Nigeria Content Online

Recently I watched
an agreeable bit of apocalyptic entertainment called 2012, which dealt
with the end of the world. As is common with such films, it involved
plans to save at least part of humanity from the coming Armageddon.
These centred around the G8 countries and naturally, the citizens and
artifacts that the leaders of those countries thought most important
were chosen for survival.

What was remarkable
was that there was no mention of Africa, even though one of the leading
actors in the film, Chiwetel Ejiofor, is also a Nigerian. That is, no
mention until right at the end when, with the new post-disaster
alignment of continents, the southern part of Africa was found to have
risen several thousand metres and thus was now seen to be suitable for
settlement by the survivors. It was implied that the place was empty.
(The historically alert will have noticed that we have heard this
theory of an ‘empty southern Africa’ before.)

One shouldn’t
complain of course: South America appeared in the film only so that the
collapse of Rio de Janeiro’s famous statue of Christ the Redeemer could
be shown. But at least people were shown there!

In most disaster
movie blockbusters, the fact that the only time you see a black face is
when the President of the United States is (fashionably)
African-American, is just one of the signs of how marginalised Africa
is. Perhaps we should even be glad that the notorious ‘District 9’ at
least juxtaposed the idea of Africa and Science Fiction in global
consciousness.

But if filmmakers
forget about Africa because for them, we are on the margin of their own
consciousness; what do we say about ourselves?

More specifically
what do we say about our own government which says that Africa “is the
centrepiece of our foreign policy”, and even mendaciously claims that
Africa will continue to be the centrepiece of our foreign policy!

It was not without
reason that the United States of America’s former ambassador to
Nigeria, John Campbell recently deflated our claim to be big and
important. We had not, he observed, been able to settle even the
problems erupting on our own doorstep in Niger Republic, or our
backyard in Guinea (Conakry), let alone play any meaningful role in
solving other crises on the continent, such as Darfur or Somalia.

One might, with
reason, ask how we ever could have? Our last Minister of Foreign
Affairs may have been famous (or is that notorious?) for the number of
trips he made to the US, but he only made his first official trip to
any African country in January this year when he visited some ECOWAS
countries. A further trip to Southern Africa in February hardly
suggests that there was any seriousness in the Yar’Adua administration
about Nigeria’s “concentric circles” approach to foreign policy.

According to this
policy, our foreign affairs priorities should start with our neighbours
in the inner circle, ECOWAS in the next, then Africa and last, the rest
of the world. But despite inverting these priorities and putting the US
and Britain first, Maduekwe achieved as little in those countries as
those eve-of-his-removal trips achieved in Africa.

Certainly the
visits failed to even begin to address the erosion of Nigeria’s
position and prestige in the Economic Community of West African States,
or on the continent.

While Maduekwe was
indulging himself in far-flung gallivanting, Niger Republic commenced
the construction of a dam across the River Niger that could reduce the
flow of water into Kainji Dam by as much as 70%! And despite this open
disregard for our interests, Nigeria not only watched helplessly as
President Mahmadou Tandja subverted his country’s constitution, but
when he was called to order and removed with no input from us, could
only join a chorus of demands that Niger conduct elections within six
months without any apparent concern about the posture that a
newly-elected Nigerién President might adopt towards us.

There will be those
who try to convince themselves that Acting President Goodluck
Jonathan’s trip to the US last week has done Nigeria some good; as if
Jonathan has not heard from his fellow-citizens that he needs to tackle
electoral reform and punish corruption, or as though he was there to do
much more than make up the numbers when US President Barack Obama met
him in a group of ten (!) to discuss the control and safeguarding of
nuclear materials.

But in our own
neighbourhood, a measure of our inconsequence was epitomized by the
remarks of Libya’s Muammar Ghadaffi who, whatever peace he may have
made with the West still feels free to stir up mischief in Africa (of
which he seems to see himself as some kind of uncrowned king) about
breaking up Nigeria. He even cheekily suggested that ex-President
Olusegun Obasanjo should oversee the process of creating the ‘Christian
South’ without any response from Obasanjo!

It would be a good idea for us to realise that nobody is going to
pull our African chestnuts out of the fire for us, even if we are to
abandon the concentric circles approach. And however much we intend to
outsource to the US, we are still going to have to get our own foreign
policy.

In the midst of a
wave of post-election political violence in Zimbabwe in 2008, Brian
James, a white farmer who had been evicted from his property years
earlier during President Robert Mugabe’s seizure of white-owned lands,
found himself surrounded by a throng of black Zimbabweans in downtown
Mutare, my hometown. The 50-strong crowd danced, sang and chanted
political slogans for more than 20 minutes before James was finally
able to raise his hand, thank them for their support and announce that
he was honored to have been elected mayor of the country’s
third-largest city.

Today is the 30th
anniversary of Zimbabwe’s independence from white rule and Mugabe’s
rise to power. Back then, Mugabe was hailed as a liberator and
conciliator. “If yesterday I fought you as an enemy, today you have
become a friend,” he told nervous whites at the time. For a long while
he was true to his word. By the mid-1990s, Zimbabwe had become one of
the most stable and prosperous countries in Africa.

But in 2000, within
weeks of losing a constitutional referendum to entrench his power,
Mugabe began the catastrophic land invasions that resulted in the
eviction of almost all the country’s 4,500 white farmers and the ruin
of what was once a model post-colonial African country. Ever since, the
narrative of Zimbabwe has been one of race. Rare is the speech in which
Mugabe does not rail against whites, colonialists, imperialists or the
West. Members of his ZANU-PF party have spoken of a “Rwandan solution”
for Zimbabwe’s whites.

Westerners have
simply accepted this narrative of blacks and whites pitted against one
another. But, in doing so, they have missed the inspiring story of what
has actually been happening in Zimbabwe over the past decade. After
years of mass unemployment, mutant inflation, chronic shortages and
state violence, Zimbabweans simply don’t care about skin color. In
fact, Mugabe has managed to achieve the exact opposite of what he set
out to do in 2000: the forging of a post racial state.

Brian James’ story,
taken in full, stands as proof of Mugabe’s unwitting accomplishment.
James was barely interested in politics before losing his land in 2003
– “I just wanted to farm and play cricket on weekends” – but afterward
he joined the main opposition party, the Movement for Democratic
Change, quickly rose through the ranks and was elected mayor by a
virtually all-black constituency. And James is not a singular example.
One of the most popular politicians in the country is Roy Bennett,
another former farmer, known to his legion of black supporters as
Pachedu, “one of us.” When Bennett was arrested on trumped-up treason
charges last year, hundreds of black Zimbabweans surrounded the prison
so that intelligence agents would not be able to smuggle him out to a
more remote location where it was feared he might be tortured.

Then there is the
inspiring sight of white farmers, who have been contesting the legality
of the land expropriations in a regional human rights tribunal,
marching into court arm in arm with their black lawyers, often dynamic
women who know the laws and Constitution of the land better than those
sitting in judgment. This belies Mugabe’s image of a country divided by
race.

My parents, owners
of a backpacker resort, are part of this new Zimbabwe. Like most
whites, they once steered clear of politics. But in 2002, when their
home came under siege, my father joined the M.D.C. By 2005, their lodge
had become a meeting place for black political dissidents who would
disguise themselves as priests to avoid detection by Mugabe’s militia.

In 2008, the lodge
became a safe house for three black activists, Pishai Muchauraya,
Prosper Mutseyami and Misheck Kagurabadza, who had won seats in Mugabe
strongholds and were now on the run from government death squads. My
mother, as tough-as-nails a white African as any, still gets emotional
when she talks of the courage of her three “fugitives,” all of whom are
now friends and in Parliament, part of the fractious national unity
government set up between Mugabe and the M.D.C. in 2009.

Mugabe knows
exactly what he is doing in constantly invoking race-based rhetoric. By
framing the crisis in Zimbabwe as a struggle against the West – against
the white world – he escapes censure from other postcolonial African
leaders who understand their own countries’ histories in the same way.
And when the West allows Mugabe’s narrative to go unchallenged, it
plays right into his hands.

Overlooked in the
racial invective are some basic and important facts. Mugabe has accused
white farmers of being colonial-era “settlers,” but about 70 percent of
them actually purchased their land after independence, with signed
permission from Mugabe himself. And far from owning 70 percent of the
land in the country, as was widely believed, those white farmers owned
only half of our commercial land – just 14 percent of Zimbabwe’s total
land. With that land, however, they used to produce more than 60
percent of all agricultural crops, and 50 percent of all foreign
earnings. One only has to look at the decline in food production and
collapse of the economy since 2000 to appreciate how vital white
farmers were to the well being of the nation.

All but ignored was
the other major target of the land grabs: black farm workers. Some
300,000 blacks were employed on white farms up until 2000 – 2 million
people, if one counts their dependents – and they overwhelmingly
supported the M.D.C. By destroying white farms, Mugabe wiped out a
major base of black opposition. It is hardly surprising, then, that
black workers often stood with white employers to resist Mugabe’s
violent invaders. When has that ever happened in post-colonial Africa?

Friends in the
United States often ask me if there is any hope for Zimbabwe, and I
always answer yes. Then I tell them a story about a funeral.

Not long before he
was elected mayor, Brian James lost his wife, Sheelagh, in a car crash
in Mutare. Her funeral was held on the lawns of the local golf club and
300 mourners turned up, among them white farmers, black friends and an
M.D.C. choir. The day before the funeral, my father was with Pishai
Muchauraya, the former M.D.C. fugitive and soon-to-be member of
Parliament, when he received a phone call from the leader of the choir.
They had a problem, they told Muchauraya: They had never been to the
funeral of a white woman before and did not know what to sing.

“What’s that got to
do with it?” Muchauraya snapped. “Mrs. James was an African just like
you. Sing what you normally sing.” When he turned to apologise for the
interruption, he saw my father had tears in his eyes.

Douglas Rogers is the author of “The Last Resort: A Memoir of Zimbabwe.”

© 2010 The New York Time

Every man gotta right

To decide his own destiny

And in this judgment

There is no partiality….’

Those opening lines have been for me a life long
anthem of strength and self-determination. Till tomorrow as we say back
home, that song by Bob Marley gives me gooseflesh. The reggae rhythm
grabs you by the gut and suffuses your core. It has the gravity,
sagacity and simplicity of those truths held to be self evident and
those pursuits that are the equal and unfettered right of all human
beings, regardless of gender: liberty and happiness. The album title is
Survival and it is a collection of perfect gems.

Take ‘Babylon System is the vampire

Sucking the blood of the sufferers day by day

Building church and university

Deceiving the people continually

Me say them graduating thieves

And murderers, look out now…’

Or even the projection of a society bent on destroying itself:

‘In this age of technological inhumanity

Scientific atrocity, atomic misphilosophy

Nuclear misenergy…

It’s a world that forces lifelong insecurity

All togther now we’re the survivors,

Yes, the black survivors’

Then there are also tracks like Top Rankin’, Ride Natty Ride, So Much Trouble and of course One Drop:

‘We refuse to be

What you wanted us to be

We are what we are

And that’s the way it’s going to be:

(If you don’t know)’

This is one of those collections you inevitably
buy ten times over. I have it in two versions vinyl and CD. Friends
forget to return it, some relative stranger decides that you will not
mind her borrowing it, or it disappears at the end of a party. One
really has no time to waste getting angry, just buy a replacement
because your library has no meaning without it and it is actually a
duty to spread its message to people everywhere.

I am old fashioned I do not do music feeding
directly into my head. I don’t walk around with what I consider to be
messy unhygienic knobs plugged into my ears ,giving me earache and
messing with my body. I prefer my music to envelope me and fill the
atmosphere around me, not lock out the rest of the world, and this is
one anthem that has everything to do with Africans individually and
collectively, and the rest of the world.

‘To divide and rule

Could only tear us apart

In everyman chest

There beats a heart…

Natty trash it ina Zimbabwe

Mash it up ina Zimbabwe

Set it up ina Zimbabwe

Africans a liberate Zimbabawe

Africans a liberate Zimbabwe’

A song of triumph thirty years ago, an anthem in
the decade that followed Marley lyrics remain ever present as an agenda
for today not only in Zimbabwe.

‘So soon we’ll find out

Who is the real revolutionary

And I don’t want my people

To be tricked by mercenaries’

The whole album is a combination of exhortations,
a rallying to arms, a preaching of history and a celebration of African
spirit in the best of this continent’s traditions of telling our
stories in many voices.

Like Fela Anikulapo –Kuti, Marley stands out as a
chronicler of his generation whose words have a message for all times
because of the truths they speak. Each age has its own criers and
speaks in its own language though it is sometime hard these days to
distill a message of lasting value from the popular music of the
present.

But since this article is not a critique of today’s sound but an
appreciation of yesterday’s perhaps it is best to say that what you
hear depends on how you listen and whether you do so in the language of
today or of yesterday. For my money, Marley rocks and one day Zimbabwe
will rock in that same way again.

A visit to
Singapore always leaves me with mixed feelings. To quote minister
mentor Lee Kuan Yew, it is the “cleanest, brightest, greenest city in
the equatorial belt”. Walking through crowds of well-dressed youth to
see a former British tropical colony of slums sporting a Manhattan
skyscraper skyline, offering well-stocked bookstores and a variety of
expensive branded shops reminiscent of London, New York, Paris, or
Tokyo, laced with wide streets and impeccably manicured parks, lifts my
sense of African possibilities.

Tempering that
feeling of hope is the sheer scale of difference between current urban
African squalor, of which Lagos is one of the more notorious examples,
and Singaporean splendor. No ifs, ands, or buts, Singapore has made it!
It is a rich city state. How did they escape poverty in our lifetime?
Can cities like Lagos and Accra emulate it? Could its methods for
selecting political leaders hold any lessons for giant Nigeria? Is
Singapore’s success the outcome of honest and competent leadership?
These questions demanded answers as I strolled through downtown
Singapore last week.

It bears repeating
that any community of people bears the scars of their own history.
Singapore’s colonial inheritance, evidenced, for example, by
institutions such as its compulsory national savings fund called the
Central Provident Fund, gave it advantages in its quest to create an
affluent Singaporean citizen. The American journalist, John Gunther,
wrote about Singapore in 1939 in his book “Inside Asia”. Apropos of
Singapore and Malaysia, he said: “acre for acre it is the richest
British possession or sphere of interest on the face of the globe. It
produces forty-five percent of the world’s rubber, thirty-five percent
of its tin.” But, it was corrupt and filthy, with pigs roaming its
streets.

The politics of the
Singapore story is inspiring for those of us who dream of clean African
politics. It starts with a group of young socialist members of its
English-educated elite deciding to fight for independence and a clean
government. Mr. Lee, for example, took a First Class Honors Degree in
Law at Cambridge University. They met in Mr. Lee’s house at 38 Oxley
Road in late 1954 to form the People’s Action Party (“PAP”). There were
other parties already in existence with prior claims on the allegiance
of the Singaporean masses that, in the main, were Chinese speakers.

The most
formidable of their opponents was the Malayan Communist Party, inspired
by the Chinese Communist Party and led by committed cadres of the most
ascetic type. But, the multicultural and multiclass group-spanning
Chinese, Indians, Eurasians, trade unionists, senior civil
servants-decided that their aspirations for Singapore were best
realised only if they themselves entered the political ring. To use the
language of my last column, “good followers” came together to form a
“group of good followers.” By 1966, the PAP had defeated their foes at
the ballot box to create a clean Singapore. Those members of Nigeria’s
educated middle and upper classes who seek an honest well run Nigeria
should consider forming their own political party.

“Good followers”
select good leaders. After attending the 1966 Commonwealth Conference,
Mr. Lee shed some light on desirable and undesirable leadership types
in an address to young students at the Law Society of Singapore. He
said: “There are two types of individuals who emerge in positions of
leadership. If your country is developed, then inevitably the people
who emerge in positions of leadership are people with a firm grasp of
the bolts and nuts of life, of standards of living and the economics of
life. And so Mr. Wilson is an economist of some repute… As I looked
around the conference table at Marlborough House recently [the venue of
the Commonwealth Conference], I saw emerging the other kind of
leadership-a new one: not one which we represent, the Tunku (the then
Prime Minister of Malaysia] and I. I looked at two young colonels
present, representing the governments of Nigeria and Ghana. And I say
to all law students: pray that my successor will be an economist. Then
you have a future.” Young soldiers, blind to norms of sober budgeting,
could not lead young people to a prosperous and dignified future.

Forty-four years
later, Nigerians will have occasion to ponder whether they have “a
future” under the presidency of a military man-General Ibrahim
Babangida. I, for one, think a Babangida presidency would be a
catastrophe. Yet, his announcement may be the event needed to compel
decent Nigerians to form a new party to fight for a better Nigeria.

One thing is now clear from Acting President Goodluck Jonathan’s recent trip to the United States: Nigeria desperately needs a re-articulation of its foreign policy. In the last few years the news that has more often than not emerged from the Foreign Ministry has had to do with tardy diplomats or gross under funding or a mismanagement of funds.

Speaking earlier in the week at a discussion organised by the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, Mr. Jonathan noted that Africa has always been the centrepiece of Nigeria’s foreign policy, and hinted of plans to continue to focus Nigeria’s foreign policy on the continent.
“So our main focus now is to see that at least within the continent of Africa, we have true democracies. We want a system where people will elect their leaders.”

Manifestations of independent Nigeria’s foreign policy ambitions date back to the 1960s when the country contributed troops to the United Nations peace keeping forces in the Congo and Tanganyika.

Speaking in Lagos at an event to mark the 2005 Black History Month , former Minister of External Affairs Bolaji Akinyemi noted: “Even before the independence of Nigeria, there had grown up within the domestic political intellectual class and the international foreign policy elite a belief in the manifest
destiny of Nigeria to play a mega role in world
affairs…

The physical size of Nigeria, the state of her economy and the size of her population vis-à-vis other countries in Africa have bred an expectation of a leadership and activist role for Nigeria in the global system, a state with a manifest destiny to become a Black Power.”

Nigeria’s leadership and activist role arguably reached its zenith during the Murtala Mohammed /Olusegun Obasanjo years, when the country played a significant role in the anti-apartheid struggle, and in the support of the Southern African Liberation struggle.

It was also during this time that the country hosted the World Black and African Festival
of Arts and Culture (FESTAC). As Foreign Affairs Minister (during the Babangida years) Mr. Akinyemi famously announced that “some of us dream of Nigeria being to blacks in the Diaspora what Jerusalem is to
Jews in the Diaspora.”

He also advocated the development by Nigeria of a “Black bomb”, arguing, “Nigeria has a sacred responsibility to challenge the racial monopoly of nuclear weapons.”

More than two decades later, that dream of a powerful global player remains unfulfilled, deferred by failures in key sectors. Nigeria remains country unable to produce basic technology – whether for civilian or military use.

In the last few years we have paid the Russians and the Chinese to help us launch satellites. At the moment Nigeria has no nuclear power generating plant (South Africahas two), only one nuclear research centre, and negligible nuclear power capabilities.

Against this backdrop the question might arise: “What exactly was Nigeria’s role at the Nuclear Security Summit? This only goes to confirm one fact: that foreign policy cannot be divorced from domestic policy. Domestic indices – transparency of elections, human rights record, security and good governance, and poverty alleviation – will always speak louder than foreign policy.

A country without a nuclear power plant, and without a serious commitment to exploiting the possibilities of nuclear energy (for peaceful purposes) cannot exert any meaningful influence in
a Nuclear Energy Summit, or in any global platform in the 21st century.

There is however no gainsaying the fact that Nigeria’s foreign standing suffered greatly under President Yar’Adua. The President’s fragile health meant that the bulk of his trips abroad were medical,
and mainly to Saudi Arabia. Nigeria had no serious representation at key international gatherings because of the President’s absence, and his refusal to delegate his deputy to attend.

Prior to Mr. Jonathan’s visit the last time a Nigerian leader visited the United States was well over two years ago. There is no doubt that Mr. Jonathan’s recent trip has done Nigeria’s image a great deal of good. The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Odein Ajumogobia acknowledged this when he said, on the Acting President’s return to Abuja, “there is a lot of goodwill, enormous goodwill for Nigeria and I think that we are back to try and take advantage of that goodwill, for the betterment of Nigeria.”

We urge Mr. Jonathan to do everything within his power to avoid frittering away this goodwill. He must as a matter of urgency overhaul Nigeria’s Foreign Service apparatus.

During the Yar’Adua era the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ojo Maduekwe was involved in an embarrassing spat with the Nigerian Ambassador to the United States. Such shameful incidents should never recur.

In the 12 months or so that this administration
has ahead of it, Mr. Jonathan should strive to
articulate a coherent foreign policy objective for Nigeria. His superficial answers to questions about Nigeria’s foreign policy at the Council on Foreign Relations briefing last week left much to be desired.

We urge him to strive to re-invigorate the Technical Aids Corps Scheme, ensure proper funding of Nigerian foreign missions, and demand rigorous accountability from them
in return.

We also demand an urgent reconsideration of the promise Mr. Jonathan to the Nigerian community in Washington to create a “Diaspora Commission.” That plan should be jettisoned immediately. As we argued in our April 8 editorial (“A Diaspora Commission”) it is a project of doubtful utility, and one that
will only further complicate the Foreign Service bureaucracy. Nigeria has far more pressing diplomatic requirements.

In my father’s stories of his posting to Karazau, a remote
location in Northern Nigeria, during his job as a station master with the
Nigerian Railways in the 1950s, was an account of how Fulani herdsmen would
emerge from the bush and the villages asking for ‘sweet water’.

“Esh Em, a bamu ruwa mai dadi” (S.M., please give us some of
that your sweet water). They were referring to clear, boiled water, free of
harmful bacteria, guinea worm and other parasites that my mother drew from the
well, treated and stored in their quarters situated between the train station
and the village. My parents’ home was the only source of clean water for miles
around.

Ironically, 60 years on, the search for ‘sweet water’ continues.
At home, the Water Corporation bills us monthly for mains water supply, yet we
have been buying our supply from private water tankers for over six months.

Most of my neighbours have boreholes. Yet, the cost of sinking
and maintaining one is so high. Securing water for our uses costs a LOT of
money.

At the recent Commonwealth Regional Law Conference in Abuja, one
of the speakers asked whether water is the new oil; not just for us, but for
the world. We are contending with a natural resource that is being consumed at
a greater rate than it can renew itself; communities migrating across
international boundaries to follow shrinking lakes; declining rainfall that
most rural population rely on, urban spread and struggling water utilities.

Do we realise how much drinking water costs? Think about it. One
litre of bottled water costs more than a litre of petrol! How many of us, like
me, pay the Water Corporation monthly not to supply water? How many, like me,
have bought new water pumps and paid for new lines to be laid, with no results?
We should prioritise water security above the elusive 6,000 kilowatts that the
Ministry of Power has been promising us. We are buying both water and diesel,
and while our industry and businesses will become moribund without reliable and
cheaper power supply, our health and bodies will become impaired without
reliable and cleaner water supply.

More importantly in comparing oil and water, people have died in
fights over access to water. Access to water continues to be a matter of life
and death between farmers and herders.

Aah! Sweet water! In the developed world, drinkable water is
truly sweet. It is available everywhere for free – at water fountains on the
streets and from taps in restaurants, offices and homes. For more discerning
palates, there is a selection of waters. What strikes your fancy? Still water
from the French Alps? Sparkling water from Scottish highlands? Water that
tastes sterile, or slightly salty. Don’t like the taste of plain water?

You can opt for a variety of flavoured waters – lemon or
strawberry perhaps? Feeling weak? Go for vitamin-infused water, or water with
an energy boost. Need a bottle that is pleasing to the eye and decorative for
your table? Go for the designer bottles in cones and cylinders, or water
presented like wine.

A natural refreshment

And where do we find ourselves on this continuum between no
potable water, abundance, and designer water? Day after day, the poor still
trek for miles to fetch water. Each day, the mass of our urban citizens get
their drinking water from ‘pure water sachet’ sellers by the roadside. The bulk
of office workers get their drinking water from water dispenser suppliers. The
majority of homes have supplementary water storage facilities that they pay
private contractors to fill up. Cart pushers plying our roads with six to
twelve 25kg kegs of water are common sights.

Bottling companies that used to make their money from bottling
imported spirits and wines for the local market, are now largely bottling
water! Our own Nigerian Bottling Company, the makers of Coca Cola went so far
as creating their own brand of water – leveraging their existing distribution
networks for sales.

The developed world has moved on from water purely as a
necessity to water as also a desirable and fashionable consumable and
accessory. Water resources for basic needs are managed, conserved, and
rationed. More sophisticated technology to desalinate water is being developed.

Our technology is ramshackle water tankers creaking, rattling,
and leaking their way between their depots and private deliveries to the water
storage tanks of homes and offices. The streak of darkened wet tarmac marks the
trail of their passage on our roads.

The criminals have also gotten in on the act. While the
government and civil society are fighting to ensure the availability of basic
potable water, the established bottled water brands and distributors are
combating ‘pirates’ who refill used bottles with untreated water, recreate the
seal, and resell them as genuine.

More than one glass of red wine a day is injurious to the health. Other
alcohol clouds our minds. Packaged fruit juices, minerals and sodas are
fattening. The caffeine in tea and coffee over-stimulates our hearts. It is
best to go the natural route. Drink clean, odourless, sweet water!

The latest development in men’s trousers in the United States is
a cut that shapes the male hip. In an article titled New Angle on Trousers by
David Coleman in the New York Times of February 26, last year the author
explains that American men in the past were “terrified’ of wearing pants that
looked tight.

But a new wave of fitness and body consciousness has changed
that and led to a couple of manufacturers adjusting to meet the demand for
pants cut to “flatter not flatten.” All of which takes one back to the queen of
soul, Ms Aretha Franklin and that resurgent album of hers with the song Freeway
of love, and makes you wonder who was her muse?

“Knew you’d be a vision in white How d’you get those pants so
tight ” Of course down here in the tropics we might say, “it’s not the cut of
the pants ma bru!” When I was 11, my father explained to me the science behind
the agbada, long, flowing robes that allowed the air to move around your body.
Loose, breathable cotton surrounding you, made into boubous, bubas, gbariyes
and wrappas, provided a barrier against the direct heat of the sun, protecting
the skin and absorbing the sweat. Call it African sense, as opposed to a
Western concept of cool being wearing as little as possible as tight as
possible.

It turns out that what was ‘missing” in American style pants was
what is known as European cut, closer to the body and more precise fit in
pattern drafting and construction.

One man who knew about fit was the late jazz musician Miles
Davis. In a memorable piece published in September of 2001 Elvis Mitchell wrote
about Davis’ attention to detail in the cut, cloth, look and feel of his
clothes. When Davis met Joe Eula, he was struck by the way he dressed. Eula
designed his own clothes with the help of his tailor Joe Emsley.

When Emsley subsequently fulfilled Davis’ request that he make
him a suit he could wear on stage, the jacket had to be constructed so that
when Davis bent his arms to play the shirtsleeve would be exposed, one inch and
no more, to show off his custom made shirt and cuff links. Likewise, the pants
had to brush the tips of his handmade shoes.

Mr. Davis was something of a showman. Everything had to be tight
literally and musically. At his tailor’s, Miles would assume the position he
would on stage with his instrument so that the measurements would be exact, the
effect precise. The suit designed by Emsley was the basis of the linear drawing
of Miles with his trumpet for the album Sketches of Spain.

Just as an exercise I googled Asian Cut and found references to
an edition of the American television cop show, Miami Vice and a complaint from
a gentleman irritated by the fact that black and white barbers did not learn
how to cut Asian hair.

African Cut yielded a slew of websites on the South African
diamond industry and Chinese companies selling something called African Cut
Lace to you can guess whom.

Looking to hone down my search I typed African Cut Clothes and
discovered that in 2002 the value of second hand American clothes exported to
Africa was $ 59.3 million according to the International Trade Commission. Out
of this total, Ugandans bought $2.3 millions worth, which was 81% of clothes
purchased in that country. The manufacturers complained that this was killing
the Ugandan clothes industry.

The response of an official from US Trade was, “the reason this
market is so huge is because most people live on a dollar a day”. You could
describe this as a case of different measurements for different worlds.

There is an African cut to pants even if Google has no access to
it and there are variations and styles that combine different elements in
length, width, pocket placement and style. The shape of the “African” hip,
which is key here, is multidimensional in men and women, necessitating a fuller
cut and deeper rise.

There are tailors who make masterfully cut African style men’s
clothes and have learnt to handle a variety of suiting fabrics. By and large
there are fewer examples of “Aba” cut men’s pants with that highflying crotch
and asymmetrically leaning hems that look as if a carpenter had a go at them.
These are trousers that aped the medium rise construction of European Cut for
bodies that had nothing to do with Europe.

But no more, it’s time to come home, even in America, change is
taking all kinds of shapes.

Dear Mr. Adoke (SAN),

Please accept my congratulations on your recent appointment as
the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice.

As AGF, it is your responsibility to ensure that the government
complies with its obligation under section 172 of the 1999 Constitution to
“abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power” and with similar obligations
in international law. It is against this background that I bring to your
attention the matter of James Ibori, which provides you with a perfect
opportunity to put into action your recent declaration that “there would be no
sacred cows” in the all important fight against corruption.

You will be aware of the ongoing trials of Mr. Ibori’s associates
for conspiracy to commit money laundering and money laundering at the Southwark
Crown, London. The Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (‘MLAT’) between Nigeria and
the United Kingdom requires both countries toafford each other, upon request,
mutual assistance in criminal matters, including obtaining evidence and
extraditing suspects. Similar obligations also arise under the United Nations
Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which was ratified by Nigeria and the UK
in 2004 and 2006 respectively.

Despite these obligations, Mr. Aondoakaa refused a request by the
UK government under the MLAT to extradite Mr. Ibori to the UK to take part in
the ongoing prosecutions of his associates. He was quoted in Vanguard newspaper
of November 21, 2007 as defending his decision not to extradite Ibori on the
grounds that “a trial in any other jurisdiction other than Nigeria would
inevitably tarnish the image of Nigeria as a nationand send the message that
the integrity of its criminal justice system cannot be relied upon.”

Mr. Aondoakaa’s decision on these purported grounds is at best
ignorant and at worst dishonest. It is unclear whether he considered the damage
that violations of international obligations would have on Nigeria’s image. In
the event, the dismissal of the charges against Ibori purportedly for lack of
evidence by Justice Marcel Awokulehin of the Asaba High Court has damaged the
integrity of Nigeria’s criminal justice system.

Under the circumstances, extraditing Mr. Ibori to the UK as a
matter of urgency to participate in the criminal proceedings that are primarily
against him will send the right signals both to Nigerians and the international
community about the Acting President’s stated zero tolerance policy on
corruption.

You will also be aware that Mr. Aondoakaa also refused to
authorise the use of evidence obtained from the Economic and Financial Crimes
Commission (EFCC) by officers of the Metropolitan Police who had travelled to
Nigeria for that purpose.

This considerable body of evidence was obtained pursuant to two
letters of request under the MLAT. The first, dated 23 August 2006, was issued
when Mr. Bayo Ojo was Attorney-General of the Federation. The second, dated
August 2007, was issued under Mr. Aondoakaa’s watch.

At the preparatory hearing at the Southwark Crown Court in
October 2008 to consider the admissibility of this evidence Judge Rivlin
confirmed that “there has been no communication from the former
Attorney-General Mr. Bayo Ojo in relation to the first letter of request in
2006”. Consequently, he held that there was “nothing to suggest that the
material so gained should not be used in a criminal trial in this country.”
However, in relation to the evidence obtained following the second letter of
request, he ruled that Mr. Aondoakaa never agreed that it should be handed over
to the UK authorities for use in criminal proceedings. Accordingly, the judge
ruled, with “considerable reluctance”, that this evidence would be inadmissible
in UK courts without Mr. Aondoakaa’s approval.

Consequently, eleven boxes containing copies of this evidence
were delivered to Mr. Aondoakaa by the UK authorities in late 2008 for his
approval but Mr. Aondoakaa refused to approve the use of this vital evidence.

As a result, although the evidence obtained following the first
letter of request, which Mr. Bayo Ojo did not object to, was allowed to the Crown
for use in the ongoing trials of Mr. Ibori’s associates, the eleven boxes of
evidence obtained following the second letter of request are not being used in
these proceedings because Mr. Aondoakaa refused to authorise their use.
Consequently, should James Ibori be extradited, this significant body of
evidence will also not be available to the Crown in his prosecution, unless you
authorise its use.

As the decision to approve this evidence now falls to you as the
central authority under the MLAT, I am confident you will fulfil the Nigerian
people’s expectations and follow the good example of Bayo Ojo by approving the
use of this evidence.

Yours sincerely

Osita Mba