By Kalu Agwu
Over the
years, Nigeria has had its own fair share of maximum rulers in the mould of
Nero.
First was
Muhammadu Buhari in 1983, and Sani Abacha in 1995.
And today
Nigeria is witnessing the re-emergence of another NERO in the mould of
Muhammadu Buhari.
I do not
intend to waste my time reflecting on Buhari’s many failures in the past twelve
months of his presidency. Failure is part of Buhari’s track record. That he has
failed is not surprising to me. If the reverse had been the case, then I would
be surprised.
However,
what is rather nauseating is Buhari’s brazen audacity to entrench democratic
dictatorship in Nigeria; and even the warped and mundane rationalization of
such criminality by apologists of the Buhari presidency.
The current attempt by the Muhammadu Buhari administration to force a leadership change in the Senate on spurious charges of forgery is the same stereotype approach which Nero applied to cripple the Roman Senate and which paved the way for the consolidation of Nero’s authoritarian rule in the empire.
Obviously,
Buhari and his advisers may not have heard of the principles of separation of
power.
For the
avoidance of doubt, the term “separation of powers” was coined by Charles-Louis
de Secondat, and Baron de Montesquieu.
Under
this model, the political authority of the state is divided into legislative,
executive and judicial powers.
Their
contention is that, to most effectively promote liberty, these three powers
must be separate and acting independently.
Separation
of powers, therefore, refers to the division of government responsibilities
into distinct branches to limit any one branch from exercising the core
functions of another.
The
intent is to prevent the concentration of power and provide for checks and
balances.
In other
words, if political power is to be limited and responsible, the legislature and
judiciary must be independent of the executive.
In a
democracy, the exercise of political power must respect the law, the
constitution, and the will of the people, through the decisions of their
elected legislative representatives.
The
inability of the Buhari administration to appreciate the relevance of this
principle in a democracy underscores the government’s unwillingness to
appreciate the independence of the legislature.
The
brazen attempt by the executive to frame the leadership of the Senate and force
a change in its leadership portends great danger to our democracy.
The
election of officers of the National Assembly is entirely the internal affair
of the house and the executive is forbidden by the principles of separation of
power to prod into such internal process.
The
incarnation of Nigeria’s democratic dictatorship can also be gleaned from the
recklessness of the EFCC.
It is
indeed a measure of Buhari’s lethargy and infantile understanding of
constitutional processes, that he could unleash the machinery of the state in
freezing the account of a sitting governor, despite the immunity clause.
I am
appalled by the rationalization of this recklessness by some APC lawyers. Truth
is that this is unconstitutional and forebodes great danger for political
stability in the country.
It is
also a measure of Buhari’s lack of understanding of socio-political forces that
he could trivialize the burning issues of separatist agitations in Nigeria to the
extent that today one can confidently conclude that Nigeria is in a state of
war against itself.
This lack
of understanding explains this administration’s penchant for telling bare-faced
lies. Lying was one Nero’s favourite past times.
This
present administration has surpassed past Nigerian governments only in lying.
For
instance, in his one year report card recently, Buhari told Nigerians that his
administration has recovered several billions of Nigeria’s stolen money. Buhari
lied. Truth is that the government has not recovered any money. You can go to
the bank with this reality.
Again
Buhari told Nigerians that Boko Haram has been crushed. Buhari lied. Truth is
that today Boko Haram has a well-equipped standing army and is getting stronger
by the day.
Buhari
told Nigerians that his administration has, in the past twelve months improved
electricity generation. He lied. Truth is that the country presently generates
zero mega-watts of electricity.
Buhari
told Nigerians that Sani Abacha was not a treasury looter. He lied. Truth is
that the president’s wife has been mentioned factually in the Halliburton
bribery scandal.
Buhari
told Nigerians that he is the solution to Nigerians many problems. He goofed on
this point. Truth, according to Pete Hoekstra, former Chairman of the U.S.
House Intelligence Committee, is that Buhari is the problem and not the
solution to Nigerians problem.
Just
yesterday (23/6/2016) Buhari lied again. According to him, his grouse with
Biafran agitators is that these agitators were not born during the
Nigeria-Biafra civil war. This is a lie and arrant nonsense.
The truth
is that Buhari’s grouse with Biafran agitators is that the agitators constitute
a cog in his Islamization agenda of Nigeria.
His
argument that the agitators were not born then and did not witness the events
of that period is tepid, lame and untenable.
If they
were not born then, what about their parents and grandparents, who must have
told them what happened during that period?
What
about the many books and literatures written about Nigeria/Biafra civil war
like- No place to hide by Ben Odogwu, Requiem Biafra by Joe Achuzia, The
Nigeria Revolution and the Biafra War by A. Madiebo, There was a Country by
Chinua Achebe, Girls at War by Chinua Achebe, The Making of a Nation by Dr
Arthur Nwankwo & Sam Ifejika etc?
If they
were not born, have the problems that spurned Biafra been resolved? They have
grown up to be confronted with the same problems; and using their own social
binoculars they have come to the same conclusion as their fathers and
grandfathers that opting out of Nigeria is their best bet.
If they
were not born then, does that mean the government should not listen to their
grievances and dialogue with them?
If they
were not born then, does that give the Buhari government the latitude to
murder, in cold blood, thousands of unarmed and innocent Biafran protesters and
dump their bodies in the river? Does that also empower Buhari’s dogs of war to
invade churches where these innocent protesters were conducting a church service
and slaughter them and dump their corpses on the streets?
I recall
that in 2013 when the government of former President Jonathan mounted an
onslaught against Boko Haram and killed some of them, Buhari was one person who
accused the government of committing genocide against the north.
I wonder
what Buhari government is doing now. Boko Haram members are armed with
dangerous weapons; Biafran protesters are unarmed.
Let the
world be the judge on who is committing genocide against whom.
The truth
is that Buhari and his journey men see Nigeria as their estate, which should be
managed as they deem fit.
For me
this type of mindset is the perfect recipe for the death of the country.
And this
reminds me of the old Igbo metaphor of the frog and tortoise. The frog was
warned by the tortoise to leave the forest because of an impending inferno. The
frog laughed at the tortoise. Realizing the looming danger, tortoise left quite
early but the frog was caught in the inferno.
I really
do not understand why is Buhari should be fiddling when Nigeria is on fire. If
his government does not know, perhaps it needs to be reminded that Boko Haram,
IPoB, NDA, Red Avengers, OPC, Egbesu Boys etc are all tinder to the impending
Nigerian implosion and inferno.
For me
Buhari is like the man who was busy pursuing rats while his house was on fire.
It is
quite shameful that till now Buhari does not know what to do in government.
The
danger facing this country is real and as far as I am concerned Buhari does not
have answers to our challenges.
Source: Kalu Agwu
0 comments:
Post a Comment