Much Ado About Onaiyekan And Emilokan – By Simon Kọ́láwọlé

By Simon Kọ́láwọlé

Am I the only Nigerian alive who is neither surprised nor stunned by the drama that played out between President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Cardinal John Olorunfemi Onaiyekan, the archbishop emeritus of Abuja? The Catholic Bishops Conference of Nigeria (CBCN) had held a closed-door meeting with the president at the presidential villa. Initially, what we saw thereafter were short videos of Tinubu talking about his administration’s achievements, pointing out that a four-year undergraduate course now runs for four years because of the end of perennial strikes, insisting that INEC is not biased as alleged, and adding that he would not give his opponents a rope to hang him.
Onaiyekan later appeared on Charles Aniagolu’s programme on ARISE TV to reveal the details of the meeting, saying they told Tinubu the “home truths” about economic hardship, insecurity and the state of our democracy. He said: “When the nation is bleeding, you cannot expect a polite meeting with the head of state. We told him the economy is not helping our poor people; he told us the economy is doing fine. Frankly speaking, he told us quite clearly that he did not agree with us. We didn’t expect him to agree with us. We have done our duty, we have delivered our message, and we have a feeling that, somehow, along the line, somebody will show him a few of the things we said.”
By the way, “Emilokan”, the word famously uttered by Tinubu in June 2022 while venting at those trying to frustrate his presidential bid, and “Onaiyekan” — a contraction of “oni aiye kan”, also rendered as “eni aiye kan” — roughly mean the same thing: “my turn”. But that is where the similarity ends. Tinubu is from the south-west, Onaiyekan is from the north-central. Tinubu is a Muslim, Onaiyekan is a Christian. Tinubu is of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Onaiyekan is of the Nigerian church establishment that brands the ruling party as Islamic — or even Islamist. I thought I was missing something when the bishops visited him. I was not surprised at how it ended.
But what did the bishops say that riled up Tinubu’s supporters so much? Is there economic hardship in the land or not? If it were possible to remove fuel subsidy and the people would not suffer, President Muhammadu Buhari would have done it. He kept the subsidy for years, borrowed trillions to pay for it and at a point mortgaged future oil revenues to import petrol at N500/litre and sell at N185/litre because he was worried about the masses. They would be disproportionately impacted. He knew the subsidy was unsustainable but dragged his feet on its removal. The delay plunged Nigeria into a dire fiscal crisis. The masses still suffered. But some people call it the good old days.
The very first thing Tinubu did upon assumption of office was to announce the death of fuel subsidy. The price of petrol tripled immediately. Transportation costs followed accordingly. Prices of goods and services went along the same trajectory. You cannot end a subsidy regime that Nigerians had been living on since the 1970s and expect that there would be no hardship. Tinubu followed suit by ending the distortions in the forex market and the inevitable outcome was a plunge in the value of the naira. In an import-dependent (some prefer the euphemism, “export-deficient”) country, the cost of living would invariably head for the skies. Economic hardship was automatic. It was inescapable.
The absolute truth, of course, is that reforms come with pains. Onaiyekan said Tinubu disagreed with them about the economic hardship and insisted that the economy was doing fine. It is true that after the initial shocks of 2023 to 2024, there has been some macro-economic stability since 2025 as can be seen in the stability of the naira, GDP growth, stock market boom and improved performance in oil production and non-oil exports. But the question many of us have been asking is: when will the burden on ordinary Nigerians be lightened? Without minimising their concerns, Tinubu could have assured them he was not unaware of the problems and challenges that come with such reforms.
Tinubu could have expressly admitted that reforms indeed bring pains but that in due season, we will reap if we faint not. Good things take time. Nothing is called gold until it passes through fire. I do not think Tinubu talked rudely to the bishops, but the subsequent response of his supporters did not help matters. It is the duty of the government and its agents to sell Tinubu’s policies to the people without being argumentative or confrontational. I do not think they needed to respond to Onaiyekan at all — or in the tone with which they did. There is no doubt that Tinubu is cocksure he is on the right path in charting a course for the economy, but he owes Nigerians assurances at every turn.
The bishops, Onaiyekan said, also raised the issue of the democratic space. When the opposition figures came together early this year to coalesce under the African Democratic Congress (ADC), their slogan was “Nigerian democracy is in danger”. I would not be surprised if Tinubu viewed the bishops’ opinion as “Esau’s hand, Jacob’s voice”. Tinubu has been blamed by the opposition for the crises in their parties, some curious court rulings, and some of the actions taken by INEC. He probably suspected that the bishops were also accusing him of being the unseen hand. The way he pushed back came across as saying: “Back to sender. Go and tell my opponents all is fair in politics!”
Actually, Mr Peter Obi, the presidential candidate of the Nigeria Democratic Congress (NDC), is a Catholic. He was clearly the preferred candidate of the Nigerian church establishment in 2023. Pulpits were used to mobilise for him. In fact, Mr Simon Lalong, then governor of Plateau state and a knight of the Catholic Church, was asked to step down as the director-general of the APC “Muslim-Muslim” presidential campaign council. He retorted that even the Pope had not told him he was wrong. This was considered blasphemous and he had to tender a written apology to the bishops. He also openly begged for forgiveness at a Catholic archdiocese event in Jos, saying he was only human.
I would think Tinubu seized the opportunity of the visit to send his own message to the Catholic bishops, something like: “We all know your chosen candidate. Don’t come here and be forming neutral.” Nevertheless, Tinubu could have handled his response quite differently. Saying “all is fair in politics” sounds like an admission that he has a hand in those crises. All cannot be fair in politics. There are ingredients that make for delicious democracy: a level playing field, fair play and competition. Any democracy that is devoid of these ingredients will not be palatable. Our democracy will get better if Nigerians see themselves as genuine stakeholders with realistic choices and chances.
Finally, for as long as bandits, terrorists and insurgents continue to kidnap and kill hapless Nigerians, the security question will continue to be asked. Yes, Tinubu is doubling his efforts, but it is the results that will count in the end. The bishops represent a community that believes it is being targeted by Islamists, even though the victims cut across religions. In fact, sections of the Christian community believe that the APC is behind the killings. This was popularly framed as “Islamisation” and “Fulanisation” under Buhari and now reframed as “Christian genocide” under Tinubu. Lest we forget, the APC is again fielding a Muslim-Muslim ticket in 2027. This is a no-no to the church establishment.
Above all, I am happy the bishops spoke frankly to Tinubu. Even if some of them are decidedly biased against him because they have their own favourite presidential candidates, they are still a major stakeholder in the polity and their voices should be heard and respected. They, in fact, said nothing new — we say all these things all the time on social media and in newspapers every day. But the calibre of the messengers can also help. It does not matter if they said these things out of envy and strife — or out of goodwill. They are things that must be said all the same. They are things that the president must hear. And they are things the president must ruminate over and take necessary steps.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…
EFCC AND OSUN

President Tinubu basically threw the EFCC under the bus on Thursday when he publicly ordered the unfreezing of Osun state government’s bank account. I agree that the freezing, coming after the arrest and detention of leaders of the ruling Accord party, came across as political — no matter the justification. But the EFCC did not act outside its powers. The law allows it to freeze suspicious accounts for 72 hours before getting a court order. Should the president be stopping the EFCC from doing its job? Would this public scolding not undermine the anti-graft agency? Will other suspects under investigation or trial not now gang up and launch a campaign against the EFCC? Precedent.

PROLIFIC PRINCE

Thanks to the revelations from different probes, we can now conclude that Prince Adeyemi Adeniyi, the disowned DG of the disowned Presidential Foreign Investment Promotion Council (PFIPC), is a prolific creator of sundry machinations. Submitting his probe report to President Tinubu on Thursday, Mr Musa Aliyu, the ICPC chairman, alleged that Adeniyi created two other agencies that we were not even aware of: the FCT Investment Promotion Agency (FIPA) and the Foreign Investment Promotion Agency/Public-Private Partnership (FIPA-PPP). We are eager to hear and read more about the adventures of the prince. Why is the house of reps afraid to allow Adeniyi testify openly? Suspicious.

INFAMOUS INFANTINO

Advertisement
Gianni Infantino, FIFA president, has finally put himself in a bind after shamelessly licking the boots of US President Donald Trump. When he was busy creating and awarding the FIFA peace prize to Trump, nullifying the red card issued to Folarin Balogun, the USA striker, at the World Cup, and doing several things that brought the world football governing body into disrepute, Infantino probably thought there was no extent he could not go. His opponents waited for him. And then he woke up and unilaterally started designing a scheme to sell stakes in the World Cup. That was the final straw. Minus Africa and his other sycophants, he now faces the daunting task of retaining his job. Disgrace.

NO COMMENT
Nigeria seems to be attracting some unwanted foreign investors. If it is not meth production, it is mineral resources. A federal high court sitting in Lagos on Thursday convicted two Chinese nationals, Zhang Hong Lin and Gao Pei Hai, for illegally mining and exporting Nigeria’s mineral resources. Justice Akintayo Aluko convicted them on a five-count charge and ordered the forfeiture of all the mineral resources recovered from them to the federal government. In addition, the judge sentenced Zhang and Gao to 25 years’ imprisonment each. However, before you begin to shout hallelujah, he also gave them the option of paying a fine of N10 million. If it were you, which would you choose? Hahahaha…