Notwithstanding different views expressed on different days by Martins Oloja and Onofiok Luke on how rift between former governor(s) and present governor(s) has had bearings and brunt on the development of Akwa Ibom, their positions should not only be case studies for momentary dissection but anatomy for fathoming elements of good and bad inherent in Nigeria’s democratic government. It could help in checkmating the ever-present devil from rearing its ugly heads of underdevelopment, thereby fostering frontiers of good governance and accelerating human development.
Oloja and Onofiok are in separate callings. The former is the Managing Director/Editor-in-Chief of The Guardian, currently estimated by many to be the flagship of the Nigerian press. The latter, who is a lawyer and politician, is the immediate past chairman of Nigeria’s House of Representative committee on federal judiciary. What the two idealistic persons have in common is advocacy.
Shortly after returning from the 19th All Nigeria Editors Conference in Uyo to his base in Lagos, Oloja, among his other takes from Akwa Ibom posited in his column in Sunday Guardian of November 19 that “management of succession plan and its discontents within the context of democracy may be another way to make democracy safe in Nigeria.” He cited projects done since the return to democracy in 1999 by the successive administrations of Victor Attah, Godswill Akpabio, Udom Emmanuel and the current Umo Eno. Describing it as “some strangeness in the polity”, Oloja noted that democratic governance can trigger development too if our elected leaders can work differently by ensuring that they commit public funds to work in public interest.”
Onoja’s position stems from the fact that, typically of what is currently obtained in the present era in Nigeria, rivalries between serving and immediate predecessor were ensuing among the three former governors of Akwa Ibom in their respective times. The political enmity that defined Attah and Akpabio’s relationship between 2007 and 2015 can easily be traced to the fact that the latter was not the preferred choice to succeed the former.
Even though, Akpabio became governor through the mandate of the people expressed through election, Attah was not democratic enough to make peace with himself by appreciating the fact that in democracy the choice of the people subsumes that of an individual person. Gratifyingly, Attah’s displeasure and adversarial scheming against Akpabio seems to have been one of the factors that spurred the Nigeria’s current Senate President to commit himself to making a marked difference in governance, especially in infrastructural development. While some of Attah’s legacy projects, such as airport, were only architectural masterpiece on the drawing board and site clearing, Akpabio’s will-power brought some of the visions of his predecessor to reality.
In his own time, Akpabio was reveling in personal success in making Udom his successor, only for the relationship to turn sour when the then Senate Minority Leader dumped the PDP, leaving Udom, who was considered a political neophyte to be scampering for his political survival, which he did unscathed. Even while taking dictations from his predecessor, Udom never lost consciousness of having his own signature appended on works in the state, hence initiating and completing a number of his own projects before the end of his eight-year tenure. Udom’s identity in governance sprout out boldly immediately Akpabio joined APC. Debatable as it might be, there are a number of instances lending credence to Onoja’s point of view.
On the other hand, since the return to democracy in 1999, clashes of interest between godfathers and god-sons have become recurrent factor in shaping, shattering and reshaping Nigeria’s political history. Given the father-figure influence that present and past governors have on leadership recruitment and disengagement processes, which mostly revolves around their personal interest, their conflicting politicking constitutes a chunk in chapters that discuss how the Nigerian political class have bastardized democracy. At the moment, Governor Siminalayi Fubara and FCT Minister Nyesom Wike are offering example of that in oil-rich Rivers State.
In 2013, following my enquiries as to why Akpabio was not continuing with science park project initiated but not completed by Attah’s administration, a commissioner, who hails from Attah’s part in the state, who was also one of the prominent beneficiaries in Attah’s administration, rationalized that other projects of Attah’s government completed by Akpabio were still credited to the former governor and that the abandonment of the science park serves notice that it took Akpabio for Attah to have projects that he could be remembered for. Whether that holds truism or falsehood, it speaks volume of pettiness exhibited by some public office holders on public works in Nigeria.
Around 2010, in the heat of Akpabio-Attah face-off, former Deputy Governor Chris Ekpenyong told me that crisis rocking Attah and Akpabio was nemesis and that Akpabio would have his own share at his own turn. According to Ekpenyong, who deputized Attah for over five years, the seed for such discord was sown by his former principal for allegedly snubbing Chief Don Etiebet, who was, to a large extent, the decider-in-chief in his emergence on the governorship throne. Shortly after he was elected governor, even before assuming the governorship office, the architect-turned-politician worked against Etiebet’s political interest, including the presidential aspiration of the Imperial College-trained geophysicist. It took overwhelming support of Akwa Ibom delegates at PDP’s first presidential primary held in Jos for Etiebet to emerge second runner-up.
Rivalry, though not strange in human environment, is an anathema. Matters in this regard is worsening when it is about leaders’ selfish interest and not to improve the welfare of the very people the leaders were meant serve. But even if opposition involving past and present governors, is jinxed such jinx can be broken with no one being maimed. Even if the seed of such nemesis was sown deed down the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, it can be uprooted without anyone getting drowned. It takes willingness on the part of major political players in the polity to make desired difference. It also requires a person to rise up to the occasion.
On December 8 at a dinner session under the auspices of Akwa Ibom State council of the Nigerian Union of Journalists (NUJ), Onofiok tasked journalists and other people to think through what would have been the level of development in Akwa Ibom had Attah and Akpabio been in harmony between 2007 and 2015 and Udom followed suit in his time. Believing, like so many other people, that peace and unity are panacea for development, the former speaker of the Akwa Ibom State House of Assembly, who now takes pride in returning to private citizenship, announced that, in addition to his private legal practice, he is currently occupying his time on a project for unity and peaceful co-existence of the people of Akwa Ibom. In fact, he launched a call on journalists to get enlisted in the project.
Admonishing that, contrary to his initial thinking, he has since realized that neither Abuja nor Lagos is for all Nigerians, he stressed the need for indigenes of Akwa Ibom to see the state as the only place they can call theirs and lay claim to the belongings of the state. Onofiok modeled the friendly disposition that have been demonstrated by two top government functionaries from two opposing parties of PDP and APC – Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Governor Umo Eno. He is anticipating a scenario where the three former governors of the state and the present governor would sit on the same table, having heartily gist and winning and dining without using long spoons.
Although Onofiok is pursuing a noble cause that is not targeted against anyone or group of persons but aimed at achieving societal harmony for overall good of Akwa Ibom collective enterprise, it is imperative to acknowledge from the starting line that he is embarking on a fight. No matter how honourable and populistic a cause for societal good might appear, it evokes strenuous fight because intrinsic elements that sustain a system inimical to human greatness can never sit idle to be dethroned, without fighting back to maintain its grip of grim picture. So, Onofiok , who is not new in prosecuting battles, even against authority, is on a new offensive, and this offensive is for Akwa Ibom prosperity.
Another challenge on the project of Private Citizen Onofiok is that those pushing for reformation are hardly endorsed by establishments. It is worsening when such change agents are from private citizens that Onofiok now returns to. Nigerian does not fall among countries that can be exemplified for jealously protecting its citizens. Except those with gargantuan economic resources, who are also allies of those in power, pushing for change from private flank is always very expensive and risky. That is why journalists, rights activists and other public concerned individuals have been endangered species in Nigeria
But change has to be achieved somewhere, if not everywhere. With a personal quest given to it by Onofiok in the public, he has set the ball rolling. Any good person with good conscience for Akwa Ibom should be on the ball in order to get it to its goal. In this kind of game, everybody wins and nobody loses. On this particular project, Private Citizen Onofiok needs all necessary pushes from relevant public citizens. Happily, Umo Eno has indicated from inception that he is poised to break the jinx by being different from his immediate three predecessors. Let him keep it up!
Also Read:
- Paternity dispute: Court cautions ex-minister’s lawyer over frivolous adjournment
- Afenifere appoints Dele Farotimi as Organising Secretary
- No better time than now for 24-hour port operations -Ministers, others
- Ibom Entertainment Forum begins membership re-validation exercise
- Sanwo-Olu celebrate ex-Deputy Governor Pedro at 70
Get me clear: while Oloja’s position on rivalry between former and present governors may be considered inherent evil genius that promotes development through competition between the past and the present, Onofiok’s offensive to get rid of strife among political leaders should be seen as conscious effort for angels of harmony to factor into political governance of Akwa Ibom.
Ekanem sent this piece through nsikak4media@gmail.com
Follow The Eagle Online Channel on WhatsApp
