Femi Fani-Kayode latest outpour on President Muhammadu Buhari for visiting President Donald Trump at the White House

The fearless icon, Femi Fani-Kayode who was the former minister of Aviation in his latest outpour on President Muhammadu Buhari for visiting President Donald Trump at the White House will shock you.

In his usual way of powerful use of language, you will see the words of a heartbroken Nigerian on this essay. Check it out below:

 

 

WHEN THE BULLY MET THE HEADMASTER AT THE WHITE HOUSE

“Nigerian herdsmen don’t carry AK 47’s. They only use sticks”- President Buhari to President Donald Trump, The White House, 30th April 2018.
“We’ve had serious problems with Christians who have been murdered, killed in Nigeria. We’re going to work on that problem and work on that problem very, very hard, because we can’t allow that to happen.”- President Donald Trump to President Muhammadu Buhari, The White House, 30th April 2018.
Despite all the smiles, banter, pretensions, diplomatic niceties, doublespeak and pleasing words these two assertions, from the bully and the big man respectively, remain the most relevant in yesterday’s historic meeting between

President Muhammadu Buhari and President Donald Trump at the White House.

DON’T MISS:

[SIR A-ONE Naked Truth Series] FEMI FANI-KAYODE, RENO OMOKRI AND AYODELE FAYOSE ARE ALL POLITICAL HALLELUJAH BOYS

The fact that Buhari, like a naughty little schoolboy standing before his intimidating headmaster, had to tell a pernicious and specious lie about the weaponry (or lack of it) of the Fulani herdsmen and attempt to absolve them of any blame for the horrendous genocide that is being perpetrated against Christians in our nation in order to escape being spanked speaks volumes.
And the fact that Trump, not fooled by the lie, like a wise old headmaster, had to issue a stern warning to the schoolyard bully about the killing of Christians says even more.
That, to me, was the meat of the historic meeting. All the rest that was said was nothing but diplomatic doublespeak, fake smiles, meaningless platitudes and dross.
Particularly nauseating were the servile and downright embarrasing questions that the Nigerian journalists that accompanied Buhari asked President Trump.
In my entire life I have never seen a journalist ask a President when he intends to visit his or her country at a major world press conference where the questions and the number of questioners are limited or ask whether he can release “just two helicopters” to help Nigeria out. This is shameless and unprofessional. It is for the Nigerian President to ask his American counterpart such questions, albeit privately, and not a member of the Villa press corps.
I see Shehu Garba, Buhari’s media assistant’s magic hand in all this. He sat directly behind the Nigerian correspondents like a bulldog, breathing down their necks and quietly warning them not to ask any difficult questions about their own country at the White House and in a foreign land.
The whole scenario was sickening. The Nigerian journalists were completely cowered. One of them called me afterwards and said it was hell and that they had been well-schooled and warned to behave themselves and mind their manners and words.
I bet the seasoned, hard-nosed and experienced American White House correspondents who also covered the event and members of the White House Press Corps shook their heads in pity and whispered to themselves, “what a country, what a people!”
Yet for the sake of posterity more needs to be said about the meeting itself. Permit me to add the following.
The truth is that the progressive forces, the official opposition and leaders of the resistance in Nigeria failed to put out the correct narrative about Buhari to the international community and international media over the last 3 years.
Consequently Buhari escaped thorough international scrutiny. Apart from that Trump failed us. He chose economic gain and the juicy prospect of a massive Nigerian market for American goods, products and commodities over human rights and decency.
Yet who can blame him for that given his “America first” mantra and the fact that the Nigerian people themselves appear to be very comfortable with their hazardous plight and murderous leader and do not appear ready to resist his corruption, tyranny, evil, ethnic cleansing, mass murder and genocide.
The good news is that Trump may be the biblical Cyrus (and I really do believe that he is) but he is not God. We never looked to him. We look to God. And God will deliver us despite our inherent weaknesses, accursed fears, petty divisions and monumental cowardice.
Finally hear this. If the opposition does not roll out its best guns, get its act togther, unite, stop playing childish games, stop the petty bickering and present one credible and acceptable candidate in 2019, Buhari will be back for another four years. The choice is ours.
Permit me to end this contribution with a final word about the meeting between the bully and the headmaster at the White House.
My younger brother, Babatunde Gbadamosi, wrote
“Buhari went and got NOTHING. We must now buy two helicopters and agricultural produce from them. This is beyond incompetent”.
Tunde, as always, is absolutely right.
Finally as Pastor Bayo Oladeji pointed out,
“Mr Buhari was asked during Monday’s joint press conference about a report in January that Mr Trump had complained about immigrants coming to the US from “shithole countries”, specifically referring to Haiti, El Salvador and some African nations. His diplomatic response was: “I’m not sure about, you know, the validity of whether that allegation against the president is true or not. So the best thing for me is to keep quiet.”
This was a golden opportunity to tell the world, in the presence of its most powerful man, that, whether Trump had said so or not, Nigeria is not a “shithole country”.
Yet sadly Buhari, the quintessential erring, self-hating and self-denigrating African leader with very low self-esteem, refused to take up the challenge and defend the honor of his people.
Instead he dodged the question, crawled into his hole, kept his mouth shut, put his tail between his legs and whimpered like a little puppy in the presence of his master.
So much for him being a strong, no-nonsense leader. At the end of the day and when it mattered the most he proved to be weak, uncaring and insensitive in the presence of a man who rightly or wrongly dishonored his country and denigrated his people.
Clearly he is only strong when he is ordering his troops or his Fulani herdsmen to slaughter innocent men, women and children. Such is the way of all schoolyard bullies.

Pengician Multimedia

Releated Post

2 thoughts on “Femi Fani-Kayode latest outpour on President Muhammadu Buhari for visiting President Donald Trump at the White House

  1. Some reactions:

    Cos Chukwudi
    I have been waiting to read from you my brain box. Buhari is a disgrace to humanity. So he can be afraid afterall. Behaving and sitting with fear in presence of Trump, what an army General indeed.

    An opposition blast:
    Mohammed Makama wrote

    Those are the views and opinions held by 2 different Presidents of the United States of America. One President is from the Republican Party, the other from the Democratic party yet they both expressed the same thing about President Buhari, so shame on you whoever you may be, if your hatred and selfish interest has made you lose your sense of decency, right judgment and sincerity. Those responsible duo are the number one citizen on planet Earth. May you perish with your hatred. Buhari till 2023, APC for life. Get wisdom. Join the winning team.

  2. PRESIDENT BUHARI’S DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY; $496M TUCANO ILLEGALITY AND FESTUS KEYAMO’S UNHOLY SONG.

    By Fred Latimore Oghenesivbe Esq. M.NIIA, FCIDA, M.ICA, et al.

    It must be stated from the outset that the “Doctrine of Necessity” is not expressly contained in the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended. It derives its origin from the writings of medieval jurists, such as Henry De Bracton and to some extent, Ivor Jennings.

    The doctrine is rarely used because of the despotic nature of some leaders who may want to hide behind it to violate their country’s constitution such as the one we have at hand in Nigeria; wherein President Muhammadu Buhari spent a whopping sum of $496 Million of Nigerians funds not appropriated for without recourse to the National Assembly.

    Simply defined; “Doctrine of Necessity is the basis on which extra legal actions by state actors, which are designed to restore order, are found to be constitutional.” This universal definition of the doctrine is hinged on Bracton’s maxim which says “that which is not otherwise lawful is made lawful by necessity.”

    The significant feature of doctrine of necessity is the tactical and well reasoned circumvention of the constitution or some aspects of the rule of law in order to get out of political quagmire; especially to satisfy the exigencies created by certain circumstances outside the contemplation of the constitution or the rule of law.

    The Bracton maxim was substantially used in the 1954 judgment in which the Pakistani Chief Justice, Mohammed Minur validated the extra constitutional use of emergency powers by Governor-General of Pakistan, Ghulam Muhammad who on October 24, 1953 dissolved the Constituent Assembly and appointed new Council Ministers on the grounds that existing one no longer represent the people of Pakistan.

    The nucleus of the legal battle was whether or not the Governor-General had the powers to dissolve the Assembly, after his objection to the country’s constituton which the ousted Assembly was about to adopt.

    The lesson here is that the case bothers on illegality and deliberate attempt to adopt a constitution that does not represent the interest of the Pakistani People. This has no bearing with spending of funds not approved in a budget without recourse to the National Assembly.
    Another classical case in which the doctrine of necessity was invoked happened in Grenada in 1985, wherein the High Court of Grenada validated the legal existence of a Court then trying for murder the persons who had conducted a Coup against former leader, Maurice Bishop.

    It was held that though the Court trying the murder case no longer had jurisdiction by virtue of new laws in place but that it had the powers to try the accused persons at the time and therefore necessity demands that it dispense justice so as to sustain the sanctity of the judiciary. A rare case indeed and cannot be compared to Buhari’s negligence and/or out right disregard for separation of powers.

    Back home in Nigeria, the doctrine of necessity was applied for the very first time on 9th February, 2010 wherein the joint session of the National Assembly passed a resolution making Vice President Goodluck Jonathan, the Acting President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

    The decision of the National Assembly was applauded by Nigerians because of the apple evidence that Section145 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended, was being or about to be violated.

    In the Nigeria example where the doctrine of necessity was invoked, the then Civilian President, Alhaji Musa Yar’Adua, who for 78 days had been in Saudi Arabia for medical treatment; refused to formally empower the Vice President to exercise powers as Acting President as provided for in Section 145 of the 1999 constitution.

    From the examples cited above, it can be safely asserted that the doctrine of necessity is not and can never be a cheap tool which state actors can arbitrarily and/or arrogantly invoke to oil their political egos and/or display their large appetite for totalitarianism.

    THE BUHARI DOCTRINE OF NECESSITY: Mr President may invoke the doctrine on the grounds that all efforts made to ensure that the National Assembly approves the $496 million so as to meet the deadline imposed by American government, failed to yielded deserved result. But this was never the case. The National Assembly was deliberately ignored only to ask the same Assembly to insert money already spent into a bill.

    As rightly opined by the Senate President, Bukola Saraki during plenary, there was sufficient time for President Buhari through his Senior Special Assistant on National Assembly Matters to deliver the letter requesting for the urgent approval of the money in question before it was illegality spent.

    The distance between the National Assembly and the Presidency cum Aso Rock Villa is less than 45 minutes, traffic inclusive. Police escorts from the Presidency will make the journey even faster. But Mr President deemed it fit to ignore the National Assembly in this matter. Buhari Must be told that “he who goes to equity must go with clean hands.” His action and inaction amounts to reckless breach of the 1999 constitution and must resign or be removed.

    From September to February is exactly six (6) months, a period more than enough for the National Assembly to deal with such emergency situation considering the fact that insecurity has become the major problem bedevilling the nation. But alas, Buhari deliberately refused to involve the Federal law makers.

    For the sacred fact that the executive arm of government deliberately refused to carry the National Assembly along as required by the relevant sections of 1999 constitution as amended; which deals with budgets, appropriation, expenditures, procedures, approvals, impeachment and so on and so forth; the National Assembly is left with no better option than to commence impeachment procedures against President Buhari for violating the constitution.

    Nigeria is perceived as a big brother to other African countries and as a key player in the stabilization of constitutional democracies in Africa; failure by the National Assembly to commence the impeachment procedures for the removal of President Buhari is not only a disservice to this nation but will serve as a bad precedent for other democracies in African continent.

    FESTUS KEYAMO’S POSITION: The learned silk is one of the best brains not only at the Bar but in dealing with national issues and more importantly his roles in nation building.

    He had solid legal mentorship from one of the best legal luminaries, Chief Gani Fawehimin of blessed memory. Not only did the highly respected silk, Festus Keyamo earned accolades from Nigerians in time past due to his proactive roles in human rights activism, he fought for the enthronement of democracy in Nigeria.

    What is now strange is the partisan politics that is about to strip the SAN of his hard earned integrity. Keyamo must be told that the Buhari administration has failed Nigerians woefully.

    For Keyamo to face television cameras in bright jackets to cajole Nigerians, trying to do the job Alhaji Lai Mohammed is avoiding, is to say the least very sad and unfortunate for an inner bar member of his status.

    The doctrine of necessity that was allegedly invoked by President Buhari as presented by Keyamo constitutes a disservice on his part to the people of Nigeria; on the one hand and a deliberate attempt for a Senior Advocate of Nigeria to aid the Executive arm of government in violating the 1999 constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, on the other hand.

    Keyamo knew that President Muhammadu Buhari can only invoke the doctrine of necessity as a state actor if all genuine efforts made by the executive arm of government failed to yield the desired results. In the instant case, the executive deliberately and arrogantly ignore the constitutional powers of the legislative arm of government at the centre.

    Similar deadline issues happened in America and President Barack Obama prevailed on congress through extensive lobby and they met the deadline few minutes to midnight and or expiration. President Buhari choose to violate the 1999 constitution for bypassing the National Assembly without making the slightest move or effort.

    I want Keyamo to research into similar developments in the United States and elsewhere in the world and am pretty sure that his finding shall certainly annul his position in the instant case.

    The then Senate President David Mark did not unilaterally invoke the doctrine of necessity to prevent the violation of the 1999 constitution; he carried the lower chambers and Nigerians along. He consulted widely, and editorial comments in our national dailies applauded the timely invocation of the doctrine by the joint Assembly.

    Keyamo should tell Nigerians one single effort made by President Buhari to carry the National Assembly along in this matter. If Keyamo were to be a serving Senator in the 8th Assembly, will his thinking and position be different?

    If I may ask, where is our Keyamo of yester years. Where is Keyamo the defender of the common people of Nigeria? Where is our human rights Keyamo? Where is Keyamo the mouthpiece of the Nigerian masses?

    National Assembly over to you.

    *End*

    Dr Fred Latimore Oghenesivbe is a Lawyer, Public and International Affairs Commentator. He is also the Executive Assistant to the Governor of Delta State on Communications and full member of the Nigerian Institute of Interntional Affairs (NIIA), Member, International Communication Association (ICA) and Fellow, Civilian Institute of Democratic Administration (FCIDA), et al.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *