The Crimes Of Buhari= By Wole Soyinka The grounds on which General Buhari is being
promoted as the alternative choice are not only
shaky, but pitifully naive. History matters. Records
are not kept simply to assist the weakness of
memory, but to operate as guides to the future. Of
course, we know that human beings change. What the claims of personality change or transformation
impose on us is a rigorous inspection of the
evidence, not wishful speculation or behind-the-
scenes assurances. Public offence, crimes against a
polity, must be answered in the public space, not in
caucuses of bargaining. In Buhari, we have been offered no evidence of the sheerest prospect of
change. On the contrary, all evident suggests that
this is one individual who remains convinced that
this is one ex-ruler that the nation cannot call to
order.
Buhari � need one remind anyone – was one of the generals who treated a Commission of Enquiry, the
Oputa Panel, with unconcealed disdain. Like
Babangida and Abdusalami, he refused to put in
appearance even though complaints that were
tabled against him involved a career of gross
abuses of power and blatant assault on the fundamental human rights of the Nigerian citizenry.
Prominent against these charges was an act that
amounted to nothing less than judicial murder, the
execution of a citizen under a retroactive decree.
Does Decree 20 ring a bell? If not, then, perhaps
the names of three youths – Lawal Ojuolape (30), Bernard Ogedengbe (29) and Bartholomew Owoh
(26) do. To put it quite plainly, one of those three
Ogedengbe – was executed for a crime that did not
carry a capital forfeit at the time it was committed.
This was an unconscionable crime, carried out in
defiance of the pleas and protests of nearly every sector of the Nigerian and international community
religious, civil rights, political, trade unions etc.
Buhari and his sidekick and his partner-in-crime,
Tunde Idiagbon persisted in this inhuman act for
one reason and one reason only: to place Nigerians
on notice that they were now under an iron, inflexible rule, under governance by fear.
The execution of that youthful innocent for so he
was, since the punishment did not exist at the time
of commission – was nothing short of premeditated
murder, for which the perpetrators should normally
stand trial upon their loss of immunity. Are we truly expected to forget this violation of our entitlement
to security as provided under existing laws? And
even if our sensibilities have become blunted by
succeeding seasons of cruelty and brutality, if
power itself had so coarsened the sensibilities also
of rulers and corrupted their judgment, what should one rightly expect after they have been
rescued from the snare of power. At the very least,
a revaluation, leading hopefully to remorse, and its
expression to a wronged society. At the very least,
such a revaluation should engender reticence,
silence. In the case of Buhari, it was the opposite. Since leaving office he has declared in the most
categorical terms that he had no regrets over this
murder and would do so again.
Human life is inviolate. The right to life is the
uniquely fundamental right on which all other
rights are based. The crime that General Buhari committed against the entire nation went further
however, inconceivable as it might first appear.
That crime is one of the most profound negations of
civic being. Not content with hammering down the
freedom of expression in general terms, Buhari
specifically forbade all public discussion of a return to civilian, democratic rule. Let us constantly
applaud our media those battle scarred
professionals did not completely knuckle down.
They resorted to cartoons and oblique, elliptical
references to sustain the people’s campaign for a
time-table to democratic rule. Overt agitation for a democratic time table however remained rigorously
suppressed military dictatorship, and a specifically
incorporated in Buhari and Idiagbon was here to
stay. To deprive a people of volition in their own
political direction is to turn a nation into a colony of
slaves. Buhari enslaved the nation. He gloated and gloried in a master-slave relation to the millions of
its inhabitants. It is astonishing to find that the
same former slaves, now free of their chains, should
clamour to be ruled by one who not only turned
their nation into a slave plantation, but forbade
them any discussion of their condition. So Tai Solarin is already forgotten? Tai who stood at
street corners, fearlessly distributing leaflets that
took up the gauntlet where the media had dropped
it. Tai who was incarcerated by that regime and
denied even the medication for his asthmatic
condition? Tai did not ask to be sent for treatment overseas; all he asked was his traditional medicine
that had proved so effective after years of struggle
with asthma!
Nor must we omit the manner of Buhari coming to
power and the pattern of his corrective rule.
Shagari’s NPN had already run out of steam and was near universally detested except of course by
the handful that still benefited from that regime of
profligacy and rabid fascism. Responsibility for the
national condition lay squarely at the door of the
ruling party, obviously, but against whom was
Buharis coup staged? Judging by the conduct of that regime, it was not against Shagaris
government but against the opposition. The head of
government, on whom primary responsibility lay,
was Shehu Shagari. Yet that individual was kept in
cozy house detention in Ikoyi while his powerless
deputy, Alex Ekwueme, was locked up in Kiri-kiri prisons. Such was the Buhari notion of equitable
apportionment of guilt and/or responsibility.
And then the cascade of escapes of the wanted, and
culpable politicians. Manhunts across the length
and breadth of the nation, roadblocks everywhere
and borders tight as steel zip locks. Lo and behold, the chairman of the party, Chief Akinloye, strolled
out coolly across the border. Richard Akinjide,
Legal Protector of the ruling party, slipped out with
equal ease. The Rice Minister, Umaru Dikko, who
declared that Nigerians were yet to eat from
dustbins – escaped through the same airtight dragnet. The clumsy attempt to crate him home
was punishment for his ingratitude, since he went
berserk when, after waiting in vain, he concluded
that the coup had not been staged, after all, for the
immediate consolidation of the party of extreme
right-wing vultures, but for the military hyenas. The case of the overbearing Secretary-General of
the party, Uba Ahmed, was even more noxious. Uba
Ahmed was out of the country at the time. Despite
the closure of the Nigerian airspace, he compelled
the pilot of his plane to demand special landing
permission, since his passenger load included the almighty Uba Ahmed. Of course, he had not known
of the change in his status since he was airborne.
The delighted airport commandant, realizing that
he had a much valued fish swimming willingly into a
waiting net, approved the request. Uba Ahmed
disembarked into the arms of a military guard and was promptly clamped in detention. Incredibly, he
vanished a few days after and reappeared in safety
overseas. Those whose memories have become
calcified should explore the media coverage of that
saga. Buhari was asked to explain the vanished act
of this much prized quarry and his response was one of the most arrogant levity. Coming from one
who had shot his way into power on the slogan of
displine, it was nothing short of impudent.
Shall we revisit the tragicomic series of trials that
landed several politicians several lifetimes in
prison? Recall, if you please, the judicial processes undergone by the septuagenarian Chief Adekunle
Ajasin. He was arraigned and tried before Buhari’s
punitive tribunal but acquitted. Dissatisfied, Buhari
ordered his re-trial. Again, the Tribunal could not
find this man guilty of a single crime, so once again
he was returned for trial, only to be acquitted of all charges of corruption or abuse of office. Was Chief
Ajasin thereby released? No! He was ordered
detained indefinitely, simply for the crime of
winning an election and refusing to knuckle under
Shagari’s reign of terror.
The conduct of the Buhari regime after his coup was not merely one of double, triple, multiple
standards but a cynical travesty of justice. Audu
Ogbeh, currently chairman of the Action Congress
was one of the few figures of rectitude within the
NPN. Just as he has done in recent times with the
PDP, he played the role of an internal critic and reformer, warning, dissenting, and setting an
example of probity within his ministry. For that
crime he spent months in unjust incarceration.
Guilty by association? Well, if that was the
motivating yardstick of the administration of the
Buhari justice, then it was most selectively applied. The utmost severity of the Buhari-Idiagbon justice
was especially reserved either for the opposition in
general, or for those within the ruling party who
had showed the sheerest sense of responsibility and
patriotism.
Shall I remind this nation of Buhari’s deliberate humiliating treatment of the Emir of Kano and the
Oni of Ife over their visit to the state of Israel? I
hold no brief for traditional rulers and their
relationship with governments, but insist on
regarding them as entitled to all the rights,
privileges and responsibilities of any Nigerian citizen. This royal duo went to Israel on their
private steam and private business. Simply because
the Buhari regime was pursuing some antagonistic
foreign policy towards Israel, a policy of which
these traditional rulers were not a part, they were
subjected on their return to a treatment that could only be described as a head masterly chastisement
of errant pupils. Since when, may one ask, did a
free citizen of the Nigerian nation require the
permission of a head of state to visit a foreign
nation that was willing to offer that tourist a visa.?
One is only too aware that some Nigerians love to point to Buhari’s agenda of discipline as the shining
jewel in his scrap-iron crown. To inculcate
discipline however, one must lead by example,
obeying laws set down as guides to public probity.
Example speaks louder than declarations, and
rulers cannot exempt themselves from the disciplinary strictures imposed on the overall polity,
especially on any issue that seeks to establish a
policy for public well-being. The story of the thirty
something suitcases it would appear that they were
even closer to fifty – found unavoidable mention in
my recent memoirs, YOU MUST SET FORTH AT DOWN, written long before Buhari became spoken
of as a credible candidate. For the exercise of a
changeover of the national currency, the Nigerian
borders air, sea and land had been shut tight.
Nothing was supposed to move in or out, not even
cattle egrets. Yet a prominent camel was allowed through that
needles eye. Not only did Buhari dispatch his aide-
de-camp, Jokolo later to become an emir - to
facilitate the entry of those cases, he ordered the
redeployment as I later discovered – of the Customs
Officer who stood firmly against the entry of the contravening baggage. That officer, the incumbent
Vice-president is now a rival candidate to Buhari,
but has somehow, in the meantime, earned a
reputation that totally contradicts his conduct at
the time. Wherever the truth lies, it does not
redound to the credibility of the dictator of that time, General Buhari whose word was law, but
whose allegiances were clearly negotiable.
On the theme of double, triple, multiple standards
in the enforcement of the law, and indeed of the
decrees passed by the Buhari regime at the time,
let us recall the notorious case of Triple A Alhaji Alhaji Alhaji, then Permanent Secretary in the
Ministry of Finance. Who was caught, literally, with
his pants down in distant Austria. That was not the
crime however, and private conduct should always
remain restricted to the domain of private censure.
There was no decree against civil servants proving just as hormone driven as anyone else, especially
outside the nation’s borders. However, there was a
clear decree against the keeping of foreign
accounts, and this was what emerged from the
Austrian escapade. Alhaji Alhaji kept, not one, but
several undeclared foreign accounts, and he had no business being in possession of the large amount of
foreign currency of which he was robbed by his
overnight companion. The media screamed for an
even application of the law, but Buhari had turned
suddenly deaf.
By contrast, Fela Anikulapo languished in goal for years, sentenced under that very draconian
decree. His crime was being in possession of
foreign exchange that he had legitimately received
for the immediate upkeep of his band as they set off
for an international engagement. A vicious sentence
was slapped down on Fela by a judge who later became so remorse stricken at least after Buhari’s
overthrow that he went to the King of Afro-beat and
apologized.
Lesser known was the traumatic experience of the
director of an international communication agency,
an affiliate of UNESCO. Akin Fatoyinbo arrived at the airport in complete ignorance of the new
currency decree. He was thrown in gaol in
especially brutal condition, an experience from
which he never fully recovered. It took several
months of high-level intervention before that
innocent man was eventually freed. These were not exceptional but mere sample cases from among
hundreds of others, victims of a decree that was
selectively applied, a decree that routinely
penalized innocents and ruined the careers and
businesses of many.
What else? What does one choose to include or leave out? What precisely was Ebenezer
Babatope’s crime that he should have spent the
entire tenure of General Buhari in detention?
Nothing beyond the fact that he once warned in the
media that Buhari was an ambitious soldier who
would bear watching through the lenses of a coup- detat. Babatope’s father died while he was in
Buhari’s custody, the dictator remained deaf to
every plea that he be at least released to attend his
father’s funeral, even under guard. I wrote an
article at the time, denouncing this pointless
insensitivity. So little to demand by a man who was never accused of, nor tried for any crime, much less
found guilty. Such a load of vindictiveness that
smothered all traces of basic human compassion
deserves no further comment in a nation that
values its traditions.
But then, speaking the truth was not what Buhari, as a self-imposed leader, was especially enamoured
of enquire of Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor
both of whom, faithful to their journalistic calling,
published nothing but the truth, yet ended up
sentenced under Buhari’s decree. Mind you, no one
can say that Buhari was not true to his word. shall tamper with the freedom of the press swore the
dictator immediately on grabbing office, and this
was exactly what he did. And so on, and on, and on.