Features
TINUBU: A Matter of Character

By Chris Gyang

Character is that which reveals moral purpose, exposing the class of things a man chooses and avoids. A good character carries with it the highest power of causing a thing to be believed – Aristotle.

The pursuit and exercise of power and influence expose some of man’s basest instincts. But there are times when leadership brings out the nobility in man, even if rarely.
Some men and women can effortlessly kill, cheat, lie and employ all manner of intrigues to gain and hold on to power. For them, all is fair in that game.
But not in a liberal democracy. This is because democracy is firmly rooted in justice, equity and the will of the majority of citizens. Above all, the people who lead are expected to be of impeccable character. Oftentimes, this is the most difficult, unpalatable, aspect of this form of government.
It insists that those who aspire to be leaders must not harbour dark secrets to the extent that they, just as President Tinubu has done, appeal to a court of law not to disclose their academic records because that would do them irreparable personal harm!
Democracy is the best form of government because it is for the people, by the people and of the people. But, beyond that, there are other salient and fundamental values that undergird its very essence.
One of these has to do with the character of the individuals who govern. Shorn of this ethical imperative, all of democracy’s remarkable benefits amount to naught.
Writing in the STATESMAN JOURNAL (January 10, 2022), Hope Gillette explains that, as part of an individual’s personality, character “represents your ethical, moral, and social attitudes and beliefs.”
The writer adds that some of the components of a person’s character are honesty, loyalty, generosity, positive ambition and integrity and that it is formed through “the conscious and subconscious thought patters that result from learning and interacting with the world around you.”
To put the above in the context of currents events in Nigeria, we offer Festus Adedayo’s character assessment of our president. He opens with these rhetorical questions: “Who is the man who today sits atop the presidency of Nigeria? What is his name? Who are his parents? What was his childhood like? What primary school did he attend? Where did he attend secondary school? Can he be trusted with the destinies of over 200 million Nigerians? Can the rest of the world trust him as the embodiment of Nigeria?” (See SUNDAY TRIBUNE, October 8, 2023).
In his own way, an equally flabbergasted Sonala Olumhense paints a no less unflattering picture. In his weekly column in THE PUNCH newspaper (October 8, 2023), titled ‘A forged presidency?’, he notes: “We have seen senatorial, governorship and presidential candidates stammer and stumble as soon as a flashlight is held to their academic claims.
“But never had we seen a president as a certificate-forger. Sadly, and in full view of the world, Bola Ahmed Tinubu now has.
“…. Two things make Tinubu’s case particularly grim. The first is that it is not the first, or second, or even 10th time the former Governor of Lagos State has been exposed for being less than, or different from, whom he claims to be. It is public knowledge, first in Nigeria but now internationally, that none but he really knows who he is, and that if you accept one claim, it is immediately controverted by another.”
Back on November 13, 2022, Obi Nwakanma had posed disturbing questions about Tinubu’s alleged involvement in a drug deal in the United States of America. He also began by asking this question: “Was Bola Ahmed Tinubu – the presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) – a drug lord?”
Then he proceeded: “The story is not new, but it won’t go away…. It is the unsettled ghost of a life and a time of imponderable risks and high ambition. It adds to the complicated and unfinished, even enigmatic, life of Tinubu.”
He revealed how, on October 5, 1999, the late Gani Fawehinmi sought an order of mandamus against the Attorney General and Inspector General of Police for the court to compel them to investigate Tinubu for presenting forged documents that qualified him to run for election. But nothing materialized from that.
And even though those allegations, just like many others against Tinubu, were flimsily explained away, Nwakanma had the foresight to warn:
“The implication of a Bola Tinubu, if he was a former drug baron, contesting for the presidency of Nigeria is far too disturbing for words. If he ever gets elected, he presents a major national security risk, and Nigeria would officially have joined the rank of pariah narco-nations…. This matter must be settled. It is not going to go away.”
In a democracy, leaders’ lives should be transparent books open to public scrutiny at all times. Which is why it comes at a pretty high price for whoever wishes to lead. It is unlike closed dictatorships where despots thrive on utmost secrecy and the cult of personality.
Democracy stands out not because it is flawless. Far from it. It towers above other forms of government because it demands that those who bring themselves up to serve must undergo a grueling process of self-examination in order to meet its very high standards.
At face value, character may appear trite, even worthless, in the rank scale of the overall pillars of democracy. Nevertheless, it dictates and sets the terms and standards for leaders – the very drivers of the machinery of state.
Our leadership space may be crowded with questionable characters. But must we descend so low as to also look the other way as a man whose popularity among citizens is fast waning (not forgetting that he was able to get only 37% of the presidential vote) gleefully struts the red carpets of the highest office in the land?
We need not sound the alarm that Nigeria is already the laughing stock of the world. Tinubu crossed the Rubicon a long time ago and the public has little hope in the judiciary to turn things around.
Those who say that Atiku Abubakar’s insistence on unearthing some truths about Tinubu is a personal vendetta do not appear to know what Tinubu really bargained for the day he decided to contest for the presidency. Perhaps they are either deliberately trying to hoodwink Nigerians or are simply being mischievous.
Well, if they continue to insist that Atiku’s gambit is entirely politically motivated, they are entitled to their own view. But they should know that if Atiku’s efforts ultimately lead to exposing Tinubu for what he truly is, nay, has always been, majority of Nigerians stand with him.
Without character, the morality that of necessity invigorates those who control the levers of state power would naturally run dry. Consequently, democracy either crashes or, as we have seen elsewhere in recent times, turns into a self-serving autocracy that attracts military adventurists, anxious to cash in on popular discontent.
President Joe Biden, the most powerful leader in the world today, is currently facing impeachment charges in Congress. His predecessor, Trump, one of the most ferocious political figures in the USA at the moment, is being dragged through several courts for crimes he allegedly committed against his country.
You may wish to dismiss both men’s travails as political witch-hunt. But that is the stuff democracy is made of. Individuals who wish to lead or hold public office are required to be above board, both in character and deed, because they are bound to be held up for very close, sometimes quite uncomfortable, public inspection.
Often, that may seem to be unnecessary meddlesomeness, even unbearable cruelty. But that is what makes democracy avoid the moral bankruptcy of other systems.
Who are our heroes in this tortuous journey of democracy? This is the urgent question our youth, who make up the largest chunk of our demographic, and other Nigerians are asking as we stand at this critical crossroads of our fledgling democracy.
To close, it is pertinent to reiterate our arguments with this quotation from the British writer and politician, Thomas Babington Macaulay (1800-1859): “The measure of a man’s character is what he would do if he knew he never would be found out.”
GYANG is the Chairman of the N.G.O, Journalists Coalition for Citizens’ Rights Initiative – JCCRI. Emails: info@jccri-online.org; chrisgyang 01@gmail.com

Features
Bruno Fernandes: Mikel Arteta credits ‘smart’ Man Utd captain for free-kick as Gary Neville says wall ‘too far back’

Mikel Arteta says Bruno Fernandes was “smarter” than referee Anthony Taylor over his free-kick that gave Manchester United the lead against Arsenal in 1-1 draw on Sunday; referee moved defensive wall 11.2 yards back; Gary Neville criticised Arsenal over incident

Mikel Arteta refused to criticise Anthony Taylor for sending Arsenal’s defensive wall too far back for Bruno Fernandes’ free-kick in their 1-1 draw but said the Manchester United captain had been “smarter” than the referee in taking advantage to net his fine strike.

Broadcast technology found Taylor marched the Arsenal defensive line 11.2 yards back, further than the minimum 10 yards required in the Laws of the Game, before Fernandes curled a dead ball inside the near post shortly before half-time.
“At the end of the day the referee is pushing them back too far, which is a mistake, but ordinarily you would sense you’re too far away and creep forward,” said Gary Neville on the Gary Neville Podcast.
“They didn’t do that and it ends up that Bruno Fernandes has the ability to play it over the wall.”
The United captain’s technique was superb but, like Neville, the Super Sunday pundits questioned whether his goal would have been possible had Arsenal’s five-player wall been closer.
Arteta refused to be drawn over the incident, only to congratulate Fernandes for making the most of the advantage he had been given.
“He’s been smart and he took advantage, that is football,” he told Sky Sports. “He’s been smarter than the ref. That’s OK, they allowed him to do it.”
Player of the match Declan Rice, who netted Arsenal’s equaliser after half-time, took the blame for the goal on himself and the other members of the Gunners wall, though he also felt it had been pushed too far back.
“It felt like a couple of us jumped and some of us didn’t, but I’ve not seen it back,” he told Sky Sports. “It felt like the ball flew over us at quite a low height so, from the wall’s perspective, we could have done a lot better.
“The wall did feel far back. Even on our free-kick, when Martin [Odegaard] took it, they felt far back as well, more than usual. But the referee makes that decision.”
After half-time, another free-kick from Martin Odegaard was being lined up when Taylor again appeared to exceed 10 yards when marking out where Man Utd’s defensive wall could stand.
As Neville had suggested Arsenal should do, Noussair Mazraoui questioned Taylor over the distance, while the wall itself crept forward before Odegaard’s strike – and did its job when his effort rebounded away to safety.
Manchester United head coach Ruben Amorim told Sky Sports he had noticed the issues with both free-kicks but had no intention of helping Arsenal out ahead of Fernandes’ opener.
He said: “It was clear, both free-kicks. So when it’s your free kick, you don’t say anything. When it’s the opponent, you try to push because it’s a big difference.
“It was fair, one for us, one for them. We had Bruno and he solved the problem.”
Man Utd midfielder Christian Eriksen, who has scored eight Premier League free-kicks, explained after the game the sizeable difference even 1.2 yards extra would make for a dead-ball specialist.
“It makes a very big difference,” he told Sky Sports. “When the ball is over the wall you don’t need to hit it as high – going down to statistics and how far they are back and how many metres and how they jump. So it’s easier and it gives Bruno a bit more space to put it over the wall.
“It was very good. It helped that the wall was about 15 metres away, so it was perfect for him to put it over.
“I saw it early [that the wall was a fair way back]. Even before the kick you could see how far back they were, and it was the same when they had it in the second half – obviously we were a bit angry with the ref [at that point] for putting us so far back after we saw that Bruno scored.
“But I think it was just beneficial to us.”

Features
Sule Lamido: Statesman, bridge builder

Alhaji Sule Lamido was born August 30, 1948. He is a native of Bamaina village, Jigawa State, and is known for his wide-level exposure in leadership. He attended Birnin Kudu school, for his primary education in 1955 and proceeded for his secondary education at the prestigious Barewa College, Zaria, Kaduna State.

Lamido embarked on a course in Railway engineering at the Permanent way training school, Zaria, Kaduna where he gained knowledge on the rail transport operations. Upon graduation from the Permanent Way Training School, Lamido started his career as a Quality Control officer at the Nigeria Tobacco Company in Zaria. He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country.

He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country. In 1992, Lamido ventured into politics, first in the second republic as a member of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) where he was an active member. Lamido was also active in the third republic, as a member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and played a key role as the National Secretary in the party. The seasoned politician was also a delegate of the 1995 National Constitutional Conference in Abuja the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).
During the military regime of the late Gen Sani Abacha, Lamido was a member of the G-34 political movement which was a notable and powerful opposition group that shaped Nigeria’s fourth republic. After several years of the Military junta in Nigeria, Sule Lamido returned back to active politics in the fourth republic under the platform of the People’s Democratic Party.
He was appointed the Foreign Affairs Minister in the first four years of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2003) at a time Nigeria had to reposition and redeem its image in the international community. As Foreign Minister he travelled with Former President Obasanjo across the globe, restoring broken relationships with the western bloc nations and opening new frontiers with countries like Japan, Russia, Brazil, China and Australia.
Other roles he played as foreign minister was representing Nigeria in the United Nations, G77 bloc of nations, Commonwealth of nations, Organization of African Unity and Economic Community of West Africa States. In November 2001, at the United Nations , Lamido described the corrosive impact of corruption on new democracies such as Nigeria, and called for “an international instrument” against transfer of looted funds abroad.
As Governor of Jigawa, Sule Lamido put the State on national scale with significant investments in infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, housing & urban development, empowerment programmes, education, rural development and industrial projects. The elder statesman is also known for his capacity to build consensus across the nation.

Features
Remembering Anthony Enahoro

By Abiodun Komolafe

It is a settled fact that Anthony Eromosele Enahoro (July 22, 1923 – December 15, 2010) was an outstanding product of Nigeria’s pre-independence era. Enahoro moved one of the motions for independence and there’s a lot for us to look at in the context of the life he lived and the political firmament that brought him up. Therefore, remembering this Father of Nigerian Nationalism is to reminisce about an era where courage and conviction were the
currencies of change.

As a pioneering journalist, politician and champion of independence, Enahoro’s unwavering commitment to Nigeria’s self-rule has left an enduring legacy that continues to inspire generations. His remarkable story is a testament to the transformative power of leadership, perseverance and the unrelenting pursuit of freedom.
Building on his legacy as a champion of independence, Enahoro went on to serve in various capacities, including as Minister of Information and Labour. He was later tried alongside Obafemi Awolowo and others for treasonable felony, a trial that became infamous in Nigerian history. Although convicted, Enahoro was later released and continued to play a significant role in shaping Nigeria’s political landscape.
Enahoro was an outstanding nationalist and a principled person, and this was evident in his involvement with the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Of course, there was no need for him and Alfred Rewane to have been involved in the struggle for the enthronement of democracy, particularly in the aftermath of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election won by MKO Abiola as they had too much to lose!. But they risked everything to fight for popular democracy, Although Rewane ultimately lost his life in the struggle, Enahoro was fortunate to have escaped the same fate.
Despite the risks and challenges, Enahoro remained unbending in his convictions, refusing to waver even in the face of adversity. As a gifted individual, he recognized that the issue at hand was not just about the violation of an individual's rights, but an affront to democracy and national sovereignty. He, along with Alfred Rewane and others fought for principles, not personalities. This commitment to principle was evident in their diverse backgrounds: Enahoro was a Christian from Uromi in Edo State, with Esan extraction; Rewane was a Christian of Urhobo descent from Delta State; and Abiola, whose rights they fought for, was a Muslim Yorubaman, from Ogun State. Unlike some NADECO members who howled with the wolves and bleated with the sheep for convenience, Enahoro was not
duplicitous. Unlike the crop of Janjaweeds who now populate our political landscape, he remained steadfast, refusing to compromise his values.
Olajumoke Ogunkeyede, a close ally of Enahoro, described him as “a man with a seriously fantastic sense of humour; Ogunkeyede, fondly called JMK, shared several instances of Enahoro’s ability to bring joy to those around him. His humorous takes on serious issues, such as the demons in Abuja, showcased his wit. Moreover, his clever commentaries, including his defence of now-President Bola Tinubu’s aspirations, and his ingenious use of allegories and analogies, like; Ogbuefi; and; Ogbueniyan’, collectively attested to the capacity of his wit and charm.
When writing about individuals like Enahoro, Rewane, Herbert Macaulay, Awolowo, Aminu Kano, Maitama Sule, and others, it’s essential to consider the context in which they lived. This context is bittersweet, as they represented an era where political activism was rooted in philosophical positions and guided by principles.
People during this time held strong convictions and were willing to make sacrifices for their beliefs. That’s why society was more orderly in their time, and it achieved proper sustainable development, unlike today where what we have is largely ‘growth without development’, to be polite, or, if we want to be impolite, ‘the development of underdevelopment’. Amidst this, our leaders continue to sing the same old, worn-out refrain while satiating a vacuous idolatry that elevates an ego bereft of substance, a hollow monolith that stands on feet of clay.
If we look at people like Enahoro and Adegoke Adelabu, their lives exemplified a paradox that underscored the tenuous relationship between knowledge and credentials. This was because, despite lacking university degrees, they possessed a profound intellectual depth that eluded many of their contemporaries who boasted an array of impressive certifications, forgetting that it is not the parchment that confers wisdom, but the depth of one's inquiry, the rigour of one's thought and the breadth of one’s understanding.
Enahoro became the youngest editor of Nnamdi Azikiwe's newspaper, the Southern Nigerian Defender, in 1944 at the age of 21 while Peter, his younger brother, became the editor of The Morning Star at the age of 23. The older Enahoro also worked with other publications, including Daily Comet and West African Pilot before parting ways with Azikiwe, whom he always referred to as his chairman, while Awolowo was his political leader. The reasons behind this preference are intriguing, but that’s a story for another time.
These early experiences laid the foundation for Enahoro’s later involvement with the Action Group (AG), a political party that shared his vision of ‘making life more abundant.’ Enahoro and the AG represented an understanding that the process of economic development must be structured and based on a philosophical thrust. In contrast, what is absurdly described as ‘politics’ today is terribly bad and basically transactional; and it’s driven by a cash-and-
carry mentality, where individuals seek to outdo one another in a chop-and-quench; political economy! No unity! No discipline! No structure! For them, any goose can cackle and any fly can find a sore place!
Looking at the plane, Enahoro’s life and career epitomized the complexities of Nigeria’s struggle for
independence and democracy. His life and work embodied the intersection of individual agency and structural forces that steered the trajectory of nations. As a prominent anti-colonial and pro- democracy activist, he played a pivotal role in the country’s transition from colonial rule to independence. The Adolor of Uromi and the Adolor of Onewa was a vocal critic of authoritarianism and a strong advocate for human rights. His perseverance in the face of resistance, setbacks and imprisonment demonstrates the dedication required to bring about
transformative change.
In moments of emotions and situations, we often discover our true strength and resilience. Enahoro has gone to the ages but his legacy continues to inspire, much like Abraham Lincolns. In simpler terms, he was a brave soul who dared to challenge the colonial powers. So, his legacy should serve as inspiration and role model for future generations, demonstrating the potential for excellence that exists within individuals and communities. In fairness to fate, Enahoro and his contemporaries were well-prepared for the liberation movement, thanks to their involvement in the West African Students Union (WASU) and their time at King’s College, Lagos. This institution, attended by Enahoro and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, was a hotbed for political activism and discourse. To truly reboot, Nigerians must remember the personal histories of pioneers like Enahoro.
Today, we remember Enahoro, a pioneering figure who dared to dream of independence for Nigeria. We honour not only his significant contributions to Nigeria’s history but also his untiring commitment to democracy, self-determination and human rights. As we remember him and his dogged commitment to federalism and the quest for social justice, it is in our best interest to recreate the ethos and the spirit which created him and people like him.
May Anthony Enahoro’s spirit soar on the wings of eternal peace!
May his memory continue to serve as a testament to the enduring impact of individual agency
on the course of national history!
May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
*KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk)

-
News6 days ago
Bill to establish National Cashew Production and Research Institute in Kogi passes first reading in Senate
-
Politics1 week ago
CPDPL accuses Adeyanju of orchestrating smear campaign against FCT Minister Wike
-
News6 days ago
Report of attack on Wike’s Port Harcourt residence false, misleading – Police
-
News6 days ago
Shehu Sani debunks Governor Uba Sani’s alleged diversion of LG funds, challenges El-Rufai to publicly tender evidence
-
News5 days ago
Plateau gov’t expresses concern over violence in Shendam LGA, calls for calm
-
Sports7 days ago
Merino gives Arsenal win over Chelsea
-
Interview6 days ago
Senators Natasha-Akpabio saga should have been resolved privately – Rev. Mrs Emeribe
-
Politics3 days ago
Opposition leaders announce coalition to challenge Tinubu in 2027