Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,152,917 members, 7,817,690 topics. Date: Saturday, 04 May 2024 at 05:23 PM

Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively - Politics (2) - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Politics / Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively (3974 Views)

Open Letter To Prof. Wole Soyinka On Sexual Bill. By Chris Anyanwu / Soyinka On Patience Jonathan & Link With Amaechi / Abacha's Daughter Lash-Out At Wole Soyinka On Twitter (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (Reply) (Go Down)

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by DMandingo: 10:48am On May 28, 2013
Wadeoye:

And who is Wole Soyinka in South West?

Who followed him when he registered a party and attempted to contest?

Wole Soyinka, though a professor, doesn't still understand the difference between an academic scholar and a leader. People follow leaders willingly while some people think they can become leaders by trying to win argument using big grammar. It doesn't work that way.

[b]SPOT ON. TOOOOOO MUCH GRAMMAR[[size=8pt][/size]/b]
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by lekkie073(m): 11:09am On May 28, 2013
tai wo: (Very interesting read folks)
WOLE SOYINKA ON BUHARI_________ _______________
_____________ This intervention has been provoked, not so
much by the ambitions of General Muhammadu Buhari to return
to power at the head of a democratic Nigeria, as by declarations
of support from directions that leave one totally dumbfounded. It
would appear that some, myself among them, had been
overcomplacent about the magnitude of an ambition that seemed
as preposterous as the late effort of General Ibrahim Babangida
to aspire yet again to the honour of presiding over a society that
truly seeks a democratic future.
What one had dismissed was a rash of illusions, brought about
by other political improbabilities that surround us, however, is
being given an air of plausibility by individuals and groupings to
which one had earlier attributed a sense of relevance of historic
actualities. Recently, I published an article in the media,
invoking the possible recourse to psychiatric explanation for
some of the incongruities in conduct within national leadership.
Now, to tell the truth, I have begun to seriously address the issue
of which section of society requires the services of a
psychiatrist.
The contest for a seizure of rationality is now so polarized that I
am quite reconciled to the fact it could be those of us on this
side, not the opposing school of thought that ought to declare
ourselves candidates for a lunatic asylum. So be it. While that
decision hangs in the balance however, the forum is open. Let
both sides continue to address our cases to the electorate, but
also prepare to submit ourselves for psychiatric examination.
The time being so close to electoral decision, we can understand
the haste of some to resort to shortcuts. In the process however,
we should not commit the error of opening the political space to
any alternative whose curative touch to national afflictions have
proven more deadly than the disease. In order to reduce the
clutter in our options towards the forthcoming elections, we urge
a beginning from what we do know, what we have undergone,
what millions can verify, what can be sustained by evidence
accessible even to the school pupil, the street hawker or a just-
come visitor from outer space. Leaving Buhari aside for now, I
propose a commencing exercise that should guide us along the
path of elimination as we examine the existing register of would-
be president. That initial exercise can be summed up in the
following speculation: “If it were possible for Olusegun
Obasanjo, the actual incumbent, to stand again for election,
would you vote for him?”
If the answer is “yes”, then of course all discussion is at an end.
If the answer is ‘No’ however, then it follows that a choice of a
successor made by Obasanjo should be assessed as hovering
between extremely dangerous and an outright kiss of death. The
degree of acceptability of such a candidate should also be
inversely proportionate to the passion with which he or she is
promoted by the would-be ‘godfather’. We do not lack for open
evidence about Obasanjo’s passion in this respect. From Lagos
to the USA, he has taken great pains to assure the nation and the
world that the anointed NPN presidential flag bearer is
guaranteed, in his judgment, to carry out his policies. Such an
endorsement/ anointment is more than sufficient, in my view, for
public acceptance or rejection. Yar’Adua’s candidature amounts
to a terminal kiss from a moribund regime.
Nothing against the person of this – I am informed – personable
governor, but let him understand that in addition to the direct
source of his emergence, the PDP, on whose platform he stands,
represents the most harrowing of this nation’s nightmares over
and beyond even the horrors of the Abacha regime. If he wishes
to be considered on his own merit, now is time for him, as well
as others similarly enmeshed, to exercise the moral courage that
goes with his repudiation of that party, a dissociation from its
past, and a pledge to reverse its menacing future. We shall find
him an alternative platform on which to stand, and then have
him present his credentials along those of other candidates
engaged in forging a credible opposition alliance. Until then, let
us bury this particular proposition and move on to a far graver,
looming danger, personified in the history of General Buhari.
The grounds on which General Buhari is being promoted as the
alternative choice are not only shaky, but pitifully naive. History
matters. Records are not kept simply to assist the weakness of
memory, but to operate as guides to the future. Of course, we
know that human beings change. What the claims of personality
change or transformation impose on us is a rigorous inspection
of the evidence, not wishful speculation or behind-the-scen es
assurances. Public offence, crimes against a polity, must be
answered in the public space, not in caucuses of bargaining. In
Buhari, we have been offered no evidence of the sheerest
prospect of change. On the contrary, all evident suggests that
this is one individual who remains convinced that this is one ex-
ruler that the nation cannot call to order.
Buhari – need one remind anyone – was one of the generals who
treated a Commission of Enquiry, the Oputa Panel, with
unconcealed disdain. Like Babangida and Abdusalami, he
refused to put in appearance even though complaints that were
tabled against him involved a career of gross abuses of power
and blatant assault on the fundamental human rights of the
Nigerian citizenry.
Prominent against these charges was an act that amounted to
nothing less than judicial murder, the execution of a citizen
under a retroactive decree. Does Decree 20 ring a bell? If not,
then, perhaps the names of three youths – Lawal Ojuolape (30),
Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew Owoh (26) do. To
put it quite plainly, one of those three – Ogedengbe – was
executed for a crime that did not carry a capital forfeit at the
time it was committed. This was an unconscionable crime,
carried out in defiance of the pleas and protests of nearly every
sector of the Nigerian and international community – religious,
civil rights, political, trade unions etc. Buhari and his sidekick
and his partner-in-crim e, Tunde Idiagbon persisted in this
inhuman act for one reason and one reason only: to place
Nigerians on notice that they were now under an iron, inflexible
rule, under governance by fear.
The execution of that youthful innocent – for so he was, since
the punishment did not exist at the time of commission – was
nothing short of premeditated murder, for which the perpetrators
should normally stand trial upon their loss of immunity. Are we
truly expected to forget this violation of our entitlement to
security as provided under existing laws? And even if our
sensibilities have become blunted by succeeding seasons of
cruelty and brutality, if power itself had so coarsened the
sensibilities also of rulers and corrupted their judgment, what
should one rightly expect after they have been rescued from the
snare of power” At the very least, a revaluation, leading
hopefully to remorse, and its expression to a wronged society.
At the very least, such a revaluation should engender reticence,
silence. In the case of Buhari, it was the opposite. Since leaving
office he has declared in the most categorical terms that he had
no regrets over this murder and would do so again.
Human life is inviolate. The right to life is the uniquely
fundamental right on which all other rights are based. The crime
that General Buhari committed against the entire nation went
further however, inconceivable as it might first appear. That
crime is one of the most profound negations of civic being. Not
content with hammering down the freedom of expression in
general terms, Buhari specifically forbade all public discussion
of a return to civilian, democratic rule. Let us constantly applaud
our media – those battle scarred professionals did not completely
knuckle down. They resorted to cartoons and oblique, elliptical
references to sustain the people’s campaign for a time-table to
democratic rule. Overt agitation for a democratic time table
however remained rigorously suppressed – military dictatorship,
and a specifically incorporated in Buhari and Idiagbon was here
to stay.
To deprive a people of volition in their own political direction is
to turn a nation into a colony of slaves. Buhari enslaved the
nation. He gloated and gloried in a master-slave relation to the
millions of its inhabitants. It is astonishing to find that the same
former slaves, now free of their chains, should clamour to be
ruled by one who not only turned their nation into a slave
plantation, but forbade them any discussion of their condition.
So Tai Solarin is already forgotten? Tai who stood at street
corners, fearlessly distributing leaflets that took up the gauntlet
where the media had dropped it. Tai who was incarcerated by
that regime and denied even the medication for his asthmatic
condition? Tai did not ask to be sent for treatment overseas; all
he asked was his traditional medicine that had proved so
effective after years of struggle with asthma!
Nor must we omit the manner of Buhari coming to power and
the pattern of his ‘corrective’ rule. Shagari’s NPN had already
run out of steam and was near universally detested – except of
course by the handful that still benefited from that regime of
profligacy and rabid fascism. Responsibility for the national
condition lay squarely at the door of the ruling party, obviously,
but against whom was Buhari’s coup staged? Judging by the
conduct of that regime, it was not against Shagari’s government
but against the opposition. The head of government, on whom
primary responsibility lay, was Shehu Shagari. Yet that
individual was kept in cozy house detention in Ikoyi while his
powerless deputy, Alex Ekwueme, was locked up in Kiri-kiri
prisons. Such was the Buhari notion of equitable apportionment
of guilt and/or responsibility.
And then the cascade of escapes of the wanted, and culpable
politicians. Manhunts across the length and breadth of the
nation, roadblocks everywhere and borders tight as steel zip
locks. Lo and behold, the chairman of the party, Chief Akinloye,
strolled out coolly across the border. Richard Akinjide, Legal
Protector of the ruling party, slipped out with equal ease. The
Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who declared that Nigerians were
yet to eat from dustbins – escaped through the same airtight
dragnet. The clumsy attempt to crate him home was punishment
for his ingratitude, since he went berserk when, after waiting in
vain, he concluded that the coup had not been staged, after all,
for the immediate consolidation of the party of extreme right-
wing vultures, but for the military hyenas.
The case of the overbearing Secretary-Gener al of the party, Uba
Ahmed, was even more noxious. Uba Ahmed was out of the
country at the time. Despite the closure of the Nigerian airspace,
he compelled the pilot of his plane to demand special landing
permission, since his passenger load included the almighty Uba
Ahmed. Of course, he had not known of the change in his status
since he was airborne. The delighted airport commandant,
realizing that he had a much valued fish swimming willingly
into a waiting net, approved the request. Uba Ahmed
disembarked into the arms of a military guard and was promptly
clamped in detention. Incredibly, he vanished a few days after
and reappeared in safety overseas. Those whose memories have
become calcified should explore the media coverage of that
saga. Buhari was asked to explain the vanished act of this much
prized quarry and his response was one of the most arrogant
levity. Coming from one who had shot his way into power on
the slogan of ‘dis’pline’, it was nothing short of impudent.
Shall we revisit the tragicomic series of trials that landed several
politicians several lifetimes in prison? Recall, if you please, the
‘judicial’ processes undergone by the septuagenarian Chief
Adekunle Ajasin. He was arraigned and tried before Buhari’s
punitive tribunal but acquitted. Dissatisfied, Buhari ordered his
re-trial. Again, the Tribunal could not find this man guilty of a
single crime, so once again he was returned for trial, only to be
acquitted of all charges of corruption or abuse of office. Was
Chief Ajasin thereby released? No! He was ordered detained
indefinitely, simply for the crime of winning an election and
refusing to knuckle under Buhari’s reign of terror.
The conduct of the Buhari regime after his coup was not merely
one of double, triple, multiple standards but a cynical travesty of
justice. Audu Ogbeh, currently chairman of the Action Congress
was one of the few figures of rectitude within the NPN. Just as
he has done in recent times with the PDP, he played the role of
an internal critic and reformer, warning, dissenting, and setting
an example of probity within his ministry. For that crime he
spent months in unjust incarceration. Guilty by association?
Well, if that was the motivating yardstick of the administration
of the Buhari justice, then it was most selectively applied. The utmost severity of the Buhari-Idiagbon justice was especially
reserved either for the opposition in general, or for those within the ruling party who had showed the sheerest sense of
responsibility and patriotism.
Shall I remind this nation of Buhari’s deliberate humiliating
treatment of the Emir of Kano and the Oni of Ife over their visit
to the state of Israel? I hold no brief for traditional rulers and
their relationship with governments, but insist on regarding them
as entitled to all the rights, privileges and responsibilitie s of any
Nigerian citizen. This royal duo went to Israel on their private
steam and private business. Simply because the Buhari regime
was pursuing some antagonistic foreign policy towards Israel, a
policy of which these traditional rulers were not a part, they
were subjected on their return to a treatment that could only be
described as a head masterly chastisement of errant pupils. Since
when, may one ask, did a free citizen of the Nigerian nation
require the permission of a head of state to visit a foreign nation
that was willing to offer that tourist a visa.?
One is only too aware that some Nigerians love to point to
Buhari’s agenda of discipline as the shining jewel in his scrap-
iron crown. To inculcate discipline however, one must lead by
example, obeying laws set down as guides to public probity.
Example speaks louder than declarations, and rulers cannot
exempt themselves from the disciplinary strictures imposed on
the overall polity, especially on any issue that seeks to establish
a policy for public well-being.
The story of the thirty something suitcases – it would appear that
they were even closer to fifty – found unavoidable mention in
my recent memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN,
written long before Buhari became spoken of as a credible
candidate. For the exercise of a changeover of the national
currency, the Nigerian borders – air, sea and land – had been
shut tight. Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even
cattle egrets.
Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that needle’s eye.
Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-de-camp, Jokolo – later to
become an emir – to facilitate the entry of those cases, he
ordered the redeployment – as I later discovered – of the
Customs Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the
contravening baggage. That officer, the former Vice-president is
now a rival candidate to Buhari, but has somehow, in the
meantime, earned a reputation that totally contradicts his
conduct at the time. Wherever the truth lies, it does not redound
to the credibility of the dictator of that time, General Buhari
whose word was law, but whose allegiances were clearly
negotiable.
i shd read all these? if i do, my comments will be...........i give up grin angry grin angry
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 11:41am On May 28, 2013
Sincere 9gerian: Obviously the article was written few years back but the MESSAGE is still VERY RELEVANT.

For those who feign RECEPTIVE APHASIA, below are important quotes from the article:

1 "Buhari – need one remind anyone – was one of the generals who
treated a Commission of Enquiry, the Oputa Panel, with
unconcealed disdain. He (Buhari)
refused to put in appearance even though complaints that were
tabled against him involved a career of gross abuses of power
and blatant assault on the fundamental human rights of the
Nigerian citizenry"

2 "Does Decree 20 ring a bell? If not,
then, perhaps the names of three youths – Lawal Ojuolape(30),
Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew Owoh (26) do. To
put it quite plainly, one of those three – Ogedengbe – was
executed for a crime that did not carry a capital forfeit at the
time it was committed. This was an unconscionable crime,
carried out in defiance of the pleas and protests of nearly every
sector of the Nigerian and international community – religious,
civil rights, political, trade unions etc"

3 "Not
content with hammering down the freedom of expression in
general terms, Buhari specifically forbade all public discussion
of a return to civilian, democratic rule"

4 "Buhari enslaved the
nation. He gloated and gloried in a master-slave relation to the
millions of its inhabitants. It is astonishing to find that the same
former slaves, now free of their chains, should clamour to be
ruled by one who not only turned their nation into a slave
plantation, but forbade them any discussion of their condition"

5 "So Tai Solarin is already forgotten? Tai who stood at street
corners, fearlessly distributing leaflets that took up the gauntlet
where the media had dropped it. Tai who was incarcerated by
that regime and denied even the medication for his asthmatic
condition? Tai did not ask to be sent for treatment overseas; all
he asked was his traditional medicine that had proved so
effective after years of struggle with asthma!"

6 "The head of government, on whom
primary responsibility lay, was Shehu Shagari. Yet that
individual was kept in cozy house detention in Ikoyi while his
powerless deputy, Alex Ekwueme, was locked up in Kiri-kiri
prisons. Such was the Buhari notion of equitable apportionment
of guilt and/or responsibility"

7 "The
Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who declared that Nigerians were
yet to eat from dustbins – escaped through the same airtight
dragnet. The clumsy attempt to crate him home was punishment
for his ingratitude, since he went berserk when, after waiting in
vain, he concluded that the coup had not been staged, after all,
for the immediate consolidation of the party of extreme right-
wing vultures, but for the military hyenas"

8 "Recall, if you please, the
‘judicial’ processes undergone by the septuagenarian Chief
Adekunle Ajasin. He was arraigned and tried before Buhari’s
punitive tribunal but acquitted. Dissatisfied, Buhari ordered his
re-trial. Again, the Tribunal could not find this man guilty of a
single crime, so once again hewas returned for trial, only to be
acquitted of all charges of corruption or abuse of office. Was
Chief Ajasin thereby released? No! He was ordered detained
indefinitely, simply for the crime of winning an election and
refusing to knuckle under Buhari’s reign of terror"

9 "The story of the thirty something suitcases – it would appear that
they were even closer to fifty – found unavoidable mention in
my recent memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN,
written long before Buhari became spoken of as a credible
candidate. For the exercise of a changeover of the national
currency, the Nigerian borders – air, sea and land – had been
shut tight. Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even
cattle egrets.
Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that needle’s eye.
Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-de-camp, Jokolo – later to
become an emir – to facilitate the entry of those cases, he
ordered the redeployment – as I later discovered – of the
Customs Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the
contravening baggage"

10 "The grounds on which General Buhari is being promoted as the
alternative choice are not only shaky, but pitifully naive. HISTORY MATTERS. Records are not kept simply to assist the weakness of
memory, but to operate as guides to the future"

Thanks for the great job.

Buhari and his likes can shed blood (may be it will be his tears of blood that will soak "the dogs and the baboons), but he will never rule Nigeria again. The blood thirsty General, should go home and weep for his crimes against humanity.

Once again, I advice southerners living in the North to come home!
Nigeria is on a brink and blood thirsty old men like Buhari whose thirst for blood surpasses those of witches will push the country beyond the brink!

2 Likes

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 12:37pm On May 28, 2013
[size=18pt]Soyinka's hypocrisy and biase against Buhari exposed[/size]



Soyinka, Labour and Progress

By

Dr. Aliyu Tilde

tildealiyu@afrione.com

Muhammadu Buhari, the presidential candidate of ANPP during the 4-19 elections has never been the favourite of the media and its clients since he came to power in 1984. Therefore, it was not surprising that when he warned the government of a possible mass action if the last presidential elections were rigged, the press, the government and its agents were quick to interpret his warning as blowing the whistle for civil disorder.

Though Buhari, his party and the Coalition of Nigerian Political Parties tried to explain what they meant by mass action, the ruling party and the press never relented in reproaching him. However, it remains a fact that there was nothing wrong with his warning. It was completely in consonance with Nigerian political tradition. Election rigging was always followed by unrest. It was there in 1965 when the “Wild, Wild, West” went on rampage, inviting the first military to topple our first civilian government. It was also there in 1983 when the same West, again using widespread rioting, led the country in opposing the rigged elections of 1983. For the second time, the military responded to their call and toppled the republic. Buhari was made the head of state then. I wonder how a warning from such a person could attract vehement criticism.

The election took place on 4-19. And what coincidence it was for it to hold on such a date in a country where ‘419’ connotes fraud. It was testified rigged not only by the aggrieved parties but also by international observers. Fortunately, this time there was not anybody wild outside there to go on rampage. Buhari cried foul, protesting that Obasanjo has shunted the race midfield. We ‘counselled’ him to head for the courts instead of saying that there will be no legitimate winner to be sworn in as President in Nigeria by May 29, 2003. That is an invitation to anarchy, we said. We reminded him that he has not crossed the finishing line of the democratic race yet. He had to follow “due process” and respect the “rule of law.”

One of the most sincere ‘counsellors’ of Buhari was the Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka. “He should wait until the tribunals make their pronouncement,” said Soyinka in an interview with Thisday of May 10, 2003. “He should exhaust the process. Why should he call for an interim national government? He has not gone through the democratic process; he has not finished it. And it is typical of people like that, very bad losers… His language was the language of incitement. How can he be calling for mass action? You know, people like that should be watched very carefully. They haven’t really changed their skin.”

An outsider conversant with Nigerian political history must have jumped at this level of political maturity. Nigerians, he would think, have overnight become supporters of due process and rule of law; they have grown out of their ‘wild’ disposition and embraced the values of civilization; they are now confident that their courts can grant justice to aggrieved parties in a matter as volatile as presidential elections. Having known our past history he would marvel at the complete U-turn of people like Soyinka. He would wonder how Soyinka discovered the wisdom of trusting the courts at seventy that he did not possess as a professor at fifty.

The outsider would recall how Soyinka, as cited on this page last week from the report of Sunday Concord of September 19, 1983, went to Europe and America warning of an outbreak of civil war. Now he has changed such that even the lesser evil of mass action is too criminal to contemplate. The outsider would have wondered how the labour leadership that was advising Buhari to go to court has developed confidence in the judiciary and abandoned civil unrest as a way of seeking redress. Almost at the time Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) leader, Adams Oshiomole, was calling on Buhari to go to courts, he was also advising the Academic Staff Union of Universities to dump their strike action over the under funding of education and return to their dialogue with the deaf and dumb.

Such an observer must have been surprised that the same NLC, beginning from last Monday, forgot the advice it was giving ASUU and went on strike over a fuel price increase. It also forgot seeking any redress in court. Actually, when the government realized that the labour was bent on going on strike, it thought that a court order will be a clever means of stopping the it, since the same union was requesting Buhari to respect the law. The court granted government the order but in spite of it the union flagrantly went ahead with its strike.

More revealing however was the conduct of the union during the strike. Its members did not remain in their houses, as law-abiding citizens. They were preventing other willing workers, petty traders, grocers, spare part dealers and market women from reporting to work or earning their daily bread. In Kano they attempted to prevent motorcyclists from running commercial drops. The cyclists defied the coercive efforts of the union and continued with their activities, claiming that they are masses who live on daily earnings. In Bauchi, shop owners in the main market rejected the union saying that it did nothing to prevent NAFDAC from destroying their items and, after all, they have been buying fuel a cost north of N40.00 for the past four years. Where was the union since? No government vehicle was allowed to ply the roads in all cities and capitals, while private vehicles were forced to hang protest leaves in their frontage. In Abuja Enugu and many other cities, there were even skirmishes with the police that left many injured. I wonder if there is anything that could qualify to be called mass action worse than the conduct of the NLC.

It is surprising how quick the NLC lost its appetite for the court, for due process and for the rule of law. I am confused on why we Nigerians think we have any moral locus to protest against Obasanjo. Is it not the same labour whose leadership supported his return despite his failure in the past four years? Why did not the union go on strike over the rigging that took place during the last election since choosing a purposeful president would have saved it the hundreds of strikes awaiting it in the next four years?

The attitude exhibited by members of National Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE) whose leadership and members have been opposing PDP’s plan to reform local governments qualifies for another contradiction. Like the labour, they do not have any moral justification to condemn any impending fate. Why did not they go on a nationwide strike when state governors were slicing their local governments to achieve cheap political goals at the eve of the last elections? Did not they submit themselves as foot soldiers who rigged elections in favour of the same governors who created the mess? Did they protest against the massive rigging that brought Obasanjo to power, knowing very well that he does not have the potential for correcting the mess he and others before him created? Why bother now about fuel increase?

The same logic stares at many members of other major unions forming the NLC. The union that had the largest share of staff who participated in the last election was National Union of Teachers. Why did its members aid Obasanjo to return for the second time, not withstanding his unenviable record of spending the least on education in our history? Many ASUU members cannot also be spared from this daunted conscience. Their strike was four months old when the election took place. I thought they would mobilize other Nigerians to ensure that the person who ignored them so long has not returned to power. No. On most campuses, they could not even mobilize members of their community against the president. Thus, on the main campus of Ahmadu Bello University the same Obasanjo got the highest number of votes than any other candidate.

The level of our hypocrisy is really amazing. That is why we never stopped fascinating the world. We make so many charades about our country’s backwardness and the obsession of its leaders with theft and irresponsible management. But never have we – those of us who are not in power – made any genuine move to check their excesses. It is now becoming clear that we make noise over such travesties only when “one of our own” is not in power. But once he is there, he can do anything and get away with it, Scot-free. We are then ready to overlook his shortcomings and cover up his atrocities. When others commit lesser mistakes, we would never miss the slightest opportunity to demonise them.

Since Obasanjo came to power there have been agitations on how different measures of justice are used for different people. We have for example members of Oodua Peoples Congress who maimed innocent citizens of other regions residing in the Southwest. Their leaders were arrested but none of the courts found any of them guilty in the crises that killed thousands of lives. On the contrary, hundreds of ANPP supporters are wallowing in police custody over their attempt to prevent PDP from rigging the last election. In another instance, bail is denied Bamaiyi and Al-Mustapha who are standing trials for attempted murder, but Omisore who is a principal suspect in Ige’s murder is granted bail and even sworn in as a senator.

Here, Soyinka again is a good example to cite. In the May 18 interview, he condemned Buhari for sending “three men to the gallows on retroactive decrees, to me that was murder. So forget Buhari and democratic…” Well Buhari might have killed only three criminals, using a retroactive decree. However, talking about killings, have we ever had a leader, outside the civil war, who has killed Nigerians more than Obasanjo? How many did he kill on our streets and our university campuses during his tenure as Head of State? How many thousands of lives did he kill in the last four years, from Odi to Zaki Biam and other populations that were massacred by his army? How many thousand others has he killed by permitting the ethnic and sectarian violence that took place in the last four years and from which he made his greatest political harvest?

In carrying out the massacre of innocent students at Ahmadu Bello University in April 1978 or ordering the military to massacre the populations of Odi and Zaki Biam, was he killing criminals, or did he even have the conscience of resorting to using a decree, retroactive or proactive? Yet, to Soyinka, it is Buhari who is “a bad case”, not Obasanjo.

Perhaps perplexed by Soyinka’s silence over the incompetence of Obasanjo, the reporter insisted on knowing whether he is satisfied with the president. “Of course, I am not satisfied,” replied Soyinka after an earlier evasion. Then came his excuse: “But I am not ready to be shooting my mouth every time. I am almost seventy now. I have been calling for a global approach to these issues. It is very tiring. The only thing to do is to encourage the progressives of this country to seek power.”

Progressives? We have heard this nomenclature for long now. But it appears that our self-acclaimed progressives have failed to live above the pedestrian level of ethnicity, religion and self-promotion. With every tick of our political clock, they are gradually becoming demystified and the masquerade they wear falls from their faces to render their reactionary psyche.

True progressives must possess two qualities in a democratic setting. They must cross the line of ethnic and sectarian chauvinism to embrace the universal values of equity and merit wherever they come from. In other words, their praise or condemnation of a person should not be inspired by his colour, faith, geography or mother tongue. And when injustice is committed, they must abandon those primordial differences and stand united against it, regardless of who the complainant is. Only this could qualify as “global approach.” Unless our ‘progressives’ can do this, their claim to progress could only pass as a façade to the promotion of primitivism.

I am hard on Soyinka and our labour unions because their domains – literature and labour – represent two of the most progressive areas of society. In Nigeria, however, learning and labour have failed to hatch out our progressives out of the hard shell of cultural primitivism into the egalitarian world of equity and merit. That is why this country still finds it hard to progress in its journey to nationhood.

To further his contradiction, Soyinka was insisting that Buhari heads for the courts in the same breadth he was condemning the police and the judiciary over the way Ige’s murder trial was going on. “It is not heard anywhere in the World,” Soyinka generalizes, “to say that a person accused of murder in a household comes around to win elections in the household of the murdered. I don’t know what part of the world that impossibility can be contemplated. The man has been accused of murdering Bola Ige… And you say the accused man won in the household of the victim? Go and tell that to the marines, not rational minds… It is something so flawed.”

That was for the elections in the Southwest where Omisore and the PDP welcomed the region into the ‘mainstream’ of Nigerian Amala politics that Soyinka is correctly resents. But for the rigging that took place during the presidential election, the level of the stick was brought down by Soyinka so that the President would jump over it easily. Protest against that was reduced to the private affair of Buhari.

That is the Nigerian ‘progressive’ for you.
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Wadeoye(m): 1:11pm On May 28, 2013
noblezone:

Thanks for the grate job.

Buhari and his likes can shed blood (may be it will be his tears of blood that will soak "the dogs and the baboons), but he will never rule Nigeria again. The blood thirsty General, should go home and weep for his crimes against humanity.

Once again, I advice southerners living in the North to come home!
Nigeria is on a brink and blood thirsty old men like Buhari whose thirst for blood surpasses those of witches will push the country beyond the brink!


The first line discouraged me...
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 1:35pm On May 28, 2013
How about the Lagos metro rail line project Jakande started only for the sectional buhari regime to cancel the contract and incur a great loss in the process...?

undecided


You can't convince anyone that the poject wasn't stopped out of malice and ill-will.

1 Like

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 1:39pm On May 28, 2013
^ Where was the funds to complete the project?

Buhari came to power because Shagari's administration had run out of money and couldn't even afford to pay wages.
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 2:57pm On May 28, 2013
Wadeoye:

The first line discouraged me...

Sincere apologies!
This language is not ours and besides, it is advisable to always proof read but then, sometimes we don't have all the time.
I have corrected it.

thanks all the same.
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by olabukola: 5:27pm On May 28, 2013
noblezone:

Sincere apologies!
This language is not ours and besides, it is advisable to always proof read but then, sometimes we don't have all the time.
I have corrected it.

thanks all the same.
this is maturity
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Nobody: 6:52pm On May 28, 2013
It is a big pity that most nigerians are too blind, dumb and stupid to know this evil man called buhari.
Smh for them.

2 Likes

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Wadeoye(m): 8:07pm On May 28, 2013
rafhell: It is a big pity that most nigerians are too blind, dumb and stupid to know this evil man called buhari.
Smh for them.

Man, think deeply about it... you have only described yourself
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by ThorpeParke: 9:55pm On May 28, 2013
Soyinka, I learned nothing new. I thought you had deeper things to say
Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by kross01(m): 8:16am On May 29, 2013
thanks to prof. W.s, though an old article yet still very relevant till this day. History is indeed sacrosanct.
@wadeoye; if after reading the article(that is if you did), and the only thing you could pick out is buhari's absence from the oputa panel then your case is just helpless. You can condemn the messenger for all you like but you cant kill his message.

2 Likes

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Itoroetti(m): 10:37pm On May 29, 2013
madam_oringo:

How many years ago was this write up? I don't hope brief for Buhari but in a matchup with the corrupt retardeen monster, he wins completely!
In what ways those he wins?have u even gone through the write up or rather u just fliped passed it?meanwhile who's d retarden,ur father?

1 Like

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by Itoroetti(m): 10:41pm On May 29, 2013
doncaster: @wadeoye,
How can the Oputa panel findings implemented when the key figures did not appear. Ok from the write up you only saw the disregard of Buhari towards the Oputa pane but you did not see the three names of your kingsmen that was murdered by Buhari. You must be a blind bat.

If this article is against GEJ this thread must have reached 20 pages by now.

Thanks bros for ur piece.nigerians easily forget about the past.but they forget that there is no future without the past.most of them,I guess have not read this piece.

2 Likes

Re: Prof. Wole Soyinka On Buhari - Read And Comment Objectively by McDogget: 10:08pm On Dec 15, 2014
[quote author=ThorpeParke post=15949456]Soyinka, I learned nothing new. I thought you had deeper things to say[/quoteyou knew all these before now and didn't bother to share with us. Know that the prof. has shared with the public you turned out to be;"Mr. Know it all. Shallow brain!

(1) (2) (Reply)

Akwa Ibom Assembly Passes N672.9bn Appropriation Bill Into Law / PHOTOS: Vice President Professor Yemi Osinbajo Seen Playing Squash To Keep Fit. / Obi Get A Rapturous Ovation At The Installation Of New CAN President In Abuja

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 89
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.