NLNG, IBB and Soyinka By Max Gbanite
“Teacher, don’t teach me nonsense” The late Afro-beat king, Fela Anikulakpo-Kuti
In spite of the intellectual, arm-twisting tactics of literary eggheads like Soyinka, Niyi Osundare, and Tam David West, the General went in full view, made his presentation, and controlled the environment as usual. This time around, it was the schizophrenic critics that chickened out. Instead of engaging the general by carrying demonstrative placards at the venue to show their ingenious disapproval vehemently, they opted to abstain.
I intend to deal with various reasons given by the celebrated professor on why General Ibrahim Babangida should be denied the right to make the keynote speech; however, it should be noted that I also intend to do this by sticking to issues without exerting emotional intelligence.
Professor Wole Soyinka and former President Olusegun Obasanjo were classmates during their secondary school days, are almost of the same age-group, and are from the same Abeaokuta axis of Ogun State. I draw your attention to the similarity because both have shown the exclusive capacity to alter the history of events in our country to suit their ever-captive audiences at various times. I will reserve my comments on the latter, and continue with the former.
In 1996-97, I had the privilege to protest against the naming of 2nd Avenue & 44th Street in Manhattan, New York (corner of the Nigeria House) in honor of the late Mrs. Kudirat Abiola. Professor Soyinka and Chief Tony Enahoro spoke for those in favor of the act. During the argument that followed in the chambers of New York City Council, Soyinka submitted for ‘propaganda purposes’ that the late General Sani Abacha has detained over 5,000 intellectuals under harsh conditions in Nigerian prisons; absolute lie, of course. I simply shook my head in shock. While on a talk radio show in Washington, DC, moderator Tony Roguister echoed the same statement by quoting Soyinka. I debunked the story and corrected the insinuation.
Back to the immediate issues; Soyinka, said that “…intellectual growth was stifled under General Babangida’s regime.” Quite the contrary, Professor! As a matter of fact Babangida’s leadership style is said to be consistent with Dennis A. Peer’s statement: “One measure of leadership is the caliber of people who choose to follow you.” And that was why when Babangida called upon Soyinka, he wasted no time in joining Babangida’s government. He became the executive chairman and progenitor of Federal Road Safety Commission. He was given the takeoff grant, which his accusers claim was lodged in a private bank account. Yes, Soyinka did account for the money, but the interest went on exile with him. General Babangida ignored all pressures to probe the incident.
When Soyinka left, he handed over to his chosen political son, Dr. Olu Agunloye, who later became a minister under Obasanjo, 1999-2003. Soyinka made the high echelons of the organization the exclusive club of his Yoruba people, thereby exhibiting parochialism.
If the above assertion by Soyinka against Babangida was true, then why did the following people join his administration, rendering legitimacy to his regime: Professor Jibrin Aminu (Education); Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi (External Affairs); Dr. Idika Kalu (Finance); Alhaji Lawal Mala (Industries); Late Professor Olikoye Ransome-Kuti (Health); Prince Bola Ajibola (Justice); Dr. Rilwanu Lukman (Mines & Power); Dr. Chu Okongwu (National Planning); Professor Tam David West (Petroleum Resources); Professor Emmanuel Emovon (Science & Technology); and Alhaji Ismaila Mamman (Agriculture); T.O. Graham Douglas (Aviation); Dr. Alhaji A. Abubakar (Budget & Planning); Alhaji Mamman Ankah (Culture & Social Welfare); Professor Babs Fafunwa (Education); Mr. Eyo Ita Eyoma (External Affairs Minister of State); Prince Tony Momoh (Information); Professor Gordian Ezekwe (later Science & Technology); Alhaji Bunu Sheriff Musa (Water Resources); and late Clement O. Akpamgbo, SAN (replaced Bola Ajibola as the Attorney General and Minister of Justice); and others whose names deserve mention at another forum.
So Professor, if your statement holds water, then you have insulted these intellectual legends who answered General Babangida’s call to serve the nation. History has shown that no other government has used such intellectual capital since Babangida. Therefore, if Babangida’s policies failed, you and your co-eggheads failed the nation.
Your brother, Olusegun Obasanjo, tried to kill the same Federal Road Safety by merging it with the Nigerian Police Force. I went to AIT to argue against it, and the merger was rescinded.
The same Babangida conferred upon you the honor of Commander of the Federal Republic (CFR) on December 2, 1986, in recognition of your winning the Nobel laureate price. He chartered an aircraft filled with very influential and powerful friends of yours, members of your family, and government delegates to accompany you to the event as a mark of honor and support of our country. This is hardly an action of a man that stunted intellectual growth.
If you are as principled as you would like the world to believe, and you disliked Babangida’s regime, why did you accept the CFR honor? Why didn’t you return it by following in the footsteps of Professor Chinua Achebe, who refused Obasanjo’s medal, and the late Dr. Akanu Ibiam, who returned his Knight of British Empire (KBE) medal to the British in protest of their one-sided support of Nigeria during the civil war?
Professor Soyinka said, “…what do we writers write for, what’s our occupation? We write for human rights, we believe in sanctity of human life. We believe that the first fundamental right is the right to life…” He continued, “…Babangida to me is an enemy of humanity.” Very strong words indeed, but he must be addressing the regime that came before Babangida.
Before Babangida took over from Generals Buhari and Idiagbon, the issues of human right abuses were heightened with the introduction of Decrees 2 and 4 by that regime. So, to change the events and to begin the gradual reform of the laws and the judiciary, Babangida appointed the then Nigerian Bar Association president, Prince Bola Ajibola, to become his Attorney General and Minister of Justice.
In Prince Bola Ajibola’s words:
“So when they (Babangida and his cronies) heard of our NBA meeting in Port Harcourt, in August 1985, they came to the venue of the meeting. There I was giving account of my exco’s stewardship between 1984 and 1985. Our members rose up to salute my courage. After giving them the reports, the implications and the harassments I received, I was stunned by our members.”
To describe the actions of members of NBA, he continued:
“Some of them came with military men. They said they wanted to take me away. They said they wanted me to serve them. They said I had criticized them, that I knew about their shortcomings, that they wanted to give us (lawyers) opportunity to help them. I was not convinced. I said they should tell them to go away. They called some of our members to have words with me. They met with some of our executive members to plead with me. Our members came back to me, asked me to accept the offer. They said I must agree to serve.”
The above statement can hardly be credited to a president that stunts intellectualism and a harbinger of inhumane tendencies that harbor human rights violations. The calls by Babangida and the subsequent acceptance by Prince Bola Ajibola to serve his country enable the intelligent attorney to assist Babangida in repealing Decrees 2 and 4.
Prince Ajibola acknowledged further:
“They told me that they gave me out to them. ‘And as you are going there to represent us, please, speak our minds.’ But for that, I would not have been there. And because of the backing of the whole NBA, the government was willing to listen to me. And we were able to repeal Decree 4, the one that was being used to clamp journalists into detention. We removed all the military boys who were sitting on criminal cases in the tribunals existing at the time. We stopped over-criminalisation of offences. Offences that ought to attract say one year imprisonment were given say 20 years and things like that.”
He added, “Then the Decree 2, we attacked it and called for its repeal. Can you all remember? You must still remember oooh….because they invited us to come and help them to do these things; we went there and did all these. I served hard. After my time, there was still the idea that they still needed bar leader to continue to do this job for them.” (Vanguard, Friday, July 29, 2005).
Prince Ajibola’s masterful delivery of legal service under Babangida endeared him to the international community. The same Babangida, in a show of appreciation and gratitude, in pursuit of, and to support the furtherance of Ajibola’s legal brinkmanship, sent him to the International Court of Justice, Hague, where he retired as a Judge.
General Babangida immediately appointed Clement O. Akpamgbo, SAN, (another NBA president) a quintessential and erudite legal scholar, and a veritable scholar of jurisprudence to replace Ajibola. The late Akpamgbo was eulogized at his burial by his colleagues to have revolutionized the judiciary and the rule of law, like no other before or after him.
Based on the available information, Babangida should be commended for recognizing his shortcomings. He recognizes that he was indeed a military man who lacks the knowledge of law; therefore, he went for the best mind that NBA could offer, and their (NBA) collaboration legitimatized the regime.
The abrogation of Decrees 2 and 4 (instituted by Buhari/Idiagbon regime) by Gen. Babangida, under the advisement of the AGF, by far is an indication that the regime respected human rights. Whilst there may be moments during the regime that heavy handedness was applied to get its points across, it still pales in comparison to what we experienced under Obasanjo’s supposedly democratic regime of 1999-2007.
Professor Soyinka said, “Babangida subverted democracy, so he has no business addressing the literary community. He laid the ground on which people like Sani Abacha and Obasanjo were able to build. The whole thing started during his period in office.”
Not so fast Professor Soyinka. As recent as year 2000, one of your colleagues, Professor Bolaji Akinyemi, told the nation that he and Professor Onogoruwa were the ones who convinced General Abacha, in writing, to take over the government.
Yes, Abacha was left behind by Babangida to strengthen the interim government of Chief Earnest Shonekan. However, the pronouncement of a Lagos High Court, ruling that the interim government was unconstitutional, was tantamount to anarchy. Rather than Shonekan going to a higher court to vacate the judgment, he was frightened to leave immediately by soldiers led by Lt. General Oladipo Diya (rtd.), under the orders of Abacha, who was guided by the advice of Akinyemi and Onogoruwa. One wonders why all the names mentioned (except Abacha, of course) are from the same state as Professor Soyinka; that is, Ogun State – a state of very clever people.
Subversion of democracy did not start with nor will it end with Babangida. For me and many others, January 15th 1966 will remain the genesis of the volcanic changes that have besieged our dear nation and subverted democracy. The late Major Ademoyega (a Yoruba like Soyinka) and his co-travelers, including former President Obasanjo’s best friend, the late Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu (an Igbo from present-day Delta State) went on a senseless murdering spree of our leaders (both civilian and military) and, above all, destroyed a democratically elected government led by Prime Minister Alhaji Abubakar Tafawa Balewa and President Nnamdi Azikiwe.
Let us not forget the civil war that came after the countercoup of July 1966. Immediately after the war, another coup was led by late General Murtala Muhammed. Then, there was the aborted coup on Friday, February 13, 1976 that brought Soyinka’s friend Obasanjo to power. Of course, the then President Shehu Shagari was subverted by Generals Muhammadu Buhari and Tunde Idiagbon. General Babangida took over from the duo, and the nation jubilated. Why?
Granted, June 12, like January 15th and July 29th 1966, did happen. But should June 12 alone be made sacrosanct? The answer is simply no. Soyinka and some of his fellow writers, who want us to believe that it is indeed an important date, should please slow down. We have accepted the event and others as part of the rebirth of our nation. Besides, the attendant saga led to the formation of NADECO; and, according to Dr. Godwin Dabo, Soyinka made so much money as a crusader and is yet to account for the millions of dollars and pounds given to his group, NALICON, which was responsible for establishing ‘Radio Kudirat’ and allegedly sending arms to the country in an attempt to cause insurrection; hence completing the realization of 60s ‘Operation Third Force.’
As for enabling Obasanjo to come back to power, Soyinka was dead right. I was at the Jos convention in 1999 and in Eagle Square in 2003 as an observer. However, it took a collective effort of Generals Babangida, TY Danjuma, Aliyu Gusua, and Abdullahi, civilians like Solomon Lar, Ahmed Joda, and Phillip Asiodu, and the collaboration of the citizens to enable what is now a regrettable, monumental mistake.
My question then: Is it fair to associate Soyinka with, or accuse him of, enunciating the scourge of cultism in Nigerian universities, organizations of students whose evil and devilish actions have exacted a heavy toll in deaths of young university students totaling almost 4,000… most of who were being trained as breadwinners for their families?
Yes, it is on record that Soyinka founded an organization called ‘Pirates Confraternity’ during his university days. It is also understood that such organization’s trajectory was to promote cultural esprit de corps with its members, give them a sense of belonging to something unique, with the hope of helping each other later in life. Unfortunately, things went bad. New organizations cropped up, following the trend. The new leaders misunderstood the essence of fraternization and allowed themselves to be used by evil politicians, leading to the menace we call cultism today.
Though not a member of any group, except my town union, I, however, state unequivocally that those who are accusing Soyinka of establishing a cult organization may be wrong, just as is his accusing Babangida of setting the stage for the subversion of democracy. Soyinka and Babangida are both victims in the shifting climate of our cultural paradigm.
As far as June 12 is concerned, all I can say to future celebrants is to please be kind to others who have suffered greater injustices. As they insist in flying the flag of that era, they should kindly make room for others who do not share their views. If they are truly sincere to themselves, they will reckon that another perspective of June 12 is that January 15th, July 29th 1966, and December 31st 1983 are superior and more important significant dates to our battered but renewing nation.
Prof. Soyinka said, “I don’t know if you remember Babangida’s statement when Vatsa’s wife was seeking justice for her husband; it was the most insensitive statement I have ever heard from any former head of state and I responded. What he said was, first of all, ‘he had no regret for the execution of Vatsa,’ he said it categorically. Then he said, ‘What’s the noise about one person, what about the lives of others that were executed?’ In other words, it didn’t matter at all who is executed. But to make that statement to a widow-that for me is a clincher that Babangida does not value human rights.”
Professor Soyinka is dead wrong again. Soyinka, Obasanjo, and Babangida’s detractors (notably some serving ministers and governors) were the ones who misled and urged the now late Mrs. Vatsa to carry a campaign of calumny against IBB, possibly to stop his attempt to contest in the 2007 presidential elections. Instead of calling for amnesty on behalf of all the widows who lost their husbands to execution in coups, her motive was purely selfish. When she failed, the anguish of the loss took her to the grave. Funny, none of those who prodded her, including Obasanjo, went to her burial or visited her family in Kaduna.
General Babangida will always feel the loss of his friend. He agonizes at the thought that his bosom friend would betray him and even planned to kill him. Well, I am sure that we remember what Brutus did to Julius Caesar; General Vatsa almost did to Babangida.
“Mrs. Vatsa’s vaulting ambition (like lady Macbeth) to become the first lady; probably out of jealousy/envy of Dr. (Mrs.) Maryam Babangida, led her to nudge and badger her husband into committing a heinous crime against his friend, and the nation.” (See Sunday SUN, September 3, 2006.)
The law of karma is like a boomerang. The late Mrs. Vatsa once complained about their driver violating her privacy by seeing her naked. The driver was sent on an errand and was allegedly killed by armed robbers along Abuja airport road. A farm help at Vatsa’s farm in Kaduna was murdered over an argument with Vatsa’s daughter. The case was in the courts for prosecution, and Vatsa’s daughter fled the country. A cook in Vatsa’s house in Lagos refused to travel to Command and Staff College, Jaji with his boss, when Vatsa was posted for training there. The cook was beaten mercilessly on Vatsa’s orders. He was taken to LUTH; he died later and was buried in an unmarked grave. General Vatsa too was buried in an unmarked grave! I believe this is called ‘poetic justice.’
If Mrs. Vatsa wanted justice, what about the families of those killed in her house? Where do they get justice? Well, God gave it to them; HE is a prayer-answering God.
Prof. Soyinka continued: “People like Prof. Niyi Osundare had spoken about the execution of Vatsa and his group. Remember that on the initiative of Chinua Achebe, myself and J.P. Clark, led a delegation to plead for the lives of all the condemned people. And Babangida did assure us that he would do his best to ensure that they would be freed. When we got the news that these people had been executed, I also received information that Babangida actually fought to save their lives during the Supreme Council meeting-this person is someone whose brother was among the condemned. I had cause to review that information; I had the cause to say it was planned.”
General Babangida was not the first to execute failed coup plotters in Nigeria. General Olusegun Obasanjo was the first, the pacesetter. After the rounding-up of those accused of murdering General Murtala Muhammed in the attempted coup of February 13th 1976, Obasanjo passed Decree 8 of 1976: if one is involved in a coup, is informed of a coup but fails to report it; the crime is punishable by death; firing squad, period.
Innocent people like J.D. Gomwalk, the then governor of Plateau State, Lt. Cols. A.D. Waya, B. Umar, and Col. Buka Suka, were convicted on unsubstantiated hearsay evidence, they were executed on the orders of the Head of State (Obasanjo) who cast the deciding vote.
Late in 2006, this became an issue. AIT, sponsored by some governors and ministers, made the rightful execution of Vatsa a campaign issue. I went to the press and called for President Obasanjo to declassify all coup records (see LEADERSHIP, Sunday August 27th, 2006 and NEW SENTINEL August 27th, 2006).
Apparently someone interested in telling the nation the truth heard my voice and released a blow-by-blow account of the events leading to the planning stages, the arrest and interrogation-confessions, trial, and execution of the coup plotters. But before then, I had made inquiries with Alhaji Gambo Jimeta, a former IGP, and NSA boss, a great Nigerian and defender of democracy, who was a member of the special investigation panel. He directed me to Brigadier General A.K. Togun, (rtd.) former DG-SSS, a brilliant officer who was the secretary of the panel.
My discussion with Togun led me to arrange an interview (though Togun was reluctant due to the sensitivity of the topic) for him with the NEWS Magazine. In the interview, it was revealed that the duo of Lt. Cols. Mike Iyorshe and Bitiyong’s confessions revealed the extent of Vatsa’s involvement in the coup; in short, collated evidence showed that he (Vatsa) was neck-deep in it.
So Soyinka’s visit with fellow writers to plead with Babangida, after the accused were found guilty and condemned to die, prompted General Babangida to enact Decree 1 of 1986. This decree enables those convicted to appeal their conviction. This singular decree sought to avoid the errors made under Obasanjo when innocent people were erroneously executed. It was during the deliberation of appeal that Babangida made a spirited effort to save Vatsa. Unfortunately, for him (IBB) and Vatsa, those sitting in the council called for a vote. The verdict was guilty. Vatsa had to go like others who were equally found guilty.
To make sure that history will judge him right, Babangida made sure that the then Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Prince Bola Ajibola, a man who will never compromise his name and integrity, was represented fully; an act that contravenes military trial by tribunal.
Based on his (Ajibola’s) observations, he had this to say:
“The coup d’etat plotters have received a fair trial. There is no doubt about that. The procedure and process of adjudication by the Special Military Tribunal reflected truly the present human rights posture of this administration. It has been a trial which even though ought to be conducted within the concept and modus of a court martial yet adequately underwent the due process of law….the coup plotters were charged with conspiracy to commit treason contrary to section 37(2) of our Criminal Code the punishment which is stated therein as ‘death.’ Other provisions of the law applied are:
(a) Section 71 of Nigerian Army Act, 1960 (b) Section 79 of Nigerian Navy Act, 1964 (c) Section 73 of Nigerian Air Force Act, 1964 (d) Concealment of treason contrary to and punishable under Section 40(2) of the Criminal Code.”
He continued: “…Again it can be said that the accused persons were given a fair trail in compliance with Section 33 of the Constitution generally. They were allowed to have legal representation; presumption of innocence was in their favour until otherwise proved guilty; the burden of proving the offence were placed on the prosecution; record of proceedings were kept and made available within seven days.
“Moreover the trial also ensured the observance of the cardinal rule of law and natural justice. Group Captain Anthony Okazoboh, a member of the Tribunal who was objected to by Lt-Col Musa Bitiyong because he (Ikazoboh) took part in the investigation of the case, was not allowed to be a judge in his own case and was thus removed and thereafter replaced by Col. E.B. Opaleye.
“The Tribunal sat in public as well as in camera as circumstances dictate, which is in accordance with the constitutional provision of fair hearing and also in compliance with the law.”
Ajibola continued: “…At the trial, full evidence were taken, exhibits of about 23 were tendered; the hearing took about nine days; even one of the accused, Col. Mike Iyorshe, commended the efforts of the investigating panel and that he was satisfied that they were given a humane treatment. The judgment was well written and not just a layman’s expression of the facts of the case but one that seriously took into consideration relevant applicable laws including decided cases of the Supreme Court and works of learned authors.”
Based on the emotional intelligence exhibited by the media on the trial which probably laid the foundations for Professor Soyinka and his colleagues to visit the President, Ajibola continued:
“…It should be pointed out, however, that many emotional and sentimental statements have been made on the pages of newspapers appealing to the military administration that in order to enhance their human rights’ posture the death sentence of the condemned plotters should be commutted to life imprisonment. To accede to this request and plea is to enthrone injustice and double standard, since the law is no respecter of any person and nobody must be seen to be above the law. People commit capital offences daily in this country and when proved and found guilty of such offences they were accordingly punished. Why then should people adjudge under the provision of section 37(2) of the Criminal Code be spared in this case?
“It must be noted and emphasized that human right must not be equated to human decadence or lawlessness. Human right is not the same thing as human sentiments. The present military government and Nigerians cannot condone lawlessness, indiscipline or anarchy all in the name of human right. The present trial has a lot to commend it for acceptability of public as well as the people involved in the plot. Obviously it is progressive development on the trial of ten years ago. All the accused persons were given adequate opportunity to defend themselves.
“Apart from all these it must be borne in mind that legal position of a soldier is a special one and has been rightly termed an ‘enigma’.” (Curled from a declassified material published in NEWSWATCH magazine, September 11, 2006)
As Professor Soyinka himself can see, the AGF’s position on the law made it more difficult for Gen. Babangida to get Vatsa pardoned by the AFRC. It was also revealed to me by a friend -- member of AFRC -- that some of them in the council accused him (IBB) of being biased when he made a passionate plea for Vatsa’s to be commutted to life imprisonment. But, Soyinka will not see the reasons.
Prince Bola Ajibola is still here to be consulted; he was Soyinka’s classmate in secondary school with OBJ; he wrote that piece for record purposes and for posterity in the event literary eggheads like Soyinka attempt to obfuscate the truth.
So, Soyinka and his colleagues should please refrain from teaching nonsense to us and the future generations.
As for the great amiable General Babangida, GCFR, mni, the progenitor of every economic and political reform in modern day Nigeria, I commend his gallant spirit to make the trip to Lagos, a city he gave the Third Mainland Bridge and many more. He went; he made his speech without intellectual molestation, intimidation, or cultism resplendent of literary eggheads.
Babangida should be prepared to travel to other parts of the country to give speeches, especially to the 11 states and 200 local governments he created during his administration, when they call upon him to felicitate with them and celebrate his works. His legacies are there for all to see.
To NLNG and the organizers, I say, thanks for keeping to your guns and letting the discussions continue.
As for the traducers, I borrow a page from the state of New Hampshire, United States of America, “Live free or die.”
|