LETTER TO MY FUTURE DAUGHTER PT. 8 (DATING A LEECH)

DATING A LEECH

Dear Child,

Thank you for passing "VIRGIN MARY 1" to Mary, I owe her the second part of that letter which I will send later. But for today, I am Oliver Twist. Help me pass this one to Austin.

My Dear Austin, you know I’ve always expressed my doubts about your money-denominated relationship. You have a girlfriend who treats you like an ATM machine. You’re dating an exploiter. You’re ATM, Austin. All your girlfriend does is demand and collect money from you. You have a demand and supply relationship. She's happy when you give. When you can’t give she becomes unhappy with you, even gets angry.

It may be in your interest to conduct research into the economic state of her last boyfriend. If he couldn’t keep her with all the money he spent, what makes you think you can? I have a feeling she moved on when his money ran out! You have spent all you have on her and she’s still complaining. Your so called “girlfriend” is a leech, sucking you dry. That is the blunt truth. You know I’ll always say it as it is. Truth does not participate in popularity contests. A leech is a blood sucking worm with two suckers at each end. That’s why Solomon wrote: “A leech has twin daughters named Gimme and Gimme more.” You know when I read your letter I actually cross-checked your name. I expected your surname to be Dangote, or Gates, or Zuckerberg, or Buffett. Maybe Ronaldo, as in Cristiano Ronaldo! I was quite disappointed you don’t have a billion dollars surname. Was quite surprised actually considering your endeavour! I don’t know how you’re going to sustain the “relationship”.

Money matters in a relationship. Especially if the two of you intend to progress your relationship to marriage. Then money matters even more! (Just being honest and laying it straight). Lack of money puts enormous strain on a relationship. Yet, it doesn't pass for money to be the sole fundamental on which your relationship is built. What happens when there is no more money to give?! Considering the fact that she doesn't chip in to help; she doesn't contribute. She tells you she received better treatment in her former relationship. She had a better deal! The question then is, why doesn’t she just go back to that relationship? You are a student Austin! Where does she expect you to get money from? You don't have money!

Aren’t you training yourself to go to jail? This is taking its toll on your parents.  Your father was recently retrenched from work. Your mother is constrained to add one more venture in her petty business to assist the home. She roasts boli now by the road side. Since your Father is out of work, someone needs to take up the responsibilities. Your school fees must be paid no matter the economic hardship. This has led to making of some adjustments. Three of your siblings dropped out of school to vend so your parents could raise enough money to afford you each month. Worst is this partial blindness affecting your mother now, she has become amaurotic. The smoke from roasting boli has taken its toll on her. Everything concerning your school increased drastically since you met this girl, but you blamed it on the nation's dwindling economy which is not true. It increased because of your girlfriend's demands. Your scale of preference and economic budget has 'Girlfriend's Allowance'. The price for school fees and textbook is now x2. This of course comes with its attendant problems. Most of the time, it is your family who bears the brunt for those costs. They sometimes do 001 (eat ones daily). They are investing heavily in you so you can be of help to them tomorrow. Be a dependable crutch to your parents in their old age and your siblings. Should that not be reason enough not to be in a relationship with this girl?! You may end up being a disappointment to them, or a chronic debtor. Or a disappointment-cum-debtor. How fast you progress financially as a man depends on the type of woman by your side. A good woman is an INVESTMENT, a bad woman is a BILL.

I do hope she’s giving you 24 carat love and affection. Her brand of love must be so rare considering how expensive it is! Are you even sure you’re the only boyfriend? How will you possibly satisfy this woman’s lusts? Can’t you see she thinks she’s smart? That she sees you like an m-u-m-u? You have even engaged yourself in a part time job in school. You combine school and work now. You toil for 30 days and at the end, your sweat and labour she comes to collect. Are you the President of Labour Party? You’ll survive on Garium Sulphate (GaSO4) – a granulated cassava staple popularly known as garri. And you think you’re being a man! That is a false definition of masculinity you’ve taken on. For the love of your family, consider their impecuniousity and stop this madness!

Aren’t you foolish to date such a woman?! You can’t afford her on every level. Stop being foolish. She has no interest in you whatsoever. You are just cashflow. And you’re deluded if you think you can keep her. Ask her last man.

Your relationship is transactional. Will only subsist for as long as her cashflow projections hold up. Your girlfriend has expensive taste. Use your tongue to count your teeth. Cut your losses. A relationship shouldn't kill your life, shouldn't stultify your growth. Redeem your gullibility. She’s running an emotional Ponzi scheme. You better leave her – while you can still afford a transport fare.

Your Mentor,
Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine
07068639696
Ebisko19@gmail.com

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE TORT OF DEFAMATION, SHOWING IT’S RELATIONS WITH THE LAWS IN NIGERIA AS WELL AS IT’S RELEVANCE IN THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE TORT OF DEFAMATION, SHOWING IT’S RELATIONS WITH THE LAWS IN NIGERIA AS WELL AS IT’S RELEVANCE IN THE NIGERIAN LEGAL SYSTEM - Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine

Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine

ABSTRACT
 This work seeks to give detailed analysis of the law of defamation in Nigeria, it’s relevance in our legal system as well as showing its relations with Nigerian laws. It embarked on an academic excursion into the weakness of this tort and suggests possible ways in which the National Assembly can make laws to consolidate on the tort of defamation in Nigeria.

Introduction
Defamation- also calumny vilification and traducement is the communication of false statement that harms the reputation of an individual person, business, product, group, government, religion or nation.

The freedom of speech is an inalienable right of every human being. Thus, a person’s right to freely express himself or herself anytime or anywhere it guaranteed by the Universal Declaration for Human Rights, 1948 African Charter on Human and People’s Rights, 1981 and Section 39(1) of the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria which provides that:

“Every person shall be entitled to freedom of expression, including freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impact ideas and information without interference”.


However, the right to freedom of expression in a civilized society is subject to the right of others not to have their reputation injured. Thus, every person has a right to the protection of his good name, reputation and other estimation which he stands in the society of his or her fellow citizens.

Under common law, to constitute defamation, a claim must generally be false and have been made to someone other than the person defamed.

This tort, seeks to protect a persons reputation from unjustified attack either by written or spoken words of others. In Nigeria, the tort of defamation occupies a prominent place in Nigeria Law, as it does in the laws of most African countries in which the common law applies. The immediate post undependable period in Nigeria was characterized by vigorous political activity supported by an articulate and free press. For this reason, it could be observed that:

(i) Actions on defamation in the early 1960’s mostly involved some leading political personages of regime.
(ii) There was hardly a frontline national newspaper that was not a defendant in, at least, one defamation suit during that period.

Consequently, in present day Nigeria, whoever utters, publishers, broadcasts, communicates, or telecasts anything injurious to the good name, or reputation of another commits both a tort and a  criminal offence. The basis for this tort is that every person has right to the protection of his good name, reputation and estimation in which he stands in the society of his fellow citizens. Nevertheless, the court has to strike a respectable balance between the interest canvassed in this tort and the interest in the freedom of speech. In this regard, not all statements that affects a person’s reputation will be regarded as defamatory.

This legal illumination is focused on defamation as a wrong or tort in Nigeria judicial jurisprudence.


Law of Defamation (An Overview)

In Benue Printing & Publication Corp v Gwargwarda (1989) 4 N.W.L.R. (PT. 116) 439, the Supreme Court defined the tort of defamation as follows:
“Defamation consist of any imputation which may tend to lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right thinking members of the society generally, cut him off from society or expose him to hatred, contempt or ridicule” A defamatory imputation may allege criminality, dishonesty or cruelty. Williams v. Daily Times.  (1990) 1 NWLR (pt. 124) 1 at p. 50.

A defamatory statement may not necessarily take the form of written or spoken words, it may also consist of carvings, painting, effigies or gestures. It is immaterial that the person to whom the defamatory statement was made did not believe it to be. What is important is that the statement has the tendency of lowering or injuring the plaintiff’s reputation. In other words, a defamatory statement may be defined as one, which tends to:

(i) Lower the plaintiff in the estimation of right thinking members of the society generally or
(ii) Expose him in contempt, hatred or ridicule; or
(iii) Cause other person to shun or avoid him; or
(iv) Discredit him in his office, trade or profession; or
(v) Injure his financial credit.

An action for defamation does not survive the death of the parties. Thus, an action for defamation cannot be maintained or continued by the relatives of a dead party or the personal representatives of the deceased party including executors, trustee’s and administrator’s of his estate.

Also, a plaintiff in an action for defamation must be a legal person. But, in the case of an artificial person, the action can only be competent when the offending statement alleges dishonest conduct or mismanagement reflecting on the trade or business reputation of the company. In Edem v Orpheo Nig Ltd (2003) 110 L.R.C.N 1673 the Supreme Court held as follows:

“It is settled law that just an individual or human being may be defamed, a trading, a corporation, a company, naturally has a trading character, the defamation of which may adversely affect and may indeed ruin it… Accordingly, a corporation or company may maintain an action for libel or slander in respect of words which are calculated to injure its reputation in the way of its trade or business.


The standard used in determining whether or not a statement is defamatory is that of right thinking members of the society. The meaning of this phrase, ‘right thinking members of the society’ is in general terms and not in particular terms.


Accordingly, it connotes the society generally and not a section of the community. Nevertheless, it includes the plaintiffs colleagues, business associates and church members, unless it is shown that their standards of conduct or morality are different from those of right thinking members (persons) generally and indeed reasonable members of the society would not consider such a statement as defamatory.

In Byrne v Dean (1937) 1 KB 818 the plaintiff alleged that the notice put up on their club’s notice board by the defendant who was a member of the club, was defamatory of him because it accused him of snitching to the police of their unlawful activities. It was held that although other members of the club might think less of the plaintiff, the statement was not defamatory because right-thinking members of the public would approve, rather than disapprove of a person who reported the commission of a crime to the police. This is in the interest of public policy.

Examples of Defamatory Statement

There are two types of defamatory statements; namely, libel (written and permanent) and slander (spoken and transient). Both are torts and crimes in Nigeria, by virtue of Section 373 of the Criminal Code. However, libel is defamation in a permanent form, slander is defamation in a transient form. Thus, defamatory words contained in print, broadcast and social media amounts to libel since they are in permanent form. It is immaterial that the defamatory statement in a permanent form was read to an audience. In Offoboche v Ogoja Local Government (2001) 90 L.R.C.N 2782; (2001) 16 NWLR. (pt. 739) 458. the Supreme Court stated thus:

“Where the defamatory material in writing is published by reading it to the audience and the audience perceived that what was being said was read from a document, that should be libel  as much as where the document was passed round to be read by each member of the audience…” 



Again, libel is actionable per se, that is without proof of actual damage. A judicial re-echo can be found in the case of Ejabulor v Ogha (1990) 4 NWLR (pt. 148) 1 at p.15it was held that questions as to proof of actual damage is totally alien to an action for libel. In that case, the defendant made a defamatory statement at a press conference and was published in a newspaper. The court held that the defendant could be sued for libel and not merely slander, and that the defendant’s counsel who had submitted that the plaintiff’s claim must fail because he has failed to prove actual damage suffered by him had erroneously believed that the action was for slander. Moreover, if the plaintiff in an action for libel proves that he has suffered actual damage, he will be entitled to recover a further sum in addition to the general damages.

On the other hand, to succeed for slander, the plaintiff must prove actual damage. In other words, no damage is recoverable merely because of loss of reputation by reason of the slander. The plaintiff must prove loss of money or some temporal or material advantage estimable in monetary terms. However, this position however is not sacrosanct. There are exceptional instances without prove of special damage. These are:

(a) Where the slanderous words complained of constitute an imputation of crime, punishment by imprisonment for at least in the first instance against the plaintiff e.g. in Agoaka v Ejiofor (1972) 2 ECSLR 109 where the defendant falsely accused the plaintiff of stealing cocoyam and it was shown that the plaintiff suffered no damage, it was held that the plaintiff was entitled to recover general damages.

(b) When the slanderous words contains an imputation that the plaintiff is suffering from a contagious disease or infectious disease such as leprosy, or other repulsive disease.

(c) Imputation of unchastity or adultery against the plaintiff in the case of a woman or girl. This can affect her moral standing in the society negatively.

(d) Where the words complained of are calculated to disparage the reputation of the plaintiff as regards his profession, trade or business and other legitimate means of livelihood.

It should be noted that where slander is not actionable per se, the special or actual damage must be proven. It should also be noted that slander is different from vulgar abuse.

As stated earlier, the tort of defamation seeks to protest a person’s reputation (good name) from unjustified, unwarranted attack either by written or spoken words of others. Nevertheless, the courts always seek to strike a balance between a person’s reputation and the exercise of freedom of expression and or speech. Thus, not all statements that affect a person’s reputation will be regarded as defamatory. Mere vulgar abuse or insult, (that is to say words or conduct which affects a man’s dignity) does not amount to defamation. Indeed, the court has tendered to take notice of the fact that it is not uncommon in social relations for people to abuse each other in exchange of hostility.

The implication is that if the vulgar or insulting words or statement are made deliberately and not in an occasion of a quarrel between the parties, an action for defamation (slander) is maintainable. In the same vein, the court will be reluctant to uphold a plea of vulgar abuse of the defamatory statement is (are) written, since in such circumstances the defendant would have had enough  time to reflect on what he had written and published. This is consistent with the position of the law in Benson v West African Pilot Ltd (1966) NMLR 3 where a distinction was drawn between a spoken vulgar abuse, which is not actionable and a written one which is actionable (Libel).

Proving Defamation

Irrespective of the nature of defamation a plaintiff must satisfying certain fundamental requirements before his action for defamation whether (libel or slander) can succeed. These essential requirements or ingredients are:
(a) The words or statement was defamatory.
(b) That the defamatory words referred to the plaintiff.
(c) That there was publication of defamatory words to an audience.
(d) Special damage in the case of slander, except the case of the plaintiff falls under any of the exceptions.
The elements will be discussed briefly below:

(a) Defamatory Words:

A statement is defamatory when it is false and capable of lowering the reputation of the plaintiff in the estimation of right thinking members of the society or caused him to be shunned and (or) avoided. The defamatory nature of a statement is measured by its tendency to incite adverse opinions against the plaintiff. Examples of such statements include calling the plaintiff a thief, insane, unchaste (in case of women), infidel etc. A statement will still be defamatory even though the defendant did not intend to bring the plaintiff into hatred, ridicule or contempt. In other words, the meaning to be ascribed to any statement is not necessarily that which the defendant ascribed to it when it was published. Additionally, apart from proving the defamatory words as primary or secondary evidence, it is equally mandatory to establish that the statement emanated from the defendant.

Statements may be divided into two classes for the purpose of determining their defamatory character. On one hand are those that are prima facie defamatory and on the other hand are those that are prima facie innocent. A statement is prima facie  defamatory when its natural, literal and ordinary meaning has a defamatory connotation. By natural, literal and ordinary meaning, we mean the meaning given to statements by reasonable man of ordinary intelligence with ordinary man’s general knowledge and expertise of worldly affairs.

Conversely, a statement is prima facie innocent when its natural, literal and ordinary meaning is not defamatory. Nevertheless, a statement which is prima facie innocent may be capable of bearing a defamatory meaning having regard to the surrounding circumstances known to person(s) who are in recipients of such publications. In such case, the onus is on the plaintiff to explain the sense in which the words which ipso facto qualifies them as defamatory or else such words will interpreted literally. This explanatory statement offered by the plaintiff which indicate the extended or hidden defamatory meaning which otherwise innocent statement has is called an ‘innuendo’

Innuendo are of two types namely: (a) true or legal innuendo and (b) false or popular innuendo. True or legal innuendo suggests that an ordinary innocent statement has a defamatory meaning, in relation to those to whom it is  made due to the existence of certain facts known to such persons. The burden of proving this knowledge lies with the plaintiff who must equally prove the particular or peculiar facts or special circumstances known to the recipients of the publications. In order to succeed, the innuendo established by the plaintiff must lead reasonable persons with knowledge of those facts to come to the irresistible conclusion that the statement is defamatory. This was the case of Akintola v Anyiam (1961) 1 ALL NLR 508. In that case, the defendant published a book titled “Among Nigerian Celebrities.” In it , he alleged that the plaintiff, the then premier of the Western Region was the son of “Chief Sawe of Illesha and Alice”. The plaintiff who was a native of Ogbomosho sued, and the words were held to be defamatory since people who read the booklet and who knew the plaintiff claimed to be an Ogbomosho man would think that he had been lying about his origin and parentage. This can be proved by calling witness with such knowledge.

It is immaterial to the question of liability that the defendant was oblivious of the particular facts or circumstances, making the seeming innocent words defamatory.

On the other hand, false or popular innuendo is anchored on the inferences which reasonable members of the society would draw from the published statement. Here, the focus is on implied meaning of the literally innocent statement being considered. In Mutual Aid Society v Akerele (1966) NMLR 257 the defendant instructed an auctioneer to advertise certain properties for sale by public auction. The auctioneer mistakenly included the plaintiff’s house. The court held that the words in the advertisement which implied that the plaintiff’s property as being sold in the exercise by the mortgage of their property sale, the plaintiff having failed to pay a mortgage debt, were defamatory.


The Statement must relate to the Plaintiff 

This is established of the plaintiff is mentioned by name (whether fictituos or fanciful) or described by means of peculiar attributes or quality. The guiding principle is whether those who know the plaintiff can reasonably think that the defamatory words statements referred to him/her. The intention of the defendant is immaterial. It is sufficient that the person to whom the defamatory statement is published, reasonably believed that they referred to the plaintiff. This is in tandem with the principle laid down in Hulton & Co. v Jones (1910) AC 20 where it was held that even when there was no intention on the part of the defendant/publisher to defame the plaintiff, the action must nevertheless succeed once reasonable people who knew the plaintiff would think the words defamatory of him. Also, the plaintiff/individual can sue for redress in respect of a defamatory statement directed at a small group or limited class which he belongs to.

Publication of the Defamatory Words

The defamatory statement is not actionable unless the words is published. Publication here means the words were communicated to an audience. In Ejabulor v Ogha (1990) 4 N.W.L.R (pt. 148) 1. the Supreme Court defined publication as “the making known of the defamatory  matter after it had been written to a third party other than the plaintiff.” However, the ideal publication is that which is meaningful to the recipient. In other words, the latter must be capable of the understanding at the hearing of the statement. Every competent repetition of the statement is a fresh publication and creates a fresh cause of action. The defendant is still liable in case where a third party intercepts the publication if it is established on the part of the defendant that a third part interception is reasonably foreseeable. In the case of newspaper printers and publishers they are liable  not distributors, carriers or agent as the law takes a rather lenient approach towards such persons.


Defence

A defence for defamation can be
(a) Justification (truth)
(b) Fair comment
(c) Privilege (Absolute or Qualified)
(d) Consent
(e) Apology
(f) Innocent dissemination


Relation and Relevance of Law of Defamation with Nigeria Law

In Nigeria, Defamation Laws has given relevance to some Constitutional and Criminal Law enactments. Defamation Law  such as Defamation Law of Lagos State (1961), Defamation Law Cap  32 Laws of Western Nigeria (1959), and  Defamation Law of Akwa Ibom State  have given credence and further hardnosed various provisions of the Nigerian laws such as Section 34, 36 (5), Section 39, 42 (2) 46(1) of the 1999 Constitution and Section 273 of the Criminal Code, as well as the Cyber Crimes (Prohibition, Prevention etc) Act, 2015 which was signed into law on May, 2015 which provides legal framework for combating prohibition, prevention, detection, response, investigation and prosecution of cyber crimes, and for other related matters makes it a criminal offence for any person who knowingly  or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer system or network that:

(a) Is grossly offensive, pornographic or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character or causes any such message or matter to be so sent; or
(b) He knows to be false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will, or needless anxiety to another or causes such a message to be sent.

The Relevance of Tort of Defamation in Nigeria

It should be noted that the basis for the tort of defamation in Nigeria is to seek for compensation for injury to one’s reputation that has been disparaged, as a means of vindicating your reputation or maintaining or restoring the good image that has been so battered by the defamatory statement. The tort of Defamation Law is relevant to Nigerian Laws, especially Section 34 (1) of the 1999 Constitution as it is in consonance with that section and it tends to protect the individual’s psyche as it was the view of the Court’s findings in Uzoukwu v Ezeounu II.(1991) 6 N.W.L.R (pt. 200) 708. In that case, the appellants, natives of Atani Community in Anambra State, sued the respondents for the enforcement of their fundamental right to dignity of human person. Though, the court held in favour of the respondents, the appellants alleged that the respondents referred to them 'as slaves’ and treated them such. The court held that the affidavit relied upon only amounted to mental abuse. The definition of “person” in that section according to the court includes individual’s psyche.

Also, the Tort of Defamation in Nigeria is relevant to Section 36 (5) of the 1999 constitution of Nigeria which provides that “a person charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed to be innocent until proved guilty…” with the daily reportage flooding the social media airspace on corruption, and the latest coming from erstwhile Petroleum Minister Diezani Alison Madueke when she claimed that she was being painted “as a common criminal” in the media despite not being convicted for any crime. One can authoritatively say that this act has shifted the onus of proving one’s guilt from the prosecution to the defendant to prove his innocence. Such is dangerous to any criminal jurisprudence as it amounts to “painting a dog bad just to hang it”. This section of the constitution has also been solidified by the enactment of the Cyber Crimes (Prohibition, Preventive etc) Act 2015, particularly paragraph (b) of the above mentioned Act.

Also, this tort is relevant to Section 9 of the 1999 Constitution of Nigeria as a limited to one’s right to freedom of expression as it was the case in Akilu v Fawhimi (1989) SC. 215/1988 where it was held that the right to freedom of speech is limited or circumscribed by the duty of the person exercising it to watch against infringing on the rights of other persons.

The tort of defamation tends to protect the right against discrimination because when one’s reputation is lowered to the point of being ridiculed on the eyes of right thinking members of the society, such person will be discriminated against as envisaged by Section 42 (2) of the 1999 Constitution. Imputing that one is from an Osu race will definitely read others to discriminate against such individuals.

The torts of defamation also gives credence to Section 46 (1) of the 1999 Constitution which provides thus;

“Any person who alleges that any of the provisions of this chapter has been, is being or likely to be contravened in any state in relation to him may apply to a High Court in the state for redress.”


Weakness of the Tort of Defamation

The tort of Defamation is not proactive in nature, in the case of slander and libel in which the act must have been done and the individual have already suffered damage.

As stated earlier, the tort of defamation in Nigeria seeks to compensate for injury to ones reputation that has been disparaged. Sometimes, the remedies sought is not enough to put the plaintiff in the position he was before in the eyes of right thinking members of society, as some of those right thinking members may have died while the case was still lingering in court or have moved out of town to the extent that for them to know that the imputation was false and defamatory.

The tort of defamation does not survive the death of the parties, therefore false story propagated to tarnish one’s image will remain so on the death of the plaintiff before clearing his name. This point is mostly overlooked but in Nigeria where illiteracy is still a major problem to contend with, a false imputation that a mother (dead) of a girl was unchaste during her lifetime, will go a long way to work against her prospect of getting married as most illiterate people in Nigeria believe s character is hereditary. In such situation, the progeny on the victim of such imputation does not have a cause of action in law.


CONCLUSION

The tort of defamation though it has exhaustively been enacted and construed to readily came to the plaintiff’s aid who seeks redress for his tarnished image can not be said to be without blame, the law should be more proactive in nature than reactive as the Biblical injunction in Proverbs 22:1 says “good name is rather to be preferred to riches” and Robert Green in his book titled 48 Laws of Power re-echoed the Biblical injunction when he says in Power 5, page 37 “so much depends in reputation- Guard it with your life”. And so, the Legislatures should make the Tort more proactive.






ALUZU, EBIKEBUNA AUGUSTINE
FACULTY OF LAW 
UNIVERSITY OF UYO, UYO 
He can be reached on 07068689696 or ebisko19@gmail.com

Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 7 (REBELLION)

Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 7

REBELLION

My Daughter,

You don't get it do you? Abuse comes in different forms. A child can be brought up well clothed and fed with all his necessaries supplied except for the all- important need for love and approval. No physical harm is ever done to him, yet, as each year goes by, his spirit shrivels up inside him more and more, as a plant will shrivel without sunlight, desperate for the smallest demonstration of affection. Eventually, he grows to adulthood; everything seems to be normal, yet he is crippled inside by the indifference of his parents.

Children are a wonderful breed. They remember a lot more than we give them credit. You were a child once. Think back to your childhood. There are things you remember no one knows you do. The same applies to your child. There are things she’ll remember about you, you can’t imagine. With the way things are going, you may create a lasting egregious image of yourself in her vernal subconscious. I know you are trying to tug the best in this child. But are you such a nitpicker you can't even see? The more you try to exert your views on her, the more you lose her to the cozy hands of depression, jealousy and hate. Children sometimes incubate this feeling and project it on their partners in matrimony. Some of the most hardened women are people who refuse to forgive their parents. Sometimes, it is not what we say to our children but how we say it. Have you forgotten you also went through this phase in your life? Of course, it is the rebellion years – usually the teen years, though not every child goes through this.

Click here To Read Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 4 (VIRGIN MARY)

Learn to appreciate her individualism. Her abilities may not be good enough, but it is what she has. When you constantly tell her how useless she is, she'll believe you. Every young child believes what their parents say about them. She may grow up, never suffering from physical abuse at your hands but nevertheless crippled in the spirit. You need to stop putting her down by constantly comparing her unfavourably with others. You are emotionally abusing this girl without knowing. She soon begins to push back in symbolisms of rebellion, which further affect your relationship with her. That's why on your recent appointment, she didn't felicitate with you. On your anniverary day, she did not congratulate you. It’s important to have an honest relationship with your child. Sometimes that’s all children want. When she knows of your struggles to give her a good education, she’ll appreciate the education more. And it will give her the impetus to succeed, to justify your investment. And show appreciation. She’ll want to succeed in life, if only to take care of you. You’ll be surprised how deep these things run. Please, understand she has her on script to act in life. Try and understand she is not in competition with anybody. She too has limitations. When you do, she'll blossom effortlessly in her métier. Just let her walk at her own pace.

Remember you were once sophomoric? Did you forget you once walked in her shoes? You threw caution to the wind too, fell in love not minding the consequences. You've forgotten you were once like her. Except when you want to remind her that you know better. Have you forgotten that at 18 you still couldn't make what you wanted to do with your own life? And when you were 25 it was patience and timing. How come those principles doesn't apply to her? You didn't pan out exactly how I envisaged, but look at you. You've done well for yourself. She looks up to you as her teacher and her leader. Yet, the one person who was supposed to be her biggest fan is never in the gallery.

Children are heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the womb are his rewards. She is bound to honour you as her parent. She owes you that moral obligation. But what happens when we stretch the elasticity of that commandment? We unconsciously lead them to develop secret resentments. Do not provoke her into anger. It's provocarmtive when you compare her with your other children and another's child. Haven't you heard the story of Isaac and Rebekah? They both have their preference when it comes to their kids. Isaac and Rebekah did many things right in their parenting, but one incredibly wrong thing they did was to be divided on their loyalties to their children. Isaac loved Esau more than Jacob. Rebekah loved Jacob more than Esau. Though not recorded, it can be imputed that at one point in time, there must have been unfavorable comparison. This caused competition in the lives of the two boys to the point that Jacob fled in fear of his life when he convinced his brother to surrender his birthright (or right of inheritance). Though biblical injuctions has it that it was ordained by God. Taking a pragmatic approach, Esau could have been the object of envy and hatred from his sibling. Esau just to annoy his parents got married to a Hittite.

I once remember a man who wanted his son to be like his friend's son back in College. Before graduation, he wanted his son to avoid his friend's son so bad, like a plague. Living in such a morally depraved world, we never can tell what the other person is up to. There's more than what meets the eye.

Click here to read Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 3 (WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE)

It hurts to be compared, yes. But you expect your child to turn the pain from it into constructive energy. I cannot blame you for wanting the best for her. So, inspite of the negative feelings it may brew in her at first, I know it is for her own good. Even as I grow older, I do compare myself to others to motivate me. Imagine life without motivation. Perhaps you just overdo yours, and perhaps, she overeacts to it. It would be great if we were given the full, unabridged instruction manual for parenting when our children are born. But regrettably, kids don’t come with instruction manuals. We must endlessly strive to be good parents to our kids, irrespectively of our own upbringing.

Till I write you again next week. I remain:

Your Daddy,
Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine,
07068639696
Ebisko19@gmail.com

Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 5 (CHAT UP YOUR PARTNER)

CHAT UP YOUR PARTNER

Dear Daughter,

This wasn't what we planned for. It was not my doing. We are contractually in the business of plays and Life the producer sold us to its viscititude. Dreams replaced reality, telephone has taken the place of voice and sight replaced the sense of touch. A fortiori I write you every week. Writing is an art. It is an act of painting our thoughts and clothing it with the inks of our mind. It is my way of assuring you that 'out of sight, is not out of mind'. I write for a purpose. That's what communication should be about. Others may argue otherwise but the gist remains it's for a purpose. Imagine a world without communication, ignorance would be bliss. Communication keeps us informed. Gives us better understanding of things and peace of mind as well.

Emotion is a demand and supply equation. It’s why we naturally seek for a partner - someone to share ourselves with. A relationship is a dependency: I depend on you, you depend on me: together we release the power of the binary. It is a falsity to imagine someone without feelings or emotions. That is a very troubled individual. It's why marriage is a binary equation. Two people, two perspectives, double advantage. That’s not saying we shouldn’t control our emotions. We do need emotional control. But contextual control of display of emotion must not be confused with invalidation of the faculty of emotion. We need effective communication to elicit the emotions of our partners. Love recognizes no barriers, it  jumps hurdles , leaps fences and penetrate walls to arrive at its destination full of hope. Relationship is the vehicle in which love is driven, and communication is the fuel that powers it.

Click here to read Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 1 (PARENTAL PREFERENCE)

It stupifies me that you two don't know how to communicate. You blame lack of things to write about. That explains why you both have chats on WhatsApp and BBM like "hi", "how are you?", "how was your night?", "have you eaten?." And halting replies like "K", "kk", "Aii" almost on daily basis. This is why i say when you chat, always have something you both look forward to. You can never run out of things to talk about that way. When you stop having some milestone to look forward to together, you’ll be stuck in emotional limbo. One thing that is true about all relationships is that if they’re not growing, then they’re dying. And communication in any relationship is vital. You must both have a converging trajectory on some point on the horizon. Otherwise you will inevitably drift apart. When you chat with him, discuss all subjects- money, babies, careers, beauty, fashion, extended family, etc. Encourage one one another. Debate with him on relevant social issues. Engage him on it, in a deep philosophical nous. Not for the purpose of winning, but to learn something new.

Click here to read Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 2 (BEING IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP)

Find out how compatible you can be in marriage. That's a different domain altogether from relationship. Don’t be too shy to discuss salient issues like long term goals, short term goals, sex. Yes, sex. It sometimes amazes me that dating couples don’t take time to discuss sexual compatibility yet they discuss children! Marriages have been known to break down from the frustration of sexual incompatibility. You may not agree on everything but at least put issues on the table. That’s how you craft a compromise through communication. If you don’t want surprises and unhappiness in marriage you better start broaching certain subjects now. What are his views about family coming to live with you after marriage for example? What is his philosophy of finance? What are his views on the financial role of a wife, about women earnings? What about his views on conflict resolution when there’s a disagreement? Is the resolution mechanism the extended family? You’ve got to have his views on his beloved mama! Does he believe she has an executive role in your marriage? His sisters? You’ve got to have an idea of his ideas about sex. You’re going to have sexual congress in marriage. Young men have fantasies. You've got to communicate. Chat up your partner! You'll need to educe that understanding of him. Because In marriage, patience, understanding and tolerance are key qualities one should look out for before love. They will endure where love won't.

Lack of plain communication breeds assumptions. When you’re apart from one another or have limited exposure to a person or event, you start to make all sorts of assumptions or judgments that are usually exaggerated or untrue. Sometimes, coming from the offshoot of ignorance. Do not turn your feelings to status and tweets. Learn to communicate so you won't conclude on your partner based on assumptions.

Click here to read Letter To My Future Daughter PT. 3 (WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE? )

When I say discuss everything… I mean everything. If you’re going to spend the rest of your life with someone. Certain discussions are too late after the marriage ceremony. Some things should be said before saying “I do”.

I discovered that most heartbreaks and broken-homes are avoidable if simple communication had been utilized.

Your Daddy,
Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine
07068639696 (SMS only)
Ebisko19@gmail.com

LETTER To My Future Daughter PT. 4 (VIRGIN MARY)

VIRGIN MARY 1

Dear Daughter,

Please help pass this on to Mary, your sister. She wrote me last week asking for advice. She probably read Letter to My Future Daughter PT. 3 ( WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE?)

My dear Mary, I admire your moral stance on this issue. I do admire your desire to maintain your "no premarital sex" stance.  My worry though is the scheming, the correspondence you are looking for and the latent effect of your somber sexual life in marriage. Plus,  I think you are confusing virginity for purity.

Now, it is deceptive for you to think that a man who loves you will not want to touch you. That is a dubietable belief. Men do not have to fall in love with you not to be sexually attracted to you. A man who loves you and is passionately so, will want to have sex with you. Infact, the deeper and passionate his love is, the more desirous he is to consummate the love with sex.  Your case is one of those relationships that "just happened”. You know, those relationships you can’t really explain the genesis of. You know how the relationship started but you don’t know why it started – exactly what prompted what.

Fact is, in every relationship we’re all coming from somewhere. Some are coming from a dream space, and so they approach a relationship romantically. While some are moving out with the jinx of a relationship that saw a displeasing end.  Some  are coming from pain, from a bad experience, some just come with a particular mindset and so they treat their counterparty with suspicion. Anything that REMOTELY SUGGESTS something in their bad experience is viciously hacked down. Decrees are soon issued and introduced, emotional boundaries unilaterally dictated and determined.

Your partner has been pushed to become mechanical in the relationship, bereft of all the naturalness that prompted his emotional involvement with you in the first place. You pushed him to have to prove he has no ulterior motive, he’s not a bad person– and he can’t understand that. Neither can I. Why such accusations? Why make your virginity a subject of discussion whenever you sit with him? you are parsimoniously basing this relationship on your virginity. And he can’t test your virginity unless he sleeps with you, in which case you'll no longer be and you won’t marry, being a virgin. The truth is, all he has is your word. It’s what you say you are that you are at this stage of your relationship. He can’t even verify your word without compromising your faith. Now, here’s the irony of your quest for marrying, being a virgin: He's not a virgin himself. At some point before he met you, he engaged in sexual congresses. In other words, he has a past. In the same vein, you also have a past. You've been in previous relationships you had to walk away from. Your man loves you dearly, he showed it by spending heavily on you. You never failed to call on him when you are in one financial crisis or the other. You just couldn't give him sex. You made a lot of foreplays with him. You cuddled, fondled, kissed, but when he wants to feel himself inside you, "no sex before marriage remember" You unalterably reminded him.

Click here to Read Letter to My Future Daughter PT. 2 (BEING IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP)

You made him feel he was dating you just to have sex with you. He could not understand why his innocent words were treated with so much suspicion, and interpreted in unsavoury light. He could not understand why you were issuing commands, and the texts were getting stentorian in tone. You  perfected the act of emotional fraud. Yes, it was fraud to have your boyfriend act like a husband when you were not married. How did you get him to perform those duties of a husband when you were not married?  You are the perfect schemer. You managed to scheme with this same modus operandi in your previous relationships. And now. You are about to scheme your way out of this one. You are keeping your virginity till marriage, for your future husband. Why don't you allow him keep his money till marriage for his future wife. When he begins to sense the fraud, you'll move your technical virginity to another unsuspecting Mr.

You  essentially took the relationship, removed some stuff, realigned some, and began to manipulate the relationship. You repainted the new structure you created, and presented it to the guy as what he wants! The guy was just meant to accept it, which he invariably did but with a hidden caveat. He began to draw back on the inside, no longer trusting you– didn’t even know how to relate with you again. Meanwhile you thought you were protecting yourself, not knowing you were accusing him. You thought you were defining boundaries not knowing you were confusing him. And because you were not the recipient of those accusations, you couldn’t feel the pain of the other party. You didn’t realize that in all that manipulation you wrecked something vital in the relationship – sincerity.

You are using the wrong parameters to look for a life partner. You must learn to use appropriate yardstick to judge and determine issues. You don’t use a ruler for example to measure the purity of water. That’s an inappropriate instrument though a measurement. Neither do you use a windguage to measure the pressure of a tyre. It’s a wrong pressure gauge. In the same manner, you can’t use  lack of erection near you as parameter to determine the suitability of a conjugal prospect. You even need to be sure he is not suffering from erectile dysfunction. In fact, ask him to go for a test. If you base your marriage decision on such, you’re clearly using a wrong means of measurement. Celibacy alone for example cannot help you determine if he’s clean or a relative of Unhygienic of Asterix fame. That’s how people arrive at wrong marital decisions. They use wrong parameters. And such a mistake can prove very costly to a woman in particular.

Click here to Read Letter to My Future Daughter PT. 1 (PARENTAL PREFERENCE)

You have unconsciously reduced your self worth to your hymen. Are you saying if your hymen is broken, you would have sex at random? Is the randy you hiding behind your virginity? Are you saying you are pure because your hymen is not broken? Do you value yourself more than non-virgins? If you pair off your commonised assets, one by one, all the basic stuff you have in common with other women, generic stuff, at some point you’ll get to your core – the very you – a “something” that is so you. It is a combination of factors all fused together. No one can have that core except you. It’s your combination. It’s what makes you remain attractive in a relationship. It’s beyond just the physical. The physical soon loses appeal after some time in a relationship. It gives room for some other lasting things. Your soul, your heart, your mind, these are where a woman's true essence is. Not in her virginity. And these are the things you should make him fall in love with. You are basing this relationship on your virginity, which you normally, shouldn't. You are taking his love and sympathy for granted. Remember he never had a 'virgin' as a condition precedent when you started dating. When you finally leave this guy, your next may not be so considerate. He may end up living your fears. You may fall for the pressure finally with the wrong guy. The type that makes girls conclude "all guys are thesame".

You wanted to be in control of the relationship, to control the dynamics, dictate the terms. An attempt was even made to change the narrative from a relationship that just happened, to one in which the guy chased you. You altered the balance of affection in the relationship to accumulate power, but then the other party begins to wonder. You end up presenting an unflattering picture of yourself, which made the guy sigh. Several times. By your actions, accusations and suspicions you have made him afraid of getting close to you. And you’re hurting yourself.

As it is now you’ve portrayed to the gentleman you’re doing him a favour, that you really don’t need him or the relationship. Which is not true. He floods your thoughts every second of everyday. And you do not know how to swim. You actually need the relationship, and you need him. By becoming manipulative in the relationship you killed something innocent and natural. And you’ve compounded it all by your inability to say I’m sorry, I did wrong, I couldn’t help myself!

I’ll touch on the other side of the coin when next I write you on this topic.

Your Father
Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine
07068639696
Ebisko19@gmail.com

Letter to my Future Daughter PT. 3 (WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE)

WHAT ARE YOU BRINGING TO THE TABLE?

Dear Future Daughter,

How many times do I have to tell you? Please, pay attention when a man is telling you what he prefers. Pay particular attention to those things that cause him bliss. Things that frees him from mental stress. then will you know what you are to bring to the table in a relationship. You don't want to go through this again, this is the second time in three years you've asked me this question. Your last intrigue was incinerating. Not paying attention will lead to an albatross of its own. Your partner begins to feel lonely in the relationship. He can't converse with you. He attempted to, but it came to a precipitous end. He felt like he was having an introspection anyway. Its strange because he can be with you and still feel lonely. Loneliness is a fact of life. You can be in a room full of people and still feel lonely. You can even be the life of the party and feel terribly lonely. The reason is because loneliness is a soulish phenomenon, it’s not physical. And there is no “cure” for loneliness. It’s not a disease. It’s a conceptual aftermath of Adam’s creation – a byproduct. As a feature, it makes us want to mate and marry, and create family, relationship and community. A marriage partner must be able to make us feel unlonely. Isn't that the reason why marriage is seen as companionship?


Men have vagaries of preference. As their faces differs, so does their needs. Men needs in relationship range from food, sex, philosophical musings, careers, partnership, religious views or inclinations, et al. Your partner is not existing on a different planet. He too have needs and preference. You can understand his needs by understanding his intellectual depth. It will always take a man with deep philosophical musings and understanding to be speculative about what you are offering. You are not reckful enough. His needs are hidden under his expressions and form of satisfaction. There is this psychological void you are yet to fill or explore. Such is necessary for the maintenance of the homeostasis of a movement away from balance. With your brain, beauty and accomplishment, you can be the best package for a man. Beauty alone may not stand the viability test for all men. And your accomplishments sometimes may have a reverse effect.

Click here to read LETTER TO MY FUTURE DAUGHTER PT. 1 (PARENTAL PREFERENCE)

I am telling you this things so you will not be a victim of grand deceit. Yes, grand deceit is now prevalent in relationships. By grand deceit I mean dating a girl and giving her the impression you will marry her, but planning another wedding. In one or two cases there was even a family introduction, but no plan whatsoever to marry the girl. Just deceit. The guys in question planned two weddings simultaneously without any intention of showing up at one. Just as your friend's partner knew he won’t marry her, yet he kept her, all the while planning wedding to another. The girl never knew he had another girlfriend, and he kept sleeping with her, giving her false hopes and making demands. That is the sad tale when you do not know what you are worth in any relationship. The man drew up his scale of preference according to his values which is different from his needs. He has drawn up his values which is regarded as what is most important to him. Unfortunately for your friend, she did not make the list. she was still not able to fill that psychological void after six years. There were the abortions, the cooking, sacrifices, emotional support, care during this six years, she was even working hard and financially dependent… She gave her life to him. And to think the deceit went on for a whole year. That’s unconscionable, cruel and dastardly. The timing shows he started dating this young woman about the time he started planning his wedding to your friend. The young lady found out he was getting married a day to the wedding. And it was accidental discovery. Someone assumed she was the one getting married. She came to remonstrate her for excluding her from the planning. You can imagine the devastation brought on this young lady by the news… The shock! She fell sick. Hope deferred makes the heart sick. Did you just murmur? The man should be able to shift grounds at least, adjust his position right? That is just the world you live in. It shows you the nefarious nature of men. I mean how can a woman do all that for him and he still feels she is not bringing anything to the table? Men are at an advantage when it comes to relationships. Maybe in other climes things would be different. But "this is Africa"

I’m very worried about a young man capable of doing that to another human. It takes a lot. If I were you I’ll be careful around such a friend. He’s capable of anything. Anything can happen if you do that to a lady– actively and aggressively deceiving her about marrying her. He aggressively built false hopes in this young woman– that he’ll marry her. That’s wicked. This young man doesn’t understand anything about life. Deceit is self-obligatory. HIS day is coming! Either he will be made to pay here by man or life will pay him back. Haven't you heard of the case of Use v Iketubosen (1975) WRNLR 187? The defendant was in breach of contract to marry by conduct. Damages can be awarded against such men in a court of Law. Nature itself also have a way of paying back. This is called karma. Haven’t you read about a gentleman named Jacob? He was a “smart” fellow. But life repaid him. Life operates a balance sheet. As you deceive you build up your credit score. Repayment is coming. And when life wants to pay you back for deceit it does so with artistic flair. Life deals with them in a way they could not contemplate. The truth is, the loser is not the girl he deceived. The real loser is the woman he married. She’s joined to a man capable of heinousness. She hardly knows the man she married. And I’m surprised his family went along with this deceit. His mother was part of the whole process. Someone should have called this young lady to tell her what was afoot. Surely someone had a conscience in that family. All those who participated in the value chain of deceit are accessories to the deceit, including his mother. But you know some people treat the child of other people like trash. Their child is of course gold.


What i am writing you today contradicts with "the unconditional love" theory. Contrary to popular belief, no man can love you unconditionally. Not even your parents who loved you first because you are their child. Not even your maker. This is evident in the scripture. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that WHOSOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM SHOULD NOT PERISH BUT HAVE EVERLASTING LILIFE". That itself is a condition. The theory of uncunconditional love is only found in the pages of William Shakespeare's fictional classics. You are not a character in a fiction play. The prospect that a relationship will lead to marriage is a condition itself. A man is very visual. He sees you and you appeal to his eyes. Your  anatomical contextual framework only give credence to cravings of his in a woman. You being a woman itself is a pre-requisite as to why he fell in love with you, and as such a condition. This also apply to same sex partners. The word "unconditional love" is a misnomer. There is a difference between "unconditional love" and "selfless love". No man will love you 'unconditionally' but can love you 'selflessly'. It's up to you to embark on a deep intellectul musing to discover your partner's craving. To know if you both are compatible. How will you know you are compatible, if you don't know what you both are bringing to the table? There must be something in you that has endeared him to you. It is not enough for you to make a list of your expectations in the relationship. What are you bringing to the table as well?

Click here to read LETTER TO MY FUTURE DAUGHTER PT. 2 (BEING IN AN ABUSIVE RELATIONSHIP)

You must know what your man prefers. What qualities he's ready to settle for. You imagine because you are from a wealthy background, he can't walk out. You imagine because you’re pretty he can’t ditch you. But beauty is many times over-rated in a relationship. Many times in a relationship beauty is not enough, likewise sex. And anyway the guy gets used to it. Guys have been known to go for lesser beauty when there’s love and character. Sometimes, for less drama. And no matter how beautiful you are, nature is already manufacturing your replacement. Don’t assume because you’re the champion there’s no alternative to you. That’s a mistake. There’s no alternative to you as long as the guy doesn’t walk. There’s a plethora of alternatives outside your village. Not being in a relationship is itself an alternative.


When a man discovers his cravings in a woman, he’s going to sink his teeth into her. He will treat her like a Queen, pamper her no end. He will feed her emotional needs till she becomes so obessed she can't even run away. It’s why it’s sometimes hard to get a good man back. It's not voodoo or black magic. The woman just have something to offer to fill his psychological void. That's when you'll hear such men say: "we are just compatible." This applies vice-verse.

Not every woman is armed with such serviceable epiphany. What you do with it, is up to you.


Your Pa,
Aluzu Ebikebuna Augustine.
07068639696 (SMS only)
Ebisko19@gmail.com

BAYELSA: RESTORATION OR DICTATORSHIP? ~ By Dei Badou

BAYELSA: RESTORATION OR DICTATORSHIP?

By -Dei B. Badou

The restoration administration-led by Hon. Henry Seriake Dickson appeared like another form of dictatorship in which he or his appointed committees holds absolute power at the exclusion of the people and even the state Assembly.

Right from its inception, the restoration government is anchored on dictatorship. He has governed Bayelsa for almost 5 years, most of that time as a dictator. His promises to restore and build Bayelsa into a great state were all promises of hopelessness and in futility; rather they are all promises in dehydrating Bayelsans.

Close to his second term ambition for the governorship, he took the title of [OFURUMOPEPE] meaning White Shark. He could hardly fulfill any of the promises made to the people in his four years in office; could not even reduce unemployment and improve the various economic sub-sectors for effective productivity, rather the price of the restoration agenda was the enslavement of Bayelsans.

This is an administration that came to power under conditions of turmoil and confusion, predecessor administration-led by Chief Timipre Sylva allegedly unable to provide the people the needed security, basic amenities through bad governance in 2012.

As a result, Abuja-based PDP political elite-led by the former President Goodluck Jonathan, late Col Sam Inokoba (rtd) and others seized power through political trickery in the highest form of revolutionary means and ousted it.

Since its takeover in 2012, the dictator and his followers retain their positions through force or threat of force, abolishes or closely controls the state legislature, rendering it impotent and a rubber stamp and quickly suppress freedom of speech, assembly and the press.

It sets up an elaborate secret-police system that monitors and detects opponents of the administration; persons who object the dictatorial rule are persecuted.  Familiar example of this dictatorship is the locking up of Tonye Okio at Okaka Prison without any justifiable reasons, sacking of a court process allegedly sponsored by dictatorial system in Yenagoa, the state capital and many other dictatorial tendencies.

A dictatorship that has power of life and death without appeal to the people or the state Assembly, but he could not leave the state and had no control of the state treasury. Dictators are known world-wide for their centralized dictating system that allows people to dictate from different locations to a central office.

With this system put in place by the dictator, the people dictating may use a regular telephone or a special micro-phone that is connected to telephone lines hence persons who objects to the dictator are detected and prosecuted even when on overseas trips.

The present dictatorship in Bayelsa lacks knowledge of ethics and politics that enable people to act properly and live happily knowing very well that the goal of human beings is happiness and that the people achieve happiness when government fulfill its functions and obligations.

Therefore, it is necessary for the government of the day whose responsibility to determine what its social contract with the people are all about and not to torment and impoverish them in the name of TALK NA-DOISM, a political slogan that holds no water in the present circumstances.

The function of any good government is what, it alone can do or what it can do best for the people and not to deny, deprive, harass, intimidate, dehumanize, call them all sorts of names including unproductive human beings as was allegedly used by the dictatorship on retirees.

For example, the function of the eye is to see, so also the function of the knife is to cut. It is said of old that a human being is a “rational animal” whose function is to reason, before acting and therefore a rational government is to provide a happy life for human beings under its control is a life government by reason and responsibility.

It is the general belief of the people that a government which has difficulty behaving ethically such as depriving and denying its people from getting their wages is morally imperfect. The ideal government practices behaving reasonably, responsibly and properly and until the government can do so naturally and without efforts amount to nothing.

It is also a general belief in governance parlance that moral virtue is a matter of avoiding extremes in behavior and finding instead the mean between the extremes. For instance, the virtue of courage is the mean between the vices of cowardice at one extreme and foolhardiness at the other.
Similarly, the virtue of generosity is the mean between stinginess and wastefulness. Therefore government has probably been the single most influential work in all literary criticism which examines the nature of the tragedy that has befallen the people and takes as its prime objective of ameliorating tragedy that afflicts the people.

It is a generally held views that when tragedy affects a people by arousing the emotions of pity and fears resulting in non-payment of workers salaries and wages; it takes sincere and honest government to purify and cleanse the people of these emotions.

By doing so, it clearly exemplifies a serious and people-oriented government other than a dictatorial government that is full of deceit, greed, selfishness, egotism and self-enrichment.

The present government in Bayelsa should not continuously attribute its inability to pay workers salaries to dwindling revenues. After all, Bayelsa under the self-styled restoration government in the past four years 2012-2015 received huge sums of money from the Federal Government without completing and commissioning any of the projects embarked upon.

So also, there is no known project executed and completed with the [#95.4bn] received between May 2015 and June 2016 except frivolous expenditures in the circles of power politics and power-play in the state during the last governorship election.

Bayelsa with a population of a little over two million people requires good governance and not a government of the wicked for the wicked and of the wicked equals to dictatorship as superimposed on the people by Jonathan and his self-styled PDP political elite.

After all a pot cannot call the kettle black neither the kettle can call the pot black.  Between 2011 and 2015, the Goodluck Jonathan-led Federal Government awarded 38 contracts for different projects in Bayelsa State. Though the total sum is worth Two Hundred and Nine Billion, Six Hundred and Seventy-Nine Million, Seven Hundred and Seventy-one Thousand and Seventy-five Naira [#209.690, 779, 771 . 75K], the projects which are meant to benefit Bayelsa people were all abandoned after due payments were made to Jonathan’s contractors.

Where on earth can this happen and the person goes scot-free if one may ask? It can only happen  in a state like Bayelsa where political leaders and elders in their late seventies and early eighties serve as sycophantic parasites and gofers to every government that come on board because of lack of skills in entrepreneurship.

Even those who were opportune to go to either state Assembly for eight years and later House of Representatives or the Senate for another four years come back home to seek even a Local Government Chairman or Special Adviser, Senior Special Assistant appointments for survival just because they have nothing upstairs economically and become drawers of wood and fetcher of water, hence Bayelsa’s industrial development atrophies.

At the political level they claimed to be the best in the circles of politics whereas at the entrepreneurial level, they lack even a single segment of skill and experience to even move their families economically not to take of moving Bayelsa State to economic prosperity.

It is high time these political juggernauts, caterpillars, bulldozers, folk-lifts  and swarm-buggies as they called themselves think of keying into the economic sector by creating investment opportunities for our jobless youths and for the state to move economically forward rather than perpetually engage in politics of sycophancy and parasitism.