Frisky Larr (M. A.)
Radio/Television Journalist/Communication Scientist,
Govt. accredited Translator/Interpreter of the English language
Judicially sworn interpreter of English (Regional Court of Bochum)
Germany
Send your email to:
FriskyLarr@aol.com
It therefore goes that hearing
foolish claims on regular basis that one is a sellout or in the
payroll of some politicians with their back against the wall
definitely loses its thought-provoking impact and becomes
counter-productive after sometime. While I understand the
sentiments of readers or hobby writers who hold different views on
different issues, I also appreciate the fact that everyone does
not have equal intellectual maturity to simply respect the views
of another no matter how much they differ. With insults and abuses
however, every commentator is further radicalized and strengthened
in the commitment to further angering and irritating the
uncontrolled and aggressive emotions of the lynch mob on the
rampage.
Defending the Obasanjos?
Hell, No! But no turning logic on its head! by Frisky Larr
These days, there are issues a public
commentator cannot shy away from as a matter of choice. Indeed,
when specific issues pervade the air and fill the news media with
some intoxicating frenzy in the assurance of positive public
sentiments, no onlooker can shy away. One very angry commentator
remarked lately that virtually every newspaper relies on
Obasanjo-bashing these days to sell amongst its readership.
But true to it, everyone will agree that
the general sentiments reflected and perhaps shared by a large
section of the Nigerian populace today, is one of deep resentment
towards and detestation of anything Obasanjo. It is a feeling that
is not only strong in its manifestation, it is an all-consuming
issue that no serious commentator can afford to ignore. In other
words, one is up against making the first choice of ignoring the
issue or taking a stand in all clarity.
The second issue of choice is to opt for one side of the furious
divide and define a location of priority. Quite naturally, issues
of this sort are filled with three distinctive and unfailing
options: the pros, the contras and the middle grounders. From the
very start however, movements on the Obasanjo issue have so far
been so badly blurred that the dividing lines that one imagines,
apparently allows for no third option outside the pros and the
contras.
One strong veracity in the light of facts that have been exposed
and processed in the public arena all through the years is that
the pro-Obasanjo camp is a collection of sycophants, paid praise
singers and favor-hungry adorers. Their stock in trade is never to
see any evil in the government and person of the ex-General and
all he stands for. They will go to any length to crush any
movement in the semblance of criticism. Most voluble amongst them
are official spokespersons and such characters as are
conspicuously close to the corridors of political power in the
past eight years.
It is also an undisputable veracity that the hardcore of the
anti-Obasanjo camp are disgruntled characters who have mainly
fallen out of favor with the ex-President, failed to get desired
favor from him or were outright badly offended by him in wanton
fallacy. Their stock in trade is to see in the ex-President evil,
evil and nothing but evil. Anything in the semblance of positivity
in Olusegun Obasanjo will be subjected to relativism and outright
denial. The most prominent face is Professor Okey Ndibe. The
larger section of this camp comprises the common man, whose
expectations in governance was not met and was dealt the deadly
shot of disillusionment by the obnoxious quest for a third term in
the Presidency.
The sheer numerical strength of this latter group has thus far,
transformed into a formidable dynamics that has gyrated out of
control in seeking to consume the camp of protagonists and
apologists. While the greatest crime of the group of protagonists
and apologists has been a life in delusion and pseudo-reality of
being blind to the obvious atrocities associated with the
government of the ex-President, the greatest failing of the
anti-Obasanjo group has been a desperate, aggressive and frantic
effort to annihilate favorable sentiments and even the balanced
voices of neutrality.
By virtue of the dominance of this subject in the news media,
comments on any political subject on modern-day Nigeria can hardly
go without a mention of the word Obasanjo in any form possible. It
therefore goes that a large section of my commentaries have one
way or the other, dealt with Olusegun Obasanjo.
In every case, my focus is and will always be on the achievements
and evils of the government that he led. I have on many occasions
drawn attention to the killing of Bola Ige and the powerful
allegations that can and should never be ignored that Olusegun
Obasanjo was directly involved in the killing of this exceptional
politician. I have advocated a meaningful and powerful
investigation not the least, since the stage-managed
investigations in the dying days of the past administration tried
to offer a smokescreen. Indeed, I hold the view that if the United
Nations could set up an investigation to probe the death of Rafik
Hariri in Lebanon, why can’t one be set up to probe the killing of
Nigeria’s serving Minister of Justice?
I have questioned the source of the explosive wealth of the
ex-General that was reported to have come out of prison with just
N 20,000.00 in his account. I have consistently pointed out
inefficiency in the government led by Olusegun Obasanjo in the
handling of the problems facing the nation. I have condemned his
advocacy for a third term in the Presidency, as was the official
position of the NigerianNews as well.
Indeed, since I do not belong to the camp of Obasanjo haters and
do not have any reason whatsoever, to hate the ex-President (never
sought any political appointment to be denied one and have never
required any favor whatsoever from his administration and have
never ever met him or anyone close to him in my whole life), I
always ask that those credible groundbreaking achievements that
distinguishes his administration from past ones should not be
swept beneath the carpet. If Obasanjo claims to have revamped his
farming empire with bank loans, he should not be shouted down. He
should be listened to.
Indeed, I am a strong advocate of a probe into the activities of
Obasanjo’s eight years in office because I do not regard a public
probe as a public disgrace. Much as it will reveal many
wrongdoings, it will give the ex-President the opportunity to
clear his name once and for all.
I have always sought to point out that the nation Olusegun
Obasanjo handed over in 1979 to President Shehu Shagari was not
the nation he took over again in 1999. Quite objectively and
fairly, the nation he handed over to Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2007
is far better than what he took over in 1999 despite very many
shortcomings that he could have corrected and failed to, not to
mention failures at the peripheral level of state administration.
Precisely this doesn’t go down well with the camp that doesn’t
like the former President. In the aftermath of seeking to shout me
down, the common grounds that I share with them of going after him
for his evils or wrongdoings are sacrificed for my call to also
give him praises where praises are due. In the end, they push me
to their corner of choice to blur off the dividing line of middle
grounders.
Then came the issue of Gbenga Obasanjo. A young man who has
apparently fallen out with his father for matters that the public
knows nothing about. With the startling revelation that his father
President Obasanjo had sexual relations with the wife of his own
son, no doubt the ultimate goal was to embarrass his dad in the
public domain knowing too well that there is a huge crowd out
there that will thankfully pick on the subject to make their day.
As one NigerianNews columnist Tunde Adenodi put it in an
intellectually well-balanced article, Obasanjo the father is a
ruthless and brutal roadside radical that will stop at nothing to
annihilate his enemy whenever anyone is perceived as such. His son
Gbenga had obviously taken up this trait. Every decent family
would have handled an issue of this nature quietly without
publicity and the mass media. Many have perhaps, done so before
Gbenga and many will probably do so after him. We can all be sure
that this issue may not be the first of its kind to have happened
in Nigeria.
That was precisely the views that I expressed in good faith
because I know too well how anyone would be feeling being in the
skin of the ex-President. I did not disregard the feelings of
Gbenga Obasanjo in anyway. I was only too certain that Gbenga
Obasanjo did not seek remedy or help from the public to cure the
pains that he felt if the allegations were true. It was obvious
that he merely sought vengeance and embarrassment for his father
in the aftermath of a quarrel none of us in the public is aware
of. If the relationship with his dad were a cordial one, no doubt
he would probably have kicked out his wife and seek to sort out
issues with his dad in private domain.
My position was seen by the almighty crowd of jubilating anti-Obasanjoists
as sympathetic to Obasanjo the father and not the son, whose
accusation is yet unproven. Indeed anyone that failed to join in
jubilation over a disgracing revelation was termed a traitor and a
sycophant.
The issue of Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello is indeed crowning up the
endless episode that will drag on for a long time to come. Indeed
before hearing Iyabo Obasanjo’s side of the story, I was
dumbfounded at the rationale behind her obscure behavior. At the
time she spoke out however, I advocated that she should not be
shouted down because she did make some very credible points.
The whole nation is in agreement that the senate (represented by
the Chairperson of its Health Committee Iyabo Obasanjo) surely has
a case to answer. If she had oversight functions over a Ministry
as Chairperson of a Senate Committee, she owed a duty to have
prevailed on the Ministry of Health to return unspent money.
Instead she had joined in the sharing of the said money. Whether
she bears the name Obasanjo or not, it is clear that she should
stand accused of aiding and abetting stealing. I therefore implied
that the EFCC is simply accusing her of the wrong offence and
filing the wrong charges against the senator. I hold the views
that she can hardly be accused of corruption or stealing unspent
budget money but simply aiding and abetting same. I neither hold
brief for her nor do I hold any plea for her innocence. Above all
she is not above the law. I simply questioned the rationale behind
charging her in her personal capacity since she did not embezzle
the money as a private citizen. The senate in which name she acted
has testified that her disbursement of the money was well
documented and legal.
While I agree that a theory advanced by one commentator may be
credible, claiming that she may have indeed taken the money as a
personal share of the unspent budget money, and hastily arranged a
retreat to justify her acceptance of the money after the whistle
was blown, the reality on the ground simply shows that she spent
this money on behalf of the senate, which is funnily also
defending her. Quite objectively, it is the senate that should be
charged to court with Iyabo as the main witness.
Unfortunately however, the Senator apparently lacks the courage of
a true politician to face EFCC’s detention until the court sets
her free in the face of the Commission’s feeble case.
Understandably though, since compensation for wrongful detention
will no longer be an issue in the aftermath of the discomfort
suffered, as some robust judicial system would have practiced, the
hide and seek game is quite normal no matter how cowardly it is.
Funnily, this objective assessment that would have been fairly
debated if the name did not include a segment called Obasanjo,
simply attracts nothing but the fury of the almighty crowd of
anti-Obasanjoists of which there is an endless number these days.
But should a commentator be intimidated?
The accustomed voices are up again. “Traitor”, “Sellout”, and the
likes are phrases anyone is used to taking, who does not partake
in the verbal lynching of anything Obasanjo. I have heard words
like Obasanjo being my god, my godfather in Otta, my hero, my
achiever, etc. Some have called me Asslicker, a jinxed washerman
laundering an irredeemable image etc. Some have characterized me
as being in the payroll of the Ex-President and now some allegedly
in places of authority have claimed that Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello
(whose face I only know from the media) has paid or pledged money
to me to qualify her as aiding and abetting stealing.
Indeed, anything falling short of applauding the EFCC for seeking
to lock up someone who disobeyed its advice is treachery.
Unfortunately however, I can only repeat that Iyabo’s (better
said: the Senate’s) refusal to return the money after being warned
by the EFCC is wrong but is not the actual crime in itself. The
senate accepting the money (through the person of Iyabo) is the
crime not disrespect for the EFCC or disregard for presidential
directive. One then begins to wonder if Iyabo’s onerous burden is
simply nothing else but the last name “Obasanjo” that she bears.
In fact, the whole regulation permitting the funding of
legislative activities by Ministries subjected to the oversight
functions of the parliamentary organs is a contradiction in itself
and should be abolished as no other parliament runs the same
system anywhere in the world. Even the EFCC is also said to be
accepting money from questionable sources for retreats.
It therefore goes that hearing foolish claims on regular basis
that one is a sellout or in the payroll of some politicians with
their back against the wall definitely loses its thought-provoking
impact and becomes counter-productive after sometime. While I
understand the sentiments of readers or hobby writers who hold
different views on different issues, I also appreciate the fact
that everyone does not have equal intellectual maturity to simply
respect the views of another no matter how much they differ. With
insults and abuses however, every commentator is further
radicalized and strengthened in the commitment to further angering
and irritating the uncontrolled and aggressive emotions of the
lynch mob on the rampage.