₦airaland Forum

BluntBoy:
First of all, did Saraki even become Senate President through due process?

And, how has Saraki protected the sanctity and individualism of the Senate from the Executive (whatever that means)

We all know how corrupt every Senate has been and always romanced with the Executives as long as bags of money are shared (OBJ comes to mind). The police and the military have always been compromised even by mere individuals (including non-elected citizens like Patience who used a Commissioner of Police to harass a sitting governor in Rivers state).

I ask again, what democracy are they protecting? What sanctity of the Senate are they protecting? Is the Senate ever sane in Nigeria?

This is purely Nigerian politics. A game of interest. No one cares about democracy.

madridsta007:
It’s quite easy to see if you put your emotions asides— which is quite difficult for most Nigerians; admittedly. Especially as I gave you the example of Obj and this 3rd term agenda.

As long as democracy is saved, whoever is the actor is relevant.

Metuh:
Saraki is the new deal a.k.a ORORO 1 of Nigeria.


He is the stubborn fly on Buhari's old wrinkled scrotum.



He is more intelligent than the whole of the cabals.


He will surely become the president of this country someday.

alphaconde:
wetin consign me na dem spoil the country

BluntBoy:
And I asked which democracy is being saved here?

Buhari is not going for an illegal third term. So, which democracy is being saved?

madridsta007:
You seem to have a naive understanding of democracy and the structures that keeps it in place so it will be hard engaging you until you understand the basics.

socialmediaman:
My brother it is good if we can sit back for a second and remind ourselves where we came from. In 2015, most of us removed Goodluck Jonathan and elected the current Tyrant we have in office. He came with a new hope, he promised only one term but trust Nigerians, if he achieved anything we would want another tenure. But what happened? He became one of the biggest scams in modern Nigerian history. So it means all these years he has been running for office, since 2003 precisely, he had nothing serious to offer? Democracy had started growing before he came to office, opposition was becoming stronger and we had a president who would not lock you up for criticizing him.... till the Tyrant came to office. We have been calling for restructuring, GEJ hurriedly implemented the confab because he was beginning to realize the strength of opposition and realized poor leadership would get you out of office, that right there my friend is what democracy is about.

Look whats happening with the herdsmen. Its very shameful and outright despicable that we have a president who condones such evil openly. The tyrant in office has been very divisive since he entered office.

It is no longer the will of Nigerians that he should continue in office, why is he trying to force himself on Nigerians? Is Nigeria for him alone? If left unchecked, this man will continue to deal more blow to a very young democracy and it should not be condoned. These politicians are fighting for themselves but so are Nigerians. It is better for you to live in a country where a president can come to terms based on the strength of opposition, than to live in one where Dictatorship is the order of the day.

I know this is not the end of suffering in Nigeria, but its gradual, we have not made any progress since the tyrant came to office and it is high time we moved forward without him, he can now keep his change, we do not want it anymore. We need to get power out from him before we can discuss better options like younger people. Unless we do this, sorry nothing much can happen as long as he is the president

Tolexander:
Hail Saraki
Blame Saraki

All I know is they don't really care about us.
They aint protecting our democracy but their own interests.

BluntBoy:
The very structure you just mentioned is the reason why we will never move forward as a country. The structure of our democracy is faulty. If you think there is true democracy (one worth defending), then you are terribly naive. Even the constitution of our dear country is a military creation.

Since many of you have short memories, I may have to remind you of the case of a certain headmistress named Maryleen Ezichi who was demoted for asking that a backlog of salaries be paid by a defaulting Abia state government. Her oppressor(s) demoted her. And that is what you call a democracy. One of the qualities of democracy is "the people's power". But in Nigeria, you cannot even ask that a defaulting government pay your salaries without risking demotion and further embarrassments

madridsta007:
Chinua Achebe was once asked— and the interview is on YouTube— about why he thinks there were problems for virtually all new republics in postcolonial, post-independence Africa. His reply was apt; “colonialism was a totalitarian system of government. When we won independence and people got into power, they were largely confused as democracy was not taught in schools. We don’t know what it meant to be democratic and we had to learn it. These things take time...”

Or something close to that.

Current structure is faulty, yes, but these things take time. As long as you have a government which is run by a former despot, then the time to be fully democratic will be slower. However, it doesn’t mean that the structures that support democracy should be treated with emotions because we don’t like those there or because we are emotional about their salaries. It’s important that pragmatism and logic takes over emotions. The National Assembly isn’t a perfect institution but one thing it should never loose, if any nation is serious about democracy, is its independence. Same with the Judiciary.

Unless we are not serious about democracy.

BluntBoy:
I wonder what makes you think the independence of the Senate and judiciary is being threatened by the Executives. Every criminal case made by the executive has always ended up in court (judiciary). The legislators have been convening when they decide and not when the executives decides. So, I don't see what independence is being threatened here. If you talk about influencing Senate and judiciary  decisions, well, everyone does it. That is not solely the fault of the executive. The country is overly corrupt. The Senate itself will do your bidding if you can share bags of money around. Like someone said once, the Senate is a business enterprise.

I wonder also why you continue to see sentiments in my own post when in actual fact, you are the one being sentimental. Nigeria's problem is evidently structural and has nothing to do with a former despot governing her.

Do you want me to make a list of gross human rights abuses that happened under GEJ (some people's hero of democracy)?

If Saraki had so much concern for democracy, would he have disobeyed the leadership of his party all so he could become Senate President? If he cannot accept Party's internal democracy, how does he want to have respect for national democracy? Someone like this will sell Kwara State to become President. And it is not just him. The average Nigerian politician will do anything to get power, even if it means killing his opponent.

Again, I may have to remind you that the APC had had internal problems since 2015. And it had happened over election of principal NASS officers. Saraki fooled his party leadership and joined forces with PDP to see him emerge as Senate President. Dino Melaye, as you must know, had always been behind Saraki. Lawani who was APC's choice for Senate President began to oppose Saraki from then on. Even the Buhari you accuse of being a despot remained aloof even when it was evident that he was disrespected and fooled because a man was so eager to become Senate President that he was ready to do anything. So, never you think this problem is recent and that it is happening because Saraki wants to protect our democracy. It had been there even before he became Senate President and Dino has always been his boy.

As for what Achebe said, it is very debatable. It was this same Achebe that claimed that Nigeria's problem is leadership when there are enormous evidence that it is beyond leadership. I respect Achebe, but I don't take him seriously when it comes to politics, especially, Nigerian politics.

madridsta007:
Now, I do not care much about GEJ— or the rose-tinted, misleading and reductionist duality of a past President in GEJ and Buhari comparisons— so please do not drag this discourse down that line. Else I will wish you a good day and take off. I’m sure you appreciate how grossly misleading that duality is— Nigeria didn’t just start in 2010 or who when GEJ’s government started!

Your views on Achebe are noted. Of course you have the right to interrogate his understanding and views on politics. Perhaps, the many— not just Nigerians, but Africans and people all over the world— who sought his views on politics precolonial and postcolonial Africa, were foolish. I do not know. While his summation of Nigeria’s problem as a problem of leadership can and should be contested, it must be appreciated, the thoughts that had led to that conclusion. Perhaps he had seen what intellectual and a pan-country leadership had done to Ghana in Nkrumah, Britian in Churchill, America in Lincoln, Mandela in South Africa, Lumumba in DR Congo... Perhaps. Perhaps he saw, as it is clear, that it is much easier getting one man to drive development than to get 180 million people to reach a consensus and drive development. Viewing a country’s development through that prism, it’s understandable Achebe’s conclusions.

However, let us not get distracted from the matter at hand. On that, I think I’ve said what I need to say. That, putting emotions aside, it is important that key arms of a democratic government needs to stand and exists as independent, if a country is serious about democracy. Unless the country isn’t serious, then I would understand why there will be excitement and happiness when the legislative arm is hounded by instruments of the State. I would understand because Nigerians, sadly, do not have the reputation of being serious.

To me, it is not about Saraki. Saraki is just a figure in the Senate. He can go tomorrow. That is why I have refrained from using his name or referring to names. It is about an institution and the independence of that institution. We have institutions in the country and cringe when they want to perform their function. Saraki was invited to the police station. If he refuses to show up, then the police can appear. Not before or within the timeframe he was given to show up. Same with it matters are left to the courts— they should be dealt with by the court.

Once again, I do not care about individuals. We should scrap all the institutions in the country so that we stop the mass pretence. Since we don’t seem to want them to function.

BluntBoy:
You do not care about individuals yet you remembered to mention Buhari as a former despot to buttress which point exactly? Of course, your point is that our democracy will be slow because a former despot is in power. You have turned Saraki into a victim and Buhari into a demon. And yet still daring to claim that you don't care about individuals.

That I don't take Achebe seriously on matters of Nigerian politics does not mean I won't throw such questions at him if I were a journalist. Those who sought his views were only doing their jobs. I have never seen papers made on the views of Achebe. If they were powerful views, they would be among the views of such political writers of Bernard Shaw's stature. Yet, Achebe is still known only for his fiction.

madridsta007:
I do not care about individuals. Remembering Buhari as a former despot is simple fact. Stating Buhari is currently President, is fact. Remembering Saraki as someone who has a current Police case is simple fact. Stating Saraki as current Senate President is fact. I’m sure you appreciate facts. Like I said, don’t get too entangled with emotions. Institutions should take precedent over individuals as they outlive individuals. Hence the focus, in my view, should be safeguarding the institution over the individual. That is what serious nations do. That is why Amber Rudd had to leave as the Home Secretary of the Home Office in the U.K during the Windrush crisis. Institutions first. Serious Nations do not sacrifice institutions regardless of the niceness or otherwise of the key individual in it.

Your (rather limited) views on Achebe are noted.

BluntBoy:
You are shouting emotions when you are the one showing it. I asked a simple question which you refused to answer. How is the independence of the Senate threatened by the ordeal of Saraki? If you were not emotional, you would answer. But all you have done is accuse me of being emotional and yet refusing to provide answers to such a simple question. I have provided instances to buttress my point that the Senate is still independent and that it is the Senate itself that is stooping and threatening its own independence for bags of money.

I do not claim to have unlimited views on Achebe, especially with regards to much of his personal life. I only talked about his political views, many of which are pedestrian, in my opinion. I read his essay "The Problem With Nigeria" as way back as 2003/04 and even as a teenager, I knew there was a lot wrong with his views, especially the opening sentence. In all the courses I have taken on politics, I have not seen a material cite Achebe. The fact that he was a successful novelist does not mean he would automatically become a successful political analyst or that it is sacrilegious to oppose his political views.