Written by Odimegwu Onwumere

To rule a state is a big task than to train a child. The trained child brings civilization to the state, for a better society and easy to govern. At old age, the importance of education is cherished. But this, some people do not know.

Since the return of 56 secondary and 1040 primary schools in Anambra State to the missionaries on the 21^st November, 2011, Governor Peter Obi of the state has experienced vocal and written mayhem in few weeks than he had ever experienced in the years he had been governor. While many observers have condemned Obi’s action from the view of politics, the governor was seeing his action from the moral point of view and was of the opinion that the society needs a big whip to flog in the lost moral decadence back in the lives of people.

His regret that government should not have taken over the schools from the missionaries in the first position may not be out of place. What may be out of place is the manner with which government hijacks every aspect of human endeavours due to political and economic interests without minding the social implications. It is believed that what this soft-spoken governor handed over were mission Schools, which the missionaries are the original owners, and not the contemporary schools dotting every corner of this country christened Private Schools. It’s this ‘Private Lifestyle’ that the society is introducing that has brought capitalistic tendencies in the people. Capitalism has broken the cable of unity in our deeply revered Communalistic ala-Igbo.

Anybody saying that the handing over of the schools is not for the good of the schools is far from saying the truth. What consultation does anyone need if the State House of Assembly undisputedly acceded to the secession of the schools to the missionaries? Anambra State House of Assembly passed an executive bill mandating the immediate release of the schools run by the state government to the missionaries. These are men and women elected by the people to see and decide on the affairs of the Anambra people at the state level. Stakeholders in the education sector are very important when it comes to education but not when a sovereign state with its lawmakers decide to implement laws that they deem pleasant would take their state to the next level. Any external input is aggressiveness!

The fear that there would be situations teachers working in the missionary schools would be given additional responsibility and mandated by the missionaries to return in the evening after school to participate in church activities is just the judgement of detractors. If all brethrens in the churches are not mandated to choir practice and catechism and other activities by their priests how come anyone would imagine that the fate of teachers in Anambra would be different in the hands of the missionaries?

There would always be job security for Anambra teachers if the priests themselves are not expelled from service without immunity. Since 80% of the people in Anambra can be said are Christians, the insinuation that education in the hand of the government is reachable to the poor masses is a circus. The people are closer to their churches than they are closer to their government, and closer to their priests than they are closer to their governor. This does not mean that the governor is not accessible. The governor also can be said is a product of the church. The truth is that religion in the world is taken seriously. This is why the policy would benefit parents, their wards and the teachers in the state. When there is strike, it will never affect the students.

No one has ever read anywhere that the governor said teachers’ rewards are in heaven, as we have been informed. This statement is without doubt the product of mischief makers in the state or in the education union. What every concernedonye-Anambra should be looking for is ways to address (as regards the Missionary Schools) the politics of Catholic Churches and Anglican Churches, which predates today. To cool their political nerves, Obi must give them equal opportunities in the area of funds.

The action of Obi is never hidebound or a caricature of governance. The project is never elitist’s or projected to undeserving the children of the poor masses and has never violated any Act of ‘the compulsory free universal basic education Act 2004.’ What Obi is doing is ensuring that there are adequate and equal educational opportunities for all in the state at all levels. If he was not bent on making this a reality, he could not be assisting the mission schools (not religious bodies as some education unionists have posited) with the billions of naira. Handing the schools back to the missionaries does not mean that Obi wants to prosecute “religious education”. Rather, he wants to promote moral virtues. No matter how corrupt anyone may see that the churches are their corruption will never be equated with that of secular state.

The people and secular state have built Capitalism around their way of life and have thought it the best way to live, since they have come to live with it for a very long time. They are the ones today hounding Obi for his act instead of celebrating with him, the satisfaction his Communal programming merited, as his government is not relinquishing the finance of the schools and pay salaries of the teachers to the secular educationists. What makes Obi’s put unique is that he is not importing our white slavers to come and manage the schools. The schools are going to be managed by our brothers and sisters, who were left with the colonialists’ form of spirituality. No matter how we may see it, there is still some form of sanity in this colonial-spiritual order than in the secular milieu.

It was due to this capitalistic and selfishness and laziness nature around us today that a group lobbied and worked for the military takeover and total destruction of the missionary school system in the 70s. So, what is the group’s moral stand today for the members to shamelessly open their mouths to complain that governments are not paying teachers well and that the typical education has fallen?

There was no better way Obi could have been managing and sustaining the State resources as knowing what is right for the state at the right time. He is also achieving enviable records in the multi-sectarian development strategy of his government. The governor’s legacy of hard work has put the government of his state on the billboard of not only good government but on the mountain of transparency and accountability. Imagine how the citizens of Nigeria are shouting and crying about the insecurity in the country! In earnest, insecurity is not lonely left to the killings and wanton destruction of property. The worst of insecurity is when experienced on the character and integrity of a people. The lack of this brews the killings and destruction of people and property. This, Obi wants to further strengthen the security network in the education of Anambra State.

Obi gives money directly to the school and monitors the execution of the project the money was given for. His mindset for doing this was hinged on the belief that missionaries would do better with money given them than the secular contractors whom he believed had formed the habit in shoddiness with money given them. Any union or group challenging Obi on this policy is just exhibiting selfishness and politics and other primordial unionist sentiments.

Myopic Anambra people and their hack writers should not refuse to appreciate Obi’s not-of-its-kind sacrifice for the State. No Anambra person should place politics before the welfare of the people. Obi had remained a caring father. People are reciprocating his love. The ancestors of Anambra State must be dancing in their graves because of this magnanimous posture of Obi in tackling and attacking illiteracy in the state. The churches concerned should live upto expectations for this noble and wonderful move by his Excellency to work out very well. Obi has done one rare thing only the wise can do: He thinks about the future of our children. Giving the schools back to the missionaries puts him on line as a man who wants the revival of character and integrity in the society, which are the highest form of education, in a non-oil producing state like Anambra. Besides, western education didn’t come with the government; it came with the missionaries.

Obi deserves his people’s expression of satisfaction. Ndi’Anambra must remain worthy Ambassadors of their state. There could not have been a better time to stem the rot in the education system than now. No group or individual should be biting the finger because of what could have gone to their personal bank accounts that would not benefit the collectivity of the people. In fact Obi’s decision in handing schools to the missionaries will be Anambra saving grace in the future, if only the governor will follow his footstep and the students not forced to be Christians against their own volition. This is why it is expedient at this project to separate God from Christianity.

Odimegwu Onwumere is a Poet/Author and Media Consultant based in Rivers State. Call: +2348032552855. Email: apoet_25@yahoo.com

By Dr. Aliyu Tilde

The latest revelation by the President of Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Pastor Oritsejefor, calls for instant comment even as the country braces up for a shutdown by its labour unions tomorrow. I am afraid that this voice will be drowned in the sea of the ongoing protests on fuel subsidy removal. It is unfortunate that the nation has to face the two weighty issues simultaneously due to the incompetence of its leadership. The situation doesn’t allow us to sacrifice one for the sake of the other.
The CAN President addressed a press conference saying that Christians are “taking their fate in our hands”, that “we have decided to work out means to defend ourselves against these senseless killings.” This came in the aftermath of the killings of Christians in Gombe, Mubi and Yola during the past four days. Some, like Aljazeera, have already interpreted the statement as signaling an impending civil war in Nigeria.
It is difficult for anyone not to sympathize with the challenging position that religious leaders find themselves in Nigeria today. On the one hand, Christian leaders cannot be expected to keep mute while their followers are slaughtered. CAN leadership since Arch-Bishop Okogie has never hesitated to call for war at the slightest provocation. We heard it during the OIC, Sharia and Islamic Banking debates. These were mere policy issues. When the issue is that of attacking churches and killing Christians, one can expect another declaration of war from a leadership with such pedigree. Apparently, the government is lagging many kilometers behind Boko Haram. Who would justifiably expect Oritsejefor to keep quiet? He must say something.
On the other hand are Nigerian Muslims who are helpless in the situation are often accused by their Christians brothers of not doing much to stop the attacks by Boko Haram. They wonder what mere condemnation would do in the face of bullets and bombs. In fact, most Muslims whom I discussed the issue with hold the belief, like many of their leaders, that Boko Haram is a conspiracy against Islam and the Muslim North. As evidence, they do not hesitate to point accusing fingers at northern Christians known to have links with Boko Haram and the instances in which Christians were caught attempting to bomb churches.
Another source of dilemma for Muslims is that these killings are happening unabated when the top echelon of the country’s security apparatus is dominated by Christians: The President and Commander-in-Chief or the Armed Forces, Goodluck Jonathan, is a Christian, just as are his Chief of Defence Staff, Chief of Army Staff, National Security Adviser and Director of State Security Services; only the Inspector General of Police and the Chiefs of Air and Naval Staff are Muslim, the last two having no direct relevance to the issue of Boko Haram.
Muslims reason that if these people, on whose shoulders rests the entire security of the country, fail to discharge their constitutional responsibilities for reasons best known to them, how can the Sultan – the ceremonial leader of Muslims in Nigeria, for example, stop Boko Haram killings when he does not command a single soldier or superintend the security his ward? The Sultan and other Muslims can condemn Boko Haram saying that their actions are illegal, un-Islamic, etc., as they have done, but that has not and will not change anything. What will check Boko Haram is intelligence, weapons, police and security personnel and the will to deploy them.
Muslims will also not forget to cite the roles played by Muslim ex-Presidents and Heads of State in suppressing Muslim insurgency. President Shehu Shagari and Maj. General Muhammadu Buhari did not waste time in brutally dealing with Maitatsine in the early 1980s. Both Buhari and President Babangida arrested and jailed Ibrahim El-Zakzaky for preaching anti-government doctrines. In 2009 when Boko Haram made its first public outing in retaliation to the extrajudicial killings of their members by the police, President Yar’adua brutally repressed them. In both Bauchi and Maiduguri, they were massacred and their bases leveled instantly by bulldozers, acts that courted worldwide condemnation by human right groups.
However, the performance of Christian Presidents is a direct contradiction of the Muslim regarding religious insurgency and criminal activities. Boko Haram first surfaced as “Nigerian Taliban” during the era of President Olusegun Obasanjo, a self-confessed born-again Christian. He did practically nothing to stop them, so much so that the then Director of SSS, Mr. Gadzama, was baffled at how the administration was adamant in checking a group that was becoming increasingly armed. Instead, it is commonly known that the leader of Boko Haram, Muhammad Yusuf, was twice bailed by Professor Jerry Gana, an elder in CAN and a Minister under Obasanjo. To my knowledge, Gana has not denied the story.
Also, the person widely known to have links with the group during its formative stage, former Borno State Governor, Ali Modu Sheriff, was a lackey of Obasanjo. Just few minutes after he met the Boko Haram leader in police cell in 2009 where he spoke to him in his native Kanuri, the former was executed in cold blood by the police. That was just after another top Boko Haram member, Modu’s Commissioner for Religious Affairs was also gunned down by the police on the street to the loud ovation of the public.
After President Yar’adua, Jonathan continued with Obasanjo’s deficit of interest to check Boko Haram. It is unbelievable to see how a government in a digital age would fail to apprehend a few thousand insurgents and their leaders who are using GSM freely to coordinate their activities and communicate with local and international press; how it will fail to prosecute arrested members of the group; how it will refuse to apprehend its known sponsors and associates; etc. It must be noted that so far, of all the thousands arrested, only one person has been prosecuted. He was quickly given a laughable jail term of three years only. This kind of evidence goes a long way to prove that there is a deliberate attempt on the part government to sustain the crisis.
So if anybody is looking for where to place his blame, he should deposit it on the doorstep of the President. I have heard Serah Jibril, David Mark and CAN leadership accusing northern leaders of not being forthcoming in condemning Boko Haram, though they are equally silent on the war crimes committed by Christian militia in central Nigeria. Muslims complain that the Sallah massacre of Muslims at a prayer ground at the end of last Ramadan where their bodies were roasted and eaten by Christians before the very eyes of security agents did not attract any condemnation from Christian leaders, the Nigerian President, or the foreign leaders and press.
If the Christian leadership would be dispassionate, I think they should redirect their criticism at the President, instead of taking the simple path of blaming a helpless section of the Nigerian population. If he is incompetent, let them tell the world, as they would hastily do were he a Muslim President. They must hold him responsible for their insecurity.
Blaming Jonathan, however, is the last thing that CAN would do. Since he became President, he has come to rely on it for support in both politics and administration. It supported his candidature almost 100%. How would it in one breath celebrate his victory and in the next advocate his incompetence? CAN is also quick to come to his rescue on any national issue, no matter unpopular it may be. Some weeks ago, its chairman tried to rope in the Christian community into accepting the unpopular decision of removing fuel subsidy, saying that CAN was supportive of the move. It took a threat from the northern wing of the organization before he withdrew the statement, claiming that he was misquoted.
Jonathan on his part has expressed his gratitude in many ways. He has used the congregation of his church in Abuja to announce important policy statements of his administration and avail Nigerians of his mindset. Today, he made this startling revelation at the interdenominational church service to mark Armed Forces Remembrance day in Abuja:
“Some of them are in the executive arm of government, some of them are in the parliamentary/legislative arm of government while some of them are even in the judiciary. Some are also in the armed forces, the police and other security agencies. Some continue to dip their hands and eat with you and you won’t even know the person who will point a gun at you or plant a bomb behind your house.”
Mhmm. Jonathan, the hostage of the invincible and omnipresent Boko Haram, is courting sympathy.
In fact, it was in the aftermath of its meeting with the President after the Christmas bombing at Suleja that CAN leadership threatened to retaliate, before it downgraded the posture to self-defence later.
Let us now examine the implication of CAN’s resort to self-defense. On the surface it loo unavoidable,but cut it deep, it is untenable.
Practically, it will require a massive militia and weapons to stem a credible defense against attack on its members. The problem is that we are talking of defending at least 65 million people. How would CAN go about this? How many hundreds of thousands of militia would it require? How many AK47s would it need?
I live in a predominantly Muslim village with only about 5% Christians. Their population has been dwindling since the beginning of the Jos crisis. Yet there are at least five churches. Each church would require at least 5 rifles to defend it against attack from gunmen, Boko Haram or otherwise. That means 25 rifles would be needed to be manned by a greater number of people. In addition, how would CAN protect them against bombs, for example? By acquiring bombs too?
Now, I guess that as the most religious country in the world, there could be about a million churches in Nigeria, some holding congregations of thousands of people at a time. How many rifles would be required nationwide to defend those churches: Five, ten, twenty million? How many youths will CAN need to defend them? In whose custody will the weapons be? From where will they get the money to purchase them? Will Jonathan provide it from the 2011 security vote that is about a trillion naira? Who will give them the permission to acquire the weapons in the first place? Again, the President?
And what happens on the other side of the divide? Would Muslims sit back and watch every church armed with weapons and militant youths without asking for the same concession to pile up arms against a possible attack by Christians? More than 90% of those killed by Boko Haram are Muslims. Would the President also allow Muslims to take up arms in self-defence?
It is here I see the call for self-defense by CAN as infeasible in any civilized society. Nigeria is not the only country where criminal gangs or religious extremists operate violence. But citizens hardly resort to self-help under circumstances like this. They will depend on government to provide such security. Taking the law into one’s hand by arming members of one’s group will logically lead to civil war in any society. That is how Aljazeerah reached its conclusion that Nigeria is heading towards a civil war. CAN, to the delight of many enemies of one Nigeria, will be starting a fire that it will not be able to quench. And if the intention of Boko Haram or whoever is bombing churches in Nigeria, having failed to get Muslims to support or join it, is to ignite a religious war in the country, then CAN would have easily aiding and abetting that objective.
So unless that is what the whole idea behind Boko Haram is intended, CAN leadership should put Jonathan on the hot seat and hold him responsible for our insecurity. It owes the nation that responsibility since it is closer to the President than anyone. Instead of blaming Nigerian Muslims, it should press Jonathan to show resolve similar to that of the Muslim presidents we mentioned earlier. I have no doubt that the Nigerian Muslim community will support him overwhelmingly. I hereby ledge my support in advance.
Why is this happening to Nigeria? Perhaps an answer could be found in Part II of this series where we will survey the six or so hypotheses behind what is termed Boko Haram today. Until then, please join the labour to protest against the removal of fuel subsidy that will start tomorrow. And when you pray, please pray for a peaceful coexistence among the different peoples of Nigeria. Pray also for the President such that he wakes up from his slumber and lead us out of this mess, for the price of failure could be costly. We do not need a badluck. A good one is better.
Abuja 8 January 2012