Being a columnist is a privilege, which should not be abused. The fact that one is a columnist does not suggest that one has superior patriotism, knowledge or wisdom. Therefore that platform has to be used with the highest sense of responsibility rather than turning a newspaper column into a licence to abuse individuals at will to gratify private antipathy.
Being a columnist is a privilege, which should not be abused. The fact that one is a columnist does not suggest that one has superior patriotism, knowledge or wisdom. Therefore that platform has to be used with the highest sense of responsibility rather than turning a newspaper column into a licence to abuse individuals at will to gratify private antipathy.
In particular, it was hard to resist Okey’s “offside musings” of Tuesday (Saharareporter and Daily Sun 14-10-2008) in which he spared no effort to put down former Vice President Atiku Abubakar just because of the speculation that the AC presidential candidate in the 2007 election is allegedly planning to return to PDP.
Since Atiku has not formally decided to rejoin the PDP, it is like jumping the gun by reacting to a political event that hasn’t taken place. Indeed, Atiku is not ignorant of the implications of whatever course of action he takes on his political future. However, let us not descend on the man with such acerbic attack when he has not taken a decision on the issue, which is more complex than it appears.
Democracy guarantees any member of the society the freedom to hold opinion but that liberty does not give us the right to abuse others at will out of sheer personal animosity. Ordinarily, one would have opted to ignore Okey Ndibe but that would have left him celebrating the victory of personal malice over objective analysis of the recent political developments in Nigeria and Atiku’s involvement with those events.
Falsehood and half-truth, if left unchallenged will take on the colour of truth, according to ancient Greek Philosopher, Aristotle. An Hausa Proverb also says “if the dwarf hits you, bend down to his level and strike back”. This implies that if a writer throws civility to the wind, you must respond in kind.
Okey would have been given the benefit of the doubt in his premature attempt to lynch Atiku but the fact that about five years ago, (precisely June, 2003) he had written the same contemptuous opinion of Atiku in his Column in the Guardian of Lagos.
At this stage, let us examine some of the vacuous arguments of Ndibe and expose his private personal vendetta against the former Vice President. For example, instead of limiting himself to the wisdom or folly of Atiku’s return to the PDP (if he ever does so), the columnist overstepped his bounds by pouring personal abuse on the former Vice President. This is nothing short of blackmail.
According to him, “myopia and the pursuit of personal aggrandizement” are the only features “consistent with Atiku’s public profile”. He also describes Atiku as the embodiment of “unprincipled, expedient and cynical Nigerian politics”. Heaping one abuse after another, he accused Atiku of not articulating any vision for transforming Nigeria and that the former Vice President did not espouse any political cause, admitting grudgingly that even the resistance to Obasanjo’s third term agenda was by sheer chance.
To cap it all, Mr. Ndibe also alleged that even when Atiku had a political leverage during Obasanjo’s first term in office, his tenure was characterized by “ineptitude, unbridled graft and absence of accountability.” These sensational allegations are superficially appealing at least to the credulous reader. And to allow him run away with such wild but unsubstantiated allegations carries the risk of feeding the public with utter rubbish in what was supposed to be inferred, unbiased and fair analysis.
Bias, personal vendetta and prejudice robs public discourse of objectivity and respectability. And for this reason, it is necessary to expose the superficiality and porosity of his logic. “Half-truth”, according to a U.S. educationist, Dr. Erwin Kirsch, “are frequently more dangerous than downright mistakes.” Because of his deliberate distortion of facts, discerning readers should not let him take the liberty of insulting their intelligence.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content1'); });
It is a common maxim among judges and lawyers that suspicion, however strong, cannot be the substitute for proof. The Columnist didn’t provide any evidence of Atiku’s corrupt behaviour when he enjoyed “political leverage” during Obasanjo’s first term. Surely, Ndibe could not have been more eager than former President Obasanjo in the desire to nail Atiku through allegations of corruption.
Admittedly, the former President assigned significant roles to Atiku Abubakar such as the chairman of the National Economic Council and the chairman of the National Council on Privatisation. But what was Ndibe’s proof that while he served in these capacities, the former Vice President manifested corrupt tendencies and ineptitude?
On the contrary, he discharged his functions effectively and transparently. Even when he was removed as the chairman of the National Council on Privatization, it was informed more by political motives than any proof of incompetence or corruption. What happened then, was that after Atiku’s removal as the chairman of the Privatization Council, the process ran into a huge controversy. Despite allegations that Atiku sold public assets to himself and associates, Obasanjo and other Atiku enemies couldn’t adduce any proof. In fact, corruption, greed, selfishness and cronyism became the notorious features of privatization after Atiku’s exit as the overseer of Privatization. Public hearings by the National Assembly in the last one year have exposed those that actually subverted the privatization policy for private gain. Was Ndibe sleeping? Did the National Assembly identify any public assets Atiku sold to himself or friends as the Chairman of the Privatization Council?
The Columnist also defeats his arguments by the fallacy of generalization. According to him, Atiku’s career in the Customs didn’t help his image because of the perception that the department is a “bastion of corruption.” In fact, this is the most curious and preposterous logic that can send even a kindergarten kid dying with laughter! Rather than come up with specific evidence of individuals who are corrupt merely because they work in the Customs, Mr. Ndibe feels he owes us no proof.
By his flimsy logic, does it suggest that anyone that ever worked in the Customs cannot rise through honest labour? Indeed, if Atiku’s political enemies or opponents had any proof of the money he allegedly stole while serving as a Customs Officer, they would have used it enthusiastically to end his (Atiku) political career from the start when the late Gen. Yar’Adua lured him into the political foray in 1989.
Does it also mean that anyone who works in government departments outside Customs is automatically clean because the society does not perceive them as corrupt? But that appears to be the simplistic theory Mr. Ndibe was throwing up to mislead his uncritical readers. Therefore, all those working in other departments of government need not declare their assets because they are inherently incorruptible by the mere fact that they are not in Customs.
If ineptitude was one of the features of Atiku’s tenure in office, why did Nigeria successfully host the All African Games in Abuja under his supervision in 2003? Why did Nigeria also successfully host the Commonwealth Heads of Government Summit in Abuja in 2004? Didn’t former President Obasanjo pay tribute to Atiku for such feats?
The Columnist also exposes his ignorance by asserting that the former Vice President articulated no vision for transforming Nigeria. This means, Mr. Ndibe is ignorant of the five-point agenda Atiku put together to sell his candidacy for presidency in the 2007 election. It is also clear that Ndibe never read Atiku’s Policy Document for the 2007 presidential campaigns, which was unfortunately stolen by the PDP otherwise he would have been helpful to his readers in understanding why every now and them, the Yar’Adua Federal Administration has been raiding the Atiku document for ideas that they themselves know, they are bereft of. By the way, Atiku was the only presidential candidate who presented his vision for Nigeria in the form of a Policy Document entitled “From Reform to Prosperity”.
Okey Ndibe, as a Nigerian has a right to his opinion on issues. But, this cannot be a licence to deny others their opinions. If he has any problem with Atiku going into the PDP, as many are bound to, he ought to have limited his grouse to that rather than engaging in an unprovoked acerbic attack on him. A writer’s frustration cannot be a licence to constitute a public nuisance.
A conscientious writer will give his subject the benefit of the doubt rather than rushing into conclusions on a matter the subject, of which is still speculative.
As things now stand, Atiku is a leader of the Action Congress and its candidate in the 2007 election which fate will be decided by the Nigeria Supreme Court.
Signed:
DAVID USMAN,
ATIKU CAMPAIGN ORGANISATION,
61,EBITU UKIWE,
JABI ABUJA.
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('content2'); });
googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('comments'); });