Special Assistant (Media) to the President’s
wife, Mr. Ayo Osinlu, in this interview with
ALLWELL OKPI, argues that those accusing
the First Lady of excesses have ulterior
motive
The President’s wife, Mrs. Patience Jonathan, has
been accused of engaging in several excesses.
Do you agree?
One can’t help but wonder what they mean by
excesses. What are excesses? Who holds the
standards to measure excesses? There are no
excesses, what you have are just perspectives.
And we know that perspectives are produced by
different sentiments each person holds. What
you take as excesses might be regular and
normal to another person. As far as I’m
concerned, there are no excesses that can be
ascribed to the First Lady. It doesn’t arise. If you
say we have done something in a way that is
different from how you would do it, that is your
opinion and you are entitled to it. But the fact
that you are entitled to your opinion does not
qualify you to describe what others do as
excesses.
By excesses, they were referring to the fact that
traffic was locked down for hours when the
President’s wife visited Lagos, Port-Harcourt and
Warri. Are you saying these never happened?
With regards to the blockage of roads, as far as I
understand, interruption of flow of traffic and
normal activities on the streets is not a thing
peculiar to the First Lady. It is simply insincerity
and some very wicked and unrealistic attempt to
give the First Lady a bad name that would make
some people come to such conclusions. The
question is, is the First Lady the only official at
that level of authority for whom traffic was
interrupted when she was passing? How many
governors move without interruption of traffic? If
you go to the states, how many governors’ wives
move without interruption of traffic.
Even in the city of Abuja, you often hear siren on
the streets and then the outriders will come and
push traffic apart for some dignitaries to pass.
Governors come from their states and do that in
Abuja. I don’t know an official of her (First Lady)
status, for whom traffic is not fairly interrupted.
It all boils down to security. It is not for glory or
grandstanding. If it was so, then every dignitary
in the country, who rides in a convoy, should
also answer to that. So, why are they singling
out the First Lady’s convoy? And don’t forget
that when this Lagos thing happened, we were
at the peak of the Boko Haram crisis.
It was really worrisome then and there were
unusual security efforts to secure the First Lady.
You can imagine the political and social
embarrassment it will be for the nation if it is
said that the President’s wife was attacked by
some of these interests. I’m not a security man,
so I don’t know what measure of security is
appropriate and adequate for any circumstance.
Don’t forget that security operatives design their
strategy according to the intelligence
information that they have, which I’m not privy
to, because it is not my job. But the point is that
there is no official at that level, not to talk of the
Presidency, that will move without some level of
interruption in traffic. Why this First Lady? Is
there no First Lady before her, who moved
without interrupting traffic. So, why her all the
time? That is why we will keep saying there are
interests behind the wall stoking these
controversies because of certain advantages
they stand to gain.
What about the issue of her campaigning for her
husband in Port-Harcourt against the provisions
of the Electoral Act?
I was in Port-Harcourt; I know what transpired
there. I can tell you confidently that there was
no campaign in Port-Harcourt. What the First
lady did was to address various persons who
came to welcome her home to Port-Harcourt and
those that came to show solidarity. Don’t forget
that the First Lady, in her own right, is a
politician; a very strong mobiliser. She is
somebody with a heart for the grass roots;
somebody with a way with the grass roots.
These are her people any time. Many individuals
and groups came to see her; traditional rulers,
women and social groups. She also paid visits to
some eminent people. And what she did was to
thank them all for the support they gave to her
husband during the last election. She told them
that she was aware that they voted massively for
her husband and that she came to thank them.
She then solicited for their support for her
husband.
There was no time she said elections would hold
in 2015 and that they should vote for her
husband. Anyone with evidence that she said
that should let us have it. She only said she
hoped they would keep on supporting her
husband. The man at the helm-of-affairs at the
Presidency needs support for his policies to go
through; support for his agenda to be
implemented; support for the sustenance of
peace, because peace is the indivisible minimum
for development. But as usual, our friends took it
out of her mouth and said she called for support
at the next election. They should show us
evidence where she said that.
There have been talks about her exercise of
power in government affairs beyond the bounds
of her office, and that the President cannot
control her. Is there any truth in that?
That is absolutely untrue and very disrespectful.
Anybody who says that about another man and
his home is disrespectful, because every man
owns his own home and every man has his own
style of running his home. No matter how you
think you are a successful manager of your
home, I can’t run my home by your own
standards because my nature is not your nature;
my disposition is not your disposition; the things
I tolerate, you may not tolerate. Some men are
hard and others are not. It is not correct to say
the President is unable to control his wife. Is he
unable to control her and they have been
married for almost 30 years?
The people saying this are mere chauvinists.
They believe the only way a man can be said to
control his wife is when he rules her life and her
activities with an iron hand. They like a situation
where a man manipulates his wife according to
his whims and caprices all the time. The woman
is not entitled to an opinion or view, she must
wait for her husband to give directives on all
things. To me, if the fact that a man allows his
wife to hold her opinion amounts to his being
unable to control her, then such persons are
taking us back by several decades, when the
woman was seen as a little above a slave in her
husband’s house.
On the talk that she goes beyond her bounds in
government affairs, it is neither here nor there. It
goes back to what I said earlier that some people
believe they would derive some benefits from
demonising the First Lady. They keep making
frivolous accusations. In what manner or
activities is the First Lady overbearing? In what
area of government can anybody show us
evidence where she intervened and interrupted
processes? If they show us where she is
overbearing, we will then have an issue to talk
about.
Part of the argument is that the office of the First
Lady should be scrapped since it is not in the
constitution.
It goes back to perspectives. If someone holds
the perspective that the office of the First Lady
should be scrapped, that is the person’s
perspective. If he is able to step out and press
his perspective on the system and if the system
adopts it and says it should be scrapped, so be
it. We are not unaware that the office of the First
Lady is not in the constitution and it didn’t start
today. I can’t remember any First Lady that
didn’t move in a convoy.
The First Lady is a politically exposed person
because of her husband’s position. Security
measures are put in place to protect all first
ladies and the whole first family. Same applies to
the governors. Isn’t Dame Patience Jonathan as
much a First Lady as the preceding first ladies,
who all used convoys? That’s why I keep saying
that we need to look beyond these campaigns
because they are not coming out of goodwill.
They are not out of concern for the person who
was held in traffic because a VIP was passing,
because these people are not interested in
people’s welfare. Their objectives are selfish.

That lady na bushmeat,just like most nigerian socialites and elite. There concept of humanity is literaly based on illusions and that is why they rob themselves and their fellow contrite men and women their fundamental rights as living creatures. They lack it all in the midst of plenty and steal for survival.

its 'don't give a dog a bad name'......or r we saying d same thing?

Special Assistant (Media) to the
President’s
wife, Mr. Ayo Osinlu,

but i thought there isn't any constitutional post for the president's wife!

@topic! Shey na we give am 'the fellow widow!

This osinlu Is as incompetent as his/her benefactor .
He does not know his job as an image maker.
A GOOD ADVISE = KEEP QUIET AND REDUCE THE EXPOSURE( A TALL DREAM) OF YOUR PRINCIPAL TO THE MEDIA.
FACT IS ,SHE IS NOT READY AND WILL NEVER BE READY FOR PRIMETIME.