Monkey dey work, ba
boon dey chop is a popular saying in Nigeria. It captures a scenario in which the one does the whole job, often dirty jobs, while another reaps the benefits accruable therein.
Viewed from the perspective of what leadership is all about, there is nothing wrong with a worker doing his work, while the leader takes the credit. After all, it is the leader that, usually, assigns whatever job the led has to carry out. He also gives the focus that guides the actions or inactions of the led.
In essence, whatever the led does, or does not do, is deemed to be in consonance with, or pursuant to the aspirations of his leader, at least from the context that everything works for an over all good. And, knowing that whatever is done in his (or her) name, the leader is usually disposed to exonerate the led from actions seen or regarded as an anomaly, in the heat of passion.
Nigerian politics, generally, paints an aptly vivid picture of this scenario. Most times a lot is done in the name of a leader in order to either fortify the leader, or place him on a perceived good stead to “be in charge” of affairs. Whether this culminates in wanton distruction of lives and properties, or breeds animosity, is a matter for another day.
The point is that Nigerian politics has been so Machiavellianised that it is difficult to truly state from which point an action is self-centred or patriotic, or in the interest of the people.
During the administration of Dr. Peter Odili as Governor of Rivers State, for instance, cultism, in all modesty, came to the fore in the state. However obvious the reasons were may  not be the subject of discussion right now, but the truth is that at no other time in the history of the state had cultism became a profession as it did then. Though currently being suppressed, it is still there, perhaps waiting for another opportunity to be promoted.
No matter the argument that may be put forth as reason, or excuse, that period also recorded the highest number of political assasinations and pandemonium across the state warranted by various political interests. None of these assasinations has been resolved. At least, not in the context of sniffing out the culprits and allowing justice to take its natural course.
Is it because the end truly justified the means? At whose expence? And for the benefit of who?
This, sincerely, is not the time to recall the bitter past, but, like the historians say, for one not to remember his past, is to remain forever a child.
Therefore, is it because Nigeria as a nation has forgotten its past that it seems to have groped for 54 years in search of a suitable democracy that we, as a people, can be proud of, really proud to call our own?
One that would indeed truly consider the real (not phantom) interests of the led?  One that would, for instance, accord the electorate the power to be able to not only elect, but also de-elect a representative when he or she chooses to be unrepresentative, different from the current situation in which privileged authorities wantonly go into tantrums of power intoxication warranted more by knowledge of the incapacitation of the voters who in reality have insignificant say over who represents them.
One would have thought that it was only in the days when such vices as cultism and militancy were treasured professions and the likes of Ateke and Asari held sway that anybody could openly threaten the peace and security of society in the media and go scotfree.
One would have thought, again, that since no one has the exclusive right to violence, any utterance of threat to life and property should not be taken lightly, no matter who made the utterance, and how subtly it sounded.
Perhaps this is not possible because Nigeria is still groping in the midst of numerous types of democracies to be able to find one that can be truly Nigerian. But for how long? For how long should people in authority make their personal agenda that of those they are supposed to serve?
No doubt, as the February 2015 elections draw nearer, the unfolding political drama within the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP), on one hand, and between the PDP and All Progressives Congress (APC), on the other, only serves as smirks that can yield nothing but unpleasant consequences.
This is mostly because the end game is to win at all cost, no matter the consequences and apologise later if need be.
In Rivers State, for instance, the issue of “monkey dey work, barboon dey chop”, is gradually rearing its head within the PDP. Going by declarations and counter declarations within the PDP, only the grace of God will stop hell from breaking loose at the end of the melodrama.
Erstwhile Minister of State  for Education, Chief Nyesom Wike, is credited with “fighting” incumbent Governor, Rt. Hon. Chibuike Amaechi, to a perceived standstill. For this reason, he is believed to have “worked” hard enough to earn the governorship of the state, hence no one is more qualified.
For the fact that this “monkey” has worked so hard, no “baboon” is fit to “chop” from the effort. Consequently, whatever understanding that had reigned for the sake of peaceful co-existence regarding which part of the state thegovernor should come from, which has hitherto been a key deciding factor, has been declared null and void for the “monkey” to “chop”.
From the unfolding drama, it’s either the monkey chops, or anything can happen. But we should ask again, at whose expense, and for whose benefit? If “anything” happens, who is likely to be the ultimate loser?
Ironically, as earlier stated, it is difficult to state when an action is selfish, or if it is for the good of the people. This is because experience has shown that in the Nigerian condition, only money and power talk. If you don’t have any of them, your voice cannot be loud enough to be heard, try as you can.
But if the Nigerian system has made the monkey the perpetual worker and the baboon the beneficiary, rightly or wrongly, should it be different now, in this case, just because a relatively few people feel so?
In essence, how long should the interest of an infinitesimal privileged few continue to supercede that of a majority of the people? At which point of Nigeria’s democracy can a declared agitation for the people truly be what it should be?
This should be a food for thought for all those who aspire to lead because anything done wrongly in the name of the people cannot be right.
At best, it can only fulfill momentary selfish satisfaction. This has been proved beyond reasonable doubts at different stages of Nigeria’s development and in different parts of the country.

Soibi Max-Alalibo