Expectedly, opinions have remained divided on the truce between the feuding parties in the Rivers State crisis as hammered out by President Tinubu, particularly in terms of what it bodes for the peace of the state. Going by the sketch of the details already in the public domain, it is clear that the suspended governor came out far worse than his supporters could have imagined. Going by the terms of the settlement, not only is the governor precluded from having a go at a second term which he is constitutionally entitled, his boss and nemesis, Nyesom Wike, still retains the prerogative to nominate all the local government chairpersons across the 23 LGAs of the state.
In fairness to the suspended governor, he appears to appreciate, at least for the time being, the imperative of peace, going as far as to declare his willingness to make difficult but necessary sacrifices.
His words: “The sacrifice that we are going to make for us to achieve this total peace is going to be heavy, and I want everybody to prepare for it…Without a total reconciliation, which by the grace of God both of us have gotten, there’s no way we can make progress in this state, there’s no way the president can come in to save the situation…So, I want to appeal to everyone, I have accepted that we must accept this peace no matter how it looks. No matter how you feel, we must accept it.”
He also left no one in doubt of how much of the native wisdom that must have come his way, in the past few months of grim reflection. Using the analogy of the native fish ‘Atabala’, (tilapia) to make his point, he says: ‘The native tilapia doesn’t grow big. The mother tilapia tells the kids that if you want to grow up to my own size, hide your head inside the mud’ – an apt reminder of the folly of duelling with one’s chi!
Now, Nigerians cannot but wonder how different things would have been had the ‘Atabala’ wisdom availed him in those early days.
Of course, the beautiful, multi-billion naira edifice that served as parliament building would have been spared the torching by arsonists and subsequently, the bulldozers of a desperate governor.
Second, the needless turf wars and the resort to brigandage would have been needless; in fact, Nigerians would have been spared the debate on parliamentary quorum and the question of whether a governor could pick which faction of the parliament to work with. Third, the whole point about the president being dragged into the fray between godfather and son would have been most unnecessary. Indeed, the president would have been spared the indignity of having the settlement he brokered torn into shreds by the governor and his army of conflict entrepreneurs.
Fourth, the ordinary citizen would have been spared the affliction of those asinine talking points daily regurgitated on prime time hours on television by those whose interests are barely disguised.
Fifth, the section of the judiciary which insisted on playing the errand for soulless politicians would have been spared the indignity of being de-robed in the market square by the apex court, followed by the weighty characterisation of the governor as a ‘dictator’ and serial lawbreaker and with it its frightening constitutional portents by the highest court in the land!
We can add to these the ordeal of kicking the executive and the parliament out of office – temporarily – to stave off further impunity!
Little wonder the Holy writ counsels that one gets wisdom as it is the principal thing in all of life’s endeavours.
As it is, it must be interesting to see the parties back to the same spot where they left off: the feet of the same president whose counsel the suspended governor and his supporters had once scoffed. This time around however, he’s probably emerged far worse than the last time. Once out of power, he suddenly realises that has no jokers left to play.
Faced with the new reality, the governor, now powerless, is forced to carry the burden of marketing the gospel of conciliation to his Simplified Movement even when all they could see is plain, undisguised capitulation! Nothing about his willingness to swallow the humble pie to enable peace to return to the state appears to make sense to them. One particular group that calls itself the Rivers Emancipation Movement says Fubara’s concessions amount to a “surrender” of his authority; and that they were made without sufficient consultation! (Did they bother to read the constitution?)
As far as the group is concerned, any settlement that falls short of restoring their man to his erstwhile pre-eminence is akin to a blow to the solar plexus.
Never mind that the governor and he alone, will have to bear his cross!
Of course, the group of 27 lawmakers must be having a good laugh at the turn out of events. After all, it is an open secret that even before the governor’s rustication, he had neither regard for them nor the institution they represented. Unable to carve the institution in his image and likeness, he, Fubara, had thought little of abolishing the institution, opting to work instead with a renegade minority that had no quorum and so no authority to conduct any business let alone the all-important legislative business. Now they are back, with their powers fully restored. They have nothing to worry about in whether or not their due emoluments would be paid, or who had the authority to pass and oversight the state budget.
In all of these, I believe the lesson is clear: there can be no fighting a right battle in a wrong way or vice versa. Nyesom Wike and the Group of 27 may have been Lucifer and his fallen angels combined; they may actually represent everything odious in politics and leadership to some, there is no reported incident of brazen lawlessness on their part. It was not his group that torched the parliament or desecrated the sacred institution that is at the heart of constitutional democracy; they had no part in the pulling down of the parliament building, which although not illegal outright in the circumstance, amounts to an egregious mocking of the law. Wike’s group had nothing to do with it! Or what the apex court aptly described as the reign of the dictator or autocrat, in a constitutional democracy. It was a case of one group taking to brazing outlawry while the other watched.
Credit:The Nation