The soothing wind of change sweeping across the land seems to have affected public discourse. The words we use and the way we use them have, no doubt, conveyed, deliberately or otherwise, the change that our leaders are preaching so much so that I am damn sure that language experts must now have their hands full.
But, before we proceed, a clarification. The idea of this column is not original to me. Respected journalism teacher Olatunji Dare patented it in his Rutam House days when he was Chairman of the Editorial Board/OPED Editor, with his “Matters lexical” passing comments on vital issues of those days when soldiers were in charge. Thankfully, the “khaki boys” – as our then leaders were derogatorily referred to by “bloody civilians” who detested the way they ran the show- are back in the barracks.
Consider President Muhammadu Buhari’s speech at the yearly Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) conference in Abuja in which His Excellency urged lawyers to stop defending “crooks” and “looters” so as to strengthen the war against “corruption”.
Of course, we all knew the battle that raged endlessly among the elite over the seemingly simple definition of “corruption” and “stealing” in the recent past. So complex were the intellectual duels the matter generated that till now we can not say for sure who carried the day.
Pardon the digression. Unknown to President Buhari, he had set off a huge debate. “How do we know ‘crooks’ and ‘looters’ before they are so labelled by the courts?” some lawyers asked dejectedly. “Isn’t an accused presumed to be innocent until he is proven guilty? Ei incumbit protatio qui dicit non qui negat.” “Isn’t everybody entitled to defence, in the principle of fair hearing?” “How do we earn a good living if we presume that all big clients are “looters”? “Where is the age-old principle: he who alleges must prove?”
Others argued: “If a public official is living above his means, do we need to go to court to establish that he is a “looter”? When does a “looter” become a “crook”? Is it after he has stolen billions and he is able to hire an army of Senior Advocates when he is called to account? What maketh a “thief “ and a “crook”? What constitutes “loot”? Millions? Billions? In dollars or naira?
The fireworks are still on, I am told. But, learned gentlemen, should there be any obfuscation? The President was simply reacting to situations in which lawyers go to court to ground the wheel of justice, filing motions upon motions and securing perpetual injunctions as well as long adjournments that make corruption cases conclusively inconclusive, thereby obstructing justice and fuelling “graft”.
The word “corruption” seems to be yielding space to “graft” in the newspapers. Why? Is it for its length or ease of pronunciation? I really do not know now. My worry was compounded the other day when embattled FIFA President Sepp Blatter insisted that there was no “corruption” in football even as several officials of the organisation had been arrested as part of the massive probe into how hosting the World Cup may have been bought.
The phrase “hit the ground running” has also dominated public discourse since Buhari mounted the saddle on May 29. Some critics have called him “Baba Go Slow”. He acknowledged this but insisted that he would rather go slowly and get it right than rushing things and failing. It has since been discovered that some of those shouting do not know the meaning of the expression. Imagine somebody saying the other day that “should Buhari hit the ground and hurt his foot, how will he run?”
The fuel queues have disappeared. Electricity has improved and Boko Haram is feeling the heat. Many corruption cases have been investigated and suspects taken to court. All in about 100 days. How else do you “hit the ground running?” Has Buhari not worked hard and successfully at governance?
A newspaper headline yesterday read: “How Wike hits the ground running in Rivers”. Does Wike “hit the ground everyday?” The writer listed some of His Excellency’s achievements, including a housing project and roads. He forgot to add the probe of former Governor Rotimi Amaechi. Is that not a landmark achievement of a governor who has hit the ground running?”
In the same newspaper, right opposite the Wike story another writer assessed Cross River State Governor Prof. Ben Ayade’s 100 days in office, “declaring that the governor has hit the ground running”.
Among today’s popular words, “quiz” and “grill” number. The anti-graft agencies, held down by stronger powers, seem to have found their long-lost form. Suddenly. Many high profile cases are being filed and heard. Former Head of Service Steve Oronsaye has had his day in court. So have former governors Ikedi Ohakim, Murtala Nyako and Sule Lamido.
Former Immigration chief David Parradang has been “quizzed” over the bloody jobs scandal, which many thought had been killed and buried. By the way, “interrogation” seems to have lost its potency to “grill” and “quiz”. Again, I do not know why. I leave it all to lexicographers and etymologists.
Does the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) actually “grill” its guests like fish tossed into the oven? Do they sweat? Do reporters use the word “grill” when a guest spends hours at the agency’s office? Does “quiz” apply to those who stroll in, escorted by a crowd of busybodies, and come out a few minutes after? I really can’t tell.
Talking about the anti-graft war, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has been howling that its members have been the target. In fact, the other day, PDP spokesman Olisa Metuh accused Buhari of running a “dictatorship”. But, needless to say, that was no popular view. Before the anti-graft agencies began to pick up suspects, Buhari, to the PDP, was slow. Now he is a “dictator”. Who knows, Metuh, who now has so much time for a research, may be teaching us a few things on the etymology of the word “dictatorship”. Whoever says being in opposition has no gain.
You will recall that as soon as Buhari took office, he declared his “assets” in the way and manner specified by the Code of Conduct Bureau. But some critics insisted that he should make the declaration public. His spokesman Femi Adesina said the President would do so within 100 days.
Buhari has kept his word. So has Vice President Yemi Osinbajo. Among Buhari’s belongings are two mud houses, 270 head of cattle, 25 sheep, birds and trees, among others. Now, the critics, obviously those who still feel the pains of losing power, are crying that Buhari and Osinbajo should also “declare” their liabilities. Is that what the law says? To what purpose will that be? How about asking our PDP chiefs why they never made public their “assets”? Can they do so now, if for nothing but to show their sincerity and strengthen their claim that they never shortchanged Nigerians?
Senator Shehu Sani, following Buhari’s and Osinbajo’s example, made public his “assets”. Among them were his two wives. He immediately set off a debate. Wives? Why “declare” their number, thereby widening the scope of this exercise to a seemingly uncomfortable level? If the electorate insist on knowing how many wives our politicians have, will they not think the size of an aspirant’s harem will dictate how prudent he will be if he gets elected? How many politicians can “declare” their women as “assets” and not “liabilities”? Are our women-activists comfortable with a politician declaring his wives as “assets” as if they are some property or commodities?
Anyway, the verb “declare” is fast yielding its use as an expression of interest in an office, such as “declare for governor” and “declare for Come and Chop Party of Nigeria” to the phrase “assets declaration”. In the immediate past administration, it was never used in relation to “assets” or “liabilities”. But that is not to say it never featured; it did so often when military chiefs were not sure whether to “declare” just a “war” or “total war” on Boko Haram–as they threatened several times before getting the push.
And talking about the war, Boko Haram now knows “a new Sheriff is in town”. Oh yes!
NATION
END
Be the first to comment