ATTACKS ON CBCN (JOHN ONAIYEKAN & HASSAN KUKAH)

For some weeks now, statements have been spreading virally on the internet in reaction to the perceived activities or comments of Hassan Kukah and John Onaiyekan, not really because comments made about them may be true in themselves, but because the internet is a place where even the whistling of a bird is acceptable. As an individual one may have his/her reservations against these two prominent figures, but we must try to approach issues with some reasonable sense of objectivity. If every article or comment made on the internet is publishable, then many Nigerians do not need much to become professors. These reactions are not unconnected with the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and their points of departure on issues of national importance. As a result, Christians of different denomination/factions and people of different faith perceive their opinion not to be in consonance with CAN and in defense of Ayo Oritsejafor, Nigerians make unwarranted comparisons among this trio. It is in reaction to the comparison made by some incoherent minds that I summarily make certain observations.

Ayo Oritsejafor is certainly the president of the Christian Association of Nigeria and we give him credit for that. However, on issues of national importance, we should not be beclouded by the office of the CAN president at the expense of one’s suitability for particular situations. John Onaiyekan and Hassan Kukah are first of all human beings, Nigerians and then clergy. However, because of our conscious amnesia, we throw to the waste bin that which qualifies them not as bishops, but as scholars and by extension resource fellows. All we need to do is to strive to sieve the ideas of these figures within scholarly and ecclesiastical lines and know when they speak as clergy and when they render their views as scholars. When I listen to some Nigerians make careless statements on internet such as; “Kukah or Onaiyekan is a politician”, “their view does not represent the mind of CAN”, the question is; should Drs. Onaiyekan and Kukah be taken for granted simply because they are bishops Onaiyekan and Kukah respectively?  Oritsejafor on one hand attended the New Covenant Bible Institute Benin City, Nigerian Baptist Seminary Ogbomosho, Oyo state and Morris Cerrulo’s School of Ministry, San Diego. All these certainly qualifies him as a pastor that he is, but absolutely not as a scholar and by extension not a resource fellow on issues of national importance.

Known across various continents for their contributions to scholarship, Christian unity and peace, Onaiyekan, who was nominated to be a recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize alongside Barack Obama and Kukah, a Harvard alumnus whose intellectual prowess is unequalled among his critics (both of whom had a stint on international diplomacy at various intervals) do not stand out as clergy alone but people of outstanding intellectual reputation. People should be discouraged, if not tired, of talking when those whose attention they want to attract, are very busy making meaningful impact in our world, therefore having no time in their schedule have to respond to mediocre. My advice to ‘you’ who seeks relevance is to have a touch of what they have acquired so that your voice like theirs, will become relevant.      

DOYIN OKUPE AND HIS ANTICS

The very first time I listened to Nkoyo Toyo on the floor of the National Assembly, the first impression I got registered in my memory because I was marveled by the level of her accuracy, logical consistency and intellectual exposure. I had to sail into her profile and I have come to revere her as one of those very few honorable members of the House of Representatives marked with clarity and distinction. As a philosopher, I always probe into a person’s profile to learn or unlearn some qualities based on either positive or negative impressions.

The first time I heard Doyin Okupe was on an interview on Aljazeera TV. Having been accused by a Sahara reporter of “doing deals with the military leaders and selling away Nigeria…” Okupe anxiously asked the reporter to “shut up”. Also, his seemingly unprofessional response to the anchors of Sunrise Daily is quite resounding. His approach to issues immediately captured the attention of many around the world and the rest of the story is on Google. But I want to draw our attention to some issues of importance:

1)      Okupe denied the allegation that he had been arraigned before the EFCC for some corrupt dealings shrouded in secrecy.

2)      He assured Nigerians never to be in despair since the Nigerian government had every situation under control.

3)      He referred to the reporter from Sahara as a liar and one that has no reputation

4)      On 3^rd November, 2013, he gave a wrong figure of the number of ATC that were fired in 1981 to be 1435 persons as against 11345 persons.

5)      That the government has granted the demands of ASUU more than ASUU desired.

6)      Above all, do not forget that President Obasanjo was reported to have physically beaten up Doyin Okupe on account of his dishonesty.

7)      Doyin Okupe said that government has opened an account with the CBN and ‘set aside’ the sum of 200million naira as ASUU requested. (Recall that he used the words ‘set aside’ and ‘paid’ interchangeably.)

If you have gone through the tertiary system of education or still an undergraduate student, then you probably should have done some GST in philosophy and logic. If numbers 1 to 6 is false, then number 7 is probably false too. So why should Okupe cajole Nigerians into believing that every demand has been met. With all these misgivings, it beats the imagination of every average mind who is impatient with incoherency why Okupe should persistently be a mouth-piece in government at this point of our political history. Having understood the antics of government and the antecedents of some government representatives, would you not expect members of ASUU to reason as intellectuals?

In 1981, when the American president fired some ATC, recall that he offered them an 11% increase in their wages having seen the demanding nature of their job. The ATC in turn rejected the offer because they wanted 100% increase. There was no prior written agreement between the government and the ATC, even though he evaded telling us the security implications it had for the American government. In the case of ASUU, there is a written agreement between the government and ASUU and a memorandum of understanding. The weak precedent or foundation upon which Okupe based his argument is feverish to a sound mind. While there is certainty that the government and ASUU are drawing closer to a middle course, the government in turn should strive to be a friend of democracy.

    

THAT ALL CATHOLICS WILL GO TO HELL? OKOTIE WAS RIGHT

I have received too many reactions from various quarters in anger against the very controversial but somewhat true statements of pastor Okotie. Please before you condemn the words of Chris Okotie; it is worthwhile that you understand the context from which he speaks. Be slow to anger lest you become as guilty as he is. Recall that in 2002, God ‘personally’ told Pastor Okotie that he should be the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria in 2003. In that same year (2003), he did not only lose the election to Olusegun Obasanjo, but was number eight (8) in the electoral results ranking.

If it was the same God that gave Obasanjo landslide victory over Okotie, then that God is a liar. But anyone who is conversant with previous write-ups knows that we have already established that God cannot lie since to lie is evil and evil is the absence of good and goodness is the very nature of our God. It becomes pertinent to know that he is yet to recover from the disappointment of a god who promised him presidency and failed. As for me, I will not want to find myself in the presence of a god who cannot guarantee common electoral success; for that is the nature of the god that Okotie serves. Invariably, when Okotie says all Catholics will go to hell, I think he could probably be correct since what we consider as heaven may be hell to him. Or would you rather follow and find yourself in the presence of a god who promises and fail?

HONORS FOR SALE (H.C.)

Over the years, friends and some senior colleagues have travelled all over the world in search of knowledge in order to increase their worth in the labour market. The results of their performance raise my hope, yet it is still worrisome. The question that keeps coming to mind is: “why will Nigerians who have attended colleges in Nigeria further their studies in some world class institutions and keep very excellent records?” One of the notable reasons is that apart from the systemic issue, there is also an individual side to each person’s story. As some will always say that they had to prove their worth in any world class university they found themselves. While I say that the system of education in many world class universities is still the best compared to what is obtainable in most African (especially Nigerian) universities, I’ve met with some scholars who are graduates of some world class universities whose performance are low compared with some Nigerian scholars (kudos to those whose personal efforts have distinguished them.) Just to draw our minds to one of the salient issues that downplays our educational system in Nigeria.

In 1985, Oxford University refused Margaret Thatcher the award of honorary doctorate in protest against her cuts in funding education. In 2001, George W. Bush received honorary degree from Yale University and in protest to such event, some students and faculty evaded the occasion before it could commence. Also, in 2007, Andrew Card, the chief of staff to President Bush was awarded honorary degree by the University of Massachusetts, while students and some staff protested in the midst of the occasion. In 2007, protesters demanded that the University of Edinburgh revoked honorary degree awarded to Zimbabwean ruler Robert Mugabe in 1984 and their demand was granted. And in 2008, protesters asked that same be revoked from Mugabe by the University of Massachusetts.

In 2009, Arizona State University refused honors to President Barack Obama for his perceived lack of qualification. There has also been controversy in Notre Dame and St. Joseph University for awarding honors to President Obama and Chris Matthew respectively since both persons maintain a pro-choice stand on abortion. In 2012, Mansor (wife of Malaysian Prime Minister) was controversially awarded honorary doctorate by Curtin University for her contribution to childhood education and protesters have since been calling for the revocation of that honor since the purpose for which she was honored was financed by taxpayers’ money in which case she cannot take the credit.

An honorary degree is awarded for the sake of the honor due to one’s contribution to the development of the society or inputs in one’s field of study. But certain considerations must also be observed: the recipient should be free from human rights abuse and from political/economic corruption. With this in mind, the reason for the denial of honors to some persons, the protests against some political figures and the revocation of honors in some instances becomes clear.

Every articulate Nigerian knows where my story leads. Going through the criteria for the award of honors, it becomes pertinent for every reasonable Nigerian to sail through the records of our political history in this republic with the litany of persons that have been awarded and will still be awarded doctoral honors. Probably, some notable figures begin to ring in our memory: Drs. Tafa Balogun, Abiola Ajimobi, George Akume, Rabiu Kwankwaso, Peter Odili, Ahmed Makarfi, Abdullahi Adamu, Ibrahim Idris, Bamanga Tukur, Patience Jonathan, to mention but a few. All these persons have been offered honoris causa based on their contribution to society and dedication to humanity. True to their cause, many Nigerian politicians have earned honors, however it was actually honorary doctorate in corruption.

We are glad to hear that the Association of Vice Chancellors of Nigerian Universities has banned the award of honors to politicians even though the University of Nigeria Nsukka intends to violate the agreement by awarding honors to Anyim Pius Anyim. With all these comic events, what does one expect from international bodies? In every university there ought to be an awarding committee to review such process, but I strongly believe that it does not exist in our system. But going by the criteria which has been stated above, we will conclude that most Nigerian politicians are not qualified. Well to the best of my knowledge, the award of unmeritorious honors to politicians recklessly rather than shows the greatness of the figures who are being honored, brings out clearly the inferiority of such institutions of learning that embark on the auctioning of these honors. Some persons around the globe had been awarded posthumously and it is also proper for universities in Nigeria to bring sanity to such practice by revoking some honors even if it means posthumously.       

  

ASUU versus PDP?

Over a decade ago, when the People’s Democratic Party appealed to our emotions to be voted into power, the slogan of the party was: P!D!!P!!! Power to the People. With time it became clear to those in power that it wasn’t necessary that power belonged to the people and so the slogan was redefined. As a replacement, it was PDP… and the response was POWER (to the people was removed). I am quite aware that many Nigerians are not aware of that redefinition and it still remains the statusquo till date. It is along this line of thought that I couched the theme to read: ASUU V PDP (instead of Federal Government). While most Nigerians know of the recent development between the federal government of Nigeria, sorry I mean PDP and ASUU, I wish to draw our attention to some salient issues. Bear in mind as you read through this piece that the reform that was meant to bring stability to our system of education was thrown into the waste bin some few years ago by few Nigerian bureaucrats who felt that it was improper for the generality of the Nigerian populace to have the same standard of education that they (the bureaucrats and their children) have, for the simple reason of widening the gap of inequality that has long existed. Thus, while the wealth of the rich shoots up, that of the poor melts down. One of the key issues responsible for this shift is the fact that the vision of the ‘leaders’ to involve technocrats in matters of technicality was relegated; hence, the emergence of the likes of Wike, who knows nothing about basic principles in educational policies. With over four ministers of education for the past thirteen years, with different ideologies and policies, we have come to the conclusion that the ministry of education like the NFF, think per game (without continuity). I have carefully followed the rise of Nyesom Wike who accidently is the supervising minister of education, from being a local council chairman to chief of staff of Rivers state, to minister of state for education and then to the supervising minister of education and I have noticed that his speedy rise in government is simultaneous with the level of his corruption. Before you give him kudos, study his antecedents. Being a guy who is on bail charged for Stealing N4.7 Billion of Rivers State Government funds by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission in October 2008, all that comes to mind are words of Nasir El Rufai and Oby Ezekwesili; in government it is only the bad that gets promoted. Quite interestingly too has been his recent statements about ASUU which seems to represent the interest of the government. His recent approach to the resolution of ASUU strike is a replay of his war with Amaechi and a rehearsal of how he intends to ‘rule’ Rivers state under the platform of PDP. The recent threat on the striking lecturers is the height of executive recklessness and could only have been an act of a refined militant. It is quite good that power comes to play at this time but in the right direction. Well, let me not dwell much on the person of Wike since he is a mere tool in the hands of the presidency. While we thank Mr President for this amiable choice of his, we also remind him that you cannot choose above your wisdom. Well that is not to say that I also believe in the ideology, if any, of other political parties since the characters that come on scene are not too different. Back to my take on ASUU. Most Nigerians know the members of the leadership of ASUU from a distance probably as a result of the lingering strike, but I speak as one who not only knows their ideology but have sat at table closely with them to discuss topical issues. Like every system of leadership that comes and passes with time, so is the management of ASUU. It is so unfortunate for us at this time of our history that the current leadership of ASUU at the national level are unionists, activists and conservative in their struggle. When you have a single soul in different bodies controlling the Nigerian Labour Congress, Joint Action Front, Nigerian Trade Union and at the same time leading the Academic Staff Union of Universities, the desired and expected outcome is but a disturbance of the old democratic equilibrium, which appears not to be favourable to the citizenry. It is quite true that the masses suffer the consequences, but let me assure you that the ‘government’ is not disturbed because it is concerned but concerned because it is disturbed. At the moment, the citizens bear the burden, but the long-term benefit still belongs to the citizens. Let me assure my fellow students that over 60% of those who are at the forefront of this struggle will only be remembered as historically patriotic figures and I think that is what democratic struggle in its truest sense should entail. Though I am as worried as every Nigerian (student) since I am also one, yet the glories of the struggle in the future encourages me with or without my presence. My advice to all Nigerian students is to be strong even in the midst of what appears to be a hopeless situation because I quite hopeful that most of you, if not all, will be beneficiaries of this revolutionary cum socio/political ‘codicil’.  

POLITICS OF RELIGION OR RELIGION OF POLITICS?

As a Nigerian, you are probably unaware of the fact that recent trend in the field of politics and religion has made it impossible for us to make a sharp distinction between both concepts. As a keen observer, I have struggled to decipher its meeting point and I share my views. With the idea of the scramble for Africa, some religions were introduced cutting across cultural lines. In Nigeria, Islam was introduced in the North and the colonial masters struggled to mount their foothold in other parts of the country. Since the West had long learnt how to work with ideologies, the question that followed immediately was: “how can we better colonize?” Religion (Christianity) was a priceless tool to be employed. Needless to mention that countries/states and groups that attempted to revolt against the religions of their colonial masters were daunted, many of whom were killed. The close of the 20th century down into the 21st century is witnessing the resurgence of such relational ideology in our political drama. Religion on its own may not pose a problem but the misuse of it has been glaring. Have u asked yourself the reason(s) for the state association with particular religions based on the dominant group in a particular state? Why should there be a pastor or an Imam in every state house? The association of intending contenders for the presidential election with the Redeem Christian Church of God is an eye opener. The charismatic nature of its leader has made it possible to be one of the fastest growing Christian communities in Nigeria. Needless to mention that the church harbours over 8% of the Nigerian voters, not to mention other Christian communities that are offspring of the church. Little wonder, Buhari had to visit the man of God, Pastor Adeboye who has in practice over 6 million followers. The sudden friendship between the pastor and the presidency is not unconnected with some political gimmicks. That exactly is the rationale behind notable Nigerian politicians going before God to endorse their campaigns as God’s chosen leaders; kneeling before God in humility, while practically standing against God in pride. The import of this gimmickry is to the effect that we are one in Christ. It is because religion has proven to be the most potent form of deceit that the Dr. Segun Oshoba report that the government of Nigeria shall not identify herself with any religion (which means that in fact and in principle, there should be no state religion), never saw the light of the day. This is just a clarion call to all believers to wake up from their dogmatic slumber; do not be cajoled into thinking that though we are different economically we are one in God, it does not in any way tally with any pragmatic principle. Refuse to be swerved by those who constantly shift the goalpost of religion to suit their desires. If we cannot be one economically, then there is no magical transformation into oneness in God.

CONTROVERSIAL ARGUMENT: SCIENCE OR RELIGION?

Being at a seminar where comparison was made between science/technology on the one hand and religion on the other, I wish to share my candid opinion. It is said that science/technology is inclined to capitalism and should be viewed with caution. Hence, religion is to be preferred as that which brings out the oneness (equality) in humanity. But if our dumping of science is based on the notion that science and technology aligns with capitalism which seeks to exploit the individual, then religion’s flaws lies on the same logic. At the dawn of colonialism, the fundamental question was: “how can we better colonize?” and not “how can we better Christianize?” So Christianity was only a latter development, because in former times, it was primarily a tool of imperialism and by extension, an exploitative technique. Though religion (Christianity) was used as a tool, if its end is worthwhile after all, then does that justify the means? If by any yardstick the end of any scientific endeavour does not justify its means, then both religion and science end up in the same pitfall.

WHY THE POOR WILL REMAIN DESTITUTE

At the conference on Nationalism and Economic Justice, A.G.A. Bello (with many supporters) thinks that resource control ends the socio/political and security problems facing Nigeria. Some renowned activists/scholars also are of the view that giving us quality education will end our entire dilemma; this is because education will lead to man’s liberation. Long before the International Conference on Nationalism and Economic Justice, these issues have been topical themes in the Nigerian polity. The question remains: “why is the status quo still the same?” If we are to take the statistics, up to 80% of Nigerian if not more, will make recourse to the government. I will tackle these issues one after the other:

Education: Let me put it more bluntly in a way we could all understand.  Is it humanly possible for the oppressor to teach the oppressed how to be truly free? Like the slave-master morality of Nietzsche, the freedom of the slave becomes a source of worry for the master because power is only relevant where there are subjects which serve as outlets to vent such power. The freedom of the citizens threatens the existence of the bourgeois. It is a situation where the awareness of the proletariat endangers the bourgeois as increase in their awareness decreases their capacity to be trampled upon by the bourgeois. How can they exercise their lordship over the vast majority by dictating how to run the resources of the state if they are allowed to go through progressive education that liberates them? If you know that the master reasons this way, then you should be aware that no master will genuinely send you to school to become liberated since your liberation sends them to hell. There is need for some sort of mental emancipation that will disturb the old equilibrium; a level of genuine ideological war that reverses the reasoning of the elites and the trampled majority, so as to bridge the gap that has long existed between both groups of people in the African society.

Resource control: the question of the various percentages that should go to oil producing communities has lingered pendulously from one administration to another. But I do not wish to bug you with such intricacies as it is absolutely secondary to my endeavour. I want you to note that when Nigerians engage in a particular struggle, what preoccupies their minds is the fact that they are interested in the immediate and magical change of their problematic situation; as such the present moment is what is most important. Thus, a rich politician knows the psychology of the average Nigerian that when he gives him/her some handsome sum of money, he wins ticket to a political office. When we go back to history, we should be aware that African nations that sought to be independent and ethnic groups that sought to have their independent states engaged in such struggle because they were marginalized. But that on its own hasn’t put an end to the fight of marginalization. People are more disintegrated when they fight each other than when they fight common enemies; the more the limitation of the quest, the higher the chances of national disintegration. That is the exact story of resource control. Give an oil producing state 100% control over their resources and they will kill themselves daily; at this point the fight will be brother against brother.  It is so clear that when we talk of resource control in Nigeria, the first thing that comes to mind is crude oil/Niger Delta communities. The question of resource control is a conceived ideology by politicians to lure various groups toward violent agitations all for the good of the political elite, yet with little or no benefit to the greater majority who are the victims of dejection. It therefore becomes the projection of the will of a few unto the whole. But we still ask ourselves if these people are being marginalized and our answer is yes and they also have a right to a fair share of their resources, but to imagine that it automatically curbs violent agitations is erroneous.

Here is my advice to actors (misguided masses) who play the script of politicians: you can never be a director in your own movie, because the more you align with the political elite, the better you are taught the rudiments of being disqualified from existential situations which are to serve as real solutions to your plight.