
The ex-militant turned university
proprietor, Mujahid Asari-Dokubo, and a former Federal Capital Territory
Minister, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai, have something in common: Both men
make President Goodluck Jonathan appear powerless.
They both call the virility of the
overarching powers he personifies into question when they make
statements capable of inciting violence and disrupting the body polity.
Even when they don’t speak directly about Jonathan, their rhetoric
manages to go back to his authority. When last weekend, the State
Security Services summoned el-Rufai for questioning, eyebrows were
raised. Why pick on one and leave the other? The answer is simple:
Asari-Dokubo is not el-Rufai.
Jonathan needs Asari-Dokubo for the same reason a frightened person needs a pit bull: To scare supposed enemies.
Asari-Dokubo is neither an environmental
activist nor particularly a friend of Jonathan. Rather, he is
Jonathan’s strong arm; the one who will articulate what the President
cannot because of the bounds of political correctness. As the 2015
elections draw near, Asari-Dokubo will serve as a vociferous moral
conscience to remind us that we, the Nigerian people, owe it to the
Niger Delta to return Jonathan to power whether he performs or not
because he is the first President from the Niger Delta that has fed
Nigeria for more than five decades. In case our conscience has been
seared with a hot iron, he will threaten us that when it comes to oil
production in the Niger Delta, the white man that made the pencil also
made the eraser; that we cannot take their oil and throw out their son.
Now, why would anyone want such a
messenger silenced? Why will the SSS go after him for threatening war
when it knows that even if the Peoples Democratic Party loses, the man
will not go to war as long as he keeps getting paid?
El-Rufai, however, taunts the President’s strength differently.
He speaks as a learned man, not a common
thug. He has a pedigree and for all it is worth, has a following too.
People take him seriously and he is a visible figure. Somebody like that
cannot be allowed to propagate a campaign of violence for the 2015
elections. He needs to be taught that there are limits to free speech.
In the process of showing who’s the boss, the state however risks making
a martyr out of him.
I must say I find the conduct of the SSS
in arresting the diminutive Mallam overzealous. When did going after
citizens’ over their mis-statement ever replace serious intelligence
gathering? If the man has something up his sleeves, why not investigate
him properly and then arrest him for whatever crime? Why harass el-Rufai
for saying what Maj.-Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.) and even
ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo have said? What were they trying to
prove?
But of course, that does not mean
el-Rufai was justified. When people like him summon up the likelihood of
post-election violence –either as a threat, warning or just by way of
speaking — I wonder three things.
One, on what planet do they live that
they do not see that Nigeria is bleeding heavily already? If the
incessant killings in Nigeria are not acts of “violence,” then what is
violent enough for them? Some days ago, some 40 people were killed in
Adamawa State and from the way these things go in Nigeria, their deaths
will probably be unatoned forever and the reasons behind their killings
will never be uncovered.
Before then, many deaths had been
reported and several cases of extrajudicial killings are going on as you
read this and somebody still says there could be violence in the
nearest future. Really? Have killings, deaths and bloodshed become the
norm in our national life that folk no longer “see” them and can still
call for more to make a point?
Two, when they use careless phrases that
say the monkey and baboon that will be soaked in blood, I wonder if
they do not derive some macabre pleasure in envisioning the spectacles
of bloodshed and violence. Do they just talk about it or are images
actually running in their minds as they speak? Of course, we will have
to psychoanalyse them to find out.
Three, somewhere in their hearts, do
they actually want their doomsday prophesy to happen so they can be
justified? Or, so they can continue to play the victims of a
dysfunctional society ever robbed of their electoral mandate? I really
will like to know. Are they like the Biblical prophet Jonah who wanted
God to destroy a whole nation because he prophesied it and his ego was
tied to his words, and he would rather die than not see it happen? If
violence should actually happen in 2015, is it so that el-Rufai can
retreat to the safety of his Twitter handle to start tweeting “Wetin I talk?!” or what?
El-Rufai’s defenders might like to point
out that his statement was conditional on how the elections are
conducted but then, so what? Does anyone actually imagine that the 2015
elections will not have some measure of irregularities? Why attach the
possibility of violence to something that you know will very likely
happen? By the way, what will constitute “free and fair elections” for
el-Rufai and those who have constituted themselves into his echo
chambers? An election in which the All Progressives Congress wins almost
every available seat or what?
While I think rigged elections are a
very terrible thing, capable of setting a country backwards by decades, I
also think for now, we cannot do away with it because what ails our
elections is not in isolation of our national underdevelopment. The best
we can do is to reduce the incidence, and plug as many holes as
possible. I mean, how can a country that cannot account for a majority
of its own citizens, either through driving licence, ID card project or
even mere birth certificates, say it can conduct “free and fair”
elections?
Curiously, the commentators in Nigeria’s
opposition parties like to throw the phrase “free and fair elections”
around, but you wonder why they never begin their charity at home. Why
do they almost always look in the direction of the presidential election
when a lot of rigging goes on in state and local governments’ elections
held in places led by their own parties? Why not set a standard for
themselves for a change?
No comments:
Post a Comment