Connect with us

Opinion

Who Is Fighting Womanhood?

Published

on

It is pertinent and high time that those of us that know the intrigues of, and on goings in Kwara politics react to the multitude of rubbish being peddle and published by the media in recent time about the politics of the state.

Those who are supposing that they know, when they know nothing, and those who tend to speak with authority when they are indeed sponsored and are mouth pieces to some cowards hiding under religion to undermine their opponents and perceived enemies should be considered as devil’s tools and political enemies of the state.

Islam and other religions may have refused women (female) of religious leadership but certainly not leadership rights in the political or social arena.

The Scroll Nigeria of June 14, 2010, Vol. 3 No 24,  claimed that Senator Gbemisola Saraki has been purportedly endorsed “to contest for the 2011 governorship election by the Kwara state ‘king makers’. The magazine went on to state that “various Islamic groups had declared their disapproval over the endorsement of Gbemisola to contest in next year’s election as governor”. These and many others like it are just the machinations of some cowards who tend to hide under religion to undermine their opponents and perceived enemies. Many of the so-called Islamic religious bodies are acting out a script as spelt out by their financiers and sponsors.

From what we know, many of those who signed the fliers being circulated are not known and for some of the fliers, there were no names. Those who sees Gbemisola as a threat to the realisation of their dreams/ambition, those that feel the women folks might undermine their authority at home and those who feel that with Gbemi on board, a lot of their misdemeanours would or might be exposed are scared and terribly threatened of her coming on board because they have skeletons to hide.

However, I am a woman, but not a politician though a watcher of politics and other unfolding events in the state, I feel it is high time we do away with trivialities and unwholesome acts because of our desperation to be relevant and put food on the table.

Some of the opposition and the supposedly clerics are doing what they are doing so that they can get attention and make some quick money before the turn of events.

To clarify issues, many of us in the state know that Dr Olusola Saraki has not named any body as successor to Governor Bukola Saraki, whom one of the writers alleged “did not do anything for the state”. It is on record that Bukola Saraki has greatly impacted on the state, if compared with other governors that had held rein at one time or the other in the state.

And for those in opposition that spoke or wrote under anonymity, I could well tell them that they are cowards and are not sure of what they said. The ANPP chieftain who craved anonymity and asked for the achievements of Bukola Saraki while alleging that Olusola Saraki was selfish should be asked where he was some 8, 10, 12 years ago. It is interesting that such a person would claim to come from Igbaja when Igbaja people are known to be bold and daring. If their is under development in Igbaja, they should ask one of their ‘own brothers’ in the Saraki camp what happened.

After all, during the second republic, a woman leader from Igbaja and in the NPN was able to woo the government to tar the road, bring a bank and some other developments to the area and making sons and daughters of the town relevant.

The anonymous ANPP member said Gbemi “hardly talk in the House”, it is a shame that the man is daft and not enlightened enough to know that he could easily access contributions of members through the internet or possibly go to the National Assembly to get the facts.

The ‘selfish’ Saraki installed Adamu Attah, made his followers to vote for Cornelius Adebayo of the opposition party, installed Alhaji Shaba Lafiaji, Mohammed Lawal in Kwara state that is, not talking of a number of people he had helped in other states to realise their political ambitions, before he ever thought of bringing his son.

Many are wont to say that he claimed to have been implored and pressured to bring his son, as far as this writer is concerned, the fact is that if anybody has done as much as installing one, two, three people in governance, when indeed he has children old enough to hold the same post, nothing should stop him from hoisting his children, if he could. It is what many of our leaders could do and what they are doing these days. The important thing is for them to behave well and govern the people to the best of all abilities.

Former Governor Bola Tinubu of Lagos is today so desperately want to be relevant in the affairs of Lagos state; he has hoisted and is still hoisting his own loyalist in various states for different juicy positions. The senior Adebayo installed his son as Governor in Ekiti state, Bankole is a son of a political heavy weight and so on. There are still many of the former governors and politicians that are seriously fighting to make waves and retain relevance by being god-fathers and political deciders and no one is complaining. In several of the states in the country today, the issue of god-fatherism has been brewing violence while discordant tunes had led to sorry tales among the people, but not so in Kwara state. There have been relative peace and progress, in spite of Saraki’s roles and perhaps he had a way of carrying every one along.

The Westerner Magazine in its edition wrote, “Though, the second term legislator has not publicly declared her intention to run for the coveted seat come next year, there is serious indication that she desires to succeed her elder brother and incumbent governor, Dr. Bukola Saraki”. As a human being, it is natural to want to try out something that others feel you could be good at. The senator, according to a source close to her never give a thought to wanting to run for the gubernatorial seat of the state, she was contented with her seat in the National Assembly until the hues and cries about her purported desires to be governor.

Obviously, The Westerner was right to say that the main problem was the fact that she is a woman, when it wrote that “A battle line appears drawn between the protagonists and antagonists of a female governor in the next dispensation”, meaning that the opposition was actually based on gender. The supposed battle therefore is against the female folks and a violation of her rights as a woman as provided for in the Nigeria Constitution.

However, the Emir of Ilorin and state chairman, Council of Chiefs and Traditional Rulers, Alhaji Ibrahim Zulu-Gambari, represented by Mogaji Nda of Ilorin, Alhaji Salihu Woru Mohammed, recently declared that there was nowhere in the Holy Qur’an, which discriminated against women holding elective office; that is coming from the custodian of the Ilorin people’s Islamic religion.

Here in Nigeria, we may recall the story of Queen Amina of Zauzau (Zaria) and other more Islamic countries in Africa that had had and still have women as their political leaders. Politics is entirely different from religion and the fact that Nigerian male chauvinists tend to combine them has always resulted in chaos, mayhem and imbroglio across the nation.

No wonder the Emir said “Politics is about comfort and making life comfortable for the people. Politics is about development; therefore, traditional rulers must take part. I have not seen anywhere in the Qur’an where women are discriminated against. My advice for you is to play politics of love and live peacefully with other people”.

As against the dissent voice of some Islamic scholars who said “While it is unequivocally stated in Shariah literature that a woman can occupy, and indeed women have occupied, the position of subsidiary leadership, as Ministers, Commissioners etc, the grand leadership of a state or a nation is exclusively men, Masculinity is usually stated conspicuously as a prerequisite for the position of leadership of a state or a nation”.

“Leadership in Islam is a responsibility and not a privilege; hence, restriction of grand leadership to males alone never suggests discrimination against women. The fact we had/have female

 leaders in very few Muslims countries-compared to the overwhelming majority of them”.

 

Binta Bunmi Ibrahim

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending