AGBAJE: Groups Are Relevant, Some Are Mischievous

Mr. Fred Agbaje is a Lagos-based lawyer and social justice activist. Speaking with KAMAL TAYO OROPO, he said socio cultural organisations must promote the good of the society and not lead their people astray through ill-informed positions.

IS the gale of endorsement by various socio-cultural organisations something that is within their purviews?

I AM not against the rising existence of some of the socio cultural organisations we have, or what I will call the proliferation of socio-cultural associations in Nigeria. This is because proliferation is an offshoot of democratic culture, which has in it, rule of law and the rights of the citizenry and which amongst other things guarantees the right to freely associate. But one must understand that in as much as the constitution guarantees the right to freedom of association, promotion of group interests and members, these rights are not absolute in the constitution. They are subject to good laws being made by the National Assembly, or what you call laws that are reasonable in a democratic society

   Furthermore, these rights can also be curtailed in the interest of other considerations or in the public interest; order and morality. We call these limitations derogatory clauses under the constitution. So, in essence, these rights are not absolute, the government can legislate on them, in as much as these groups exist to promote their own interests, and by way of enhancing unity and progress for the community as well as protecting their political interest. 

   Care must, however be taken in dealing with some of these associations. Some of them come under false names and purporting to be interested in certain ideals, but what they are out to achieve is different. The very fundamental essence of any of these socio-cultural organisations is to promote their own interest, enhance development of their members and community or region. But then, government must be very careful and members of such organisations must also be very careful that their leaders don’t lead them astray. They might come under the false pretence that they are promoting their individual political interest or regional interest or socio-cultural interest, but at the end of the day you discover that leadership of such associations have ulterior motives, which is clearly contrary to the fundamental objectives and principles upon which such organisation was supposedly set up. Every of such organisation must have a constitution and the constitution must spell out the objectives. Sometimes you find out that the constitution defines the extent to which the organisation may dabble into politics or governmental affairs or imposing the wills of the leaders on members without consulting the members.

Is it politically and morally correct for them to endorse candidates and parties?

   Are they not contravening their mandates as stated in their objectives? In as much as you can protect your interest, you don’t have the right to say you have adopted on behalf of the generality of your people. If you want to play politics, you remove the toga of socio-cultural association and then officially seek registration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Then, the world will know for sure that you either belong to the All Progressives Congress (APC), the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) or any other political party of your choice.

   And speaking of societal value and morality, the question is, in most of these socio-cultural groups, are they governed by morals? Do they have regard for morals and value, when money is speaking? Which leader in any of the socio cultural society in the country does not want to become a minister or pave the way for their children, where they are too old to be considered? That is why it is easy for them to flirt with the ruling political parties, either in the state or at the federal level; and for monetary gain. And when their pockets have been sufficiently stuffed, they begin to talk from both sides of the mouth, a clear case of loss of core value. When money is talking, such socio cultural organisations turn blind eyes to their value, societal values and morals. Even when things are terribly going wrong with their members and members of their community, they keep quite.

   For instance, I had expected, on a very serious note, let me come back home and I would like to be specific, I had expected the Afenifere to speak out against the deliberate refusal of the Federal Government  to construct the Lagos/Ibadan road, which has become a death trap. Go and look at Ibadan/Ilorin road. Also, their counterpart in the East, Ohaneze Ndigbo, look the other way in the face of deplorable road networks in the East. Why have they not been able to speak out against the government? The East has the worst road network in the country today.

   The Lagos/Ibadan road carries the heaviest traffic every day. But why has the socio-cultural organisation in the Southwest not been able to speak against the government? Why are they now suddenly waking up and finding their voices to support the ruling government? The Afenifere is a huge disappointment. Their attitude is very painful. One would have thought their very existence is to promote the interest of the society, of the under-dog and concern themselves with the welfare of the community. What have they now derived from their inconsequential adoption? And I must say that, I am very happy that the former vice president, Dr. Alex Ekwueme, declaration that President Goodluck Jonathan should not expect bloc vote from the eastern states this time around the way he got in 2011 elections –– that the zone’s votes are going to be split. That is the truth because, he is indirectly telling you that, the interest of those people, who voted massively for him in the previous election, have not been served. So, you don’t expect bloc vote like you had before. But till today, has any cultural group in the zone spoken against the ruling government? No, they would rather begin to embrace politics for their own selfish end and lining their pockets with ill-gotten money from a government that has become notorious with settling people out of sense.

Let us be specific on some of the issues they raised. For example, the Afenifere raised the issue of the recommendations of the constitutional conference, which they claim they were expecting the president to implement. Is this not in the interest of the country, particularly the Southwest?

   Specifically, the issue of constitutional conference, which some members of Afenifere are now hammering upon is a ruse. You can’t have a constitutional conference the same year, or very close to the period you want to have the general election. How do you expect the government to implement it? This tells you that the government is not sincere. 

   We told them that the government just wanted to create job for you people, so that you people will come and chop and keep quite, and begin to be supportive of the government. Go and ask them and check out those who are talking about the constitutional conference and its implementation. They are the people who came to eat and after eating they suddenly realised that they have been used and dumped by the government. They are now talking of recommendations, who is going to implement them?

    Supposing the present ruling party loses the general election, do you expect the other party coming to go and inherit the liability from the so-called constitutional conference? Even the party that organised it; does it have the liver (courage) to implement the outcome? We told them that they are making you people to embark on a wild goose chase, but they refused to listen. But because most of them were mentally old –– people of 70s and 80s, they made sure they manipulated the process and found themselves there.