Emeka Ojukwu Jr., a legal practitioner and son of Igbo
leader, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, tells BAYO
AKINLOYE what he knows about Gen. Muhammadu Buhari’s
meeting with Ojukwu and why he disagrees with the President’s
statement that Nigeria’s unity is not negotiable
What exactly
transpired between your father, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, and
Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.) in 2003 on the issue of Biafra and
the restructuring of the country?
I didn’t attend the meeting. I was not privy to what happened.
But the indices point to the unassailable fact that the meeting
(between Ojukwu and Buhari) held. Why I say so is, remember that
Gen. (Olusegun) Obasanjo assumed power as a democratically elected
president in 1999. I think the time of the meeting must have been
the period leading to Obasanjo’s second term. At that time, there
were people who felt he didn’t perform well. So, there was a
build-up and upswell of political opinions to see what could be
done either to change him or whatever. So, they must have met.
Not long after that, there was a one-million-man march involving
my father, President Buhari and Chuba Okadigbo. When he (Ojukwu)
came back, he told me about the one-million-man march but he didn’t
tell me about the discussion he had with the President. They were
no strangers and you could not had a one-million-man march with
someone you have not discussed anything with. In his life, the way
he lived, my father always wanted peace for everybody. About the
meeting holding, yes, it did. But as for the finer points of the
discussion, I cannot tell you this was what was discussed or not
discussed, because I didn’t attend that meeting. If I had attended
that meeting, I could pointedly tell you offhand what was
discussed. But I would never be in a position to say that the
President is a liar.
On record, your father was the first person to
agitate for the emancipation of Igbo people by declaring an
independent state of Biafra. How would you situate that moment in
history with the current agitation of the Indigenous People of
Biafra and The Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign
State of Biafra?
The agitation of IPOB and MASSOB is a valid agitation. The only
thing I hold against them is their methodology. But for somebody to
fight for self-determination I do not see anything wrong in that.
It is like a marriage; there are times the situation will be rosy
and pleasant, there are times there will be some upheavals. So, we
must give room for those things. No one should say those boys
shouldn’t talk. They are allowed to talk. But what I am against or
what I frown on is their taking over the road because when it comes
to roads, there is what we call “access.” If a Yoruba man wants to
go to Port Harcourt (Rivers State) or Aba (Abia State), you should
not try to block the road, saying you want to vent your spleen
because of some certain grievances. You’re obstructing him and if
you succeed in doing that, you’re proving that there is no
government and there is insecurity.
If there is a need to demonstrate or do whatever, then they
should go to a stadium, book the venue, go to the police to get a
public permit to hold a demonstration and you can all stay in the
stadium, have (a protest by) candlelight and get the media to cover
the protest – that’s enough of a message to pass across to the
world. It is better than recruiting a group of young children from
the universities, indoctrinating them and pushing them to get on
the roads to do whatever they think they like; acting that way
doesn’t help anybody. Their agitation must be devoid of violence.
Any agitation must be devoid of hate speech. The reality is that
nobody has a monopoly of hate speech. Everybody should be civil in
relating with their fellow men. We must eschew hate speech to avoid
bad consequences.
President Muhammadu Buhari, in his Monday broadcast,
stated categorically that the unity of the country is settled, not
negotiable. How do you relate that to the call for an independent
state of Biafra?
I don’t think the tone of finality in the President’s speech is
right. I have always said Nigeria is a product – a child – of
negotiations. It is a child of negotiations in that when they
started the agitation for the country’s independence — Zik (Dr.
Nnamdi Azikiwe) from the Igbo side, Chief Anthony Enahoro from
South-West, and (Ahmadu Bello) the Sardauna from the North — they
were all going to London. They had problems but they patched their
differences and, ultimately, without firing a gunshot, the British
government gave independence to Nigeria. For somebody to wake up
and say ‘there are no negotiations’ is not in line with the fact
that an agreement is susceptible to review and renegotiations.
Since it is not really possible to see the future or what will
happen in 50 years, agreements are subject to review and
negotiations. An agreement over time requires reviewing or
renegotiations. So, if we are all pleased with it, there will be no
pocket of agitations or discontent. But the pocket of discontent
and agitation is a throwback showing that we are having problems
with implementation (of the agreement to remain as a country), thus
calling for renegotiation. In that regard, it is important that
everybody should be carried along.
What I don’t like is a situation whereby the government sponsors
people. As of the time they were convoking the last national
conference, it was my view that the Federal Government should not
pay the delegates. I suggested that each ethnic nationality should
choose and sponsor a delegate to the confab; you submit your
interest under a bigger umbrella; once all views are gathered, then
we will harmonise them and look for the best way to implement them.
The reason why we are having problems is that people believe that
the constitution we are using was at no time agreed on. They feel
that it was the military that gave us what we have now.
Do you think the restructuring of the country should
be left to the National Assembly and the National Council of State
as indicated by Buhari?
It is a step in the right direction. What I feel is that the
last regime that organised the 2014 national conference did not do
enough. You cannot go to the market to buy all needed ingredients,
cook a meal and not serve it. Delegates to the confab were
assembled in Abuja for about four months with each paid N4m. What
was the problem in implementing their recommendations? Why would
anyone play politics with that by saying ‘vote for me’ and the
recommendations will be implemented? But we are not God and things
did not go the way some people expected. Maybe if the election
result had gone their way, we would not have the situation that we
have today. The will of God or the mind of God is not that of the
people. Maybe the Peoples Democratic Party government felt that
they would be there for the next 60 years. When that failed, you
should expect that there would be a lot of frustration. Also, a lot
of looted money linked to some people now might not have been
accounted for if the previous government had continued.
Do you think your father, who first championed the
cause of Biafra, would be proud of Nnamdi Kanu’s determination in
seeking for an independent state of Biafra?
Well, he’d be proud. He was not a jealous person – he was always
very free. If you remember exactly what he said: ‘I hold the torch,
but my problem is that I am looking around for a young man to pass
on the torch.’ So, if Nnamdi Kanu shows that he is the person that
will bear the torch, I don’t have any problem with that. But my
problem with him is (that) the language being used (by him) is not
refined – the language is heating up the polity. I pray that the
meeting the South-East senators had with him will ensure that
caution is exercised in the language used. I am a party to that. In
fact, that (language used) was the dividing line between the two of
us – it started when I said ‘don’t insult people’ and all that but
he stuck to that. I didn’t want that to happen because I have a
name to protect.
I think Nigerians should love one another and agitate within the
confines of the law. I should also add that we know the history of
Nigeria; when did we start to feel bad about one another? If we
come to the conclusion that things were going on well until 1960 or
1963, then, why can’t we go back to that point and start from
there?
Culled Punch
Emeka Ojukwu Jr., a legal practitioner and son of Igbo
leader, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, tells BAYO
AKINLOYE what he knows about Gen. Muhammadu Buhari’s
meeting with Ojukwu and why he disagrees with the President’s
statement that Nigeria’s unity is not negotiable
What exactly
transpired between your father, Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, and
Gen. Muhammadu Buhari (retd.) in 2003 on the issue of Biafra and
the restructuring of the country?
I didn’t attend the meeting. I was not privy to what happened.
But the indices point to the unassailable fact that the meeting
(between Ojukwu and Buhari) held. Why I say so is, remember that
Gen. (Olusegun) Obasanjo assumed power as a democratically elected
president in 1999. I think the time of the meeting must have been
the period leading to Obasanjo’s second term. At that time, there
were people who felt he didn’t perform well. So, there was a
build-up and upswell of political opinions to see what could be
done either to change him or whatever. So, they must have met.
Not long after that, there was a one-million-man march involving
my father, President Buhari and Chuba Okadigbo. When he (Ojukwu)
came back, he told me about the one-million-man march but he didn’t
tell me about the discussion he had with the President. They were
no strangers and you could not had a one-million-man march with
someone you have not discussed anything with. In his life, the way
he lived, my father always wanted peace for everybody. About the
meeting holding, yes, it did. But as for the finer points of the
discussion, I cannot tell you this was what was discussed or not
discussed, because I didn’t attend that meeting. If I had attended
that meeting, I could pointedly tell you offhand what was
discussed. But I would never be in a position to say that the
President is a liar.
On record, your father was the first person to
agitate for the emancipation of Igbo people by declaring an
independent state of Biafra. How would you situate that moment in
history with the current agitation of the Indigenous People of
Biafra and The Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign
State of Biafra?
The agitation of IPOB and MASSOB is a valid agitation. The only
thing I hold against them is their methodology. But for somebody to
fight for self-determination I do not see anything wrong in that.
It is like a marriage; there are times the situation will be rosy
and pleasant, there are times there will be some upheavals. So, we
must give room for those things. No one should say those boys
shouldn’t talk. They are allowed to talk. But what I am against or
what I frown on is their taking over the road because when it comes
to roads, there is what we call “access.” If a Yoruba man wants to
go to Port Harcourt (Rivers State) or Aba (Abia State), you should
not try to block the road, saying you want to vent your spleen
because of some certain grievances. You’re obstructing him and if
you succeed in doing that, you’re proving that there is no
government and there is insecurity.
If there is a need to demonstrate or do whatever, then they
should go to a stadium, book the venue, go to the police to get a
public permit to hold a demonstration and you can all stay in the
stadium, have (a protest by) candlelight and get the media to cover
the protest – that’s enough of a message to pass across to the
world. It is better than recruiting a group of young children from
the universities, indoctrinating them and pushing them to get on
the roads to do whatever they think they like; acting that way
doesn’t help anybody. Their agitation must be devoid of violence.
Any agitation must be devoid of hate speech. The reality is that
nobody has a monopoly of hate speech. Everybody should be civil in
relating with their fellow men. We must eschew hate speech to avoid
bad consequences.
President Muhammadu Buhari, in his Monday broadcast,
stated categorically that the unity of the country is settled, not
negotiable. How do you relate that to the call for an independent
state of Biafra?
I don’t think the tone of finality in the President’s speech is
right. I have always said Nigeria is a product – a child – of
negotiations. It is a child of negotiations in that when they
started the agitation for the country’s independence — Zik (Dr.
Nnamdi Azikiwe) from the Igbo side, Chief Anthony Enahoro from
South-West, and (Ahmadu Bello) the Sardauna from the North — they
were all going to London. They had problems but they patched their
differences and, ultimately, without firing a gunshot, the British
government gave independence to Nigeria. For somebody to wake up
and say ‘there are no negotiations’ is not in line with the fact
that an agreement is susceptible to review and renegotiations.
Since it is not really possible to see the future or what will
happen in 50 years, agreements are subject to review and
negotiations. An agreement over time requires reviewing or
renegotiations. So, if we are all pleased with it, there will be no
pocket of agitations or discontent. But the pocket of discontent
and agitation is a throwback showing that we are having problems
with implementation (of the agreement to remain as a country), thus
calling for renegotiation. In that regard, it is important that
everybody should be carried along.
What I don’t like is a situation whereby the government sponsors
people. As of the time they were convoking the last national
conference, it was my view that the Federal Government should not
pay the delegates. I suggested that each ethnic nationality should
choose and sponsor a delegate to the confab; you submit your
interest under a bigger umbrella; once all views are gathered, then
we will harmonise them and look for the best way to implement them.
The reason why we are having problems is that people believe that
the constitution we are using was at no time agreed on. They feel
that it was the military that gave us what we have now.
Do you think the restructuring of the country should
be left to the National Assembly and the National Council of State
as indicated by Buhari?
It is a step in the right direction. What I feel is that the
last regime that organised the 2014 national conference did not do
enough. You cannot go to the market to buy all needed ingredients,
cook a meal and not serve it. Delegates to the confab were
assembled in Abuja for about four months with each paid N4m. What
was the problem in implementing their recommendations? Why would
anyone play politics with that by saying ‘vote for me’ and the
recommendations will be implemented? But we are not God and things
did not go the way some people expected. Maybe if the election
result had gone their way, we would not have the situation that we
have today. The will of God or the mind of God is not that of the
people. Maybe the Peoples Democratic Party government felt that
they would be there for the next 60 years. When that failed, you
should expect that there would be a lot of frustration. Also, a lot
of looted money linked to some people now might not have been
accounted for if the previous government had continued.
Do you think your father, who first championed the
cause of Biafra, would be proud of Nnamdi Kanu’s determination in
seeking for an independent state of Biafra?
Well, he’d be proud. He was not a jealous person – he was always
very free. If you remember exactly what he said: ‘I hold the torch,
but my problem is that I am looking around for a young man to pass
on the torch.’ So, if Nnamdi Kanu shows that he is the person that
will bear the torch, I don’t have any problem with that. But my
problem with him is (that) the language being used (by him) is not
refined – the language is heating up the polity. I pray that the
meeting the South-East senators had with him will ensure that
caution is exercised in the language used. I am a party to that. In
fact, that (language used) was the dividing line between the two of
us – it started when I said ‘don’t insult people’ and all that but
he stuck to that. I didn’t want that to happen because I have a
name to protect.
I think Nigerians should love one another and agitate within the
confines of the law. I should also add that we know the history of
Nigeria; when did we start to feel bad about one another? If we
come to the conclusion that things were going on well until 1960 or
1963, then, why can’t we go back to that point and start from
there?
Culled Punch
Read more https://nairalaw.com/dad-would-be-proud-of-nnamdi-kanus-biafra-agitation-ojukwus-son/