Burden Of Leadership …Coping With False Friends, Betrayals

Attorney-Genaral and Commissioner for Justice, Barr Nworgu Boms (left) chatting with the Perm Sec and Solicitor-General,Ministry of Justice, Barr Rufus N. Godwins (middle) and Head of Service, Rivers State, Barr Samuel LongJohn at the Rivers State Civil Service Week/Awards day 2013 in Port Harcourt, recently

Leadership in governance depends on honest, trusted, loyal and dependable followership to flourish. But in a country like Nigeria, where politics is seen as war, where intrigues, conspiratorial tendencies, rumour mongering, betrayals and constant clash of individual ambitions and greed, near frequently define political ends, to enjoy such perfect followership is at best a tall order.
This is because the average Nigerian politician is not only selfish, the game itself is often a strife of personal ambitions, desires and appetites often brandished as public interest. So, each time a politician is heard voicing the familiar refrain, ‘In Politics, there are no permanent friends or enemies, only permanent interest’ it inadvertently underscores the potency of personal greed and the lack of guilt that ought to attend the betrayal of a once trusted friend.
Make no mistake, there are still politicians of integrity who are in politics for selfless service, but the numbers are so insignificant that they are swallowed by the large ocean of the crooked many, with their bag of intrigues.
No time are these traits more destructive as in moments of political conflicts between and among leaders, upon whom countless depend for economic survival, political relevance and indeed actualisation of individual ambition. At such moments, the most dangerous enemy to watch out for is not the known one, but the false friend who often sees in such conflict his own opportunity to achieve either political relevance or enjoy pecuniary freebies, which real peace can hardly provide.
It is this class of political players that usually benefit most from crisis and conflicts and who would do everything to not only fuel a crisis through lies, incitements and dangerous rumours but would go a step further to build round the feuding leaders phony loyalty. To prove such loyalty, such false friends could even maim, kill and destroy any perceived opponents without the consent and approval of the principal, certain that such principal would help him escape punishment. It is the hope of escaping punishment that is the biggest incitement to violent crime during conflicts.
These were the under-currents that fuelled, cultism and gang violence, either directly or indirectly, during the last years of former Governor Peter Odili’s first tenure, (1999-2003). Capitalising on the enstrangement between Governor Odili and his once trusted friend and political benefactor, Late Dr. Marshal Harry, the political climate was not only charged, it polarised the state to such extent that various groups went to the extremes to earn the trust of the feuding combatants.
The most worrisome effect of the fight between two elephants was the slow pace of development in the state, as the governor, being human, was naturally distracted from the requirements of governance.
In all those, the beneficiary was not the state or its peoples but those who found in that crisis their own opportunity to strike gold or enjoy political visibility but who, once the chips were down, joined the bandwagon with such speed, that  one wondered if conscience and integrity were values in inter-personal relations. But such were the facts.
For the first time since the intra-party crisis within the Rivers State Chapter of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) began, I was consumed by a deep sense of concern that it could degenerate to the despicable levels already chronicled. Sadly the signals point towards that direction, with many enlisting with either divide with very few, particularly, the South-South Bishops Forum, exploring ways of quickly resolving the lingering crisis.
Ordinarily, an entirely intra-party tiff should not have degenerated so fast as to threaten public peace, sustainable development and unity enjoyed in the state. But not only has the crisis negatively impacted on the state, it poses an ever bigger threat of polarising the people and forcing return to the dark days of cult-related violence and gang wars, with their attendant senseless blood letting and insecurity.
How did the PDP, that enjoys 100 per cent control of the 32-member state House of Assembly, control of the 23 local government councils and indeed governorship allow itself to become such violent opposition to itself? What are they fighting for?
The general notion, even outright accusation among members of a school of thought is that Abuja-based politicians with the alleged tacit support of Nigeria’s President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan or his wife Dame Patience, or both are behind the crisis in Rivers State, with their target being Gov Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi. This school vows that the Presidency was indeed uncomfortable with Gov Amaechi’s soaring national profile and popularity as vocal Chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum (NGF). That, that concern changed to apprehension over rumours that the state Chief Executive was harbouring a Vice Presidential ambition come 2015, which, Presidency sources allegedly fear would impact negatively on the yet-to-be-declared intension of Jonathan to seek re-election.
This school of thought, peopled mostly by pro-Amaechi loyalists insist that the hurried formation of the novelty of a PDP-Governors’ Forum was to whittle down Amaechi’s political relevance and truncate the governor’s re-election bid as NGF Chairman, that went awry. It is indeed the school’s thinking that the loud presidential silence in calling to order, the Jonah Jang-led faction of the NGF amounts to acceptance of the largely feared, ‘kill Amaechi Before He Grows’ campaign.
Were that not so, the school argues, the Rivers State Police Commissioner, Mbu Joseph Mbu, who has had a protracted crisis of confidence with the state’s Chief Executive, would not have been so emboldened to publicly refer to Gov Amaechi as a ‘tyrant’ and unilaterally take far-reaching decisions bordering security in a state Amaechi  remains Chief Security Officer, without recourse to the principal.
Most importantly, this school swears that the removal of the Godspower Ake-led state executive committee of the Party by an Abuja High Court, was a travesty of Justice and the National Executive’s quick displacement of the status quo a deliberate attempt to deprive Amaechi, the much needed support and loyalty of a trusted party executive and indeed hierarchy.
All these the school swears, were orchestrated by those the school views as a conspiratorial ensemble of disgruntled Abuja-based politicians, with the Minister of State for Education, Barr. Nyesom Wike as the face of the opposition, with the ‘unseen’ hands of the presidency. The group can list grounding of the state’s aircraft; perceived rejection of Amaechi’s re-election as NGF Chairman by his own party, the PDP; withdrawal of security details to key state functionaries, including the governor; fueling of the violence that erupted at the State Assembly July 9, this year, with little or no Police intervention and recent mob attack on four visiting Northern States governors, as some of countless examples of witch hunting against the person of Amaechi and indeed government of Rivers State.
However, both President Jonathan and Gov Amaechi have repeatedly and publicly denied harbouring any form of animosity that could amount to conflict or crisis between them, so did Dame Patience, when the Bishops of the South-South paid her a visit in Aso Rock recently.
But the second school of thought, peopled by loyalists of the Wike-Obuah divide insists that the suspension from office of the Chairman of Obio/Akpor Local Government Council, Hon. Timothy Nsirim and 17 Councillors, by the State House of Assembly, shortly after the Abuja court judgement that replaced the G.U. Ake-state Exco with the Felix Obuah-led one, was master-minded by the Governor. That the action was intended to punish Wike for his alleged betrayal and present him as a politician without a rural political base.
This school of thought faulted the House’s decision on grounds that if indeed there existed a petition against the Obio/Akpor Council leadership, such should have been known to the House Committee on Public Complaints and Petitions, which alone could have investigated its authenticity before forwarding a report to the committee of the whole, and accused the House leadership of breaking the rules on public petitions just to punish Wike.
Another campaign is that Gov Amaechi, as leader of the PDP in the state, was fraternising excessively with opposition elements, within and outside the state, particularly, those of the fledging All Progressive Congress (APC).
Infact, during a courtesy visit by the Obuah-led state PDP Executive on him at Aso Rock, President Jonathan made veiled reference to same, when, he said, “you cannot belong to one party and partner others to vilify your own party. If you don’t like your party you leave and join another and not criticise it from within”.
Also, the Wike-Obuah divide insists that Gov Amaechi was planning to jump ship to APC, where, they allege he would pursue his alleged Vice Presidential ambition and was working on destroying the PDP before the exit. That they would rather stick with a Jonathan re-election come 2015 and view Amaechi’s unconfirmed Vice Presidential bid as an attempt to truncate Jonathan’s presidential project.
No doubt, it was in pursuit of that agenda that the foiled impeachment of the State Assembly leadership was hatched, with Amaechi’s ultimate impeachment as target destination.
Now, the question are who pioneered these series of accusations and counter-accusations. What efforts were made by the affected players to address such issues from the early stages before the involvement of false friends? Who are the likely beneficiaries of a protracted Jonathan – Amaechi political difference? Who benefits from the political war now using Rivers as the theatre?
I ask these questions, rather than condemn or pass judgment because most of the issues in dispute are either before courts of competent jurisdiction or being investigated by various committees of the National Assembly and the Police. The attempt here, is to warn the parties against the services and phony loyalties of those who sing their praise by day, line their pockets and join the opponent’s campaign.
It is indeed to indentify the unseen enemies, in the mould of rumour mongers, false friends, dangerous tale-bearers, partisan media men, political party thugs, greedy politicians, corrupt security operatives, ambitious women and youth groups and indeed over-zealous supporters, who find in the running crisis, their own opportunity to enjoy limitless relevance at the expence of the sustainable development of Rivers State.
My Agony is that some of these unknown enemies will even attempt to use this candid view to demonise the author, all in a bid to line their pockets at the expence of truth. Fact is, there is nothing that cannot be resolved between two or more persons through dialogue, truth and openness.