Kennedy Emetulu

Professor Patrick Okedinachi Utomi is angry! He’s angry that “internet warriors” and “shameless commentators” are unconscionably purloining his well-manicured reputation as a national moral standard-bearer and carting him off to Hades! He suggests that these “people a long distance from a matter, armed with information that in some cases were incomplete or inaccurate and proceeding in self-righteous purity pontificating on matters which nothing in their personal history suggest they are able to live up to the standards with which they judge others” are the polluters of public space. How dare these uninformed ignoramuses question his well-thought-out comments over the African Finance Corporation affair? How dare these plebeian crows peck the royal eagle?

Professor Utomi says he used to believe he has “earned the moral right to talk down at such people, with documented evidence of the number of times” he has “been target of state terror and the powerful lined up against the common good”. But, on “further reflection”, now he thinks he was wrong because we are all given by our various circumstances to different roles and the nature of these roles “should neither diminish nor elevate the moral authority of one over the other”. Yet, in the same breath, Prof Utomi describes his supposed traducers as “people of a lower moral authority base”, which obviously calls to question his fidelity to his self-confessed conversion. Perhaps, the good professor should stick to his earlier view, because every man has the right to courageously place himself on a moral scale. That is the only way we can differentiate between those doing good and those invested in evil, even as we eternally insist that good must prevail. Therefore, blurring the moral line in an attempt to appear humble or not holier-than-thou actually does more harm than good, because the only beneficiaries would be those whose moral pendulums swing with the weather. Of course, different circumstances and different roles may in reality raise or lower moral expectations, but standards are never thrown overboard where they concern matters of public good.

Now, before I go further, let me make a declaration. I have never had reasons to respond to Prof Utomi publicly before now nor have I met him in person. The only contact I’ve ever had with him was by phone in the early days of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s regime sometime in the year 2000. At the time, I had been invited by Michael Holman, the African Editor of the London Financial Times to further discuss an article/rejoinder of mine they published in response to an Editorial of the paper on Nigeria. On returning to their offices after lunch, Mr Holman saw a note to say Prof Utomi was in town and he asked if I knew him. I said I didn’t know him as a person, but that I’m familiar with his views as a national figure and public commentator. I opined that amongst them, he’s “one of the sane ones”. Later that day I called Prof Utomi who said he was in London as part of the vice president’s entourage (though he paid his way) to London. On one hand I was pleased, he was in the Nigerian team visiting the United Kingdom at that critical time, but on the other hand I was suspicious that he may have just been taken along to garner credibility for the new Obasanjo regime, which I never trusted at any time, even though at that point I was ready to give it the benefit of doubt.

So, when I spoke to Prof Utomi, the only question I kept asking and repeating was whether the new people in power were actually listening to advice or were they just carrying him around the place to give a respectable face to their government while invested in doing things the same old, failed way? Prof Utomi tried his diplomatic best to parry the question; but in the end, I thought I had my answer. We ended up on the note of him inviting me to Oxford where he had an engagement (maybe a speech, a lecture or the launch or signing of a book, I can’t remember now). I thanked him but declined the invitation because I wasn’t going to be available. So that was it. After then, I reverted to observing Prof Utomi in the public space as usual.

In truth, as I implied to Mr Holman, my observation of Utomi began long before that chat on the phone. I have watched him from the day he was appointed as President Shehu Shagari’s Political Adviser, through his time as Deputy Managing Director and later Chief Operating Officer of Volkswagen Nigeria, his activism with the Concerned Professionals at the time of the Sani Abacha dictatorship, the establishment of the Lagos Business School, his media business with VIVANTE and his television discussions as leader of the Patito’s Gang, his foray into presidential politics as candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), etc. Indeed, as many of us followed the fortunes of Barack Obama in America and inevitably began to longingly dream of such in Nigeria, lodged somewhere in the consciousness of not a few of us is the image of an Utomi. His eclectic success is inspirational and credibility has never been much of a problem with him. But now, as I read his latest response to some of the intellectual challenges he’s facing from younger Nigerians who are cashing in on internet technology to make their voices heard, I’m beginning to wonder if this man has the temperament for the kind of political leadership our country needs.

Utomi’s piece titled, Public Space and the Discipline of Honest Engagement is a patronizing exercise in presumptuous, self-serving sophistry. I have read at least three of those who picked issues with him (Moses Ebe Ochonu, Sabella Abidde and Taju Tijani) and I absolutely agree with their position (even if Mr Tijani’s claim that Utomi belongs to the “overeducated, contemptible, professional and business class” is a little over the top). Utomi’s attempt to explain the context of his comments that were under attack fell flat on its face. He said nothing to show that the quotes attributed to him in the interview published in The Punch, Friday, 8 May, 2008 were not true. Telling us about Nigeria’s penchant for losing money when governments change or our reputation for reneging on international obligations which significantly raise transaction costs in doing business in Nigeria is no substitute for addressing the accusation that he does not support a probe of Professor Chukwuma Soludo over the latter’s ill-advised decision to “invest” a whooping $462 million in the African Finance Corporation.

Contrary to his latest claim, his quotes in The Punch report (which he has not denied) tell us he does not support the probe. He clearly stated he wants President Umaru Yar’Adua to rethink the idea because it is mistaken and wrong-headed. He firmly implied that a probe of that nature will embarrass us amongst our international friends, though I would have thought he and his international friends would gladly welcome a probe, if only to affirm the propriety of the investment and give the Central Bank Governor a clean bill of health - both of which can only be good for our credibility rating nationally and internationally. It’s immaterial that before then he wasn’t on speaking terms with Soludo or that it would have been in his best interest to jubilate at his putative misfortune. What matters is what Moses Ebe Ochonu synthesized as the need for men like Utomi to avoid being sucked into supporting the “cult of competence” to the detriment of the simple requirement and indeed, necessity, of public accountability. No one is too big to be questioned about what they are doing for and on behalf of the state, especially with such a large sum involved. Utomi should have known better than to lend his considerable credibility and respectability to a stance that seems to negate that basic principle.

As for the professor’s logic on the Ribadu affair, I say it is the other side of this same bad coin, which is one that wants us to buy into the cult of competence without accountability. Utomi was irked by some responses he got when he posted the “simple” message “Wow...Okiro dismisses Ribadu from Police Force” on Facebook.  He’s scandalized by the fact that these respondents “did not care because they thought Nuhu Ribadu got what he deserved because he was used by an evil regime to harass opponents”. But he prides himself in seeing them off with a supposedly unimpeachable logic, which he expresses thus: “In an imperfect world in which most people, at least those like me, have flaws, what is the greater evil; treating someone who did a lot of good, albeit with some flaws, in a manner that would then discourage anyone inclined to fight a social monster, or acclaiming his contribution while building institutions to prevent repeat of the shortcomings”.

But presenting the Ribadu situation vis-a-vis our national requirement as Utomi has done is either being too economical with the truth or being too generous with national standards. Ignore the fact that Ribadu was not dismissed by Okiro, but by the Police Service Commission (which is the authority constitutionally empowered to do so), forget the unhelpful truisms of an imperfect world and flawed humans; does Utomi not realize that describing what Ribadu has done as “a lot of good, albeit with some flaws” is in itself heavily debatable? Does he think his own idea of “a lot of good” is everybody’s, especially when we consider that whatever the good he’d supposedly done can easily be cancelled out by the singular fact that he made himself and the institution he served available to be used for all sorts of political chicanery culminating in the installation of an illegitimate government on Nigerians? Does Utomi not realize that building institutions and perfecting their shortcomings is a continuous human and developmental process which is not antithetical to calling a public servant (of whatever presumed credibility quotient) to account where necessary? Has Utomi thought about the possibility that Ribadu’s personalization of the office of the EFCC Chairman (rather than building it and respecting it as an institution) could be the core of the problem the organization is facing today as a new government or leadership tries to reposition it institutionally? Why should a proper call for Ribadu to account for his stewardship discourage anyone inclined to truly fight corruption? Of course, it is bound to discourage only those who do not know that power is transient, who think they are above the law, who think blindly serving an establishment and criminally installing a seemingly compliant successor regime will inoculate them against the vagaries of power! What Utomi’s logic reveals is that some of us are still not learning the proper lessons from the Ribadu affair!

 True, great men like Professor Wole Soyinka and Gani Fawehinmi are on Ribadu’s side on this issue, much like Utomi; but we need to realize that it’s not about sides and if it is, it’s not just about two sides. Opposing Ribadu’s conduct as a so-called anti-corruption campaigner does not necessarily imply one supports the Yar’Adua government or the police authorities in the way they have chosen to deal with him or in the way they are presently pursuing the anti-corruption campaign. What it says is that in railing against the supposed injustice or unlawfulness of Ribadu’s treatment, no one should try to tell Nigerians that a dog is actually a monkey! From the time he was removed as EFCC Chairman, he has acted in a manner contemptuous of constituted authority. No matter what anyone says, Ribadu is a child of the establishment who did the establishment’s biddings against the sanctity of our laws and national decency and who today, after being used, is being dispensed with by the same establishment he served. If I have tears, I will not shed it for Ribadu; rather, I will shed it for Nigeria that is yet to get a true leadership with the political will and iron commitment to fight corruption. And those who’d jump in my face to remind me of the peculiarity of Nigeria, how it is impossible to find anyone without fault, how it is impossible to fight corruption without doing it piecemeal, how you are going to be “wasted” if you do not fight with caution or kowtow to the big-big criminal at the top of the food chain, I say, get behind me! If we want to fight corruption, let’s go for the ideal; not hang on to preposterous rationalizations that take us nowhere forward fast! If the Ganis, Soyinkas and Utomis are now battle-weary to the extent that they’ll accept a massively flawed character like Ribadu as a hero, some of us who worship them and who appreciate all they’ve done for us and our country will continue to tell them they are very wrong! We are not doing so because we are holier-than-thou; we are doing so because we strongly believe that you do not fight political corruption by making compromises. Every known success against it in history begins and ends with zero tolerance. Yes, human factors will always make it impossible to really, really eradicate it; but you don’t start waving the surrender flag on the battlefront and expect to be declared a victor thereafter! Today’s young people are not that desperate for heroes as to canonize any pretender that first shows up with populist preachments in the public space!

So, professor, if you are reading this, here is some friendly advice. You are a man who still has a lot to offer our country, so don’t get in the habit of disparaging those who write on the internet, because such will surely come back to bite you on your butt in the days ahead! You are going to be around for a long time and if indeed the struggle is now your life, you’re better off getting comfortable with critics dealing with you via the medium, because that is the future. The Internet has democratized public discourse and will continue to give power and influence to more people now and in the future. Nigeria will get there, so you better position yourself now in the forefront of exploring the potential. More importantly, you are not a hungry man; you are not dependent on prebandalism for survival and therefore you do not have to please anybody to get by in Nigeria. You have a gift and a responsibility that providence has given you. That gift is your ability to think, create and teach success and that responsibility is as a prophetic voice for sorely needed change in our country. Yes, you can be a strong, firm and an uncompromising moral voice in our nation and damn the consequences. Sir, the ball is still firmly in your court.

Robot  # 1 | 30.12.2008 02:28

Kennedy Emetulu Professor Patrick Okedinachi Utomi is angry! He’s angry that “internet warriors” and “shameless commentators” are unconscionably purloining his well-manicured reputation as a national moral standard-bearer and carting him off to Hades! He suggests that these “people a long distance from a matter, armed with information that in some cases were incomplete or inaccurate and proceeding in self-righteous purity pontificating on matters which nothing in their personal history suggest they are able to live up to the standards with which they judge others” are the polluters of public space. How dare these uninformed ignoramuses question his well-thought-out comments over the African Finance Corporation affair? How dare these plebeian crows peck the royal eagle? Professor Utomi says he used to believe he has “earned the moral right to talk down at such people, with documented evidence of the number of times”...Read the full article.

Jagunlabi  # 2 | 30.12.2008 09:15

Thanks kennedy, It could not have been put more succinctly.

Albany  # 3 | 30.12.2008 10:09

Bravo Kenn ! It is interesting to see those who are benefitting from the status quo in Nigeria shiver and lose sleep over the unconventional yet effective guerilla warfare being unleashed on them by the 'internet warriors', who (un)fortunately are out of their reach. The bourgeois are visibly angry, because with the current speedy penetration of the internet in the country, more Nigerians are now aware of the things that were hitherto an exclusive preserve of the elites who have held us hostage over the years. That knowledge is the catalyst that will usher in the needed freedom for our enslaved collective mindset as Nigerians. The good thing is that the bourgeois are now feeling the heat and are most uncomfortable. No wonder they went after Elendureports; they went after Saharareporters and they are not done yet. They have now realized that times have changed and so must the status quo in Nigeria. There is still hope for Nigeria afterall. I can see a light on the horizon. Let the tempo be sustained. It is only a matter of time but we will get there.

igwe  # 4 | 30.12.2008 10:40

If the Ganis, Soyinkas and Utomis are now battle-weary to the extent that they’ll accept a massively flawed character like Ribadu as a hero, some of us who worship them and who appreciate all they’ve done for us and our country will continue to tell them they are very wrong! This is a very constructive article I actually gave up on Gani after his legal rigmaroles on the many illegalities Ribadu engaged in during his "fighting against corruption".

tonsoyo  # 5 | 30.12.2008 12:05

Kenn, This would have been one of the situations that I would have loved one of your several epistles, but you ended up messing up the whole write-up with your lame and baseless accusations of Utomi's stand on Ribadu, to which you devoted the last four paragraphs and the better part of the article. First of all, Ribadu did not in any way "personalize" EFCC, but Ribadu symbolizes the fight and was the face of EFCC. Just like one of my friends wrote in High School that Tunde Idiagbon was the Nigerian Head of State during his reign with Muhammad Buhari. I make bold to say that not a few Nigerians actually believed that he was the Head of State, why? because he was the face of the reforms carried out by that administration. In reference to that regime between 1983/85, most Nigerians will still say something like "you dare not do that in the days of Idiagbon" If I may ask you, did Idiagbon personalize the government at that time? One other ridiculous stand of you anti-Ribadu brigade is your attempt to paint those who are condemning his present travails as "canonizing" Ribadu, in your desperate attempt to justify that Ibori and co is right. Words and phrase like "venerate" "canonize" "made an hero" have been employed by various commentators from your group, because we tried to highlight a few achievements of his. How else do you think we will justify our condemnation of his treatment if we cannot point to any achievement attributable to him? According to you, you did not think that the treatment being meted out to him is right, only that we lost our right to say so, because saying so amounts to "venerating" him in your dictionary. It is the height of hypocrisy! This is why I will continue to hammer it into every anti-Ribadu's commnetators head, that there is no mid-way position on this, when you condemn Ribadu, you are justifying Ibori and co. When you argue that you are only against "venerating" or "canonizing" him you are not saying anything because nobody is. The stand of Pat Utomi is more honorable, in the present saga, we are left with only one choice between Ibori winning and Ribadu winning. It is not a trial of Ribadu's service, it is a war of criminal elements against the enforcers of law. It is a different issue if what we are doing here is assessing Ribadu's stewardship. How can you guys find it convenient to hammer away at Ribadu's shortcomings while looking away from the other side of the coin which is Ibori running him out of town. Ribadu is not a saint, we have agreed, quit telling us that we want to make him an hero, but if you have to pick between him and Ibori, which is the options that we have to deal with right now, who will you pick?

Ispy  # 6 | 30.12.2008 12:09

Yet again another supposed impartial intellectual response to the Pat Utomi's 'Public Space And The Discipline Of Honest Engagement' article. Personally i think the man expressed his personal opinion albeit the piece in question seemed to have been hurriedly put together with a lot of emotional input some of which bordered on self self-aggrandisement. Pat Utomi however remains a respected public commentator who i believe has earned the right to be placed 'up there' on issues that have to do with the socio-economic and political development of Nigeria(from his association with the Lagos Business School, to the provision of employment to hundreds of Nigerians through the then Platinum Bank now PHB,not to mention the very insightful TV programme 'Patito's Gang' with the likes of Reuben Abati etc), how high up however remains for Nigerians to decide. Self recognition, as was displayed in his article was however surprising and i'm afraid in bad taste. The barrage of criticism from supposed and self elected/imposed 'Custodians of NVS' or as one mentioned in a recent post the 'Elders Council ' is to say the least however very interesting. Apparently each one like the author of this piece, has qualified Pat Utomi's reference to internet pundits to be a personal reference to themselves and as such reacted with a thinly veiled attempt to immediately fill the non existent vacuum in the Public Space they seen too eager to fill. His assertion that since the likes of Professor Wole Soyinka and Chief Gani Fawehinmi still actively support Ribadu signifies they are probably Battle-weary is one i totally disagree with as i believe strongly these are at least two very experienced and tested social crusaders who must have identified a special quality in Ribadu having dealt with numerous would be anti corruption warriors in the past. In this regard i totally agree with Utomi's statement in his article when he said 'In an imperfect world in which most people, at least those like me, have flaws, what is the greater evil; treating someone who did a lot of good, albeit with some flaws, in a manner that would then discourage anyone inclined to fight a social monster, or acclaiming his contribution while building institutions to prevent repeat of the shortcomings'. Those who seek an ideal fight against corruption in Nigeria today should realise that Nigerias' problems require a situational solution and should stop advocating a 'copy and paste' approach based on those societies they obviously consider 'ideal'. One respondent (Moses Ebe Ochonu) in his article 'Public Space And The Discipline Of Honest Engagement' implicitly under the sub heading 'Fading Glories and New Voices' insinuated that Utomi was of the past and they of course are the new voices. He went further to state that 'Unlike Utomi, most Nigerians in the Diaspora are not invested in the Nigerian business sector, which survives almost entirely on direct and indirect government patronage' a statement which i believe tries to belittle Utomi's business achievement as well as those of the millions of Nigerians actively involved in private enterprise.Also his specific defense of the respected internet news site Sahara reporters could be deemed misleading as Pat Utomi never made mention of the news site as one of the internet pundits he criticized. On a last note, and though i am not in possession of the full issues concerning the Soludo-AFC probe and as such will refrain from making any comments on the appropriateness of the probe instituted, i will however state that Pat Utomi's concern on the effect of reversal s of government policies everytime a new government comes into being is not misplaced.At least he stated very clearly in his article that he has no personal reasons for asking for caution in the probe of Soludo concerning his investment in AFC. Nigeria truly has acquired the reputation of having an unstable environment for investors and based on his active involvement in business and financial workings of Nigeria it would go without saying that he just may be in a better position to express accurately the effects of all such actions on our economy. We should also not fail to realise that not all probes were instituded with sincere intentions. In addition, Nigerians in the diaspora who by the way Utomi did not collectively condemn in his article or neither did he insinuate their non participation in all matters Nigeria, i'm afraid irrespective of their zeal or patriotism can not proclaim to be as in touch with all things Nigerian as those at home who are constantly in the heat of things. The likes of Chief Gani Fawenhinmi remain fully on ground and in the thick of things whilst the Professor Soyinka's who spend considerable time abroad have enough trusted friends and comrades in sensitive positions that give them accurate feedback on issues added to frequent visits to Nigeria. Even such online news sites like Sahara reporters have people on the ground in Nigeria. The public space is unlimited in its boundaries and can accommodate views and opinions from all, the internet further making this so, nobody therefore needs to be replaced of forcibly booted out for someone else's opinion to be heard or valued!! If you can, help others; if you cannot do that, at least do not harm them.-Dalai Lama

Osibinaebi  # 7 | 30.12.2008 12:19

KENN, Thank you very much. Some of the fighters of yesteryears are getting exhausted and are hanging to RIBADU as successor. We just must not lower our standard of measurement just because the rigor of passing test are getting more strainous. How do we welcome a NEWS that pass mark in WAEC( name whatever exam they conduct cos its been changing of late) from 40 to say 25 simply because year in year out, only 10 % of candidate have been passing. For people that say, refusal to pity RIBADI means supporting IBORI, i also put it to them that hero worshipping RIBADU equally means canonization of OBJ simple following their logic.

Pius72  # 8 | 30.12.2008 12:37

@ Mr Ispy: Although I disagree with your take on Moses Ochonu's intervention, I must tell you that you made my day with your fantastic prose! Great prose, great style! Excellent syntax. Thanks man and have a wonderful day Pius Adesanmi

tonsoyo  # 9 | 30.12.2008 12:45

=OSIBINAEBI;306492>KENN, Thank you very much. Some of the fighters of yesteryears are getting exhausted and are hanging to RIBADU as successor. We just must not lower our standard of measurement just because the rigor of passing test are getting more strainous. How do we welcome a NEWS that pass mark in WAEC( name whatever exam they conduct cos its been changing of late) from 40 to say 25 simply because year in year out, only 10 % of candidate have been passing. For people that say, refusal to pity RIBADI means supporting IBORI, i also put it to them that hero worshipping RIBADU equally means canonization of OBJ simple following their logic. > OSI, Your position still defies logic. People did not just come out one and day and start to sing a song titled Ribadu the Messiah. The criminal elements being investigated by Ribadu hijacked this government and ruan him out of the Police Force. That is all to all our discussion about Ribadu's at this time. Some of us came out to say the treatment being meted out to him by the criminal gang is wrong, some of you came out to say no it is right, some say it is not right, but that our condemnation of the treatment amunts to "canonization" "veneration" and "deitifying" of Ribadu, how does that make sense to you. The condemnation of Ibori group winning against law enforcement good or bad, is not a vote of confidence in Ribadu, it is an alert to the greater danger that it portends. We are not passing a judgment on Ribadu stewardship at this time, there will be a time for that later. Why is that so difficult to understand? The most ridiculous position is that of people like Kenn and Ebe, who think the treatment being meted out Ribadu is wrong, but we lost our rights to voice it because Ribadu has his own shortcomings. It is against common sense. If they think we have a right to voice it, why did they keep condemning everybody that is saying so and colored it "canonization" and "veneration" to justify the absurdity of their position?

Osibinaebi  # 10 | 30.12.2008 13:12

=tonsoyo;306515> > OSI, Your position still defies logic. People did not just come out one and day and start to sing a song titled Ribadu the Messiah. OSIBI SAYs My position does not defile logic, it only butresses the fact that, what is good for the geese is good for the gander, lets not apply double standard.Ribadu should not be singled out for praise The criminal elements being investigated by Ribadu hijacked this government and ruan him out of the Police Force. That is all to all our discussion about Ribadu's at this time. Some of us came out to say the treatment being meted out to him by the criminal gang is wrong, some of you came out to say no it is right, some say it is not right, but that our condemnation of the treatment amunts to "canonization" "veneration" and "deitifying" of Ribadu, how does that make sense to you. OSIBI SAYS, What most Anti-Ribadu said was that the treatment was wrong, but that we feel no qualms if RIBADU is the beneficiary since he also employed such tactics in the past, if the tactics was applied across board by RIBADU, i bet you, we will have no problem supporting him, it was the selectiveness of his use of the wrong tactics that makes us not to pity him The condemnation of Ibori group winning against law enforcement good or bad, is not a vote of confidence in Ribadu, it is an alert to the greater danger that it portends. We are not passing a judgment on Ribadu stewardship at this time, there will be a time for that later. Why is that so difficult to understand? OSIBI SAYS I partially concur with you on the above, but you guys insinuated that the non-condemnation of the IBORI groups meant fully support for it. We are not hypocrites, so if we did not condemn RIBADU when he was using back door tactic, we lack the moral obligation to cry out when same tactic is used against him The most ridiculous position is that of people like Kenn and Ebe, who think the treatment being meted out Ribadu is wrong, but we lost our rights to voice it because Ribadu has his own shortcomings. It is against common sense. OSIBI SAYS, you guys were not just saying RIBADU's treatment was wrong, you guys said anyone that does not condemn the treatment was an agent of IBORI and co. It was your right to say the treatment was wrong and almost all of us agree on that, , but it was wrong on your part to conclude that our not being vocal about it being wrongs implied we sanctioned it If they think we have a right to voice it, why did they keep condemning everybody that is saying so and colored it "canonization" and "veneration" to justify the absurdity of their position? OSIBI SAYS, The canonization was not from you saying the treatment was wrong, but you saying RIBADU was the best and that you approve of his tactics that were unconstitutional( or you twisting the constitution to accomodate his tactics), You venerated RIBADU when you say he had done what nobody has done before when you very much know that nobody had been given the type of power or presidential backing available to RIBADU. its like you tie peoples hand and loosen that of RIBADU and expect them to run a race with RIBADU. You veneration comes from praising RIBADU as the winner of such a race.

---

The conversation continues in our forum. Click here to read all comments

---