Whispering Drums With Maigani
By Musa Ibrahim
The Politics Of Power
In its final report, Sam Ervin as chairman, made the following observations: "Unlike the men who were responsible for Teapot Dome, the presidential aides who perpetrated Watergate were not seduced by the love of money, which is sometimes thought to be the root of all evil. On the contrary, they were instigated by a lust for political power, which is at least as corrupting as political power itself…
Their lust for political power blinded them to ethical considerations and legal requirements; to Aristotle's aphorism that the good of man must be the end of politics, and to Grover Cleveland's conviction that a public office is a public trust..."
One of the veritable by-products of politics is the acquisition of political power which is like a licence granted to the political participants to use in seeking to achieve their political aims and objectives. Like the game of poli- tics itself, political power has its own dynamics, its rules and modes of appli- cation and operation and it is always imperative that those who seek political power understand the intricacies embedded therein. But it is not everybody with political power that under- stands the use of it.
Practitioners of democracy (of which America is ranked second to none being the founder) understand the dynamics of power and the trite contrivance that while power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely. To prevent the corrupting influence of power on those who have it, the found- ing fathers of America, imbued with the principles of libertarianism and freedom, came out with a package called the constitution. The constitution is supreme and binding on all and sundry and nobody is held above it.
According to Ervin, "The Constitution of the United States is a law for rulers and people alike at all times and under all circumstances. The President and all other public officers in our land are bound by oath or affirmation to respect and obey it... For, the only security America has against anarchy on the one hand and tyranny on the other is to be found in reverential obedience to the constitution by those entrusted with governmental power..."
Ex-President Shehu Shagari of Nigeria was not in the category of many of Africa's poppy cocks. He had enormous powers in the eyes of the populace, but he understood the dynamics of the presidency and of the use of power. With the constitution staring at him, he knew the limits of his presidential powers and did not overstep his bounds. He was slow to act on many occasions and those who did not know that he did not have all the powers they thought he had, accused him of being lazy and inept.
The ordinary people often become dumb-founded on the several occasions that Shehu Shagari was dragged to court by ordinary citizens such as they. And within the bounds of etiquette, Shagari demonstrated his knowledge on the use of power in his second term in office by sacking over eighty percent of his cabinet ministers (a world record) and cutting down to size the unruly ones.
Margaret Thatcher of Great Britain understands the politics of power. After last week's attempt on her life and her entire cabinet by the IRA bombing of their convention hotel at Brighton, the temptation is great for the Prime Minister to order the British army to go and flush out all known or would-be terrorists. But Thatcher's executive powers won't allow it and the only thing she has to contend with is more security men breathing down hard on her back.
Other leaders in the world that practise or profess democracy understand the politics of power and the attendant consequences that might follow if they erred. That is why their own part of the world is a better place to live in.
Apart from Nigeria under Shagari, hardly is there now an African leader that understands the politics of power. From one-party dictators to military juntas there is evidently no limit to the powers some of these leaders have. It is absolutely total and this is often demonstrated in the most cruel, barbaric and sadistic manner. In Africa we have seen heads of states personally and publicly flog subordinates; we have seen public officers flout with impunity the laws of the land and of natural justice; we have seen presidents-for-life transform the wealth of their lands into personal property; we have seen Master-Sergeants and Captains and Flight Lieutenants terminate with reckless abandon the lives of their fellow human beings for no just cause other than to show and flex the enormity of their powers; we have seen Brigadiers and Generals usurp the fundamental rights and freedom of the individual through the most uncivilised and forceful means; and much, much more.
The extent to which the lust for political power has corrupted and detached African leaders from the path of sanity is, to say the least, quite unbelievable. You look on the face of an African leader today and it is stony with nothing but a streak of ruthlessness and you ask, where has all the African sense of humour, the mirth, and the laughter gone?
And my mind cries in rebellion, for, is there an antidote against this dangerous cankerworm that is threateningly propelling my own breed to the verge of a stupendous crisis?
Can't answer back
Some insults really hurt. And they hurt even more because you have put yourself in a situation where you cannot answer back.Everybody has heard of the 'Durban Six' now reduced to the Durban Three' the South African political dissidents who had taken refuge in the British Consulate in Durban. The British Labour Party's special emissary Mr Donald Anderson has been visiting the three who left the consulate and were arrested and detained and then been saying uncomplimentary things about the South African Government, Mr 'Pik' Botha, the Foreign Minister stung by the remarks made by Mr Anderson, challenged him to name another African country that would have allowed him to visit detainees in jail and then publicly criticize that country's government.
Our continent being what it is, poor Mr Anderson could not come up with the name of any country, but he still had the last word.
He said he was confident that, as a British MP, he would be allowed to visit detainees in other African countries if he asked to do so (fat hope!). And then came the sting;. "It was odd that Mr Botha was inviting comparison with African governments when South Africa usually preferred to be judged by European standards." End of fight, technical knockout, Mr Botha is silenced.
But let's face it, to think that South Africa can abuse us and get away with it. For, in truth, which country in Africa could have allowed a foreign MP (British or otherwise) to visit detainees and then criticize it. I wonder why we have such chips on our shoulders.
But the answer to Mr Botha really is that Mr Anderson could have visited Nigeria under Alhaji Shehu Shagari and Ghana under Dr Hilla Limann, because they had no political prisoners. The question of being allowed to visit political detainees would not have arisen at all. But today 'Pik' Botha can dare abuse us and be quite right!
And Mr Anderson, are there two standards of civilised and acceptable behaviour for governments? What does he mean by being surprised that Mr Botha was inviting comparison with African governments when South Africa usually preferred to be judged by European standards.
Obviously African governments are not expected to behave any better and can be forgiven when they have "laws on detention without trial which are an abuse of human rights in any civilised country." Mr Anderson wonders why South Africa wants to go down to the level of African governments.
Again the insult is quite clear, we in Africa have different standards, not quite the level of civilised European standards.
And yet one cannot be angry or insult them back. We have made it possible.
