Date Published: 03/18/10

How is the President? By Uche Ohia

One question which Dr. Goodluck Jonathan, Acting President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria would have come to dread by now is “How is the President?” How does he respond to such an apparently innocuous question? What does Jonathan say to other sovereigns or anyone at all that enquires after the health condition, state or well-being of his ailing principal, President Umar YarÁdua? Does he confess that he has not set his eyes on the President since November 23, 2009 when the man was spirited out of the country to Saudi Arabia in search of remedies to his lingering health condition? Would he admit that he has not seen the president since he returned or was returned to Abuja in the wee hours of February 26, 2010? What does he say to enquiries about President YarÁdua?

An easy way out may be to use the response used daily by millions of ordinary Nigerians, meaning law abiding citizens condemned to live ordinary lives by the extraordinary greed of their leaders. To any enquiry about a relation, friend or associate whose well - being they cannot readily vouch for, the response in pidgin English is “e dey!” This could mean anything from ‘he is there’ to ‘he is ok’.  But will protocol permit Jonathan to give such a vague response?

When a man is acting for another, he should be able to speak for him. Jonathan should have the final word on the present condition of the President. But how does he sincerely speak for someone he has not seen? How does the acting President of a country keep a straight face and give an answer about the condition of a principal that he does not know about first hand? How does one president give to another that has made an enquiry - whether out of courtesy, curiosity or concern - a response that both know is not true?

That is the millstone that hangs not only on Jonathan’s neck but on the neck of Nigerians at home and in diaspora. Nothing can be more embarrassing; nothing can be more disorienting. A situation where the de facto leader cannot see his principal is, to say the least, a psychological torment. It is deflating and dispiriting. Like having an apparition or a ghost breathing down one’s neck, the mere thought of it is unnerving. The result is visible in the polity. All around, there is an air of uncertainty. On top of all uncertainties is the uncertainty about the role concerned citizens should rightfully play in the present imbroglio.

But no situation no matter how adverse can be without beneficiaries. The Igbos have a saying: “Ala adighi nma wu uru ndi nze” (When there is crisis in the land, it benefits the elites). Already the YarÁdua saga has spawned a thriving club of writers, professional rejoinders, advocates, defenders, commentators, authors of advertorials and the like. Some people are smiling to the banks. But no one, as yet, can give a good answer to the question “How is President YarÁdua”.

It is well for Jonathan to focus on confronting some of the most compelling challenges of the nation such as power and energy, security, electoral reforms, corruption, etc as many have argued. Some even contend that Jonathan does not have to see YarÁdua because at the end of the day, he would be judged by the way he handles the challenges facing the nation rather than whether or not he saw YarÁdua. In other words, it does not matter whether Yarádua is visible or not.

But is it possible to achieve stability in an atmosphere in which rumour and apprehension reign supreme? Few serious foreign partners would, normally, deal in an air of uncertainty. In any case, how will this tale sound fifty years from now? How will posterity look upon this travesty? However compassionate anyone may be towards the filial bond between spouses, whatever intrigues may be at play, holding a leader incommunicado raises many questions.

Has the president been abandoned to his fate in his greatest hour of need? Is the president receiving the best attention irrespective of whether he is conscious or conscious? Is the president being held hostage? Is the president a helpless pawn in the chess board of political intrigues? Has the nation done enough to protect the president from the intended and unintended consequences of this political ding dong over which he, obviously, has little control?

Some people tend to hold the first lady, Turai (as opposed to the acting First Lady) responsible for the current impasse while others contend that she should be left alone to nurse her husband back to good health. Some people have written to say that keeping vigil around the villa is unnecessary meaning that it does not matter whether the president is seen or not. However one looks at it, the indefinite detention of any sovereign even on medical grounds by anyone including his closest family is not only a national embarrassment but a gratuitous insult to national pride.

To reassure Nigerians and the international community who have been given various unflattering impressions by the on-going saga it is important that the acting president, the chief justice of Nigeria, the senate president, and the speaker of the House of Representatives should have access to President Yarádua even for a brief moment. That is a hurdle which the Presidential Advisory Council and the new National Security Adviser, Aliyu Gusau, must find a way of crossing. Seeing him will act as a balm on the national psyche that has been bruised.

Of course, the health condition of the head of any country has serious implications for that country’s national security, economy, and political stability. What is true or right may not always be expedient. Managing such information to deflate uncertainty, apprehension and rumour requires diplomacy of the type exemplified in the following anecdote: a man stole a rooster and put it in a bag. As he walked along the village pathway to make a get-away, some children who suspected that he had stolen the fowl followed him. They accused him of stealing a fowl and, despite his denials, continued to follow him in growing numbers. Some picked up stones, others picked up sticks.

Seeing himself about to become the victim of a mob, the suspect hastily approached an old man he saw coming in the opposite direction and pleaded thus: Nna anyi (our father), these youngsters are abusing and accusing me of stealing a fowl. Please use the eye that an old man uses to look intro a bag and look into this bag and say whether there is any chicken inside.

Seeing the impending danger and the innuendo contained in the plea, the old man peered knowingly into the bag, stared sternly at the youngsters and said: “why are you abusing and harassing an innocent man? There is no chicken in this bag!” Perplexed, the children instantly dispersed. uchebush@yahoo.com; 0805 1090 050