Pendulum @DeleMomodu IN SEARCH OF DISCIPLES

            
Fellow Nigerians, what should have been a
special Valentine for Nigerians this year was
cleverly terminated and postponed last week by
INEC. The much anticipated elections would now
start on March 28 and conclude on April 11,
2015. Not to worry, life continues. No matter the
motives behind it, whether genuine or
mischievous, it gladdens the heart that the
decision was taken in good faith by all, albeit
reluctantly.

In the spirit of that renewed determination to
keep our peace before, during and after the
elections, we must continue to run issue-based
campaigns irrespective of who we support. I was
sent a very irresistible article this week by
Professor Kayode Oyediran, the former Vice
Chancellor of the University of Ibadan. I found
both his intervention and topic very relevant to
the present situation in our country. I believe
many of our young readers have a lot to learn
and enjoy in this beautifully written piece which I
couldn’t stop reading once I started. On a lighter
note, it seems Taureans have the gift of the pen.
Professor Oyediran and I share the same
birthday of May 16.

Please enjoy my very special guest this week, a
most distinguished scholar and administrator…
Four recent publications in several national
dailies illustrate various dimensions of
discipleship which has become a topical concept
not only in Nigeria but globally. They are: “The
chance of prosperity versus poverty of austerity”
by Bola Ahmed Tinubu; “PMS pump price
reduction and the economy: My take-away” by
Babatunde Raji Fashola SAN; “Buhari vs
Jonathan: Beyond the election” by Charles
Chukwuma Soludo; and “Buhari has not satisfied
the constitution – Adebanjo” being an interview
of Chief Ayo Adebanjo. These publications
addressed several current national issues, and
gave insight into the perceptions, priorities and
prejudices of the respective authors, and
illustrated the various manifestations of
discipleship.


Tinubu’s article is a well-researched critique of
the macro-economic policy of the Federal
government, and a spirited articulation of his
preferred strategy for the creation of wealth and
jobs. Fashola similarly presented a constructive
critique of the government’s policy on the price
of fuel. Soludo critically reviewed the economic
policies of the Jonathan government as well as
the proposed policy of the opposition party, APC.
Whether one agrees or disagrees with the views
expressed in the three articles, it cannot be
denied that each addressed issues, and
articulated researched, reasoned, balanced
arguments; they criticized extant policy and
practice, and presented alternatives. To that
extent they were in the tradition of the late sage,
Chief Obafemi Awolowo. Indeed in his article
Soludo acknowledged this hallmark of the sage.

In his interview Chief Adebanjo declared his
preference for President Jonathan and his
aversion to General Buhari’s candidature in the
imminent presidential elections; he admonished
the people of the South-West to support
Jonathan in order to avoid “making a big mistake
and digging their own graves”; he emphasized
that his position was based on “principles”; he
explained that, because he and his colleagues in
their faction of Afenifere are “strictly Awolowo’s
disciples”, they do not “modify Awo’s principles
for our(their) own interest”. He did not elaborate
on the “principles”.

Chief Adebanjo’s choice of candidate – indeed
the choice of any Nigerian – cannot and should
not be questioned, and he need not proffer any
reason for it. However if, as in this case, he
decides to give reasons for his choice, it is
legitimate to examine the reasons proffered.
Therefore I wish to comment on four of the
reasons presented by Chief Adebanjo namely:
implementation of the recommendations of the
2014 national conference, the character of
General Buhari, the qualifications of Buhari, and
the suitability of Professor Osinbajo as Vice-
Presidential candidate.
Chief Adebanjo stated that he is supporting
Jonathan “because he is the only man who can
implement the recommendations of the national
conference which was set-up to bring equity to
Yoruba land and Nigeria”. He asserted that the
conference produced the panacea for Nigeria’s
problems, and “—that is why I am insisting that
all the recommendations of the confab should be
implemented before the elections because the
inequality this country has been suffering all this
while has been rectified with the
recommendations of the confab. All the things
that could cause us conflicts have been
rectified.” It is rather simplistic to suggest that,
by itself, the recommendations of the 2014
conference – or any other conference for that
matter – constitute a magic wand to sweep
away all the problems of Nigeria. It is also
internally inconsistent to insist that the
recommendations of the conference must be
implemented before the elections and
simultaneously affirm that Jonathan, who is yet
to submit the conference report to the National
Assembly six months after it was presented to
him, is the only man who can implement the
recommendations. Could it be that those who
described the conference as diversionary are
correct? Could it be a repeat of a similar exercise
during the second term of President Obasanjo?
Chief Adebanjo asserted that “as a NADECO
man” he cannot support a former military
dictator like Buhari. He described Buhari as a
“fundamentalist” whose tenure as the boss of the
Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) was tainted with
corruption. I share Chief Adebanjo’s aversion for
military dictatorship. However it is possible for a
Saul to become a Paul. Buhari’s track record
during the current political dispensation
demonstrates that he believes in and submits to
democracy and the rule of law. Furthermore
Obasanjo was a military dictator who became
President in a civilian democratic dispensation.
His re-election in 2003 for a second term was
supported by Chief Adebanjo and his colleagues.
Obasanjo, who set-up two panels to probe the
PTF, stated publicly that Buhari’s hands are
clean, but Chief Adebanjo asserted that “—
Obasanjo was trying to cover him (Buhari) up”
because “—the issue of the N25 billion ---is all in
the report”. People like me who have not seen
the report would have appreciated it if he had
quoted the relevant parts. Corruption is a major
endemic problem in Nigeria which should be fully
exposed and condemned when and as
opportunity permits. It is therefore unfortunate
that Chief Adebanjo stated: “When they talk of
corruption in Jonathan government, I won’t say
the government is clean, but those who are
talking about corruption, how clean are they
themselves?”
Chief Adebanjo described Buhari as an Islamic
fundamentalist, and “a man who said he was
going to work for the operation of Sharia
throughout the country”. I do not know whether
Buhari said so, but I am confident that the
pursuit of such a venture would be futile. I also
recall that a widely publicized allegation that
Buhari had said he would make Nigeria
ungovernable turned out to be false; Reuben
Abati and the Guardian newspaper published an
unreserved apology to Buhari in the Guardian of
11th July, 2013. However action, it is said,
speaks louder than words. It is instructive that
when Buhari was the military Head of State he
refused to make Nigeria a member of the
Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC); he cut
in half the number of Nigerian pilgrims going to
Mecca for the Hajj, and directed that they should
be given only their Basic Travel Allowance (BTA);
the majority of his cabinet and of the military
governors he appointed were Christians; he had
and still has several Christian personal staff
(personal assistant, cook, driver etc.). Clearly the
available facts indicate that the description of
Buhari as an Islamic fundamentalist is
reprehensible scare-mongering. It is relevant to
note that, whereas Nigeria became a member of
the OIC during the presidency of General
Babangida, the first and only incumbent Head of
State to attend a summit of the OIC was
President Jonathan on 6th February, 2013 in
Cairo where his host was President Morsi of
Egypt, the fundamentalist leader of the Moslem
Brotherhood.
Chief Adebanjo questioned the qualification of
Buhari to contest the Presidential election. He
asserted: “What the law says is this; you must
have a school certificate before you can qualify.
---------Buhari has not satisfied the constitution.”
Careful reading of the relevant sections of the
constitution will demonstrate to even the
proverbial ordinary Nigerian that these
statements are most incorrect; the expositions
of several senior members of the bar in the
dailies provide confirmation. Coming from a man
of Chief Adebanjo’s stature, the statements are
surprising, disappointing and embarrassing.
Chief Adebanjo described the selection of
Professor Yemi Osinbajo as Buhari’s running-
mate as “a gimmick”. He stated that Osinbajo:
“—is a distinguished lawyer and a nice
gentleman---has no political experience ---Tinubu
brought him in as Attorney General, he was
never in politics --- he is from Ikenne but does he
know the politics of Ikenne?” This is most
amazing! Chief Adebanjo knows that Osinbajo is
a Senior Advocate of Nigeria who became a
Professor of Law at the University of Lagos over
two decades ago, served as Adviser to Prince
Bola Ajibola when the latter was Attorney
General of the Federation in the late eighties,
and gave widely-acclaimed meritorious service
as Attorney General of Lagos State for two
terms from 1999. In addition he has served with
distinction in several capacities nationally and
internationally, including the United Nations. He
is clearly a distinguished lawyer who has
cognate experience of governance by virtue of
his eight-year membership of the cabinet of the
Lagos State Government. The point is not that
Chief Adebanjo should support the choice of
Osinbajo. Rather it is his implied belief that
knowledge of the politics of Ikenne –whatever
that is – constitutes an/the important criterion in
the selection of a candidate for the post of Vice-
President!
Chief Adebanjo is well-known as a long-standing
political associate of the late Chief Obafemi
Awolowo, and proudly asserts that he and his
colleagues are disciples of the sage. The
contributions of the sage to public discourse
were always characterized by focus on issues,
constructive criticism, and clear articulation of
well-researched balanced arguments. . The
statements in the interview reviewed do not
reflect these hallmarks.
A disciple is a follower of the doctrines of a
leader, teacher or school of thought. The quality
of discipleship is a function not only of loyalty
but also the disciple’s perception or
understanding of the doctrines. The availability
of relevant literature promotes discipleship, and
facilitates assessment of its quality. Thus the
Bible and Koran make it possible to evaluate the
utterance and actions of self-professed
Christians and Moslems. It is a blessing that the
books written by Chief Awolowo, as well as
lectures which he delivered and his contributions
in parliament are readily available. They make it
futile for any individual or group to claim
proprietary rights to the sage.
End note: my sincere thanks to Professor
Kayode Oyediran, the author of the above article,
for being a mentor and major inspiration since I
started my writing career around 1986. Indeed,
he has been a mentor and great inspiration to
many of us, especially his son-in-law and my
best friend, Prince Adedamola Aderemi. I will
forever treasure the special occasions we spent
with him and his wonderful wife, Mrs Tola
Oyediran (Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s eldest
daughter) at their serene home in Ibadan. I’m
privileged and honoured to have you grace my
page today in Thisday, one of Africa’s most
influential newspapers.