Much Ado about a debate

The disagreement between literary icon, Prof. Wole Soyinka, and the President’s wife, Mrs. Patience Jonathan, and calls for a public debate between the two have attracted a lot of attention from Nigerians, writes CHUKWUDI AKASIKE

That literary icon, Prof. Wole Soyinka is the only Nobel Laureate that has ever come out of Nigeria is no news. In fact, Soyinka was the first African to be awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature in Africa; a feat that was achieved in 1986. But what is news is the recent invectives between the man many call Kongi and the wife of the President, Mrs. Patience Jonathan.

Really, if Nigerians were not surprised to hear and read the outburst of Soyinka against Mrs. Jonathan on her visit to Rivers State and other issues pertaining to the wife of the President, they (Nigerians) were shocked to have read what appears to be a kind of vituperation poured on the professor in reaction to his criticism of her person.

Soyinka had, during an event, accused Patience of being used by her husband to destabilise Rivers State. He went ahead to describe the President’s wife as a mere domestic appendage of power, who depended on state security apparatus to intimidate. “Be a lady before being a First Lady. In fact, you can’t be a First Lady without first being a lady. Is she the 1st First Lady we have had? The vulgarity has become intolerable. We have now reached the bottom of obscenity,” the renowned poet and playwright had fumed.

Although Soyinka’s remarks on the President’s wife was greeted with many reactions, the reaction from the First Lady attracted a huge response from Nigerians, especially on the social media. One of the most striking reactions was the call on the two dramatis personae to engage each other in a debate.

Mrs. Jonathan had taken on the Nobel Laureate for attributing the crisis in the Rivers State House of Assembly to her. In a statement by her spokesman, Ayo Osinlu, the President’s wife said Soyinka betrayed the moral duty that expected him, as a respected member of the society, to carefully consider all shades of issues that informed his opinions on any matter. Mrs. Jonathan said Soyinka had become an embarrassment to his admirers with his diatribe against her.

“Unfortunately, Soyinka betrayed moral duty in his recent diatribe against Mrs. Patience Jonathan. Of course, this would not be the first time he would reach out against the First Lady, usually from self-righteously indignant lecterns. In this particular instance, his verdict was that Mrs. Jonathan was ‘stoking the crisis currently rocking her home state of Rivers…’, and thereupon asked Mr. President to caution his wife. The good, old Prof. reminds one of the truth that indeed, most of the giants on the street are men of like passions like everyone else. Worse still, most of them are actually standing on clay feet and would fail the test of a gentle push.

“Otherwise, who would have believed that the social, civil, constitutional and sundry rights crusader Prof. would maintain a safe distance from the heart of an activity that is a potential threat to the peace, security and safety of the people of a state, then collect exaggerated stories and jaundiced perspectives from familiar propagandists and character assassins, and promptly summon the media to a ‘state of the nation’ address. It’s an embarrassment to his throng of admirers and followers, that a sage of Prof. Soyinka’s status, who used to be a gauge of public morality in this nation, would lend himself to a propaganda of high drive, to save a governor who elected to launch into a river without applicable survival skills,” the statement read in parts.

Mrs. Jonathan argued that the calculation was to attack the President and pull to pieces anyone associated with him, as a strategy for attracting public sympathy to the “clear underdog.” She said Soyinka was only contributing to the project when he claimed that she (First Lady) was Governor Rotimi Amaechi’s problem.

But some Nigerians were of the view that the anger shown by Soyinka and Mrs. Jonathan had made a public debate between both of them necessary. Some of them (Nigerians) had taken to twitter to call on a Lagos-based private television station to organise the debate for Soyinka and the President’s wife.

Secretary General of Grassroots Development Initiative, Mr. Samuel Nwanosike, said such debate was uncalled for because the office of the First Lady “is a bigger office.” The GDI is a socio-political group, which has the Minister of State for Education, Nyesom Wike, as its Grand Patron. Nwanosike argued that Soyinka should keep his advice to himself or give it to the states in the western part of the country.

Nwanosike maintained that political crisis was not peculiar to Rivers State, adding that Ogun, Oyo, Osun and other states in the West, where Soyinka hails from, have also had their fair share of political crises. “The office of the First Lady is bigger. She (Mrs. Jonathan) is a very busy woman, who is interested in developing Nigerian women. No! She does not need to sit with Professor Soyinka for any debate. The professor should forget about politics and concentrate on writing books for Nigerians. But if he (Soyinka) feels that he is very popular, he should contest election in the western party of Nigeria and leave Rivers alone,” Nwanosike insisted.

But Chief Jackson Omenazu, who is the Chancellor of a human rights group; the International Society for Social Justice and Human Rights, disagreed with Nwanosike on Soyinka’s advice to President Goodluck Jonathan to caution her wife. According to Omenazu, there is no basis for inviting a person of Soyinka’s calibre to a public debate with the First Lady. Omenazu reasoned that rather than allow Mrs. Jonathan to be involved in such debate, President Jonathan should heed the literary icon’s advice by finding a solution to the crisis in Rivers State.

He added that to invite the professor to such a debate would demean his person and what he stood for. The lawyer and human rights activist wondered what topic Mrs. Jonathan and Soyinka would be speaking about, even as he described such event, if it would ever hold, as a mismatch. “At the level of Professor Wole Soyinka, what are they (Mrs. Jonathan and Wole Soyinka) going to be talking about. Professor Soyinka is only giving Mr. President an advice.

“What would be the criteria for such debate? The disparity between Professor Soyinka and the First Lady is too wide. To call Professor Soyinka to a debate with Mrs. Jonathan is an insult to the person of the Nobel Laureate, renowned author and poet. If there must be a debate, it should be between Soyinka’s wife and Mrs. Jonathan. The truth is that the man has given Mr. President his (Soyinka) advice, which most people around him (Jonathan), who are sycophants, will not give him,” Omenazu noted.

On the protest that greeted the recent visit of the northern governors to Rivers State, Omenazu described the youths that threw stones at the governors’ convoy as misguided, disoriented and psychologically violated. He further described them as a disgrace to the generation of youths in the country. According to him, it is morally wrong for the youths to have attempted to stop four state governors that were on a visit to their fellow governor no matter what they (youths) think their mission was.

Also, the Secretary of the Niger Delta Watchdog, Mr. Sam Ebiye, disagreed with the call for a debate between Soyinka and Mrs. Jonathan. The youth leader said Soyinka was biased in his statement on the crisis rocking Rivers State and explained that the Nobel Laureate should have blamed the Rivers State governor (Rotimi Amaechi) for marching to the State House of Assembly during the fracas among lawmakers. “I do not support the call for a debate between him and the President’s wife because there is no need for that. But Prof. Soyinka knows that he is biased in his statement on Rivers State.

“He knows that the Governor of Lagos State, (Babatunde) Fashola will not take security agents to Lagos State House of Assembly and watch a lawmaker beat his fellow lawmaker. It is not possible. So, Prof. Soyinka should apportion blame where necessary and not to be biased,” he added. Ebiye, however, expressed optimism that the political crisis in Rivers State would soon be a thing of the past, describing the crisis as man-made and avoidable. He explained that the people of the state had been caged for so long, maintaining that the time to express themselves had come.

But a public affairs analyst, Mr. Chike Ogolo, stated that there was nothing wrong in respecting the call by Nigerians for a public debate. According to Ogolo, in developed countries where public opinion counts, Prof. Soyinka and the President’s wife would have heeded the call for a public debate on the crisis in Rivers State. “If Soyinka accuses Mrs. Jonathan of fuelling the crisis in Rivers State and the President’s wife thinks the Professor is wrong in his opinion, a public debate would offer both of them an opportunity to prove their points,” Ogolo added.