Dissent and national interest

Recent tides in the Nigerian polity indexed some hypersensitivity against criticism and dissent – in the present circumstance, as much by supporters of the power elite as by members of the elite themselves cutting across partisan diversity of the political spectrum.

Last week, Seun Onigbinde, a co-founder of civil society group, BudgIT, ducked out of his recent enlistment as Technical Adviser to Budget and National Planning Minister of State Clem Agba, in the face of intense lashback by supporters of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) who held him damnable for hitherto being a critic of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration.

Onigbinde’s organisation is reputed for serially exposing duplicities in national budgets – to be sure, not just that of the federal government but also the state governments. But he, in particular, is also accused of taking criticisms of Mr. Buhari quite personal, having previously posted acerbic comments about the president on his social media platforms.

Ordinarily, we should consider it an indication of broadmindedness on the minister’s part (and by extension, that of the Buhari government) that Onigbinde got invited to serve. Dispassion would show it was a unique challenge for the activist to come walk his talk, so that the country might benefit from the fiscal transparency skills and insights that undergirded  his organisation’s past exposes on governments’ budgetary documents. Among other cautious observers, ace campaigner and technocrat, Oby Ezekwesili, openly pointed out to Onigbinde that it was a test, which located him on a historic perch to prove his mettle.

But supporters of government thought differently as they rose in fierce rebuff of the activist’s enlistment for national service. Some saw egregious double standard in his past criticisms and his new acceptance to serve in a government that he had been critical of. Others wagered higher, describing Onigbinde as a foreign agent being embedded in government and alleging that the civil society group he co-founded was funded by a local organisation fronting for the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). Perhaps the crudest blowback was from cheerleading Buhari Media Organisation (BMO), which said Onigbinde’s appointment was a travesty that desecrated the integrity of the Buhari administration. 

In flinging the job amidst that storm, Onigbinde said media reports about the appointment had “created a complex narrative” likely to engender an atmosphere of mistrust in his performance of the role. He explained: “My sincere interest is to see a Nigeria that grows and optimises resources for the benefits of all Nigerians. My loyalty to the good cause of our nation, Nigeria, compelled me to accept the call to provide technical skills, and this experience has more than strengthened it.”

Onigbinde isn’t the only person forced out of call to national service because of their critical posture in the past towards the government or suspicion of diluted loyalty, if at all, towards the ruling party. In June, reputed columnist Festus Adedayo got the boot soon after he was appointed Special Adviser on Media and Publicity by Senate President Ahmed Lawan. Even though the legislature is an independent arm of government, the Senate helmsman backed down on Adedayo’s appointment within a week of handing him the job following a furore by Buharists who dug up past writings of the journalist that were critical of the present administration and the ruling party. The apparent logic being peddled by the supporters is: you can’t have pissed in a well and turn round to come drink from that same well. And really, there may be some sense to make of that logic at least on the face of it.

‘By keeping critics , dissenters or opponents at bay, we lose so much that synergy of our rich diversity could offer’

But if you thought aversion to criticism is a syndrome peculiar to supporters of the ruling party, you need look at Cross River State where retributive stakes are even far higher: a journalist has been held in detention since late August for taking issues with Governor Ben Ayade of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Agba Jalingo, publisher of online CrossRiverWatch, was arrested in Lagos by the police on August 22 and dragged down to Calabar where he’s been under lock allegedly at the state governor’s behest.

Before his arrest, Jalingo had been having brushes with the Ayade administration over his journalism that was critical of the state government. The last straw was a July 17 story in which he alleged diversion of N500million meant for the establishment of Cross River State Micro-Finance Bank. Following his arrest and detention, the journalist filed a suit for enforcement of his fundamental rights. But while that case awaits court hearing, the police have slammed Jalingo with a counter suit. And rather than charge him with the standard felony of libel, they have put up a four-count charge of treasonable felony, terrorism, cultism and disturbance of public peace against the journalist. It is apparently the severity of the charges that explains his being held without bail. Jalingo is also accused of working in cahoots with #RevolutionNow campaigner, Omoyele Sowore, who himself has been kept in detention since August 3 by the Department of State Security (DSS).

The seeming counter-productivity of open dissent in our clime was theatrically highlighted recently by maverick artiste and convener of ‘OurMumuDonDo’ Movement, Charles Oputa better known as Charly Boy, when he said he was cutting out of street protests as a mode of venting displeasure over nationhood challenges because that option had proven ineffective to impact the power elite at all levels. Speaking with the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN), Charly Boy argued that successive political leaderships in Nigeria have been insensitive to the plights of ordinary citizens and were unfazed by protests to hold them accountable. Lamenting that in almost six decades of Nigeria’s independence, citizens were yet to experience “freedom from bad leadership,” he added: “I have spent over 40 years of my life leading protests for a better society, and I can tell you that street protests will not change our leaders.”

The 68-year-old self styled ‘president of frustrated Nigerians’ recalled personal discomfiture he had suffered for dissent: “My father (the late Justice Chukwudifu Oputa) always told me back then that whenever I see injustice, I should fight it because it may come to affect me someday, and that is my motivation for fighting injustice over these years. On several occasions, I have been tortured by the Nigerian police and the military for standing up to authorities to ask questions. However, on some occasions I have been regarded as their friend, depending on the sensibility of those in power. I am not a professional protester, so now I have decided to use other means to hold leaders accountable,’’ he said.

Are dissenters or critics essentially enemies of the prevailing orders they take on? The respective experience of Onigbinde and Jalingo, among the others, suggests they are so regarded by some, if not all in the power elite and their supporters. Besides, there is a pervasive notion across partisan divide that only members of a political party or its cheerleaders qualify to participate in a government formed by that party. Thus ‘governments of national unity,’ as they are often called, have become sheer anachronism.

But by keeping critics , dissenters or opponents at bay, we lose so much that synergy of our rich diversity could offer. Also, not only is this tendency at odds with provisions of our national code, it is the bane of our development as a nation. Chapter II, Section 14(2)(c) of the Nigerian 1999 Constitution provides that “participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution.” And such provisions include Chapter IV, Section 39 (1) stipulating that “every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart ideas without interference.”

The power elite and their supporters must learn to rise above cronyism and parochialism of vision by allowing the best available hands to participate in the drive for national development.