The presidency and the power to impose travel ban By Rotimi Fasan

IN one sense the news that President Muhammadu Buhari plans to impose travel restriction on Ayodele Fayose and Nyesom Wike, respectively governors of Ekiti and Rivers states, seems to have come from nowhere. It simply stood out there and you’re left wondering where it came from or what could have informed it.

On the other hand, when you consider that these governors or their states appear to be the arrowhead and stronghold of the Peoples Democratic Party, main opposition to the governing All Progressives Congress, then it may begin to make a little sense why such thoughts might be contemplated. When it’s also considered that Fayose has been an unrelenting critic of both the person of President Buhari and his government, then people might fully understand how, in the Nigerian context, somebody might want to move against such an individual even though a governor.

That then is the other sense in which the reported plan of the president to restrict the right of these two men to travel outside the country using the Department of State Security may begin to make some meaning- at least to a Nigerian, not citizens of countries where democracy is the norm and the right of free expression is indeed guaranteed. Perhaps, the whole idea of a travel ban is nothing but a red herring without any foundation in reality. Which may explain why Abuja has studiously ignored it without a comment. But to say that may be taking assumption too far because the Buhari government is like the president himself- taciturn. There is always a grey zone to its position on issues given its refusal or failure to explain itself. It says little next to nothing and tends to leave unexplained issues that should be clearly explained to the understanding of even the most concerned and best informed supporters to say nothing of the uninterested majority who would nevertheless criticise.

While a responsible government cannot waste its time responding to any rubbish somebody somewhere may choose to make a press war, it must sufficiently avail itself of every opportunity to make its stand on issues clear. Once it does this, it can thereafter ignore any other irrelevancies. But the Buhari administration has been outstandingly remiss in this regard. And this has more to do with the president himself, his natural disinclination to communicate openly, rather choosing to do so via what people now call body language, than with his press handlers. Indeed his handlers have a tough row to clear given their principal’s disinclination to talk or choosing to do so via body language which is no replacement for clear, unambiguous explanation.

His saying too little many times appears arrogant which may not necessarily be his intention. But who is to tell what his intentions are when there is so little said? Nobody, much less a leader, should feel too important or unable to communicate with those they lead. Where no explanation is offered the field is left open for all kinds of speculations. Who knows if what the rumour mill is shunning out is just the handiwork of some busybody without the president’s authorisation?

Yet, who is to tell who is up to what when and where all is dead silence? Who can read the mind of the government? The travel ban proposition is as bizarre as they could come and one only needs to ask what would be the purpose of such restriction and if it would be an appropriate response to the unrelenting criticism of Buhari by Fayose. I’m inclined to think that the inclusion of Nyesom Wike to the alleged plan may be just a mere detail. Ayo Fayose is the target of that plan if such plan indeed exists. But this doesn’t make it any less bizarre.

For one, the governor has not been accused and found guilty of any criminal act. Even if that’s the case, Section 308 of the Nigerian Constitution provides immunity cover for him as it does for the president. Which means unless he chooses to wave that right, there is hardly anything anyone can do to him until and unless he leaves office. And if history is any judge, no governor, not even those that like sin have been convicted of one malfeasance or another have ever waved their immunity. Possible reasons for the travel restriction? That Fayose has never pretended to be a fan of the president or this government before and after he/it was inaugurated? Yes! In the absence of any proven case of criminality or treasonable offence, the only reason anyone in the Buhari administration may want to restrict the movement of Fayose would be because of his constant attack of Buhari.

Which still does not make the imposition of a travel ban an appropriate response. For one, the presidency has a vast array of means, far more than anything at the disposal of the governor, through which it could counter any attack, real or imagined, against it. Beyond this to seek to impose a travel ban would seem to suggest that Fayose truly is on point and has always been right about his many criticisms of the government of Buhari. Some of his criticisms have been very correct even when coloured with drama; and so have many been off point especially when they fail to distinguish between the person of the president and his official action.

Otherwise, a credible response would not take the form of a gag order through the convoluted means of a travel restriction. This smacks of intolerance which is not a trademark of democracy. For all we know, Buhari’s mature response to Fayose may yet be the most credible advertisement of his subscription to democratic principles. He could use Fayose as a barometre, a measuring rod for the performance of his government, knowing as many now do that he is one of the most truculent critics of his administration, likely to exaggerate rather than play down the shortcomings of his government.

A leader may feel stymied sometimes by the relentless badgering of a stubborn critic but it is the hallmark of a democrat to listen and make use of that which can help enhance his performance. To seek to silence opposition voices cannot at all be helpful to a former military ruler turned civilian president but one who still has a hard time convincing many die in the wool opponents that he is now a democrat both in action and orientation. Fayose has not always been magnanimous in his criticisms of Buhari. But the president can turn that to an advantage. He can pay attention to many of his messages without considering the messenger or the drama that clouds his messages. But above this all, the president can be less humourless.