Plateau Mayhem: Was CAN Chairman Wrong?

Abdulrahman Muhammad Dan-Asabe, Ph.D.

Ningbo, P. R. China

I have now regained myself and able to add my voice to that of many-concerned Nigerians on the issue of the senseless killings that took place in Yelwa-Shendam of Plateau State; and as a result of which some form of reprisal actions occurred in Kano. I need not waste efforts and time recounting what happened, suffice it to say that it was another sad, very sad indeed, event in the history of Nigeria.

The central issue I would like to address here, however, was the much-publicized face-off between the Plateau State chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Rev. Yakubu Pam and President Obasanjo over his (Yakubu Pam) utterances on the crisis in the state.

Rev. Yakubu Pam was quoted by the Daily Trust of Friday, May 14, 2004 as having “accused the president of bias,” and that the President “did not do anything when Christians were killed but decided to visit the state when Muslims were the victims.” Embarrassed by this unexpected confrontation, the President, once again, lost his cool and balance and was reported to have, there and then, retorted as “Mr. chairman of CAN, you are talking absolutely nonsense and don’t provoke me. When I invited people to Abuja in April, do you think I invited them for a picnic? You are talking rubbish and I will not accept that." (All emphases mine). The President was also said to have used even more disgusting foul language not befitting of a president. He was, for example, quoted as having referred to the CAN chairman as an “idiot”(Ibid).

I have searched, without success, to find where the CAN chairman went wrong in his questioning of Mr. President’s visit then and not before. Was Rev. Yakubu Pam really talking nonsense or rubbish as claimed by Mr. President? Was he? The reader should put aside the issue of who is wrong or right in the killings and think carefully for a moment about what the CAN chairman’s statement really meant. Was he not simply telling Mr. President to take immediate and decisive action with any crisis at its genesis to guarantee it will never happen again, and that any thing other than that will amount to nonsense and rubbish? How could anybody fault this?

As a war veteran, is Mr. President not in the best position to know that our civil war was brought about by the reprisal actions of a section of the country that felt cheated by another section and their perceived helplessness or unwillingness by the authorities concerned to decisively address the injustice(s) to them? If only the then government nipped in the bud the crisis that led to the civil war, would the country have witnessed the colossal lost of innocent lives, properties, time and be in the state of backwardness that we are in today? The state of emergency declared in Plateau State would have been totally unnecessary and avoidable had prompt actions taken before now and the crisis nipped in the bud, as urged by the priest.

Indeed, Nigerians - Christians and Muslims - should be grateful to Rev. Yakubu Pam for his courage in speaking the truth. There is a serious lesson to be learned from the above reported face-off with Mr. President and, in fact, the solution for taming further ethno-religious crisis in Nigeria lies in the recognition and acknowledgement of that lesson and the truism therein. I for one have not seen any sense in all other utterances made so far on the Plateau killings other than that by the CAN chairman.

There are those who will argue that as the head of the country, the President deserves the highest respect and politeness from his followers and should have been spared the public embarrassment. True. But again, what happened between the President and the CAN chairman was enabled by the ‘system’ decay in the country. There is nothing that is functioning correctly in the country. The priest knew that there would be no serious judicial or Senate committee of inquiry to quiz the President (or anybody) on why decisive action was not taken on the Plateau crisis till now, after almost three years of continuous killings. He knew too, just like every other person, that taking the case to court is also useless. He is actually left with no other opportunity to voice out the grievances of his followers where it will have maximum effect but that moment. It is all the fault of our “leaders” who have watched unperturbed, the gradual bastardization of the very checks and balances that are supposed to help them and ease their task of running the country. In most cases, it is these same “leaders” themselves that are the chief architects of the ‘system’ bastardization, unfortunately.

Anyway, the priest’s public and direct accusation of the President himself has, no doubt, helped in forcing the government to take its latest action on Plateaus State. It would be difficult, however, for this government to do what it ought to do in this particular case, i.e. to bring to book all those involved in the Plateau crisis in addition to the declared state of emergency. The government may fear the ripple effects of the real and/or perceived injustices that thorough and total actions would create. The declared state of emergency has already been condemned and seen as biased in some quarters.

The only way this government can be seen as demonstrating fairness and seriousness in taming further crises in the country is to investigate all the crises since 1999 when the present government took over the leadership of the country.

In the meantime, however, there should be an immediate legislation stating, in unequivocal terms, the consequences to any individual or groups of individuals found in any further disturbances in which the peace and tranquility of a particular section of the country is disturbed. Most importantly, victims of such disturbances should be assured and restrained from taking reprisal actions by government through the inclusion in the proposed law, among other things, the following:

(1) A standard investigation producers that must be followed in any and all disturbances in the country;

(2) A specified number of days – not exceeding one month – for the Government to compulsorily publish its investigation findings;

(3) The immediate implementation of all recommended deterrent measures/actions - within not more than one week of its recommendation; and

(4) The public naming and shaming of the “leaders” of such disturbances.

Meanwhile, until the recent Plateau crisis, I used to think of the calls for Sovereign National Conference (SNC) in Nigeria as an agitation mainly by those from the South and/or East who, due to real and/or perceived injustices, wants us to, as a nation, come together to determine the manner of our continued co-existence as a people in the same country. However, with both the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN) and the Supreme Council for Sharia in Nigeria (SCS) all calling for the SNC with regard to the recent Plateau mayhem, I am now left confused as to where I will park and go to, if and when the ‘divorce’ papers are finally signed.

Given the fact that there is no single State in Nigeria in which all its citizens adhere to a single/homogeneous religion, what does CAN and SCS mean by their latest call for SNC in Nigeria? Are they advocating for the segregation of Nigeria based on religion? This call by both groups, to me, is what our security “experts” should have picked up as a serious national security threat and to which action should have been taken against the “leaders” who made such an unguarded and inflammatory remarks that are capable of causing anarchy in the country. These are the people talking nonsense/rubbish, Mr. President.

***

HEALTH INTERACTIVE WITH DR. AMINU MAGASHI Critical Look at 2003's HIV Prevalence

healthinteractive@hotmail.com From 9th to 15th May, 2004 I was at the University College Hospital, Ibadan in Oyo state attending a course entitled " strategic leadership in HIV/AIDS programming for NGOs convened and implemented by The Social Sciences And Reproductive Health Research Network ( SSRHN ). I must confess that by the end of the training course what I was able to gather in terms of latest materials and up dates on HIV/AIDS and skills and knowledge on programming , in the last 2 years, hitherto, I couldn't have such extensive and elaborate data and information and exposure on strategies and techniques toward effective leadership and programming. .

It was in that session that I begin to look at the 2003 Nigeria's HIV prevalence in apparent comparison to the previous 2 sentinel surveillance (1999 and 2001) with a view to examine the rise and fall in percentages, factors attributing to that and what could be done in terms of policy reforms and impacting on the life of the impoverished populace with the aim of ameliorating their suffering and helping those that are not infected towards prevention.

Since the first global cases of AIDS were diagnosed in New York in 1981, the problem has undergone a lot of transformation from being a health issue to a developmental problem affecting social and economic life of individuals. The HIV so far, by 2003, has infected a cumulative total of more than 60 million people, over one third of such people have subsequently died. Africa in particular is been faced with a grave crises of HIV/AIDS with nine out of every ten new cases from the continent and an estimated 13 million AIDS orphans currently live in Africa.

Coming back home, Nigeria, the first case was reported in 1986. The prevalence since then has been on increased from 1.8 % in 1990, 3.8 % in 1993, 4.5 % in 1995, 5.4 % in 1999 and 5.8 % by the year 2001. Nigeria now has the highest number of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLWHA) in the world (UNICEF, 2002). Between 1986 and June, 2001, 52, 962 AIDS cases were reported in Nigeria, although that is far from being the actual figure due to under reporting, fear of stigma, under diagnosis and poor service utilization. Current UNAIDS estimate , indicate that 3.5 million Nigerians may be living with AIDS.

Looking at the 2003's prevalence rate in the country, which is the most recent, it shows that 5.2 % of the population are living with the virus , meaning, 5 out of every 100 people are infected with the virus, this is a slight decline when one compared the figure with 1999 ( 5.4 % ) and that of 2001 ( 5 . 8 % ). Never the less, it shows that over the last two years the tripartite relationship and partnership between Government, International Donor Organizations and NGOs has made some tremendous achievement, no matter how small in quenching the fire in our society.

However, looking at the prevalence with a quizzical mind, one is bound to discover that it is not yet Uhuru with regard to dampening the devastating effect of the disease which complicates other diseases and made them more grievous, notably among them, Tuberculosis, Malaria, Malnutrition, Skin Infections to mention but few.

As we all know that, Nigeria is adopting a sentinel survey not an epidemiological one, and at the same time it is only using a sample of pregnant women attending antenatal care across the 6 geopolitical zones.

Going by that, do the women attending ante natal care, as a sample represent the population of Nigeria and give a fair view as to the actual problem and prevalence of HIV? The answer is far from being yes. This is because, it is perceive that among women attending antenatal care, above 90 % of them are regarded as carrying legitimate babies by choice, are faithful and happily married and the society regard them among the safest population. On the other hand , if we are to do sentinel surveillance among Commercial Sex Workers, Men Attending Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) Clinic, Youth In Tertiary Institutions, Long Distance Drivers, Patient With Tuberculosis, one is bound to have a very high unimaginable figures that can make Nigeria declare state of emergency on the entire nation .

Base on this submission and assertion, the study that may help produce the actual Nigeria's HIV prevalence, is not of course taking a sample of women attending ante natal care but rather taking samples of low risk groups and that of high risk groups, and then take an average, that way we will have a better view of the calamity bedeviling our nation. I strongly advocate to the partners involve in conducting surveys to really review the methodology and take as much samples as they can in the next survey coming up in 2005.

Let me conclude by looking at some factors that are contributory to the fuelling of the epidemic in Nigeria with a view of making the issue clearer for policy reforms and programming. On the top list is poverty, as a driving force, it renders the working force (youth) in the country highly vulnerable to sexual harassment, exploitation, abuse and inducement by the older generation. It complicates and worsen the mild form of the disease to reach the stage of AIDS and provide a compromised body immunity which pave way for other opportunistic infections and also it makes it very difficult for PLWHA to afford routine anti retroviral drugs, other essential drugs and adequate nutrition capable of reversing the complication of HIV/ AIDS. The policy of the Federal Government And Other International Partners In The Provision Of Anti Retroviral Drugs is far from achieving the desired result of down sizing the prevalence and reducing the calamity of having children orphaned by HIV/AIDS. With 15, 000 people on the list of federal government and 8000 people coming on board on the list of AIDS Prevention Initiative In Nigeria ( APIN ) yearly, definitely there is no way a remarkable result will be achieved. Other factors are related to NGOs viewing HIV as a national cake and instead of using meager available resources to impact positively, they are busy living on HIV/AIDS and of course factors in our hospitals related to blood screening are not encouraging and helping matters.

In essence, I am of the belief that, Nigeria need to nurture leaders with utmost dedication and social responsibility who will strongly advocate towards policy reforms and programming to address factors mentioned above

***