 |
Despite the criticism surrounding his presidency, President Goodluck Jonathan will go down in history as an exceptional democrat with deep tolerance as his defining virtue, writes Ojo M. Maduekwe
Some people had predicted that Nigerians will soon start to compare the administration of outgoing President Goodluck Jonathan to that of the President-elect Muhammadu Buhari and wish that the former were still their president. Only that none knew that the basis for comparison might be soon.
Buhari’s action, barring the Africa Independent Television (AIT) from covering his activities, in reaction to AIT’s alleged partisanship during the just concluded 2015 presidential election has reminded many people of Buhari’s first coming to power between 1983 and 1985, when as a military dictator, he clamped down on the press.
Citing issues of “ethics and standard” Buhari on Monday, reportedly barred the AIT crew from entering the Defence House building to cover an official meeting between the president-elect, the Cuban and the Switzerland ambassadors as well as other guests. The spokesman for the Buhari Campaign Organisation said AIT was asked to step aside on “security and family concerns”.
According to Garba Shehu, “Buhari has decided that they will have to resolve some issues relating to issues of standard and ethics. We will be talking with them to try and resolve the matter, but for now the station has been asked to stay aside because, like I said, there are some family and security concerns… You can quote me that I said that we have asked them to step aside and that we are resolving the issues of ethics and standards with them.”
During the campaigns and prior to the March 28 presidential election, AIT aired a series of documentaries said to have disparaged Buhari, his late wife and late daughter, as well as other prominent faces in the APC – an action likened to the infamous PUNCH newspaper front page advert sponsored by the Ekiti State Governor, Ayodele Fayose against Buhari.
But Buhari’s action was greeted with widespread outrage. Professor of English at Carleton University, Ottawa Canada, Mr. Pius Adesanmi, took to his Facebook page and posted the following: “You cannot ban or prohibit or prevent a media group from covering your activities never mind the unethical, stomach-churning jackass that AIT has been.
“In a democracy, the worst you could do is tactically ‘freeze out’ journalists and media groups making you uncomfortable. They still have the right to be there – and report things as they see it. If there are ethical breaches, there are appropriate institutions and channels to handle that.”
Another reaction came from a prominent supporter of Buhari, Mr. Kayode Ogundamisi. In a series of 16 tweets on social media platform – Twitter – the social and political commentator went from narrating how “AIT and Raymond Dokpesi’s DAAR Communication is an outfit that played a monstrous role during the 2015 Presidential Election” to “General @MBuhari barring AIT is disappointing, the decision should be reversed…”
Seeing the Monday miscalculation by the president-elect, the APC on Tuesday in a statement by its National Publicity Secretary, Lai Mohammed, said “There must be repercussions, within the realms of the law, for media organisations which have wantonly breached the Code of Ethics of the journalism profession and turned themselves to partisans instead of professionals. But such repercussions will not include barring any accredited media organisation from covering the activities of the President-elect.”
It will be surprising if APC’s correctional statement will change people’s perception and suspicion about Buhari’s perceived “dictatorial” tendency because, people voted for him and not APC and so will take more seriously Buhari’s action over his party’s reaction and attempt at correcting his gaffes. It is only when Buhari re-assures (assuming he does) of his support for press freedom that the suspicion his action has re-ignited can be doused.
His claim to being a former dictator turned “democracy convert”, as well as his party’s change mantra is already being questioned. “Once a dictator, always a dictator,” some have said. His action, aside the criticism also generated comments where some compared him to Jonathan, who is said to have displayed a calm demeanour whenever criticised, and in some cases ridiculed.
Buhari, by his action barring AIT has shown himself as not only intolerant to criticism but also unable to follow due process. The change that Buhari and his APC promised was hinged on the strict observance of the rule of law. There are appropriate channels available to Buhari for seeking redress, including the Broadcasting Organisation of Nigeria (BON), the Nigeria Broadcasting Commission (NBC) or the court.
There are arguments in support of Buhari’s action. Many of the masses who mimicked Shehu’s excuse of “security and family concerns” have gone further to also argue that Buhari as president-elect was not yet the President of Nigeria and is still acting in his personal capacity, and for this can choose the television station he wants to air “his activities”.
Not only was Buhari on an official engagement, since he was meeting officials of the Cuban and Switzerland foreign ministries, the venue of their meeting, the Defence House, was not Buhari’s private property, but an official building owned by Nigeria.
Buhari’s gaffe, irrespective of his party’s reaction has woken and given tooth and claws to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), a once upon a time ruling party gearing up to become an opposition. Their reaction was a summation of the fears of millions, who have never believed in Buhari as a democrat or his party as the change that Nigerians need.
PDP in a statement through its National Publicity Secretary, Mr. Olisa Metuh, asked, “Has our dear nation finally fallen into the clutches of totalitarianism and impunity where government actions will be based on egocentric decisions and impulses of individuals rather than the rule of law?”
The party wasted no time in drawing comparison between Jonathan and Buhari: “The APC and the President-elect may have one or two lessons to pick from President Goodluck Jonathan, who though the most maligned and abused President in the history of our nation, even by the APC, allowed his actions to be sufficiently guided by humility, tolerance and the rule of law.”
Except for few instances where Jonathan was seen to have stood his grounds of rights in relation to press freedom, history will forever group him as one of Nigeria’s most criticised and ridiculed president. But the lesson is in the fact that he remained largely calm and was not seen to be vindictive of any media, organisation or political party for criticising him.
APC’s rise from an opposition to a ruling party was partly and largely because Jonathan took several bashing from them and did not go after the party and its members like some past leaders would have done. Even when the first lady was disparaged on several occasions, Jonathan never resorted to media suppression. His governance may have been poor and somewhat incompetent, but same cannot be said about his credentials as a true democrat.
Buhari’s action only goes to show that his media handlers may have succeeded in changing his wardrobe and given him a pair of glasses, but are yet to change some of his entrenched dictatorial tendencies, such as how he sees and handles the press; attitudes that saw to his failure and eventual toppling as military dictator.
The “converted democrat” may be nothing more than a smokescreen just for the purpose of APC winning the presidential election. And truly, for APC, winning still is easier.
No comments:
Post a Comment