Opinion
Obasa, Aláàfin Ṣàngó and the capture of Lagos | By Festus Adedayo
On Wednesday, February 25, 2025, a very toxic but innocuous advertorial was published in the Punch newspaper. It was authored by a group which called itself De Renaissance Patriots Foundation. Entitled Systematic Marginalization of Lagos State Indigenes, and signed by Major General Tajudeen Olanrewaju (rtd.) and Yomi Tokosi, the advertorial explains the legislative gangsterism currently going on in Lagos State, ex-Speaker Mudashiru Obasa’s impudent audacity and President Bola Tinubu’s nauseating silence on the civilian coup ongoing in the State of Aquatic Splendour.
The only fitting narrative that can explain the Obasa phenomenon and the Lagos godfather’s paternalism for Obasa and his ilk is the Osu caste system in Igboland. Among other obnoxious systems like the killing of twin babies, killing of children who grew first upper incisors, human sacrifices, among others, Osu caste is evergreen in its evil, and rooted in Igbo tradition and religion. Rev. George Thomas Basden’s book Among the Ibos of Southern Nigeria, (1921), a detailed account of the clergy’s experiences while living in Igbo land as a Christian missionary in the early 20th century, examines the people’s customs, beliefs, social structure and religious practices.
On page 109 of the book, Basden defined Osu as “a slave, but one distinct from an ordinary slave (ohu/oru) who in fact is the property of the god and when devoted to a god, he has no prospect of regaining freedom and he restricts his movements to the procuts of the shrine to which he was attached”. Centuries after the end of slavery and in spite of modernity, Osu caste’s poignant smell is rank in Igboland as Osu are still discriminated against, cannot marry a freeborn, their aspirations curtailed. They are thus forced to form an inter-group bond and alliance to press for their rights. A former minister under Olusegun Obasanjo, who is an Osu, is the rallying point of this caste against discrimination by “freeborn” Igbo. As I will argue presently, the Lagos parliament crisis, among other indicators, is fueled by the ancient indigene/settler dichotomy in Lagos. In this case, the Lagos godfather symbolizes the Obasanjo minister, hell-bent on protecting his fellow Lagos migrant-settlers.
General Olanrenwaju’s group which published the advertorial made several allegations against the godfather. They are encapsulated in the phrase, “persistent discrimination against the indigenous people of Lagos State.” Perhaps, the most insulting to the group was the temerity of the godfather’s choice of two non-indigenes of the state, Bisi Akande and Segun Osoba, ex-governors of Osun and Ogun States, to mediate in the crisis of the Lagos House of Assembly. Apart from the group’s total denunciation of this alien intervention, it specifically took Akande to the cleaners. Akande, it said, who “is struggling for political breath” in his home state, being unable to resolve the ongoing conflagration therein, feels entitled to poke-nose into Lagos matter “because his children, Akande Funmilayo (Chairman Apapa/Iganmu LCDA) and Yinka Akande are seriously benefiting from (sic) as Local Council Chairman and Director of Lekki Free Trade Zone respectively.”
As groups or individuals, Lagos indigenes have always stood up against the ruling establishment. A 1908 proposed water rate for Lagosians is an example. On July 20 of that year, Governor Walter Egerton proposed to charge Lagosians for them to access portable water. This was after his government constructed a #130,000 pipe borne water scheme, the precursor of the Iju waterworks built in 1916. Two indigenes of Lagos, John Randle and Orisadipe Obasa, medical doctors, under the banner of the People’s Union, arranged a rally of Lagosians at Enu Owa on November 26, 1908 where they took Egerton on. Randle and Obasa were themselves not autochthonous Lagosians. Randle, born in 1855 in Regent, Sierra Leone, originally from Oyo town, was son of Thomas, who settled in Aroloya part of Lagos, while Obasa, whose father descended from the Elekole of Ikole-Ekiti, was brought to Lagos in 1878. It must be borne in mind that Orisadipe Obasa has no ancestral connect with Mudashiru who is currently recreating an MC Oluomo motor-park hijack prototype in the Lagos parliament.
Indigene/settlers conflict in Lagos dates back to the 15th century. The Awori headsmen earliest settlers on Lagos Island, descendants of legendary Ogunfunminire, who hailed from Ile-Ife, had faced a Bini attempt to uproot them which was successful. A fierce battle that took place at Iddo had Olofin, who administered the area, being routed. Since then, the development of Lagos has attracted the influx of migrant-settlers Yoruba and other ethnicities laying claim to Lagos. The influence of migrant-settlers was so overwhelming that when in 1950, Dr I. Olorun-Nimbe emerged Mayor of the Lagos Council, only him and four others were Lagos indigenes while the rest 19 were migrant-settlers. The 1951 Constitution which placed Lagos under Ibadan, in a Western Region administration, further worsened Lagos’ fate, until the 1954 Constitution restored its place. In 1967, Lagos got a state of its own and federal capital status. So, when in the 1950s, the heartland of Lagos indigenes’ residence, the Isale Eko, was demolished, groups were formed to continually fight the interest of indigenous Lagosians. They included the Isale Eko Association (1955) and Egbe Eko Parapo (Lagos Citizens’ Rights Protection Council – LCRPC) 1962. The latter emerged from a merger of the Lagos Aborigines Society and the Egbe Omo Ibile Eko (Association of the Sons of Lagos State) which was led by Chief T. A. Doherty. Today, the most prominent of those associations is the Association of Lagos State Indigenes (ALSI) hitherto led by Justice Ishola Oluwa, a retired High Court Judge.
The role of identity in Nigeria’s migrant-settlers crisis shows its importance in Nigerian social life. It also shows that identity has negative potentials that can be deployed as a tool for mobilizing violence. In the year 2000, Lagos deployed identity for violence when Hausa and Yoruba indigene-settlers engaged one other in a fratricidal war in Ketu. That fight, which claimed lives, indicates the adversarial use that autocththony can be put to. Scholars have said that several of Nigeria’s worst conflicts occurred because original inhabitants, or indigenes, are pitted against migrant-settlers. The Obasa Lagos budding conflict, though appears political, may unravel the powers behind it.
In Yorubaland, the migrant-settlers dynamics is rich in literature. It is indeed an ancient phenomenon. Signified by the native markers of àjèjì or àjòjì (migrants) and onílé, (autocththony) the common phrase that defines that transaction is, no migrant-settler should duel with an indigene over ownership of land (àjòjì kìí b’ónílé du’lé). This is the meat of General Olanrewaju and his De Renaissance Patriots Foundation’s beef with Tinubu and why many autochthonous Lagosians, regardless of Tinubu’s behemoth political power in Nigeria, his talismanic influence and boundless wealth, are against his continued domination of Lagos. It also explains why a Tinubu, who today is carrying a monstrous elephant of Nigerian power and wealth on his head could be this needlessly bothered by the tiny cricket of being sidelined in the sack of Obasa as Lagos House of Assembly Speaker. The moment Tinubu loses this makeshift, badly-constructed Lagos identity in the battle with autochthonous Lagosians, he has lost all.
The above was recalled with the aim of stating that, though the àjèjì and onílée stranger politics in Lagos has always been on the front burner, it has been more pronounced in recent time. This specifically drew more Lagosians’ ire with the godfather, an àjèjì, becoming the Lord of Lagos and defender of the rights of fellow migrant settlers. In the above referenced advertorial, the De Renaissance Patriots Foundation claimed that since 1999, only one Lagos Omo-Onílé (son of the land) has been governor, ostensibly Raji Fashola. What this means is that Tinubu, Akinwumi Ambode and Babajide Sanwo-Olu, in the words of the advertorial, are àjòjì. The group also listed names of many àjòjì who it said have, unfairly, hoisted the banner of Lagos at the detriment of Lagosians.
Some extreme ones among the Lagos indigenes’ rights advocates have literally equalized their battle to an ancient Yoruba wise saying that no stranger can back a child like its mother (kò s’éni t’ó le mòó pòn bí olómo). Some others, in pursuit of this narrative, have claimed that the àjòjì at the helm of political affairs in and of Lagos, don’t appreciate Lagos enough,just like the domestic goat undervalues the prowess of a hunter and his gun; or one who inherits a huge agbada gown does not appreciate its value (ewúrẹ́ ilé kó mọ iyì odẹ, aj’ogún ẹwù kó mọ iyì agbádá nlá). It is on these twin premises that they derive their two conclusions. One is that, Lagos could have developed more than it does if the migrant-settlers had been autochtonous Lagosians. Second, that Lagos could have been greater but for the fact that the wealth accruable to the Ajoji from their leadership of Lagos are being funneled to the migrants’ original place of migration.
Prior to 1999, there did not seem to be anyone who held the jugular of Lagos like Tinubu. Before the ascendancy of his volcanic phenomenon, the last power outpost of Lagos was a group pejoratively called the ‘Ijebu Mafia’, disciples of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, operating as Afenifere leaders, living in Lagos. They determined the political geography of the aquatic state. Indeed, this group conducted the primary for the 1999 governorship which allegedly had Late Funsho Williams coming tops but which an internal abracadabra among the group tilted in favour of Tinubu. Immediately he grabbed political power, Tinubu, applying Law 33 of Robert Greene’s 48 Laws of Power which encourages the power holder to discover each man’s thumbscrew – their weaknesses – found out the Ijebu Mafia leaders’ thumbscrew and used it to prepare their political graveyards. He then succeeded in tearing them apart, deploying the Niccolo Machiavelli divide and rule tactics in the service of his ambition.
By 2007 when the godfather left office as Lagos governor, he had totally decimated their ranks, cloning a counter-group called Afenifere Renewal Group and leaving the Awo disciples licking their fatally bruised wounds. Abetted by Lagosians themselves, only a few, like the late Chief Ganiyu Dawodu, fought Tinubu to the hilt before his transition. By the time Lagos aborigines woke up to do a reconnaissance, it was too late. The godfather had captured Lagos and kept the lagoon and the sea inside his limitless-space pocket. Twenty five years after, not only does the godfather determine the political and economic barometer of Lagos, he determines when it will rain in the state or its time of drought.
The godfather’s migrant-settler place in Lagos is discussed only in hushed tones. Those privy to his migration and the story of his settling in Lagos maintain sealed lips. While he was governor of Lagos State, some dissident groups made efforts to document his migrancy by writing a book to document the family tree of Lagos Tinubus. Some other analysts have said that if the Lagos autochthony is to be broken into brass-tacks, virtually all Lagosians will fail the litmus test. For instance, the ancestor of the Tinubus is himself a Kanuri. While some settlers chose the Lagos Island side of Lagos called Isale Eko, Sierra Leone returnees were known as Akus or Saros, and Brazilians and Cuban returnees known as Agudas. Many of them originally hailed from towns scattered round the southwest. Only the Aworis can be said to own the Lagos autochthony. Immediately Mudashiru Obasa began to recreate the MC Oluomo-style tactic in Lagos House of Assembly, some forces came out to assert the deposed Speaker’s àt’òhúnrìnwá (migrant) status in Lagos and that he was not linked in any way with Orisadipe Obasa.
The 2023 election witnessed a groundswell of push-backs by, especially non-Yoruba indigene-settlers in Lagos, against the godfather’s fiefdom hold on Lagos. The outcome of that election showed a gradual whittling of the corrosive hold of the godfather on Lagos politics. Apparently a rebellion, Lagos migrant-settlers encircled the Peter Obi Labour Party and succeeded in giving it 582,454 votes as against 572,606 for the godfather’s APC. The godfather must have been furious. Until then and since 1999 when he held court, no one dared peer naked fire to look at the fiery face of the leopard. In the process of scapegoating for this colossal rout, a source told me the godfather held his Ajélè (an appointed official who oversees an empire’s economic and political interests) responsible and has since not forgiven him. More importantly, he is cross with him for being his own man and having the guts to win re-election due to his personal effort. For any godfather, a la the precepts of the Forty-eight Laws of Power, the Ajélè had committed an unpardonable sin against the Leviathan. So, even though Obasa rode roughshod on the Ajélè as Speaker, especially during the 2025 budget speech presentation, keeping him waiting for hours, the godfather wasn’t fazed and probably wrote the script. The world has since seen that, as Obasa’s water bug (Ìròmi) dances on the stream surface with impunity and audacity, executed with sheer brigandage, as well as abetted by institutions of the Nigerian state, the danceable tune egging the poor little creature on comes from a godfather drummer living in Aso Rock whose ego was fatally bruised.
To buttress General Olanrewaju’s submission, today, Lagos political power echelon, from governor, deputy governor, commissioners to special advisers, ministers representing Lagos, to federal and state parliamentarians, is tilted in favour of àt’òhúnrìnwá (immigrants) as against autochthonous Lagosians. The most laughable was Senator Solomon Olamilekan Adeola who represented Lagos West from 2015 to 2023 and before then, from 2011 to 2015, was Lagos House of Representatives member. Today, the man, known as Yayi, has perfunctorily exchanged state of origin like a prostitute changes her liaisons. He now represents Ogun West.
The story of Lagos, its godfather and potential explosion is beginning to resemble the cataclysmic end of the Yoruba deity of thunder and lightning, Ṣàngó. Aláàfin Ṣàngó, the third monarch of the Oyo Empire, was about the most celebrated and one of the most controversial rulers of the Empire. He was fiery, ambitious, charismatic and was extremely powerful. Like the cap insignia with which the Lagos godfather is known by today and which his worshippers scramble to don, Ṣàngó’s motif was a staff called Ose Ṣàngó, an ornately carved symbol depicted by fire, lighting and thunder.
Ṣàngó, the third Aláàfin of Oyo, who reigned between the 15th and early 16th centuries, was a man of great ambition, fiery charisma, and immense power. His name is invoked today to reify awesome might and the mystery of power. He mirrors a complex interplay of leadership acumen, divinity, and eventually, a reference point of potential human vulnerability. Like the Lagos godfather, Aláàfin Ṣàngó had a talismanic and commanding presence and inspired widespread loyalty. He also had the magical and mystical ability to command fire from the sky in his fit of anger. Ultimately, though his strength , the endowment ultimately led to his downfall. One day, Ṣàngó, enraged, invoked fire which resulted in a conflagration that went out of control. It eventually led to the destruction of his palace as well as lives of its inhabitants. It was the beginning of his end. Stripped of all he had, Ṣàngó departed Oyo Kingdom and never returned. He eventually committed suicide at a place called Koso.
Apart from the power of Yoruba anecdotal retelling latent in that Sango narrative, the downfall of Oba Ṣàngó is a detailed illustration that even in a modern world, no ruler or godfather is immune from the vulnerabilities of power. It also illustrates the destruction immanent in human nature. The Obasa episode, though seemingly miniature, has the potential to implode and flush the Lagos godfather down the drain, replicating the Ṣàngó downfall in recent history.
Maybe we all should just watch while an end comes to this tyrannical hold, after all, in the words of Nawal El Saadawi in her A daughter of Isis, “Things that never end are only boring, and were it not for death, life would be an impossible burden.”
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.
-
Education1 week agoCisco Centre to Benefit Ayede Poly, Staff, Host Communities – Rector
-
Opinion1 week ago
Beyond the Blackboard: How Akinde Aremu is Reshaping Federal Polytechnic Ilaro
-
National Issues1 week ago
Gbenga Daniel Seeks End to Immunity for Governors, Calls for Constitutional Amendment
-
Metro1 week ago
Popular Akure Hotelier Assassinated in Cold Blood
