Wages of Impunity, by Wole Soyinka
The dancing obscenity of Shekau and his gang of psychopaths
and child abductors, taunting the world, mocking the BRING BACK OUR GIRLS
campaign on internet, finally met its match in Nigeria to inaugurate the week
of September 11 – most appropriately. Shekau’s danse macabre was surpassed by
the unfurling of a political campaign banner that defiled an entry point into
Nigeria’s capital of Abuja. That banner read: BRING BACK JONATHAN 2015.
It affirmed the
acceptance, even domination of lurid practices where children are often victims
of unconscionable abuses including ritual sacrifices, sexual enslavement, and
worse. Spurred by electoral desperation, a bunch of self-seeking morons and
sycophants chose to plumb the abyss of self-degradation and drag the nation
down to their level. It took us to a hitherto unprecedented low in ethical
degeneration.
The bets were placed
on whose turn would it be to take the next potshots at innocent youths in
captivity whose society and governance have failed them and blighted their
existence? Would the Chibok girls now provide standup comic material for the
latest staple of Nigerian escapist diet? Would we now move to a new export
commodity in the entertainment industry named perhaps “Taunt the Victims”?
As if to confirm
all the such surmises, an ex-governor, Sheriff, notorious throughout the nation
– including within security circles as affirmed in their formal dossiers – as
prime suspect in the sponsorship league of the scourge named Boko Haram, was
presented to the world as a presidential traveling companion. And the
speculation became: was the culture of impunity finally receiving endorsement
as a governance yardstick?
Again, Goodluck
Jonathan swung into a plausible explanation: it was Mr. Sheriff who, as friend
of the host President Idris Deby, had traveled ahead to Chad to receive
Jonathan as part of President Deby’s welcome entourage. What, however does this
say of any president? How come it that a suspected affiliate of a deadly
criminal gang, publicly under such ominous cloud, had the confidence to smuggle
himself into the welcoming committee of another nation, and even appear in
audience, to all appearance a co-host with the president of that nation?
Where does the
confidence arise in him that Jonathan would not snub him openly or, after the
initial shock, pull his counterpart, his official host aside and say to him,
“Listen, it’s him, or me.”? So impunity now transcends boundaries, no matter
how heinous the alleged offence?
The Nigerian
president however appeared totally at ease. What the nation witnessed in the
photo-op was an affirmation of a governance principle, the revelation of a
decided frame of mind – with precedents galore. Goodluck Jonathan has brought
back into limelight more political reprobates – thus attested in criminal
courts of law and/or police investigations – than any other Head of State since
the nation’s independence. It has become a reflex.
Those who stuck up
the obscene banner in Abuja had accurately read Jonathan right as a Bring-back
president. They have deduced perhaps that he sees “bringing back” as a virtue,
even an ideology, as the corner stone of governance, irrespective of what is
being brought back. No one quarrels about bringing back whatever the nation
once had and now sorely needs – for instance, electricity and other elusive
items like security, the rule of law etc. etc. The list is interminable. The
nature of what is being brought back is thus what raises the disquieting
questions. It is time to ask the question: if Ebola were to be eradicated
tomorrow, would this government attempt to bring it back?
Well, while
awaiting the Chibok girls, and in that very connection, there is at least an
individual whom the nation needs to bring back, and urgently. His name is
Stephen Davis, the erstwhile negotiator in the oft aborted efforts to actually
bring back the girls. Nigeria needs him back – no, not back to the physical
nation space itself, but to a Nigerian induced forum, convoked anywhere that
will guarantee his safety and can bring others to join him. I know Stephen
Davis, I worked in the background with him during efforts to resolve the
insurrection in the Delta region under President Umaru Yar’Adua. I have not
been involved in his recent labours for a number of reasons.
The most basic is
that my threshold for confronting evil across a table is not as high as his -
thanks, perhaps, to his priestly calling. From the very outset, in several
lectures and other public statements, I have advocated one response and one
response only to the earliest, still putative depredations of Boko Haram and
have decried any proceeding that smacked of appeasement. There was a time to
act – several times when firm, decisive action, was indicated. There are
certain steps which, when taken, place an aggressor beyond the pale of
humanity, when we must learn to accept that not all who walk on two legs belong
to the community of humans – I view Boko Haram in that light.It is no comfort
to watch events demonstrate again and again that one is proved to be right.
Thus, it would be
inaccurate to say that I have been detached from the Boko Haram affliction –
very much the contrary. As I revealed in earlier statements, I have interacted
with the late National Security Adviser, General Azazi, on occasion – among
others. I am therefore compelled to warn that anything that Stephen Davis
claims to have uncovered cannot be dismissed out of hand.
It cannot be wished
away by foul-mouthed abuse and cheap attempts to impugn his integrity – that is
an absolute waste of time and effort. Of the complicity of ex-Governor Sheriff
in the parturition of Boko Haram, I have no doubt whatsoever, and I believe
that the evidence is overwhelming. Femi Falana can safely assume that he has my
full backing – and that of a number of civic organizations – if he is compelled
to go ahead and invoke the legal recourses available to him to force Sheriff’s
prosecution. The evidence in possession of Security Agencies – plus a number of
diplomats in Nigeria – is overwhelming, and all that is left is to let the man
face criminal persecution. It is certain he will also take many others down
with him.
Regarding General
Ihejirika, I have my own theories regarding how he may have come under Stephen
Davis’ searchlight in the first place, ending up on his list of the inculpated.
All I shall propose at this stage is that an international panel be set up to
examine all allegations, irrespective of status or office of any accused. The
unleashing of a viperous cult like Boko Haram on peaceful citizens qualifies as
a crime against humanity, and deserves that very dimension in its resolution.
If a people must survive, the reign of impunity must end. Truth – in all
available detail – is in the interest, not only of Nigeria, the sub-region and
the continent, but of the international community whose aid we so belatedly
moved to seek.
From very early
beginnings, we warned against the mouthing of empty pride to stem a tide that
was assuredly moving to inundate the nation but were dismissed as alarmists. We
warned that the nation had moved into a state of war, and that its people must
be mobilized accordingly – the warnings were disregarded, even as slaughter
surmounted slaughter, entire communities wiped out, and the battle began to strike
into the very heart of governance, but all we obtained in return was moaning,
whining and hand-wringing up and down the rungs of leadership and governance.
But enough of recriminations – at least for now. Later, there must be full
accounting.
Finally, Stephen
Davis also mentions a Boko Haram financier within the Nigerian Central Bank.
Independently we are able to give backing to that claim, even to the extent of
naming the individual. In the process of our enquiries, we solicited the help
of a foreign embassy whose government, we learnt, was actually on the same
trail, thanks to its independent investigation into some money laundering that
involved the Central Bank. That name, we confidently learnt, has also been
passed on to President Jonathan. When he is ready to abandon his accommodating
policy towards the implicated, even the criminalized, an attitude that owes so
much to re-election desperation, when he moves from a passive “letting the law
to take its course” to galvanizing the law to take its course, we shall gladly
supply that name.
In the meantime
however, as we twiddle our thumbs, wondering when and how this nightmare will
end, and time rapidly runs out, I have only one admonition for the man to whom
so much has been given, but who is now caught in the depressing spiral of
diminishing returns: “Bring Back Our Honour.”
No comments:
Post a Comment