AKWA IBOM STATE IN NIGERIA POLITICS Now that Obong Attah has rejected Umana By Joe Effiong The story in the current edition of The Ink Newspaper about how the former governor of Akwa Ibom State, Obong Victor Attah told the former secretary to government of same state, Mr Umana Okon Umana, that he would not support the latter’s gubernatorial ambition, makes an interesting reading. According to story, Attah, after meeting Umana, very reluctantly, through the intervention of Gen Edet Akpan (retd), reasoned his refusal to support Umana on betrayal. Let me borrow a section of the story as is here reproduced: “Obong Attah is said to have reasoned that apart from the fact that zoning does not favour the aspirant, Umana while he served with Akpabio failed to do the biddings of Akwa Ibom People but rather went on a rampage against them. Obong Attah is said to have expressed sadness over the action of Umana which he described as ungodly. Umana, the former Governor said betrayed him in 2007 and ever since then had not shown any sign of remorse only for him to begin to look for him simply because of his ambition to become the next Governor. The newspaper gathered that the meeting between Umana and Attah lasted well but ended in total deadlock especially when the former Governor took time to explain to Umana that he was a total disappointment to the people of the state while he served as the state SSG.” Since the online edition of the story hit the highway, hordes of responses supporting or against Umana or Obong Attah, have also established their presence. Obong Attah’s main grouse seems to be the alleged betrayal Umana dished out to him in 2007; and since then, Umana never thought it wise to go and make amends till now that he wants to be governor. We the political Lilliputians and outsiders may not know the object(s) of betrayal between the political godfather and the assumed godson. But if hazarding a guess would not be regarded a procedural fatality, I would think that the gubernatorial election of 2007 is the nucleus of this betrayal cell while Umana’s actions or inactions since hitchhiking (as it now seems) in Akpabio’s government, are only the cytoplasm. Yet, I won’t stick my thick 18-inch neck as a bet because when it comes to political offices, especially, between the master and the boys, anything, almost everything from the moral to the amoral can be scrolled on the betrayal continuum. Unfortunately, betrayal, like loyalty, is an absolute term in power. It is all or nothing. That is why betrayal though fluid and nebulous compared to concrete and legally binding breach of contract, even political contract, leaves the betrayed, pained, ashamed and bitter, sometimes eternally. Even those of us who only suffered betrayal at a political level that could be regarded as infinitesimal, still feel hurt and bitter. Sometimes, the betrayed can be tempted to think that the betrayer is worse than a murderer; maybe that is why Judas Iscariot is still vilified till date. When in 2006, some groups, apparently buoyed by the Da Vinci Code controversies, came up with the view that Judas should be forgiven by the Church; they were ignored with a very loud silence. I remember putting the question to Dr Abel Damina of Power City International and he told me; “Judas never forgave himself. He never repented. Apart from betraying Jesus, he committed murder. He died a sinner by killing himself.” Maybe, if Judas had not been too heartbroken after realizing the enormity of his act, as far as master/follower relationship is concerned, he could have pocketed the money and used part of it to buy relief materials to the distraught Mary; and be among the first to receive Jesus on resurrection like Peter did even after denying Jesus on technical grounds of self-preservation. Sorry, it seems I have digressed. But the subject is still betrayal for now. Obong Attah and Umana, prior to 2007, had a fairly long history, while the year itself had so many sub-sets of issues that Umana as the commissioner for finance with Attah as governor trying to push his son inlaw as successor, could have collaborated, if not connived, to tackle. But however pained or bitter the master feels when he becomes the victim of betrayal, it doesn’t detract from the fact that sometimes, the boys are also betrayed by the masters. The only difference is, while the boys would cry out loud and complain to anybody who cares to listen about being used and dumped, and in the process get consoled by his friends and associates who urged him never to lose hope; that there are better days ahead, the betrayed master is often left with no or a few friends, especially at the initial stage, and more especially, if his tenure has just expired with no immediate political boat to jump into that would generate crumbs for the hangers-on. I can imagine Obong Attah on May 29, 2007. The programme of the swearing-in of the new governor didn’t even provide a slot for him to make a valedictory speech. As far as that day was concerned, he never existed. He retired to his barely-completed house in Shelter Afrique after having lost the presidential bid, the preferred gubernatorial successor, many of his friends who had “crossed carpet”; and when he turned , he saw that Mr Umana Okon Umana, the man he had sworn in as permanent secretary and later “promoted politically” to man the powerful finance ministry, whom he might have confided in on a number of issues and times, had also “defected.” It must have been very lonely. Thus, the rapprochement sought by Umana now could be seen as medicine after death considering all that has happened between 2007 till date. And the reactions by the people to the failed reconciliation bid can also be understood. But it may also be gladdening, based on the responses of the people to the story, that Obong Attah’s support or lack of support for a gubernatorial aspirant/candidate would (still) carry enough weight to make a difference, because if history is to be depended upon, the candidate he allegedly supported in 2007 never made it. In 2011, we were told he actually, and unfortunately, lifted the hand of Sen Akpanudoedehe, but it amounted to naught. So what would be the content reality of Obong Attah’s support or lack of it for Umana’s aspiration? I don’t want to believe that Obong Attah added the Umana not coming from the preferred zone clause as one of the reasons for which he would or wouldn’t support Umana, because recent history also shows that since Akpabio, from Ikot Ekpene Senatorial District had got into office, there shouldn’t have been any attempt to uproot him before he finished his/senatorial district’s 8-year tenure, through either in-house PDP opposition or outside ACN opponents that Akpanudoedehe represented. Maybe, there is something we need to be told that Obong Attah and Mr Umana have not told us yet because my lawyer friend most times would say; “You cannot probate and reprobate at the same time.” He also says some other things in latin: Consuetudo loci observanda est – “The custom of the place is to be observed,” and; Allegans contraria non est audiendus – “One making contradictory statements is not to be heard.” I pray the interpretation is correct. I’m not a very good foreign language student. I hate betrayal and I believe everyone does. Sometimes, I wonder if Etorobong Inyang, one of my very trusted “boys” were to betray me, what I would do. But what (we, hahahaha) the masters should also learn to know is that nobody remains a boy forever. As the calendar/political years pass by, the boys are acquiring bia-bia, and some mini-boys are also springing around the boys looking up to them for direction, sustenance and political/economic survival. Would boy-to-man Umana have done himself, and his clan of mini-boys, a favour to have refused to serve in Akpabio’s government? Or having “been carried along,” should he have served in a way that would please Obong Attah? Wouldn’t that have mounted to disloyalty? Who doesn’t know the dispensability of political appointees in our clime, however powerful and resourceful such an appointee claims to be? In fact, the more resourceful the worse because it can be termed as trying to outshine the boss; and if you add a fraction of disloyalty to that by hobnobbing with someone whose relationship with the boss is hazy, especially former occupant of the boss’ office, then you would be lucky go back home with your head. I believe that Umana has done the needful to consult his (former) godfather; and Obong Attah in his characteristic bluntness, has also done the needful by making Umana know how he feels because qui peccat ebrius, luat sobrius - He who does wrong when drunk must be punished when sober. It may be difficult to convince someone like Obong Attah to change his mind but nothing is possible; after all Boutros Boutros-Ghali once said only that fools do not change their minds. But what difference will it make with Gov Akpabio campaigning for an Eket senatorial district candidate? I also however believe that though frankness or bluntness is good as it is what leaders actually need to succeed in the long run, it doesn’t seem to pay off in the short run because leaders don’t want it. Thus if I were made to choose between being blunt and being tactful, I wouldn’t hesitate to choose the latter. Blunt opinions may eventually lead to solving avoidable problems, but unfortunately, blunt people are not often seen as sharp people; thus they are often avoided. Blunt people often lose out, momentarily though; and it can be very lonely.
Posted on: Sat, 01 Feb 2014 14:03:54 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015