Unknown to Dr. Reuben Abati, one of President Jonathan’s media spokespersons, when he referred to Nigerian youths who are genuinely passionate about the wrong direction the only country they have is going as “collective children of anger” he, Dr. Reuben Abati took a moral stand on the moral and social question in our country. 

That moral point indicates a social and ethical divide down the line among Nigerian peoples, families and parents.
Also, a while ago when it was revealed that the children of  Nigeria’s political and economic class, the children of the “very high” economically and politically, who by that virtue  cannot belong to Mr. Reuben Abati’s  “children of anger” are part of the oil subsidy thieves, the parents of the “children of oil subsidy theft” and their advocates  balked and attempted to distance themselves from their allegedly thieving children. Messrs Mahmud Tukur and Abdullahi Àlàó   are part of these children.

Given our primary concern on this platform, the moral question in this regard is: to what extent in a broad sense are parents of thieving children culpable when their children are caught in the immoral act?  And in a specific sense of the “children of oil subsidy theft”: to what extent are parents of oil subsidy thieving children  culpable? In other words, to what extent are Mr. Bamangar Tukur and Mr. Aríṣekọ́lá Àlàó culpable of the alleged oil subsidy theft of their children? If they are culpable, is their culpability legal or moral?

If so, what is the basis?  If neither, why are they said not to be either morally culpable or legally culpable?
Of interest is the position of Senator Babáfẹ́mi Ojudu of the ACN and who currently represents Ekiti Central in the Senate. I will like to quote him  verbatim. He said: “I disagree with my party a little on the call for Bamangar Tukur to step down.
“This is because the moment somebody is above 18 years of age such person is an adult and could be held responsible for his misdeed“.

For now, Tukur is innocent until he is proved guilty. The sin of the son should not be visited on the father,’’.(Premium Times August 2, 2012)
Senator Babáfẹ́mi Ojudu seemed to have confused too many things in one fell swoop. First and most important is ETHICS, a moral estate, its inheritance from forebearers, and its transfer to children and grandchildren.  Second is LAW. Third is SANCTION-legal and moral.

Let me say categorically that Messrs Bamangar Tukur and Aríṣekọ́lá Àlàó and the parents of “children of oil subsidy theft” cannot be legally held responsible for the alleged theft of their thieving children. The parents cannot even be tried in court, so the question of legal culpability and punishment do not arise for them.

The question however is: can they be morally held responsible?  Can they be asked simple moral questions? Based on the history of democracy, families,  inheritances, and bequests, I think  that even when parents are not legally culpable for the actions of their grown up children, they have moral questions to answer when their children commit serious injury against the public, the moral and  public good.

While they may not be morally obliged to answer such questions, the public is morally obliged to ask them such simple moral questions.
As part of the building of our democracy, asking such  simple moral questions may just be sufficient.

They put a moral caution and check on so-called political families whose political and economic estate, the moral source of such estate, and the use to which they are put  is part of our moral problems.

It will then be left to parents of thieving children, and “children of oil subsidy theft”  to  morally caution their children.
The assumption that parents of thieving children cannot be asked simple moral questions  is unhelpful for many reasons.

In many instances, these thieving children set forth into the public, the economy, and politics with the wind and momentum of their parents behind them. In many cases these parents groom these children to take over their economic, political and social estate.  And we must add-moral  or immoral estate depending on the source of their political and economic wealth...

http://premiumtimesng.com/opinion/101075-bamangar-tukur-ari%E1%B9%A3ekola-alao-their-children-and-oil-subsidy-theft-by-adeolu-ademoyo.html

Atheist:-D:
So let me get this right... a bigwig of PDP (son of the Chairman) and a bigwig of ACN (running mate with their presidential candidate) are both in the same company and are both implicated in the scandal (Eterna plc). Interesting. Politics at work I guess

Atheist:-D:
So let me get this right... a bigwig of PDP (son of the Chairman) and a bigwig of ACN (running mate with their presidential candidate) are both in the same company and are both implicated in the scandal (Eterna plc). Interesting. Politics at work I guess