The ‘politics’ of political appointment: Focus on ICPC chair

I have read Sahara Reporters’ story on the appointment of Rosemary Abang-Wushishi as acting chair of Nigeria’s Independent Corrupt Practices and other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) and wish to comment on the case thus.

Political appointments will always be used to advance political interests (in addition to any other reasons that may be openly expressed). The political class will always take advantage of loopholes in (read manipulate) the law to advance their interests.

If the law actually demands that the chair of the Commission "shall be a person who has held or is qualified to hold office as a judge of a Superior Court of record in Nigeria”, the critical question, as far as the law is concerned, to ask is whether or not Abang-Wushishi is so qualified. For our information a person is qualified to be appointed a judge of the superior court of record (i.e. High Court) on attaining 10 years at the Bar. To that extent, the interim appointee 'qualifies'. And the argument that the AGF should have known that since when Angulu was appointed may be a good one that queries the alertness of the AGF, but it does not stop him from 'acting right' now that he apparently realises that.

Now talking about the 'morality' of such appointment is altogether another issue. There are thousands of us lawyers so qualified to have been appointed, so why Abang-Wushishi and not ME for instance? The truth is that many, if not most political appointments in Nigeria and elsewhere, are still done based on so many inexplicable 'interests', unfortunately. Some may be easily traceable, others are not. And the reasons could be to advance political interests (as alleged in the appointment of Bianca Ojukwu) or to score political point and win the confidence of the 'civil society' (Jega, Sam Amadi, Mike Igini). They could be as a result of 'Old-Boy network' or even to advance/cover up criminal interests. The best way to assail such appointments is to show that the person is not qualified or is incompetent or has otherwise done something that questions his/her integrity for the position etc. The British PM was severely criticised the other time for getting two men who used to work for him personally as photographer and video cameraman during his campaigns to be on government appointment. A good reason for the criticism was that the civil service already had people who were doing that for the office of the PM. I heard he has since dropped them though.

I would really want to know the exact basis of the complaint here. Is it that the appointee is not qualified or that because she was allegedly proposed by the president's wife, she should not be appointed? Do we know how many other decisions of governments have been so influenced by spouses? Didn't they say the creation of Delta State was influenced by then First Lady, Maryam Babangida? Or would we rather that appointments are influenced by a mistress or an uncle or a religious minister?

The much I know about the appointee is that she is a lawyer and retired as an assistant inspector general of the police many years ago and tried her hands in politics and failed. If that makes her unqualified to head the agency that she is currently a member of, I do not know. But since the appointment would eventually require Senate approval, let us hope the 'distinguished' Senators would ask critical questions to verify the competence or otherwise of the appointee.

But we may laugh about the Senate screening being nothing more than 'bow and go', as they recently approved the appointment of a 'career diplomat' as an ambassador even when she showed incompetence at the screening (couldn't tell where Jigawa state was; asked to mention the official channels of diplomatic communication, she said she was confused etc). The Senate President urged his colleagues to approve her appointment even when he admitted that hers was a 'poor pass'. So the Senate just approved the appointment of a mediocre to head Nigeria's foreign mission.

Interestingly though, I recently read of the same Senate rejecting the nomination of a retired justice (I have forgotten the name) as head of this same ICPC because the legislators were convinced during the committee screening that the eminent retired jurist no longer had the mental capability and physical strength they would expect of the head of this agency. Now, those aren't written qualifications but I agree with Senate that it was a sound reason. Let us pray that the Senators put on their thinking caps when considering Abang-Wushishi for this present case.

The power of obsession

Today, Apple introduced "iPad 2" to the market and it has been all frenzy about people getting the product on the first day. One internet site described it as "a slimmer, faster, camera-equipped version of the sexy glass slab that singlehandedly launched the current tablet computing craze".

I am listening to BBC and the station just spoke with a man on the queue in London waiting to buy the product. The prospective first-day buyer says he is told (considering the number of people on the line) he would be able to get it by 5p.m. (that is more than four hours away).

And guess how long he had been waiting in that line? Since 7a.m of yesterday. He spent the freezing night out there, with many other techno-obsessed folks like him. That means he has spent about 29 hours already and by the time he gets the wonder product, he would have spent one and a half days just to get a product that would flood the market in the days, weeks and months ahead anyway. That is the power of obsession.

And, oh, that is not all the price he paid for his obsession. While he was at it, he had to miss his son's 12th birthday. Asked if he didn't feel he had disappointed his son, he said, well, when he gets home eventually with the new product, his son would be free to play with the older version of the iPad he currently has.

What else can we be obsessed about in life?

Yes, I will vote for women and (we)men

On the emergence of President Goodluck Jonathan to replace the late President Yar’Adua, the new president had to nominate someone to the National Assembly for endorsement as vice president. It was generally expected that by Nigeria’s ‘unwritten agreement’ the nominee must necessarily be from the North and a Muslim, since Jonathan is a Christian from the South.

Most Nigerian adults being ‘experts’ and ‘analysts’ on every issue of national importance, from minimum wage to the choice of the national football coach and in fact, what the president should wear, plunged into permutations. In the midst of the political permutations and public commentaries by the clichéd ‘all and sundry’, I posted on facebook that it was a rare chance to appoint a woman as vice president. The reactions were, predictably diverse: agreement, query and sarcasm.

With the new season of elections here again (starting from party primaries to the general elections), there have been calls to vote in more women. Although women constitute 50 per cent of our population, apropos, voters, their representation in government is far less than that, even lower than the 30 per cent benchmark set by the international community.

I have been asked a number of times if and why I would vote for a woman in an election. I consider such question as misguided because nobody has ever asked me if and why I would vote a man in an election. To ask me the earlier question is to presume that a man is the preferred candidate to be voted for in an election and that voting for a woman is an exception or aberration. And why is that so? Simply put, it is patriarchy at play.

Thus, when a man stands for election, whatever quality he possesses: a man of integrity or a well-known crook, a decent person or a drunk, a principled family man or a notorious philanderer, nobody talks about his sex. But if the politician is a woman, her sex suddenly becomes an issue. If she is involved in corruption or other forms of official misconduct, just as her male counterpart, the patriarchal society sexily points to the errant public officer as a woman, just so that we are told why we should not support another woman for public office.

I recall the sneers that went round during the scandal involving Rep Patricia Etteh as Speaker of the House of Representatives. On her eventual exit, many thought, “oh, well, the women have been given an opportunity which they have bungled, so enough of the talk about women in leadership”. That was so spurious and pathetic an argument. Did anyone remind us that Rep Salisu Buhari who was disgraced out of speakership and membership of the same House in 1999 was a man and had blown away the chances of other men?

More recently, we are being reminded that Sarah Jubril contested the Peoples Democratic Party’s presidential primaries and got away with a solitary vote (presumably hers) and so they question why no woman voted for her, at least out of solidarity. Truth is the mere fact that Jubril is a woman does not mean she necessarily went there as ‘consensus candidate’ of women, the way Atiku Abubakar was packaged as ‘consensus candidate’ of the North. And yes, Jubril was simply not saleable. Her address to the delegates was so horribly poor that even a rabid supporter of women in government would be at pains to vote her. Need we even talk about the peculiarity of the delegates breeding, grooming and capturing that ensured that the voters were mainly there to vote according to the whims of the party bigwigs (read state governors), who had bought them wholesale? And for that reason, Jubril had no chance.

Sarah Jubril is not the only politician to perform abysmally in an election. I recall a certain House of Representatives member in 1983 in Cross River State who similarly scored one vote in the primaries where he sought a fresh mandate. For a long time, people used to deride him as ‘one man one vote’. Did his failure rub off on other men? Not at all.

So now, will I vote for a woman in the election? I will vote for anyone who knows his/her onions, who displays a high sense of integrity, who has the brains to understand current issues and can solve problems. I will vote for someone who, when faced with the dilemma of doing what is honest and in the best interest of Nigeria, would do so, rather than buckle under the pressure of ethnic, religious or partisan political interests and sentiments. I will vote for someone who can stand up to his/her superior in the political hierarchy such as president, state governor, head of the legislature or party leader and godfather (when will we have godmothers?) and say, ‘you are wrong’ and mean it.

I will not vote for someone who would do what is clearly contrary to what s/he believes and mouths and then tells us s/he was obliged to do what his/her party or party leadership mandated. I recall how many politicians of otherwise wonderful intelligence and pedigree so easily fumbled during the ‘Third Term’ debate, telling us they must support the tenure elongation in line with their party’s wish.

In line with my arguments above, yes I will vote for a woman, because I know of many such women (and men), who fit into those standards. I have related closely with many of them as friends, associates, my line managers or superiors in office, professional colleagues, tutors, classmates etc. I have also observed some of them in public life and public office. So if some of them present themselves for office, I certainly would give them my vote.

But I will not vote for the woman who, when sitting with her colleagues in a meeting thinks herself only worthy of being made to chair the ‘welfare’ committee and then saddle herself with the responsibility of caterer for the meeting. That isn’t my idea of voting for or empowering a woman. Such a woman would only go to deepen patriarchy. But then, I could still vote for such a woman if I am only concerned with the numbers of women, not necessarily their quality in government. After all, who says men alone must have and display a monopoly of failure in government? And if I vote against a woman, it would have nothing to do with her sex, just as I would never vote for a man merely because he is a man.

*This piece is on http://free2runonline.com.ng/?p=1 where I contributed as guest columnist.

I want to be a public official

As Nigeria marches through another season of selecting its public officers, I am here reproducing a piece I first wrote in 2004 about public office.

I want to be a public official
By Obo Effanga Jr

“Doc. Doc!”
“Eeeh! Tony my man!”
“Old boy, is it true that you are aspiring to get into public office?”
“What a stupid question. Who no like better thing?”
“In other words you have a strong urge to serve the society?”
“Well, you may say so.”
“No. You should be definite in your answer, it is either you want to serve or not.”
“Well, everybody in public office is there to serve after all, so when I get into public office, I also will be there to serve.”
“To serve the public you mean, not yourself, your family and your community only?”
“Are you suggesting that when I take up public office I should forget about my family and my community? You can’t be serious. Tell me which public officer ever did that in this country?”
“Oh, really? I thought you wanted to make a difference when you take up public office.”
“I have not said I wouldn’t. There is nothing wrong with the change starting with me? I mean, you don’t imagine that I would get into public office without a positive change to my station in life? Even my family and friends like you would feel disappointed if I don’t come out of public office with something to show for it. Mind you, I won’t be going into public office to display poverty.”
“What amounts to ‘something to show for it’, if I may ask?”
“Pally, you don’t fail to amaze me. Shouldn’t I, as a public official, own choice houses in choice areas? Shouldn’t my children be able to study abroad or at least in private colleges? Are you suggesting that I would return to this job after public service? Ah! My guy, you amaze me.”
“But you have a responsible job at hand. I mean you are a professional in your field and I do not see why you shouldn’t return to your teaching job.”
“You cannot be serious. Come back to this thankless job? God forbid! It is not my portion and I reject it!”
“You are sounding religious there.”
“I am a child of God, mind you.”
“I cannot imagine an egghead like you wasting away in public office and not returning to the classroom”
“Old boy, I won’t be the same. I don’t mind being an ‘AGIP’, any government in power, like other eggheads have been.”
“Like who, if I may ask?”
“Don’t ask me. All I know is that I can also serve as a director today, minister tomorrow and a personal assistant the next day. I don’t care what the designation is, it’s the trappings of government that I care about.”
“That means you won’t mind being reduced from being a federal minister to being a local government councillor.”
“My friend, with government appointments, ‘image is nothing, the lucre is it’.”
“But we still need bright people like you to teach our children in schools.”
“Yes, I agree with you. But I don’t have to be that someone. Or have I not taught enough this past seven years? And what do I gain from it anyway; insults from students and their money-miss-road parents, some of who cannot even make one flawless sentence?”
“You seem to be unhappy with your job Doc?”
“That is why I will jump at any opportunity to take up public office.”
“If I may ask, what is really your attraction in public office?”
“I too want to be invited to come and chop.”
“But I thought you said earlier that you want to serve? You better watch it. Remember what usually happens to those who go to chop rather than go to work?”
“I didn’t particularly say that I want to chop. I will serve and then chop. Look, a prophet eats from the temple.”
“I can see you are already doing well as a potential public official, given the way you can easily change your response to a question.”
“If you can’t beat them join them my brother.”
“Oh, by the way, what will your wife be when you get into public office?”
“Look, e-ma try mi-o! What are you suggesting? She will continue to be my wife of course.”
“You mean she won’t set up one of those bogus pet projects to raise funds from the public and carry on as if she has a constitutional role?”
“And what would be wrong with that? She won’t be the first person to do that. Besides, there are associations these days for wives of public officials. Haven’t you heard of Committee of Wives of Lagos State Government Officials (COWLSGO) or whatever they call it? My wife can as well join any of such clubs in my state and be active”
“What do you mean by ‘active’?”
“She could attend parties and wear aso-ebi.”
“You are already beginning to think like a public official, right?”
“Well, to be a millionaire, think like one.”
“That was a Freudian slip wasn’t is?”
“What?”
“You just alluded to being a millionaire.”
“Do you have a problem with that?”
“You want to be a millionaire through the public office?”
“Silly you. Show me one public official who is not. Many of them were no better than I am now. Look at all those school dropouts who became local government public officials the other time. In just three years, many of them have permanently kissed goodbye to poverty.”
“Are you sure? I thought some of them were so broke soon after leaving office that they had to sell their personal cars.”
“Why not talk about the ones who invested their stolen funds wisely, building houses and establishing business centres and cyber cafes. My councillor even established a guesthouse and got three chieftaincy titles.”
“So how do you plan to invest your ill-gotten wealth when you get…”
“Point of correction, I will not have ill-gotten wealth.”
“No no no! That point is already settled. After all you will work and chop.”
“Look, you better mind how you talk to a future honourable. I might not forget this insult once I get into office. And I can be quite vindictive you know.”
“Like all of them are anyway. I know you are just joking.”
“Don’t count on it. Public office has a way of turning good people to something else. I might just ask one of my thugs or security aides to brush you.”
“So you even plan to go about with thugs?”
“Ah! You want my enemies to make mincemeat of me? And besides, I will have to give jobs to the boys.”
“What boys?”
“Grow up man. I mean the boys that will help me into public office. If I have to take office through an election, I need to compensate the boys who may have helped me on Election Day.”
“You mean those who would vote for you?”
“No, those who would vote on behalf of the registered voters for me.”
“I don’t seem to understand that.”
“You cannot, because you are not a politician or a potential one.”
“Can you just explain that?”
“I mean the boys who will help stuff the ballot boxes to my advantage.”
“Oh-oh! So you plan to do it like the rest of them eh?”
“How else can one get into office? When I get there I can always change things.”
“But you know you cannot build anything worthwhile upon a faulty foundation. That explains why our democracy has remained stunted for the past five years.”
“I will make a difference, with God on my side, I can do all things because greater is he that is in me than that…”
“Oh please stop that crab. Keep God out of it. You cannot plan to get into public office through crooked means and hope to claim God’s favour.”
“Look, I will be attending tarry nights, miracle nights and declare days of prayers in my office.”
“But God would rather you obeyed Him than offer sacrifices.”
“Eeeh! Enough of this. It’s time for my lecture. Let me hurry up. The class representative is supposed to bring me the returns from the student’s registration for my course. We will talk later.”
“Doc. Doc!”

First published in the NewAge newspaper in 2004

Servicom my foot!

Servicom my foot!
By Obo Effanga

You suddenly realise that the power outage in your residential area is localised.

Three days after, you receive a circular written by a resident in the neighbourhood stating that s/he made inquiries at the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) office and was told that the cable supplying power to the area was ‘vandalised’. The circular says the cost of the vandalised item is N150, 000.

In simple words, the ‘beneficiaries’, (not consumers or customers you suppose) of electricity in the area should be responsible for replacing the equipment, which the PHCN had ‘benevolently’, and ‘graciously’ provided before now.

It seems that the service provider, Power Holding, as the name suggests is not under any obligation to supply you electricity power, but to hold it. The circular further asks residents who may know someone in PHCN to please make use of their contacts to ‘help’.

Several questions run through your mind. How are power cables, which in Nigeria hang up there from pole to pole ‘vandalised’?

Why should you be expected to provide the equipment for your service provider when you pay for the service provided?

Would your children’s school be right to ask parents to compulsorily pay for the replacement of its school bus because the one they use and which service the parents pay for is broken down or stolen?

Or why don’t the GSM service providers ask customers to pay for the damaged or ‘vandalised’ equipment in their neighbourhood to guarantee continued service? If residents of the neighbourhood pay for the new cables, would they claim ownership or would the equipment continue to belong to PHCN?

In any event would the cable and equipment not be supplied from PHCN’s stores? So how would that be accounted for and be reflected in the budget of the company? Would PHCN issue receipts to the contributors?

You finally hit an idea and decide to explore it - Servicom to the rescue! Servicom is government’s effort to reform the public service and cleanse it of its notorious poor attitude to service provision.

And so you make inquiries and get the contact number of the Servicom officer in PHCN. You get the officer on line and you relate your problems to him, certain that you are speaking with a service-minded person. Alas, your wish remains that, a wish!

Your respondent tutors you on your duty as a beneficiary of PHCN’s magnanimity; that you and the other residents in the neighbourhood are expected to serve as monitors to PHCN equipment (day and night, rain or shine) to ensure that nothing untoward happens to the equipment.

He in fact tells you that those who ‘vandalised’ the equipment must come from among you and in your neighbourhood because it is not possible for an ‘outsider’ to come into your area and interfere with PHCN equipment.

You try as much as you can to remind the officer that you and your fellow victims in the locality are not security officials or PHCN personnel to dedicate your time to policing electricity facilities.

Besides, the so-called vandalism might have happened in the night, after all the outage was in the night. You also tell him that it is more in the interest of his organisation to get the cables replaced and power restored in order for them to continue generating revenue from power supply.

But your ‘benefactor’ on the line would take none of that. He tells you that you urgently need the power supply, and that is why you telephoned him. He is damn right you know. But he is also damn stupid to think that this situation therefore makes him a demigod of electricity supply.

In fact he warns you that there are many people like you out there who also need electricity supply.

So if your neighbourhood does not appreciate that fact or cannot be grateful enough to the god of electricity by protecting its equipment or replacing the ‘vandalised’ one, PHCN would gladly take the electricity from you and ‘donate’ to others!

Completely taken aback, you begin to wonder if you hadn’t called the wrong number instead of Servicom, but hello, this is Servicom.

In fairness, the ‘Servicom officers’ in the various public agencies are not ‘staff of Servicom’, but staff of the host offices that were simply trained as reformists.

It seems however that many of these persons, like the story of the pig, may have been taken out of the dirt, with a new orientation, but the dirt may not have been taken out of them. Some of the public institutions surely are still in dirt and the PHCN is one of them.

The Compliance Evaluation Report as posted on Servicom website scores PHCN’s performance as 1.0 on a scale of 4 and describes it as ‘shameful’.

And shameful indeed was the response you got from the officer who certainly knows nothing about customer care, one of the areas incidentally, that the evaluation report wants PHCN to consider.

Published in NEXT newspaper October 26, 2009. (http://234next.com/csp/cms/sites/Next/Home/5473915-146/Servicom_my_foot!___.csp)

A PATRIOT'S MISSILE

Why do I carry an international passport that describes me as a Nigerian, yet within Nigeria I could be described as a ‘non-indigene’, if I find myself in the wrong place at the right time or because I was born at the right time in the wrong place?

And why would the registration form in the National Hospital, Abuja insist on branding my children as Cross Riverians, when none of them has ever lived up to 20 cumulative days of their lives in that state?

And why should a poor girl on the street of my late father’s country home pay more school fees than my nephew to attend the state’s university in the very state she was born in 18 years ago and had never travelled out of?

Why should anybody refer to her as a non-indigene by saying that her parents, even though have lived there for the last 25 years, were previously born and bred in an ‘alien’ part of Nigeria? Yet, my daughters, who can hardly speak any language from Cross River State, are expected to stay here in Abuja and access scholarship from the state as...indigenes?

I laugh at it, and you laugh at it too, yet in the last 15 years or so, I have not paid any income or other direct tax to Cross River State; rather, Lagos and FCT have fed fat on my fat taxes.
And talking about my fat taxes, how come I pay so much to fuel the “consolidated lootable funds” operated by the governments who serve me darkness instead of electricity, after they threatened since 2007 to declare a state of emergency in the power sector but have failed to? I tell you what, by the time God touches their heart to declare this long-awaited emergency, even they would forget what the emergency was meant to be declared on. There, we laugh again.

For my fat taxes, I traverse potholed roads. For my fat taxes, I operate my own water corporation. For that same reason, I struggle to pay through the nose, that my children may have quality education provided by a money-bag private school proprietress; because the public school our parents attended, which we attended have been destroyed by our governments. Hey, and do you know that we even pay more taxes than some of our fat cows in government? Well, that is a story for another day.

Why do we declare two days of public holidays to mark religious events when other countries declare just a day? Is it just so that we tell the world we are highly-religious, yet we loot the national treasury daily? Why do we waste public funds in sponsoring cronies of those in governments to pilgrimages that have failed to rub off on our lifestyles? How come we have a high per-capita of religious places with a non-commensurate holiness?

And why do we declare one day in a month as sanitation day if all we do is sit at home to watch television or generate waste that the rains would help us wash back into the drains?

Or why do we waste resources on and fix certain days as election days when we would already have pronounced some people as ‘anointed’ or ‘consensus’ candidates and we already know the result before the election?

And why did we declare October 1 a national holiday to mark our Independence Day when all we ended up doing was stay at home and wonder about how we have failed as a nation and the lack of freedom we experience?

But why am I so critical of my nation as though I were a foreigner or a ‘non-indigene’? My answer is simple compatriots. I am a true Nigerian; proudly Nigerian; 100% Nigerian and more Nigerian than many of our leaders. After all, I have one and only one citizenship – Nigerian, like my parents before me, like all my siblings, like all my children. So when I criticise my country I do so with love and the selfish hope that it becomes better, that it may be well with me and my family. I do so knowing that if Nigeria fails, I stand to lose, much more than many in government who could easily flee to their alternate, if not primary countries, where their families live or where they spend vacations and go for medical checks, using public funds.

So my dear compatriots permit me to call my critical attacks a PATRIOT’S MISSLE. It is still preferable to a SYCOPHANT’S PRAISE.

· First read at Balcony Muse IV and published in NEXT newspaper on October 12, 2009

Rep. Chinyere Igwe's audacity of dishonour

Rep. Chinyere Igwe’s audacity of dishonour
By OBO EFFANGA

A certain Chinyere Emmanuel Igwe who happens to be a member of Nigeria’s House of Representatives reportedly slapped a security official of the National Assembly on Wednesday September 9. The latter’s offence was, in the words of Igwe, “he has just embarrassed me and I won’t take it”.
News reports say the security official had asked the Representative to identify himself as he (Igwe) made to enter the National Assembly but the legislator replied with the assault and battery. He would probably have done worse but for the intervention of other security personnel who rescued their colleague from the lawless lawmaker!
One newspaper (The Nation) quotes the dishonourable member as saying afterwards: “Imagine that boy. How could he claim not to know me? Does his duty not include recognition of faces of members? He has just embarrassed me, I won’t take it. This case will not end here. I will take it to any length, including the National Assembly Service Commission, where he would be disciplined.”
Really Rep. Igwe? You mean you actually said that? Talk about the audacity of dishonour! If Igwe truly believes that the duty of a security officer in the National Assembly includes recognising the faces of all 360 members of the House of Representatives and all 109 Senators, he must be a comedian. And to think that most of the 360 Reps and 109 Senators are absentee legislators or bench-warmers who hardly speak on any issue, let alone sponsor a bill or motion, Igwe must be berated. I have never heard of Rep. Igwe, and I cannot be described as a person non-conversant with issues in the National Assembly. I am just knowing today that the man is (embarrassingly) the vice chair of the committee on human rights. What horror!
Pray, what is embarrassing in a security officer asking for the identity of a public officer, just to be sure that he has the right of free access to the National Assembly? One ordinarily flays the idea of unduly fettering public access to the legislative building, but our present legislators prefer to build undue security round themselves, hence the extra screening of persons going to the National Assembly. So, if a security officer asks anybody to identify himself/herself, such must be taken in the line of the duty of providing security.
The newspaper description of the dishonourable member’s appearance is relevant here. He was “casually” dressed in black trousers and a “flying” khaki short-sleeve shirt. He also wore a “jungle face cap” and slippers! Given our stereotyping nature, who would blame a security officer for having a doubt that a “big man” could be so dressed in the “corridors of power”? The main building of our National Assembly is actually referred to as “White House” among staff and members of the federal legislature.
The federal legislator talked about the matter not ending there and threatened to take it up to the National Assembly Service Commission (NASC) to “discipline” the staff. I just wonder who between the aggressive legislator and the battery victim needs to be disciplined by the appropriate body. Is there any hope that the House of Representatives would sanction the dishonourable lawmaker for his undisciplined public behaviour?
Igwe, no doubt, talked like a typical Nigerian “big man”, who in the face of his guilt is shameless to throw his weight around. He plans to take the matter to a higher authority, where he would sit as superior or at least a contemporary to discuss the matter involving a “poor, lowly security man” who stands the chance of being “disciplined” by the powers that be. A pointer to what might happen when the matter goes to a higher authority could be seen in the news report which said the matter lasted for 30 minutes “before other National Assembly security operatives and the police intervened to calm the lawmaker”. Calm the lawmaker? That is apparently a euphemism for “beg the lawmaker”.
I fear therefore that soon, the senior management of the legislature may compel the victim to apologise to the aggressor for embarrassing him! But if the leadership of the Sergeant-at-arms office is worth its professional status, it must rise to defend its officer and in fact demand an apology, if not more from the legislator.
And this calls to question again the quality, temperament, value system and mental frame of some of our public officers. Igwe’s attitude is to a large extent, representative of the arrogance of the ruling class in Nigeria and the contempt with which they treat the rest of the society. Sadly, nothing, absolutely nothing positive would come out of this incident. It would just be one in a series of human rights abuses by the powerful against the powerless in Nigeria.