLY LIFE interview with him in the 80s. When I asked Ojukwu why he and Soyinka could not agree on a way out of the shooting war, Ojukwu smiled and said, “Let me just say that he had his strong views and I had mine. There is no doubt that Soyinka is a man of strong convictions, but so am I”.

Soyinka was thrown into jail when he returned from Biafra. He spent the rest of the war years in jail. He  has since made up with the principal actors of the civil war on both sides of the divide, General Gowon and General Ojukwu. It is quite a feat to have been relevant to one’s nation for more than six decades and that privilege is given only to a few. On the academic turf, he has numbered among the very best on the planet with a Nobel under his belt. He is a man of his convictions.

To be sure, Soyinka is not infallible. He can be wrong like any of us. But on the issue of totally ceding control in electoral contests to the judiciary, I do agree with him; no one should be seen to be threatening the arbiter.  And I don’t subscribe to the emerging culture of mob intimidation and lowlife lingo.

The dim side of this cyber-bullying is that it splits the ranks of progressive elements down the middle. The other day, I received a lesson in how cohesive groups could be torn asunder. It was an interview on a popular US tv network. The interviewee, a noted Republican, was educating the reporter on how Donald Trump’s  shenanigans had divided the Republican Party. He noted that the party was now made up of the die-hards on one side and ‘rationalists’ on the other.

In the same vein, I’m afraid, the supporters of the Labour Party are entering a phase of unnecessary division. For a party which has set a historic template of leveraging on mass-oriented e-groups whose selflessness is unprecedented, the wise thing to do at this stage is to concentrate on the court cases. I have said it before, and it bears repeating: In matters such as the ones before their Lordships, Justices of the Supreme Court, water can still run uphill!

It doesn’t take much time for matters such as the intemperate language being deployed by some of those who think they are doing the Obi-Datti ticket a favour, to take the centre-stage and turn brother against brother — even within the movement.

Former presidential aspirant, Kingsley Moghalu quickly intervened on Soyinka’s side: “Nobel Laureate Wole Soyinka is a principled fighter for justice in our country and around the world. He is a phenomenon that unlettered and uncultured people may not fully understand in an age of lazy social media in which many don’t read or think deep.”

I have read some of the arguments justifying the use of intemperate language on some media platforms. One contributor even made allusion to a statement credited to General Buhari in the heat of his quest for the presidency. The kare jini biri jini Hausa parable was interpreted by some to denote ‘fire for fire’. But educators like Dr. Aliyu U. Tilde have deconstructed the proverb to mean a tough contest in which both parties suffer injuries: “The dog gives up hunting for that day, returns home and is granted a sick leave by its master. The baboon keeps his life and his baby and remains in his territory or migrates to a safer one.…”

So, weaponising the Hausa parable to justify incendiary language easily goes up in smoke.

However, one remembers that the ruling APC threatened in 2015 to form a parallel government if the elections were rigged. I do, by the way, consider that threat fascistic too. The security agencies looked the other way at that time, so why all the hoopla against the Labour Party this time around?

Whatever happens, I repudiate the culture of insolence gaining a foothold on social media. I insist that everyone has a right to determine where he draws the line in human relations and shared passions. I have drawn mine.

ADIEU, ALHAJI B. A. IDRIS-ANIMASHAUN

Alhaji Bashir Alade Idris-Animashaun, former Chairman of Academy Press Plc and other sister companies, was called to glory last week at 89. He was a mentor of mentors and one of the pioneers and pillars of the printing industry in Nigeria. He came, he saw, he conquered. He will be sorely missed by all who knew him. May Allah grant him Aljannah firdaus.

“Life is short. Life is short. Life is short. Make hay while the sun shines. Make hay while the sun shines. Make hay while the sun shines,” the preacher bellowed. While I was still in a state of bewilderment trying to grasp his drift, the preacher said, “Work while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work”.

It was not a lengthy sermon, but the clergyman concluded by calling on all who heard him to channel their time, energy and resources to do the things they wish to be remembered for, before their time on earth is over, because according to him, life is short.

As I drove home in sober meditation, the words of my mentor of blessed memory, the unforgettable Oronto Natei Douglas, popularly known as OND, came knocking in the innermost recesses of my heart: “Ipi, the world is not waiting for us. We must work fast and work right too.” But why would Oronto be so much immersed in a work that he profits little or nothing from directly? This was a question I couldn’t ask him for the close to two decades period that I worked with him as an aide. On the other hand, was Oronto like the children of Issachar, who were men that had understanding of the times?

In my curiosity to link the words of the preacher with those of OND, I perused through the several Bible references the preacher quoted and I discovered the hidden secret of OND’s untiring commitment to his advocacy and developmental work  in John 3: 16 - “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life”.

I came to the understanding that the only thing that would make someone to give his or her best sacrificially to others is love. OND lived a sacrificial life of service, powered by love. He gave his best to his community, state, region and country. Oronto joined his ancestors on 9^th April, 2015 at the prime age of forty-eight (48) years. His departure has created a very large void that is still noticeable, eight years after.

Oronto did contribute to the advancement of the human race much more than most people who lived for over a century, and this is a lesson that age is only but a number. His enduring legacies as a brand of exceptional enthusiast for justice and development remains glaring.

OND’s life as a crusader of social/human rights and environmental justice manifested in his childhood age. Growing up, the Okoroba, Ebela Kingdom-born activist challenged his teacher at St Mark’s Primary School, Okoroba, in his early years of primary education. The contention was that OND failed to attend a Sunday Church Service (which was compulsory in those days for all pupils) and a particular teacher who was on a fishing expedition instead of being in church wanted to flog him as punishment.

OND vehemently protested to the headmaster of the school, contending that the teacher had no moral right to flog him since that teacher also failed to attend the church service. The headmaster listened to the case and set Oronto and the other pupils who were yet to receive their punishment, free. From that day till Oronto left his community, he became a voice to all the pupils in the school, and he never disappointed any. He was loved by both the pupils and teachers as well because he was not only brilliant but would always speak the truth.

Oronto’s voice against injustice became louder as he grew older. At the United Comprehensive High School (UCHS), Wasimi, Abeokuta, where he had his post-primary education, Oronto became a symbol of justice. He defended severally, especially the weak students in the school, against unwarranted punishments. At a point, his name became a brand. When OND was appointed as the Deputy Senior Prefect, he ensured that no student was punished unjustly. Oronto’s personal belief was that good must be rewarded with good and evil must in same manner receive its due reprimand. Academically, OND was a force to be reckoned with, in the arts subjects. He was the leader of the UCHS Wasimi drama/debating society and he won several laurels for the school within and outside Ogun State.

During his tertiary education at the Rivers State University of Science and Technology (RSUST), now Rivers State University, Port Harcourt, OND served his favorite platter of intellectually fighting against injustice, to the university community. He was the Editor-in-Chief of the University Press Club. He also coordinated activities of the Civil Liberty Organization. Through these platforms, OND defended and promoted the rights of students on campus. His press work became so strong that the University authorities of RSUST as well as the leadership of the Student Union Government were kept on their toes throughout the duration of his Bachelor of Laws (LLB) study. Oronto also attended the famous De Monfort University, Leicester - United Kingdom, where he obtained a master’s degree in environmental law.

Like my beloved father of blessed memory (Elder Elegumo Jackson Oruwari Oghe) would always stress – the greatness of a man is not in his possessions, but in the sacrifices he makes for the good of others and the society. Oronto’s greatness was neither in his possession nor in his intellectual/oratorical prowess. Oronto is remembered today for his life of sacrifice and service propelled by love. In his lifework, communities and peoples were at the center stage. OND was a voice for the voiceless, a defender for the defenseless, an environmental and human rights advocate and above all, a lover of peace, justice and development.

It was for the love of Nigeria that Oronto joined others to fight for the return of democracy. He suffered several arrests, detentions and brutalization from the Nigerian military in the struggle to end military dictatorship in Nigeria.

It was for the love of Ogoni that Oronto joined the team of lawyers that defended Ken Saro Wiwa pro bono. In his stance and battle on the side of justice for the people and land of Ogoni, OND and others received the beating of their lives on the orders of the despicable Lieutenant-Colonel Paul Okuntimo, the commander of the Rivers State Internal Security Task Force, then. Oronto, Uche Onyeagucha and Nick Ashon-Jones, a British national, each received one hundred strokes of the cane and forced to lie in the rain thereafter.

The plan was for the trio to be shot once Okuntimo returned from the Officer’s Mess, where he had gone to watch the FIFA World Cup football match between Nigeria and Bulgaria. It was the victory of Nigeria over Bulgaria, that made Okuntimo to change his mind. Indeed, God moves in a mysterious way.

It was for the love of the hapless people of the Niger Delta that OND confronted the multinational oil companies in Nigeria such as Shell, Agip, Chevron and Elf over the environmental degradation occasioned by the activities of the oil companies. He advocated for resource control, self-determination and environmental security in Nigeria.  On this cause, he met with world leaders, including President Bill Clinton, and gave parliamentary briefings in many countries on issues of environmental/human rights and livelihood.

Oronto believed that oppressed people only had their chains to lose. In this regard, he founded and co-founded several non-governmental and community-based organizations to serve as platforms for the oppressed communities and locals to confront the brazen injustice that was being dished out on them daily. Organizations such as the reputable Environmental Rights Action/Friends of the Earth (ERA), Ijaw Youth Council (IYC), Chikoko Movement, Niger Delta Resource Centre, Ogbia Study Group (OSG), Community Defence Law Foundation (CDLF), Douglas Educational Foundation, and many more. His commitment to strengthening the organizations was unflagging and strong as if the entirety of his life depended on them.

OND committed his body, soul and spirit to doggedly fight, not only for the people and the environment of the Niger Delta, but also for a better Nigeria. He was fearless in his call for the abrogation of the Land Use Decree and the restructuring of Nigeria.

I recall vividly in 1999, when former President Olusegun Obasanjo forcefully grasped a microphone from Oronto in Port Harcourt, when Oronto called on him to retract the Land Use Act and grant the Niger Delta Region self-determination and resource control. It resulted in a physical struggle between Oronto and President Obasanjo on who should have the microphone, but thanks to the elders who intervened.

It is worthy of note that the tension and resistance Obasanjo met from the Niger Delta under the intellectual command of OND were the major factors that made him establish the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC). His crusade as well as pressures on the Federal Government from other credible voices in the region resulted in the increase in oil Derivation Fund to 13%.

Oronto’s exploits are too numerous to be listed in this short piece of eulogy for want of space. He did a lot to advance the prosperity of humanity. In all his outstanding legacies, one area that displayed his exceptional love for children and youth progress was in his well-crafted educational programmes.

When in the 90s Oronto initiated an annual programme he christened “EDUCATION FIRST” in his native home of Okoroba, I never knew that it was a prelude to what is set to spread in different dimensions. The idea of the programme was to promote education as the nerve centre of community development and to make it available to all children of his hometown.

In the programme, Oronto gave prizes accompanied with an award of scholarship to the three best pupils in each class. He also provided complimentary prizes and educational gift items to all the pupils. It was a programme that thrusted a new concept of academic competition amongst the pupils on who next to win Oronto’s prize and scholarship.

In pursuit of his vision to provide quality education for all kids living in Okoroba, OND later built and equipped a world-class nursery school to serve as ‘feedstock’ to the primary school. At the kindergarten school, Oronto provided all educational materials needed by the enrollees, ranging from school uniforms, shoes, bags, books/writing materials to snacks, etc.

As one who believes in the collective growth and development of all, and not just his native home, Oronto provided educational support services to some schools in rural communities. Oronto launched the “FREE SCHOOL UNIFORM PROJECT” to make it exciting for children to want to go to school. Under this programme OND provided free school uniforms to pupils. Notable amongst them are Community Primary School, Obeduma, State School I, Idema, State School II, Idema, State School, Agrisaba, State School I, Epebu, State School II, Epebu, Community Primary School Ewoma II, State School I Anyama, State School II, Anyama, Oruamabiri Primary School, Nembe, Okoroba School I, Okoroba School II, etc., all in Bayelsa State. This was done in 2005, 2007, 2009, 20011, 2013 and 2015.

When OND served as a Special Adviser to former President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan, he launched the Bring Back the Book (BBB) Initiative.  This was a strategy to revitalize the reading culture, with knowledge serving as a tool for development. This programme derived from OND’s belief that the secrets of good governance, amazing discoveries, development, progressive management principles and every legitimate desire of prosperous nations are hidden in books, and that only through reading, can the leaders of tomorrow nurture dreams and values that can change society for the common good. The programme which was launched in Lagos attracted Nigeria’s literary giants in attendance. One of the highlights of the BBB was the distribution of books in tens of thousands to attendees and children in the slums of Lagos such as Makoko. The BBB programme spread to Jos, Benin City, Yenagoa and Abuja before the transition of OND.

As a lover of academics and driven by the need to provide a resource base for the continuing support of communal development and for the public good, Oronto also initiated the COMMUNITY LIBRARY PROJECTS, wherein he built and equipped several community libraries. Under this project, OND facilitated the construction of libraries in communities across the country.

The first library and pilot project started in the personal house of Oronto Douglas in Yenagoa, Bayelsa State, and he named it in honour of foremost educationist, historian and specialist on Niger Delta, Professor E.J Alagoa. Others include the Chief Melford Okilo Library in Ogbia Town; Dr. Goodluck Jonathan Library in Okoroba; Prof Bruce Powell Library at the Federal University, Otuoke; Obigbo Mikimiki Library in Opume; Prof C.T.I Odu Library in Twon Brass; Obafemi Awolowo Library in Irele-Ikole Ekiti - Ekiti State; Resident Tuodolo Library in Bomadi - Delta State; Nkwot Library/Resource Centre Akwa-Ibom State, and a yet-to-be-named library in Umuobuna-Ohaozara - Ebonyi State.

Oronto also provided support to several organizations. Groups such as Women Writers of Nigeria (WRITA), Human Rights Writers Association, CORA Art & Cultural Foundation, Journalists for Democratic Rights (JODER), Association of Women Librarians (AWLIN) etc., were beneficiaries of OND’s benevolence.

As I reflect on the departure of this great soul, I am pained that many of Oronto’s projects, especially the ones in Bayelsa State are left to rot away. As I pen this piece of tribute in remembrance of Oronto, the Professor E.J Alagoa Library, Dr. Goodluck Jonathan Library, Chief Melford Okilo Library etc., are no longer functional. I therefore wish to use this medium to appeal to the Bayelsa State Government to revive these legacy library projects and bring them back to a state of usefulness. This is necessary as it will serve as a means of encouraging others who have good intentions to impact on their communities. Also, the libraries are viable resources that can positively shape the minds of our youths for greatness.

Like my grandmother will say “he who gives you a book, gives you a great future”, Oronto indeed, gave a great future to Ogbia, Bayelsa, the Niger Delta and Nigeria. But how are these regions memorializing this great soul? Will the good works of Oronto go unrewarded? On this 8^th memorial of OND, these thoughts now cloud my brow.

Though the erudite Oronto Natei Douglas lived a short life, he greatly impacted positively on humanity. He was a lover of people, a crusader of peace and equity, a detribalized Nigerian, a scholar, a strategist, a philanthropist, a helper, a giver, a mobilizer, a mentor, a motivator and a conduit for blessing others. He was a brand of exceptional enthusiast for justice and development. One of the global best and Nigeria’s shining light has gone. What a pain! What an irreplaceable loss!

However, I am particularly grateful to God for the privilege to know and work with this extraordinary soul, whose heart for charity was legendary. May God who never rests by day or night, continue to rest OND’s soul in eternity and grant his family peace and comfort. Amen.

Engr. Ipigansi Okumo is the General Secretary of the Ogbia Brotherhood Unity Branch - Abuja, and a member of the Ogbia Study Group. He worked with Oronto Douglas for about two decades.

In my experience of presidential elections in Nigeria, I must necessarily admit that 2023 is the most dramatic so far — and something tells me I have not seen anything yet. I am not talking about the drama of candidates winning or losing in unexpected places. That is lovely. That is what I live for as a journalist: looking out for the unusual event, the outlier, the against-the-grain stories. The more, the merrier. As journalism students, we were taught that the uniqueness of an event is the story. We were told “dog bites man” is no news, except the man is prominent, say a governor or celebrity. The real news is “man bites dog”, except, well, the man in question just had a “404” or “Lokili” delicacy.

The unusualness of the 2023 presidential election is no longer about man biting dog. Otherwise, I would be enjoying it in full. We are now in a dangerous, perhaps unprecedented phase, one I have never seen before, one that is capable of turning the country upside down. In an election season, there are issues at every stage: before, during and after voting. During pre-election, there are court cases, intra-party crises, accusations of planned rigging, etc. During the election, there are accusations and counter-accusations of rigging. Winners would say the election was free and fair while losers would call it the worst in history. All these have become dog-bites-man stories to me.

However, I think this is the first time I am witnessing a situation where election petitions are before the tribunal and the petitioners and their supporters are practically in the media daily arguing their case, mounting enormous pressure on the judiciary and trying to delegitimise the institution even before the tribunal starts sitting. Usually, dog bites man: petitioners wait for the judgement before making comments. If the judgment is favourable to them, Nigeria’s judiciary gets rated as the best in sub-Saharan Africa. If things go otherwise, the judiciary becomes the most corrupt in the world. But the entire Nigerian judiciary is already on a wheelchair when the petitions are yet to be argued.

I can understand the campaign that the final verdict should be given before the May 29 inauguration. There are fears that once a new president is sworn in, the tribunal is highly unlikely to unseat him. So, it is argued that for the sake of fair play, or level field, the litigation should be dispensed with before May 29. Can a tribunal nullify the election of a sitting president? It has never happened before in Nigeria, but that does not mean it can’t happen. Mr Peter Obi unseated a governor in 2006 by going through the judicial process. It was rare, the first in the third republic, but it happened. In 2017, Kenya’s presidential poll was annulled and a rerun ordered by the Supreme Court. It was a first.

Although many Nigerians want an expedited process, the laws have already stipulated the deadlines for the trial. Even after the petitions are determined by the tribunal, there is still a right of appeal to the Supreme Court. In my opinion, the speed of the trial will be determined by the complexity of the case. Some arguments look more straightforward than the others. For me, issues around an alleged criminal conviction, 25 percent requirement in federal capital territory, alleged double nomination, and the failure of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to upload the result sheets of the presidential poll in real time to IReV should not be too complicated for the tribunal to decide.

But the core case of rigging is one that usually takes more time and energy. Lawyers to Obi, the Labour Party candidate, have listed 18,000 polling units (PUs) where they want to challenge the results. You would agree with me that 18,000 result sheets cannot be scrutinised in a hurry. This has mellowed my enthusiasm about a speedy trial. I am not holding my breath that this can be concluded, along with a possible appeal, before May 29. Examining 18,000 result sheets is no tea party. More so, the All Progressives Congress (APC) may also counter-sue and challenge results in some PUs. They too may want to scrutinise thousands of result sheets. Can this be fast-tracked?

Nonetheless, I support the campaign for a fast-tracked process, but we cannot hurry the judiciary. While it is said that justice delayed is justice denied, there is also an axiom that justice hurried is justice buried. We need a balance. My first choice, always, is for justice to be done as quickly as possible, preferably before May 29. But it is not my call. It is not our call. There is also a campaign for the proceedings to be televised live. While I would love this too, I do not think it will happen. Court proceedings are hardly televised live. I don’t know why. Ex-US President Donald Trump just appeared before a court in New York for a criminal trial. Only his entry into the courtroom was televised live.

While I am not worried about the campaigns for speedy trial and live telecast of the tribunal proceedings because these are legitimate and legal demands, I am deeply disturbed by comments that are injurious to the institutions of democracy. When a case is before a court of law, a litigant is not supposed to make comments that could be subjudice. It not only violates the ethics of the legal profession, it can actually be treated as contempt of court. A lawyer for one of the parties has written and distributed an article on the 25 percent requirement despite filing a petition. Arguments that should be canvassed in court are now being pushed in the media. It doesn’t sound right to me.

Dr Datti Baba-Ahmed, Obi’s vice-presidential candidate and a party to the election petition before the tribunal, was on TV the other day saying Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the legally recognised president-elect except otherwise declared by a court of law, should not be sworn in. He called on President Muhammadu Buhari and the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) not to inaugurate him. He said Tinubu does not meet the constitutional requirement of scoring 25 percent in the federal capital and that his own interpretation is final and not subject to debate. I don’t think this is the right path. Why then did his party approach the election tribunal for justice? And why do we need the judiciary at all?

I recall that in 2007, President Olusegun Obasanjo did everything in the books to stop Vice-President Atiku Abubakar from succeeding him in office after they had a very public spat. The PDP did a membership revalidation exercise and weeded out Atiku’s core supporters. Atiku defected from the PDP and joined Tinubu’s Action Congress (AC), where he was given the presidential ticket. Obasanjo declared Atiku’s VP position vacant for defecting from the PDP but the courts overruled him. Obasanjo went ahead to set up a panel to indict Atiku on corruption charges and INEC quickly excluded him from the presidential election. The Supreme Court overruled Obasanjo and INEC.

I also need to make a point here: I have never heard Obi denigrate or intimidate the judiciary since he came into politics. He ran for governorship in Anambra in 2003. He believed it was rigged. He went to court. The PDP used all the tactics in the book to stretch the trial. He did not budge. It took three years but he got judgment and went on to govern Anambra state for eight years. When he was illegally impeached in 2006, he did not talk much. He went to the court and he was restored. When INEC tried to undermine him in 2007 by conducting an election when his tenure was still valid, he did not raise hell. He headed to the courts. He won. He never commented while the cases were ongoing.

That is why I find it disturbing that some leading lights in his camp are resorting to these tactics. Maybe Obi needs to have a word with them. I accept that Obi is no longer what he used to be — he has become a legend and some hardliners now surround him. However, for someone who has been a beneficiary of justice at a time Nigerians did not have much faith in the courts (for the record, only Obi won his petition in the 2003 governorship election), he is not being well served by those stirring up anti-judiciary sentiments at this critical juncture. In fact, some of his supporters have second-guessed the courts and concluded that Obi has already lost the election petition by unfair means.

You may call me naïve but I insist that the focus should be on the strength of the case before the tribunal and every party to the suit must give the judiciary a benefit of the doubt. We just have to trust the process. That is what we are left with, legally speaking. Or, if I may ask, if we do not trust the judiciary, what are the options? One lawyer suggested that Senate President Ahmad Lawan, a member of Tinubu’s APC, should act as president from May 29 until the election petition is concluded. Lawan recently benefited from a controversial Supreme Court decision on his candidacy. Some people are so emotional and desperate that they are not thinking before talking again.

Let us give democracy a chance. It has an in-built capacity to correct itself and grow organically. Our elections today are better than they were in 1999. For instance, in 2003, Obasanjo was suspiciously credited with 2,003,521 out of the 2,171,215 votes cast in Rivers state. Today, no candidate can claim two million votes in Rivers again. Think about that again and again. That is progress. Same 2003, Obasanjo (PDP) got 1,360,170 votes from Ogun state. Otunba Gbenga Daniel (also PDP) won governorship but with just 449,335 of 681,317 votes. Both elections were held simultaneously, with each voter given the two ballot papers. Yet, Obasanjo managed to poll 910,000 more than Daniel.

What is my point? We should not seek to damage our democracy by delegitimising its institutions because of their failings. We should allow the process to cleanse itself. Since 1999, people have been losing elections and seeking redress constitutionally and some have won their cases based on merit. Obi is a living example. Let us keep the faith. Let us trust the process. Those angling for an interim government or military involvement are canvassing things not known to our laws. It may sound sexy today, but so did it appear when some activists were asking Gen Sani Abacha to take over power in 1993. We paid the price for years and I am not even sure we have stopped writhing in the pains.

By and large, this post-election circus around the judiciary needs to either end or be toned down drastically. People are free to protest or counter-protest as they like. People can write to President Joe Biden or Prime Minister Rishi Khan if that is their understanding of promoting electoral justice. No law is being violated that way. What we should discourage is the denigration or intimidation of the judiciary because we desire a particular outcome. There is no way this democracy can grow when those who know the laws and the processes resort to subtle blackmail just to have their way. Let the petitions be judged by the strength of legal arguments, not the intensity of media campaign. Please.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

ORONTO NATEI DOUGLAS

Eight years ago, Oronto Natei Douglas, campaigner for environmental justice and special assistant to President Goodluck Jonathan on documentation and strategy, took a final bow from this world after a stubborn battle with cancer. The day he told me doctors had informed him he was about to die, I cried like a baby. “Don’t cry, Simon,” he said, “just thank God for me. I have an opportunity to put my affairs in order and make peace with my Maker. It is a rare privilege.” Everyone who knew Oronto had mostly wonderful things to say about him. That was because he was simply wonderful. It took me years to finally come to terms with his death. His memory remains blessed forever. Unforgettable.

BULLYING BROADCASTERS

The National Broadcasting Commission (NBC), the regulatory agency for the broadcast media, is now clearly overreaching itself and needs to be tamed. The N5 million fine slammed on Channels TV for its interview with Dr Datti Baba-Ahmed, the vice-presidential candidate of the Labour Party, was way out of line. Let’s say Baba-Ahmed said “treasonable” things, but the anchor, Mr Seun Okinbaloye, discharged his professional duty by repeatedly questioning his statements. The only option left for Channels was to terminate the broadcast abruptly. Still, regulators can be draconian and the regulated must have a right of appeal. NBC is becoming a bully to broadcast journalism. Menacing.

MEDICINE AFTER DEATH

Nigerian lawmakers are going to an unusual extent in trying to stop our doctors from migrating. A law is prescribing a period of five years between graduation and when a doctor can leave the country. Whatever their intention is, this is how not to solve a problem. Why pick on medical doctors? More importantly, why are they leaving the country? What can we do to address the problems and challenges they face so that they can practise more comfortably here? I recognise the big issue of spending so much to train these doctors and then losing them to other countries while we suffer a severe shortage of personnel. But there should be a more intelligent way of addressing this. DOA.

JUSTICE AND MERCY

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has written to the clerk of the central criminal court of England to plead for leniency for Senator Ike Ekweremadu, the former deputy senate president who was recently found guilty, along with his wife, of organ trafficking. The sentencing to determine their punishment is expected on May 5. The character reference provided by Obasanjo is intended to help mitigate the punishment. I find that to be so kind of him. It is very easy for us to scoff or rejoice at the situation of the Ekweremadus. We can judge them. But I pray we would never experience what they have gone through over their daughter’s medical plight which brought this upon them. Amen.

For at least three reasons, I really wanted to stay away from the hoopla that attended Peoples Gazette’s publication of Peter Obi’s “religious war” (or “Thank you, Daddy”) phone conversation with Living Faith Church’s Pastor David Oyedepo.

One, there was nothing in the conversation that was surprising to me. I have repeatedly called attention to the unmistakably Christo-centric tenor of Peter Obi’s campaign, which his deluded defenders disingenuously deny even when undeniably overwhelming evidence unquestionably points to it.

Unlike many people, however, I don’t hold this against Obi. It was his tactical and strategic response to APC’s same-faith ticket and PDP’s nomination of a northern Muslim as its candidate after eight years of a northern Muslim presidency. 

In a deeply fractured country like Nigeria, when a competitive electoral contest pits entrenched collective identities against each other, as I’ve pointed out several times, it’s inevitable that political gladiators will deploy religion and ethnicity as tools for mobilization. 

Second, I recognized that Obi’s “religious war” comment to Oyedepo was merely his attempt to cultivate what we call consubstantiality in rhetorical studies, that is, establishing mutual ideals, values, interests, and attitudinal dispositions with the person or people you’re speaking to.  Every human being seeking to persuade does it.

Oyedepo is a militantly passionate anti-Muslim preacher (who once told congregants to never give alms to any “Malams by the roadside” who beg them “in the name of Allah”), so the best stratagem to achieve identification with such a person is to invoke the specter of a “religious war” with Muslims. And it was very effective. “I believe that. I believe that. I believe that,” Oyedepo said in response to Obi’s claim that the 2023 presidential election was a “religious war.”

Although Obi deployed anti-Anglican bigotry (and often framed Chris Ngige as a “Yoruba man” in order to delegitimize him, which Okey Ndibe condemned in his columns) to gain and retain power when he was governor of Anambra State, I have not seen any credible evidence of Islamophobia against him.

 Significantly, Obi is Igbo and Oyedepo is Yoruba (in common with Tinubu, Obi’s mortal opponent), so Christianity is the only obvious margin of overlap between their lived experiences. Obi exploited that overlap to establish kinship with Oyedepo, like any politician would do. I don’t have a problem with that.

Finally, I think Southern Nigerian Christian politicians suffer a linguistic disadvantage that their Hausaphone northern Muslim counterparts don’t when it comes to the exploitation of religion for politics. They discuss their strategies of religious mobilization in English, Nigeria’s national language that most people have access to, but Hausaphone northern politicians discuss theirs in the Hausa language, which isn’t accessible to most people in the South.

Muslim Northern politicians have uttered similar or worse sentiments than Obi’s during political campaigns, but their verbal indiscretions often don’t leak out because of linguistic barriers. On the few occasions that they do (such as when Buhari exhorted Muslims to vote for only Muslim politicians who’re sympathetic to Sharia or when he said the dog and the baboon would be soaked in blood if the 2015 election was rigged), northern defenders muddy the waters by accusing southerners of mistranslation, of literalness, of incompetence in understanding interlingual equivalence between Hausa and English, etc.

And, frankly, how many people will come out smelling good if their private communications are made public? We all have what scholars call a duality of scripts. We sometimes say different things for public and private spaces, although I think publicizing the private thoughts of politicians who’re seeking political offices that put them in positions to determine the destinies of millions of people is fair game.

So, I was prepared to let this slide until Obi issued a statement calling the leaked telephone conversation “fake” and threatening to “take appropriate legal actions against Peoples Gazette and others” for publishing the tape. (By the way, who are the “others”?)

That statement implies that he will sue the Peoples Gazette for libel. I am convinced that this is mere face-saving litigious bravado that will peter out quietly. In libel law, truth is the most important defense. The tape is NOT fake, so Obi can’t conceivably win a case against the Peoples Gazette.

First, on April 1st, the Foundation for Investigative Journalism (FIJ) fact-checked the audio tape and found that it is neither AI-generated nor altered by editing.  “FIJ subjected the audio to a deepfake test using Deepware, an AI tool used to detect alterations in audios and videos,” the publication wrote. “Deepware’s deepfake detection technology ‘was designed to detect deepfake videos or, simply, any fake content in the areas of visual and audio communication.’”

I also personally used multiple deepfake detection software and found no evidence that the audio was edited or generated by Artificial Intelligence.

Plus, Obi’s presidential campaign spokesperson by the name of Kenneth Okonkwo confirmed the authenticity of the tape and even retorted that “Honesty is the best policy” when he was unremittingly bullyragged by the headless mob of revoltingly primitive social media rapscallions who call themselves “Obidients.”

Obi’s close personal media aide by the name of Valentine Obienyem also all but confirmed the genuineness of the tape and only added the requisite fib that spokesmen of Nigerian politicians must tell by claiming that “They edited out the Muslim-Muslim ticket that led to the discussion, where Obi said that in a society like ours, religious balancing was a necessary consideration and that their recklessness had made Christians to assume it was a religious war.”

That’s the most persuasive admission yet that the tape is real. Obienyem gave an insider’s confirmation that the conversation did take place. Is he and Okonkwo the “others” that Obi threatened to sue alongside Peoples Gazette? 

Well, Oyedepo himself hasn’t questioned the veracity of the tape. He only said Obi was one of several politicians who routinely call to seek his blessing and counsel and that he is not a political partisan. Maybe, he is also part of the “others” that Obi will sue. He basically confirmed the Peoples Gazette’s story.

More than that, though, Peoples Gazette gave Peter Obi and his aides ample pre-publication opportunities to respond to the tape before publishing it. The paper said it gave Obi and his aides 48 hours. They didn’t respond. 

The paper reached out to Oyedepo via WhatsApp who asked to be sent the audio file. The paper did. Oyedepo read the WhatsApp message, but never responded 24 hours after the fact, probably because he remembered the conversation but couldn't defend it with the resources of logic and reason.

So, what will Obi tell the courts if/when he sues Peoples Gazette “and others”? If he says the tape is fake and Peoples Gazette insists that it isn’t, the court will call IT experts to authenticate it. The result will embarrass Obi, diminish his credibility irretrievably, and herald the death knell of his budding national political career. 

That’s why I think he is merely blustering—or that unscrupulous lawyers want to get his “shishi,” which he doesn’t like giving out to people. In law, if a piece of information causes you to suffer reputational damage or emotional anguish it isn’t libel if it is true. Irreproachable scientific proofs and circumstantial evidence conclusively show that the audio tape is real. Obi has no legal basis to seek redress from the Peoples Gazette. 

If Obi had threatened to sue on the basis of the invasion of his privacy, that would have been a different matter altogether. Although Section 37 of the 1999 Constitution provides that, “The privacy of citizens, their homes, correspondence, telephone conversations and telegraphic communications is hereby guaranteed and protected,” there is not a sufficient body of judgements against privacy violations in Nigeria to determine how the courts will rule. 

But privacy violation isn’t the basis of his threat because that would confirm that he did utter the words he is disclaiming. The basis for his litigious threat is the claim that “the audio call being circulated is fake” and that “At no time throughout the campaign and now did I ever say, think, or even imply that the 2023 election is, or was a religious war.” 

That’s in the realm of libel. In light of watertight evidence that it is he who is lying, not the Peoples Gazette, let’s see if he’ll have the courage to follow through with his threat. I am salivating in anticipation.

Nigeria churns out roughly 2 million barrels of crude oil a day, making it Africa’s top producer and the world’s thirteenth. But still, because of its feeble domestic refineries, Nigeria imports about 80 per cent of the gasoline it consumes at home, selling it at a government-fixed rate (US$0.43) that is below the international average price (US$0.97) and the landing cost determined by world oil price and cost of freight. The difference is finance in subsidy. For instance, in 2011 alone, the total subsidy amount was over $13 billion—about 3 per cent of Nigeria’s GDP that year; and N4.39 trillion last year, 2022. The subsidy is expected to shield local pump prices from rising international oil prices. Tellingly, subsidy expenses should rise with and fall with world oil prices while keep domestic retail prices relatively constant. However, the reality on the ground is a far cry from this in that Nigerian pump prices, global prices and the subsidy bill change in the same direction (see the chart below). This situation motivates sceptics of the subsidy claims to ask a probing question: since local buyers are not utterly being shielded by the subsidy from rising global oil prices, then who are those being shielded or protected by subsidy expenses.

To reduce this huge financial (or fiscal) burden, Nigeria’s government in January 2012 attempted to free up the gasoline price by ending the subsidy regime and allowing demand and supply to determine the price. (The subsidy programme was also considered rife with double-dealing—about US$6 billion in fraudulent claims were made in 2012.) Although praised by the IMF, the move was met with a storm of protests at home, forcing the government to rescind its decision. Within two weeks, the price reverted from 141 naira to 97 naira per litre.

But the price deregulation move was not permanently shelved. The government that came to power in May 2015 revisited the idea, and after one year in office raised the official price by 67 per cent, to 145 (N95.18 if adjusted for inflation) naira per litre (US$ 0.43 at black-market rates). This remains the official price today. But as the global crude oil price heads to triple digits, there are concerns that what the government spends on subsidies may rise, potentially pushing up the official price. However, there is no clear claim by the government, despite the price rise, that the subsidy regime has ended. But do local consumers (e.g., motorists) still pay this price for the product? The answer is not straightforward. These are the facts.
The domestic supply of and demand for gasoline in Nigeria have not always been matched. The excess demand has always been preceded by truckloads of products smuggled abroad. Higher pump prices relative to Nigeria’s (US$0.43) in neighbouring countries are argued to have fuelled the racketeering: Benin (US$0.72); Niger (US$0.88); Cameroon (US$1.03) Chad (US$0.78); Togo (US$0.71); and Ghana (US$0.92).

The fiscal dent (or ‘under–recovery’) of this, according to estimates by the NNPC, is US$2.3 million daily. This is a benefit that goes to the sellers and consumers of the products in the neighbouring countries rather than the consumers in Nigeria. This often creates scarcity, which drives up the black-market premium (BMP)—the difference between the unofficial (true) price and the official price.
It should be noted that if the BMP is zero, then there is perfect compliance by the distributors/retailers of the product: they are selling at exactly the official price. If, on the other hand, the BMP is greater than zero, then there is some non-compliance. Therefore the closer the BMP is to zero, the higher the level of compliance with the official price.
A caveat: theoretically, the BMP can be less than zero, but this is practically impossible because all distributors/sellers are expected to be rational, meaning they will never want to sell the product below its official price.
However, strong enforcement of the price control law does not necessarily guarantee a high level of compliance as there could be stiff resistance to the enforcement. But weak enforcement does not mean there has been more noncompliance—sellers’ fear of state authorities may compel their compliance. However, strong enforcement can lead to high levels of compliance.

But:

1. Evidence from the graph shows that all the states, on average, sell the product above the official price; no state is exactly on the y (or the vertical) axis. There is no perfect compliance in any of the states.
2. Abuja’s BMP (N1.27/litre), relative to other states, is the closest to zero, making it the most officially price-compliant part of the country. Abuja is the seat of power, where we expect institutions to be more effective in enforcing compliance.
3. Abia is the state with the highest BMP: N25.71/litre, making it the least compliant state. Other least compliant states can be found on the bottom right and top right of the graph. This simply means big state-level consumers tend to comply, more than other states, with the official price.

But what could account for the variation in prices across the states?

If the distance from the refinery (Nigeria has four functional refineries, although not operating at full capacity at the moment) and the cost of transporting the product significantly determines the variations, then the graph will be a straight 45-degree line and all the dots (or the state labels) will cluster around the line.

But what we see is partially the opposite: states that are closer to their nearest refineries tend to pay higher prices than other states. For example, Abia State is closer to its closest refinery (Warri refinery, Ekpan in Delta State) and still pays the highest pump price.

The correlation between the pump price and distance is negative at 11 per cent. The farther the state is from the refinery, the lower the pump price it pays, at least relative to other states.
On the graph, Delta, Kaduna and Rivers (the locations of three refineries) appear in the same area. The reason is simple: the distance from Delta to Delta is zero; the distance from Kaduna to Kaduna is also zero and so on.

But then, about 80 per cent of Nigerian petrol is imported. In this case, how is this brought into the country/distributed across the states? Answering these questions may shed some light on unravelling the source of variations.

The undersupply of gasoline has been the main justification for the fuel subsidy, and consequently the official pricing of the product. And as noted by Moss et al., “This has discouraged investment in domestic refining capacity. Of the 20 refinery licences issued since 2000, none have been used because the current market structure does not allow investors to fully cover their operational costs.”

Since Nigeria imports over 80% of its petroleum products, local pump prices must be divorced from changes in international oil prices if they are to be kept stable. One way to do this is for the country to refine its fuel needs locally. This brings to the fore the forthcoming Dangote refinery, which is expected to be the largest in the world. If it succeeds, it will play a key role in revamping Africa’s largest economy. It will raise Nigeria’s external reserves by replacing imports of refined petroleum products that cost about $7-$10 billion annually.

However, there are two vital questions that Dangote, the federal government of Nigeria and their deal makers must answer. First, the refinery is expected to pump and refine 650,000 barrels of crude oil per day. Will it pay for the oil in dollars? Otherwise, the refinery will cut Nigeria’s flow of foreign exchange by over $60 billion annually. This is based on my estimate using data on oil prices and oil production.

Second, how will the pump price be set? If the government steps back from its refining business and therefore stops setting the pump price as it is currently doing, Mr Dangote could rule the Nigerian oil market.