How long do we carry on like this? What are we telling our children, when we carry on like this? That stealing is right? How do we explain the hand cuffs? That it is a medal for valour and courage? What are we teaching our children? What message are we sending home? People who should know better are lining up behind petty thieves, justifying crimes, on account of ethnic, party and religious affiliations… Can we not pretend to be sane, for once, at least, for the sake of our children?
There is a photograph making the rounds. It is that of one of the men charged to court for their alleged role in the diversion of funds meant for the purchase of arms. It is of that same man, alleged to have chewed his statement. Yes, the newly-bearded one with the cuffs, who has only just perfected his varied bail conditions.
The day after he secures bail, a photograph of him, presumably with family members, seated around a table, leisurely decorated with food, is let out into the public domain. It must have been taught necessary to share a photograph of a man victimised, as the table is set before him, in the presence of his enemies. Otherwise, what was the essence of sharing with the world that private moment? What was the intent in sending out that picture? To show off, taunt or provoke? Was it to show that our man remains unshaken, in spite of his travails? Was it to erase whatever doubt there was, that he is a man of comfort and opulence? Or perhaps it was to let us see him, eating in sobriety.
Of course, we know that our legal system is one founded on a presumption of innocence of the accused. But many, I assume, must be mistaking that for something else. The fact is, though the accused might be innocent in the eyes of the law, the state in fact deems the accused guilty, otherwise charges would not have been pressed in the first place. Going to court is only meant to establish that fact beyond any reasonable doubt. The assumption of innocence, I dare say, is only a philosophical pretence, in line with the legal system that has been foisted upon us.
But the disrespect with which our ‘Big men’, charged to court for crime, are treating the court process is getting worrisome. Petty thieves now cat-walk to and from the court, mistaking themselves as heroes. Every big man is suddenly struck with one ailment or the other for which he must travel overseas to receive treatment.
So, it is a slap on the face of the society and a misnomer for an accused to seize that window allowed by the trial period to strut the turf or take it as one to lay down the red carpet in the court premises – and then disrespectfully saunter in and out of court appearance. A bit of sobriety is a given, in any sane society, for anyone charged before a court.
We have had a situation, for years now, where political office holders simply make a show of court appearances – some hire supporters, dressed up in ‘Aso-ebi’ for the occasion, to come sing and dance, as if it is a theatrical performance. One turned the occasion of a court appearance as one for showing off his latest ‘babe’ to the world, hugging the limelight, when sobriety should have been the watchword. We had a case of an accused for whom the legislative chambers shut down so that ‘Honourables’ could accompany him to court, virtually refusing to enter the dock.
Now, the presumption of innocence is accepted here, even though one is finding it difficult to justify why that should apply to public servants and political office holders being prosecuted for corruption and financial crimes. But the disrespect with which our ‘Big men’, charged to court for crime, are treating the court process is getting worrisome. Petty thieves now cat-walk to and from the court, mistaking themselves as heroes. Every big man is suddenly struck with one ailment or the other for which he must travel overseas to receive treatment.
People who should bury their heads in shame are growing beards, pretending to be freedom fighters. Soon, we might be finding it difficult to tell the difference between Anini and Mandela. A man handcuffed to court for crimes allegedly committed and only graciously released on bail is not sober. He thinks it necessary to share the experience of his opulent living with people who are starving and mourning.
See what has become of us. People who should bury their heads in shame are growing beards, pretending to be freedom fighters. Soon, we might be finding it difficult to tell the difference between Anini and Mandela. A man handcuffed to court for crimes allegedly committed and only graciously released on bail is not sober. He thinks it necessary to share the experience of his opulent living with people who are starving and mourning. Millions are displaced from their homes and will count themselves lucky to have a table to lay their heads on, to pass the night, yet someone facing trial, even though presumed innocent, does not mind displaying his table of surplus before those who do not have. It is disrespectful and abusive.
What has happened to us? Once, it was a source of shame to be seen in the police station, innocent or not, not to talk of being charged to court. Where is the shame, today? Where is the remorse? Do these people know what happened to millions of Nigerians on account of their alleged actions and inaction? Many have died. Women widowed. Children orphaned. Yet people deem it fit to make a joke of the court process. What has happened to these people? Why have they become so hardened that they are no longer able to feel the pulse of the people?
That picture tells it all. It tells you how calloused the hearts of the people, who were in office yesterday, have become. They did not care then. They said they did not give a damn. They, obviously, still do not give a damn now. Left to me, that picture being passed around is one that the Judge ought to take judicial notice of, as a good enough ground for a revocation of the bail. It is distasteful and provocative, to say the least.
Some, pretend-democrats and latter-day converts, have suddenly become apostles of the rule of law, quoting sections of the law, they did not read while they were eating yams.
How long do we carry on like this? What are we telling our children, when we carry on like this? That stealing is right? How do we explain the hand cuffs? That it is a medal for valour and courage? What are we teaching our children? What message are we sending home? People who should know better are lining up behind petty thieves, justifying crimes, on account of ethnic, party and religious affiliations. Some, pretend-democrats and latter-day converts, have suddenly become apostles of the rule of law, quoting sections of the law, they did not read while they were eating yams. Can we not pretend to be sane, for once, at least, for the sake of our children?
No comments:
Post a Comment