Lieutenant A.M. Yerima Was Foolhardy

Nyesom Wike, Nigerian FCT Minister (right) and Lieutenant A M Yerima, a Young Nigerian Soldier (left)

A small cadastral drama in Abuja turned out so huge that public attention in Nigeria drifted from Donald Trump and his alleged intention to invade the country to it. It was the confrontation between Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), and a soldier, Lieutenant A.M. Yerima. A land title that, by all indications, was not properly acquired had drawn the Minister’s attention. Upon arriving at the site, he met stiff resistance from the soldier, who refused to let him in, and the issue quickly escalated into an altercation.

Nyesom Wike is a powerful political figure—feared by many—but the soldier refused to bow to his authority. Yerima’s defiance against the formidable power and influence of the federal minister won him praise from many Nigerians, who hailed him as a courageous soldier worthy of honor, despite preventing a Federal Minister from performing his lawful duties. This, however, was not courage; it was rebellion.

Sadly, the incident exposed the shallow understanding of governance and authority among many Nigerians. While the soldier thought he was being brave, he was, in truth, being foolhardy. If the law were to be applied strictly, Lieutenant Yerima should face dismissal. Mr. Wike is an appointed and sworn Minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, charged with the responsibility of administering the Federal Capital Territory. His duties include, among other things, land administration within the FCT. This is what the soldier—and many Nigerians—fail to understand. Wike was performing his legitimate duty; by obstructing him, Yerima was standing against the authority of the Federal Republic of Nigeria itself.

We can examine the soldier’s ignorance further in his claim that the land belonged to a three-star General. By implication, he believed his superior officer was above Wike and the law. But a three-star General is not above the law. In fact, if the land was illegally acquired, his superior officer is culpable—perhaps even guilty of treason. Yerima also reportedly said, “Imagine a policeman talking to a soldier.” He seemed to believe that a police officer should not address a soldier, even when the latter is in the wrong. This is a dangerous mindset. The Nigeria Police Force is a constitutionally established institution responsible for enforcing law and order—even when those breaking the law are soldiers.

If the land had truly been acquired in accordance with Nigeria’s cadastral laws, there would have been no need for soldiers to guard it. The mere fact that the Minister visited the site shows that a dispute already existed over its ownership.

Many Nigerians also questioned why the Minister “stooped so low” as to personally visit the land in dispute. But that is part of his job—especially when it concerns a controversial or disputed property. If he had stayed in his office, the same Nigerians would have accused him of being disconnected from the realities on the ground.

However, the incident also highlighted Wike’s own flaw—his notorious stubbornness. The political drama involving Governor Siminalayi Fubara in Rivers State has already earned Wike many enemies. Many believe that since Fubara was elected by the people, Wike had no moral right to attempt to unseat him. In this latest clash, Wike’s opponent was a young, handsome soldier—a fact that, in the court of public opinion, automatically drew sympathy to Yerima and fueled generous praise for him across social media.

Apparently, Lieutenant Yerima was trained for combat but not adequately educated in civil relations—an essential aspect of maintaining a responsible and disciplined military force. I have always worried about this, assuming that such mentality was confined to the rank-and-file of the armed forces. Unfortunately, it appears to be spreading upward through the hierarchy. This is a worrisome trend that should concern both the military and the nation at large. A special course should be introduced for all soldiers to help them understand that a civilized army must refrain from bullying the very citizens it exists to protect. Failure to do so only brings shame and disgrace upon the nation.

Chatham House: Tinubu Did Nothing Wrong

 

Bola Ahmed Tinubu

There is an undying noise across Nigeria, regarding Ahmed Bola Tinubu’s conduct at Chatham House. Tinubu, the All Progressive Congress’ (APC’s) Presidential Candidate in the 2023 General Elections in Nigeria, forwarded questions he was asked to members of his team. In Nigeria, a lot of people see it as a sign of ineptitude by someone seeking to become the Nigerian President.

But there’s really nothing wrong with Tinubu’s conduct at Chatham House. It is important for Nigerians to understand that all the persons to whom he directed the questions are members the APC. A political party is a team of persons who are ‘fighting’ for power. People in the same political party are driven by a common wish for the nation. So, they pool themselves into a strong force with the propensity to achieve their goal of setting up a government and unleashing their common idea.  When eventually the government is formed, the same group of persons will form the cabinet. It is the cabinet that, as a team, makes decision on how a country is governed, not an individual.

If Tinubu becomes president and decides not to allow other members of the cabinet to make contributions, he would be referred to as a despot. Democracy itself is a space that allows contributions from everyone. By relaying questions to other members of the campaign team, he is already demonstrating that he will run a government of inclusivity.

Someone argued that the party doesn’t have any ideology. That the team is a group of guys who failed to find positions in other parties and, hence, found an umbrella in the APC. The most important thing is that they have come together. If there are differences among them, coming together will compel them to prune the differences so that they can move along. Furthermore, cross-carpeting is a tradition in Nigerian politics. It is not peculiar to the APC.

Someone, opposed to how Tinubu conducted himself, compared Tinubu’s visit to Chatham House to attending a job interview and should not refer questions thrown at him to other persons. The situations aren’t similar. Someone seeking to become President will oversee a country of diverse institutions. He is not trained to have knowledge in the affairs of every institution. Instead, he relies on members of his cabinet with experiences in these institutions to help him run the country well.  There is no single president anywhere who ran a solitary government successfully. There are always diverse group of professionals with whom the president builds his team to run the country well. Tinubu proved that he will not be an exception.

As said before, Nigeria has run a political system without ideologies. From 1999 till date, there are only a few politicians who endured without changing a political party. Most of them ran to other political parties and later returned to the same party they had deserted.

What do the electorates do? The electorates will have to take part of the blame for a stagnant political system. If we search deeply, there are other political parties with younger politicians offering modern ideas that meet the standard we are yearning for. Unfortunately, Nigerians are unable to read the policy content of these new political parties. They lazily shove them aside and continue to give attention to the same politicians from an old political culture that has ruined the country for decades.

Until the electorates play their own roles well, blames against certain politicians will never stand.