BA KO DAYA!

The group-of-three, on the other hand, seemed to have gone to the heart of the matter. Ballot papers were by law supposed to be printed,numbered serially and bound in booklets, the group noted. This was
supposed to have been done before the election. It is therefore a condition precedent to the holding of an election, any election. This condition was met in all the other elections. If the ballot papers do not meet these conditions they would be, to the extent of the law, be invalid. A ballot, they argue, become a vote when used by a voter to declare his or her intention at the polling booth. An invalid ballot can only become an invalid vote. In other words, if the ballot is invalid, it cannot become a valid vote. Now, what that means, in my understanding of the thoughts of the three justices is this: since in the face of the law, there were no ballots, there could not have been any votes and therefore there were no presidential elections.

I was a little more than 11 in December 12, 1959 when the general
elections to usher in indigenous officials to lead Nigeria into
Independence were held. I remember very clearly how the results were
announced in the three main Nigerian languages of Hausa, Igbo and
Yoruba, apart from English, the lingua franca. Well, I cannot claim
to understand the full import of the announcements coming from the old
Reddifusion box hanging on a nail from the wall of my father's parlour
in Isale-Bode, Ibadan, and then capital of what used to be known as
Western Region of Nigeria. I can recall, however, that one phrase
stuck to my memory. It was the one that rang out from the melodious
voice of the Hausa language announcer. It was "Ba ko daya", which I
was later to understand meant "did not score anything."

Even in my child's mind, I wondered mildly why someone who had
contested in an election in which he had a right to vote could score
nothing. Did he refuse to vote for himself? What about his wife or
wives? Didn't he have friends or relations of any kind who could at
least have supported him? It did puzzle me also that, the Action
Group, the party which seemed to have done well in my part of the
country, consistently scored nothing in the North. I wondered then
whether the people in those other parts of Nigeria did not see the
"Vote Action Group," "Life More Abundant" messages, magically written
in the sky by that flying machine known as helicopter. I made a note
to ask my father those questions when he finally returned from those
interminable political meetings from which he still hadn't withdrawn
fully, in spite of his narrow escape with his life when axe-wielding
assailants nearly smashed his skull in as he mounted the campaign
rostrum at Apatere two years or so earlier. It was his payback for
daring to leave the NCNC, known at that time as National Council of
Nigeria and the Cameroun, the party on the platform of which he had
been elected councilor in 1954 or so.

This is not the place and time to tell you what he told me – you have
to wait for my memoirs for that. It should suffice only that what he
had to say left me with several other questions, answers of which cast
doubts on the meanings of many concepts one had been taught at Civics
and Moral instruction classes in school.

Anyway, "Ba ko daya' stuck in my memory. I had no chance of forgetting
it anyway because, one of Nigeria's musical icons of the time, Victor
Olaiya who led a band which, if my memory serves, was known as the All
Stars Orchestra, went on to write and record a song of the same title
soon after. I suspect that because it reflected the frustrations of
the Western Nigerian elites, about the political culture of Northern
Nigeria of the time, it was a hit record that must have sold in tens
of thousands.

These memories came flooding back to me when the news media announced
penultimate week that Friday, December 12 had been fixed for the
delivery of judgment by the Supreme Court of the Federal Republic in
the appeals by two of President Umar Musa Yar'Adua's opponents in the
2007 elections. Erstwhile Vice-President Atiku Abubakar and a former
military Head of State, Gen Muhammadu Buhari, you may recall had
challenged Yar'Adua's election at the Presidential Elections Tribunal
on the grounds of gross electoral malpractices, but their petitions
were thrown out. They had then gone on appeal to the court of final
jurisdiction, the Supreme Court to seek a reversal of the earlier
judgment. Memories of Ba ko daya came flooding back and I thought
that I knew what to expect; that history was about to repeat itself;
that fate was playing a game with Nigeria's political history. I
wasn't too far off the mark. In fact I proved right, except that the
winner didn't clean the slate at the Supreme Court. Even Atiku
Abubakar, who suffered the worse fate, at least had one "vote." Buhari
actually had three Justices "voting" for him, as against four for
President Yar'Adua! To some, like Gani Fawehinmi, the Senior Advocate
of the Masses who became a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, this result
removes the president moral rights to remain in office. To others, the
small majority against Buhari is immaterial. To this What is
important, is the conclusion of the majority, namely, that Yar'Adua's
election stands. To those of this pragmatic persuasion, that Yar'Adua
remains the man in Aso Rock, the validly elected President and
Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria translates to
"ba ko daya" for both Atiku and Buhari. And they are right! And I
don't necessarily mean that tongue-in-cheek; after all what use is a
minority ruling to a petitioner whose goal was to upturn the status
quo and thus get a chance to try again for the "crown".

Interestingly however, the judgment, particularly the minority part of
it, did throw up a similitude of "ba ko daya" to the entire
presidential election to which I would like to draw attention. To
appreciate this, it is necessary to briefly review the key elements of
the judgments as reported in media reports.

The respected group-of-four Justices which constitutes the majority,
reportedly berated lawyers to Buhari for failing to call enough
witnesses to substantiate the claim that the elections were
fraudulently conducted. They argued that, relative to the size of the
country and the magnitude of the exercise, the number of witnesses was
infinitesimal and that even of the few witnesses, only one, eventually
testified. To Atiku Abubakar, they said, it was impossible to be
candidate in an election and still claim to have been excluded. Even
to my unlearned mind, the justices are right in their assertions, were
these to be the "koko" of the matter before them.

The group-of-three, on the other hand, seemed to have gone to the
heart of the matter. Ballot papers were by law supposed to be printed,
numbered serially and bound in booklets, the group noted. This was
supposed to have been done before the election. It is therefore a
condition precedent to the holding of an election, any election. This
condition was met in all the other elections. If the ballot papers do
not meet these conditions they would be, to the extent of the law, be
invalid. A ballot, they argue, become a vote when used by a voter to
declare his or her intention at the polling booth. An invalid ballot
can only become an invalid vote. In other words, if the ballot is
invalid, it cannot become a valid vote. Now, what that means, in my
understanding of the thoughts of the three justices is this: since in
the face of the law, there were no ballots, there could not have been
any votes and therefore there were no presidential elections.

Now, one might counter: but, in fact, we did hold an election. And
that would be true, but not according to law. Is this crass legalism
then? Should an election of such magnitude be cancelled on the basis
of such a moot technical point? These would be valid questions. But
the answers are clear: ballots are numbered, so that they can be
tracked when they transform into votes. A ballot which has no identity
cannot be proven to have gone through the hands of a valid voter
exercising his or her rights at a polling station before transforming
into a vote! This is therefore much more than a technical issue; it is
fundamental. Without being able to state the number of ballot booklets
used in the election, how can you know the number of votes cast?

The three justices concluded that since the ballots did not exist,
according to law, the votes did not exist and if the votes do not
exist, then nobody scored any votes. In other words, all the
candidates scored zero! That is to say, Yar'Adua: Ba ko daya; Buhari:
Ba ko daya; Atiku: Ba ko daya. Funny, as that sounds, it is the hard,
cold truth. As one of the readers of this column, Mr Akintunde Makinde
once said in a different context, lawyers have a dictum that says,
"Nothing can on nothing stand." Standing something on nothing was
precisely what INEC, the electoral body did. That was what the lower
tribunal upheld, and that is what the Supreme Court has affirmed. For
over 18 months, something has been standing on nothing, in defiance of
this basic principle of law, morality and most importantly of all,
against Kingdom principles. It will take a miracle to sustain it and
God is the only miracle worker, I know.

THE OBAMA PHENOMENON (4)

This has prompted reactions like that of Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr who serves as Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life, a body fighting for the rights of unborn children. In a statement soon after Obama's election, she wrote: "The election of an African American president sends a powerful and historic message that what was previously unthinkable can become reality. The battle for equal rights has reached a major milestone, but Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream of full equality remains just a dream as long as unborn children continue to be treated no better than property. President-elect Obama has promised actions that will only increase the number of abortions. Pro-lifers, in turn, must promise to redouble our efforts to resist anti-life proposals, speak up for the babies, and, above all, pray. We must pray with persistence and love that, in God's time, what is now deemed unthinkable will become reality - that all our brothers in sisters, from conception to natural death, will be protected in law and welcomed in society. The elections are over. The pro-life battle begins anew."

Thirty-seven days from now, a new chapter in world history will open. The first Blackman ever to fly the flag of one of the major political parties for the presidency of the United States of America will take the reins of power. It is the closest thing to assuming office as president of the world. That is power at its most dizzying. It is prestige at its humbling. But above all, it is responsibility at its most challenging.

The question is can, Stephen Barack Obama, the black man, whose audacious hope, whose daring, whose resounding call for change resonated with Americans across several divides, handle it? Will the black race, which is now seen by many as "in the driving seat" through Obama be standing head held high after Obama's tenure? Or will it be otherwise?

I had said last week that the economic team announced by the President-Elect is already being hailed by those who should know. His security team, an all-super-star affair is no less hope inspiring. And if his ability to keep his campaign team under tight rein offers any clue, no one needs bother about his ability to conduct his star-spangled ensemble harmoniously.

But, if you'll allow the metaphor, I feel somewhat like Betty Wright's mum in the song, "Tonight's the Night" who told her daughter, "you know, I love the melody, but no, you are not going to sing that song!" In this case, the song does have its inspirational stanzas, but I have serious doubts about both the rhythm and the melody.

As I have tried to explain in the earlier pieces in this serial, a leader's success or failure is measured, substantially by the extent to which the values (and expectations) of the constituencies he represents, (in some cases vicariously), or appropriates are reflected in the style and substance of his leadership. I tried to show how the erstwhile President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo rated rather abysmally as a reflection of both his Yoruba ethnic group and Christianity.

I tried in the last piece to identify the values that Obama might need to reflect consistently in policy formulation and execution if he is to avoid Obasanjo's fate – one that consigns him to mediatory role in some "obscure" African tragicomedy in Congo, but not a place of honour at the celebration of 60th anniversary of the Declaration of Universal Human Rights.

For ease of reference, permit me to quote a few relevant assertions I made last week.

"…African-Americans are deeply God-conscious and tend towards Christianity, and to a lesser extent Islam; they also tend to gravitate in large numbers to the liberal wing of the political spectrum, because of its anti-slavery and equal-rights origins. Also, given that the socio-economic disadvantages the man of colour experiences in the United States has its origins from slavery and its aftermath, it should be no surprise that the mere fac of "one of their own" got close enough to winning the commanding heights led the majority to jettison other considerations. All things considered, therefore, it is clear that the black man would like an Obama presidency to quicken the pace of equality between the races economically, as his election seems to have achieved in the political area. So, they are not averse to adapting the old Clintonian (Bill, that is) campaign slogan, 'it's the economy, stupid' to read something like, 'it's political and economic equality, stupid.'

"It can also be discerned that not a few members of this constituency who are Christians, including those who did not vote for him, would expect an Obama presidency to return America to God; to re-enthrone God in the public life of America; to deal political correctness some deadly blows. No, not that anyone would expect these to happen in four years or even in eight, if he gets re-elected, but they will expect him to have begun so powerfully that it will be hard to reverse things after him. This is very important because, his membership of this constituency does not derive from the colour of his skin; it derives from his own personal faith. He is himself a Christian."

In that piece we also tried to show that Obama is, by his own declaration, a Christian, who situated the activism that led him to politics as a leading of his faith. The Christian content and orientation of his government will therefore a critical factor in the evaluation of his tenure. Unfortunately and regrettably, he seems hardly correctly orientated in this respect.

Take the issue of abortion. Majority of the Christian folks in the United States of America are agreed that it should be outlawed at the federal level, but Obama's position is pro-choice. That is euphemism for, "let those who want abortion get it, even at cost to the State." In other words, abortion is a choice to which human rights apply. In his well-publicised opinion, women do not take decision about having an abortion lightly.

This has prompted reactions like that of Dr. Alveda King, niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr who serves as Pastoral Associate of Priests for Life, a body fighting for the rights of unborn children. In a statement soon after Obama's election, she wrote: "The election of an African American president sends a powerful and historic message that what was previously unthinkable can become reality. The battle for equal rights has reached a major milestone, but Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream of full equality remains just a dream as long as unborn children continue to be treated no better than property. President-elect Obama has promised actions that will only increase the number of abortions. Pro-lifers, in turn, must promise to redouble our efforts to resist anti-life proposals, speak up for the babies, and, above all, pray. We must pray with persistence and love that, in God's time, what is now deemed unthinkable will become reality - that all our brothers in sisters, from conception to natural death, will be protected in law and welcomed in society. The elections are over. The pro-life battle begins anew."

In electing Obama, many pundits have drawn the erroneous conclusion that social issues like abortion and homosexuality no longer rank high with the American people's priority. In fact, I have read a number of articles declaring such issues as "old fashioned" and mere tools in the hands of conservatives seeking Christian votes. But such opinions fall short of the reality. For instance, in spite of the fact that Obama, flies the pro-gay right flag, was elected in California, Proposition Eight, which sought to nullify a court-imposed redefinition of marriage to include liaisons within the sexes, sailed through. Translation: "we may have other reasons for voting Obama, but on this issue, we disagree.
I also spoke about the expectations of the Christian community with regards to returning God to public life in the United States. Many think it is just another conservative ploy to hand on to power. But, please read this report from one of the Christian wire services on what has been described as a war against Christmas:

"Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi recently confirmed to Capitol Hill missionary Rev. Rob Schenck of Faith and Action that the war against Christmas is real. Schenck… was a VIP guest at the recent US Capitol Christmas Tree Lighting ceremony held on the Capitol's West Lawn.. Following the ceremony that included traditional Christmas carols played by a US Air Force band, Rev. Schenck thanked Speaker Pelosi for keeping, as he said it, "Christ-mas" at the US Capitol, emphasizing "Christ." Speaker Pelosi politely acknowledged the remark, then pursued Rev. Schenck to tell him she had been "mugged" for doing so. Rev. Schenck commented, "At first I didn't understand what Mrs. Pelosi was saying, so I simply nodded and thanked her again, but she repeated it emphatically. I realized the Speaker was saying she had paid a serious price politically for allowing the Christmas celebration to go on. She obviously took some political heat for it. For that, Nancy Pelosi deserves to be commended, and I made sure I did so…"

Will Obama be willing to pay a serious political price like fellow-Democrat, Pelosi to return God to the commanding heights of rulership in the United States? Will he purge himself of his sinful, un-Christian position on abortion, homosexuality and related issues? Unless he does these, as I once said in this column, no matter how brilliant his economic team is, no matter how otherwise efficacious the policies, they will fail in Sodom and Gomorrah society he would have helped to sustain and strengthen.

Now, to all Obamites, you know what to pray. I am with you. (Concluded)

THE OBAMA PHENOMENON (3)

It can also be discerned that not a few members of this constituency who are Christians, including those who did not vote for him, would expect an Obama presidency to return America to God; to re-enthrone God in the public life of America; to deal political correctness some deadly blows. No, not that anyone would expect these to happen in four years or even in eight, if he gets re-elected, but they will expect him to have begun so powerfully that it will be hard to reverse things after him. This is very important because, his membership of this constituency does not derive from the colour of his skin; it derives from his own personal faith. He is himself a Christian... a Newsweek magazine article had this to say about the faith of the man: "Born to a Christian-turned-secular mother and a Muslim-turned-atheist African father, Obama grew up living all across the world with plenty of spiritual influences, but without any particular religion. He is now a Christian, having been baptized in the early 1990s at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago…"

I was saying that the general ecstasy, the euphoria, the boundless hope that the election of Senator Barack Stephen Obama as president of the United States of America has brought about, give me the déjà vu feeling. You know; that feeling of having trodden this path before. And my gut feeling is that many Nigerians of the Yoruba stock may, if they will for one moment come up for air, can relate to the feeling. So should most Nigerians who share the Christian faith.

In my last piece in this serial, I tried to paint a picture of contemporary political history of our nation relating to how Chief Matthew Olusegun Obasanjo became President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, following years of marginalisation of two of the constituencies he came from and his performance in office vis-à-vis the values of those constituencies. It was a picture that started with the brightness of red and yellow and gradually paled through to gray and ended solidifying in pitch black.

It was such a disappointment that a man who had the opportunity of stepping into the steps of the great Mandela as Africa's number one statesman ended up in disgrace, his place in history virtually guaranteed on the wrong side.

But like I asked in closing last week, what has all of that got to do with the Obama phenomenon? How can the shenanigans of a military general with little formal education and a misguided messianic complex be compared with the prospects of a well-educated relatively young man; product of a deeply democratic culture whose credo is change and whose trajectory is clearly divinely ordained?

It certainly looks like an exercise in comparing chalk with cheese, doesn't it! And believe me, I shudder to think about it, but this is not the product of my five senses, this about an urge to point at the dangers ahead, an urge that won't go away. This, dear reader is about what my heart says as against the dictates of my head. After all didn't I enjoy it when that English man accosted my wife and me on a Hertfordshire, UK street and declared, "you guys are in the driving seat now…" you guys meaning, blacks?

Let's begin with a snapshot of the man, Obama and the "constituencies" he "represents." Easily his most important identity derives from the colour of his skin and the cultural root of his father in Kenya, Africa. That is why even people who disagree with him on certain issues, which they used to consider as non-negotiable, simply dumped all pretensions to principled stand. The buzz word became pragmatism. Such issues include abortion and homosexual rights and the uses of stem cell research. I shall return to these presently.

So, what does this constituency stand for? What are those issues upon which, as blacks, they are agreed; values with which they are identified? Well, that is a tough one, given the fact that on the one hand, African-Americans are deeply God-conscious and tend towards Christianity, and to a lesser extent Islam; they also tend to gravitate in large numbers to the liberal wing of the political spectrum, because of its anti-slavery and equal-rights origins. Also, given that the socio-economic disadvantages the man of colour experiences in the United States has its origins from slavery and its aftermath, it should be no surprise that the mere fact of "one of their own" got close enough to winning the commanding heights led the majority to jettison other considerations. All things considered, therefore, it is clear that the black man would like an Obama presidency to quicken the pace of equality between the races economically, as his election seems to have achieved in the political area. So, they are not averse to adapting the old Clintonian (Bill, that is) campaign slogan, "it's the economy, stupid" to read something like, "it's political and economic equality, stupid."

It can also be discerned that not a few members of this constituency who are Christians, including those who did not vote for him, would expect an Obama presidency to return America to God; to re-enthrone God in the public life of America; to deal political correctness some deadly blows. No, not that anyone would expect these to happen in four years or even in eight, if he gets re-elected, but they will expect him to have begun so powerfully that it will be hard to reverse things after him. This is very important because, his membership of this constituency does not derive from the colour of his skin; it derives from his own personal faith. He is himself a Christian.

Although there are those who doubt his credentials in this respect, the facts are clear. At the height of his campaign, when as many as 12% of American believed he was a Moslem and an additional 26% thought he was raised in a Moslem home, a Newsweek magazine article had this to say about the faith of the man: "Born to a Christian-turned-secular mother and a Muslim-turned-atheist African father, Obama grew up living all across the world with plenty of spiritual influences, but without any particular religion. He is now a Christian, having been baptized in the early 1990s at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago…"

The article somewhat also situated the activism that eventually led him into politics and now to the presidency in his faith when it reports: "Obama's organizing days in Chicago helped clarify his sense of faith and social action as intertwined. 'It's hard for me to imagine being true to my faith - and not thinking beyond myself, and not thinking about what's good for other people, and not acting in a moral and ethical way,' he says. When these ideas merged with his more emotional search for belonging, he was able to arrive at the foot of the cross. He 'felt God's spirit beckoning me,' he writes in his book, The Audacity of Hope. 'I submitted myself to His will, and dedicated myself to discovering His truth.'…At the point of his decision to accept Christ, Obama says, 'what was intellectual and what was emotional joined, and the belief in the redemptive power of Jesus Christ, that he died for our sins, that through him we could achieve eternal life - but also that, through good works we could find order and meaning here on Earth and transcend our limits and our flaws and our foibles - I found that powerful.'

Of course, Obama has other constituencies. The African at "home", expects him to do better than other Democratic Party presidents in the past, who gave greater attention to Africa and the developing world. Incidentally, it is for this reason that Bill Clinton was dubbed in certain quarters as the first black president of the US.

Another of Obama's constituencies is the youth. He fired their imagination with his campaign slogans: "Change," and "Yes We Can", which got many of them who are normally detached from the political process, to contribute to his campaign fund mobilize others and come out to vote. Obviously they have their expectations in form as well as in substance.

It is however to the expectations of his Christian constituency that I shall focus, given the nature of this column. But that is not before I have examined those of his kith and kin irrespective of faith and geographical location.

On the face of it, Obama has all it takes to make a change on the economic front. His commitment to progressive taxation which opponents have dubbed socialist because of its wealth distribution possibilities has the ability of reducing poverty among the most vulnerable. The economic ambience he is inheriting, ordinarily one of adversity, actually gives him room for the kind of creativity and engineering that would be required to bridge the gap between rich and poor, between the haves who are predominantly whites and the have-nots - a sizeable percentage of whom are blacks and Hispanics. The sheer brilliance of his economic team and the breath of their experience and exposure, as well as the mix of policy orientation, indicate that exciting times are indeed ahead. That's why pundits are already talking about a so-called Obama's Third Way.

It is simply hard not to get carried away by all these possibilities, but I am not. And, if the lord tarries, I'll tell you why in the concluding part of this serial next week.

THE OBAMA PHENOMENON (2)

Given that some of the traits identified above do not reflect Christ-likeness, it is not hard to see why not many Christians rate Obasanjo high. While it is noteworthy that Nigeria became attractive to such leading lights of Christianity as Benny Hinn, Reinhardt Bonnke and even the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship which held its world conference in Abuja; while it is true that he used his good offices to raise funds for the completion of the National Christian Centre and built a chapel in the presidential complex, his altercation with the Chairman of the Plateau State chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria, whom he called a number of derogatory names, remains in the public domain. In addition, some of the revelations that have come out from the various public hearings organized by the two arms of the National Assembly do little to strengthen his Christian credentials.

The point can bear repetition. With the landslide victory of Stephen Barack Obama in the November presidential elections in the United States and his impending inauguration as the first black man to rule the world’s most powerful nation, nothing will be the same again. And people know it across the globe, as a recent encounter I had brought poignantly home to me.

My wife and I were walking down Clarendon Road in the Borehamwood area of North London last week. Temperature was five degrees Celsius, which for a couple of Africans who had just arrived from the warmth of Lagos, Nigeria was cold, cold, cold. And we were appropriately dressed. My wife in fact might pass for an astronaut! As we were “brisking” our way towards the Borehamwood-Elstree Highway, there was this gentleman calling out to us from across the road. “Xcuse me”, he called out. We stopped. He walked up to us and with a smile said to us: “You guys are in the driving seat now. You should make the best of it. My daughter works somewhere in Washington and you know what she told me? Michele Obama was speaking recently and she said, ‘all my ancestors asked for were 50 hectares of land and a mule to work it, but look what we’ve got: 50 States and a White House!’” He walked away before we’ve had time to reply him.

Now, I cannot vouch for the accuracy of the statement attributed to the in-coming First Lady of the United States. But the preface to his statement made such an impact on me. You guys, meaning, blacks, Africans, erstwhile slaves treated as sub-humans, with no civil liberties at all, ARE IN THE DRIVING SEAT NOW. In other words, the African is in charge, in a position to call the shots, direct the affairs of the most powerful nation in the world and, therefore, the world!

It is one of the most humbling interpretations of the Obama Phenomenon that I have heard. It is one of the reasons all who share the black skin must appreciate the monumental import of the miracle of November. It has brought home to me, very forcefully, the concept of success-by-association; a concept that says because Obama has a black skin and his father was from Kenya in Africa, and he succeeded, then I am a success, if I share those attributes even partially! But the opposite would also be true, won’t it? If Obama, black skin and all, fails, I would have failed too. If there is success-by-association, then there must be failure-by-association!

This brings me back to my thesis of last week. I had admitted to a déjà vu feeling, a feeling of having walked this path before. I told the story of contemporary Nigerian political history. Following the resounding success of one of their sons in an election that was adjudged free and fair by most observers, ethnic Yorubas had expected to see one of theirs in Aso Villa, our own White House. When that did not happen because the elections were annulled, they were understandably livid, seeing it as a continuation of the maginalisation that had characterised the process of recruiting leadership at its highest in the country. Reading the mood of this vocal segment of the nation, and desirous of assuaging their hurt, the political establishment, the “fixers” decided to concede the presidency to the Yorubas. As a result Matthew Olusegun Obasanjo, a former military Head of state was virtually sprung from prison and steam-rolled through an election against one of his kinsmen, Olu Falae. As I pointed out, the Yorubas, most of whom did not vote for him, soon began to celebrate the ascendancy of one of their own.

The Yoruba were not alone. Nigerian Christians also found kinship with President Obasanjo who had upon release from prison publicly proclaimed that he had become born-again. I concluded like this: “Expectations were high both among the Yorubas and among Nigerian Christians. Yoruba expected their son to reflect the values they represent in the style and content of his governance. Christians expected the enthronement of Kingdom principles in policy making and execution. What did they get? Were their expectations met?”

Without being uncharitable, the answer is an unqualified ‘no’. That, for the avoidance of any doubts, is not saying that he achieved nothing; it is simply to say that he fell far below expectation on many crucial counts. Let’s look at some of them, for purposes of authentication.

The Yoruba like to see themselves as democratic in orientation, preferring their leaders to reason with rather than coerce the led into submission. They are rule of law activists with uncompromising commitment to constitutionalism. They like to see themselves as supportive of the medium-size government operating the so-called mixed economy model with an eye on the necessity for government to be in position to assist the weak, the poor. The Yorubas like to be styled as Omoluabi – subscribing to a certain set of values built around honesty and communality. Obasanjo didn’t seem to have reflected any of these with any degree of consistency. He was high-handed, operated like a dictator rather than an elected official. Given his military background, this didn’t come as a surprise to many people, but it was thought that he would allow the democratic ambience provided by the presence of the legislature moderate his conduct in the high office of civilian president. He talked down on the people rather than talk with them. He simply could not rein in his command mentality. To compound matters, most members of his personal staff simply took on his aggressive, combat posture, treating dissent virtually like rebellion.
He treated the constitution and the rule of law sometimes like mines to be walked round; and at other times like hindrances to be taken out of the way. This reflected in his relationship with the legislature, the courts and civil society. While his economic policy, based on the market-dominated model of the World Bank/International Monetary Fund, contributed somewhat to the rebirth of the middle class, it also led to the emergency of a new class of the super-rich on the one hand and further impoverishment of the very poor. Against the background of the unprecedented rise in crude oil prices virtually all through his tenure, the fact that power, roads and rail only got his attention at the tail end of his eighth year in office is, to put it mildly, rather cynical.

Obasanjo also rubbished the values of his people in the abuse of the anti-corruption machinery he himself set up turning it into a personal attack dog; his attempt at elongating his stay in office through a dubious constitutional review project; and the virtual militarization of the conduct of the 2007 elections leading to its widespread condemnation as the worst in the history of polling in the nation.
What about his Christian constituency? How did he represent them in government?

Given that some of the traits identified above do not reflect Christ-likeness, it is not hard to see why not many Christians rate Obasanjo high. While it is noteworthy that Nigeria became attractive to such leading lights of Christianity as Benny Hinn, Reinhardt Bonnke and even the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship which held its world conference in Abuja; while it is true that he used his good offices to raise funds for the completion of the National Christian Centre and built a chapel in the presidential complex, his altercation with the Chairman of the Plateau State chapter of the Christian Association of Nigeria, whom he called a number of derogatory names, remains in the public domain. In addition, some of the revelations that have come out from the various public hearings organized by the two arms of the National Assembly do little to strengthen his Christian credentials.

Now, what have all of these got to do with Barack Obama and the US presidency? Very little in direct terms, but as I said earlier, the ecstasy that I see all around me is relatively similar to the optimism among the Yorubas and Christian Nigerians at the election of Obasanjo. I recall the slogan “it won’t be business as usual” at the onset of the administration and I wonder what went wrong. But how does this reflect on the Obama Phenomenon? (To be concluded).

THE OBAMA PHENOMENON

As I was saying, yes, three days shy of one month from today, Americans will, for the first time ever wake up each day for at least the next 1,460 or so days, to the truth, the reality, that the First Family of the United States of America consists of a man, a woman and two girls – all black, all men of colour. They will see happening in their lives, before their very eyes one of those things that could only have happened in a Hollywood production; or the prodigious imagination of Eddy Ugbomah who several decades ago, produced a film with the title, The Black President. They will have to continually pinch themselves to see if they are awake!
So will leaders of the nations of the world. Each time, one of those summits hold, they will see, the unprecedented sight of a man of colour seated in the elevated seat they had gotten used to seeing a white man. They will wonder: is there a mistake somewhere? This isn’t a meeting of Foreign Ministers, is it?!

And so, like it or lump it, Senator Barack Stephen Obama, the African-American whose father was from the minority Luo tribe in Kenya; product of a marriage that was not made in heaven; who has no executive experience in governance; who is a first-term Federal senator having served earlier only in the senate of the small state of Illinois, an erstwhile improbable candidate, an outsider, if ever there was one, will be the most powerful man in all the world from January 20, 2009.

It reminds me of a devotional piece I read recently. Written by Bill Crowther, it reads like this: “No one watching Britain’s Got Talent (a popular televised talent show) expected much when mobile phone salesman Paul Potts took the stage. The judges looked skeptically at one another when the nervous, unassuming, ordinary-looking chap announced he would sing opera—until Potts opened his mouth.

He began to sing Puccini’s “Nessun Dorma”—and it was magical! The crowd roared and stood in amazement while the judges sat stunned in tearful silence. It was one of the greatest surprises any such television program has ever had, in large part because it came wrapped in such an ordinary package. In the Old Testament, the rescuer of Israel arrived at the battlefield in a most unlikely form—a young shepherd boy (1 Sam. 17). King Saul and his entire army were surprised when David defeated Goliath and won the day. They needed to learn the way that God looks at people. He said to the prophet Samuel, “The Lord does not see as man sees; for man looks at the outward appearance, but the Lord looks at the heart” (16:7). If we judge others only by their outer appearance, we might miss the wonderful surprise of what’s in their heart.

As I was saying, yes, three days shy of one month from today, Americans will, for the first time ever wake up each day for at least the next 1,460 or so days, to the truth, the reality, that the First Family of the United States of America consists of a man, a woman and two girls – all black, all men of colour. They will see happening in their lives, before their very eyes one of those things that could only have happened in a Hollywood production; or the prodigious imagination of Eddy Ugbomah who several decades ago, produced a film with the title, The Black President. They will have to continually pinch themselves to see if they are awake!
So will leaders of the nations of the world. Each time, one of those summits hold, they will see, the unprecedented sight of a man of colour seated in the elevated seat they had gotten used to seeing a white man. They will wonder: is there a mistake somewhere? This isn’t a meeting of Foreign Ministers, is it?!

Yes sir, nothing in our world would ever be the same again! Man had been grappling with the elements and winning, but as all Christians know or should know, the Bible already described those ones as “the beggarly elements of this world” meant to be subdued. So, as momentous as man’s landing on the moon was, as significant as the march of space exploration with the $100-million International Space Centre already 10 years out there; as noteworthy as transplants of organs of the body are, this beats them all. It beats them all because it represents the end of one of the world’s many “original sins”: slavery, the domination of man by man; the idea that one man has dominion over another!

It has already been said that, hope in the breast of the youth, the female, the otherwise disadvantaged will be more audacious as ever; that “yes we can” is the new song and dance of even the not-so-bold, that “change” is no longer just a slogan; that the days of glass ceilings, wherever they exist are numbered.

Welcome to the Obama phenomenon! It’s like an unstoppable train which only manages to slow down at each station for the smart to jump into like the “molue” on Lagos streets. The young, the old are jumping aboard, enthusiastically, ecstatically, joyfully. A new passion for life and living is aboard in the nooks and crannies of the earth. It is indeed one of the most momentous times in the history of the world. It is indeed a great privilege to be alive at this juncture!

But as I said in this column before, “I do not share the ecstasy, the euphoria of the majority…” I do not share the feeling that an Obama presidency in the United States will make much impact on the most fundamental issues that will define the ultimate destiny of man. As a Nigerian of Yoruba extraction, there is a kind of déjà vu feeling rising slowly in my bosom. Come with me please as I reflect on an episode in the contemporary political history of the nation of Nigeria.

In 1993, Nigeria held an election which has now gone into history as her freest and fairest up until then and since. It is a settled part of her history that the election was won by a well-known international businessman turned politician, M.K.O. Abiola. But that election was annulled, that is cancelled, to be recorded as having never happened, by the military junta in power which supervised it.

Now, MKO, as he was widely known, was a Yoruba man, from an ethnic group, which in spite of all its education and administrative savvy, had never produced a Head of state in this vast African commonwealth. Predictably, the Yorubas, you may recall, were incensed. They took it as an injustice done to them. A titanic struggle ensued. This is not the place to examine the tactics and strategies employed in the struggle, but it was sustained for so long that two governments, one a diarchic interim contrivance, the other fully military and venal, later, the establishment caved in and decided to right the wrong done the Yorubas.

Somehow, the erstwhile president-elect died in the military’s detention. This was shortly after the head of the junta that usurped his office and locked him up had also departed in circumstances said likely to the pornographer’s delight. And so some one else had to be found from the Yoruba group. The result was only two Yorubas contested the election held in 1999. Of course the establishment’s choice won. The result was the second coming of a former military head of state, a general who became President Matthew Olusegun Obasanjo.

In spite of initial reservations that Obasanjo was not their choice since the majority obviously preferred the opposing candidate, Olu Falae, there soon developed a love affair between Obasanjo and his kinsmen.

What applied to Yorubas also applied to the Christian community. Except in the ceremonial capacity of the First Republic and stints under military rule, no Christian had ever been President of the nation. So, with Obasanjo, a Baptist who proclaimed that he was born again in prison where he had for a while even been on the death row, Christians saw a brother at the helm. From prisoner to president became a singsong among Christians who saw a miracle of biblical proportions in the development.

So, Abuja Federal Capital Territory attracted Christian leaders. Benny Hinn, Reinhard Bonnke and others all came to see and pray for the man who made it from the prison cell to the palace throne. The world conference of the Full Gospel Businessmen’s Fellowship held in the city.

Expectations were high both among the Yorubas and among Nigerian Christians. Yorubas expected their son to reflect the values they represent in the style and content of his governance. Christians expected the enthronement of Kingdom principles in policy making and execution. What did they get? Were their expectations met?
(Continues Next Week).

EVERYTHING THAT CAN BE SHAKEN…2

At our level in Nigeria, the swearing in of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole as Governor of Edo State after a prolonged legal battle is also evidence of the shaking that is going on even here. Since the decimation of the progressives following the demise of the Second Republic which led to the seeming south- westernization of progressive politics through the Alliance for Democracy earlier in this Republic, it had seemed like that group was an endangered species. It had seemed like it was a matter of time for “the last state standing” to fall. Given the twist and turns being experienced at the tribunals and the inexplicable delays at the appellate level, even the most incurable of optimists had begun to give up. And the establishment must have concluded they had it sewn up. But here we are; the khaki combat-suit wearing erstwhile labour leader now occupies the Government House in Benin. Truly these are times of “shaking all the shakeables.”

First, I like to apologize most sincerely for going awol (military term for absence without license) from this page for two consecutive weeks prior to the last. It was due to an inexplicable communication breakdown between the writer and his editor, with the writer erring on the side of assumption, which as you probably have heard is the lowest form of knowledge. In the event, what you read last week was indeed meant for two weeks earlier which explains why it wasn’t exactly hot and fresh. Forgive me please.

Interestingly, however, even the hottest pieces of news nationally and internationally validate our theme. Everything that can be shaken is being shaken, big time!

Take the epochal election of Barack Stephen Obama as the first African-American President of the United States of America. It has blasted many previous “givens” to smithereens. It is therefore safe to say that nothing will ever be the same again, not in America, not anywhere in the world. The “yes, we can” message will reverberate through the generations, for as long as the Lord tarries. Glass ceilings, wherever they existed, have been shattered, and like good old “humpty dumpty” can never be put together again! The man of colour, the women and other hitherto disadvantaged people groups, are never again going to sit on their hands and accept any kind of restrictions to their aspirations.

I congratulate all Nigerian “Obamaites”, whose vision of a great new frontier led them to support him, pray for him, and even contribute ideas to his campaign strategies. In this latter respect, my dear sister, Rev Mrs Uche Biosa was particularly active. Readers of this column would remember her exchanges with me over the suitability of Obama for office, in which she canvassed her convictions with such great passion. She and others like her deserve their season in the sun. Incidentally, also in this group is my centre pastor, Rev Jibola Oluyede, who is also passionate about Obama and what he represents for the child of God.

Joyful as I am that I can look at the story of a first term Federal senator, (though he had been in the Illinois Senate), with no executive experience and no godfathers, from an historically disadvantaged group who became President of the most powerful nation on earth, I do not share the ecstasy, the euphoria of the majority. But let’s not spoil the party; let’s leave that for another day.

At our level in Nigeria, the swearing in of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole as Governor of Edo State after a prolonged legal battle is also evidence of the shaking that is going on even here. Since the decimation of the progressives following the demise of the Second Republic which led to the seeming south- westernization of progressive politics through the Alliance for Democracy earlier in this Republic, it had seemed like that group was an endangered species. It had seemed like it was a matter of time for “the last state standing” to fall. Given the twist and turns being experienced at the tribunals and the inexplicable delays at the appellate level, even the most incurable of optimists had begun to give up. And the establishment must have concluded they had it sewn up. But here we are; the khaki combat-suit wearing erstwhile labour leader now occupies the Government House in Benin. Truly these are times of “shaking all the shakeables.” Being an unabashed supporter of Oshiomhole, I have no difficulty in joining in the revelry even as I congratulate all Nigerians for this victory.

One of the truly interesting aspects of the unfolding scenario, however, is the return of a debate that many thought had been completed, concluded and settled for ever. We put it like this in the concluding paragraph of last week’s piece: “Interestingly, this crisis has led to a fresh new debate about the continued viability of capitalism, the conqueror of socialism and communism. Fukiyama’s dance on the grave of communism is today being touted as hasty…”

The picture is like this. George Bush, a Republican Party president of the United States of America found himself resorting to a so-called bail-out programme to prevent the crash of the biggest capitalist economy in the world. By that programme, he was to use public fund to stabilize private institutions. Although this is being revised, the very contemplation of it is sacrilegious! But he didn’t just think about it, he approached Congress and got its approval to do whatever he thinks fit with a whopping $700billion. Now, shorn of all the verbiage, the world’s erstwhile model of capitalist purism was resorting to a socialist tool to tackle its problems!
Next Americans voted in by a landslide, a president that the Republicans are already characterizing as the first socialist president of America ever! He won election on the economic platform of wealth redistribution through a progressive tax regime. Now in a world where China has become capitalist and Russia is beginning to embrace the market system, this, to put it mildly, is ironic.

And back home in Nigeria, you have a comrade in one of the Government Houses! That, in Nigeria, where IMF/World Bank policies rule the roost, where the sing-song had been there’s no alternative to complete deregulation; where Obasanjo had wanted to stay in power till death do them part just to keep watch over the elaborate free enterprise system he had laboured to construct.
(Continues Next week).

EVERYTHING THAT CAN BE SHAKEN…

Now, where does that leave Nigeria and Nigerians? Our economic managers say all is well with Nigeria. Praise God for that. But is that the whole truth? In fairness one or two of them have been forthright enough to point to the effect of the plunging oil price, which as at Wednesday was down less than $68 from a height of about $147 on July 11 will have on the 2009 budget. One of them also spoke about the need not just to redenominate our external reserves away from the dollar, but also review the list of foreign banks in which they are domiciled. Central Bank Governor, Professor Charles Soludo does not appear to share this latter opinion, obviously preferring to ride out the storm. I wish him all the best, for all our sakes.

Morris Cerullo, an icon of the Pentecostal movement said it many years ago. Even if nobody else listened, Rev Bayo Oniwinde sure did and internalized it. So, at every opportunity, he’ll remind his audience, particularly at the Rehabiah Centre of Christ Chapel International Churches, Ikeja what Cerullo said God told him about two decades ago. Tell, my people, he quoted God as saying to Cerullo, “to fix their faith firmly on things of eternal value; because everything that can be shaken would be shaken.”

Well, think about it: what is there that can be shaken that is not already being shaken? Before 9/11, the United States of America was thought to be impregnable. It was thought that only its interests outside its geographical boundary were susceptible to terror attacks of any serious magnitude. But that myth was shattered in the most cynical manner by a crop of meticulous devil-may-care suicidal terrorists with such horrific results that infamous day.

Since then we’ve had the highly unlikely incidences of corporate failures in the world’s largest single economy and the bastion of capitalism. Enron, Worldcom happened in quick succession. Although the impact was deftly managed, it was clear, from that point on, that the resilience of the so-called self-regulating, market modulated capitalist system was becoming suspect.

And all such suspicions have been confirmed by recent events. Collectively known as the global market’s meltdown, it all began innocuously enough with the so-called sub-prime mortgage lending crisis. This extract from a Peter Gumbel article of October 8 paints a graphic picture of the situation: "The mess caused by fast-and-loose mortgage lending in the U.S. has now blown into a perilous global crisis of confidence that has revealed both the scale and the limitations of globalization. Finance is built on trust, and suddenly that trust has been replaced by fear: fear among depositors from Madrid to Macao over the safety of their money; fear among banks worldwide about lending to one another; and now fear among politicians, central bankers and regulators that they don't have adequate tools to fix the problem.’

He continued: “At the root of the troubles are the "toxic assets" — the highly leveraged securities mainly linked to U.S. mortgages — that banks around the world still have on their books. In its latest estimate this month, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) calculated that losses on these now virtually worthless securities could amount to $1.4 trillion. So far, banks have written off less than half that. Concern about who is still holding dud paper has gummed up credit markets, with banks refusing to lend to one another for fear that the borrowers may default or may have themselves lent to other banks that could default. That in turn is causing solvency problems for some financial institutions that rely on short-term borrowing to fund their operations.”

Of course, if you have been following the developments, you already know that the leaders of the capitalist world are not exactly sitting on their hands. George Bush sought, and with the assistance of the presidential gladiators in a bruising battle for the White House (Obama & McCain), got a so-called bail-out package of $700 billion rushed through the American Congress. By October 14, $250billion of that huge chunk of taxpayer’s money was already being put into the banking system to buy equity in selected private financial institutions. This, in the neo-capitalist post-Reagan era, is the closest thing to sacrilege, particularly under a conservative Republican administration. The British government and the European Central Bank have all also put rescue packages in place bringing government back into business!

Why, you may ask, are Bush and his Western capitalist friends committing ideological suicide? The reason, as Gumbel put it, is that “The pain will soon come to Main Street.” That is to say, the seemingly obscure statistics will ultimately affect Joe at the grocery shop, as much as, Peter at the burgher franchise. In other words, this is about real people, not cold statistics. In one particularly melodramatic case, a grandmother in her 80s was reported to have attempted suicide when her mortgage company threatened foreclosure because she could not meet her mortgage responsibilities. Thank God that her case became known and she was rescued and the company compassionately reversed itself.

Gumbel’s piece says it like this: “Economists are already outlining the downward spiral that they predict will follow. Banks will cut back on their lending to households and businesses. Mortgages and car loans will become harder to get. That in turn will stifle consumer spending and crimp investment in companies, leading to production cuts and job losses. Judging by previous crises, it can take about 18 months to two years for a financial squeeze to spread to the rest of the economy, which means that 2009 is shaping up to be a bleak year everywhere”.

But is this all about America, their America and perhaps, some European allies of her’s? Think again. As Gumbel says, even as the current crisis arose from an American export known as the sub-prime mess, so would the consequences be exported. His words: “…As the go-go economies of China and India hit the brakes, so too will demand for American goods and services. That will have a knock-on effect on jobs and the earnings of companies that rely heavily on international sales...In its latest economic outlook, published on October 8, the IMF predicted that the U.S. economy will grow just 0.1% next year, its worst showing in 18 years. Europe is expected to fare no better, and China, India and other emerging economies that have been critical drivers of global economic growth over the past five years are also expected to slow markedly. That means nobody will be able to take over for the U.S. as the locomotive of the world economy, and everyone will drag down everyone else. Overall, the IMF expects world economic growth to slow to 3% in 2009, from 5% in 2007, and it warns, "The world economy is now entering a major downturn in the face of the most dangerous shock in mature financial markets since the 1930s…"

Now, where does that leave Nigeria and Nigerians? Our economic managers say all is well with Nigeria. Praise God for that. But is that the whole truth? In fairness one or two of them have been forthright enough to point to the effect of the plunging oil price, which as at Wednesday was down less than $68 from a height of about $147 on July 11 will have on the 2009 budget. One of them also spoke about the need not just to redenominate our external reserves away from the dollar, but also review the list of foreign banks in which they are domiciled. Central Bank Governor, Professor Charles Soludo does not appear to share this latter opinion, obviously preferring to ride out the storm. I wish him all the best, for all our sakes.

What is not subject to any controversy is the fact of the recent downward spiral at the Nigerian capital market. Largely an implosion caused by its own internal contradictions, it has made debtors of many erstwhile billionaires. Many fringe players have been wiped out as the gravy train that was Broad Street left the station. Just because you have not heard about attempted suicides does not mean that all is well. Interestingly, in our peculiar economic environment, we are being told that the fundamentals are good. And I am wondering, if a stock exchange all-share index nosedived about 50% over a short period, and that exchange’s trading is dominated, according to available statistics, 80% by less than 30 companies, mostly banks, what magic insulated the dominant companies from the crash? It is probably closer to the truth that but for the interventionist role of the Presidential Advisory Team on the Capital Market, we would have had a major crisis on our hands. Otherwise why is Soludo talking about another round of recapitalization? Or is there something I am missing here? Somebody, please help me.

Interestingly, this crisis has led to a fresh new debate about the continued viability of capitalism, the conqueror of socialism and communism. Fukiyama’s dance on the grave of communism is today being touted as hasty. These are indeed interesting times. (Continues Next week).