The Guardian
Email YouTube Facebook Instagram Twitter WhatsApp

Buhari’s war on corruption: Real or fake (4)




Continued from yesterday
THIS three-caste concept of Nigeria had to be modified after the civil war because of how it was fought and won. To defeat Biafra, the Caliphate relied heavily on the “willing tools” from the Northern minorities, and on the Yoruba from among the conquered territory of the South. After the war, the castes had to be shuffled to reflect that reality. The modified version was publicly articulated in 1992 by a senior Caliphate politician, Maitama Sule, when he described the revised version of the caste system they deem proper for the relationship between the peoples of Nigeria:

“In this country, all of us need one another. Hausa need Igbos, Igbos need Yoruba and the Yorubas need the Northerners. Everyone has a gift from God. Northerners are endowed by God with leadership qualities. The Yoruba man knows how to earn a living and has diplomatic qualities. The Igbo is gifted in commerce, trade and technological innovation. God so created us individually for a purpose and with different gifts. Others are created as kings, students and doctors. We all need each other. If there are no followers, a king will not exist, if there are no students a teacher will not be required, etc.”
– Alhaji Maitama Sule in an address which was written and spoken in Arabic during the launching of The Power of Knowledge authored by Alhaji Isa Kaita, at Durbar Hotel, Kaduna on December 22, 1992.

[Ayoada, J. A. A. Nigeria and the Squandering of Hope, Ibadan: University of Ibadan Press, 1997, p. 14]

The main post-civil-war changes were as follows: the Yoruba from the South were promoted to join the Northern minorities in the caste of willing tools and junior partners, i.e. house slaves, to the Caliphate masters.  The defeated Biafrans remained in the lowest caste – the slaves who were never to rule over the Caliphate masters or to be allowed to have control over their future. From this Caliphate perspective, it was a serious breach of the Caliphate-established order for Jonathan, from among the defeated Biafran slaves, to be a President ruling over the Caliphate masters. That aberration was made possible by the quarrel between the Caliphate masters and their Yoruba junior partners over the annulment of the June 12 election by Sultan Dasuki.

The masters had been forced to hand power temporarily to their loyal Yoruba agent, General Obasanjo. But Obasanjo, for his own personal purposes, schemed to place Jonathan in line for the presidency by making him the running mate to Yar’Adua, the Caliphate scion to whom, in 2007, he dutifully handed back their power that they had lent him. When Yar’Adua died in office, the Caliphate plotted to prevent Jonathan from succeeding him. When that plot failed and Jonathan was installed to complete Yar’Adua’s term, the Caliphate demanded that he not exercise his constitutional right to seek election in 2011. They threatened that if he did, they would make the country ungovernable for him. [North ’ll make Nigeria ungovernable for Jonathan –Lawal Kaita ]

But Jonathan had the temerity to defy them and win office in his own right instead of vacating it when the masters demanded it back.

In Caliphate eyes, Jonathan’s living in Aso Rock was a desecration of an inner sanctum of Caliphate power, like a slave sleeping in his master’s bed. The indulging by his officials in the looting that is a privilege of the masters was seen as eating the forbidden fruit. For this unforgiveable sin, he has to be punished now that the masters, through Buhari, have retaken what they regard as theirs and theirs alone.  The usurper slave from Biafra has to be punished as a deterrent to any others who might dare to repeat the crime of usurping the masters’ power and privileges.

Those to whom the masters lent their looting privileges are exempt from punishment. But those who usurped that privilege must be punished for the crime of usurpation. Accordingly, usurpation of Caliphate privileges is the real crime for which Jonathan and his officials, especially his fellow ex-Biafrans, must be punished under the guise of the war on corruption. That is why Buhari’s war on corruption must be confined to the Jonathan administration and must not be extended to the regimes of President Yar’Adua, President Obasanjo, General Abubakar, General Abacha, Ernest Shonekan, General IBB, General Buhari, President Shagari, General Obasanjo, General Murtala Mohammed and General Gowon.

From the foregoing examination, we can see that Buhari has tailored his war on corruption to make it serve the Caliphate agenda of protecting the Caliphate system of lootocracy. Looting by regimes led by Caliphate scions or by Caliphate-approved agents must not be probed, prosecuted and punished. And above all, the 1999 Constitution, the godfather of lootocracy and the fountainhead of corruption must be preserved. That is why Northern leaders want to ensure that the 2014 Confab report is not implemented. [Northern leaders move to block implementation of confab report]

We can now answer the question: Is Buhari’s war on corruption real or fake?

It depends on what he does: (1) whether he extends it to cover all the regimes since 1966, like Bakarbe Musa demands; (2) whether he prosecutes himself for the missing N2.8bn and, above all (3) what he does about the 1999 Constitution.

If he omits (1) then it is a war with many sacred cows; and if he omits (2) then he is coming to equity without clean hands.

That would be bad enough.

And if Buhari goes along with the Northern leaders, it will become clear that he is opposed to dumping the 1999 Constitution – that he refuses to meet the necessary condition for “killing” corruption before it “kills” Nigeria. Should he do that, Buhari’s “War on Corruption” would have failed the litmus test for being genuine, and would become exposed as fake. And Nigerians would be justified in feeling conned by Buhari.
• Concluded
• Chinweizu wrote via

Receive News Alerts on Whatsapp: +2348136370421