News
Voice of Emancipation: Defending the Real Victims
Throughout history, there have been many marginalised, victimised and oppressed subsections of society, from the slave trade, to the marginalisation of women, to the belief that children have no worth until they come of age. Yet in all of these, whenever the oppressed have sought to gain equal standing with their oppressors, those in a position of privilege declare themselves to be victimised by the request.
Take, for example, the response to the Black Lives Matter movement. This movement, whilst having been in existence for nearly a decade, really came to the forefront of society’s collective consciousness in 2020, following the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, USA. People began to raise the banner for a proactive change in mindset, such that black people and other minority ethnic groups should receive equitable treatment comparable to the white predominators. However, almost simultaneously, a counter-campaign arose, advocating “All Lives Matter”.
This campaign was propagated nearly exclusively by those who already enjoy privilege within society: predominantly white and largely male. Despite having a societal advantage in terms of colour and gender from their birth, when those disadvantaged tried to say, “Hey, I matter too,” the All Lives Matter advocates felt so threatened that they had to try to bring the spotlight back to themselves.
This trend, recurring cyclically through history, has not passed Nigeria by. Indeed, we recently saw Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the former Governor of Lagos State, decrying his unjust treatment in his political party trying to outsmart him in the recently-concluded presidential primaries. After a considerable amount of maneuvering, Tinubu emerged as the flagbearer, insisting that it is the turn of the Yoruba tribe to provide the next president of Nigeria. He went a stage further, pronouncing that, should a Yoruba be appointed president, as he contends is their due, then he is the worthiest to take that position.
I have no personal problem with Tinubu’s ambition toward becoming the president of Nigeria. But when I look at his campaign for the presidential candidacy, to me it would appear that Tinubu was playing the victim card in order to strengthen his position to be the eventual flagbearer. However, if one was to critically assess the situation honestly, the real victims are the ordinary Yoruba people, suffering under the oppression of a contemptuous Nigeria as a whole, and by other large ethnic groups within the country.
The politicians in Nigeria know how to manipulate the emotions of our people when elections arrive. But once the election is over, they don the mantle of overlords who are unconcerned with the problems of the common people. Governance ought to be a selfless service to humanity, where those who must aspire to become leaders must possess a clear vision of their plans for the coming generation/s, not merely limited to this present one.
In 2015, I implored friends and families to open their eyes to the truth that further elections in Nigeria will never bring about the developments and quality of life that we all hope for. Alas, most people cannot see beyond the political assertion that our only option is to choose which of two evils to instate. I argued that there ought to be another way of doing things, that if the present way does not serve for our benefit, then we need to pause, reaffirm what we want and assess how best to achieve it, before enacting further elections.
My narrative wasn’t a popular one; the prevailing view being, let Buhari be president, after eight years it would be the turn of the Yoruba and we can do whatever we want. This to me presents as entirely absurd: how can the progress of an entire race be placed on hold for eight years? Yet our elders and leaders see no incongruity in that. Suppose that even if a Yoruba did become president of Nigeria for eight years, what happens in the following eight years when a Yoruba is not in power? These are legitimate questions, but our elders and leaders championing a Yoruba presidency fail to provide answers.
I will not engage in the self-deception that maybe something good will come out of it; a rotten tree can never produce any fruit that is not itself rotten. Nigeria is bankrupt already, a failed nation waiting for its burial. When Lugard amalgamated the country, he tried with all he had to justify his work by demonstrating that the new country was able to live within its means. However, the reality today is that Nigeria is borrowing more than half of its income required to run the economy. This situation is dire in the extreme, not just for this generation but for the generations as yet unborn. And yet, rather than our elders to raise an alarm, they are watching impotently and burying their heads in the sand.
It is superfluous to state that a Yoruba presidency means nothing for the Yoruba people. After all, Fashola, the Minister of Works, is a Yoruba man as is other Yoruba ministers, but this has not resulted in the roads in Yorubaland to be even a passable standard. As such, it may be that having a Yoruba presidency will be worse than bad for the Yoruba people: it may even, God forbid, spell doom for us. The best outcome – indeed, the only survivable outcome – for the Yoruba people is to gain our independence. Only then will we be able to decide how we want to govern ourselves, and not have to sacrifice eight or even 16 years, just to gain a presidency that ultimately confers no benefit to the people.
When Awolowo was Premier of Yorubaland, his reign brought about the golden years of development for the Yoruba people that are unrivalled even ’til today. However, when he ventured into Nigerian politics, not only did he not bring any further development to Yorubaland, he engendered an environment in which Yorubaland began to diminish until reaching the pitiable situation in which we see it today.
I want every Yoruba person to understand that WE are the real victims. This time around, the campaign should be about how to get out of this disadvantageous mess in which we find ourselves being melded into Nigeria; not how a Yoruba person can become president. My personal feeling is that I would rather the presidency be handed to a northerner even worse than Buhari: at least then people’s eyes will truly be opened to the calamitous situation in which we have found ourselves. This is not the time to be clamouring for a Yoruba presidency, but rather a Yoruba independent nation. That, I believe, should be our ultimate priority and demand at this critical moment.
If we think a Yoruba presidency will bring us any closer to achieving an independent Yoruba nation, I must ask us to think again. A Yoruba president will be not for the Yoruba people alone but for the entirety of Nigeria. Their allegiance will be to Nigeria in its current incarnation, and they will bear the Yoruba people no heed, not caring if the entire Yoruba race goes to ruin. We have seen the Northerners handle the insecurity in the north with kid gloves, to the point that today it is beyond their control. Those Yoruba elders who are still campaigning for a Yoruba presidency need to rethink their stand and ask themselves some critical and likely disquieting questions:
In the next 20 years, will the Yoruba people be better off outside Nigeria or inside Nigeria with a Yoruba presidency? If the answer is the former, then why do we invest our efforts in advocating for continuing this road of self-destruction, rather than striving for an independent Yoruba nation? If anyone thinks a Yoruba presidency will bring progress and prosperity to the Yoruba people, I believe they will be in for a rude shock.
My perspective is this: the campaign for an independent Yoruba nation draws nearer by the day and its emergence will be seen sooner rather than later. Those who still remain on the fence will be better off making their minds fast on the direction they want the Yoruba to take. We must see beyond the narrative that political aspirants would seek to perpetuate, that they are the victims; instead that it is the people who will bear the brunt if further misrule is permitted in Nigeria. This time around, we must realise the truth of the situation and act so that we may divert the course of our trajectory and obviate the impending cataclysm.
The All Progressives Congress has expelled a former Minister of Interior and ex-Osun State Governor, Rauf Aregbesola, over alleged anti-party activities.
Aregbesola, who led Osun State for two terms, had spearheaded a faction within the APC known as The Osun Progressives which was later rebranded as the Omoluabi Caucus.
A letter from the APC leadership seen by newsmen on Wednesday officially confirmed Aregbesola’s expulsion.
The letter, titled “Allegations of Anti-Party Activities – Conveyance of State Exco Decision to You,” accused him of breaching Article 21 of the party’s constitution, which outlines disciplinary measures for members.
The letter read in part, “At the end of the investigation, the State Executive Committee (SEC) considered the report of the Disciplinary Committee. Having carefully reviewed the findings and recommendations, the SEC resolved to approve your immediate expulsion from the APC.
“The decision was predicated on clear evidence of your actions, which undermined the unity and integrity of the party. As a result, you are no longer a member of the APC and must refrain from holding yourself out as one or acting on behalf of the party in any capacity.”
The former minister’s expulsion followed a Sunday meeting of the Omoluabi Caucus, presided over by Aregbesola, where the group announced its decision to exit the APC, citing the party’s waning influence in Osun.
Ogun State governor, Prince Dapo Abiodun, has vehemently opposed the establishment of Sharia Court in the State, declaring it unauthorized and illegal.
He, therefore, directed the individuals behind its creation to immediately cease operations and disband all related activities.
The governor’s response followed the circulation of a flyer announcing the launch of a Sharia Court in Ogun State by the Sharia Arbitration Committee.
The flyer stated: “Alhamdulillah, it’s eventually established in Ogun State. A Sharia Court, which Ogun State Muslims have been yearning for, for ages, is finally here.”
It further invited litigants, stating: “You can now seek redress or have your case adjudicated based on Qur’an and Sunnah by reputable Islamic jurists. The Shari’ah Court, under the able leadership of eminent, reputable and erudite Islamic scholars like Shaykh Dr. Khidri Mustafa – Grand Qadi, Shaykh Abdu-r-Rasheed Mayeleke, Dr. Musa Afis, and a host of competent Islamic jurists, is open to all Muslims, male and female.”
It also listed the types of cases the court would handle, including marital disputes, Imamship tussles, organizational conflicts, child custody and guardianship, and inheritance matters.
Reacting to this development, Governor Abiodun issued a personally signed statement, making it clear that the legal framework of Ogun State does not recognize Sharia Court.
“No Sharia Court is authorised to operate within Ogun State. The courts that are legally empowered to adjudicate disputes arising within Ogun State are those established by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria or by state laws, which are: Magistrates’ Courts, High Court, Customary Courts, Customary Court of Appeal, Federal High Court, National Industrial Court, Court of Appeal, and Supreme Court.”
The governor emphasized that Sharia law does not form part of the legal framework of Ogun State and reaffirmed the government’s commitment to upholding the rule of law.
“No law operating in Ogun State has established a Sharia Court, and Sharia law does not form part of the legal framework by which the Ogun State Government administers and governs society,” he declared.
While recognizing the freedom of individuals to practice their religion, the governor stressed that this does not extend to creating unauthorized courts.
“No individual or group is legally permitted to constitute a court or present themselves to the public as a court without legal backing,” he warned.
Governor Abiodun then ordered the immediate cessation of all activities related to the illegal Sharia Court, stating:
“The Ogun State Government, hereby, directs that all persons involved in the creation or operation of this unauthorised court must immediately cease all related activities and disband the illegal entity and all its apparatus.”
He further warned the public against engaging with the court, urging them to report any related activities to the authorities.
“The Ogun State Government also advises members of the public to disregard any summons, documents, or persons associated with the illegal Sharia Court. Such occurrences should be promptly reported to the State.”
The controversy surrounding the establishment of Sharia Courts in the Southwest has been growing. Just last week, the Governor of Ekiti State, Abiodun Oyebanji, similarly rejected the creation of a Sharia Court in his state, calling it illegal.
In December last year, the Supreme Council for Shari’ah in Nigeria announced plans to inaugurate a Sharia Court in Oyo town, Oyo State. However, following public outcry, the council postponed the inauguration indefinitely.
Commenting on the issue, Oyo State Governor, Seyi Makinde, said Sharia Courts would only be permitted if they align with the Nigerian Constitution.
“People may try, but for us, I swore to uphold our laws and the Constitution of Nigeria. If their actions are within the law, fine. If not, they should expect that I will insist the law must be followed,” Makinde stated.
On Monday, Afenifere and CAN publicly rejected the idea, while the International Council for Ifa Religion also voiced its disapproval.
The council’s President, Fayemi Fatunde, warned that the introduction of Sharia law in the Southwest could have hidden motives.
“We have witnessed the consequences of Sharia law in the northern parts of Nigeria. The introduction of Sharia law to the South-West has a hidden agenda of Islamisation, contrary to the narrative being presented,” Fatunde argued.
As the debate over Sharia Courts in the South West continues, the Ogun State Government has made its stance clear—only courts recognized by the Nigerian Constitution will be permitted in the state. With similar resistance in Ekiti, Oyo, and other states, the issue remains a subject of intense national debate.
The Federal Civil Service Commission (FCSC) has debunked reports about an ongoing recruitment in the Commission, saying it is not true.
The Public Relations Officer of the FCSC, Mr. Taiwo Hassan, quoting the Chairman Tunji Olaopa on Monday night, clarified that there is no fresh recruitment currently going on at the commission.
“The attention of the FCSC has been drawn to information making the rounds on various media platforms about advertised vacancies and recruitments in the commission.
“The commission unequivocally declares that the information containing the commission’s website and the name of the Director (Recruitment and Appointment) did not emanate from the commission.
“It is fictitious and should be disregarded,” Hassan said.
He warned members of the public to be wary of activities of fake recruitment syndicates and racketeers.
He said the commission would officially announce to the public on national dallies and through its website whenever such recruitment exercise commenced.
