Before embarking on today’s topic, let me pay my highest respect to three illustrious Nigerians, each a giant in his own right, who departed last week, namely (in the order of departure), Chief Bayo Akinnola, the Lisa of Ondo Kingdom and renowned industrialist; Prof. Chinua Achebe, renowned author, literary critic, and social historian; and Prophet Timothy Obadare, renowned Evangelist and Founder of the World Soul Winning Evangelical Ministry. May their souls rest in peace.
A week before this string of high profile losses, President Goodluck Jonathan had thrown the nation into yet another controversial decision of his, which simultaneously questioned his own morality, the wisdom of the Council of State, and the standing of the Nigerian state in the comity of nations, when it comes to probity in public service. At least, this is how well-meaning Nigerians and, indeed, the international community have received Jonathan’s recent pardon of a convicted fraudster and money launderer, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha, the former thieving Governor of Bayelsa State, with whom Jonathan served as Deputy Governor.
True, it is Jonathan’s presidential prerogative to grant pardon, even to criminals, but there are at least three reasons he should have refrained from extending same to Alamieyeseigha. First, not only has Alamieyeseigha been convicted and sentenced to prison for corruption, he is still wanted for the same offence in Britain, where he jumped bail, allegedly by disguising as a woman. Were he to wait for trial in Britain, he probably would still have been in prison like James Ibori, yet another former thieving Governor of Delta State.
Second, granting Alamieyeseigha a pardon is a statement by Jonathan that Nigeria is a corruption haven and that he is not going to do anything to reverse the situation, or simply does not give a damn. The implication is that Jonathan is deaf to all the complaints about corruption and profligate spending under his administration. He is deaf to the poor ranking of Nigeria on various international indices, which highlight corruption as the key factor behind Nigeria’s underdevelopment. He is deaf to the calls to fight corruption by Nigeria’s allies, especially the United States, which is currently involved in a binational relation with the country. It may well be that Jonathan does not understand that when American leaders talk about “good governance”, they are talking simultaneously about effective leadership, strong and effective state institutions, and zero tolerance for corruption.
Third, Jonathan’s ties to Alamieyeseigha should have cautioned him against the decision. By pardoning Alamieyeseigha, Jonathan put self-interest above national interest. After all, there are ways he could have shown gratitude to his former boss and self-admitted political benefactor other than dragging the Council of State and the whole nation through the mud. It is a shame that the Council, which includes former Heads of State, former Chief Justices of Nigeria, National Assembly leaders, and state Governors, assented to this shameful decision. The assent speaks to the oga mentality in Nigerian politics by which the person in power is uncritically supported, if not idolised, often for the supporters’ self-interest.
Alamieyeseigha’s pardon is the latest in a series of controversial decisions by Jonathan since he took office. To be sure, it is not unusual for leaders to take controversial decisions from time to time. After all, not everyone always agrees with their leaders, especially in democracies that have strong opposition. What is peculiar about Jonathan is that he creates unnecessary controversies through bizarre and queer decisions or unwarranted indecisions. As a result, his Presidency has come to look like the situation of a boy plucked from the village and given a jumping rope to play with. Painfully, despite some tutelage, he couldn’t quite figure out what to do with the rope. Each time he attempted to jump, he lost his balance and entangled himself in the rope. Eventually, it was taken away from him.
One can only hope that Nigeria, already entangled in corruption, internal terrorism, and poor governance, will not lose her balance completely before Jonathan leaves office. But Nigeria may lose it, if Jonathan is left unchecked. Just consider two other controversial decisions he has taken within the past 15 months.
Remember the fuel subsidy crisis of January 2012? The decision that led to the crisis portrayed Jonathan as someone who would swing a jumping rope backwards (that is, behind him), and still hope to be able to keep jumping forward. Just when the citizens were complaining bitterly about increases in commodity prices and the profligacy of those in power, Jonathan chose to increase the pump price of petrol by 125 per cent. Worse still, he did it without adequate public education about fuel subsidy, or even public buy-in as expected such complex economic decisions, without putting in place necessary palliatives for consumers, and without regard to the hardships caused for travellers during the Christmas-New Year festive season.
Although it was later revealed that fuel subsidy has been a corruption dragnet, Jonathan has done little or nothing to avoid the subsidy completely-the nation’s refineries have remained in bad shape, producing far below capacity under his Presidency. His recent insistence on removing the subsidy completely may witness the Mother of all protests, if appropriate measures are not taken to increase domestic production of refined petroleum.
Another controversial decision by Jonathan that was equally greeted with protests and denunciations was the attempted renaming of the University of Lagos to Moshood Abiola University, without consultation with the stakeholders and without going through due constitutional procedure. By renaming a 50-year-old institution and a national treasure in highly controversial circumstances, Jonathan threw mud at the honour he sought to bestow on Abiola, who, indeed, is worthy of honour.
It is not only poor judgment that runs through these three controversial decisions. Another common thread is poor timing. As indicated earlier, Jonathan took the nation by surprise by increasing the pump price of petrol during the holiday season, when many citizens had travelled away from their home or workplace. They suddenly faced high transport costs and further increases in commodity prices. To complicate matters, the increase was announced at a time when the citizens’ awareness of their own plight had been heightened by the Arab Spring and Occupy protests.
Equally inconsiderate was the timing of the botched UNILAG name change. Jonathan chose to do it at a time when the university was embarking on two major events, namely, the burial of its deceased Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Adetokunbo Sofoluwe, and the celebration of the institution’s 50th anniversary. Nothing could be more insensitive than throwing the university community into commotion at such times.
Like the other controversial decisions, Alamieyeseigha’s pardon was as inappropriate as it was ill-timed. If Jonathan didn’t hear the loud complaints against increasing corruption, if he failed to appreciate the negative effects of corruption on national development, he should at least have known that presidents don’t grant controversial pardons in the middle of their tenure. They usually wait until the very end. He and his advisors should have learnt this lesson from the former US President, Bill Clinton, who waited until the very last day in office before pardoning his political allies.
It may be too late for Jonathan to learn. But it is never too late for Nigerians to demand the best for their country. And their leaders, as well.
Niyi Akinnaso (niyi@comcast.net)
Article culled from Punch
