₦airaland Forum

Two things are happening simultaneously in south eastern Nigeria right now. On the one hand, separatists and other unknown groups are busy burning police stations and other federal government infrastructure in the region. On the other hand, there is a reluctance, or as a senior colleague put it to me recently, there is an ‘ambivalence’ in the national conversation about what to call these acts and those who perpetrate them.

On the first, the headlines are clear enough with increasing regularity in recent weeks: “Again, unknown gunmen raze Abia police station, kill two cops in A’Ibom” (The Guardian, 29 April 2021); “Uneasy Calm as Police Desert Streets in South East” (Daily Trust, 02 May 2021); “Truck loaded with ammunition discovered in Anambra” (Premium Times, 10 May 2021); “Five suspected IPOB members arrested over alleged killing of police operative. Police and other security agencies have been the targets of deadly attacks in South-east and South-south regions” (Premium Times, 15 May 2021).

If these are only a few selected headlines, they are still clearly suggestive of the general turn of events in southeastern Nigeria in recent months. It is sad, however, that there is not much clarity but plenty of ambivalence in the media and the general public about how to describe these acts and their perpetrators, leaving the detached observer with the alarming feeling that we have walked this path before.

As anyone familiar with the still ongoing tragedy of Boko Haram would tell you that the headlines above reflect how the whole thing it started. From the slippery slope of attacking police stations and policemen, like play, like play, as we say in Nigeria, Boko Haram quickly morphed into a most devastating religious insurgency that more than a decade later, we are still grappling to contain. For this reason alone, one would expect more nuance and introspection in how the media approaches and reports these events in the South East.

Instead, on both social and mainstream media, IPOB members are celebrated as ‘agitators’, and their activities glorified as ‘a fight for self-determination’. Hardly any media refers to such activities as terrorism, insurgency, or violent secessionism, all of which they are. When an organisation, or any persons linked to it, take to burning down police stations and attacking policemen, what they are doing is simply called terrorism, regardless of whether it is for religious or secessionist purposes.

After all, the United States’ Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), for example, defines terrorism simply as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”. The key to what constitutes terrorism is the violent acts committed, not by whom or for what political or religious purposes the actors use to justify their activities.

Such ambivalence in about naming similar acts differently if committed by different persons has a long history in Nigerian media and politics, and it is perhaps borne out of the need to distinguish between IPOB, or indeed militancy in the Niger Delta, from Boko Haram. Or perhaps, Nigerian newspapers are taking a cue from the international media which for years created and fostered the impression that terrorism is terrorism only when committed by Muslims or in the name of Islam. Or perhaps it is just the plain ignorant assumption that using violence in the name of religion is a different thing from doing the same thing for political purposes.

All of these are false premises, however. It is true that even among well-known terrorist organisations, Boko Haram are still a different beast altogether. It is also true that the scale of violence used by Boko Haram does not compare to anything we have ever seen in Nigeria. But it beggars belief that Nigerian newspapers, some of which do not refer to an elected Buhari as ‘President Buhari’, still have no qualms describing the leader of IPOB as ‘Mazi’ Nnamdi Kanu, a title denoting high respect and regard for the holder in Igbo land.

There is a difference between opposition to a government and support for rascality and criminality, and our media needs to be clear about this. Moreover, differences of degree must not be confused with differences of kind. Boko Haram is a far more violent organisation than the Niger Delta militants, and on recent evidence, than IPOB. But the differences between them are more of a degree, than of a kind, much like the difference between a group of trees and a forest, not like that between a forest and a cave.

To the extent that all three use violence or threats of violence as part of their overall approach, they are all terrorist organisations, and a responsible media system cannot shy away from this. Even in the international media, there has been a significant change on this. American media had no hesitation in calling out those who stormed congress earlier this year as right-wing terrorists, nor did the media from elsewhere.

But the real point here is not exactly about whether or not we chose to give different names to similar events with similar outcomes. The problem is just the name we call things, but the consequences of the name we call things. The consequences of this ambivalence are already here with us in public perception of and attitudes towards IPOB and their increasingly violent activity. Let me elaborate on just two.

First, while IPOB has of late turned increasingly violent in its approach to achieve its secessionist ends, ambiguity in the media about what they are doing has only helped to deflect attention away from the danger they represent, or could represent. Worse than that, it is helping to cultivate emotional and moral support for their actions. Many so-called civil society and socio-cultural organisations, among them Ohaneze, Human Rights Writers Association (HURIWA), World Igbo Assembly, and so on, have been quick to denounce the government of state-sponsored terrorism, or ethnic profiling. But no word from them even of caution for the IPOB insurgents. Again, this is a dangerous road that we have travelled before, with scarring consequences.

Above all, violent agitations of any kind can easily take a life of its own, separate from the intentions or expectations of its original founders. All that maybe needed is just once chance event, however remotely, and things could well get out of hand quite suddenly. This is precisely the history of both Boko Haram and militancy in the Niger Delta, the ashes of which are still yet to burn out. The fact that ‘Biafra’ is a far more emotional subject among more Igbos than Boko Haram’s extremist ideology ever was among Nigerian Muslims makes the situation even more delicate. There are certain circumstances where a word is enough even for the foolish. This is one. There is still enough time to avert this. Let’s seize it by first calling a spade by its real name.

Fahdiga:
SILVERNORGOLD aka BLOODOFJESUS don't let me come for you. Better respect yourself now. I mean everything I said

The Hausa-Fulani:

I always had his notion about the Hausas that they were violent people. Reading the papers about Boko-haram only fueled that and there was this myth that most of them carried knives under their clothing.

I was posted to Plateau state for my compulsory youth service and when I first saw the posting I was scared. I didn't want to go to the north but my parents convinced me to go there telling me I'll redeploy back to Lagos after camping is over. So I went over to the north and when I got there it wasn't what I expected. I expected hard Hausa faces instead I was greeted with smiles. The people there helped me in every way to get to the camp (it was my first time there and I didn't know anywhere). Even during the camping, the Hausa soldiers were really friendly to us. Same with those at the mami market. They even trusted us to give us food on credit with the promise we would pay later. Plateau state was so good after camp I stayed around for a week before returning to Lagos. Sadly I wouldn't serve there as I redeployed to Lagos. But after my Nysc I returned to the north for 2 weeks and toured a few states there.

In conclusion and my own opinion the Hausa-Fulani are warmhearted people and would only cause trouble if you try to harm one of theirs or brought trouble to them. They are peace loving religious people.

The Igbo:

I traveled to the south-east sometimes ago (can't remember the year exactly). And that was before I went to the north. If I should compare it to my trip to the north, it was terrible. Just asking for description to a place from an Igbo stranger could cause trouble. It was really terrible I had to leave just after 3 days. I'm Igbo and I don't even like interacting with my fellow Igbo people. Igbos are one of the most egotistical people on this planet. They've this mindset that everyone is trying to cheat them so they get defensive everytime. Just a basic correction can lead to fight between you and an Igbo person. Oh yeah they're ignorant too and believe they're better than everyone else.

There's nothing to conclude here, i’m igbo and have nothing good to say about my own people.

The Yorubas:

The yorubas lol, they love parties. They love to enjoy themselves and are rarely fighting themselves or any other tribes like the Igbo and Hausas fight themselves. I think after the Hausas, the next United tribe are the yorubas. They cook the best jollof lol and are very understanding. They're also the most educated amongst all the tribes.

In conclusion and my own opinion the yorubas are really accomodating.

I have nothing against the igbos. I just wish we were more accommodating and friendly like the rest of the tribes. We need to stop assuming we don't need others and are better alone. I've stayed with the yorubas for 20+ years and its been awesome. I went to stay with the Hausas and it felt good to be away from home. My people just have to do better. I want us to be better and try to learn from others.

Umudiawa Community in Umuahia North Council of Abia State has warned its neighbouring Umuoma Community of Imo State to stop encroaching into the disputed land between the duo or brace up for their wrath.

The traditional ruler of the Umudiawa, HRH Eze Nnamdi Ofoegbu who issued the warning while addressing newsmen, vowed that any further provocation by their Imo neighbours would be stoutly resisted.

The royal father explained that the warning had become necessary following the recent disruption by Umuoma locals, of the activities of the developer engaged by the Umudiawa Community to develop some portions of the land.

According to him, the ownership of the said land was decided in favour of Umudiawa Community in February 1958 by the Supreme Court presided over by Chief Justice of the federation, A Ade Ademola, with Justices W H Hurley and S O Qushie-Idum serving as members.

The royal father who was flanked by members of his cabinet during the briefing explained that the judgment was subsequently upheld in 2019 by the Federal High Court Owerri presided over by Justice T G Ringim.

Part of the judgment read: “In the circumstances, I would dismiss the appeal of the defendants (Umuoma Community) which relates to the two portions of the land to the north and the centre of the plan (edged yellow and green respectively) and in like manner, uphold the plaintiffs appeal with regard to the southern portion of the land (edged green on the plan) but amend the declaration made by the learned trial judge as follows:

“The plaintiffs are granted declaration of the title to a portion of the land claimed and known as Umuhu Ofemiri, namely that portion edged yellow and brown respectively; thus excluding the portion edged green on the exhibit P.1 filed by the plaintiff in this case”.

Adding his voice, the President-General of the Umudiawa Community, Sir Monday Nwokocha observed that the Supreme Court judgment of February 1958 which was also upheld by a Federal High Court sitting in Owerri in 2019 was fair to all the parties in the dispute, adding that learned justices favoured the two communities as it gave them different areas for ownership.

He argued that the said judgment ceded portions of the land to the Umudiawa Community and a different portion to the Umuoma Community and wondered why their neighbours of Umuoma Community have continued to interfere in the portion belonging to Umudiawa.

A Fulani herder, Muhammed Maikudi, has been shot dead at a forest reserve in Ifira Akoko in Akoko South East local government of Ondo State.

Daily Trust gathered that a local hunter, identified as Seyi Sansere, killed Maikudi when he was grazing his cows in the forest reserve in the area.

It was not clear if the deceased had an altercation with the hunter before he was shot.

It was gathered that the state security outfit, Amotekun corps and policemen in the area quickly waded into the matter, retrieved the deceased’s corpse and deposited it at a government hospital morgue in the council area.

The security operatives also apprehended Sansere from his hideout and took him into custody.

A leader of the Hausa Fulani Community in the state, Bala Umar, who confirmed the incident said preliminary investigation revealed that the late herder was traced to the forest by his assailant where he was shot.

He, however, appealed to Fulani settlers in the area to be calm and not take laws into their hands.

He said the police and Amotekun operatives are already on top the situation and assured that justice will be done on the matter.

“The suspect has been transferred to the state police headquarters in Akure for more discreet investigations. We have appealed to our people to be calm because we know that the government and security agencies will do justice to the case” Bala said

Spokesperson of the Ondo Police Command, Tee Leo Ikoro, said he had yet to be briefed on the incident.

The state commander of Amotekun Corps, Adetunji Adeleye, said his men were not involved in the shooting of the late herder but only worked with the police to ensure there is peace in the area after the incident.

He said it was not a case of herders- farmers clash as the Sansere allegedly carried out the act while hunting in the forest.

He expressed optimism that the police will do justice to the case, assuring of the government’s readiness to protect all law abiding citizens in the state.

“It was a local hunter who shot dead the young herder. Our Operatives were not involved. We only made efforts to ensure there is peace in the community.” Adeleye said

The 24 year old Maikudi who hailed from Katsina state is a father of two kids.

He was reportedly engaged by one Alhaji Akerele, a Fulani man from Ilorin, Kwara State, to graze his cows before he met his untimely death.

His kinsmen have made entreaties to the police for the release of his remains for burial in line with Islamic rites.

Clashes between herders and farmers have led to casualties on both sides in the state over the years.

Leaders of Hausa Fulani Community, state government officials and security agencies have held several meetings with herders and farmers on the need to be accommodating and live in peace.

The Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, on Wednesday, said the Federal Executive Council did not discuss the issue of the Minister of Communication and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, during its meeting presided over by the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.).

There is currently an ongoing call for Pantami’s resignation or sacking over his past controversial comments on terrorist groups including the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

The Presidency has, however, so far remained silent on the matter.

The embattled minister participated virtually in the weekly meeting of FEC.

When asked, Mohammed said the issue was not discussed at the meeting.

He however parried a question on whether the Federal Government feels comfortable with Pantami’s continued presence in the cabinet.

“I am not going to go into the issue of whether government is comfortable or not.

“I will answer your question directly. It (Pantami’s issue) was not discussed at the council meeting.”

A support group loyal to the National Leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu has threatened to sue him if he fails to declare for 2023 presidency.

This is coming amidst speculation that the APC leader has 2023 presidential ambition.

The group known as the Disciples of Jagaba (DOJ) is a merger of 12 political and socio cultural groups working towards the actualisation of Tinubu’s presidency come 2023.

National president of the group, Comrade Abdulhakeem Adegoke Alawuje, described Tinubu as the most qualified politician to vie for the presidency.

He said if he fails to contest, a suit would be instituted to compel him to vie for the presidency.

Alawuje described Tinubu as the only trusted politician capable of building on the legacies of President Muhammadu Buhari.

Divergent views have continued to trail the action of the Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Dr Isa Pantami, to renounce his previous support for extremist groups.

On Tuesday, Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike in a TV interview joined calls for the minister to resign.

The governor noted that in an ideal society, an allegation that the United States of America has placed a serving minister on its watch list as regards to terrorism should jolt any government into action.

“If it was really where a government is working, if an American government says your minister is on a watch list, it calls for concern for you to say look there is a problem. The moment a high government official is on a watch list as to regards to terrorism, no government can fold its hands and allow it,” he said.

Governor Wike said the minister ought to have resigned from the government immediately the information about his extremist views in support of terror groups became a matter of public discourse.

“I don’t understand why a reasonable government will allow such a person to be in the cabinet,” he said.

[color=#000000]Calls for Pantami’s resignation a funded programme – CSO[/color]

Also on Tuesday, the Coalition of Civil Society for Good Governance called the rising calls against Pantami a well-funded programme by highly placed individuals to heighten insecurity in the country.

Addressing a press conference in Lagos on Tuesday, 20th April 2021, the coordinator of the Coalition, which is an amalgamation of various Civil Society organisations, Comrade Declan Ihekaire, said it is alarmed by the sustained campaign against Pantami.

The coalition described Pantami as a principled, innovative and a key member of the team of the incumbent administration of President Muhammadu Buhari.

Ihekaire said: “We dare say that Dr. Isa Pantami’s sincere admission of once holding views, which were supposedly in support of some radical groups, during his growing up years is an unusual display of sincerity, patriotism and we see this, as a welcomed step.”

[color=#000000]Investigate the allegation – CAN[/color]

Also speaking on Tuesday, the President of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Reverend Samson Ayokunle, urged relevant security agencies to investigate the allegation against the minister of communications and digital economy.

Reverend Ayokunle, who is also the President of Nigerian Baptist Convention (NBC) was responding to a question during a press conference on the 108th convention in session of the church, which will hold from April 24 to 29 at the 37,000- seater auditorium Baptist International Conference Centre, BICC along the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway.

[color=#000000]Campaign of calumny will fail – Muslim students[/color]

While reacting, the Muslim Students’ Society of Nigeria (MSSN), Gombe State Area Unit, has said that the campaign of calumny being carried out by fifth columnists and political jobbers against the minister will fail.

In a statement jointly signed by Bilyaminu Abdullahi and Auwal Yahya Adamu, Amir and Secretary of Gombe Area Unit respectively, the MSSN said the minister is not an obscure person whose background is not known.

“The desperation of those behind the lies blindfolded them to the extent that they were ready to use anything they came about in order to launch their attack against him. Unfortunately for them, the very materials they used for their venomous attack on the Hon. Minister is the very materials that cleared his name.

“His attackers were too hasty to understand and verify the content and context of the materials. They just described him as having a friendly chat with the late Muhammad Yusuf in one of the audio/video clips,” the [color=#000000]MSSN[/color] said.

flames01:
Yeah, Pantami for president of your Islamic terror organization.

Nigeria court is under the control of your fellow Islamic terrorists

That post is his Twitter handle and drums support for terrorism.

flames01:
You mean the court under the control of your fellow Islamic terrorists?

flames01:
You mean members of Islamic terrorists attack PDP for demanding sack of a member terrorist?

FarahAideed:
God go sack all of una for us soon

FarahAideed:
Zombies are not really NIGERIANS

PureMe01:
Nonsense...
"Dr Andrea Brigaglia is an IPOB member."

Above is the only opinion zombies will come up with if they don't run from this thread.
Those people brain dey inside bubu nyash
Nothing remain again

Following the publication of a Daily Independent article alleging that Minister Pantami is on a United States’ “terrorist watchlist”, the Nigerian social media started to circulate quotes of an article I had published in 2019, where I analysed some of the public speeches Pantami had given in the early-to-mid 2000s. From social media, references to that article have filtered to the national newspapers.

I remain committed to my criticism of what I see as the many problematic aspects of those speeches, but I believe that the core of my analysis is lost in the current mediatic brouhaha.

It is hard to believe that Minister Pantami is currently included in any “United States terror watchlist” as claimed by some. On the contrary, from the late 2000s onwards, Pantami has been a key actor of Nigeria’s de-radicalization programmes earlier conceived (from the early 2000s), in the context of the American “War on Terror”.

But what is the War on Terror, and why do I insist that the latter is the only meaningful context to make sense of the transformation of the content of the public speeches of Minister Pantami and other Nigerian Islamic scholars on Global Jihad; from endorsement to avoidance, to opposition?

The War on Terror is a complex structure that, by leveraging on the opportunity provided by the emergence of Al-Qaeda’s Global Jihad, aims at empowering the traditional allies of the US in the Middle East (and, by extension, Muslim communities in Africa and Asia); forcing non-aligned countries to cooperate in security partnerships coordinated by the US; and ensuring, through the securitisation of the political landscapes of the latter, US has control over their destinies.

As it is no secret that the main foe of the United States in the Middle East has been and continues to be Iran (as well as, more broadly, Russia-aligned states), the War on Terror could not but translate, amongst other things, in an empowerment of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, promoted as the leader of a US-aligned “Sunni block” aimed at checking Iranian influence worldwide. The problem, for the US, was that both the Saudi-aligned religious scholars and the Alqaeda leaders, claimed to be the genuine representatives of the same religious trend within Islam, that is, Salafism. The Saudi War on Terror strategy, therefore, translated into a mission to “purge” global Salafi constituencies from anti-American and pro-Alqaeda sentiments.

Most Nigerian scholars chose the Saudi-aligned camp to the Jihadi-aligned camp, and Pantami is definitely one of them. Embracing the Saudi version of the War on Terror discourse, however, has come at a huge cost. Not only, in fact, it has exposed them to the wrath of their Jihadi opponents (as we all know, Minister Pantami himself has been the object of direct death threats by Shekau). The problem was also that such Saudi discourse was based on an ultra-monarchic political theology that labeled as “terrorist” any Islamic group that deviates from the principle of absolute obedience to the King. It openly branded as haram, in plain fatwas signed by scholarsBin Baz and al-Fawzaan, things like constitutionalism, elections, democracy. Mainstream Islamic political parties that, like the Muslim Brothers of Egypt, agitated for a constitutional Islamic Republic, were thus labelled as outright kuffar (unbelievers) and treated as equivalents of Alqaeda. Independent-minded Salafi scholars of Saudi Arabia like Salman al-Ouda, who did not side with Alqaeda but also refused to express uncritical support for the Kingdom, were victimised too: today, al-Ouda is in jail, branded as a “terrorist”, with a death sentence pending on him.

As odiously repressive as it was, the political theology promoted by the Salafi leaders loyal to the Kingdom could, to some extent, guarantee stability in the context of an absolute monarchy like Saudi Arabia. But once it was exported into a constitutional democracy like Nigeria, it became a recipe for chaos. In Nigeria, the fatwas of Bin Baz and Fawzaan against democracy and constitution empowered Yusuf, and disempowered people like Pantami who argued against him.

By imposing the false premise that there is no alternative to the binary option of fanatical Jihadism vs uncritical subservience to the United States’ agenda, the War on Terror discourse has closed any space for a critical, counter-hegemonic, democratic and non-Jihadi Muslim discourse to emerge.

The Suwaye Taliban speech was delivered by Pantami in 2006. At that time, Saudi Arabia was being lacerated by an internecine, intra-Salafi war between Alqaeda-aligned groups (which in 2003, had started a campaign of bombings inside Saudi Arabia); the Saudi-aligned scholars (which approved the Saudi alliance to the US and the repression of dissenting voices); and independent-minded scholars like Salman al-Ouda, who did not align with the Jihadis but were targeted by the Saudi state in the name of the latter’s “War on Terror”. This conflict entirely disappears from Pantami’s Suwaye Taliban speech. By generously distributing his praises, at the same time, to the Saudi Kingdom, to Alqaeda, and to al-Ouda, Pantami was selling the fairy tale of a perfect Salafi utopia made of united ranks of “upholders of the Sunna” engaged in a sincere confrontation with the unbelievers.

Pantami is no “terrorist monster”. He is a man who, in 2006, was trapped in the volatile world of the global Salafi da‘wa in the twenty-first century.

Those who would like to see him stoned today, should honestly ponder: are they so sure that the closets of the Christian preachers of Zonkwa or Yelwa Shendam are cleaner than his?

Those who, on the contrary, label any attempt to scrutinise his speeches as a conspiracy to “crucify” him, should remember how they were cheering when El-Zakzaky was victimised as the “terrorist”, the coach of Muhammad Yusuf on Boko Haram, the epitome of all evil. Was theirs not “War on Terror witchhunt 101”?

No good come from witch hunts, whether addressed at Zakzaky or Pantami. My article was concluded by the following call, which I would like to make once again:

“Nigerian Muslims will continue to create their future by negotiating between utopias and lived realities, and both Salafis and Shiites can play a positive role in this process. For this to happen, three steps seem to be necessary: (1) the Nigerian government should strive to relate to both Iran and Saudi Arabia (as well as Russia and the US) with cautious cordiality, carefully avoiding being turned into a new playground for Middle Eastern geopolitics and sectarian wars; (2) Zakzaky should be released and undergo a fair trial, while the IMN should be reintegrated into the wider Muslim community and allowed to contribute to the national debate (being also freely criticised by other Muslims when necessary); (3) the mainstream Nigerian Salafi leadership should undertake an honest process of clarification to its own public, of the tumultuous ideological shift of which it has been the theatre over the last two decades.”

When I wrote the above lines, I was sceptical that anything like this was bound to happen anytime soon. I hope the time will be ripe one day.

slachtoffers:
Read una no gree see as you dey disgrace una village people

So a strident section of the nation is incensed that a terror-sympathiser has made it not once but twice into the cabinet of General Muhammadu Buhari. Once in government against his strongest of views and wishes, Mr Isa Ali Pantami was given positions that allow him to take charge of the development and the deployment of technology in the 21st century.

That means that given his strong religious views, he currently has unfettered access to information that could have been used to advance the insurgency if he so desired. On top of that, he still has access to all our telecommunication data, from banking and other financial information to our physical and biometric data. Some would jump and shout—no wonder Nigeria has made no headway in its so-called fight against terror or reduce fraud and redeem national integrity. But those are the smallest of our concerns as a nation.

We are thankful that our president, against the best wishes of woke hecklers and their paid antagonists, returned in peace and restored health. For his mental health, the president would be shielded from reports of the harvests of death that is the hallmark of his regime either from insecurity or as harvests of a dilapidated health care system. Either way, Buhari, it bears reminding, does not give a damn! People with integrity resign but Buhari sacks no one. It is obvious that Pantami would not contemplate resignation, so sheathe your swords, you social media warriors. Get ready for the launching of a book in honour of Pantami. A post awaits the author.

It is evident that Nigeria and Nigerians have forgotten that they lost their rights to be governed conscientiously. Nigerians who vote on region and religion over values and national interest should not expect to have leaders blind to ethno-religious or nepotistic leaning. Those who conspired to rig elections from party primaries to the general polls have lost their rights to demand the fruits of democracy. These include beneficiaries of stomach infrastructure and their offspring.

A party that charges more than the maximum wage as nomination fee has lost its rights to demand efficiency or bark at a winner’s corruption and crooked tendencies. An electorate that supports men and women of questionable character as their representatives after collecting money, rice and condiments have lost their rights to recall or direct them to work in the public interest. You can’t eat your cake and still have it.

Now that we have laid the foundation for how a character like Pantami rose to the position of minister of the federal republic without first recanting his extremist views, let us equally remember that having laid the foundation for our own misfortunes, we should not expect anything good to come out of it. You can’t build a straight structure out of a faulty foundation.

We have had cause in the past to question what exactly our security agencies do when they do embark on their so-called security clearance. We have concluded that they do nothing, except perhaps take their share of the sleaze cake and close their eyes. In spite of our so-called security clearance, we have elected crooks as governors, thieves as local government chairmen, and scam artists as representatives and ministers.

What became of those who asked Nasir el-Rufai huge sums of money to clear him as a minister? Or the bribe money Obasanjo dropped for Ghali Na’Abba? What has happened to Abdullahi Umar Ganduje after video evidence emerged of him stuffing the people’s money into his private pockets other than being re-presented as a candidate and winning elections by a landslide victory? Bode George is still a patron of some political parties and Femi Fani Kayode’s sins have been forgiven since he returned to the nest of vipers he once swore never to go near. Oshiomole’s promise fulfilled.

We could pretend all we want, but it was not lost on us when a senator of the federal republic and retired AIG expressed shock that the criminals he once indicted had found their way into law-making chambers with him. We have observed like suspects hiding behind one finger as an ex-governor was extradited from Dubai to serve a prison term in England. He returned home a hero.

We are witnessing the strident campaign for the release of Joshua Dariye, a convicted felon on compassionate grounds as protesters languish in jail. While it is common knowledge that Nigeria is the sleaze headquarters of Africa, we are the generation that demands compassion for the Barrabases among us while demanding the crucifixion of our saints.

If we run a democracy, there is enough not just to call for Pantami’s resignation but the resignation of this misanthropic regime. But if you start such a hashtag in the morning and survive indefinite detention or police brutality, a million supporters would emerge before noon with placards supporting the status quo on regional and religious grounds. If these people represented the best among us, we would have demanded that the Senate and security agencies that cleared Pantami be disbanded. Unfortunately, we have sold our rights for a mesh of tuwo, bread and even gari and peanuts.

Indeed as some intensify their calls for Pantami’s resignation, there were those asking him to run for President. On his own part, Pantami has blamed his al-Qaeda and Boko Haram sympathy on youthful exuberance even though some of his controversial comments were made in 2007 when officially he was 35. In Nigerian politics, 65-year-olds have been elected as youth leaders.

We should thank the heavens that Pantami in his own words has matured in disposition to accept a position in government. The unreformed Pantami would not have touched governance with the longest spoon. Today, he suckles on the nectar of officialdom.

These, dear citizens are indeed the essence of maturity. When indeed Pantami decides to run for president may it be well with Nigeria!

For now, let us welcome back Imperial Majesty, Muhammadu Buhari, from his well-deserved medical leave and expect to hear nothing about this storm in a teacup. Let us with gladsome minds thank Malam Danladi Umar of the Code of Conduct Tribunal who went to a mall in his private capacity and displayed indecorous and uncivilised conduct. He earned himself an unenviable mention in the book of official infamy at our expense.

Let us also remember Adejare Bello, Nigeria’s Ambassador-designate to Mexico who allegedly booked a mention in that book when he slapped Adeniyi Akinromade, a journalist he accused of driving one way. The journalist said he was only being a good citizen who tried to clear a traffic logjam when he was assaulted for not giving His Slapping Excellency preferential passage. With such a man as our envoy in Mexico, banditos have nothing on our citizens. There’ll be no qualms for any Nigerian who gets a whack for not prostrating for his Excellency at the embassy. Bello the assaulter of journalists is in good league with the failed Generals who have been rewarded with ambassadorial positions after clearing senate screenings. Nothing do you Pantami!

helinues:
We are actually enjoying their wailing as it dey sweet our belle...

The Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Dr Isa Pantami, has charged the National Information Technology Development Agency, NITDA, to build on efforts to advance the IT sector of the country.

The minister made the call at a news conference organised by the agency to celebrate its20th anniversary achievements in Abuja.

The theme of the anniversary is “Growth and Resilience’’, while activities to celebrate the anniversary will last until April 30.

Mr Pantami recounted that NITDA from inception, especially from 2016 to date, activated its IT project clearance function, engaged in diverse capacity building and established the Nigeria Data Protection Regulation, among other achievements.

“NITDA has done well in IT project clearance, the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari is more about fighting corruption and this is one of the strategic areas that has fought corruption in Federal Public Institutions.

“IT project clearance by NITDA has saved the FG over two billion Naira and the agency has been consistent with that and exercised high level of integrity in IT project clearance.

“Nigeria Data Protection Regulation, established in January 2019, which ensures data protection and the first of its kind in Africa is another area where NITDA deserves commendation.

“I encourage NITDA to redouble the efforts because the reward of hard work is more work.

“FG has appreciated the efforts of NITDA by recently approving its Conditions of Service and the Career structure,’’ Pantami said.

He recalled that in April 2012, Mr Steve Oronsaye, former Head of Service’s report on some government agencies recommended the scrapping of NITDA and transfer of its responsibilities to other government agencies.

According to the minister, we are no longer discussing that, but we are looking at more responsibilities to be added to the agency and this is a significant change.

He commended the efforts of previous Directors-General (D-Gs) of the agency, adding that the present leadership was building on their legacies.

Pantami prayed that the ICT sector would continue to advance for a better national economic growth.

The D-G of NITDA, Kasifu Inuwa, said that the agency had substantially actualised the National IT Policy goal to digitise the country.

Mr Inuwa also said that the agency was participating in implementing the National Digital Economy Policy and Strategy launched by President Buhari in 2019.

He said that the idea was to facilitate the diversification of the country’s economy and position Nigeria to tap from the $11.5 trillion global digital economy worth.

He recounted that the agency had contributed in improving the IT sector, creation of jobs, igniting innovative activities in the IT ecosystem and aligning the country with emerging technologies.

“The achievements of the agency include huge ICT contribution to Gross Domestic Product from less than 0.5 per cent in 2001 to more than 14 per cent in 2020.

“From inception to date, the agency has deployed over 1,560 ICT centres across the country, with minimum of two centres in each of the 774 Local Government Areas.’’

He also said that from 2017 to date, lots of regulations were put in place to advance the IT sector, which included the NDPR, Rule-Making Process Regulation, among others.

Mr Inuwa added that the agency, as part of activities to celebrate its 20th anniversary, would unveil a new strategy to advance the IT ecosystem.

“The new strategy roadmap has seven pillars; it will focus more on creating enabling environment for our country and also to help position Nigeria to tap into the fourth Industrial Revolution.

“Today, we celebrate what we have accomplished in 20 years, but next week, we will unveil our new strategy to raise the bar a little higher to help us do more before our silver jubilee anniversary.’’

Festus Dauda, the Permanent Secretary of the ministry, in his vote of thanks, called on the media to project good reports about the country.

According to Mr Dauda, negative news discourages investors and limit development.

Highlights of the event included unveiling of NITDA at 20 anniversary logo by Pantami.

saaron:
TOTAL DISINTEGRATION OF NIGERIA is the only solution against terrorist sponsors and their sympathizers.
Patami is just one of the numerous islamist extremists domicile in North west and North east. That's why boko haram will continue to flourish in the region.

From the responses to my Saturday column www.nairaland.com/attachments/13285746_exlink_png92027429acb891ea5f514add5d4a21c3, you can almost accurately tell the motivation that drives the responders. Regular, everyday people with no loyalties to any religious ideology have a different response from thin-skinned, unthinking, “touch-not-my-anointed” Salafist and Pentecostal religious partisans.

The Salafists are angry that I put their ideology under a microscope. They said I poured fuel to the fire of Pantami’s troubles, said I am a “fake friend,” and have been cursing me. The Pentecostal partisans, particularly of the RCCG crowd, are ticked off that I mentioned Yemi Osinbajo’s name in the column even though I made it clear that while he has been accused of RCCG bigotry with solid evidence, to his credit, he hasn’t been associated with extremist and exclusivist religious rhetoric in his past homilies.

It's my choice whom I chose to reference in my own column. Don’t like it? Tough luck.

This reminds me of a report I did about Katsina in either 1999 or 2000 for the Weekly Trust titled “Katsina: Transparency Without Development” when the late Umar Yar’adua was governor of the state. All the people at the extreme ends of the partisan divide were livid. They called and sent copious mails to complain and harangue.

I was initially worried, but my editor-in-chief invited me to his office and said something along the lines of, “Look, Farooq, you’ve managed to equally piss off people at the extreme ends of a mutually opposed political divide. That’s evidence you’ve done a damn good job!”

The Christian partisans ignore my condemnation of my friend’s rhetoric and are hung up on what I said about their “anointed”— and the fact that I didn’t ask my friend to “resign” (as if anyone resigns in Nigeria for anything unless they’re British-born Kemi Adeosun).

Salafist partisans ignored my saying that Pantami has a side to him that is not publicly known but that departs from his past fiery rhetoric— and that some facts of his life after those preachments point to a more tolerant ideational evolution. (He himself said so yesterday after my column.) They instead chose to fixate on my condemnation of his rhetoric and my affirmation of the views of people who called him out.

Regular people, of course, see a sincere attempt to X-ray and condemn a friend’s indefensible past utterances, offer another perspective about him, and suggest a way out for him. Most of these extremists who want me to mirror their thoughts (as if they pay me to write for them) don’t have the courage to question their own assumptions, their friends, their priests, and their primordial allegiances. In their childlike hauteur, they even suggest that I shouldn’t have written my column if I won’t validate their emotions. Ha!

Evolutionary biologists say humans didn’t evolve to be a thinking species (and that the burden of thinking is often invested in a minority of people), but the simplemindedness— and sense of entitlement to own my mind and to mold my opinions in other people’s self-interested images— by a vast horde of people is both insufferable and entertaining, if that's possible.

After all is said and done, the truth is that while my thoughts may be expressed in public, they are not public property. They are mine and mine alone. I express thoughts that I’m convinced about, not to court anybody’s validation or admiration. You don’t like my opinions? Write yours. Better yet, don’t read them. It’s that simple.

360degreess:
.. Exactly my thought.Sometimes if God wants to push someone to the top He uses his enemies and antagonists to bring that person to limelight.
Some years ago,PDP used all kinds of allegations against Buhari, they said he has links with Alkaeda, that he wanted to islamise Nigeria.etc..But that only made him popular and he later became president..

nairalandankrah:
who cares? Mtchewww..They just wan rewind our brain.. OGA resign and go and fulfil your jihadist calling..