HARSH TACKLES ON BUHARI: IS IT OLUSEGUN OR OBASANJO AT WORK? By Dodoiyi Deinbo William-West (Managing Editor)

When on Wednesday, November 23, 2016, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, former president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces declared his displeasure at the manner President Muhammadu Buhari is administering the country, he sent intensely hot vibes through the political realm; what many in these parts will describe as ‘heating up the political system’. He was presenting a paper titled: “Nigeria – Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow: Governance and Accountability” at the First Akintola Williams Annual Lecture in Lagos. Whether heating up the system was his intention or not is unknown but he is known for one thing, he speaks his mind – whether what he says is right or wrong hardly bothers him.
What did he say that so troubled the ‘political system’? In paraphrase, he told President Buhari that:

1. if the country was in good stead, there won’t have been widespread calls for ‘change’; the slogan that ended PDP’s hold on power at the centre;
2. the proposal to seek international loan about $30 billion was not in the interest of Nigeria as it will greatly hurt our future;

• castigating his (Obasanjo’s) administration alongside previous ones was wrong, describing such as ‘uncharitable, fussy and uninstructive’;

1. if Buhari’s administration does not quickly fix the economy and assuage the hardship people are going through, the gains of victories over insurgents and corruption will ‘pale into insignificance’;
2. there is anger in the land, especially among youths, and this may portend trouble soon if accountability and good governance is lacking;
3. domestic and foreign investors are neither fools nor amused at the poor manner of managing the economy; the administration’s ‘short termish’ approach may hurt medium and long term; and,

• the administration should ride on its popularity to cleanse the judiciary.

He declared emphatically: “It is easier to win an election than to right the wrongs of a badly fouled situation. When you are outside, what you see and know are nothing compared with the reality. And yet once you are on seat, you have to clear the mess and put the nation on the path of rectitude, development and progress leaving no group or section out of your plan, programme and policy and efforts. The longer it takes, the more intractable the problem may become.
“I understand President Buhari’s frustration on the state of the economy inherited by him. It was the same reason and situation that brought about cry for change, otherwise there would be no need for change if it was all nice and rosy.
“Now that we have had change because the actors and the situation needed to be changed, let us move forward to have progress through a comprehensive economic policy and programme that is intellectually, strategically and philosophically based.” Loaded with meaning one might say!
… The National Assembly Too
Chief Obasanjo also had a fully packed parcel for the National Assembly. It seems theirs was even rougher and harsher; he described the Senate and House of Representatives as a den of corruption by a gang of unarmed robbers and stinking worse than the judiciary! Perhaps, drawing from his inside knowledge, he said that each senator took home N15 million and each member of the House of Representatives, N10 million, respectively per month. He added that their ganging up to try to put down a whistle blower ‘is deplorable and undemocratic’.
He was not finished. He declared that budget padding must not go unpunished and that ‘constituency projects’ were conduits for corruption! He surmised that the National Assembly must be purged and those found culpable made to face the wrath of justice.
By the time he finished his paper, he had landed telling blows to Buhari’s executive arm, the National Assembly, the judiciary, the military and the Nigerian Bar Association. Looking at the targets, one could summarise his utterances as a declaration of total failure of Nigeria’s democratic system. The questions then are:

1. what does Obasanjo want?
2. doesn’t he have direct access to the president in particular, who he campaigned for tirelessly, so he does not have to come out to the public in the manner he did?

• how are other former heads of states making their displeasure known to the president or are they totally quiet?

While the Presidency and the Senate seemed to maintain studied muteness, the House of Representatives came out ‘smoking’! They called the Owu chief, the ‘grandfather of corruption in Nigeria’ and went on to list several ‘proofs’ to confirm their tag. They pointed out to his ‘bribe for third-term’ scheme and his serial interference in the leadership of the National Assembly – using money as bait. In the words of Hon. Abdulrazak Namdas, Chairman, Committee on Media and Public Affairs, “The list of his corrupt acts while in office is endless. Unquestionably, he is the greatest corrupt person ever to hold office in Nigeria. He remains the grandfather of corruption in Nigeria and lacks the moral authority to discuss corruption or abuse of office in Nigeria as he remains the most corrupt Nigerian on record.”
The legislators warned the Buhari administration to be wary of the real intention of Obasanjo’s recent outburst, claiming it was a bid to bring the government down sooner or later.
The Many Sides of Obasanjo
When people talk about Chief (Gen.) Olusegun Obasanjo, you cannot help but notice the back and forth of bitter and sweet. All at once, his strengths and foibles compete for attention! He has a lot going for him nationally and internationally but there are those times… As Tunji Olaopa wrote concerning him, he “is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma… Olusegun Obasanjo is complexity personified.”
Though not a pre-Independence nationalist hero, his recurring relevance and influence in Nigeria’s unfolding history could place him not far behind the country’s leading nationalists prior to Independence; the likes of Herbert Macaulay, Margaret Ekpo, Ahmadu Bello, Obafemi Awolowo and Nnamdi Azikiwe. In contemporary Nigeria, besides Alhaji (Gen.) Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida and Lt. Gen. Theophilus Yakubu Danjuma, it will be difficult to find another man or woman alive who has been more involved in ‘installing’ respective administrations in Nigeria than Chief Obasanjo, the retired infantry general, war-time hero, two-time commander-in-chief, longest serving Nigerian head of state, author, international speaker and Owu chief; often referred to as OBJ. Indeed, he too benefited from the ‘installation’ mafia, leaving prison broken and broke to become Nigeria’s second civilian executive president in 1999.
No matter which side of public opinion divide one finds himself, the end of every discourse on the man many consider to be an enigma is: what does OBJ want? Providing an answer to this seeming innocuous question is as difficult as understanding the man’s brand of politics and logic.
A National Hero
Anyone with any true sense of objectivity will acknowledge Obasanjo’s national hero status. Here are some reasons why:
A. Whether he planned it or not, he played an active role fighting to ‘keep Nigeria one, during the Nigerian Civil War, culminating in his receiving the instruments of ‘surrender’ from Biafran forces on behalf of Nigeria’s then Head of State, Yakubu Gowon. There are conflicting stories about how this came about but they are not the subject of this piece.
B. In 1979, when the likes of Mobutu Sese Soko of Zaire (now Democratic Republic of Congo) and Idi Amin of Uganda had cornered their respective countries and declared themselves ‘life president’, General Olusegun Obasanjo, handed over to an elected president in the person of Alhaji Shehu Shagari. Again, this part of history cannot be told without the alleged indecent manner Obafemi Awolowo was ‘rigged out’ to ensure he did not become president. That historic landmark of handing over to a civilian president came with a now almost forgotten sibling: the ‘twelve two-thirds’ abracadabra.
C. As first president in the Fourth Republic, he laid out the foundation for the war against corruption though this outcome is laden with controversies of using the agencies to fight ‘his enemies’. But he must be credited for putting efforts into what led to the establishment of the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) in 2000 and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) in 2003. However one looks at them, it was a bold indication to deal with the cankerworm of corruption in Nigeria. What remains, till date, is how comprehensive the two agencies have been in their war against corruption.
D. He took an unprecedented step in negotiating with the Paris and London Club of Creditors and paid off Nigeria’s foreign debts. Painfully, all the debt seems to have returned as things stand today! Succeeding administrations did not keep this reality going.
The ‘Villainish’ Side of Obasanjo
a. Obasanjo’s Serial Disregard of the Law: Obasanjo seems to show that he can only give recourse to the law when it suits him. Some people claim that whenever he wants to ‘deal with’ someone, he recounts how many wars he had fought and won and how his ‘current target’ will also be ‘defeated’. His critics allege that all seems to okay as long as he has his way; they claim that his disregard of the constitution, the law courts and law enforcement agencies is evidence of power-intoxication.
b. His Disregard of Due Process As President: According to E.C. Ariye, T.O. Ogbomah, Pullah Ebipre and Derie Eric, in their study between 2011 and 2012, “…the blatant abuse of constitutionalism and rule of Law in the Nigerian states of Anambra and Plateau under President Obasanjo’s watch did not only threaten to weaken democracy but also exposed an open sore in the country’s body polity. Essentially, the first episode occurred on July 10, 2003 when the “Elected” executive Governor of Anambra State, Chris Ngige was abducted and reported to have purportedly resigned his position as Governor… The second case occurred a year later when on May 18, 2004 president (Obasanjo), without recourse to other statutory bodies, unilaterally imposed a state of emergency on Plateau State.”
While Anambra State appears to have arisen and moved on from the ashes of that unfortunate ‘overthrow’ of Ngige, Plateau State still suffers from the after-effect of its share of Obasanjo’s hit-and-go as the state became more divided and more volatile following Obasanjo’s handling of the civil unrest there. In either case, many believe that Obasanjo’s direct or indirect interest was the catalyst.
c. The ‘levelling’ of Zaki Biam (Plateau State) and Odi (Bayelsa State) following the deaths of military men in the areas remains a ‘big blood stain’ on the administration of Obasanjo in the Fourth Republic. By opting to level those towns instead of investigating to isolate and arrest the criminals who carried out the dastardly acts, Obasanjo is said to have exhibited a usual condescending behaviour towards ‘bloody civilians’ though he was, at this time, a civilian president in a democracy. Till date, there is nothing to show that he has apologised to those communities.
d. Obasanjo’s Third-Term Scheming: In 2006, the country was thrown into needless political and social stress with the oft denied but clearly true allegation of Obasanjo’s plot and financial inducement of members of the National Assembly to elongate his stay in power in what is now referred to as his ‘third term agenda’. The more he denies this failed ambition, the more his perception rating drops.
Truth be told, Obasanjo was not the first Nigerian head of state to attempt to over-stay in office. First to bite the elongation bug was General Yakubu Gowon, whose foot works and body language were not in tandem with his repeated promises to return Nigeria to democratic rule in 1976.
Then, followed General Ibrahim Babangida. In their research work, “Factors in Mass Media, Third-Term Agenda and Governance in Nigeria”, Dr. Taiwo A. Olaiya, Olubunmi D. Apeloko, and Oluwadare O. Ayeni stated: “The “sit tight” syndrome became worst during the Babangida’s regime through his “transition without end”.  The hope of returning Nigeria to a democratic government appeared to be realizable when he set up the ‘Political Bureau’ in 1986 and the constitutional drafting process that he initiated to create a blue print on how to return to democratic rule… The transition “enterprise” constantly witnessed postponement.” The culmination was the annulment of the ‘freest and fairest’ presidential election in 1993.
Again, there was General Sani Abacha, the ever-goggled infantry czar. As Olaiya, Apeloko, and Ayeni put it: “Then Abacha came and promised to be different from Babangida.  He committed himself to organizing a quick transition to democratic rule and reneged.  Abacha thought he could manipulate the process and use the security agencies to intimidate his opponents into silence while prolonging his autocracy. All the registered political parties adopted him as their presidential candidate in his bid to become a “civilian” government.  His effort was contested and his plans resisted by a wide spectrum of Nigerians (the mass media inclusive).” Ironically, the trio stated that “General Olusegun Obasanjo risked his life to confront the self-secession plan of General Abacha.”
e. ‘Do Or Die’ Politicking: In 2006, in the middle of a boisterous speech while campaigning for the late Musa Yar’Adua, whose presidency was unfortunately cut short by death, Obasanjo stunned the country and the international community when he declared that for his former party, Peoples Democratic Party, winning the general elections was ‘a do or die affair’!  And, do or die it was. It was so bad that Yar’Adua, in his speech immediately after being sworn in as president, declared that his election was contrived!
Not only did Obasanjo have his way, he unwittingly introduced a new phrase in Nigeria’s politicking and is alleged to have backed this up by consenting, directly or indirectly, to actions that translated those scary words to practical manifestations.
f. The $16 Billion Expenditure Wasted in ‘Power Plants’: In a rather mind boggling manner, what happened to the $16 billion expended in pursuing ‘power sufficiency’ for the country remains a mystery. Till this is unravelled, one can only say that that humongous amount ‘was wasted’.
g. Huge Sums Unaccounted for by the Federal Ministry of Works: Like the non-existent ‘power plants’, several billions of naira remain unaccounted for by the Minister of Works in Obasanjo’s administration, Chief Tony Anenih.
For a man who declared: “By training, inclination, and aptitude, I was averse to being in government”; a military head of state eager to hand over power to a civilian president in 1979 and went on to write “Not My Will”, by 1999, his political taste buds had transformed. He returned to power a willing and ‘prepared’ civilian president in commando style.
Many critics wonder how quickly he went from being broken and broke in 1998 to the ‘all-knowing, all powerful and almost all-conquering president’ from 1999 to 2007. Others wonder still why he has something harsh to say about every administration since he left power in 1979 till date, except of course the eight years he was in charge!
Some commentators have reminded us that whenever he spoke out so stridently, it marked the ouster – one way or the other – of the man at the helm of power at the centre. Is this a coincidence? It is difficult to say but anyone who follows the trajectory of events after his respective harsh tackles in the past may be concerned for the current president: are Obasanjo’s criticism a signal that Buhari should not bother to stand for election in 2019, for instance? Has Obasanjo seen the ‘hand writing on the wall’? We may speculate but this writer believes that Obasanjo just spoke his mind; he knows that the administration can do better and wants it to actually do better.
With regards to his third term agenda, the only reasonable question that comes to mind is: what could have made a man who, at the risk of public execution for ‘coup plotting’, boldly tried to dissuade Abacha from perpetuating himself in office to soon follow the same path? Answer to this question is largely unfathomable except pointers to the allure of power and its several benefits plus – oh yes – the deafening prodding of close associates who have scant regard for national interests. This horde of associates and advisers has been a recurring decimal from 1914 till date; Nigerians working against Nigeria and Nigerians!
The unfortunate result of this selfish and bogus third term plot was the overthrow of the entire painstakingly drawn recommendations for the amendment of the 1999 Constitution which in this writer’s opinion was an exhibition of legislative indolence, insensitivity and indiscretion. It is known that legislation is done by clause by clause considerations. The National Assembly should have thrown out the pungent clauses that was intended to elongate the tenure of ‘the president and governors’ and commenced due procedures for the other clauses. Throwing out the entire package – after the humongous amount of money, time and efforts of various groups and personalities across the country was roundly indecent.
Conclusion
After this recent outburst, it is necessary for Obasanjo to answer some salient questions. First, was there no budget padding during his tenure? Second, how would he feel and react if any of his predecessors had come out to attack his administration and policies so flagrantly when he was president? Has the direct communication access with the serving president been ‘sealed off’? If yes, why? Since his last harsh commentary was pinned mainly on corruption, what does he have to say about several unsolved cases of unaccounted funds in his administration: the $16 billion for power plants and N300 billion for road construction, for instance? Was monetary inducement for a third term bid anything short of corruption? Was the illegal eviction of Dr. Chris Ngige as governor not evidence of abuse of the law? Why did he declare a state of emergency in Plateau State then turn round to persuade the National Assembly to give it a stamp of approval – a development that was purely unconstitutional and ultra vires?
So far, Obasanjo’s responses to these and similar questions are not convincing. If anything, they increase the yoke of pungent-baggage linked to his reputation, a baggage this writer would really be glad to see him cast away reasonably.
Does he know that he is making it difficult for posterity to remember him for good? So far, it seems, for every good he does or intends to do, there is some equally sinister draw back just waiting to unveil. Looking at his strengths and weaknesses, his good moves and antics, one cannot but think that there are two equally strong and competing sides in him: the side that desires to do the best for the benefit of all and the side that desires to ‘deal with’ foes (real or imagined). These equally strong and opposing ‘forces working within him’ have created this unhelpful perception of “riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma”  for him.
We could safely say that his good side is Olusegun and the other, ‘Obasanjo’; both make up this enigma we have all come to revere but also look again and shake our heads, wondering why he is the way he is. In the context of his outburst against President Buhari and the National Assembly, the question to ask is: which of these two sides spoke those words? This is coming on the backdrop of his knowing that some of the spots, stains and blemishes he has so harshly and openly identified on the garment of that is Buhari’s administration and the National Assembly are easily identifiable on his own garment too.