President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is so inordinately inebriated by his IMF-motivated decision to remove subsidies on petrol that at every opportunity he has he brags about it in giddily superlative terms.

For example, during a meeting with the Nigerian community in France on June 24, 2023, he couched his decision to impose the Tinubu fuel tax (to borrow from his 2012 characterization of Goodluck Jonathan’s subsidy removal) on Nigerians in epiphanic, providential, and inspirational terms.

He told Nigerians in France that during his inaugural speech on May 29, 2023, he was suddenly overcome by a mysterious force of unusual courage, which propelled him to veer off his prepared speech to announce the removal of fuel subsidies. “When I got to the podium, I was possessed with courage, and I said, ‘subsidy is gone!’” he said with a smug glow of perverse, meanspirited self-satisfaction.

Again on November 22, 2023, Tinubu boasted to investors at the 10th German-Nigerian Business Forum that his courage to remove petrol subsidies and visit unheard-of economic violence on poor, luckless Nigerians was a gargantuan feat of derring-do worthy of acknowledgement in the Guinness World Records.

“Nigeria voted for me for reforms, and from day one of my inauguration, I started the reforms,” he said. “To me, if you didn’t mention me in the Guinness Book of Records, I’d strive to find a way to insert myself because I did it without expectation.”

Well, the IMF, whose approval he desperately seeks and on whose behalf he is harming Nigerians, has approbated his policies, which should be more important to him than an entry in the Guiness World Records for sadistic governance.

“The new [Tinubu] administration has made a strong start, tackling deep-rooted structural issues in challenging circumstances,” the IMF said on February 14. “Immediately, it adopted two policy reforms that its predecessors had shied away from: fuel subsidy removal and the unification of the official exchange rates.”

The IMF then instructed that “electricity subsidies are costly, do not reach those that most need government support and should be phased out completely.”

On February 16, that is, exactly two days after this IMF directive, Minister of Power Adebayo Adelabu announced that the government would withdraw electricity subsidies. That’s precisely why the government has approved a more than 200 percent hike in electricity tariffs this week. As I’ve repeatedly said, the IMF is the de factor ruler of Nigeria. Tinubu and his henchmen are mere cushy neo-imperialist surrogates.

Well, I don’t know of any halfway rational human being in the world who will see courage in choosing to hurt the dispossessed who can’t fight back. There is no courage in trampling on the poor, the weak, and the defenseless.

There is no courage in kicking people who are already down, people who are down on their luck, and people who are down in the dumps as a consequence of being serial victims of a steady succession of cruel and self-serving governments who are servile errand boys of the racist sadists at the IMF.

There is no courage in oppressing the oppressed. That’s cowardice. That’s callousness. It’s unrelieved maliciousness. And it’s not something to be proud of, not something to make a song and dance about. On the contrary, it’s something to be mortally ashamed of.

Real courage comes from standing up to bullies, which the World Bank and the IMF are, and from defending the defenseless against oppressors. Courage comes from shielding the weak from the untoward designs of the strong and the unjust. It comes from protecting the underdog from the unprovoked aggression of the top dog.

Since Tinubu came to power nearly a year ago, he has never implemented any policy that gives even an ounce of solace to the poor. Instead, like Muhammadu Buhari before him, he is a proud reverse Robin Hood who takes from the poor to enrich the already rich, with the recent IMF-directed astronomical increase in electricity tariffs—which makes electricity in Nigeria more expensive for “Band A” users than I pay in the United States—the latest example.

The only people who will benefit from the latest tariff hikes are Tinubu’s friends who own power generation and distribution companies. As a Tinubu-supporting friend pointed out to me on Friday, “This is a government of the elite, for the elite, and by the elite.”

In the United States where the IMF is headquartered, there are electricity subsidies for low-income households, yet it wants none for anybody in Nigeria. The primary federally funded electricity subsidy program here is called the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).

LIHEAP provides eligible households with financial assistance for energy bills, emergency energy services to prevent disconnection, and low-cost home improvements, known as weatherization, to help make homes more energy efficient.

LIHEAP is funded by the federal government, but the program is administered at the state level, which means eligibility requirements and the form of assistance offered can vary from one state to another.

Generally, to qualify for LIHEAP, a household’s income must fall below a certain threshold, which is typically set at a percentage of the federal poverty level or a percentage of the state’s median income level.

In addition to LIHEAP, some states, utilities, and non-profit organizations offer additional assistance programs or subsidies to help low-income households with their energy needs. These programs may provide direct bill assistance, energy-efficient home improvements, or emergency aid for utility shutoff prevention.

Yet, the IMF has bludgeoned the Nigerian government into removing subsidies for electricity that isn’t even constant and reliable. And being the slavish lackeys that they are, they obeyed like dutiful, well-trained poodle dogs. Of course, it’s because it doesn’t hurt them, their immediate families, or their associates.

The IMF never tells Third Word leaders to increase the minimum wages of workers. Maybe that’s why Tinubu’s Guinness-World-Records-size courage is absent when it comes to approving a minimum wage for Nigerian workers.

See also  Tribute: End Of News For Consummate Newscaster, Aisha Bello Mustapha

The 30,000 naira minimum wage that the Muhammadu Buhari regime approved for workers expired in March. The Tinubu government had promised that a new minimum wage would start on April 1. That has turned out to be a cruel April Fools’ joke on Nigerians.

The last we heard of this issue is that the minimum wage committee would “reconvene mid-April to continue further negotiations and consultations on the new minimum wage expected to be announced by President Bola Tinubu on May 1, 2024.”

This is the same committee that requested 1.8 billion naira (which it later scaled back to 1 billion naira) just to sit in comfort and decide how much the least remunerated government worker will receive. “Start with N500million first,” Tinubu wrote in a leaked memo.

As senator Shehu Sani quipped on Twitter, “The minimum wage committee… allocated the maximum wage for themselves.” What exactly does the 37-member committee—made up of governors who don’t pay the current 30,000-naira minimum wage even when money realized from petrol subsidy removal has tripled their monthly allocations— want to use a billion naira (later reduced to 500 million naira) to do?

There was no committee when petrol subsidies were removed. There was no committee for the removal of electricity subsidies, which will now ensure that Nigeria descends into total darkness. But when it comes time to increase the minimum wage of workers, an expensive committee is needed.

In other words, where the welfare of everyday folks is concerned, Tinubu loses his magisterial, self-affirming courage. He transforms from a lion to a chicken. His courage only emerges when he oppresses the poor and recedes when he is required to help the poor. May God save Nigerians from Tinubu’s courage.

Has Nigeria learnt any lessons from the Okuama massacre?  Will the incident repeat itself or offer profound lessons against future experience?  In the journey of life, no individual or nation or country is immune from occurrences thrown up by circumstance, which, may be pleasant or painful.  Lessons learnt from such experiences are deployed to prevent possible future reoccurrence, failing which, same catastrophe repeats itself.

In context, the gruesome murder of army officers at Okuama in Ughelli South Local Government Area, Delta State, which transcends ethnic emotions and accompanied by wide condemnations, is a confirmation that Nigeria has not, and does not learn from lessons, otherwise, the calamity would have been avoided.

The incident was not the first. It happened previously at Odi, Bayelsa State, Zaki Biam, Benue State, and Gbaramatu, Delta State, yet, it appeared neither the federal government nor the Nigerian Army learnt any lessons therefrom.  This is evident from the Okuama saga, a proof of the country’s insensitivity to bloodshed and exposition of poverty in the policy making process.

This notwithstanding, the Okuama calamity has again thrown up another opportunity for lessons to be learned.  If Nigeria failed again this time around to learn from these happenings, then the country risks further carnage, which may possibly take a more complex form with unmanageable and unpredictable consequences.  It may be too costly for the country’s fledgling socio-economic balance and stability.

Therefore, the lessons are crucial, and should be identified by government and harness as feedback for proactive purposes to forestall future recurrence.  It is a tragedy for any country with a relapsing experience not to have a codified strategy encapsulated in a template to resolve related matters.  In specific terms, what then are the lessons and takeaways from the Okuama disaster?

Lesson One: To have allowed a land dispute over fishing rights between Okuama and neighbouring Okoloba community in Bomadi Local Government Area, Delta State, to escalate means there were no proactive measures and concerted prompt intervention by the Nigeria Police Force and Delta State Government in response to petitions written by Okuama community.

The community, through its lawyers, I. Ejedegba and Co., had written a petition to the Commissioner of Police in Asaba, Delta State which was acknowledged on January 31, 2O24, while the petition written by Okuama community leaders and addressed to the Delta State Governor was received on February 2, 2O24.  This was over one month before the gruesome murder of the military officers on March 14, 2O24.

Since the Police is the first line of defence and statutorily responsible for civil matters, they should have wadded in upon receipt of the petitions to nip the crisis in the bud, aside previous joint meetings among the communities, the Police and the Delta State Government that yielded no solution.  Under this development, the Delta State Governor should have been advised to wield the big stick by acquiring the land in contention for public interest to end the crisis.

Lesson Two: Inviting the Army for a mediatory and peace mission to Okuama for resolution of land dispute between two communities that were not at war, was an error in judgement. The dispute was civil in nature, and it was only when efforts by the Police and the Delta State Governor had failed, and there was evidence of likely escalation into a dangerous dimension beyond the capacity of the Police, that would have warranted intervention by the Nigerian Army.  It is not the responsibility of the Army to broker peace in a civil matter.

Lesson Three: Central to the killing of the military personnel in Okuama, is presumably oil.  Oil appeared to be the underpinning motive behind the horrendous and senseless killings.  Mere land dispute between two communities could not have led to such a mindless massacre. Soldiers are deployed to the Niger Delta region to protect oil facilities, and in the course of this duty, they might have been marked as “enemy” by those profiteering from illegal oil deals.

Those involved in crude oil theft and other illegal activities, including processing of locally refined products might see the Army as obstacle to their business interests.  The military high command should have known this, and prepare the soldiers for possible eventuality and collision with entrenched oil thieves.  The circumstances of their death showed that the military men were taken unawares.  It was likely that crude oil thieves and other vested interests might have planned and taken advantage of the soldiers’ peaceful disposition to unleash mayhem in such a horrific and despicable manner.

Lesson Four: The mass destruction of Okuama by the Army in response to the death of the soldiers without singling out the culprits, was unhelpful, as innocent children, mothers, elderly, the sick and even pregnant women, were either killed, rendered homeless or died while trying to escape.  To bring pains on an entire community over the action of a few criminals, is indefensible.  Reprisal attack and collective punishment are incompatible with international laws.

Recalled that after destruction of Odi by the Army, the community resorted to litigation and got a favourable judgement, leading to payment of N15 billion out of court settlement, as compensation.  Justice Lambi Akanbi of the Federal High Court had condemned the government for a “brazen violation of the fundamental human rights of the victims to movement, life and to own property and live peacefully in their ancestral home.”  Since the Okuama experience is reminiscent of the destruction at Odi, it is likely Okuama may seek redress in the law court for compensation over reprisal destruction of lives and properties.

Lesson Five: As the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria, Bola Tinubu’s order to the Army was too hasty and reactionary without taking into consideration, innocent lives in Okuama that were caught up in the web.  Granting “full authority” to the military to bring anybody found to have been responsible for the attack to justice, was an obvious blanket licence for the military to invade Okuama.

Instead, the President should have ordered the security agencies and the Police to specifically intervene, identify and arrest the criminal elements in the community, while instituting an independent high-powered panel of enquiry to unravel the causes of the mayhem.  A future restraint on the part of the President is imperative to douse tension and minimize further collateral damage.

Lesson Six: The Army’s decision to lock down and lay siege to Okuama without granting access to the Delta State Governor, the Police, humanitarian agencies, and even the press to assess the situation on ground, has given rise to speculations about the plight of the members of the community, particularly the innocent, helpless and indigent persons.  This is unhelpful to the image of the Army.

By not allowing access, the Army has unwittingly, open its operations to speculations. For example, it was alleged that the Army killed over 5O persons in Okuama, with other survivors hiding in the bush, including old women, children, the elderly ones and even the sick, with no food to eat and water to drink.  This is a gross violation of their fundamental human rights.

To avoid being put on the spotlight, it is imperative for the military to grant access into the community to enable humanitarian agencies and volunteer groups to extend help and assistance to the innocent ones to prevent further fatalities.  This will also serve the interest of the Army’s reputation.

Lesson Seven: After the destruction of Odi, initial public sympathy for the military waned.  Same is replicating itself at Okuama over the conduct of the Army.  The Army, like other federal government agencies, is not a supreme institution that is above the Constitution and the Nigerian State, neither is civilian population subject to military laws.  Indeed, the Army is subject to civil authority under Democracy. Therefore, it must change its current tactics at Okuama where it has refused access to the community, assumed sole information provider on goings-on, and subjected civilians to investigation, arrest and detention.

It is hoped that these lessons will serve as reference and guide for the state governments, the Police, the Army and the federal government in handling of related crises to avert future disaster.

Dr. Owhoko, Lagos-based public policy analyst, author, and journalist, can be reached and followed on X {formerly Twitter} @michaelowhoko.