Nigeria: Atiku's House of Commotion?
6 June 2023 By Abiodun Kareem Giwa
Alhaji Atiku Abubakar
Fela Anikulapo Kuti made it famous for people to demand the right to voice their opinion in one of his famed songs where he said his padlock was not in tormentors' hands. He was a challenge to the government in Nigeria that sought to shut him up from commenting on public issues using his music. He was loud, and people loved him for his criticism because they were grounded in the truth.
The speaker owns the mouth and is free to say anything with it. It does not mean that every statement is sensible; many people make noise to attract public attention for nothing, especially on Social Media. Imagine a former communication director of one presidential candidate in Nigeria whose party lost the election accusing the winner and the winning party of manipulation. Is anything to be expected from a loser than a crying wolf where there is none?
The trouble here is that the speaker knows the problem, or at least he ought to know. But knowing the truth and glossing over it is the hallmark of politicians who have not learned to accept defeat. Parties and causes excused that are in order can challenge election results without raising eyebrows, but not one who has a divided house. And that was the case of Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, the former vice president who ran to be president but came second in the race.
The truth about Atiku's loss is glaring, with five governors on his party's platform working again his election, and they vowed to help the ruling party. And they indeed helped the ruling party to win their respective state. They did not hide it. They published it. The feud within Atiku's caucus and party was so deep that instead of working to bridge the division, he went into the election hoping to win with a house of commotion! How would he have won?
Haven't managers of his campaign organization told him that he could not have won, given the division in his party? Is it not shocking that one of the so-called managers trumpeting evil against the elected over no-existing manipulation? The ethical dilemma in the Atiku campaign organization's claiming a loss in an election due to fabrication is that Nigerians hearing the nonsense may believe them. The truth is that the campaign organization or the party on which platform Atiku ran for president manipulated themselves. Now one of his managers wants to brainwash Nigerians to the contrary, fabricating a lie and calling it the truth.
What school of communication teaches that falsehood is the truth? Has Yellow Journalism become an extension of politics? Yes, coloring the truth exists in politics because politicians hardly follow the fact. They believe in falsehood which is the ethics on their planet. Whenever politicians and their messengers want to take us into their world, we must tell them the truth because we have the mouth they have, using verification as taught by ethicians.
First, there is hardly any country a cry of rigging does not follow election results. Therefore, Nigeria is not an exception. The primary issue with Nigeria's case is that allegations of election rigging and politicians' reliance on the court of law to decide election outcome has become an art. The fact that losers in the last election are in court challenging the results is not a reason to believe their allegations. If anything, all parties in the election accuse one another of rigging. Chief Obafemi Awolowo lost to Alhaji Shehu Shagari in 1979 and legally challenged the election and lost. The same happened in 1983. The National Party of Nigeria, NPN, the bridge between Awolowo and the state house, was a composition of wealthy Nigerians who had a reach to the grassroots in their localities and used the power of the purse against Awolowo. Can any Nigerian say the election of Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999 was a fair practice? Has not corruption become so endemic and enveloping in Nigeria that no one will expect any politician pontificating to be angels that they are not? Didn't Obasanjo midwife the worst election in Nigeria and also a beneficiary of the most questionable polls in the country's history?
All these are not enough for anyone to excuse or campaign for continued accommodation of rigging in an election. However, the truth is that the People's Democratic Party's inability to resolve the debacle over the choice of chairmanship position caused fierce disagreement with five governors against Atiku's caucus and the eventual loss of the presidential race to the ruling party.
This piece should help Atiku campaign organization managers reach terms with an acceptable ethical resolution over their loss at the election rather than allowing one to gasp about like a hen whose head is off.
The speaker owns the mouth and is free to say anything with it. It does not mean that every statement is sensible; many people make noise to attract public attention for nothing, especially on Social Media. Imagine a former communication director of one presidential candidate in Nigeria whose party lost the election accusing the winner and the winning party of manipulation. Is anything to be expected from a loser than a crying wolf where there is none?
The trouble here is that the speaker knows the problem, or at least he ought to know. But knowing the truth and glossing over it is the hallmark of politicians who have not learned to accept defeat. Parties and causes excused that are in order can challenge election results without raising eyebrows, but not one who has a divided house. And that was the case of Alhaji Abubakar Atiku, the former vice president who ran to be president but came second in the race.
The truth about Atiku's loss is glaring, with five governors on his party's platform working again his election, and they vowed to help the ruling party. And they indeed helped the ruling party to win their respective state. They did not hide it. They published it. The feud within Atiku's caucus and party was so deep that instead of working to bridge the division, he went into the election hoping to win with a house of commotion! How would he have won?
Haven't managers of his campaign organization told him that he could not have won, given the division in his party? Is it not shocking that one of the so-called managers trumpeting evil against the elected over no-existing manipulation? The ethical dilemma in the Atiku campaign organization's claiming a loss in an election due to fabrication is that Nigerians hearing the nonsense may believe them. The truth is that the campaign organization or the party on which platform Atiku ran for president manipulated themselves. Now one of his managers wants to brainwash Nigerians to the contrary, fabricating a lie and calling it the truth.
What school of communication teaches that falsehood is the truth? Has Yellow Journalism become an extension of politics? Yes, coloring the truth exists in politics because politicians hardly follow the fact. They believe in falsehood which is the ethics on their planet. Whenever politicians and their messengers want to take us into their world, we must tell them the truth because we have the mouth they have, using verification as taught by ethicians.
First, there is hardly any country a cry of rigging does not follow election results. Therefore, Nigeria is not an exception. The primary issue with Nigeria's case is that allegations of election rigging and politicians' reliance on the court of law to decide election outcome has become an art. The fact that losers in the last election are in court challenging the results is not a reason to believe their allegations. If anything, all parties in the election accuse one another of rigging. Chief Obafemi Awolowo lost to Alhaji Shehu Shagari in 1979 and legally challenged the election and lost. The same happened in 1983. The National Party of Nigeria, NPN, the bridge between Awolowo and the state house, was a composition of wealthy Nigerians who had a reach to the grassroots in their localities and used the power of the purse against Awolowo. Can any Nigerian say the election of Olusegun Obasanjo in 1999 was a fair practice? Has not corruption become so endemic and enveloping in Nigeria that no one will expect any politician pontificating to be angels that they are not? Didn't Obasanjo midwife the worst election in Nigeria and also a beneficiary of the most questionable polls in the country's history?
All these are not enough for anyone to excuse or campaign for continued accommodation of rigging in an election. However, the truth is that the People's Democratic Party's inability to resolve the debacle over the choice of chairmanship position caused fierce disagreement with five governors against Atiku's caucus and the eventual loss of the presidential race to the ruling party.
This piece should help Atiku campaign organization managers reach terms with an acceptable ethical resolution over their loss at the election rather than allowing one to gasp about like a hen whose head is off.
