WHY GOATS STEAL YAMS

Our dear President Goodluck Jonathan, like most political leaders under constant public gaze and oftentimes, glare has had his fair share of 'moments to regret'. Different leaders have different ways of dealing with the aftershocks of these blunders. Some indeed can be laughed off. Others can be logically reconstructed with clever 'wordneering'. The thing though is that there are certain attributes that help a bumbler to talk himself out of a sticky 'moment to regret'. It may be a gift of the garb, locally known as 'sweet mouth' or the confidence to admit that it was a 'stupid thing to say'. Or indeed to keep quiet and at least some will afford the benefit that the bumbler had seen the light and was internalizing his painful regret. Our dear President Jonathan,  will rather and in the most unconvincing fashion defend the indefensible and make things worse, or in 'yamandgoatspeak' -  'pour sand in his own garri' 

The thing about corruption is that whether we like it or not, it is simply not a laughing matter. Corruption is at the root of all our national problems and why the country is a statehood in failed mode. So when a president burdened with a systemic corruption perception goes on a literary journey for which he is poorly equipped and declares that his government is not as corrupt as acclaimed - because all the talk about corruption is based on lumping stealing (rampant by implied admission) with corruption. This has since been summarized in the new Nigerian phraseology dictionary to - 'STEALING IS NOT CORRUPTION'. A president overly defensive and seriously allergic to the mention of corruption, portrays a serious disconnect with the anger of his hungry people. The impression of the average Nigerian on the president's attitude to corruption can be summed up in the well known Nigerian phrase – 'WETIN CONCERN AGBERO WITH OVERLOAD?'.

In a recent media chat, the president likened the Nigerian situation of endemic corruption to 'goat and yam' For those not conversant with folk tales and wisdom, what he means is that if you leave your yams in a barn and allow access to goats, the goats will in a compulsive manner feast on the yams to the detriment of the owners. That the goats cannot be blamed! (that much is true). I think though that it is uncharitable for Mr President to liken our public servants and even the corrupt ones to goats. I do not share the view that they are compulsively corrupt or just cannot help themselves.

So let me help Mr President with my own folksy perspective. Nigerian people are blessed with a huge barn of yams sufficient to feed everyone. What has happened though is that those we have mandated to watch over the yams against insects and other elements have transformed to goats and are eating the yams ravenously, destroying yams they cannot ingest and not keeping watch over other destructive elements. The resultant shortage of yams and therefore hunger amongst the people has made them not only angry with the goats but reluctant to farm as their harvest will only be enjoyed by the goats. An atmosphere of distrust amongst the people has set in and the general tendency is that we are all now fighting each other to grab the remaining yams. What we should be doing Mr President is that we should all be out cultivating yams in the full assurance that those mandated to watch over our yams are playing that role faithfully.

Mr President needs to know that as the head guard, when the people complain that the barn is being ravaged, we do not expect him to tell us that not all the yams are actually being eaten and that some or perhaps most are being destroyed by the feet of rampaging goats or in Jonathanspeak tell us that - ' All these things people say all over the place that goats are eating the yams and causing shortages is not correct. I was discussing with a former stock keeper who told me that on inspection he found that in most cases the destroyed yams were not eaten but merely destroyed. I dont know why people should confuse eating with destroying. You know in my village if you cry that your yams have been destroyed by goats, people will ask you first whether the goats used their mouth or their legs, before knowing what to do with the offending goat. If you say the goat ate with mouth, they will ask for the complexion of the goat – this will let them know whether the goat did it out of hunger or wickedness.' Is this the reaction of someone who appreciates our emotional connection to and dependence on our 'yams'?

The president should understand, that using the barn example he is the head guard appointed by the people to take care of their barn of yams and also supervise the allocation of yams for different purposes. Nigeria needs a head guard who understands that his work is to protect the yams for common benefit. His work is not to allow the guards to uncommonly transform to goats. Using the president's analogy, Nigeria needs a head guard who is not so fond of yams that he and other guards become goats once they see yams! Rather we need to transform our guards to dogs so that our yams will be safe and we can all be fed and happy. Currently we are in a situation whereby the yam owners are meeting to decide whether to appoint a new head guard or keep the present one. How does the president think the conversation will end? Yes, some owners will point to the poor rainfall, others will talk of errant goats, others will wonder why we cant distribute the yams immediately upon harvest, others will wonder why those who did not participate in the tilling and weeding but waited to harvest should be considered as owners. Many questions but in my view the main question will be whether the head guard has done his job to the satisfaction of the owners. The owners can see for themselves and will decide by themselves. Forget the rainfall, mode of distribution etc – has the head guard effectively done his job? Mr President, that is the question that would have been answered on the 14^th February and should be answered on the 28^th March but must be answered by 29^th May this year.

An important consideration is the identity of the others interested in the head guard job. The chief applicant was once the head guard. Those alive at that time attest to the fact that he is allergic to yam even in the pounded form. Rather than behave like a goat he behaved like a lion and that is what worries some owners. Much as they detest the goats, they do not want a head guard with fondness for goat meat. Those rooting for a change of guard insist that the lion has transformed into a guard dog on account of the fact that we have come out of the jungle and are now in a domesticated environment aka democracy. Which is why there is even a meeting in the first place to decide who to appoint. What the owners are hearing in support of allowing the head guard to continue is that he is working on using technology to secure our yams.  So perhaps microchips will be installed in the yams. I think the owners are afraid that the kind of goats under the head guard and the reckless abandon with which they eat will end up eating the yams and embedded microchips!(yam chips) I hope the president realizes that this perception is his problem, his headache and his fate determinant. So Mr President using your analogy, will the owners act to save their yams or the goats?

EDO UKPONG
LEGAL PRACTITIONER