Mustapha Shehu
Jour E-120 Ethics and Journalism.
Bristol Palin’s pregnancy is only news because she is the 17-year old daughter of the Republican Vice-Presidential Nominee and Governor of Alaska, Sarah Palin. Save for this reason, it would have passed un-noticed in a country where teenage pregnancy is high. According to a 2006 report of the Guttmacher Institute which advances sexual and reproductive health worldwide through an interrelated program of social science research, public education and policy analysis, each year, almost 750,000 women aged 15-19 in the USA become pregnant. Overall, 75 pregnancies occur every year per 1,000 women aged 15-19.
The public image of Gov. Palin as that of a Christian Conservative makes the pregnancy, rightly or wrongly, newsworthy in a tough and close presidential campaign season in which this very image is seen to be the game changer for the republicans. So it is not unusual, particularly in this era of citizen journalism, that the issue is discussed by the media. This is in spite of the call by the Democratic presidential nominee Senator Barrack Obama and his running mate Senator Joe Biden to their campaign organisation to hands-off the private family life of their republican opponent.
Although the mainstream media have refused to heed to a request by Gov. Palin to hands-off her daughter’s private life, it is worthy to note that even if they had, the issue would still continue to be discussed in the blogosphere. The great thing about it though is that most of the discussions in the media that I happen to monitor from Nigeria, do not seen to question Gov, Palin’s suitability as vice presidential nominee.
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Thursday, August 14, 2008
Nigeria: In Search of Freedom
By Mustapha Shehu
Rep. Abike Dabiri, Action Congress (AC) Party representing Lagos, shifted to the edge of her seat when she heard Nigeria’s President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo asked on
National television when he would sign the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill.
“I have not seen the bill yet.” Obasanjo had said
The bill which seeks to compel the Public Service to divulge information to citizens on demand had earlier been sent to him by the National Assembly.
“I could not believe my ears,” Dabiri, 49, said. “That the president, a septuagenarian, would look the nation in the eye and tell a lie.”
But days later, when there was media uproar about his claim, Obasanjo said that he had declined to sign the bill, because it would undermine the security of Nigeria, among other things.
“An FOI Act,” he argued, “would embolden Nigerian journalists, knowing the type of journalists we have, to publish issues bordering on defense and security of the country. This, to me, would be the height of irresponsibility if I consented.”
This was March 2007, two months before he left office on May 29th, and the bill, solely sponsored by Dabiri, a former journalist, remained unsigned to the end of his tenure.
It marked the death of the first attempt to enact a FOI Act in Nigeria’s 47-year post independence history. The failure of the bill has meant that journalists have been unable to obtain government records to investigate corruption in the government. Scholars and researchers also are hampered in their work. And many advocates say that Nigeria’s image and the life of her citizens will not improve until the FOI bill is passed
“Let us stop living alongside goats and pigs, both literally and figuratively,” said Dele Olojede, 2005 Pulitzer Prize Winner and Chairman, Timbuktu Media, in reaction to the non-passage of the bill. “It is time we stepped into the sunlight, to the hard task of gradually dispelling the darkness, and to make whole again a traumatised land,”
Since the inception of the new National Assembly and the Umar Musa Yar’adua presidency on May 29th, 2007, the Assembly, comprising the Senate and the House of Representatives, has been forced to launch five major inquiries into alleged embezzlement by public officials through government contracts. The amounts involved in various sectors are:
* Power Sector - US$ 13 billion
* Aviation Sector - US$ 165 million
* Petroleum Sector - US$ 210 million
* Federal Capital Fund - US$ 271 million
* Telecommunications - US$ 950 million
“These amounts are a tip of the iceberg,” Dabiri said. “If we had the FOI Act, these embezzlements, along with others not discovered, would have been nipped in the bud.”
Besides these losses to corruption, Dabiri explained, expenses to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, which would have gone into the provision of basic social amenities and other infrastructural facilities, are being incurred in conducting the inquiries. For these reasons, she has remained constant in her efforts to ensure that the bill is passed into law.
“I will not relent, until this (FOI Bill) is signed into law. Even if it is the only legislation I spend the whole of my legislative life on, or if it would be the only contribution I make to the development of my country,” she said.
The bill, Dabiri argued, is not only about the media, but it would be useful to researchers, scholars and students as well. It also excludes issues relating to national defense and security. She wondered why public servants, who hold office only in trust for the people, would want to hide anything from them.
“This is what we must fight,” she said.
Dabiri re-presented the bill before the new House for its first reading on July 4th. Its second reading and debate on general principles were held in the subsequent months until the bill was committed to the committee of the whole House.
On March 7th, 2008, the House listed the bill on its order paper for a clause by clause consideration in what would be its third and final reading. But citing the ‘absence’ of Dabiri, the bill’s sponsor, at that day’s session, the House postponed action on the bill until a later date.
“The House would begin the consideration of the bill in the Committee of the Whole on April 29,” Rep. Usman Nafada, presiding House Deputy Speaker, assured.
But on that date, Nafada, asked Dabiri to agree to drop the clause by clause discussion of the bill which was listed as second item on the day’s order paper for a later date pending “clarifications” from the House Rules and Business Committee. Dabiri however insisted the bill must be taken at that seating.
Nafada called for a voice vote on the floor on whether senators should consider the bill at the seating.
The “nays” had it after the vote.
Shocked by the development, Dabiri could not hide her displeasure. “If lawmakers are serious about the fight against corruption they should have passed the bill,” she said. “They should put national interest before personal interests.”
This statement fuelled speculations that most of the legislators, about 80 percent of them being first-timers, were out to kill the bill simply because they were jittery it would stop them from “recouping” their campaign expenses from the public coffers.
A national outrage against the legislators erupted.
In the heat of the outrage, AELEX, a group of legal practitioners and arbitrators, organised public lectures in Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital and hotbed for political radicalism, on July 24th , with the general theme “Freedom of Information: Balancing the Public’s Right to Know, against the Individual’s Right to Privacy,” and drawing experts from a cross spectrum of the society.
Olojede, noted at the lecture, that the bill suffered its fate in the last tenure of the Assembly because of Obasanjo’s “hatred of the media” and his belief that the bill was about granting license to reporters to “rummage in politicians’ closets.” The former president did not see it as conferring certain inalienable rights upon the citizens. The bill, he said, aims to bring a number of existing laws, notably the “crudely colonial and militaristic Official Secret Act,” into conformity with Nigeria’s current Constitution.
Chief Ajibola Ogunshola, President of the Newspapers Proprietors' Association of Nigeria (NPAN), said if the bill had been passed into law before now, the time-consuming inquiries embarked upon by the House would not have been necessary since the public would have had access to the information on the matters being investigated.
“By treating such an important tool which would bring about positive change to the Nigerian society lightly,” Ogunshola said, “the House members have called to question their commitment to, and the real intentions of the inquiries embarked upon by them.”
Mrs. Funke Adekoya, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and Managing Director, AELEX, called on other lawyers in the country to join in the crusade for the passage of the FOI Bill. She explained that the bill is not about peeping into the affairs of politicians and public officials, but a way also to portray to the global community that Nigeria is a transparent country.
“Without the Act, prospective investors would be discouraged to come and invest in the country since they don’t have information on the things they want to invest in, it would impact on the country negatively,” she said.
Nduka Obaigbena, Editor-in-Chief of Nigeria’s most influential daily, THISDAY, urged Nigerians to rise to the occasion to ensure that the bill “sees the light of the day” before the year ends.
“We can only achieve this feat if we apply our energies the same way the Americans did when they fought for their liberation and freedom.
“Our generation must stand up to save this country. We (Media) shall make sure the bill is passed into law, and will fight relentlessly the way we fought the military and chased them out of power,” he said.
John Odey, Secretary General, Nigeria Labor Congress (NLC), Nigeria’s most organized pressure group, said “labor would find out what went wrong, before it acts, because the bill is an important aspect of finding solutions to the problems of Nigeria.”
Shu’aibu Leman, National Secretary, Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) described the action of the House as “a betrayal of the trust the electorate reposed in it.”
Ayo Adebusoye, Secretary General of Nigeria Network of NGOs (NNNGO's), said civil society organizations in Nigeria “frown at the delay of the bill.”
Gabriel Baglo, Director Africa Office, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), described the action of the House as “very disappointing since their rejection of the bill was without any valid reason.”
Balarabe Musa, fiery leader of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), said “the excuses it gave for not passing the bill were flimsy and exposed the hypocrisy of the House that has been engaged in public inquiries into the past administration since the new session started.”
Another body, the Coalition against Corrupt Leaders (CACOL), a non-governmental organisation with grassroots spread, also came out with a strongly worded statement and accused the House of conspiring with some “extraneous but decidedly negative political forces” against the wishes and aspirations of Nigerians, following their rejection of the bill.
“The legislators are dancing to the tune of their political godfathers who imposed them on the nation,” said the statement, “we can only conclude that, they are there to perpetrate and perpetuate corruption, if they remained abhorrent of the bill."
The coalition warned that it would initiate the recall of any legislator by his constituents, who opposed passage of the bill.
With this threat and the public outrage, legislators whom had expressed opposition to the bill, retreated into their shells. If the tempo of the campaign in support of the bill does not subside, the FOI Bill may soon become law.
Dabiri would then be the most loathed legislator among her colleagues in the Assembly, among the politicians in general, and in the civil service, which is the quickest avenue of making easy money.
To Nigerians who would have achieved their freedom however, she would be a heroine.
Rep. Abike Dabiri, Action Congress (AC) Party representing Lagos, shifted to the edge of her seat when she heard Nigeria’s President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo asked on
National television when he would sign the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill.
“I have not seen the bill yet.” Obasanjo had said
The bill which seeks to compel the Public Service to divulge information to citizens on demand had earlier been sent to him by the National Assembly.
“I could not believe my ears,” Dabiri, 49, said. “That the president, a septuagenarian, would look the nation in the eye and tell a lie.”
But days later, when there was media uproar about his claim, Obasanjo said that he had declined to sign the bill, because it would undermine the security of Nigeria, among other things.
“An FOI Act,” he argued, “would embolden Nigerian journalists, knowing the type of journalists we have, to publish issues bordering on defense and security of the country. This, to me, would be the height of irresponsibility if I consented.”
This was March 2007, two months before he left office on May 29th, and the bill, solely sponsored by Dabiri, a former journalist, remained unsigned to the end of his tenure.
It marked the death of the first attempt to enact a FOI Act in Nigeria’s 47-year post independence history. The failure of the bill has meant that journalists have been unable to obtain government records to investigate corruption in the government. Scholars and researchers also are hampered in their work. And many advocates say that Nigeria’s image and the life of her citizens will not improve until the FOI bill is passed
“Let us stop living alongside goats and pigs, both literally and figuratively,” said Dele Olojede, 2005 Pulitzer Prize Winner and Chairman, Timbuktu Media, in reaction to the non-passage of the bill. “It is time we stepped into the sunlight, to the hard task of gradually dispelling the darkness, and to make whole again a traumatised land,”
Since the inception of the new National Assembly and the Umar Musa Yar’adua presidency on May 29th, 2007, the Assembly, comprising the Senate and the House of Representatives, has been forced to launch five major inquiries into alleged embezzlement by public officials through government contracts. The amounts involved in various sectors are:
* Power Sector - US$ 13 billion
* Aviation Sector - US$ 165 million
* Petroleum Sector - US$ 210 million
* Federal Capital Fund - US$ 271 million
* Telecommunications - US$ 950 million
“These amounts are a tip of the iceberg,” Dabiri said. “If we had the FOI Act, these embezzlements, along with others not discovered, would have been nipped in the bud.”
Besides these losses to corruption, Dabiri explained, expenses to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, which would have gone into the provision of basic social amenities and other infrastructural facilities, are being incurred in conducting the inquiries. For these reasons, she has remained constant in her efforts to ensure that the bill is passed into law.
“I will not relent, until this (FOI Bill) is signed into law. Even if it is the only legislation I spend the whole of my legislative life on, or if it would be the only contribution I make to the development of my country,” she said.
The bill, Dabiri argued, is not only about the media, but it would be useful to researchers, scholars and students as well. It also excludes issues relating to national defense and security. She wondered why public servants, who hold office only in trust for the people, would want to hide anything from them.
“This is what we must fight,” she said.
Dabiri re-presented the bill before the new House for its first reading on July 4th. Its second reading and debate on general principles were held in the subsequent months until the bill was committed to the committee of the whole House.
On March 7th, 2008, the House listed the bill on its order paper for a clause by clause consideration in what would be its third and final reading. But citing the ‘absence’ of Dabiri, the bill’s sponsor, at that day’s session, the House postponed action on the bill until a later date.
“The House would begin the consideration of the bill in the Committee of the Whole on April 29,” Rep. Usman Nafada, presiding House Deputy Speaker, assured.
But on that date, Nafada, asked Dabiri to agree to drop the clause by clause discussion of the bill which was listed as second item on the day’s order paper for a later date pending “clarifications” from the House Rules and Business Committee. Dabiri however insisted the bill must be taken at that seating.
Nafada called for a voice vote on the floor on whether senators should consider the bill at the seating.
The “nays” had it after the vote.
Shocked by the development, Dabiri could not hide her displeasure. “If lawmakers are serious about the fight against corruption they should have passed the bill,” she said. “They should put national interest before personal interests.”
This statement fuelled speculations that most of the legislators, about 80 percent of them being first-timers, were out to kill the bill simply because they were jittery it would stop them from “recouping” their campaign expenses from the public coffers.
A national outrage against the legislators erupted.
In the heat of the outrage, AELEX, a group of legal practitioners and arbitrators, organised public lectures in Lagos, Nigeria’s commercial capital and hotbed for political radicalism, on July 24th , with the general theme “Freedom of Information: Balancing the Public’s Right to Know, against the Individual’s Right to Privacy,” and drawing experts from a cross spectrum of the society.
Olojede, noted at the lecture, that the bill suffered its fate in the last tenure of the Assembly because of Obasanjo’s “hatred of the media” and his belief that the bill was about granting license to reporters to “rummage in politicians’ closets.” The former president did not see it as conferring certain inalienable rights upon the citizens. The bill, he said, aims to bring a number of existing laws, notably the “crudely colonial and militaristic Official Secret Act,” into conformity with Nigeria’s current Constitution.
Chief Ajibola Ogunshola, President of the Newspapers Proprietors' Association of Nigeria (NPAN), said if the bill had been passed into law before now, the time-consuming inquiries embarked upon by the House would not have been necessary since the public would have had access to the information on the matters being investigated.
“By treating such an important tool which would bring about positive change to the Nigerian society lightly,” Ogunshola said, “the House members have called to question their commitment to, and the real intentions of the inquiries embarked upon by them.”
Mrs. Funke Adekoya, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) and Managing Director, AELEX, called on other lawyers in the country to join in the crusade for the passage of the FOI Bill. She explained that the bill is not about peeping into the affairs of politicians and public officials, but a way also to portray to the global community that Nigeria is a transparent country.
“Without the Act, prospective investors would be discouraged to come and invest in the country since they don’t have information on the things they want to invest in, it would impact on the country negatively,” she said.
Nduka Obaigbena, Editor-in-Chief of Nigeria’s most influential daily, THISDAY, urged Nigerians to rise to the occasion to ensure that the bill “sees the light of the day” before the year ends.
“We can only achieve this feat if we apply our energies the same way the Americans did when they fought for their liberation and freedom.
“Our generation must stand up to save this country. We (Media) shall make sure the bill is passed into law, and will fight relentlessly the way we fought the military and chased them out of power,” he said.
John Odey, Secretary General, Nigeria Labor Congress (NLC), Nigeria’s most organized pressure group, said “labor would find out what went wrong, before it acts, because the bill is an important aspect of finding solutions to the problems of Nigeria.”
Shu’aibu Leman, National Secretary, Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ) described the action of the House as “a betrayal of the trust the electorate reposed in it.”
Ayo Adebusoye, Secretary General of Nigeria Network of NGOs (NNNGO's), said civil society organizations in Nigeria “frown at the delay of the bill.”
Gabriel Baglo, Director Africa Office, International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), described the action of the House as “very disappointing since their rejection of the bill was without any valid reason.”
Balarabe Musa, fiery leader of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP), said “the excuses it gave for not passing the bill were flimsy and exposed the hypocrisy of the House that has been engaged in public inquiries into the past administration since the new session started.”
Another body, the Coalition against Corrupt Leaders (CACOL), a non-governmental organisation with grassroots spread, also came out with a strongly worded statement and accused the House of conspiring with some “extraneous but decidedly negative political forces” against the wishes and aspirations of Nigerians, following their rejection of the bill.
“The legislators are dancing to the tune of their political godfathers who imposed them on the nation,” said the statement, “we can only conclude that, they are there to perpetrate and perpetuate corruption, if they remained abhorrent of the bill."
The coalition warned that it would initiate the recall of any legislator by his constituents, who opposed passage of the bill.
With this threat and the public outrage, legislators whom had expressed opposition to the bill, retreated into their shells. If the tempo of the campaign in support of the bill does not subside, the FOI Bill may soon become law.
Dabiri would then be the most loathed legislator among her colleagues in the Assembly, among the politicians in general, and in the civil service, which is the quickest avenue of making easy money.
To Nigerians who would have achieved their freedom however, she would be a heroine.
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
Thursday, August 7, 2008
MAURITANIA: Another President Booted out
Aug 7th 2008 DAKAR, From The Economist print edition
Why the world likes this coup less than the last one
WHILE the rest of Africa seems to be slowly ridding itself of its penchant for coups, Mauritania seems to be perfecting its ability to stage them. Such is the country’s current strike rate that the last two successful coups on the continent have both taken place in this Islamic republic, a vast, sandy country that sees itself as part of both the black and Arab parts of Africa. The latest victim is President Sidi Mohamed Ould Cheikh Abdallahi, who was arrested by his presidential guard and relieved of his duties on August 6th. Not a shot was fired and the news was spread mostly by the president’s distraught daughter, who telephoned journalists as dissidents occupied their house and whisked her father away.According to script, state television and radio went off air, except to declare Mr Abdallahi a “former” president and to reinstate the senior army officers whose sacking had been announced earlier that morning. The coup was led by Mohamed Ould Abdelaziz, the head of the presidential guard and one of the officers Mr Abdallahi had tried to fire. Even before the military dismissals, politics in Mauritania had been in a rotten state. In the space of three months one government had been sacked and another forced to resign. Complaints have ranged from poor management of rising food prices to the lack of transparency over the first lady’s finances. The army was believed to have instigated a mass resignation of the president’s supporters in parliament earlier this week.
Why the world likes this coup less than the last one
WHILE the rest of Africa seems to be slowly ridding itself of its penchant for coups, Mauritania seems to be perfecting its ability to stage them. Such is the country’s current strike rate that the last two successful coups on the continent have both taken place in this Islamic republic, a vast, sandy country that sees itself as part of both the black and Arab parts of Africa. The latest victim is President Sidi Mohamed Ould Cheikh Abdallahi, who was arrested by his presidential guard and relieved of his duties on August 6th. Not a shot was fired and the news was spread mostly by the president’s distraught daughter, who telephoned journalists as dissidents occupied their house and whisked her father away.According to script, state television and radio went off air, except to declare Mr Abdallahi a “former” president and to reinstate the senior army officers whose sacking had been announced earlier that morning. The coup was led by Mohamed Ould Abdelaziz, the head of the presidential guard and one of the officers Mr Abdallahi had tried to fire. Even before the military dismissals, politics in Mauritania had been in a rotten state. In the space of three months one government had been sacked and another forced to resign. Complaints have ranged from poor management of rising food prices to the lack of transparency over the first lady’s finances. The army was believed to have instigated a mass resignation of the president’s supporters in parliament earlier this week.
NIGERIA: Cults of Violence
Jul 31st 2008 PORT HARCOURT
From The Economist print edition
How student fraternities turned into powerful and well-armed gangs
A YOUNG man whispers a confession: as a university student, he killed six or seven of his peers. He cannot be sure of the number, since his shots were fired in gun battles. He intimidated professors, burned their cars, and helped kidnap—briefly—their children to force them to give good marks to certain students. He did it all as a member of a campus cult. When he renounced his membership, he got death threats and moved to another city, where he lives today.
Nigeria’s university system used to be the finest in west Africa, but today’s classes are overcrowded, buildings are crumbling and the curriculum has remained unchanged for years. The cults emerged from the shambles. Having started life as confraternities for the most academic students, they have deteriorated into gang violence. The Exam Ethics Project, a lobby group, says that inter-cult violence killed 115 students and teachers between 1993 and 2003. The real number may be much higher. The situation is particularly bad in Port Harcourt, the capital of Rivers State, the country’s wealthiest and the centre of the oil industry. Here cults have spilled beyond the campus walls to mix with the political militants, thugs and crooks responsible for a violent insurgency in the Niger Delta. Most city residents believe that nearly all of today’s most prominent militant leaders were or still are cult members.
How did the cults become such a problem? Wole Soyinka, a Nobel prizewinner for literature, helped found the Pyrates Confraternity, the first such group, in 1952 at the elite University of Ibadan. Slowly, splinter groups emerged: the Black Axe, the Klansmen Konfraternity, and countless others. It was harmless fun to begin with. But military leaders of the 1980s and 1990s saw the groups’ growing membership as a chance to confront the leftist student unions, often aligned with pro-democracy movements. So the confraternities were given money and weapons. They turned against student activists—and against each other. By the mid-1980s, violence had become so fierce that Mr Soyinka tried unsuccessfully to disband his former creation.
As their strength grew, the cults’ influence on the universities became more malign. They exacerbated the corruption that had already bred in unmanageably big classes and deteriorating facilities. Today, older students and alumni flood campuses in the first weeks of the new academic year to recruit for the cults. Omolade Adunbi, an anthropologist, says that some students, fearing that they are going to be failed in exams, believe the only way to protect themselves is to belong to a cult where they can “harass professors”.
Ban them—if you can
Rivers State outlawed cultism in 2004, setting up rehabilitation committees and special courts to try those accused of membership. But the law has had little effect, since politicians play a big part in keeping the groups rich in cash and arms. “In Rivers State everybody is fighting for the soul of governance in the state, and you need everything—everything—to get it,” says Professor Chiedu Mafiana, a director at the National Universities Commission. Politicians use the students to intimidate opponents, he says. “And so if a student has gone to commit some level of atrocities on behalf of a political group and comes back with good money, another person joins the bandwagon in order to make money for himself.” Though the cults charge membership fees of between 10,000 ($85) and 30,000 naira a year, the boys can expect to make a profit on the streets.
The pay-offs after university can be no less rewarding. With a well-connected alumni network, students hope that their cult membership will win them a job in a country where most graduates are unemployed. Alumni of the Vikings Confraternity, for example, claim at least 11 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Some progress has been made in tackling the cults at the Rivers State University of Science and Technology, thanks to 200-odd security officers, covert surveillance and student informants. For the first time in over a decade there were no gunshots on the campus last year. Yet many students say the violence has not ceased; it has just moved to the streets. Recently, a new vice-chancellor took over the university. Asking him to do the job, the Rivers State governor, Rotimi Amaechi, put the task simply: “Go on a rescue mission for me.”
From The Economist print edition
How student fraternities turned into powerful and well-armed gangs
A YOUNG man whispers a confession: as a university student, he killed six or seven of his peers. He cannot be sure of the number, since his shots were fired in gun battles. He intimidated professors, burned their cars, and helped kidnap—briefly—their children to force them to give good marks to certain students. He did it all as a member of a campus cult. When he renounced his membership, he got death threats and moved to another city, where he lives today.
Nigeria’s university system used to be the finest in west Africa, but today’s classes are overcrowded, buildings are crumbling and the curriculum has remained unchanged for years. The cults emerged from the shambles. Having started life as confraternities for the most academic students, they have deteriorated into gang violence. The Exam Ethics Project, a lobby group, says that inter-cult violence killed 115 students and teachers between 1993 and 2003. The real number may be much higher. The situation is particularly bad in Port Harcourt, the capital of Rivers State, the country’s wealthiest and the centre of the oil industry. Here cults have spilled beyond the campus walls to mix with the political militants, thugs and crooks responsible for a violent insurgency in the Niger Delta. Most city residents believe that nearly all of today’s most prominent militant leaders were or still are cult members.
How did the cults become such a problem? Wole Soyinka, a Nobel prizewinner for literature, helped found the Pyrates Confraternity, the first such group, in 1952 at the elite University of Ibadan. Slowly, splinter groups emerged: the Black Axe, the Klansmen Konfraternity, and countless others. It was harmless fun to begin with. But military leaders of the 1980s and 1990s saw the groups’ growing membership as a chance to confront the leftist student unions, often aligned with pro-democracy movements. So the confraternities were given money and weapons. They turned against student activists—and against each other. By the mid-1980s, violence had become so fierce that Mr Soyinka tried unsuccessfully to disband his former creation.
As their strength grew, the cults’ influence on the universities became more malign. They exacerbated the corruption that had already bred in unmanageably big classes and deteriorating facilities. Today, older students and alumni flood campuses in the first weeks of the new academic year to recruit for the cults. Omolade Adunbi, an anthropologist, says that some students, fearing that they are going to be failed in exams, believe the only way to protect themselves is to belong to a cult where they can “harass professors”.
Ban them—if you can
Rivers State outlawed cultism in 2004, setting up rehabilitation committees and special courts to try those accused of membership. But the law has had little effect, since politicians play a big part in keeping the groups rich in cash and arms. “In Rivers State everybody is fighting for the soul of governance in the state, and you need everything—everything—to get it,” says Professor Chiedu Mafiana, a director at the National Universities Commission. Politicians use the students to intimidate opponents, he says. “And so if a student has gone to commit some level of atrocities on behalf of a political group and comes back with good money, another person joins the bandwagon in order to make money for himself.” Though the cults charge membership fees of between 10,000 ($85) and 30,000 naira a year, the boys can expect to make a profit on the streets.
The pay-offs after university can be no less rewarding. With a well-connected alumni network, students hope that their cult membership will win them a job in a country where most graduates are unemployed. Alumni of the Vikings Confraternity, for example, claim at least 11 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly.
Some progress has been made in tackling the cults at the Rivers State University of Science and Technology, thanks to 200-odd security officers, covert surveillance and student informants. For the first time in over a decade there were no gunshots on the campus last year. Yet many students say the violence has not ceased; it has just moved to the streets. Recently, a new vice-chancellor took over the university. Asking him to do the job, the Rivers State governor, Rotimi Amaechi, put the task simply: “Go on a rescue mission for me.”
Sunday, August 3, 2008
July Fourth (RE-POST)
Mustapha Shehu
Cambridge, MA
July Fourth was conceived as a celebration from the very beginning. John Adams, the second American president had predicted, albeit in reference to July 2nd the day the legal separation from Great Britain took effect. “It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other,” Adams then wrote.
However, in a presidential election year, when sentiment against the war in Iraq is high and the discontent (fear?) over the economy is growing, many Americans paused to think about what it means to be patriotic on July Fourth.
Jessie Babcock, a native of Seattle, Wash, and MBA student at the Heller School of Policy Management, Brandies University, said that unlike the older generation, most people now see July Fourth as time to only party and barbeque. “The generation of my 71-year-old veteran father, celebrates July Fourth with more patriotism. They wave and salute the flag,” she said.
Babcock points to change in patriotic sentiment she has noticed since the Iraq War. “Without lapsing into generalization, I sense that among people my age who identify as liberal-minded, socially-conscious citizens, feeling a strong sense of patriotism is anathema in the face of a narrow-thinking, inept President; a hypocritical, dysfunctional government; and an over-powerful, over-exerted military.
“There is so much wrong with the country and the direction we've been heading for the last decade that I think many of us are waiting for a change in leadership to restore our faith in the country and to help us feel honor as Americans again,” she said.
Bartholomew Ken a 51-year-old African American, who said he is unemployed, however questions the essence of the independence itself. To Ken, seen hanging around Au Bon Pain in Harvard Square, the Declaration of Independence was negotiated by a group of white men. “What then is there in July Fourth for the Black man like me?” he queried. “You have to consider our history.”
Bernard Mwangi, a 45-year-old naturalized American citizen of Kenyan descent however, believes that there is much to celebrate about July Fourth. American freedom from British colonialism, he said, is worth celebrating irrespective of race and in spite of discontent with the current administration.
“Americans celebrate July Fourth with high patriotism, they seem to connect that day with the ideals of freedom, like free speech etc.” he said.
Mwangi contends that in spite of the high sentiment against the war in Iraq and the growing discontent (fear?) over the economy, the kind of patriotism displayed by Americans in the celebration of the Declaration of Independence is not evident in Kenya his birth place that achieved independence only recently in 1963
Babcock points out that in shaping the country’s future, Americans must acknowledge its history. Americans must also recognize that while the country may have been founded on equality and justice for all, blacks, women and other minorities did not have the same rights as white men because they were not considered full citizens.
Even now that the laws have changed to try to protect people's rights, discrimination is still an everyday reality for many” she said.
Cambridge, MA
July Fourth was conceived as a celebration from the very beginning. John Adams, the second American president had predicted, albeit in reference to July 2nd the day the legal separation from Great Britain took effect. “It ought to be solemnized with pomp and parade, with shows, games, sports, guns, bells, bonfires, and illuminations, from one end of this continent to the other,” Adams then wrote.
However, in a presidential election year, when sentiment against the war in Iraq is high and the discontent (fear?) over the economy is growing, many Americans paused to think about what it means to be patriotic on July Fourth.
Jessie Babcock, a native of Seattle, Wash, and MBA student at the Heller School of Policy Management, Brandies University, said that unlike the older generation, most people now see July Fourth as time to only party and barbeque. “The generation of my 71-year-old veteran father, celebrates July Fourth with more patriotism. They wave and salute the flag,” she said.
Babcock points to change in patriotic sentiment she has noticed since the Iraq War. “Without lapsing into generalization, I sense that among people my age who identify as liberal-minded, socially-conscious citizens, feeling a strong sense of patriotism is anathema in the face of a narrow-thinking, inept President; a hypocritical, dysfunctional government; and an over-powerful, over-exerted military.
“There is so much wrong with the country and the direction we've been heading for the last decade that I think many of us are waiting for a change in leadership to restore our faith in the country and to help us feel honor as Americans again,” she said.
Bartholomew Ken a 51-year-old African American, who said he is unemployed, however questions the essence of the independence itself. To Ken, seen hanging around Au Bon Pain in Harvard Square, the Declaration of Independence was negotiated by a group of white men. “What then is there in July Fourth for the Black man like me?” he queried. “You have to consider our history.”
Bernard Mwangi, a 45-year-old naturalized American citizen of Kenyan descent however, believes that there is much to celebrate about July Fourth. American freedom from British colonialism, he said, is worth celebrating irrespective of race and in spite of discontent with the current administration.
“Americans celebrate July Fourth with high patriotism, they seem to connect that day with the ideals of freedom, like free speech etc.” he said.
Mwangi contends that in spite of the high sentiment against the war in Iraq and the growing discontent (fear?) over the economy, the kind of patriotism displayed by Americans in the celebration of the Declaration of Independence is not evident in Kenya his birth place that achieved independence only recently in 1963
Babcock points out that in shaping the country’s future, Americans must acknowledge its history. Americans must also recognize that while the country may have been founded on equality and justice for all, blacks, women and other minorities did not have the same rights as white men because they were not considered full citizens.
Even now that the laws have changed to try to protect people's rights, discrimination is still an everyday reality for many” she said.
Caffeine: Not only in Coffee
Mustapha Shehu
Cambridge, Mass.
Michelle John, 28-year old single mother, works two jobs and takes evening classes. Her greatest friend through these is coffee. “I take about five cups a day to get the buzz, to remain active,” she said.
Is she aware that she ingests caffeine, the main ingredient in coffee, from other foods and drinks other than coffee? “Yes,” she replied, but thinks it is only Pepsi and Coca Cola.
John is wrong.
It is for her benefit and millions of others that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and dozens of health advocates say they filed a 70-page petition urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require the caffeine content of foods to be declared on labels.
Caffeine may cause miscarriages, insomnia, and other problems, according to more than 40 scientific studies outlined in the petition.
"Caffeine is the only drug that is widely added to the food supply," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of CSPI, at a press conference in Washington, D.C., "and consumers have a right to know how much caffeine various foods contain
Knowing the caffeine content is important to many people -- especially women who are or might become pregnant -- who might want to limit or avoid caffeine."
According to a CSPL Press Release, studies have shown that the amount of caffeine added to foods varies widely among brands:
*A cup of Dannon Coffee Yogurt has as much caffeine as a 12-ounce can of Coca-Cola, while a Dannon Light Cappuccino Yogurt has no caffeine.
*Sunkist Orange Soda has more caffeine than a Pepsi, while Minute Maid Orange Soda has none.
*A cup of Starbuck's Coffee Ice Cream has as much caffeine as half a cup of instant coffee, while some other brands are virtually caffeine free.
Andre Konnich, 42, seated in the Z-Square Café in Harvard Square sipping coffee cannot agree more with the CSPL. As a father, he believes that children and pregnant women must particularly be protected from ingesting foods, whose caffeine content is not known.
“Health effects like insomnia are terrible things in children, and to find out that caffeine is added to many foods and causes miscarriage in pregnant women is frightening,” he said.
Konnich, an easy-going-looking guy, seems to have been shocked to learn that there are dozens of foods out there, which unknown to the people, contain caffeine. “It is the right of consumers to know what they are buying,” he said. “It’s not only about caffeine, but all food labels must show the chemical contents of the food.
“Consumers deserve no less.”
"This all comes down to the consumer's right to know," said Lisa Cox, program and policies director at the National Women's Health Network. "When a food contains an ingredient linked to health problems, labels should disclose to shoppers the amount of that ingredient."
So also believes Patricia Lieberman, CSPI senior science policy fellow.
Spurred by legal action by CSPI in the 1970s, the FDA issued an advisory in 1981 warning that "Pregnant women should avoid caffeine-containing foods and drugs, if possible, or consume them only sparingly." The FDA still maintains that advisory as its official policy.
"Unfortunately, food labels do not provide women with the information they need to put the FDA's advice into practice," Lieberman said.
"Caffeine is present in an increasing variety of coffee and tea beverages, soft drinks, caffeinated waters, ice creams, and yogurts. It's usually impossible for consumers to estimate caffeine content based on a product's name or other label information."
Konnich’s daughter, 18-year-old Melanie, seated with her father at the café agrees with him. “Since caffeine has been proven to impair people’s health, all foods containing it must be labeled as such.
“It is the right of citizens to know what they eat,” she said.
Cambridge, Mass.
Michelle John, 28-year old single mother, works two jobs and takes evening classes. Her greatest friend through these is coffee. “I take about five cups a day to get the buzz, to remain active,” she said.
Is she aware that she ingests caffeine, the main ingredient in coffee, from other foods and drinks other than coffee? “Yes,” she replied, but thinks it is only Pepsi and Coca Cola.
John is wrong.
It is for her benefit and millions of others that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and dozens of health advocates say they filed a 70-page petition urging the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to require the caffeine content of foods to be declared on labels.
Caffeine may cause miscarriages, insomnia, and other problems, according to more than 40 scientific studies outlined in the petition.
"Caffeine is the only drug that is widely added to the food supply," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of CSPI, at a press conference in Washington, D.C., "and consumers have a right to know how much caffeine various foods contain
Knowing the caffeine content is important to many people -- especially women who are or might become pregnant -- who might want to limit or avoid caffeine."
According to a CSPL Press Release, studies have shown that the amount of caffeine added to foods varies widely among brands:
*A cup of Dannon Coffee Yogurt has as much caffeine as a 12-ounce can of Coca-Cola, while a Dannon Light Cappuccino Yogurt has no caffeine.
*Sunkist Orange Soda has more caffeine than a Pepsi, while Minute Maid Orange Soda has none.
*A cup of Starbuck's Coffee Ice Cream has as much caffeine as half a cup of instant coffee, while some other brands are virtually caffeine free.
Andre Konnich, 42, seated in the Z-Square Café in Harvard Square sipping coffee cannot agree more with the CSPL. As a father, he believes that children and pregnant women must particularly be protected from ingesting foods, whose caffeine content is not known.
“Health effects like insomnia are terrible things in children, and to find out that caffeine is added to many foods and causes miscarriage in pregnant women is frightening,” he said.
Konnich, an easy-going-looking guy, seems to have been shocked to learn that there are dozens of foods out there, which unknown to the people, contain caffeine. “It is the right of consumers to know what they are buying,” he said. “It’s not only about caffeine, but all food labels must show the chemical contents of the food.
“Consumers deserve no less.”
"This all comes down to the consumer's right to know," said Lisa Cox, program and policies director at the National Women's Health Network. "When a food contains an ingredient linked to health problems, labels should disclose to shoppers the amount of that ingredient."
So also believes Patricia Lieberman, CSPI senior science policy fellow.
Spurred by legal action by CSPI in the 1970s, the FDA issued an advisory in 1981 warning that "Pregnant women should avoid caffeine-containing foods and drugs, if possible, or consume them only sparingly." The FDA still maintains that advisory as its official policy.
"Unfortunately, food labels do not provide women with the information they need to put the FDA's advice into practice," Lieberman said.
"Caffeine is present in an increasing variety of coffee and tea beverages, soft drinks, caffeinated waters, ice creams, and yogurts. It's usually impossible for consumers to estimate caffeine content based on a product's name or other label information."
Konnich’s daughter, 18-year-old Melanie, seated with her father at the café agrees with him. “Since caffeine has been proven to impair people’s health, all foods containing it must be labeled as such.
“It is the right of citizens to know what they eat,” she said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
