Naija News

While Seun Kuti, King Wadada, Adewale Ayuba, Daddy Showkey, and a host of other entertainers were captivating protesters in Lagos with a mix of adapted music and inspiring revolutionary talk, Abuja emptied into Under Bridge, Area 1, Garki with a huge crowd to continue the protest against removal of fuel subsidy. In most parts of Nigeria the crowd of protesters has continued to increase in size, passion and aggressiveness. It may not be long before they are no longer amenable to restraint. By Day Four, when Ekiti was adopting the carnival style developed by Lagos and Abuja, Abeokuta was quaking under worrisome disorder. According to some reports, a few former presidents, very sensibly understanding that President Goodluck Jonathan was endangering too many things, including past leaders, himself, democracy, and the unity of the country, have called on him to revert to the former fuel price and begin the process securing popular consent afresh. Will he listen? On Day Four of the protests, it become clear the battle lines had been drawn. The previous day, Wednesday, the Federal Executive Council (FEC) met and decided there was no going back on the fuel subsidy removal, and they put that fact out to the public insensitively unadorned. All government spokespersons talked passionately, sometimes imperiously and offensively, about the subsidy removal measure they said had no alternative. The government would intensify its provision of palliatives to cushion the effects of the measure, they offered. But for the labour unions and civil society groups, the problem was no longer that of fuel subsidy removal alone, for that would presuppose that the revenue shortfalls underpinning the subsidy measure was strictly economics. They insisted that a complex interplay of economic and political factors were involved, and that except the country grappled with those factors, even if subsidy was returned, the problem of a dysfunctional system engendering poverty, social dislocations, and general infrastructural collapse would persist. The two positions appear irreconcilable. It is clear that Nigeria reached a watershed last Monday when the country erupted in countrywide protests against subsidy removal. Jonathan’s ancient approach to governance made that watershed possible. But rather than merely focus on the subsidy controversy, the protests are sending a much more sublime message, probably influenced by the Arab Spring and other protests in the world, such as Occupy Wall Street and anti-Putin protests, that the problem of the country is systemic and much more structural and political than economic. In places like Lagos where the protests have been well organised and speakers get opportunity to articulate their views, there seems to be a growing consensus that President Goodluck Jonathan does not have the depth, democratic credentials, temperament and charisma to orchestrate or lead the change that would give Nigeria a workable and more perfect union. However, the protesters face the risk of being accused of impatience, as the constitution makes it possible every four years to change a bad president or even a non-performing ruling party. If protest leaders ask for the president’s resignation or impeachment, it is simply a reflection of their frustrations with the system, frustrations that have built up over the decades because of poor governance. There is, however, doubt that the ordinary protester smashing windows and burning houses and cars in the North or crowding rally grounds in the Southwest understand the deeper issues involved. There is in addition fear that those addressing them are both immoderate and inciting. It is in fact suggested that civil societies and labour unions are irresponsibly and unintelligently hardline. There is also the argument that the government is recklessly and unwisely rigid. What is not in doubt is that something will have to give. As unpleasant as it may sound to the government, speakers at protest rallies in many cities have been receiving applause for reiterating the fact that sovereignty resided with the people, and that the people could take it constitutionally or unconstitutionally. However, much more than Labour and Co., the government has a higher responsibility to be flexible and accommodating, no matter how appropriate it thinks its economic policies are. Indeed, the turmoil in the country, the demonstration of extreme frustration by the people – whether they are knowledgeable about the issues or not – and the inconceivable defiance by government, seemed eerily like Libya in the closing months of the Gaddafi regime, like Mubarak in the thick of Tahrir Square occupation, and like Zine Abidine Ben Ali in late December 2010. But comparisons, it is said, are odious, and it may be too early to compare anyway. Since last Tuesday, protesters have started to feel they are a part of history in the making. They sense that something dramatic is happening; they experience kinship with protesters in other parts of the world; and for once, they seem to think they can take their constitution seriously, believing that power belongs to the people. On the other hand, the government has either not felt that keen sense of history and has, therefore, kept up its rhetoric of ‘apocalypse now’, or its leading functionaries feel fated to play the part of tragedians. The protests are not only a first in terms of size and resilience; they are also a stunning first in terms of generations of families proudly identifying with the rallies. Dr Tunji Braithwaite came with some members of his family on Day One; Femi Falana appeared with his son the second day or so, Pastor Bakare also showed up with his wife; and the Kutis – Femi, Seun and Yeni – protest in their veins, also came and performed. Doubtless, many protesters mindful of history but unknown to the media showed up with their families at some of the rallies. Whatever the outcome of the negotiations brokered by the Senate, a culture of mass protest, like a genie let out of the bottle, has taken root. If the ongoing protests lead to a reversal in fuel price, it would strengthen democracy and create an unstoppable momentum in the fight for brilliant and responsive governance at all levels of government. The fuel price protests have also seen creative cartooning and other forms of messages on placards, banners and other canvases. One had this bold and creative punchline targeted at the famously shoeless President Jonathan: ‘Vacancy: Applicants must have shoe and common sense.’ Effigies of Jonathan were also hoisted aloft, manhandled, but not burnt. In many ways, the protests have introduced many interesting novelties into Nigeria’s political culture, and the novelties are being adopted in many cities. They will be perfected over the years. The outcome of the protests is by no means certain. By press time, government and labour were meeting. But by yesterday and gradually, more cities and towns were succumbing to violence as the population of protesters swelled to almost uncontrollable levels. Many parts of the country could come under curfew in the coming days, and the situation could get so bad that law and order would break down. If the government sustains hard- line position, it will have to move against the protesters without any guarantee that it could pacify their rage. Indeed, force is often an indication that a democratic government has lost the argument. No matter what degree of success labour and civil societies achieve in the subsidy struggle, their image has risen in the estimation of the people. On the contrary, Jonathan’s popularity has plummeted. Few people think he acted presidential in the past few days, or showed empathy, or properly judged the issues that needed a show of courage and tenacity. Unbelievably, he seemed to have forgotten he was elected, or that he stood for that election on the platform of a political party, and that his political fortunes are bound to rub off on that party. In all, the country is unlikely to ever remain the same; and in the coming years, many analysts will realise that the great protests of January 2012 were in fact fortuitous.