By Tabia Princewill
The idea of a witch-hunt seems to be trending now in Nigeria, as everyone with a case to answer believes he or she is being witch-hunted, forgetting the evidence presented by the courts to justify the case’s existence. Another very famous witch-hunt is currently taking place in the United States and if you’re familiar with the term “Benghazi” you’re sure to already know about it.

The lessons for Nigeria are striking. In 2012, Libyan militants invaded a US diplomatic compound killing four Americans who therefore died under former Secretary of State (and possibly the Democratic party’s future presidential candidate) Hillary Clinton’s watch.

The Republican party (some would say in a bid to damage her presidential bid) attacked her tenure as Secretary of State and her handling of the Benghazi crisis, which led to her summons by a House of Representatives Committee. Hillary Clinton defended herself during an 11 hour hearing.

She didn’t call it a witch-hunt or refuse to attend the hearing. Rather, she believed that her actions and her good name could withstand any scrutiny. There is a lesson here for our leaders across the political divide: Hillary Clinton didn’t go seeking a perpetual injunction stopping any judge from investigating her, unlike the Amaechis and Stella Oduahs of this world. Nor did she hire the likes of Fayose or Olisa Metuh to scream “witch-hunt” across the pages of newspapers.

Pages of newspapers

She attended the hearing and rationally detailed and explained all that occurred which led to the loss of four American diplomats. Let me say that again, four diplomats. All this trouble for four deaths. What about the millions of dead and displaced in the North-East?

Will Fayose and Metuh make noise for them? Will Oduah and Amaechi ask the judiciary to investigate whose failures, at the state and federal level, led to deaths, kidnapping and insecurity in the South-South or South East?

Hillary

Besides Wike and Amaechi trading insults, will we ever know where the billions supposedly invested by the Niger Delta Development Commission since the Obasanjo era, all through the Yar’Adua and Jonathan amnesty years, actually went?

Hillary Clinton never once, during the 11-hour hearing, raised her voice or challenged the committee’s right to summon her. Yet, she is political royalty, but unlike Bukola Saraki, she did not seem to exude contempt for the system that dared to challenge her authority or her legacy. She was an adult and took it, quite literally, “like a man”, for lack of a better expression. She accepted responsibility for the staff in her care: Americans don’t do dereliction of duty, a very Nigerian act where we seek to blame others for our failures. I wonder what Hillary Clinton would have said, had she been President of Nigeria when the Chibok girls were taken. She certainly would not have denied their existence like the Jonathan camp did. Nor would she have called the whole thing “a witch-hunt” perpetrated by Northerners to destroy Jonathan’s image. She wouldn’t have ignored insurgency in the North simply because it wasn’t happening in her back yard.

So if anyone thinks they are being witch-hunted today, rather than an attempt to single them out (there are a lot of other wrong-doers, I agree) it is simply the justice system catching up with them, the same way it will catch up with the misdeeds of others in the long term. Americans are losing sleep over the fate of four of their citizens. Yet, we confidently ignore the fate of millions, the Internally Displaced Persons, IDPs.

Witch-hunt or not, the Clinton hearing, as the chairman of the committee who summoned her, said, is a symbol of a very American sentiment: “It is about what this country owes every single American. There is no statute of limitation on the truth”. So the PDP needs to find another narrative outside persecution, which makes a mockery of the continued suffering of the Nigerian people nation-wide. But the people understand: those who are anti-change (for the record, they are housed by both parties) grow fretful. The oppressive, corrupt system they so carefully built, is in danger for the first time in decades (we have perhaps not seen a more committed leader to real change since Murtala Mohammed) and so they seek to hide behind ethnic bigotry, pseudo-religious sentiments and “witch-hunts” to escape destruction.

The assault on democracy isn’t coming from Buhari but from the politicians whose mentality is curiously that of military rule: subvert the rules, lie, divide Nigerians, feign innocence, ignore the real issues at stake and most of all, pretend to work in the interest of the people, whereas everything they do is anti-Nigeria. Paranoia in a witch-hunt claimant is seen as a synonym of guilt. In a way, the witch-hunt trend is a positive development: it means there is finally shame or stigma attached to accusations or allegations of corruption, which plaintiffs are uncomfortable with.

Clinton never directly spoke of the political machinations behind her summons. Instead, she chose to raise the bar: “My challenge to you, members of this committee, is the same challenge I put to myself: Let’s be worthy of the trust the American people have bestowed upon us. They expect us to lead, learn the right lessons. To rise above partisanship and to reach for statesmanship.” Nigerians, let’s accept this challenge: let justice be served no matter whose ox is gored.

Governor Wike and PDP

The King has lost his crown. It’s a difficult time for the Jonathans, their heirs, associates and supporters, many of whom have turned resentful or incoherent (Femi Fani-Kayode’s defence of Biafra is too misguidedly and confusingly anti-Nigerian to even be analysed, although it shows just how much the Jonathan years made the PDP a sectional party).

The PDP believes there is a plot to use the judiciary to remove all those the Presidency isn’t comfortable with.

For the sake of following this argument, let us ask why wouldn’t he be uncomfortable with widespread allegations of fraud and misconduct as evidenced by the courts?

For arguments sake again, let us look at the records of the Fayemis, Amaechis and Fasholas whom the PDP uses to argue “selective justice”: if indeed they are guilty of improprieties why didn’t the PDP senators prove it during the ministerial screening?

The Senate could learn a thing or two from Hillary Clinton’s hearing. If the PDP feels it has been wronged, it should appeal the judgement that annulled the Rivers election, the same way Buhari went to the courts each time he contested.

He accepted court judgements even when they weren’t in his favour. If Wike believes he won fair and square then the same people who voted for him once will come out again to support him. If the PDP believes the judiciary is corrupt, they had ample time, in 16 years, to reform it, rather than enshrining a system where judges marched to politicians’ tune.

The Ijaw Youth Council

The IYC claims the anti-corruption war is targeted at the Ijaws. Why do we simplify things in the most grotesque way in Nigeria?   They asked the UK government to stay away from Diezani Allison-Madueke. What does the UK gain from “witch-hunting” her?

Simply, the UK has questions to ask and its prosecutorswill give the accused the opportunity to defend herself. As for the notion that Alamieyeseigha died because he was harassed, it is offensive: that he didn’t go abroad for treatment is a choice he made, one rendered all the more ironic by the number of supposedly state of the art hospitals built by PDP members from time immemorial.

As for the assertion that the UK streets are owned by corrupt Northerners, let the IYC rest assured. There is no statute of limitation on corruption. It might be easier to try recent cases, but once we do, our judiciary would have matured and gained enough confidence to investigate even 20-year-old crimes.