Paul
Onomuakpokpo argues that at the United Nations General Assembly,
President Buhari like a thespian, played the role of a charmer, the man
with a magic wand to solve the nation's problems and root out corruption
in a short time.
It is not that we have ever doubted the thespian talents of
President Muhammadu Buhari that render him eligible to assume the role
of an actor before any audience. We have always known that he is like
any other wily politician, especially in these climes, who can fit into
any dramatic role before a given audience. Remember, in 2015 when Buhari
had before him citizens who were desirous of a leader with democratic
credentials, he offered himself as perfectly fitting that role. He
regaled them about his mutation into a democrat since he was forced by
Ibrahim Babangida and his co-travellers to pull off his military uniform
and jackboots.
Again, before a south-east audience, he identified with them by
dressing like an Igbo man. Still, before the general population as his
audience, Buhari played the role of a charmer, the man with a magic wand
to solve the nation’s problems and root out corruption in a short time.
He made the audience swoon over him. And he was rewarded with the prime
prize – the presidency – as the encore continued until it was disrupted
by the subsequent months of the reality of hardship.
Now, Buhari has taken these dramatic skills onto the global stage.
At the 72 session of the United Nations General Assembly, Buhari took on
a role that was totally alien to his personality. The meeting was about
the wellbeing of people. It had the fitting theme of “Focusing on
People: Striving for Peace and Decent Life for All on a Sustainable
Planet.” Thus, Buhari played the role of an actor who wants to improve
the wellbeing of the people and make them to live in peace and live a
decent life.
In this role, Buhari stressed the need for expanding the frontiers
of democracy and the rule of law. Buhari indeed must be acting; that was
why he could talk about this. If Buhari stopped acting, he would not
hesitate to tell you that democracy and the rule of law are misguided
notions that trammel his own idea of governance. Or is this not the same
Buhari that forgot a major bulwark of democracy, the separation of
powers? In his contempt for democracy and rule of law, Buhari raided the
homes of judges who constitute the third arm of government and
attempted to terrorise them into accepting his vision of fighting
corruption. In fact, to Buhari, the judiciary is not necessary in his
concept of democracy. He would like to appoint his own judges who would
dispense his own kind of justice. Because the existing judges do not
dispense the kind of justice he wants, and because he cannot decree the
judiciary out of existence, he can only tolerate them.
But clearly, not for him the sanctity of their judgements. He
selects the judgements to obey. If the judgements favour him, as the
case of law courts ordering the forfeiture of the assets of suspected
corrupt persons, he can obey them. But if the courts rule that suspects
should be granted bail, then the judges have failed to deliver his kind
of justice and he is not obliged to obey them. That is why Buhari has
failed to obey the court rulings granting bail to former National
Security Adviser Sambo Dasuki and the leader of the Nigeria’s Islamic
Movement, Ibrahim El-Zakzaky. And that was why for a long time, he also
refused to obey the court rulings that the leader of the Indigenous
People of Biafra (IPOB), Nnamdi Kanu, should be released from detention.
This brings us to the issue of inequalities that the president
spoke about. Buhari spoke like a man who was pained by the inequalities
in societies. But in speaking this way, Buhari was acting on the UN
stage. For, if Buhari were not acting, he would have acknowledged that
back at home his administration has become a breeding ground for
inequalities. This is why Buhari would easily prosecute others,
especially the members of the opposition, the Peoples Democratic Party
(PDP), who are accused of corruption, while shielding his associates and
members of his party, the All Progressives Congress (APC) on whom are
hanging egregious charges of corruption. Buhari encourages inequalities
by supporting a system that makes the oil resources of the south-south
to be appropriated by the ruling class and its accomplices while the
people of the region are impoverished.
Inequalities in Buhari’s society are stoked by ethnicity and
religion. Thus, when Buhari warned against the perils of ethnicity and
religion, he was only playing the role of an actor. Buhari has become a
source of strength for rabid ethnicity and religion by not tackling the
Fulani herdsmen menace.
These herdsmen can go ahead to destroy farms, rape, maim and kill.
Buhari would not see the need to check them. He would not support the
proposal that the herdsmen should embrace ranching as it is done in
other parts of the world. When the herdsmen attack innocent farmers,
Buhari would consider them as clashes between two lawless parties.
Worse, if the farmers are outraged at their crops being destroyed by the
herdsmen, then Buhari would legitimise this destruction. It is in this
regard that Buhari has supported the grazing bill that would take land
from others and give it to herdsmen to graze their cattle. Buhari’s
ethnocentrism is further seen by his appointments which only go to
people of the same tribe and religion with him. All security agencies
are headed by his fellow northerners and Muslims. Again, Muslims without
provocation can kill Christians as in the cases of Mrs. Eunice Elisha
in Abuja and Mrs. Bridget Agbahime in Kano and they would not be
punished.
If by now you still do not accept that the president is an actor,
this point would convince you. Did you not hear Buhari make a case for
dialogue with North Korea over its nuclear deal? Yes, this is the same
president who does not believe in dialogue. Citizens from every part of
the country have been pleading with him to allow dialogue over the
destiny of the country. But he has refused. He does not want any
dialogue through which Nigerians would arrive at a constitution that
would guide their existence. They want a constitution that would carry
the imprimatur of the citizens, “we the people,” like that of the United
States. But he would not allow this. He wants inequalities in the
society to be perpetuated by the military-imposed constitution that is
blithely bereft of the input of the citizens. It is because we have a
president who has anathemised dialogue that he thought and still thinks
that the best response to the Biafra question is the liquidation of the
Igbo.
But for the close observer, Buhari did not succeed in disguising
the fact of his being only an actor and not as a person who spoke from
his heart. Throughout Buhari’s speech, he used the word “people” only
twice. The only other occasion was when it appeared as part of the theme
of the gathering. On the two occasions when Buhari deliberately used
the word, he never had his people in mind. He had Palestinian and
Rohingya people in mind. Compare this with the speech of the United
States President Donald Trump that referred to the “people” 45 times.
Forget the notion that Trump is a warmonger and that his speech is
longer than Buhari’s. What matters is that he articulated the interests
of his people. He was unequivocal while declaring that he would
subordinate the interests of other peoples to those of the American
people. This makes the difference between the two countries: In America,
“the people govern, the people rule, and the people are sovereign.” But
in Nigeria, Buhari governs, Buhari rules and Buhari is sovereign.
For Buhari to be among those leaders who would ensure a better
world that is marked by peace and decent living for their citizens, he
must allow restructuring. He must allow the citizens to negotiate how
they want to live. Or did Buhari not listen to Trump when he declared
that ‘‘Strong sovereign nations let their people take ownership of the future and control their own destiny’’ ?
***
Written by Paul Onomuakpokpo
0 comments:
Post a Comment