#2023ELECTION ; TINUBU AND BURDEN OF HISTORY
By Biodun Olamosu
At the inception of the 4th republic in 1999 after the tormentors struggles by the prodemocracy movement against the military rule, the new political elite came under the scrutiny of the microscope of vigilant Nigerian press that sought for impeccable politicians to drive the new political administrations rather than having not good for nothing politicians replacing the military dictatorship of the old that share common banners of corruption, oppression, and exploitation against the people.
Among the politicians that came forth to participate in the new government were those that could not in any way be differentiated from what Abacha-Babangida stood for among other right-wing tendencies.
Not long thereafter the inauguration of the National Assembly, the presiding officers of both houses of the National Assembly – Uche Enwerem and Salisu Buhari of the Senate and House of Representatives respectively were found to have misrepresented themselves as contained in the affidavit filed with INEC. They claimed to attend schools they never attended. Buhari on his part misrepresented his age too to make up for age qualification that is a condition for anyone contesting into the House of Representatives. Such act of fraud and perjury were disowned by Nigerians including those that voted for them to be elected as their representatives.
The human right community and the press in unison raged against those politicians and called for their resignation from the National Assembly and as the presiding officers. While Enwerem managed to retain his seat at the Senate but lost his position as the presiding officer, Buhari was not lucky as he lost everything and apologized to the nation for mercy before stepping out of the National Assembly for infringing on the principle of utmost good faith that his conduct of misrepresentation has caused the nation.
This first step in testing the principle and practice of democracy emanating from below having been achieved was a landmark in the potential of what vibrant press and public opinion could achieve on their own; especially as this was against the background of prodemocracy movement that had taken a decade to transit from military to civil rule. This also had its attendant advantage of strengthening the confidence of the movement in achieving greater heights.
The vigilance was not restricted to the central government as the new governor of Lagos State, in person of Bola Tinubu was alleged of the same offence that include misrepresentation of both his age, primary school and university attended. He claimed to have attended Government College, Ibadan and University of Chicago for his high school and tertiary institution respectively. The name he bared as a toddler did not tally with the one he now bears as an adult. Not only this, he was alleged of being involved in drug business which caused his bank account where drug money was laundered to be confiscated. The discrepancy in his particulars worth being scrutinized to get the truth of the matter like it was the case with Enwerem and Salisu Buhari before it.
Gani Fawehinmi became vociferous in championing the cause of getting to the root of the matter; while the press and the NGOs were recasistrant to do so. The State House of Assembly waded into the matter in order to save him in the hand of Gani Fawehinmi. This was not unusual as the legislative house was dominated by one party, Alliance for Democracy led by him in Lagos State. The intervention of the House was therefore to cover-up the certificate forgery and other allegations committed by Bola Tinubu. This is understandable from this quarters as most members of the Assembly held their positions at the instance of the governor and they were therefore expected to reciprocate in turn with unflinching loyalty at all circumstances.
The situation at the National Assembly was a bit different and made possible against the interest of the extant president, Olusegun Obasanjo that gave both officers his support but for the pluralistic nature of the assembly that comprised strong opposition parties – All Peoples Party and Alliance for Democracy as against that of the ruling party, People Democratic Party, a cover up was made difficult to achieve.
On understanding that no good result would come from the Lagos State House of Assembly on the matter, Gani Fawehinmi had to expound the scope of the fight to involve the police that has the constitutional responsibilities to investigate on any matter of fraud and criminality. This he commenced by writing a letter to the Inspector General of Police and informed his office that he has a duty to investigate the alleged misrepresentation by Bola Tinubu in his particulars as contained in the affidavit swore under oath by him or his agent. Such step taking by Gani got Tinubu and his cohorts napping as they were earlier hiding under the cover that a seating governor could not be prosecuted as he was covered by the immunity clause provided for in the 1999 Constitution. They were made to realise by Gani’s argument that even if immunity is to prevent the governor from prosecution, but that such provision do not prevent him from being investigated. Before long Senator Afikuyomi showed up at Gani Fawehinmi’s Chambers to confess that the errors in Tinubu affidavit came from him and that Gani should forgive Tinubu on this.
It was at this juncture that the character of what comprised the hitherto outspoken Nigerian press and human rights activists became exposed. They came like angry flood in greater speed and strength to challenge Gani and in defence of Tinubu. Not a few theories were propounded to establish why Gani should be snubbed by Nigerians as canvassed by these combined forces. Some of the information from this end to chastise Gani was at the level of sentiment and personal attack. The first fervor came from an equally respectable prodemocracy fighter, Beko Ramsome-Kuti* through a letter he caused to write to Gani. In the letter, he insinuated that “Gani is not a Saint that he claims to be.” According to him, the #6million naira that he raised in saving Gani’s properties from being confiscated by way of award granted by court judgment against him while in prison for libel suit by Akilu and Togun, - two Babangida’s boys that Gani hitherto alleged of responsible for the killing of Dele Giwa on behalf of their principal; was kept by Gani after his release by a superior court order and that some of the money were raised from outside the shore of the country.* He also vent his anger against Gani’s role in supporting Buhari-Idiagbon military government some years earlier. This he attributed to reason of what Gani was going to gain by doing so as a professional legal practitioner in defending corrupt politicians. The very reason, according to him, NBA sanctioned him for flouting their order of boycotting the military tribunals* In his words, he further reiterated, “permit me to recall that you decided to form the National Conscience Party in 1994 after you have failed to get the Campaign for Democracy to transform into a political party of your dream*” “Only recently you resigned as chairman of the joint Action Committee of Nigeria when the members rejected your renewed campaign against the civilian government that was yet to take off*.”
“The question that some members of the human rights community are asking: “when have we decided to be the defenders and policemen of some selected provisions of the transition programme decrees? It is for this reason that most of us distanced ourselves from the Buharigate and Enwerem affair. It will be recalled that it was you and your compatriot Femi Falana who had cause to play professional roles in both cases. In other words while Falana acted as the solicitor to The News magazine which published the Buhari’s story, you were the counsel to the Tell magazine which reported the Emwerem’s story”* “In the Tinubu case I have enquired and confirmed from the entire human rights community that you never deemed it necessary to discuss the Tinubu matter with anyone or group. Yet after you have taken your position and issued your ultimatums you expected everybody to line up behind you in your crusade to remove an elected governor without regard to dueprocess.* Because of your inability to secure the support of other human rights organisations in this your crusade you have resorted to name calling and abuses.”
Beko was not without avalanche of supporters among journalists and human rights activists. Prominent among these include Femi Falana that claimed Bola Tinubu has being his long time client and for this reason he would rather abandon principle than to abandon his client of many years*. This was Femi that his client, The News started Salisu Buhari’s saga. Other known human rights lawyers involved in defending Tinubu include Olisa Agbakoba, Fred Agbaje, Dele Adesina and Nurudeen Ogbara were all present at the Lagos State House of Assembly to defend the interest of Bola Tinubu.
Writers like Soji Omotunde put the whole saga into perspective in defending Tinubu by stating that: “If Tinubu had accepted that errors were made, not necessarily in bid to gain advantage over his competitors for the office of governor; and the Lagos State House of Assembly has found him fit to continue in office, and the people of Lagos State who elected him, are not interested in getting him out yet, who then could a crusader be representing”.* He further stated that: ”Governor Tinubu might have perjured, and so what? President Bill Clinton perjured over the Monica Lewinsky affair.” “If Tinubu is riding the storm against the fancy of his adversaries that might as well be the reward for his past activism against evil. Like it or not, the man shot himself to the forefront of those who campaigned against the evil of thwarting the legitimate wishes of the people as expressed on June 12, 1993. To now expect those who struggled along with him to buckle and turn against him because he has sinned and because they need to make those who once supported atrocity happy is a wishful thinking. It is simply realistic that Tinubu’s moment of trial is when he needs his true friends most. Why then blame Afenifere or the radical wing of the media for not helping to roast a colleague in trauma?” He further stated that: “Gani has fought a gallant fight. He should leave it at that. Swimming against the tide can never be in his ultimate interest. If indeed he loves his people and wants democracy to survive, he should not yet carried away by a gobbled morality crusade and be used at pulling down. He should not claim to be more nationalistic, patriotic or morally upright than a Beko Ramsome-Kuti, Femi Falana or Olisa Agbakogba, his comrades in the social struggle who are not aligning with him on the Tinubu affair. Such right-righteousness would amount to destructive vainglory.”
These defences on the side of Tinubu are smack of inconsistency, common sense and belittle those engaging in it. It in fact corroborate the position of Gani Fawehinmi the more, that there must be reason for why such supporters have descended so low from their hitherto Olympian height as fighter for truth, equity and justice to that of clappers and jobbers to a political degenerate, granted the fact that he was once an activists as being canvassed.
Richard Akinola position on the matter was the most ridiculous as he preferred to approach the discussion purely on personal level, even letting out intimate personal information confined in him by Gani (as he claimed), as a trustworthy friend. He said Gani told him for reason of personal safety why he used different birthday (1940) as opposed to his authentic birthday of 1938.*
It is for this reason that Olumide Fusika lashed at those opponents of Gani. He stated: “If anybody has spoken or made any statement considered uncomplimentary (against Gani) there is nothing to gloat about without subjecting it to critical evaluation: why are they saying all these about Gani now? What is the relevance of the information being supplied about Gani? Beko say this, Akinola says that, Keyamo says his own, what is the relevance? I agree with Beko that Gani is not a Saint. Gani himself has not said that to me. I am close to him (too). The issue at stake is not about Sainthood, the Tinubu question is about setting standard for public office holders. That is what this issue is all about and it is unfortunate that people refuse to understand it from that perspective. Private wrongs can be forgiven and over looked. If anybody beats his wife, it is a matter between the individuals involved. If somebody commits fornication, the spouse can choose to forgive but public wrongs in the realm of public office holders who do or seen to have done things inconsistent with public interest or morality, every citizens must ensure that redress is sought in accordance to the law. It is not really, a personal thing and I do not agree with the people who are presenting this matter as personality conflict. “What Chief Fawehinmi is saying … is that: one, what is good for A is good for B. Two, that the reputation of the Yoruba race is greater than the demands of friendship and our pity for one man. Now you begin to hear arguments, some say like Professor Bolaji Akinyemi that ‘dogs don’t eat dogs’ and that we should treat the man with compassion. I agree completely that we should treat him with compassion but compassion does not mean overlook it. Others (like Soji Omotunde and Richard Akinola) are saying ‘he is our man, it does not matter what he is said to have done. We must overlook it’. If a vigilante group is harbouring a suspected armed robber it would not be extremist to say that it is no more than a gang of armed robbers. Gani is saying that the Yoruba race in Nigeria has always been known to stand by what is right irrespective of individual interest. All I am saying is that this controversy is needless and can be put to an end without further delay. That can be done by Bola Tinubu coming out to show to the world his credentials, particularly his Nigerian Secondary School Certificate or the American equivalent as well as his other credentials. If he had done that when Gani gave the ultimatum, this matter would have been settled a long time ago.” “But to leave the issue and begin to call Gani names, that he is tyrant, and has stolen a non-existence N6million, sponsoring articles and interviews with persons who have personal grouse to settle with Gani cannot end the problem. If anybody feels Gani has done anything worthy of public censure, let the person go to court”.
The fact also surfaced that Gani did not have anything to do with Gani Fawehinmi Solidarity group as well as the account of the organization after being released from prison. The organization was being led by Dipo Fasina and it maintained its independence without any iota of interference from Gani. Such allegation by Beko who was a very close supporter of Tinubu was like giving dog bad name in order to hang it. On the allegation of forming National Conscience Party after his advice on Campaign for Democracy led by Beko to transform into a political party was rejected, should be counted as a plus for him rather than being a minus. The cause of the struggle would have been enhanced if the advice was yielded to and there was the possibility that the party coming from fighting tradition would have endured for long in challenging for power rather than being limited to act of pressurising the government in power only.
Events of our political life has no doubt subsequently confirms Gani argument in respect of the NGOs as the different groups had fought themselves to almost extinction, you hardly heard the old names after factional struggles that came about when funding of NGOs dropped for reason of the donours that felt civil rule has been achieved in Nigeria. Gani as an insider was not unaware of the atrocities perpetrated by the NGOs in being funded. This author was privy to such act by a top NGO/prodemocracy group that resorted to publish editions of its tabloid in arrears in order to have something to show to their foreign donours and claim funds in return.
Thereafter, the NGOs looked towards the established governments – the state and the central for the funding of their programmes and to survive as groups or individuals. Bola Tinubu led government was the first government to provide hand outs to those NGO organizations together with the press and this informed why the people involved are so desperate and will be ready to do anything for the sake of Tinubu against anyone having critical position not in his favour. The government of Tinubu that could be described as a philanthropist form of government for eight years on this kind of goodwill provided for its hangers-on in strategic position. And this was the very reason on leaving office while he was asked to summarise his achievement in office, he retorted to say unabashedly that he achieved being succeeded by Babatunde Fashola having seen the new government of Fashola performance that dwarfed his, whatever might be the shortcoming of the government.
The government led by Goodluck Jonathan was like behind the scene populated by the NGO people that served as its foot soldiers and there was nothing to show for it beyond personal survival as they represent nothing significantly different from the extant ruling elite and the government made no difference in the life of the people and even made this worse. Some of the defenders of human rights external funding in responding to Gani Fawehinmi have come to argue that there is nothing new in this as it is not restricted to Nigeria but a world phenomenon. But they fail to say that such funding was not without string being attached. A typical instance was the case when the foreign donours wanted the NGOs loyal to them to drop the June 12 part of the agenda of the prodemocracy movement. This was responsible for why NCP was not part of the UAD initiative as there was no agreement on this new agenda at the pre inaugural meeting of UAD held between the organisations that make up the coalition. Such agenda was later resisted by groups that were still loyal to June 12 movement and this was how anti-June 12 could not be sustained by the collectives.
It is not fortuitous that greater percentage of the leading members of the NGO groups are today in PDP and some others in APC which in a way is a clear indication that they are not in any way different from the extant ruling elite. Gani and the party he helped to put in place thought differently as what we now have in the polity do not match what we were fighting for. He might not have achieved his entire objective in this regard but the principle could not be disputed. Much could be achieved if others in the NGO business saw reason with him not to follow the old politicians and crooks that constituted the new polity.
Though Bola Tinubu hegemony was sustained up to the present but this could hardly qualify to be a hegemony in the service of the poor. And this is the very reason that in Lagos State and other parts of the South West where he controls the bountiful legacy of free education, cheap housing facility, provision of market, recreation, free and access to health services, rural electrification, leadership with awe of integrity, etc. that were left behind by the preceding generation led by Obafemi Awolowo and Lateef Jakande in Lagos have been uprooted while the gap between the rich and the poor widen each day.
Gani shall for ever be remembered in legal statutes that being in power does not guarantee any person cover by immunity from being investigated and for this reason impunity is being checked by the people on the corridor of power. The intervention of Gani Fawehinmi on Bola Tinuba’s case of certificate forgery and criminal record of money laundering and drug trafficking at the inception of the 4th republic is hunting Bola Tinubu today especially now that he is being sponsored by All Progressive Congress for the position of president. The issue has come up again into front burner of political discourse.
The new NGOs in difference with the hitherto social movements before it aim to achieve human rights and democracy in the country like Nigeria and other African countries in the post-cold war era. In comparing the two forms of social movement and the periods which they operate, it would be understood that they share some similarities as well as differences. In the past, up to the 1980s social movements were voluntary and based on ideological persuasion as socialist philosophy was strong as a way of social change. Issues were perceived from class perspective rather than ethnic consideration.
Organisational structures as a vehicle to carry out the philosophical mission of the movement depended largely on voluntary memberships that were also responsible in financing its activities out of their monthly dues. Sometimes such movement might be a broad left organization composed of different left tendencies with a common mission of anti imperialist agenda.
Things changed abruptly in the late 1980s with the collapse of Stalinism and the arrival of neoliberal variant of capitalism during this period. In Nigeria with the introduction of Structural Adjustment Programme since 1986, policies such as privatization, liberalization, devaluation and deregulation became the common phenomenon in causing more harm than good rather than addressing problems of the economy. The resultant effect of this was the huge debt incurred, deindustrialization and large scale social inequality.
It was against this background that the political arms of economic neoliberalism had to be introduced in the creation of the Non-Governmental organizations that were to fight for human rights and one issue base activism like that of prison congestion, abuse of judicial process, illegal detention, right or freedom to exercise fundamental rights – of speech, movement and association. Others include agitation against environmental right abuse, campaign for child right, women rights, etc. Unlike in the past, the new NGOs were to be sponsored from abroad – USA, Canada and Western Europe. They were meant to serve as filling the gap associated with the pervaded poverty that became the lots of the poor masses. In this wise they were to serve the purpose of providing palliatives to the poverty ridden people with the new associated concept of making “end to poverty history” rather than the old concept of end to capitalism or path to socialist revolutionary transformation of the capitalist society. It was in this way there emerged avalanche of donour NGOs to provide aid in financing social services such as providing water boreholes, credit facilities to traders in form of micro finance, workshops in advancing human rights education consciousness that were hitherto the prerogative of the public sector but now carried out by the private sector under the umbrella of NGOs. Not only this, such important role as policy making is now being carried out by the private oriented NGOs under the auspices of providing consultancy services. More auspicious in the role of the NGOs is in the realm of intervention in politics as to help in navigating democracy. NGOs are thereby misconceived as non-partisan in politics and therefore meant to occupy one of the tripods of public, private sectors and NGOs. Such assumption could hardly match as NGOs just like any of the stakeholders in the tripod could hardly be excluded from political interest as this is largely a function of the economy especially in a capitalist society that determine the associated civil society in such environment.
There is no doubt that not a few people that constituted the leadership of the later day NGOs were rooted in the radical student movement of the past but their orientation changed with their new role in the later dispensation. They thereby became attached to the new philosophy of the neoliberal induced reforms to be carried out by the NGOs, a very important part of the imperialist role in the post-cold war era of globalization.
The NGOs platform thereby become a base for the new educated elites for survival as well as playing their politics as new representatives of the imperialist interest even though without capital but with enough resources to eke a living and sustain life as a middle class. This was why Edwin Madunagu once remarked in the case of Comrade Ola Oni being described by the popular press as a human rights activist; that he was an activist in the real sense of the word, but did not belong to the imperialist inspired human right activists of late. The same comment could as well be extended to cover Gani Fawehinmi that claimed never to have collected money from any donour agency to prosecute his human right activism which predated the later day human rights activism of the 1990s to the 21st century. The problem actually is not only in being financed by the external NGOs but also in embracing their philosophy unconditionally. This was how Gani differed in comparison with other NGO’s leadership that combined to fight him for exposing them for what they were in reality having jettisoned the principle of social justice and fight against exploitation and oppression of the poor masses. The very reason their interest coincided with their alter ego as Tinubu and other members of the ruling class.
Biodun Olamosu
Centre for Social Policy and Labour Research
Dugbe Ibadan
+2348175109802
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
A1 PREMIER MODEL ACADEMY LTD, OSOGBO, OSUN STATE
Excellent, our choice!!!
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
By Biodun Olamosu
At the inception of the 4th republic in 1999 after the tormentors struggles by the prodemocracy movement against the military rule, the new political elite came under the scrutiny of the microscope of vigilant Nigerian press that sought for impeccable politicians to drive the new political administrations rather than having not good for nothing politicians replacing the military dictatorship of the old that share common banners of corruption, oppression, and exploitation against the people.
Among the politicians that came forth to participate in the new government were those that could not in any way be differentiated from what Abacha-Babangida stood for among other right-wing tendencies.
Not long thereafter the inauguration of the National Assembly, the presiding officers of both houses of the National Assembly – Uche Enwerem and Salisu Buhari of the Senate and House of Representatives respectively were found to have misrepresented themselves as contained in the affidavit filed with INEC. They claimed to attend schools they never attended. Buhari on his part misrepresented his age too to make up for age qualification that is a condition for anyone contesting into the House of Representatives. Such act of fraud and perjury were disowned by Nigerians including those that voted for them to be elected as their representatives.
The human right community and the press in unison raged against those politicians and called for their resignation from the National Assembly and as the presiding officers. While Enwerem managed to retain his seat at the Senate but lost his position as the presiding officer, Buhari was not lucky as he lost everything and apologized to the nation for mercy before stepping out of the National Assembly for infringing on the principle of utmost good faith that his conduct of misrepresentation has caused the nation.
This first step in testing the principle and practice of democracy emanating from below having been achieved was a landmark in the potential of what vibrant press and public opinion could achieve on their own; especially as this was against the background of prodemocracy movement that had taken a decade to transit from military to civil rule. This also had its attendant advantage of strengthening the confidence of the movement in achieving greater heights.
The vigilance was not restricted to the central government as the new governor of Lagos State, in person of Bola Tinubu was alleged of the same offence that include misrepresentation of both his age, primary school and university attended. He claimed to have attended Government College, Ibadan and University of Chicago for his high school and tertiary institution respectively. The name he bared as a toddler did not tally with the one he now bears as an adult. Not only this, he was alleged of being involved in drug business which caused his bank account where drug money was laundered to be confiscated. The discrepancy in his particulars worth being scrutinized to get the truth of the matter like it was the case with Enwerem and Salisu Buhari before it.
Gani Fawehinmi became vociferous in championing the cause of getting to the root of the matter; while the press and the NGOs were recasistrant to do so. The State House of Assembly waded into the matter in order to save him in the hand of Gani Fawehinmi. This was not unusual as the legislative house was dominated by one party, Alliance for Democracy led by him in Lagos State. The intervention of the House was therefore to cover-up the certificate forgery and other allegations committed by Bola Tinubu. This is understandable from this quarters as most members of the Assembly held their positions at the instance of the governor and they were therefore expected to reciprocate in turn with unflinching loyalty at all circumstances.
The situation at the National Assembly was a bit different and made possible against the interest of the extant president, Olusegun Obasanjo that gave both officers his support but for the pluralistic nature of the assembly that comprised strong opposition parties – All Peoples Party and Alliance for Democracy as against that of the ruling party, People Democratic Party, a cover up was made difficult to achieve.
On understanding that no good result would come from the Lagos State House of Assembly on the matter, Gani Fawehinmi had to expound the scope of the fight to involve the police that has the constitutional responsibilities to investigate on any matter of fraud and criminality. This he commenced by writing a letter to the Inspector General of Police and informed his office that he has a duty to investigate the alleged misrepresentation by Bola Tinubu in his particulars as contained in the affidavit swore under oath by him or his agent. Such step taking by Gani got Tinubu and his cohorts napping as they were earlier hiding under the cover that a seating governor could not be prosecuted as he was covered by the immunity clause provided for in the 1999 Constitution. They were made to realise by Gani’s argument that even if immunity is to prevent the governor from prosecution, but that such provision do not prevent him from being investigated. Before long Senator Afikuyomi showed up at Gani Fawehinmi’s Chambers to confess that the errors in Tinubu affidavit came from him and that Gani should forgive Tinubu on this.
It was at this juncture that the character of what comprised the hitherto outspoken Nigerian press and human rights activists became exposed. They came like angry flood in greater speed and strength to challenge Gani and in defence of Tinubu. Not a few theories were propounded to establish why Gani should be snubbed by Nigerians as canvassed by these combined forces. Some of the information from this end to chastise Gani was at the level of sentiment and personal attack. The first fervor came from an equally respectable prodemocracy fighter, Beko Ramsome-Kuti* through a letter he caused to write to Gani. In the letter, he insinuated that “Gani is not a Saint that he claims to be.” According to him, the #6million naira that he raised in saving Gani’s properties from being confiscated by way of award granted by court judgment against him while in prison for libel suit by Akilu and Togun, - two Babangida’s boys that Gani hitherto alleged of responsible for the killing of Dele Giwa on behalf of their principal; was kept by Gani after his release by a superior court order and that some of the money were raised from outside the shore of the country.* He also vent his anger against Gani’s role in supporting Buhari-Idiagbon military government some years earlier. This he attributed to reason of what Gani was going to gain by doing so as a professional legal practitioner in defending corrupt politicians. The very reason, according to him, NBA sanctioned him for flouting their order of boycotting the military tribunals* In his words, he further reiterated, “permit me to recall that you decided to form the National Conscience Party in 1994 after you have failed to get the Campaign for Democracy to transform into a political party of your dream*” “Only recently you resigned as chairman of the joint Action Committee of Nigeria when the members rejected your renewed campaign against the civilian government that was yet to take off*.”
“The question that some members of the human rights community are asking: “when have we decided to be the defenders and policemen of some selected provisions of the transition programme decrees? It is for this reason that most of us distanced ourselves from the Buharigate and Enwerem affair. It will be recalled that it was you and your compatriot Femi Falana who had cause to play professional roles in both cases. In other words while Falana acted as the solicitor to The News magazine which published the Buhari’s story, you were the counsel to the Tell magazine which reported the Emwerem’s story”* “In the Tinubu case I have enquired and confirmed from the entire human rights community that you never deemed it necessary to discuss the Tinubu matter with anyone or group. Yet after you have taken your position and issued your ultimatums you expected everybody to line up behind you in your crusade to remove an elected governor without regard to dueprocess.* Because of your inability to secure the support of other human rights organisations in this your crusade you have resorted to name calling and abuses.”
Beko was not without avalanche of supporters among journalists and human rights activists. Prominent among these include Femi Falana that claimed Bola Tinubu has being his long time client and for this reason he would rather abandon principle than to abandon his client of many years*. This was Femi that his client, The News started Salisu Buhari’s saga. Other known human rights lawyers involved in defending Tinubu include Olisa Agbakoba, Fred Agbaje, Dele Adesina and Nurudeen Ogbara were all present at the Lagos State House of Assembly to defend the interest of Bola Tinubu.
Writers like Soji Omotunde put the whole saga into perspective in defending Tinubu by stating that: “If Tinubu had accepted that errors were made, not necessarily in bid to gain advantage over his competitors for the office of governor; and the Lagos State House of Assembly has found him fit to continue in office, and the people of Lagos State who elected him, are not interested in getting him out yet, who then could a crusader be representing”.* He further stated that: ”Governor Tinubu might have perjured, and so what? President Bill Clinton perjured over the Monica Lewinsky affair.” “If Tinubu is riding the storm against the fancy of his adversaries that might as well be the reward for his past activism against evil. Like it or not, the man shot himself to the forefront of those who campaigned against the evil of thwarting the legitimate wishes of the people as expressed on June 12, 1993. To now expect those who struggled along with him to buckle and turn against him because he has sinned and because they need to make those who once supported atrocity happy is a wishful thinking. It is simply realistic that Tinubu’s moment of trial is when he needs his true friends most. Why then blame Afenifere or the radical wing of the media for not helping to roast a colleague in trauma?” He further stated that: “Gani has fought a gallant fight. He should leave it at that. Swimming against the tide can never be in his ultimate interest. If indeed he loves his people and wants democracy to survive, he should not yet carried away by a gobbled morality crusade and be used at pulling down. He should not claim to be more nationalistic, patriotic or morally upright than a Beko Ramsome-Kuti, Femi Falana or Olisa Agbakogba, his comrades in the social struggle who are not aligning with him on the Tinubu affair. Such right-righteousness would amount to destructive vainglory.”
These defences on the side of Tinubu are smack of inconsistency, common sense and belittle those engaging in it. It in fact corroborate the position of Gani Fawehinmi the more, that there must be reason for why such supporters have descended so low from their hitherto Olympian height as fighter for truth, equity and justice to that of clappers and jobbers to a political degenerate, granted the fact that he was once an activists as being canvassed.
Richard Akinola position on the matter was the most ridiculous as he preferred to approach the discussion purely on personal level, even letting out intimate personal information confined in him by Gani (as he claimed), as a trustworthy friend. He said Gani told him for reason of personal safety why he used different birthday (1940) as opposed to his authentic birthday of 1938.*
It is for this reason that Olumide Fusika lashed at those opponents of Gani. He stated: “If anybody has spoken or made any statement considered uncomplimentary (against Gani) there is nothing to gloat about without subjecting it to critical evaluation: why are they saying all these about Gani now? What is the relevance of the information being supplied about Gani? Beko say this, Akinola says that, Keyamo says his own, what is the relevance? I agree with Beko that Gani is not a Saint. Gani himself has not said that to me. I am close to him (too). The issue at stake is not about Sainthood, the Tinubu question is about setting standard for public office holders. That is what this issue is all about and it is unfortunate that people refuse to understand it from that perspective. Private wrongs can be forgiven and over looked. If anybody beats his wife, it is a matter between the individuals involved. If somebody commits fornication, the spouse can choose to forgive but public wrongs in the realm of public office holders who do or seen to have done things inconsistent with public interest or morality, every citizens must ensure that redress is sought in accordance to the law. It is not really, a personal thing and I do not agree with the people who are presenting this matter as personality conflict. “What Chief Fawehinmi is saying … is that: one, what is good for A is good for B. Two, that the reputation of the Yoruba race is greater than the demands of friendship and our pity for one man. Now you begin to hear arguments, some say like Professor Bolaji Akinyemi that ‘dogs don’t eat dogs’ and that we should treat the man with compassion. I agree completely that we should treat him with compassion but compassion does not mean overlook it. Others (like Soji Omotunde and Richard Akinola) are saying ‘he is our man, it does not matter what he is said to have done. We must overlook it’. If a vigilante group is harbouring a suspected armed robber it would not be extremist to say that it is no more than a gang of armed robbers. Gani is saying that the Yoruba race in Nigeria has always been known to stand by what is right irrespective of individual interest. All I am saying is that this controversy is needless and can be put to an end without further delay. That can be done by Bola Tinubu coming out to show to the world his credentials, particularly his Nigerian Secondary School Certificate or the American equivalent as well as his other credentials. If he had done that when Gani gave the ultimatum, this matter would have been settled a long time ago.” “But to leave the issue and begin to call Gani names, that he is tyrant, and has stolen a non-existence N6million, sponsoring articles and interviews with persons who have personal grouse to settle with Gani cannot end the problem. If anybody feels Gani has done anything worthy of public censure, let the person go to court”.
The fact also surfaced that Gani did not have anything to do with Gani Fawehinmi Solidarity group as well as the account of the organization after being released from prison. The organization was being led by Dipo Fasina and it maintained its independence without any iota of interference from Gani. Such allegation by Beko who was a very close supporter of Tinubu was like giving dog bad name in order to hang it. On the allegation of forming National Conscience Party after his advice on Campaign for Democracy led by Beko to transform into a political party was rejected, should be counted as a plus for him rather than being a minus. The cause of the struggle would have been enhanced if the advice was yielded to and there was the possibility that the party coming from fighting tradition would have endured for long in challenging for power rather than being limited to act of pressurising the government in power only.
Events of our political life has no doubt subsequently confirms Gani argument in respect of the NGOs as the different groups had fought themselves to almost extinction, you hardly heard the old names after factional struggles that came about when funding of NGOs dropped for reason of the donours that felt civil rule has been achieved in Nigeria. Gani as an insider was not unaware of the atrocities perpetrated by the NGOs in being funded. This author was privy to such act by a top NGO/prodemocracy group that resorted to publish editions of its tabloid in arrears in order to have something to show to their foreign donours and claim funds in return.
Thereafter, the NGOs looked towards the established governments – the state and the central for the funding of their programmes and to survive as groups or individuals. Bola Tinubu led government was the first government to provide hand outs to those NGO organizations together with the press and this informed why the people involved are so desperate and will be ready to do anything for the sake of Tinubu against anyone having critical position not in his favour. The government of Tinubu that could be described as a philanthropist form of government for eight years on this kind of goodwill provided for its hangers-on in strategic position. And this was the very reason on leaving office while he was asked to summarise his achievement in office, he retorted to say unabashedly that he achieved being succeeded by Babatunde Fashola having seen the new government of Fashola performance that dwarfed his, whatever might be the shortcoming of the government.
The government led by Goodluck Jonathan was like behind the scene populated by the NGO people that served as its foot soldiers and there was nothing to show for it beyond personal survival as they represent nothing significantly different from the extant ruling elite and the government made no difference in the life of the people and even made this worse. Some of the defenders of human rights external funding in responding to Gani Fawehinmi have come to argue that there is nothing new in this as it is not restricted to Nigeria but a world phenomenon. But they fail to say that such funding was not without string being attached. A typical instance was the case when the foreign donours wanted the NGOs loyal to them to drop the June 12 part of the agenda of the prodemocracy movement. This was responsible for why NCP was not part of the UAD initiative as there was no agreement on this new agenda at the pre inaugural meeting of UAD held between the organisations that make up the coalition. Such agenda was later resisted by groups that were still loyal to June 12 movement and this was how anti-June 12 could not be sustained by the collectives.
It is not fortuitous that greater percentage of the leading members of the NGO groups are today in PDP and some others in APC which in a way is a clear indication that they are not in any way different from the extant ruling elite. Gani and the party he helped to put in place thought differently as what we now have in the polity do not match what we were fighting for. He might not have achieved his entire objective in this regard but the principle could not be disputed. Much could be achieved if others in the NGO business saw reason with him not to follow the old politicians and crooks that constituted the new polity.
Though Bola Tinubu hegemony was sustained up to the present but this could hardly qualify to be a hegemony in the service of the poor. And this is the very reason that in Lagos State and other parts of the South West where he controls the bountiful legacy of free education, cheap housing facility, provision of market, recreation, free and access to health services, rural electrification, leadership with awe of integrity, etc. that were left behind by the preceding generation led by Obafemi Awolowo and Lateef Jakande in Lagos have been uprooted while the gap between the rich and the poor widen each day.
Gani shall for ever be remembered in legal statutes that being in power does not guarantee any person cover by immunity from being investigated and for this reason impunity is being checked by the people on the corridor of power. The intervention of Gani Fawehinmi on Bola Tinuba’s case of certificate forgery and criminal record of money laundering and drug trafficking at the inception of the 4th republic is hunting Bola Tinubu today especially now that he is being sponsored by All Progressive Congress for the position of president. The issue has come up again into front burner of political discourse.
The new NGOs in difference with the hitherto social movements before it aim to achieve human rights and democracy in the country like Nigeria and other African countries in the post-cold war era. In comparing the two forms of social movement and the periods which they operate, it would be understood that they share some similarities as well as differences. In the past, up to the 1980s social movements were voluntary and based on ideological persuasion as socialist philosophy was strong as a way of social change. Issues were perceived from class perspective rather than ethnic consideration.
Organisational structures as a vehicle to carry out the philosophical mission of the movement depended largely on voluntary memberships that were also responsible in financing its activities out of their monthly dues. Sometimes such movement might be a broad left organization composed of different left tendencies with a common mission of anti imperialist agenda.
Things changed abruptly in the late 1980s with the collapse of Stalinism and the arrival of neoliberal variant of capitalism during this period. In Nigeria with the introduction of Structural Adjustment Programme since 1986, policies such as privatization, liberalization, devaluation and deregulation became the common phenomenon in causing more harm than good rather than addressing problems of the economy. The resultant effect of this was the huge debt incurred, deindustrialization and large scale social inequality.
It was against this background that the political arms of economic neoliberalism had to be introduced in the creation of the Non-Governmental organizations that were to fight for human rights and one issue base activism like that of prison congestion, abuse of judicial process, illegal detention, right or freedom to exercise fundamental rights – of speech, movement and association. Others include agitation against environmental right abuse, campaign for child right, women rights, etc. Unlike in the past, the new NGOs were to be sponsored from abroad – USA, Canada and Western Europe. They were meant to serve as filling the gap associated with the pervaded poverty that became the lots of the poor masses. In this wise they were to serve the purpose of providing palliatives to the poverty ridden people with the new associated concept of making “end to poverty history” rather than the old concept of end to capitalism or path to socialist revolutionary transformation of the capitalist society. It was in this way there emerged avalanche of donour NGOs to provide aid in financing social services such as providing water boreholes, credit facilities to traders in form of micro finance, workshops in advancing human rights education consciousness that were hitherto the prerogative of the public sector but now carried out by the private sector under the umbrella of NGOs. Not only this, such important role as policy making is now being carried out by the private oriented NGOs under the auspices of providing consultancy services. More auspicious in the role of the NGOs is in the realm of intervention in politics as to help in navigating democracy. NGOs are thereby misconceived as non-partisan in politics and therefore meant to occupy one of the tripods of public, private sectors and NGOs. Such assumption could hardly match as NGOs just like any of the stakeholders in the tripod could hardly be excluded from political interest as this is largely a function of the economy especially in a capitalist society that determine the associated civil society in such environment.
There is no doubt that not a few people that constituted the leadership of the later day NGOs were rooted in the radical student movement of the past but their orientation changed with their new role in the later dispensation. They thereby became attached to the new philosophy of the neoliberal induced reforms to be carried out by the NGOs, a very important part of the imperialist role in the post-cold war era of globalization.
The NGOs platform thereby become a base for the new educated elites for survival as well as playing their politics as new representatives of the imperialist interest even though without capital but with enough resources to eke a living and sustain life as a middle class. This was why Edwin Madunagu once remarked in the case of Comrade Ola Oni being described by the popular press as a human rights activist; that he was an activist in the real sense of the word, but did not belong to the imperialist inspired human right activists of late. The same comment could as well be extended to cover Gani Fawehinmi that claimed never to have collected money from any donour agency to prosecute his human right activism which predated the later day human rights activism of the 1990s to the 21st century. The problem actually is not only in being financed by the external NGOs but also in embracing their philosophy unconditionally. This was how Gani differed in comparison with other NGO’s leadership that combined to fight him for exposing them for what they were in reality having jettisoned the principle of social justice and fight against exploitation and oppression of the poor masses. The very reason their interest coincided with their alter ego as Tinubu and other members of the ruling class.
Biodun Olamosu
Centre for Social Policy and Labour Research
Dugbe Ibadan
+2348175109802
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
A1 PREMIER MODEL ACADEMY LTD, OSOGBO, OSUN STATE
Excellent, our choice!!!
SPONSORED ADS 👇👇
.jpeg)
.jpg)
