There is this national dilemma, the Nigerian factor, intermittently exhuming hypocrisy, double standard, mischief prejudice, amnesia, political opportunism, ethnic jingoism, tribal animosity, among others. In the guise of acclaiming Aisha, wife of President Muhammadu Buhari, yesterday’s critics only succeeded in exposing the injustice, indeed the malice inflicted on Turai Yar’Adua, wife and later widow of the late President Umaru Yar’Adua.

Aisha Buhari attracted international attention with an interview on British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) putting her husband on notice that unless the man (Buhari) changed his style of administration, specifically in making political appointments, she  (Aisha) would not join in campaigning for his second term in 2019. To make her point, Aisha Buhari accused an unidentified power bloc of hijacking her husband’s administration. She further explained that these power brokers were never known to have participated in the energy-sapping campaigns all over the country, which resulted in Buhari’s victory in the 2015 presidential elections.

Valid observations? Undoubtedly. However, there are vital ingredients in making or offering political appointments. These include mutual trust, commitment and loyalty of the beneficiaries of such appointments. A situation in which the primary loyalty of such appointees is to their extraneous godfathers is not desirable.

By the way, in consequence to her BBC interview, international attention further beamed on Aisha Buhari when President Buhari figuratively confined her control/influence to the home, particularly the kitchen and relevant rooms. Even if that was a clampdown, President Buhari went about it in a harmless and humorous way. Still, that was an opportunity for the angry, frustrated mischief-makers, who suddenly assumed the posture of better judges of Buhari’s wife than her husband of almost thirty years. Aisha became their heroine on how to play politics or run an administration or the functions of a first lady, not provided for in Nigeria’s constitution or that of any political party or its manifesto.

The worry here is the volte face. So soon? In one case, after only six years and in another, after only eighteen months. Is it now proper for a first lady, at least, Aisha Buhari, to pontificate, especially in public, how an elected president (Muhammadu Buhari) must run government? On the other hand, throughout his tenure of three years, ending in his death in 2010, the late President Umaru Yar’Adua, there were malicious whispering and open criticisms of the wife (now widow) Turai Yar’Adua for her alleged power/influence on who got what and when or how in her husband’s administration. According to the allegations, she was the head of an unseen cabal, running the government even when the husband was in good health.

The critics portrayed President Yar’Adua, as weak in allegedly conceding any influence at all to his wife Turai. And, of course, a field day when Yar’Adua himself took ill as everybody descended on poor Turai, who, in fact, was cited as one of the reasons for hastening transfer of power. If it was wrong of Yar’Adua to allow his wife same powerful political influence, it surely cannot also be wrong of President Buhari to indirectly halt his wife (Aisha) from attempting to run his administration for him. Still, if it was wrong for Turai Yar’Adua to exercise any political influence in her husband’s administration, it cannot be right for Aisha Buhari to commence exercising the same influence.

Clearly, those acclaiming Aisha Buhari as a heroine for exercising political influence on her husband must be suffering from amnesia since the same right was denied to Turai Yar’Adua. Equally, those who portrayed Yar’Adua as weak must, today, acclaim Muhammadu Buhari’s strength in asserting his pre-election campaign pledge that under his administration, there would be no virile office of the first lady. For getting involved in governance, Turai Yar’Adua was eventually reduced by political opportunists to a typical Nigerian widow – silenced, abandoned, lonely, isolated and, of course, betrayed by those who successfully lobbied her for minister and public board appointments despite the fact that she (Turai) was spectacularly discreet in the exercise of her political influence.

Hence, the double standard, hypocrisy, political opportunism of godfathers’ intent on imposing their protégé, ethnic prejudice.

What can we say of Aisha Buhari’s instant predecessor, Patience Jonathan? The image carved for her by critics was that she was jointly running the government with President Goodluck Jonathan. Even after leaving office, Patience Jonathan remains object of critical comments for the political influence she was perceived to have exercised. The focus here is not strictly on the political influence Aisha Buhari has commenced exercising. Rather as we say in South West, what is bad (double standard) is bad. Accordingly, if she indeed exercised the political influence adduced to her in those days, Turai Yar’Adua should feel vindicated since her critics of yesteryears have today acclaimed the exercise of political influence by first ladies, as an act of heroism.

Poor Muhammadu Buhari. Suppose in his reaction, he said, “My wife has spoken. I will instantly adjust my style of governance.” What would have been his assessment among Nigerians or even throughout the world? “See this man, (Buhari) woman wrapper. We elected him and he can’t take decisions until he consults the wife.” Nigerians?

Related News

In any case, here is an aside. Everybody, before being a Nigerian, belongs to a local community each with its culture. Which and where is that community in Nigeria and the office of a lady in life is eventually not the kitchen? Infact, anywhere in the world, once a lady is toasted and she agrees, that positive response implies her destination in the eventual marriage is the other room and the kitchen. Any status beyond that is extra. A businesswoman? A female judge? A woman head of state or government? A female medical specialist? The first office is the kitchen.

Much was made of Buhari’s comments made in the presence of German Chancellor, Angela Merkel. So, her spouse’s menu is not her priority, never mind the cooks and stewards? Does the husband publicly get involved in the exercise of her political power? If so, only behind the scene. The same applies to British Prime Minister, Theresa May. Since her membership of British parliament, ministerial office and lately headship of British government, Britons hardly heard of Mr. May in all his wife’s official activities. Even now that the wife is Britain’s Prime Minister, any political influence by Mr. May is strictly limited to behind the scene. The Queen of Britain, Elizabeth the Second? The husband, Prince Phillip, never interferes with the wife’s ceremonial duties. America’s potential next president is a lady, Hilary Clinton. During the campaigns, the husband, ex-President Bill Clinton, made it clear that he would be invisible throughout his wife’s tenure, making the other room his man office.

How then was Buhari wrong? The bitter truth is that Aisha Buhari played into the hands of political self-assumed power drunk godfathers, serving and former state governors, hand-picking local government chairmen, councilors, senatorial candidates, House of Representatives members hell-bent on also appointing ministers. Admittedly, a president may not know who is who throughout Nigeria to be appointed to public offices. But then, it must remain the initiative of the president to request those concerned for recommendations rather than the insistence of godfathers/state governors to appoint ministers. Afterall, it is not the arrogant sole authority of state governors to appoint commissioners? Does the party even enjoy any patronage in appointing state commissioners?

Only ignorance of the culture of our brothers and sisters in the North could have robbed latter day praise singers of Aisha Buhari of the bitter truth that she couldn’t have dared the BBC interview without the husband’s knowledge if not prompting. In short, that celebrated interview was more for public consumption in preparation for an eventual cabinet shakeup with the magnitude to be determined by how big is Buhari’s knife.

There were other aspects for take-aways from Aisha Buhari’s exasperating interview. One of such was the subtle indication of 2019, against which intending aspirants have, so far, been only short of openly throwing their caps into the ring. Have other APC leaders taken note? Flashback to the nomination of Muhammadu Buhari, as APC’s presidential candidate. The main rival party, the PDP, was so shocked and felt threatened by Buhari’s candidacy that a blackmail was issued that the North would be short-changed, as Buhari would run for only one term as per an agreement, which the PDP alleged. The then national publicity secretary of APC, Lai Mohammed, had to counter that if elected, Buhari would run for two terms provided by Nigerian constitution.

Despite that assurance, some are still under the illusion that Buhari would not run for second term. Only Buhari can decide on that pledge. Otherwise, the threat of Aisha (Buhari’s wife) not to campaign for him for second term is only on the condition that Buhari does not change his style of governance. If he changes his style by meeting the wife’s demand to appoint those who campaigned for him into public positions, the wife will campaign for him and that can only be for the 2019 elections. There has since been a sudden quiet in APC’s rush for 2019 elections, even as Buhari keeps them guessing.

Second, the cabinet shake-up implied in Aisha Buhari’s interview with BBC is debatable. Appointment into cabinet is a serious business, as new appointees require months to grasp the demands of their offices. There was an unnecessary delay last time before ministers wee appointed and they assumed office only mostly to be defending other people’s budget. Only the alertness of some of the ministers exposed the padding of the estimates of most ministries. So far, ministers are barely one year in office. Now, only to be sent packing for a new set of ministers the list of whom may not be ready for another six months? Minister of State for Labour, James Ocholi, died in a motor accident. After so many months, any replacement yet?

Every administration will always face pressure for cabinet changes. Who, anyway, are the ministers to be booted out? The same ministers, who eventually subdued the Boko Haram insurgents? The same ministers, who stopped wasteful public expenditure? The same ministers, who halted the looting spree in contract awards? The same ministers, who stabilised fuel supply and halted the subsidy scandal without any violent reaction from the public?

aisha-buhari-also