Opinion
MONDAY LINES: Bisi Akande and Nigeria’s Last Puritan
There is a huge noise over Chief Bisi Akande’s autobiography released on Thursday, December 9, 2021 in Lagos. I have not read the book. But I have read what the media says the book contains. I have also read the book review by a brilliant professor of English at the University of Ibadan who spiced it with copious quotes. There is a particular ‘something’ that interests me in what I read.
President Muhammadu Buhari’s other name among his fans is Maigaskiya, the truthful one. Buhari was present at that book launch where he declared that he loved Akande so much that he would follow him into the jungle without asking questions. But snippets from the book say Buhari, ‘the truthful one,’ promised something in 2014 but did the opposite in 2015. Before bedtime, Maigaskiya offered to make someone his soulmate; then at satiation, he denied saying so; he said it was a mere partnership he offered. And Akande asks: what is the meaning of partnership?
Like Aesop’s winds, Akande’s controversies fall upon us with their gusts and gales. It will be nice to hear the president’s defence of that charge from his bosom friend. Or will he be quiet, guilty as charged? That won’t be good for Maigaskiya. There are many other contentious claims in that memoir. We will soon see how firm the ground is under the author’s feet. However, the question of who is truthful and who is trustworthy and reliable is my greatest take-away from the book – at least for now. I look forward to reading the front cover, the photos, the leaves inside, and the back cover inscriptions, then draw conclusions. Whatever the book says, however, the good thing is that it has provoked its victims to counter-write the author, tell their own stories and put audacious Akande on the spot. It has also challenged us to ask questions on the characters of our leaders, how we got to where we are and how to avoid falling into another ditch as we forage and trudge forward.
Autobiographies and biographies are floodlights; they illuminate fields and sack dark alleys. They are also swords with two edges- injurious to the author, to the subjects and to the objects. Some come plainly audacious like Barack Obama’s; some come wearing the masks of fiction – like George Santayana’s ‘The Last Puritan’ – a story of a “fearless but helplessly subjective” character; a book about a puritan “who convinced himself on puritan grounds that it was wrong to be a puritan.” If I meet Chief Akande tomorrow, the question I will ask him is not just why he wrote that book of vitriol; I will also ask him why now? Why is almost every outsider bad and his friends good? I will ask too about the factuality of his facts. And there is a reason for that. From the letters of Cicero to Saint Paul’s letters; Julius Caesar’s ‘Commentaries’ to Saint Augustine’s ‘Confessions’ and now to Bisi Akande’s ‘My Participations’, what we see is what Graham Greene said are “a sort of life” – and what another writer described as accounts of “a life, reshaped by recollection.” To ‘reshape’ is to rearrange. How much of rearrangement of facts is in Akande’s book of attack and abuse? How accurate biographical recollections are determines the justness of authorial verdicts. We will hear more on this author’s judgmental intrusions in days to come.
There will be other ‘puritanical’ books of push and punch. There should. But the ones I want to read are life stories of those seeking to rule me in 2023. That is what sane people demand of their princes and aspiring kings. Barack Obama is a son of nobody who wanted to be many things in the politics of the United States. He started by deciding to tell his full story. He wrote ‘Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance’ in 1995 and republished it in 2004 with updates. Through that book, he lucidly told the world that his father was Barack Obama Sr. of Kenya and his mother Ann Dunham of Wichita, Kansas, United States. He said his parents met while they were students at the University of Hawaii. Then in 2006, he decided to be president, and he wrote ‘The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.’ That book is an outline of his beliefs, political and spiritual. Obama then delivered speeches, he granted interviews and never ran away from debates. Through all these, he made his life an open book and offered deep insights into who he was, where he was coming from and where he could take his people to. There was no ambiguity in his mission and no dark shades in his vision beyond what his long shadow cast. We want politicians who would do this, not slithering snakes scheming to enter the palace through sewage pipes.
Every book, notwithstanding its moral shape and form, has values. We definitely need more ‘unusual’ books to provoke and force us to think. We are not a normal people. What do we want as a people? Business as usual? At the beginning of this year, it was either restructuring or self determination. Now, the year is ending and it would appear that we have dropped the ball. Everyone now talks about the next elections and who holds next the ladle. Every activity, whether book launch or birthday luncheon, is tied to answering the next question: Who is my next governor? Who is the next president? Everyone asks that question because of the sauce in the pot and the meat in the plate and who eats what.
Harsh winds are blowing against our soul and we all feel it. That is why we should reshape our thoughts and regather what remains of our sense going forward. Do we want to rebuild and keep Nigeria or we want to do away with the sick man-child? Unfortunately, Chief Akande has told us that there is no restructuring in his party’s constitution and manifesto. But I read what Governor Rotimi Akeredolu of Ondo State said at the weekend about the structure of Nigeria. He belongs to Akande’s party and he didn’t sound like he has read his leader’s book. He spoke at the 45th convocation lecture of the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife as the guest lecturer on the theme: ‘When Is A Nation? Exploring the socio-Political Crisis In Post Independence Nigeria.’ He said “this structure cannot survive.” He said our “constitution lies about itself.” He said the Constitution provides for “Federal Character” for “National Cake Sharing.” He said a commission oversees the sharing of offices and other spoils of politics among the major ethnic groups.” He spoke on “manifest injustice…promoted as care for equity.” He lamented that our constitution “is silent on the rotation of offices to complete the tragicomedy.” He noted that “Federal Character is good for as long as it affords certain persons the opportunity to benefit from the sacrifice of merit on the altar of mediocrity.” He didn’t speak like APC. His speech gave hope that all hope is not lost.
There will be many books and reactions to books. How they would make our lives better is what should concern us; not the politics of the books, not the indignation in the reactions. Bean cakes are sweet but honey is sweeter. A child would taste honey and throw away the cake. We should start now the conversation on how we handle the future whatever happens to Nigeria. At whatever time and in whatever space, we need real leaders. How should the leaders emerge? After their emergence, what are our expectations from their reign? Who should such leaders be and what should qualify them to be leaders? And their beginnings should not matter. It is the quality of their brain, the health of their body and the strength of their character that should recommend them. We have seen the example in Barack Obama who wanted leadership and worked consciously towards it. We’ve also seen that he was accepted following a very rigorous leadership selection process. If a nobody’s child would be king, he must have king-size character. And getting that cannot be by chance, or by luck, by trade or by force or by wishful thinking. It has to be through deliberate, well-nurtured and curated positive action. We should ask politicians to write and debate and answer questions before decking them out in kingly robes. As we have post-office books on participations, let us also have pre-office books of commitment to values. Electors should always ask questions.
Back to Buhari’s pledge to follow Chief Akande into the jungle. Why would a president think of going into the jungle and what would he go there to do? There is a book with the title ‘The President of the Jungle’ written by André Rodrigues, et al. The Children’s Book Council describes the story as a fabulous and funny introduction to how democracy works. What is in that jungle story? Lion is made the King of the Jungle, then he becomes too proud, greedy and unfeeling. He thinks he needs a swimming pool in his house and therefore reroutes the jungle’s only river to his house for that purpose. The animals go on rampage #OCCUPYTHEJUNGLE. The king laughs and challenges them to more demonstrations. They hold more protests. Then, reason prevails. The animals decide to try something new – hold an election! A commentator says: “Once Owl explains the rules, the fun begins, and Snake, Sloth, and Monkey all announce they will be candidates. But oh no, Lion is going to run too! It’s a wild campaign season as the animals hold rallies, debate, and even take a selfie or two, trying to prove why they’d make the best president of the jungle.” Even animals in the jungle obey their own rules; they allow protests and peaceful campaigns. They hold their election. The self-centered Lion runs; Sloth wins, Lion loses. Heaven does not fall. There are no threats, no killings as we had in Bauchi in 2011.
Our own president loves the jungle and would go there with his political friends. If he goes there, maybe he will learn that hashtags of anger and protests are allowed in a democracy and that even animals make promises, and they keep them. Preparatory to the 2015 elections, did the president promise to make Bola Tinubu his running mate before the primary? Did he deny making that promise after winning the primary? Chief Bisi Akande is the president’s friend; he levelled that allegation in his book. What has Maigaskiya, the truthful one, to say?
Celebrated columnist and Editor at Nigerian Tribune, Dr. Lasisi Olagunju, writes
In a world that is increasingly dependent on sound financial expertise and innovative management practices, illuminating figures are crucial for the academic and professional growth of a nation. One such figure is Dr. Akinde Mukail Aremu, the esteemed Rector of the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro in Ogun State. With an impressive academic background and a commitment to excellence in education, Dr. Akinde is not just shaping the minds of future financial leaders; he is also positioning the institution at the forefront of Nigeria’s educational landscape.
A Legacy of Academic Excellence
Dr. Akinde’s academic journey is nothing short of remarkable. With multiple degrees—a Bachelor’s and Master’s in Economics, a Master’s in Finance, and a PhD in Finance—his expertise spans across vital fields like Financial Management, Business Finance, and Financial Accounting. His position as the Chief Lecturer in the School of Management Studies at the Federal Polytechnic is a testament to his commitment and passion for education. Dr. Akinde’s rich academic fabric is woven with numerous publications in reputable journals, exploring key issues from stock market performance to the complexities of financial reporting standards in Nigeria.
His research interests primarily lie in finance and financial analyses, where he tirelessly seeks to address pertinent economic questions, providing insights that resonate deeply within the Nigerian financial landscape. His studies not only contribute to academic discourse but also guide policy-making in the financial realm, fostering a better understanding of economic development in Nigeria.
Championing Innovative Pedagogy
As a dedicated educator, Dr. Akinde has consistently advocated for modern pedagogical methods that inspire creativity and critical thinking among students. His teaching areas encompass crucial subjects that equip students with the financial acumen needed in today’s dynamic economic environment. By incorporating practical examples and real-life scenarios into his curriculum, he ensures that students are not just passive recipients of knowledge but active participants in their learning journey. His hands-on approach is fostering a generation of finance professionals ready to tackle the challenges of the industry head-on.
Elevating the Institution to New Heights
Under Dr. Akinde’s leadership, the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro, is experiencing a renaissance. His vision for the institution is clear: to provide quality education that meets the benchmark of global standards. His strategic initiatives have led to the establishment of innovative programs that align with market needs, ensuring that graduates are not only employable but also ready to lead. His emphasis on human capital investment and sustainable economic strategies positions the institution as a beacon of hope for Nigeria’s future.
Furthermore, Dr. Akinde’s efforts extend beyond the classroom. His participation in international conferences and collaboration with academic institutions worldwide has spotlighted the Federal Polytechnic on a global stage. By fostering partnerships and exchanging knowledge with global thought leaders, he is silencing the cynics and proving that Nigerian institutions can compete on an international level.
A Voice for Change and Development
Beyond academia, Dr. Akinde is a vocal advocate for fiscal responsibility and policy reform in Nigeria. His extensive research publications reflect a commitment to dissecting the intricacies of Nigeria’s financial landscape, addressing critical issues ranging from foreign direct investment to the implications of tourism development on economic growth. His work sheds light on the pivotal role that education and informed fiscal practices play in Nigeria’s quest for economic revival.
Dr. Akinde understands that his role transcends academia; he is a mentor, an innovator, and a change-maker. His unwavering dedication to equipping the next generation of leaders with the skills and knowledge they need to thrive in an increasingly complex world is evident in every initiative he undertakes.
In conclusion, Dr. Akinde Mukail Aremu’s leadership at the Federal Polytechnic, Ilaro is redefining the educational landscape of Nigeria. His commitment to academic excellence, innovative pedagogy, and social responsibility serves as an inspiration for students and educators alike. As he continues to shape the future of financial education in Nigeria, there is little doubt that Dr. Akinde is not just preparing students for jobs—he is preparing them to become the architects of the nation’s economic future. In a rapidly evolving global economy, his vision and leadership will undoubtedly leave an indelible mark on the educational sector and beyond.
Former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir Ahmad El-Rufai, is a restless and courageous politician. However, he ought to have learned political patience from President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, who spent years building a viable political alternative to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) when its stalwarts boasted that they would rule Nigeria for 64 years.
Cleverly, Tinubu abandoned the Alliance for Democracy (AD) to establish another political platform, the Action Congress (AC), which later metamorphosed into the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN).
In collaboration with other political groups—including the Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) and some elements of the PDP—the All Progressives Congress (APC) was born, with El-Rufai as one of its foundation members. Ultimately, the APC wrestled power from the PDP, truncating its 64-year dominance plan.
For El-Rufai to abandon the APC now is nothing short of political suicide, as Tinubu is strategically positioned to secure a second term with an array of both seen and unseen political foot soldiers.
The Social Democratic Party (SDP), as a political entity, effectively died with the late Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola. Any attempt to resurrect it is an exercise in futility.
For the sake of argument, let’s consider a hypothetical scenario: Suppose another southern politician is fielded in 2027 and wins the election. Even if he signs an agreement to serve only one term, political realities could shift, and he may seek another four years.
If anyone doubts this, they should ask former Presidents Olusegun Obasanjo and Goodluck Jonathan. The simple implication of this is that President Tinubu remains the best candidate for northern politicians seeking a power shift back to the North in 2031—at which point El-Rufai could have been one of the credible northern contenders for the presidency.
When Ebenezer Babatope (Ebino Topsy), a staunch Awoist, chose to serve in General Sani Abacha’s regime, he later reflected on his decision, saying: “I have eaten the forbidden fruit, and it will haunt me till the end of my life.”
By abandoning the APC for another political party, El-Rufai has also eaten the forbidden fruit. Only time will tell if it will haunt him or not.
However, for some of the political leaders already contacted from the South West, supporting any party against President Tinubu would be akin to Judas Iscariot’s betrayal—a reputation no serious South West politician would want to bear.
El-Rufai’s departure from the APC to SDP is nothing short of a suicidal political move, reminiscent of Harakiri.
Prof. Adeniyi Olowofela, a former Oyo State Commissioner for Education, Science, and Technology and the Commissioner representing Oyo State at the Federal Character Commission (FCC), sent this piece from Abuja, the nation’s capital.
For most of last week, Senate President Godswill Akpabio was in the eye of the storm as his traducer, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, who represents Kogi Central, was relentless in getting her voice hear loud and clear.
Though the matter eventually culminated in the suspension of the Kogi senator for six months on Thursday, it is clear that the drama has not ended yet. The whole saga, as we have seen in the last few weeks, smacks many wrongs and few rights. The Senate scored some rights and some wrongs, the same for the Kogi senator. But in apportioning the rights and the wrongs, we have to distinguish between emotions and the rules.
Recall that in July of 2024, Senator Akpabio had compared the conduct of Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan to that of someone in a nightclub. That statement incensed the Kogi Central senator, the womenfolk, and a number of other senators. Days later, Akpabio, having sensed the mood of the Senate, spoke from his chair and said: “I will not intentionally denigrate any woman and always pray the God will uplift women, Distinguished Senator Natasha, I want to apologise to you.” That was expected of him and by that statement, Akpabio brought some calm into the relationship between him and the Kogi senator, but as we are to discover in the last two weeks, still waters do run fast under the surface.
The latest scene of the drama started with what looked like an innocuous development on the Senate floor. The Senate president, in exercise of the power conferred on him by the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and the Senate Rule book, made adjustments to the seats in the minority wing of the chamber and relocated Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan. The excuse was that following the defection of some senators from the minority side, seat adjustments had to be effected. That was within Akpabio’s power. Remember that the Senate Rule book does not only empower the Senate president to allocate seats, but he can also change the seats occasionally. So, Akpabio was right with that action. But perhaps Akpoti-Uduaghan, based on family relationships with the Akpabios, expected that she would have been alerted of the impending seat change. And on getting to the floor of the Senate to discover the seat switch, she got alarmed. Was she right to flare up? No, that is the answer. Apart from the powers of the Senate president to change seats allocated to senators, the rule book also says that every senator must speak from the seat allocated. The implication is that anything a senator says outside the allocated seat will not go into the Senate records. The Senate, or any parliament for that matter, is a regulated environment. The Hansards take records of every word and action made on the floor of the chamber. And so, it is incumbent on every senator to follow the rules.
So, on Thursday, February 20, when Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan raised hell over her seat relocation and engaged Senator Akpabio in a shouting match, she was on the wrong side of the Senate Rule book. No Senator is expected to be unruly. In fact, unruly conduct can be summarily punished by the presiding officer. It is important to note that the rules of the Senate treat the occupier of the chair of Senate President like a golden egg. The President of the Senate is the number three citizen in the country, even though he was elected to represent a constituency like his colleagues. He is first among equals, but the numero uno position comes with a lot of difference.
A legislative expert once told me that the Chair of the President of the Senate must be revered at all times and that infractions to the rules are heavily punished unless the offender shows penitence. The rule says the President of the Senate must be heard in silence; Senators must avoid naming (being called out for unruly conduct); and that any situation that compels the President of the Senate to rise up to hit the gavel in trying to restore order could earn the culprit (any named senator) summary dismissal. Those are the powers of the President of the Senate, which Madam Natasha was trying for size. I think it is important that Senators are taken through inductions on the rules and regulations, whether they got in mid-term or at the beginning of the session.
Rules are very key to operations in a big club like the Senate or the House of Representatives. But as we will later discover on this page, the number of years spent on the floor does not necessarily guarantee a clear understanding of the rules.
Well, as we saw it, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan raised hell by protesting the decision of the Senate to relocate her seat. She was out of order, and her colleagues noted the same. With another presiding officer, she could have been suspended right there. But Akpabio didn’t do that. Then, the Kogi Central senator opened another flank, this time, outside of the Senate chamber. She granted an interview to Arise television, claiming that she had been sexually harassed by Akpabio. Here, too, Senator Natasha was on the wrong side of the Senate rules. Yes, she has a right of freedom of speech, but if the right must be meaningfully exercised, she must do so in compliance with the rules of the club she belongs-the Senate. This is expressly so because she is covered by Order 10 of the Senate Rule Book, which permits her to raise issues of privilege without previously notifying the President of the Senate or the presiding officer. The elders and the holy books also say that when you remove the log from the eyes, you show it to the eyes. As a club, the senate detests the washing of its dirty linen in the public. Such conduct led to the suspension of the late Senators Arthur Nzeribe and Joseph Waku, as well as Senator Ovie Omo-Agege, Senator Ali Ndume and even Senator Abdul Ningi in recent past.
Rather than go to the court of public opinion to accuse Akpabio of sexual harassment, Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan should have quietly assumed the seat allocated to her, raise her complaints through Order 10 and at the same time tender details of her sexual harassment allegation against Akpabio and seek Senate’s intervention. If she had done that, she would have been on the right side of Senate Rules and had Akpabio by the balls. As much as the Senate rules forbid a senator from submitting a petition he or she personally signed, the Senate does not forbid any lawmaker from raising allegations that affect either their rights or privileges on the floor. Several newspaper editors have been summoned before the Ethics Committee to answer questions of alleged breach of the privilege of senators. I recall that as correspondents in the chamber, senators were always unhappy each time we scooped a story or blow open a report they were about to submit. Such senators didn’t need to write a petition. They would only come to the floor and raise points of order on privilege. Senator Akpoti- Uduaghan failed to do that.
But the conduct of the Senate President and some of the principal officers on Wednesday, March 5, left so much to be desired of the Senate. I was shocked to see Senator Akpabio rule Senator Natasha in order; he also ruled Senator Mohammed Monguno in order as well as Senator Opeyemi Bamidele. How do you have three right rulings on one issue? First, he allowed Senator Natasha to lay a defective petition on the Senate table. That’s expressly out of order. In the days of Senate Presidents David Mark, Bukola Saraki, and Ahmad Lawan, we saw how such scenes were handled. A David Mark would simply ask the senator, ‘Distinguished Senator, please open to Order 40(4) and read’. By the time the senator finished reading the order and seeing the order had negatived his or her motion, he would only be begging to withdraw that motion. That was not the case with Akpabio. And to make matters worse, the clerks at the table were also looking lost. They could not guide the presiding officer in any way. That tells a bit about human resource capacity in the assembly. But then the Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele and the Chief Whip, Mohammed Monguno, who have spent quite a long time in the National Assembly, should know better. Their interventions did more damage to Akpabio’s Senate. Once the President of the Senate had ruled Senator Natasha in order to submit a petition she personally signed, (against the rules of the Senate which forbids such), and the Kogi Central senator had approached the chair and laid the petition on the table, the matter in a way becomes sub judice, to borrow the language of the law. The Senate Rule Book classifies such an action as “Matters Not open to Debate.” So at that point, the matter was no longer open to debate. Since the gavel has been hit and the action has been taken, no senator has the right to reopen the case. It was wrong of Senator Bamidele and Monguno to immediately start to revisit a closed matter, and that’s illegal. It is wrong for Akpabio to allow it.
I recall an incident in the 6th Senate when President Umaru Yar’Adua was bedridden in Saudi Arabia. Some senators moved a motion, seeking the Senate to constitute a panel to visit Saudi and ascertain the health status of the president. Somehow, when the motion was finally passed on a day, Senator Ike Ekweremadu presided, it turned out that the motion only mandated the Federal Executive Council to do the assignment. The original proponents of the motion were enraged, but they were not allowed to reopen the matter. They had to go into lobbying and eventually secured signatures of two-thirds of the Senate to re-table the matter and that paved the way for the adoption of the famous “Doctrine of Necessity.” That’s how serious the matter should be handled, but it was trivialized by Akpabio, the Senate Leader and Senate Whip. That’s on the wrong side of the rule.
Now that Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan has been suspended, many would say she was being silenced. That is far from the truth. Her suspension was on the basis of what the senate perceived as unruly behavior on the floor. We are yet to hear the details of her sexual harassment allegations, and I believe that she has avenues to ventilate that. Nigerians earnestly await these details, which should be salacious enough to help us cool off some heat.
-
News1 week agoOseni Congratulates Ajewole, Others on CCII Mandate Renewal
-
News1 week ago
Nigeria Has Lost One of Its Brightest Minds in Olunloyo – Rep Oseni
-
News1 week ago
Ex-Oyo Governor, Olunloyo, Passes On at 89
-
Education6 days ago
Cisco Centre to Benefit Ayede Poly, Staff, Host Communities – Rector
