|
The
Atiku Revolt
By
Reuben Abati
culled from GUARDIAN, April 7,
2006
The details of what was discussed
by the 200 anti-third term campaigners who were barred from holding a
meeting at the Sheraton Hotel, Abuja, on Wednesday, April 5, have now become
public knowledge. When this is placed beside the motives of their traducers
masquerading as state agents, it is safe to conclude that it is indeed a sad
moment for Nigeria. The third-term gang included Major-General Muhammadu
Buhari of the All Nigeria Peoples Party (ANPP), Alhaji Ghali Na'Abba, former
Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr Audu Ogbeh, former Chairman of
the Peoples Democratic Party, Alhaji M. D. Yusuf, Alhaji Gambo Jimeta,
Governors Bola Tinubu, Boni Haruna, Orji Kalu, and Senator Uche Chukwumerije....
It was in one word, a gathering of well-known opponents of the Obasanjo
administration - many of whom have had cause to criticise the government
openly on issues of policy, and in the cases of Ogbeh, and Ghali Na'Abba,
and former Governors Bisi Akande, Segun Osoba and Niyi Adebayo, these are
bold critics of the ruling PDP and its methods.
They and their associates had
paid for the use of the Ladi Kwali Hall at the Sheraton Hotel. But the
FCT Police Commissioner, Lawrence Alobi and the Director-General of the
State Security Service, Kayode Are personally led a contingent of
security agents to prevent the meeting from taking place. Their reasons:
the politicians did not have "police permit"; they, the security agents,
were also acting "on instructions from above". So, the SSS director
walked up to Buhari and told him: "Sir, you can't enter." In case anyone
had any doubts about the seriousness of this directive, such doubts were
soon laid to rest when the security men descended on Francis Amadiegwu,
a member of the House of Representatives who had stubbornly tried to
enter the Ladi Kwali Hall. He was wrestled to the ground in the presence
of his colleagues and reportedly beaten "black and blue". When Amadiegwu
was eventually released, he could only mutter a few words: "This is the
darkest day in the history of democracy in Nigeria." He obviously did
not enjoy the beating!
There have been many dark
days in Nigerian democracy, and if present signs are anything to go
by, there may well be darker days ahead. What transpired at the
Sheraton Hotel, Abuja between security agents and the anti-third
term politicians last Wednesday, is yet another illustration of the
flowering of a culture of dictatorship that is being imposed on the
present process by the Obasanjo government. It is reminiscent of the
old days of Abacha and Babangida, of crude intolerance and abuse of
public institutions. In recent times and as opposition to the third
term agenda continues to grow, the Obasanjo government has displayed
greater intolerance for ideas or any form of opposition. It is a
disturbing antithesis: a government that was ostensibly elected
democratically is now in the vanguard of an assault against some of
the pillars of democracy itself namely the right to choose, the
right to differ, the right to associate freely, and the right to
express opinions as free citizens under the rule of law. Any
government that breaks the law so brazenly threatens the very
foundations of society itself, and the objectives of an open society
and the common good. Nor is this the first time that the Obasanjo
government will behave in this manner.
Other instances
include the disruption, last year, of a rally in Osun, that was
organised in honour of Chief Bisi Akande, the 2005 open attack
on a group of women led by Mrs Jadesola Akande who were
expressing solidarity with women who lost their loved ones in
the famous Sosoliso air crash, the March 17, 2006 attack on a
meeting of the Advanced Congres of Democrats (ACD) in Dutse,
Jigawa State, and the March 20 arrest of Alhaji Lawal kaita, a
chieftain of the ACD. Even more telling is the arraignment in
court of Miss Funke Adedoyin, Mrs Kofo Olugbesan, Lawal Abba,
Musa Garba and others for belonging to a so-called illegal
group, the Turaki Vanguard. The accused persons, it is alleged,
belong to "a society which is dangerous to the good government
of Nigeria". And what did they do? These are friends of the Vice
President, Abubakar Atiku, (closeness to the VP is a major crime
in the corridors of power these days); in addition, these
members of the Turaki Vanguard had the effrontery to describe
the current Federal Government as "corrupt". The case is in
court. It will be interesting to know what the court will come
up with.
But so far, what
is indicated in all these instances of repression, is sheer
blackmail and abuse of fundamental human rights. The "police
permit" that security agencies continue to insist upon has
since been upheld by the Court of Appeal in the case of
Lewis Chukwuma and 2 ors v. Commissioner of Police (March
2005). Nonetheless, the conduct of the police and other
security agencies in these matters amounts to a violation of
the right to the dignity of the human person. Of what use is
the brutalisation of Francis Amadiegwu? The fellow should go
to court to enforce his rights under the Constitution. The
job of the police and the SSS is to ensure security, not to
act as an attack dog against perceived enemies of the
President. If the politicians who gathered at the Sheraton
Hotel had been friends of the President, definitely they
would have been offered state protection.
There is a
creeping absence of civility in the conduct of public
officials at the highest levels. "Instructions from
above?" Who else could have given such instructions to
brutalise members of the National Assembly, a former
Head of State, former Governors, former
Inspectors-General of Police, former Ministers just
because they dared to differ? If Major-General Muhammadu
Buhari had defied the SSS Director, and tried to enter
the hall, would he also have been wrestled to the ground
and beaten "black and blue"? If the Governors had
organised a rebellion, would they also have been beaten
"black and blue"? Whoever gave those "instructions from
above" cares very little about civility. There is only
one way to describe what is happening: it is bad.
Defiant,
the anti-third term protesters moved their meeting
to the Niger State Governor's Lodge, where with
Governor Abdulkadir Kure as their host, they met
till 12 midnight. Curiously, the security agents did
not go to that other venue to disrupt the meeting.
Was there a police permit for that second meeting?
Or the police and the SSS did not consider the logic
and consistency of their action? Anyhow, their point
had been made based on 'anti-democratic instructions
from above". But the main significance of the
meeting hosted by the Niger State Governor was the
presence of the Vice President Atiku Abubakar. The
relationship between the President and his Deputy
collapsed a long time ago. But the Vice President
has been fighting quietly, while the President has
done whatever he can to make him redundant and to
ridicule him. Note: Atiku's supporters are in court
for opposing the Federal Government; the "Turaki
Vanguard", the VP's political machinery has been
labelled a dangerous society, and yet this was the
same machinery that facilitated the President's
election in 1999.
But
we have now reached a point when the Vice
President is fighting his boss publicly. The
President had once accused him of disloyalty: he
is now affirming that disloyalty by declaring,
once more, his opposition to the transformation
of the PDP into a one-man estate, and the abuse
of Presidential office. At the meeting at the
Niger State Lodge, Atiku openly called on
members of the National Assembly to oppose
President Obasanjo; he also invited more persons
to join the anti-third term campaign. Atiku is
an insider, even if his boss has labelled him a
leper. His open revolt confirms the existence of
a third term agenda.
Atiku's words bristled with anger and
disgust. He holds his boss in extremely low
esteem. He even called on Nigerians to stand
up and protect democracy. And he pledged his
loyalty to the struggle; "I want to assure
you I am always available and I will give
you any support that you need, I will be
with you, look when I begin to talk, you
will know more". Without any doubt, the
Nigerian Presidency has collapsed. The feud
between the President and his Deputy has
brought that exalted office to great
ridicule. With Atiku coming out in the open
to organise a rebellion against his boss, it
is doubtful if any real governance can take
place henceforth. What the Vice President
has done is to stage a moral coup against
his boss. President Obasanjo may not know
it, but his Deputy has proven to be a master
politician, he has dealt him a deep,
retaliatory cut.
There are some moral questions. If Vice
President Atiku is so disgusted with his
boss, the PDP and the character of
government, should he continue to remain
in office? Shouldn't he just walk away
and build up the opposition? Does he not
see a contradiction in the dual role he
now plays as an insider and outsider? If
he openly identifies with "enemies of
the government and enemies of the
President", would he not feel
uncomfortable sitting at the same table
with the President? I once wrote that
there would be injuries on all sides in
the Atiku-Obasanjo feud. I also
predicted that the "body bags would soon
begin to arrive, and we shall start
counting....." ("The long knives are out
for Atiku", The Guardian, September 2.
2005, p. 51.) We have now entered that
season of the swords! Femi Fani-Kayode
acting on "instructions from above," has
asked Vice President Atiku to resign.
You see the kind of government they are
running in Abuja: a Presidential
Assistant abusing the Vice President?
Surely, Atiku is not going to resign:
his strength lies in the fact that he is
an aggrieved and well-positioned
insider. As Vice-President, he is
covered by constitutional immunity. He
will hold on to that until his fight
with the President is resolved: the
battle has gone so far now...The Vice
President can only be removed in four
ways: if he suddenly dies, if he is
incapacitated, if he is impeached or if
he chooses to resign. The emergent
dilemma is that he will not resign and
the National Assembly has already been
put in a difficult situation where it
cannot afford to take sides in the
Presidential debacle.
Whichever way it all goes, Atiku's
revolt is bound to become another
major event in the history of
Nigeria's Fourth Republic, in more
or less the same class as the crisis
in Anambra, Plateau, Oyo, and
Bayelsa, except that for now, it is
difficult to predict the end of this
particular battle. What can be
safely surmised is that President
Obasanjo may soon discover that he
is about to receive another lesson
in the intricacies of power
politics. Abacha taught him that
lesson once. The second lesson may
come from Atiku. Why, to start with,
did the Niger State Governor agree
to host the anti-third term
campaigners? Why was the Niger state
Governor so defiant? The long
awaited "bloodshed" in the
Presidency has begun...Poor
Nigerians.
|
