---

These days, there are issues a public commentator cannot shy away from as a matter of choice. Ind...Read the full article.

---

The time is up. Obasanjo and every other former holder of public office will have to cough up. It is not an either/or question everyone must be brought to book to start afresh.

---

---

I have always sought to point out that the nation Olusegun Obasanjo handed over in 1979 to President Shehu Shagari was not the nation he took over again in 1999. Quite objectively and fairly, the nation he handed over to Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in 2007 is far better than what he took over in 1999 despite very many shortcomings that he could have corrected and failed to, not to mention failures at the peripheral level of state administration.

---

Dear Mr Larrimore,

Regarding your assertions above, I should be grateful if you could clarify the following for me:


<*>What was the rate of inflation in 1999 and 2007 respectively?
<*>Comparatively, how much was Nigeria making from the sale of crude oil in the periods in question?
<*>Comparatively, how many, if any, refineries were working in 1979 and 2007?
<*>What were the respective exchange rates for the US Dollar and British Pounds Sterling during the comparative periods in question, 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was the state of education in Nigeria in 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was, say, the price of Bread, Garri, Rice, Beans, Cassava, Palm Oil, Maize during the comparative periods that you gave?


I have asked the above questions for my own enlightenment, since I fail to see the basis for your conclusions and because ‘Is quisnam affirmo must probo’ he who assert must prove. Once you revert to me on these points, I should be wiser and dignified enough to accept your points as valid, if I am persuaded.

On the Gbenga Obasanjo and Mojisola Obasanjo saga, it is regrettable, shameful, selfish and inconsiderate for Gbenga to have brought a personal matrimonial matter into the public domain. The interests of the children should have been uppermost in his mind before he took the rash decision. What he had done would have been roundly condemned and his advisers called to order in some other jurisdictions, notably the UK. As a matter of fact, when Heather Mills, erstwhile wife of Sir Paul McCartney, went on national TV to vent her spleen about her broken marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings, her solicitors and public relations advisers promptly dropped her. Such is the integrity of real professional people. Gbenga Obasanjo and Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello do not appear to have gotten the right professional people and, In the case of Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, some of the arguments attributed to her lawyers are regrettable & one cannot mention to lawyers in other jurisdictions, for fear of obvious ridicule: I have never heard of a good lawyer advising his/her client to file preliminary objections to charges whilst running away from going to the court to make a plea/apply for bail. It is elementary and trite that an accused must be present in court before raising an objection to the charge, and it is a position shared in the entire commonwealth jurisdiction. There are decided case law on the point including, I believe, a Supreme Court decision (Okeke v. State (2003) 15 NWLR (PT 843) 73). It is a sad reflection that some of our colleagues in Nigeria are bringing the practice of law to ridicule by some of their utterances and practices, e.g. a SAN caused a member of his own legal team to take affidavits of witnesses in a matter they are conducting! Truly astonishing!

I find your position that 'Understandably though, since compensation for wrongful detention will no longer be an issue in the aftermath of the discomfort suffered, as some robust judicial system would have practised, the hide and seek game is quite normal no matter how cowardly it is' hard to comprehend.

Is compensation not the a posteriori rationalisation in an action brought for unlawful detention and the damages awarded thereto reflective of the discomfort suffered? Have I missed something here, not being a SAN?

You say

---

Whether she bears the name Obasanjo or not, it is clear that she should stand accused of aiding and abetting stealing. I therefore implied that the EFCC is simply accusing her of the wrong offence and filing the wrong charges against the senator. I hold the views that she can hardly be accused of corruption or stealing unspent budget money but simply aiding and abetting same

---

Sir, are you saying that aiding and abetting corruption is not tantamount to corruption? Assuming it is conceded that she is not guilty of stealing, you concede that she is guilty of aiding and abetting stealing, to wit she is not the thief but a receiver of stolen goods. If she is accused and subsequently found guilty of aiding and abetting the stealing of unspent budget money then, in my view, she is just as corrupt as the person or body accused of stealing. It was 1985 when I last studied criminal law and I am open to learning from you some of the fundamental precepts of Nigerian Criminal Law on which you have based your views, perhaps recent cases that I might have been ignorant of or parts of the Criminal Procedure Code I am unaware of, etc.

I am in agreement with you on the general view that Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello should not have been singled out, since she attended the retreat, which seems to be an after-thought, in my view, with some of the members of the health committee. Unless there had been an investigation conclusively showing that she had actually held the money away from the other members until the alarm blew, which is not inconceivable, all the Senators who attended the retreat and who were forewarned by the EFCC should have been charged too.

However, you appear to opine that the money was accepted by Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello on behalf of the Senate. I cannot reconcile myself with that view because the Senate as a body constitutes itself into different committees and it will be strange and incorrect to argue that the money accepted by the Health committee was also accepted by the Stock Exchange Committee headed by Senator Ganiyu Solomon; unless of course you are positing a principle of vicarious liability for malfeasance of a group of Senators, which is bound to fail for obvious reasons.

To be frank, I have enjoyed your viewpoints, some of which I do not agree with but for which I think it would be deplorable for anyone to castigate you over since we should accommodate divergent opinions. On balance, I see this as a subjectively objective article about the need to have a balanced view on matters Obasanjo. I fervently hope that this forum will someday attain the status of a true interchange of ideas devoid of personal recriminations, name-callings, literary intolerance.

---

---

=ajimoh;4295012817>Dear Mr Larrimore,

Regarding your assertions above, I should be grateful if you could clarify the following for me:


<*>What was the rate of inflation in 1999 and 2007 respectively?
<*>Comparatively, how much was Nigeria making from the sale of crude oil in the periods in question?
<*>Comparatively, how many, if any, refineries were working in 1979 and 2007?
<*>What were the respective exchange rates for the US Dollar and British Pounds Sterling during the comparative periods in question, 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was the state of education in Nigeria in 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was, say, the price of Bread, Garri, Rice, Beans, Cassava, Palm Oil, Maize during the comparative periods that you gave?


I have asked the above questions for my own enlightenment, since I fail to see the basis for your conclusions and because ‘Is quisnam affirmo must probo’ he who assert must prove. Once you revert to me on these points, I should be wiser and dignified enough to accept your points as valid, if I am persuaded.

On the Gbenga Obasanjo and Mojisola Obasanjo saga, it is regrettable, shameful, selfish and inconsiderate for Gbenga to have brought a personal matrimonial matter into the public domain. The interests of the children should have been uppermost in his mind before he took the rash decision. What he had done would have been roundly condemned and his advisers called to order in some other jurisdictions, notably the UK. As a matter of fact, when Heather Mills, erstwhile wife of Sir Paul McCartney, went on national TV to vent her spleen about her broken marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings, her solicitors and public relations advisers promptly dropped her. Such is the integrity of real professional people. Gbenga Obasanjo and Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello do not appear to have gotten the right professional people and, In the case of Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, some of the arguments attributed to her lawyers are regrettable & one cannot mention to lawyers in other jurisdictions, for fear of obvious ridicule: I have never heard of a good lawyer advising his/her client to file preliminary objections to charges whilst running away from going to the court to make a plea/apply for bail. It is elementary and trite that an accused must be present in court before raising an objection to the charge, and it is a position shared in the entire commonwealth jurisdiction. There are decided case law on the point including, I believe, a Supreme Court decision (Okeke v. State (2003) 15 NWLR (PT 843) 73). It is a sad reflection that some of our colleagues in Nigeria are bringing the practice of law to ridicule by some of their utterances and practices, e.g. a SAN caused a member of his own legal team to take affidavits of witnesses in a matter they are conducting! Truly astonishing!

I find your position that 'Understandably though, since compensation for wrongful detention will no longer be an issue in the aftermath of the discomfort suffered, as some robust judicial system would have practised, the hide and seek game is quite normal no matter how cowardly it is' hard to comprehend.

Is compensation not the a posteriori rationalisation in an action brought for unlawful detention and the damages awarded thereto reflective of the discomfort suffered? Have I missed something here, not being a SAN?

You say

Sir, are you saying that aiding and abetting corruption is not tantamount to corruption? Assuming it is conceded that she is not guilty of stealing, you concede that she is guilty of aiding and abetting stealing, to wit she is not the thief but a receiver of stolen goods. If she is accused and subsequently found guilty of aiding and abetting the stealing of unspent budget money then, in my view, she is just as corrupt as the person or body accused of stealing. It was 1985 when I last studied criminal law and I am open to learning from you some of the fundamental precepts of Nigerian Criminal Law on which you have based your views, perhaps recent cases that I might have been ignorant of or parts of the Criminal Procedure Code I am unaware of, etc.

I am in agreement with you on the general view that Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello should not have been singled out, since she attended the retreat, which seems to be an after-thought, in my view, with some of the members of the health committee. Unless there had been an investigation conclusively showing that she had actually held the money away from the other members until the alarm blew, which is not inconceivable, all the Senators who attended the retreat and who were forewarned by the EFCC should have been charged too.

However, you appear to opine that the money was accepted by Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello on behalf of the Senate. I cannot reconcile myself with that view because the Senate as a body constitutes itself into different committees and it will be strange and incorrect to argue that the money accepted by the Health committee was also accepted by the Stock Exchange Committee headed by Senator Ganiyu Solomon; unless of course you are positing a principle of vicarious liability for malfeasance of a group of Senators, which is bound to fail for obvious reasons.

To be frank, I have enjoyed your viewpoints, some of which I do not agree with but for which I think it would be deplorable for anyone to castigate you over since we should accommodate divergent opinions. On balance, I see this as a subjectively objective article about the need to have a balanced view on matters Obasanjo. I fervently hope that this forum will someday attain the status of a true interchange of ideas devoid of personal recriminations, name-callings, literary intolerance.

---

Dear Sir,

I dare say and commend you, that you have set the standard of response/rejoinder to that of civility. You have demonstated that it is possible to disagree and yet respect the views of others without descending into the abyss of abuse and name calling.

You are, in my view, an example I hope to learn from.

With High Regards,

Olu

---

---

=ajimoh;4295012817>Dear Mr Larrimore,

Regarding your assertions above, I should be grateful if you could clarify the following for me:


<*>What was the rate of inflation in 1999 and 2007 respectively?
<*>Comparatively, how much was Nigeria making from the sale of crude oil in the periods in question?
<*>Comparatively, how many, if any, refineries were working in 1979 and 2007?
<*>What were the respective exchange rates for the US Dollar and British Pounds Sterling during the comparative periods in question, 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was the state of education in Nigeria in 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was, say, the price of Bread, Garri, Rice, Beans, Cassava, Palm Oil, Maize during the comparative periods that you gave?


I have asked the above questions for my own enlightenment, since I fail to see the basis for your conclusions and because ‘Is quisnam affirmo must probo’ he who assert must prove. Once you revert to me on these points, I should be wiser and dignified enough to accept your points as valid, if I am persuaded.

On the Gbenga Obasanjo and Mojisola Obasanjo saga, it is regrettable, shameful, selfish and inconsiderate for Gbenga to have brought a personal matrimonial matter into the public domain. The interests of the children should have been uppermost in his mind before he took the rash decision. What he had done would have been roundly condemned and his advisers called to order in some other jurisdictions, notably the UK. As a matter of fact, when Heather Mills, erstwhile wife of Sir Paul McCartney, went on national TV to vent her spleen about her broken marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings, her solicitors and public relations advisers promptly dropped her. Such is the integrity of real professional people. Gbenga Obasanjo and Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello do not appear to have gotten the right professional people and, In the case of Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, some of the arguments attributed to her lawyers are regrettable & one cannot mention to lawyers in other jurisdictions, for fear of obvious ridicule: I have never heard of a good lawyer advising his/her client to file preliminary objections to charges whilst running away from going to the court to make a plea/apply for bail. It is elementary and trite that an accused must be present in court before raising an objection to the charge, and it is a position shared in the entire commonwealth jurisdiction. There are decided case law on the point including, I believe, a Supreme Court decision (Okeke v. State (2003) 15 NWLR (PT 843) 73). It is a sad reflection that some of our colleagues in Nigeria are bringing the practice of law to ridicule by some of their utterances and practices, e.g. a SAN caused a member of his own legal team to take affidavits of witnesses in a matter they are conducting! Truly astonishing!

I find your position that 'Understandably though, since compensation for wrongful detention will no longer be an issue in the aftermath of the discomfort suffered, as some robust judicial system would have practised, the hide and seek game is quite normal no matter how cowardly it is' hard to comprehend.

Is compensation not the a posteriori rationalisation in an action brought for unlawful detention and the damages awarded thereto reflective of the discomfort suffered? Have I missed something here, not being a SAN?

You say

Sir, are you saying that aiding and abetting corruption is not tantamount to corruption? Assuming it is conceded that she is not guilty of stealing, you concede that she is guilty of aiding and abetting stealing, to wit she is not the thief but a receiver of stolen goods. If she is accused and subsequently found guilty of aiding and abetting the stealing of unspent budget money then, in my view, she is just as corrupt as the person or body accused of stealing. It was 1985 when I last studied criminal law and I am open to learning from you some of the fundamental precepts of Nigerian Criminal Law on which you have based your views, perhaps recent cases that I might have been ignorant of or parts of the Criminal Procedure Code I am unaware of, etc.

I am in agreement with you on the general view that Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello should not have been singled out, since she attended the retreat, which seems to be an after-thought, in my view, with some of the members of the health committee. Unless there had been an investigation conclusively showing that she had actually held the money away from the other members until the alarm blew, which is not inconceivable, all the Senators who attended the retreat and who were forewarned by the EFCC should have been charged too.

However, you appear to opine that the money was accepted by Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello on behalf of the Senate. I cannot reconcile myself with that view because the Senate as a body constitutes itself into different committees and it will be strange and incorrect to argue that the money accepted by the Health committee was also accepted by the Stock Exchange Committee headed by Senator Ganiyu Solomon; unless of course you are positing a principle of vicarious liability for malfeasance of a group of Senators, which is bound to fail for obvious reasons.

To be frank, I have enjoyed your viewpoints, some of which I do not agree with but for which I think it would be deplorable for anyone to castigate you over since we should accommodate divergent opinions. On balance, I see this as a subjectively objective article about the need to have a balanced view on matters Obasanjo. I fervently hope that this forum will someday attain the status of a true interchange of ideas devoid of personal recriminations, name-callings, literary intolerance.

---

Frisky Larr seems to be avoiding response here these days. But Ajimoh is one I would have advised him to respond to. This man is very civil and fair in his assessment not like all the "kill am" "kill am" chorus.
But I go tell Ajimoh say, OBJ failures plenty as FL acknowledge. But all in all OBJ put Naija on the right track again in very many respect. All those question asked above about prices are as important as the elimination of foreign debt, creating a basis of no longer accepting corruption with impunity, correcting the banking system, bringing back foreign investors, etc., etc.
In my view, na lawyers go fit say categorically say person wey "aid and abett" na the same as the thief himself. But I share FL view say EFCC dey file the wrong charge against Iyabo. Because to blow whistle say she join dem for Ministry of health steal money dey give the impression of Ibori and co. wey pocket money take dey buy private jet etc. Secondly, no matter the offense wey she commit, the question be whether she dey liable as "Iyabo" or as "senate". Every committee na integral part of the senate and represents the senate. They are constituted by the senate. Money accepted by one committee for official use is on beahlf of the senate. In Iyabo' case, the senate is not even dissociating itself from the issue.
Na so me I see an and I hope FL would answer you directly. But I share some of his views. Me I agree with you very well for the way you conclude your submission. That has been the problem here that is making many people stay away from offering divergent views. People are quick to abuse and insult here.
Kudo my bro. Make we keep da flag flying.

---

"It is also an undisputable veracity that the hardcore of the anti-Obasanjo camp are disgruntled characters who have mainly fallen out of favor with the ex-President, failed to get desired favor from him or were outright badly offended by him in wanton fallacy. Their stock in trade is to see in the ex-President evil, evil and nothing but evil. Anything in the semblance of positivity in Olusegun Obasanjo will be subjected to relativism and outright denial. The most prominent face is Professor Okey Ndibe."

Mr Frisky, its good seeing your article once again. From the above quote, did you classify Professor Okey Ndibe among those who failed to get favor from Obasanjo? If yes, then it will be better if you can say it in BLACK AND WHITE what and what Obasanjo denied Okey Ndibe that made him to start fighting him, so that some of us who believe in Prof will know the real motive behind his position on OBJ.

Cheers.

---

---

=ALORAINIDDEVIL;4295012861>"It is also an undisputable veracity that the hardcore of the anti-Obasanjo camp are disgruntled characters who have mainly fallen out of favor with the ex-President, failed to get desired favor from him or were outright badly offended by him in wanton fallacy. Their stock in trade is to see in the ex-President evil, evil and nothing but evil. Anything in the semblance of positivity in Olusegun Obasanjo will be subjected to relativism and outright denial. The most prominent face is Professor Okey Ndibe."

Mr Frisky, its good seeing your article once again. From the above quote, did you classify Professor Okey Ndibe among those who failed to get favor from Obasanjo? If yes, then it will be better if you can say it in BLACK AND WHITE what and what Obasanjo denied Okey Ndibe that made him to start fighting him, so that some of us who believe in Prof will know the real motive behind his position on OBJ.

Cheers.

---

...forget dat MIDGET, Freaky Frisky Larrimore from Bochum, Germany..he's nobody, inconsequential, but, one thing must be clear until Nigerians start chopping their heads off, there's nothing we can do as to keep on living with such C-R-E-T-I-Ns..:mad:

---

---

=denker;4295012866>...forget dat MIDGET, Freaky Frisky Larrimore from Bochum, Germany..he's nobody, inconsequential, but, one thing must be clear until Nigerians start chopping their heads off, there's nothing we can do as to keep on living with such C-R-E-T-I-Ns..:mad:

---

Denker, abeg take am easy o!! Na wetin be dis? Haba!!!

---

---

=ajimoh;4295012817>Dear Mr Larrimore,

Regarding your assertions above, I should be grateful if you could clarify the following for me:


<*>What was the rate of inflation in 1999 and 2007 respectively?
<*>Comparatively, how much was Nigeria making from the sale of crude oil in the periods in question?
<*>Comparatively, how many, if any, refineries were working in 1979 and 2007?
<*>What were the respective exchange rates for the US Dollar and British Pounds Sterling during the comparative periods in question, 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was the state of education in Nigeria in 1999 and 2007?
<*>What was, say, the price of Bread, Garri, Rice, Beans, Cassava, Palm Oil, Maize during the comparative periods that you gave?


I have asked the above questions for my own enlightenment, since I fail to see the basis for your conclusions and because ‘Is quisnam affirmo must probo’ he who assert must prove. Once you revert to me on these points, I should be wiser and dignified enough to accept your points as valid, if I am persuaded.

On the Gbenga Obasanjo and Mojisola Obasanjo saga, it is regrettable, shameful, selfish and inconsiderate for Gbenga to have brought a personal matrimonial matter into the public domain. The interests of the children should have been uppermost in his mind before he took the rash decision. What he had done would have been roundly condemned and his advisers called to order in some other jurisdictions, notably the UK. As a matter of fact, when Heather Mills, erstwhile wife of Sir Paul McCartney, went on national TV to vent her spleen about her broken marriage and ongoing divorce proceedings, her solicitors and public relations advisers promptly dropped her. Such is the integrity of real professional people. Gbenga Obasanjo and Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello do not appear to have gotten the right professional people and, In the case of Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello, some of the arguments attributed to her lawyers are regrettable & one cannot mention to lawyers in other jurisdictions, for fear of obvious ridicule: I have never heard of a good lawyer advising his/her client to file preliminary objections to charges whilst running away from going to the court to make a plea/apply for bail. It is elementary and trite that an accused must be present in court before raising an objection to the charge, and it is a position shared in the entire commonwealth jurisdiction. There are decided case law on the point including, I believe, a Supreme Court decision (Okeke v. State (2003) 15 NWLR (PT 843) 73). It is a sad reflection that some of our colleagues in Nigeria are bringing the practice of law to ridicule by some of their utterances and practices, e.g. a SAN caused a member of his own legal team to take affidavits of witnesses in a matter they are conducting! Truly astonishing!

I find your position that 'Understandably though, since compensation for wrongful detention will no longer be an issue in the aftermath of the discomfort suffered, as some robust judicial system would have practised, the hide and seek game is quite normal no matter how cowardly it is' hard to comprehend.

Is compensation not the a posteriori rationalisation in an action brought for unlawful detention and the damages awarded thereto reflective of the discomfort suffered? Have I missed something here, not being a SAN?

You say

Sir, are you saying that aiding and abetting corruption is not tantamount to corruption? Assuming it is conceded that she is not guilty of stealing, you concede that she is guilty of aiding and abetting stealing, to wit she is not the thief but a receiver of stolen goods. If she is accused and subsequently found guilty of aiding and abetting the stealing of unspent budget money then, in my view, she is just as corrupt as the person or body accused of stealing. It was 1985 when I last studied criminal law and I am open to learning from you some of the fundamental precepts of Nigerian Criminal Law on which you have based your views, perhaps recent cases that I might have been ignorant of or parts of the Criminal Procedure Code I am unaware of, etc.

I am in agreement with you on the general view that Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello should not have been singled out, since she attended the retreat, which seems to be an after-thought, in my view, with some of the members of the health committee. Unless there had been an investigation conclusively showing that she had actually held the money away from the other members until the alarm blew, which is not inconceivable, all the Senators who attended the retreat and who were forewarned by the EFCC should have been charged too.

However, you appear to opine that the money was accepted by Senator Iyabo Obasanjo-Bello on behalf of the Senate. I cannot reconcile myself with that view because the Senate as a body constitutes itself into different committees and it will be strange and incorrect to argue that the money accepted by the Health committee was also accepted by the Stock Exchange Committee headed by Senator Ganiyu Solomon; unless of course you are positing a principle of vicarious liability for malfeasance of a group of Senators, which is bound to fail for obvious reasons.

To be frank, I have enjoyed your viewpoints, some of which I do not agree with but for which I think it would be deplorable for anyone to castigate you over since we should accommodate divergent opinions. On balance, I see this as a subjectively objective article about the need to have a balanced view on matters Obasanjo. I fervently hope that this forum will someday attain the status of a true interchange of ideas devoid of personal recriminations, name-callings, literary intolerance.

---

Ajimoh

You have almost said it all. Let me add some more questions to also be convinced to accept his conclusion since if the premise of any argument is false, the conclusion therefrom is bound to be false.

Questions:
1. How many politically motivated, wilfully unsolved murders did Obj inherit and how many did he leave behind?; The 1st time ever, a serving Minister was murdered on a non coup scenario!

2. How many fuel price increases did he inherit and how many did he introduce?;

3. How much Megawatts of electricity generated(the motive force of any economy anywhere today) did he inherit and how many did he generate?;

4. How many of the previous leaders had previous experience in governance as Obj.

5. How many of the previous leaders had uninterupted, unopposed, unfettered 8yr tenoure?

---

It is very clear that if one looks hard enough, he will find something to praise about the devil. But something must be seriously wrong somewhere if, in the guise of being objective someone is always in the habit of praising the good part of the devil. The person must be either devilish himself or an occultic or something in that region.

Frisky, find another subject to defend and allow Obasanjo's good deeds (if any) to speak for him. Afterall, as you have said, you were not employed to launder his image. Let those who are paid to do that job do it. You have tried your best to show us the brighter side of OBJ. Thanks for that.

Your take on Gbenga also exposes why someone like me feels your defence of OBJ has some ulterior motive. If you canot realize that it was not Gbenga that blew the story to the press, but the press got the scoop from an affidavit sworn to by Gbenga to prevent the court from awarding the alimony sought by the lady for their divorce settlement, your middle of the road stance is really questionable indeed. So, Gbenga should allow the girl to scrape his head because he did not want to cause an embarrassment to his father. Good logic!!

A good product advertises itself. No amount of whitewashing can turn a grave to anything other than a whited sepulchre.