BETWEEN WHISTLEBLOWING/MUDSLINGING, ACTIVISM/VENDETTA, SOCIAL CRITICISM/BLACKMAIL AND ALL OF US: SAMUELSON IWUOHA AND KENNETH UWADI IN PERSPECTIVE By ONWUASOANYA FCC JONES, 08035828819. The most topical issue within the spheres of socio-political discussions in the last few weeks in Imo State has been the Samuelson Iwuoha versus Speaker Uwajimogu saga. The former has been bombarding the media with several allegations of mind blowing malfeasance against the latter, since he was ‘edged’ out of office in December, 2013. I had earlier published a first part of an article which I tagged: SAMUELSON IWUOHA VERSUS SPEAKER UWAJIMOGU SAGA: THE TRUE STORY (1). This particular essay is not the concluding part of that earlier article, that one will come after the House of Assembly has concluded its investigations on the allegations against the Speaker of the House and some of his colleagues. This is an entirely different essay with the primary focus of re-educating myself and my Comrades, especially Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha and his ghostly friend, Kenneth Uwadi on the real meanings, demands, differences, and also businesses of activism and its concomitants, vis a vis; whistleblowing, social criticism and social crusading. In a latter article, I will attempt to dig deeper into the more extreme types of these humanitarian vocations like; militancy, civil resistance, social rebellion, conscientious objection and civil disobedience. Do not ask me if I have plans of going into those extremes, myself. I am getting convinced with the break of everyday that most of those who call themselves activists have hardly taken out time to educate themselves on the principles that guide this vocation. I am also disappointed beyond words that Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha whom I had so much regard for as a consequence of my erroneous conviction that he was a real social crusader does not even have the slightest idea about what social crusading or activism is. I have made up my mind to completely forgive his sabotage against the integrity of this revered vocation because I am convinced that he is ignorant of what he claimed to be. This essay is also a direct response to some of the people who have confronted me through lengthy phone calls, face to face discussions, social media interactions and private text messages trying to get a categorical answer from me on whether I believe that Samuelson is truly one of us in the vocation of activism, social criticism, social crusading and whistle blowing on the one hand and to another set of inquisitors who wanted to know if it was right for activists to collect any kind of gratification from politicians or any class of individuals. I pledge to make a conscious effort towards conveying my convictions as succinctly and as mildly as I can, but in a situation where my ink gets too blunt, I will not ask to be forgiven by anyone. Activism has been described as consisting of efforts to “promote, impede, or direct social, political, economic or environmental change, or stasis. The term connotes a peaceful form of conflict.” From the above definition, I can easily draw my conclusions on whether Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha is or was ever an activist, and that I shall go straight to doing. The making of the activist Samuelson Iwuoha began during the time of Chief Ikedi Ohakim as the Governor of Imo State. It is now a well-known fact that the singular motivation behind Samuelson’s serial attacks on the government of Ikedi Ohakim was as a result of the destruction of his kerosene tank, which literarily crumbled his only means of livelihood. He did not begin his crusade against the government of Ikedi Ohakim because he wanted to instigate social change or promote justice, but because he wanted to retaliate or get back at the government for destroying his kerosene tank and possibly be recompensed. The next big step in the making of activist Ikenna Samuelson is this present one, in which he is alleging that Rt. Hon. Benjamin Uwajimogu and some or all members of the Imo State House of Assembly are involved in some criminal and fraudulent cartel that have consistently milked the State coffers dry. There is every possibility that this could be true. However, even if it is proven by some acts of magical manipulations or credible investigations that the Speaker and his colleagues in the House of Assembly are some terrible collection of corrupt legislators, it still does not stop us from asking salient questions on the real inspirations and aspirations of Mr. Samuelson Ikenna Iwuoha. An activist does everything for the sake of societal good, an activist is inspired by the selfless desire to correct anomalies, and not the selfish goal to be settled. I will want the reader to conclude on whether Samuelson is truly an activist by the real definition of the word. However, I will make your conclusions easier with these questions: Did the corruption in the Speaker’s office start after December, 2013 when Mr. Samuelson was ‘edged’ out of work as an aide to the Speaker? Did Samuelson resign immediately he found out that the Speaker, his aides and his colleagues were corruptly enriching themselves? Did Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha write an official letter to anti-corruption agencies to alert them on the alleged fraud in the Speaker’s office, immediately he discovered same? Was Samuelson ready to return to the same haven of corruption if the Speaker had sacked some of his aides as he(Samuelson) requested in several of his write-ups? Would the sacking of these aides had restored the funds he alleged that the Speaker, his aides and his colleagues stole from our common till? Was Samuelson ready to sacrifice his personal comfort, security, wealth and even freedom in order to ‘promote societal sanctity and impede decay and potential stasis’? would Samuelson had come out with these ‘facts’ or allegations had the Speaker retained him in his services as an aide? Let your conscience dictate the answers. If you are convinced that he is an activist, then, queue behind him, support him and clap him along. If you think otherwise, then you should know that he is merely pursuing some selfish vendetta, and you must not take whatever he says seriously. In the thinking of Arthur Schlesinger, Jr; activists are supposed to be public watchdogs and whistle blowers, attempting by all legitimate means to understand and influence ALL the actions of government that acts in the name of the people. It is the primary responsibility of activists to ensure that all governments be accountable to oversight and transparency. Activists are enemies to anything that is anti-people, no matter from whom it comes. Activism is not a vocation for the weak minded or flippant individuals in the society. Activism is not by those who prefer to be anonymous, activists must own up to their actions, and be ready to reap the gains or pains of his or her activism. Kenneth Uwadi has remained anonymous, all efforts and entreaties I have made to get his contact phone number or his physical address has been rebuffed by Samuelson. While an activist must be very conscious of his personal security, an activist must guard against living like a fugitive criminal who is always on the run. Social criticism has its roots in the religious repression that was the order in Europe for a time. It took the independence mindedness of an atheist Catholic Priest, Jean Meslier, whose book-length essay with the title: “My Testament” remains one of the best handbooks on social criticism. Wikipedia defines social criticism as “a mode of criticism that locates the reasons for malicious conditions in a society considered to be in a flawed social structure. It may also refer to people adhering to social critic’s aim at practical solutions by way of specific measures either for consensual reform or powerful revolution.” From the foregoing, I can arguably posit that while social criticism and activism are closely related, they are not completely the same thing. One can actually be a social critic without being an activist, but one can hardly be an activist without being a social critic. However, both are united by motivation. For one ton be a real social critic or activist, he or she must be dissatisfied with the prevailing economic, religious, social, and or political situation in the society. He or she must also be inspired by the goal to effect a change, to make things better than they are. A social critic does not only criticise actions that are directly unfavourable to him or his immediate environment, but pours his or her spleen out on all issues affecting the society in general. While the social critic is less economical with words, and hence, may use words that may be deemed vituperative, the social critic must be careful not to mudslinging. I cannot categorically say if Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha is a social critic or not, but I can tell you that he is closer to being a social critic than being an activist. Blackmail has been defined as “an act , often a crime, involving unjustified threats to make a gain or cause loss to another unless a demand is met. It may be defined as coercion involving threats of physical harm, threat of criminal prosecution, or threats for the purposes of taking the person’s money or property.” One who engages in this crime is called a blackmailer, while I cannot readily lay my hands on the relevant sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria that criminalises this, I should be sure that blackmail is globally a criminal infraction that is also punishable by Nigerian law. I can remember that one of my lawyer friends told me that it carries a seven year jail term. Some of my Comrades have called Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha a blackmailer, and with recent revelations, I do not think I will be arguing much with them again. With an audio recording of his voice which was played during the six am news of the State owned Orient FM, where he was heard affirming that all his allegations against the Speaker were fabricated and when he is settled, he will amend whatever has been damaged, I am compelled to join my voice with that of the others to call him a blackmailer. It does not follow that in a radio call in program on Hot 99.5 FM was asking a guest on the program and my beloved Comrade, Darlington Irobi, if he was sure that Samuelson’s demand wasn’t for his legitimate entitlements as a former aide to the Speaker. I am not a lawyer but I should think that even if you resort to making unfounded allegations against your debtor as a way of stampeding him or her into paying the debt, then you are also a blackmailer. If the voice I heard over the radio in the morning of Wednesday 2nd April, 2014 was truly the voice of Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha, then I will not spare words in calling him a blackmailer. There is actually no amount of desperate explanations that will clear him of that tag. However, if he is able to credibly refute that the voice belongs to him, then Emeka Ahaneku, who is the present media aide to the Speaker is the blackmailer, and should be charged to court for that and also forgery. In determining between a genuine whistle blower and a mudslinger, an activist and a vindictive fighter, and a social critic and a blackmailer our basic guide should be on the spur- that is what motivates the action- and the goal- that is what the individual wants to achieve. Modern day activism is inseparable from the social media, hence we have a new breed of social media activists who are making a name for themselves in the activism ‘industry’. The social media comes handy as a formidable tool for real activists in advancing their selfless causes. This is especially so, because of the interactive features and widespread attraction of the social media to a wide range of individuals. This reality helps activists to quickly disseminate information and rally supporters to their conscientious struggles. In Imo State, there is an intimidating new breed of young, vibrant and intelligent crop of social media activists who are contributing in no small way to the advancement of good governance and democracy in the State. I have had the pleasure of interacting with some highly placed political and business leaders in the State who acknowledged that without the efforts of this group of Imolites, the present government may have metamorphosed into a monster that may consume all of us. it is this same group of activists that Mr. Samuelson Iwuoha had the temerity to refer derogatorily to as ‘Some Facebook boys’. Some people have also questioned the propriety in activists openly supporting particular political Parties or politicians. I have been severally accused of that, and I have maintained one response; “An activist is not an idiot, an activist is primarily a politically conscious individual who is motivated by the desire to effect change in the society. An activist or a social critic cannot just stand by and watch politicians destroy the society. He must apart from condemning the activities of underperforming or corrupt public officials get actively involved in ensuring that the right individuals are elected or appointed into public offices. You cannot say that this politician is not doing the right things, without selling a better alternative to the people. While there is a good number of activists who are pretentious about their partisan tilts, I am not and will not be such an activist. An activist cannot lie to himself, you must be bold to air your convictions and beliefs” It has remained my conviction that activists and social critics should not just talk about positive change, they must instigate it. One of the world’s best ever activists and social critics is the iconic Nelson Mandela, and all through his activist life, he remained actively partisan. Therefore, activists, social crusaders, social critics, whistle blowers and every other people involved in the struggle for justice and social change must be actively partisan, if they want to be taken serious. However, an activist politician is quite different from a normal politician. While a normal politician is primarily interested in grabbing power or ensuring that his or her choice politician is given power, the activist politician while supporting particular candidates and or political Parties is primarily interested in ensuring that the right things are done and justice prevails. There has also been rumours about some social critics and activists receiving gratifications from politicians or other business moguls in the State and outside. I have maintained my convinced stance on this, too. An activist or social critic must be beyond any price tag. An activist must not be ready to sell his or her conscience even for all the money in the world. However, it is different when you are appreciated for what you are doing. An activist or a social critic cannot be crucified if he receives gift from anyone in appreciation for his or her good works and sacrifices. But, when the activist is offered any gift as a bait for him or her to act against his or conscience and convictions, that gift must be rejected out rightly. Any activist or social critic who can be paid to dump a struggle is a saboteur and not an activist. It is also important that every activist ensures that he or she has a credible means of income, any activist who depends on monetary gratifications for survival cannot be said to be a real activist. To be continued.
Posted on: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 17:03:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015