 We'll judge you by the company you keep, the Presidency warns South-West agitators and will give Jonathan a chance to contest in 2023 if he joins the APC, says the ruling party. This is Press Politics and I am Mary Ann Cronin. Eurobernation agitators have been threatened by the federal government, this was in reaction to a protest held by the Nigerian-Indigenous Nationalities Alliance for Self-Determination Nines and Umbrella Buddy for Self-Determination groups in the country at the United Nations headquarters in New York, in the United States. Members of the Self-Determination groups representing the Europe, South-East, South-West and the Middle Belt were seen displaying placards with different inscriptions and chanted anti-oppression songs. They were also seen chanting, we want the Eurobernation now, declare independent Biafra now, and some of the protesters held Eurobernation and iPod flags. The Presidency, however, faltered the Eurobernation agitators for keeping association with the prescribed Indigenous people of Biafra, iPod. In a statement, the senior special assistant to the President on media and publicity Garba Shehu, the federal government also threatened to judge the Eurobernation agitators by the company they keep, saying that no one will take them seriously. What's running us to discuss this is Obinna Chukri, he's a legal practitioner, we also have Baba Shola Adegui, he's a political analyst, and Ni Baba Adegui is an international journalist. Thank you very much gentlemen for joining us. Thank you for having me. All right. I'm going to start with you Baba Shola. It's interesting that the Presidency is saying this again. The Presidency has said over and over again about these agitators, that nobody will take them seriously, and now they're reiterating that they will judge them by the company they keep. What exactly do you think the federal government is referring to? When I heard, we will judge you by the company you keep, it sounded as a threat, a way of blackmailing a group of people agitating for self, what you call, rule, what you get. So when I heard that, I went for that to see why, and I heard that because the Nigerian government has declared iPod as a terrorist organization. So for the Yoruba Nation of agitators to be in alliance with the iPod, then they will also regard us as the Yoruba Nation of agitators as terrorists, and that is exactly what I discovered. And the first question I asked myself, that's going to be a United Nations General Assembly today, everybody was aware before today, anybody can go there and agitate. Coming together against governments or agitating for self-determination, I don't see anything wrong in doing that. But the first question is, is iPod a terrorist organization? But it has been declared a terrorist organization by the government in Nigeria, so they do see them as a threat to the government. So are they really wrong in saying that you're associating with people, they term as terrorists, means that you might just be judged in the same light? Well, from their own hand, yes, they have the right to declare them as a terrorist organization, as an Yoruba organization for aligning with them. But the truth is, when we are talking of terrorist organization, where iPod is not, all, every one of them, both iPod and Yoruba Nation agitators, have the same interest. And what is that, what is that, it is the self-determination. It is about having their own nations. So if you are now saying, because of that, you want to raise your hammer on the Yoruba agitators, then definitely you are not being reasonable in what agitation is all about. It is all about wanting these governments to refuse to realize these things. When people are agitating, listen to them, invite them. How many of these people, as this government actually invited, for maybe a report to even hear them out? There is agitation from the left side. Now it is Middle East. Sorry, Middle Belt. Now it's Middle Belt. Before you know it, maybe some other part. Then it means that the government in control of this nation is not really getting it. It is not about declaring some people, attacking a group of people. No, it is not all about trying to blackmail. Are you saying that the government is speaking and choosing who they want to attend to or those they want to hear out? Well, for me, the government is only interested in those they want to hear out. If not... What are these people? If, well, there are people that are talking about the interests of government, the pro-government, the people that will make the government happy. Those are the people this government is actually interested in. Once the government discovers that you are anti-government or you are a critic or say something that does not go down well with them, they see you on the opposite side of the... something of the ring. So if this government is doing this, definitely, you can also see what happened with the media. When the media houses started disclosing a lot of things happening, we know how the NBC sent mail to have one of them to stop what you call... broadcasting some things in respect of the government. How they stop the media houses from using social media, it is all about them. Interesting. Let me come to you, Barsalbina. You are a lawyer and it's interesting because a lot of people ask, is it unlawful to ask for secession within a country and entity like Nigeria? Is it illegal to ask for self-determination? And for the case of iPop, they have been, of course, that's what we said, been prescribed as a terrorist group. So why should the government be criticized for saying that they should not be associated with... rather, that the European nation and the middle-belt groups should not be associating with iPop? Okay. First, thank you for having me. The question as to whether or not self-determination is unlawful, I think it's very clear. The law, the Nigerian law, even international law, supports self-determination. Let's look at it from this angle. It's like a man who has married a wife, maybe more wives. And one of the wives wakes up one morning and says, I'm tired, I do not want to marry again. The law has provided the way or the leeway through which such a marriage can be dissolved. And the law says, you have to go through the court or through either through the high court or through the customary court in order to dissolve the marriage. This thing applies to a country where you will have a dominance or ethnic nationalities in a particular country who may want to self-determine or may want to have a separate nation. I do not think that there is anything wrong in even tribes in Nigeria saying that they want a separate nation. It is expected when you have a country that has more than 500 or more ethnic groups, according to some of the books that I read, there is bound to be altercation. There is bound to be disagreement. People will disagree even to the point that they will say that I do not want to belong to that particular nation. It is not something that one will not expect in a union of many nations or union of many people. But the problem there is the way federal government is handling it. I think federal government is looking at it from the angle that we are government. These people are against government. No, they are not against government. All that federal government needed to have done or needs to do is to their Nigerians, whether it's from the Southwest, whether it's from the Middle West, whether it's from the Southeast. All these geopolitical zones are the makeup of Nigeria. So anytime you have something like that, the even thing to do would have been to set up a commission. I was even surprised that Nigeria does not have an agency that deals with some of these quotas, that deals with disagreements. A nation like Nigeria that has so many tribal groups and all that needs to have a full agency that should be looking into some of these things. We have the constitution. Nigerian constitution tries to solve that problem by one. It's certainly the constitution allowing for federal character. So that there will not be a dominance of one particular ethnic group in their face of government. How has government been able to implement federal character? There is a commission. But how has Nigerian government been able to ensure that the federal character commission does the work? And in that constitution, I think in that section 16 or so, I empower the government to redistribute to it after a certain period of time. Because we all anticipated that after a certain period of time, some few people that may be close to government or close to governments or have a relationship with people that are empowered, they may have enough to promote government pattern that we have so much right that government needs to come in to redistribute right. The constitution also says the way should not be concentrated in the hands of a few. But government, Nigerian government, not the really perceived, is present government. So sensitive regions have failed Nigerians. And that have given rise to the agitations for all the agitations from some of the ethnic groups in Nigeria. The truth remains that to self-determine, it is an add-on that the law allows. And again, looking at it from the point, even when the iPods started, all that they were asking is referendum. It's still a process of law. Referendum is for the law to fight that whenever a particular group wants an autonomy, that particular group will go through with GIAs to help them with the referendum, which will show whether or not they support it. All right, let me go to Babadi. You're, of course, an international journalist. And just as you all know, the United Nations is going to have the General Assembly and our Presidents is going to be in attendance. And there are lots of things that have happened in the country that has given the world our attention of sorts. We had the answers in 2020, and the whole world was looking at Nigeria. And now we're dealing with banditry. The US Senate has withheld sales of some of the equipments that we need to fight terrorism, pointing fingers to human rights abuses. But I'm going somewhere. There has to be a reason why we're having all of these non-state actors creeping up from different parts of the country. Now, AIPAP has been there for a long time. We all know this. But now we're seeing more and more agitations from different parts of the country. So let's talk about the reason why these non-state actors keep increasing in their number and why we're going to keep having these protests outside the United Nations from today up until tomorrow and maybe in the days after. Well, I have been happy to hear you. But with that, I think that we have a poor connection from you. So we'll try again. Maybe we'll just get you on the telephone. But I'm going to come back to you, Bawashala, because we're unable to get Bawadi. Let's talk about the reason why we're having these agitations, which we're having a Sunday ball. And Namdee Khan has been around for a long time, even under the Jonathan administration. We had Radio Biafra, a rogue radio station. And now we're seeing the middle bells for him. We're seeing a lot more people creeping up and having a say. Let's talk about the underlying reasons as to why we're here. Well, the main reason why we are here is because of the necrotism. Yeah, whereby the government is more interested in one part of Hillary and in one part of the nation than the others. If you look at the ministers, if you look at the people, heads of paracelters, agency, those in ministry or holding one position or the other, you will discover that they have been occupied by, majorly, people from a particular tribe. So when, for example, the iPod, iPod virtually started because they felt that they had not been recognized in Nigeria. So they wanted a situation whereby they'd be recognized, whereby, okay, if you are not interested in it, let us go with it. So that is the... But then again, iPod started on the... It gained more prominence under the Jonathan administration and administration headed by a governor from the South-South. So is this really a Bahá'í administration problem? It is not a Bahá'í administration problem. If you are to look at that from the 1960s, I think the people from the Southeast actually had only one president, or one president that actually came from that Southeast. For the past 1960s, up to this now, we are talking of about 15 years or 61 years now. Now, for good 61 years, a particular part of the nation has ruled. And just once, and any time we are talking about who is going to be president, we don't discover that this has not been considered for the position of that president or any of those high positions. So they felt that they are not welcomed. But I don't know, better ways, because I was going to ask that question to Baris Achiku. Is it not about the way that we're going about it that is making the federal government respond? Let's not forget, the reason why we had the Twitter saga is first and foremost, Mr. President's tweet. And the fact that people reported that tweet and saying it was sensitive, it was triggering, et cetera, et cetera. Now we don't have Twitter in Nigeria. But we were asking for the president to speak on issues of insecurity and the president spoke. It didn't go down well with a lot of people. They felt targeted. Yes, that's a different conversation. But how are we going about it? The way we're going about it, the conversations that we're having, the push and the shove, is it being done violently? Could that also be the reason why government is responding the way they're responding? Well, for any good government, for any good government, there must be an interest of the needs of the people. You need to find out why people are protesting, or making a request. It is a matter of their calling for your attention. And once they don't get that attention, they move to the next step. And that is the problem, not only with this government. Just like I told you, we know about the marsup that was in assistance before this hype up came in. I think this hype up came in a way, I think, towards the end of Johnathan's government. If I can remember, it was the end of Johnathan's government. So they came in such a way that to pass a message to the government. But the government is only a need to that. And before you know it, they started spreading, increasing in numbers. And before you know what was happening, they already have the strength. But in Nigeria and outside Nigeria, a good government would have invited someone, the leaders of Hypo, sit down, let's talk. But we are found ourselves in a situation, at least as a nation, whereby once we have a leader in the government, such leader is not interested in the reason. What he's interested in is to keep such group, to keep them mute, to ensure they are not speaking out their mind. Because they see every protest, every agitation as anti-government. And this, of course, is not so. Baisachiko, can you come in here? Because, like I said, I wanted to ask you that question initially. How were we going about it? Now, let me just cash your mind back to how Namdi Kanu was arrested. Before he was arrested, while he was in Nigeria and arraigned in courts, and before he jumped bail, we saw what happened. We saw what happened in his hometown. Now, let me also take your mind to what happened in the Boho residence, which is still a matter that's in courts. So we might not necessarily discuss that. Could it be something in the way that they are enunciating their demands? Or could it be something in the way that they're grouping, I don't know, recruiting people to be part of their groups or their agitation? I'm trying to understand why the government would first and foremost prescribe iPop. And then now, as saying to the Yoruba nation, we might just judge you by the company that you keep, meaning that in no time we might just group you with those terrorists and probably be termed as terrorists also in the nearest future. But let us look at the manner in which they're going about these agitations. Okay, let me begin by saying that time. Yes, if we look at the manner in which all the pattern of the tactics are done or being used by the agitators, we may find some few areas where I think I would say that they shouldn't have done that way. Let's also look at the federal government or let's look at government, because the social contract simply endows the power that the citizens endow their power to government. Then government in town will now at best act like a father. I would say that federal government did not also do well in some ways, because if people are agitating at the beginning of this agitation, most people wouldn't have gotten to that. The beginning, most of the issues that they raised, I think maybe too quick they were able to convince so many people to have sympathy for them or to join them. There have been issues of inequality in the system or some of the policies of government that they felt may not have favored a particular ethnic group. I think at that point the federal government or government had at least intervened and had a dialogue with them or set up a committee or a commission or whatever that may reach out to them and see how some of their challenges or some of the issues that they may be attended to, I think they are human beings. If you check, as at that point, I can tell you that the interest of those agitators at that point wasn't to recognize Nigeria. It was to find to see whether or not federal government will look into the problem and again try to solve the problem. We had a bigger challenge sometime in the past under the Yeraduwa administration when the NIDA data was also a goal making so many demands. That government was able to, in fact the then vice president also had to go to the creek and he met with them. Some of them were the youth chartered flight, chartered flight to bring some of them to Abuja and negotiate with them. Federal government was able to douse tension. In this one thing that we must know and I think government must take that into cognizance is that military or the use of force no longer solves problem, no longer solves problem in any part of the world, even in US, even in UK and all kinds of, in all the other countries, might or force no longer solves problem because at the end of the day, by the time you start using force, maybe somehow some of the security agencies may also be affected and so-called agitators may be affected. At the end of the day, the thing will snowball into something that everybody will not, the whole country will be running a task either or finding solution to solve the problem. Let's hope that it doesn't get to that point. Let's hope, but let's see if we can establish contact with Nii Babade again. Mr. Babade, can you hear me? Yes, I can hear you now. Great, let's talk about the emergence of Sondik Bohu and the Yoruba Nation. And let's not forget, Sondik Bohu as a person, of course, came out of the woodworks as a result of something that happened in the Southwest. Now we also have the Odwa People's Congress and now it's been called the Yoruba Nation and the Aare or Nakhankafo is also spearheading that and he's been very vocal about some of the things that has happened in the country. So looking at all of these agitations and pairing it, because look, all three regions are at the United Nations right now protesting and they're all protesting for one reason or the other. Some are asking that the president stepped down, some are saying they want secession, the others are saying help the country, I mean, they all have different, but there's one unifying voice, which is they're trying to be heard. Now let's talk about the Yoruba Nation. If the presidency is warning, he's putting out this warning to the Yoruba Nation, does this affect the agitations of the Yoruba Nation? And is it everyone that is from the Southwest that agrees with or welcomes the idea of the Yoruba Nation? Yes, yes, thank you. What Nigeria is witnessing right now is a government that is in 2016. How do we, I always talk about the most crazy, which is government of the people by the people and what the people, to be clean when it comes to the Nigeria issue. Because we, like here at Yoruba, right? Because it's so, it's so crazy who and it's so... I think we lost him again. Unfortunately, the connection is really bad and we're unable to hear him, so we're just going to leave it at that. But I think he was trying to make a point that what we're experiencing now is that the whole country is trying to be heard at the same time and insecurity is obviously the order of the day. So now that the president is at the United Nations, I mean, we've seen people protest in London when the president is going for his medical checkups, we see people protesting, he doesn't really change anything. So before we wrap up this conversation because we're almost out of time, do we see the government shifting grounds anytime soon? But this message that has been put out because the government is citing the fact that in the Southeast, there have been governments installations that have been targeted, INEC offices have been burned down, police officers have been, police stations have been burned down. A lot of havoc has been wrecked. And let's not also forget about the sit-at-home order, which has affected businesses, have affected people's means of livelihoods. And then there's an election coming up in November where some people have been told not to show up for the election. So looking at all of these things that the federal government is pointing to, they obviously seem like threats, but do we see the federal government shifting grounds anytime soon and bringing the people, like you said, to the table? This government, I know, I've not seen the government shifting ground. This government is doing everything possible to either keep you short, mime you, or you kill you. Well, that's a heavy allegation to me. Who's the government killed? Well, government killed the people. How? The people that the government is ruling, that the government is ruling, a leading. As long as you are protesting, as we experienced in the end of 2020, as long as you are protesting against the government, the government can send soldiers there and the other dispatches there. And by the way, in the process, the soldiers will start using the ground, ammunition to kill just like what happened last day. So it has happened and it will happen. This government, I'm saying, this government I know of is not ready to shift as long as their own image is intact. As long as they are protecting the image of the government, they are less interested in anything. In fact, the agitation we are talking about, the truth is, the people who are agitated for Yoruba nations, they are not even in Nigeria. You get, that is why you see millions of them, thousands of them protesting or doing a lot of things. They are actually doing it as a disnation. And the reason why the government is happy about this thing is this. The Yoruba nation, before now, had the concrete set to the United Nations to give a speech during the General Assembly. But I want to believe that it became possible for them because the vice president of the United Nations, or is it vice president of the Deputy Secretary General, is in Nigeria, who opposed to be a full-time woman. You got my point. Definitely would not allow that to say to her. And you're just making this up because you obviously, she hasn't come out to say that she would stop that happening. That says, I say. These are all speculations. Yes, that's why I use our, would not have allowed that. You get, would not have allowed that to happen because he's representing the government, which is Nigerian, Nigerian government. So- Well, she's representing the United Nations. In the United Nations, definitely, as long as she's in Nigerian, the Nigerian blood will still be in her vein. Okay. In closing, Vice-Chicu, like I asked him, we see a lot of things happening in the country where, I mean, the country has a lot on its plate, including Mr. President. And we're dealing with insecurity. We're dealing with the deep dive of the economy. Our Naira is nothing to, I mean, compared to the dollar. I think as yesterday was 550. I mean, point to anything now, we really can't say that things are really going well for us, even though statistics has it that the number of people that have been abducted or killed lately has reduced. But then the elections are just around the corner and I've asked somebody this question before. Do we see government changing or moving, you know, in a direction that might want to appease the people, at least being that they would be wanting our votes in a few months? I think government will shift grants once they get, that's why programs like this I think should be encouraged so that government will also get ideas from people. I think government will shift grants. What is needed now is for the federal government to set up a truce commission or committee. Let that committee talk the geopolitical zones, especially the ones that are agitating. At least for the first time, let them itemize, even if it's a list of one to 10, let them itemize the reason behind the agitation, so the reasons behind the protest, then report of the truce commission or committee. Federal government can move on from there and see whether they can enlarge it to include the principal actors or the people that are championing these agitations. Then on the strength of that, I think that if federal government does that, then we can say that the government has shifted grants and that I can tell you, we may make progress. We may make progress because when you ignore people like that, you are telling them that they are insignificant and when you say people are insignificant, I think they will want to maybe throw in lawful means also show you that they are significant. Let the federal government reach out to middle beds, reach out to south-west, reach out to southeast, reach out to south-south, reach out to all the people, even the north-west and all that, reach out to them, let's have a discussion. This nation belongs to us, we have no other nation. I think if the government does that, we might be able to down station them. Finally, the rhetorics from the president's media people to me needs to change the way most of the comments that have been binded in the press are linked to them. I do not think that will engender, it will not engender unity. Even using the language that Euroban nation or whatever will be judged by the company, I come from statistics are well over 40, 50 million. You don't talk to people like that, let those rhetorics or the language or whatever that is coming from the handlers of Mr. President and all the other people, let them tone it down, let them not inflame this society the more. Nigeria has suffered so much within the past 34 years at the international level. Nigeria is like a parallel state. Nigeria is no longer recon-weight. Even in West Africa, how long shall we continue like this? They need to have a change of heart, stop talking the way they are talking, that will not help us. Okay, well, Nii Babade is an international journalist who has been a trigger, is a barrister at law and Babashala Adebi is a political analyst. Thank you very much gentlemen for being part of the conversation. We appreciate it. Thank you for that. All right, well, we'll take a short break and when we return, we will discuss the ruling ABC persuading former President Goodlock Jonathan to join its party. How true is it? We'll be right back. Ah.