…also
published in Daily Trust
Though
conscience is inherent in man, ability to behave accordingly obviously differs
from one man to another. Also, though
everyone can pretend to be a person of conscience, only time and circumstances
will tell a real man of conscience from a charlatan. Besides, the fact that no
one today can rightly claim the ability to maintain a perfect commitment to his
conscience all the time, explains individuals’ points of strength and weakness in
this regard.
With
its complicated socio-economic and political challenges, Nigeria’s public
sphere has always featured many supposedly principled public affairs analysts
and critics analyzing the causes of its various challenges, proffering solutions
and advocating good governance and accountability.
Prior
to the internet age, the sphere was dominated by newspaper columnists, academics
and civil society activists. Today, however, with the proliferation of internet-based
platforms where everyone can effortlessly publish his thoughts at will, the
sphere is awash with all types of analyses, criticisms and solution proposals.
Yet,
there have always been some public affairs analysts who have always enjoyed public
confidence as, supposedly, principled and patriotic individuals thanks to their
apparently constructive criticisms, anti-corruption stands, exhaustive analyses
of issues and, of course, sophisticated literary styles.
This
isn’t surprising because a typical public affairs analyst of this calibre would
always sound so principled that one would swear that when he gets the
opportunity to hold a position of authority, he would prove too honest to
tolerate corruption, let alone take part in it. He would also always sound so
competent that one would equally swear that when he is brought into the
corridors of power to hold a position of authority, he would simply dust off
his written columns and articles and begin to put into practice all the
solutions he had proffered and the development ideas he had written over the
years, to completely turn things around in the particular government
institution under his supervision or direct administration.
Over
the decades, many reputable public affairs analysts and critics have at various
points been appointed by successive federal and state governments in the
country, to head various government institutions and agencies. Some of them
have been ministers, managing directors, director generals, commissioners, advisers
etc. Some have even somehow managed to secure elective offices to become
senators, members of the House of Representatives at the federal level, and legislators
in their respective states.
However,
obviously the corridors of power in the country have persistently proved to be
the graveyard of conscience, patriotism and development ideas. Because, with
the exception of a very few real men of conscience, all those supposedly principled
and patriotic critics, firebrand academics and civil society comrades appointed
to hold different positions of authority at various points have always appeared
to lose their wonderful ideas and indeed their respective consciences as well, if
they actually had it in the first place.
A
typical unscrupulous and manipulative opportunist cunningly
pursuing selfish interests has enough patience to keep faking commitment to
conscience and patriotism for as long as it takes to get him into the corridors
of power where he would, in no time, quietly vanish into its comfort
and begin to be part of the normal business to eventually blend into the largely
corrupt elite he had always castigated. He would lay low therein resonating
only when it’s absolutely unavoidable, in total contrast to the situation when
he was advocating good governance. Sometime one would even wonder if he is
actually still active publicly. Yet, as soon as he loses his job and his
privileged access to the corridors of power, he shamelessly begins to resume
his advocacy for accountability. Instances
of this trend are simply too many to count.
Incidentally,
though some few may perform relatively well or better than their predecessors,
yet their respective performances would remain largely overshadowed by the
sheer amount of public expectations, thanks to their hitherto holier- than-thou
style when condemning their predecessors, and their obvious know-it-all
attitude when proffering solutions to the country challenges. This is because prior
to their appointments they had been unnecessarily too idealistic in their criticisms
paying little or no attention to the country’s peculiar underlying challenges
and systemic constraints. Consequently, having inadvertently conditioned the public
mindset to rightly expect them to, once they are in power, deliver exactly what
they used to preach, their performances would always fall short of public
expectations.
Besides,
unlike what obtains elsewhere where public office holders with real commitment
to their consciences simply quit whenever they face persistent pressure or
temptation to compromise their respective principles, in Nigeria, most of those
appointed to hold positions of authority based on their perceived integrity as,
say, supposedly principled critics, actually never try to operate according to
their supposed principles in the first place, let alone consider voluntary
resignation no matter the amount of illegal practices perpetrated under their watch.
No comments:
Post a Comment