Leadership (Abuja)
29 December 2008
opinion
Without engaging into any strenuous intellectual exercise, it is evident that a survey of objects of human knowledge shows that they are either ideas imprinted on the senses or passions and operations of the mind or better still, ideas formed by the help of memory and imagination.
How and to what length these ideas connect with the reality of things lies the validity test.When the bold caption of 'Umar Blasts Governor Namadi' appeared on the cover page of National Life November 22, 2008 as a headline news item, we for once thought it was our own colonel (rtd) Umar Dangiwa, the incorruptible and indefatigable social critic. But further enquiry revealed that someone with a similar name also, presumably in the league of the 'critique enterprise' decided in his own wisdom to take a swipe at Governor Namadi. For what the piece of interview is worth, an illogical assemblage of mis-information traded on the turf of public conscience, some issues needed to be responded to. In doing this we desire to tie the loose ends of misinformation and the split personality created by Major Umar Abubakar who many mistook for Col. Umar Dangiwa.
To put issues straight, the said interview granted National Life Newspaper was by one Major (rtd) Umar Abubakar, a social critic in his own right but whose style and depth of research are a world of difference with that of Col. Umar Dangiwa. When Umar Dangiwa decides to speak on any issue the detail and depth of his research, articulate culture and style of presentation are exemplary and faultless, full of punches and hard-hitting in form of content. So we may be forced to rest our curiosity; Dangiwa could not have been a party to that tiny piece of show-sensation prosecuted with such bold screaming headline as to suggest that there is virtually no governance in Kaduna.Observation and remarks are all holed up in the deep trenches of ideas in possession of the observer. Ideas are the fountain head of remarks and comments. In an informed society where ideas are traded comments and remarks on issues of public concern are well thought of before they are let off because superior ideas offered as a counter poise can render them hollow and dry and a source of embarrassment to one.
As human as we are, we are not in possession of clairvoyant insight to discern what informed a particular comment or remark or what such persons who made have at the back of their minds. However certain consideration of style of language, mode of expression, mood of the moment, accuracy of facts and figures, give considerable insight and understanding of purpose and intention behind certain remarks.The case we have in hand though, only a speck of catchy similarity in personal identity but a cast off from the real Umar Dangiwa whose views are sharp and straight, cornered to the ends of indepth research, and brain work, facts and figures as part of the general features of his remarks.In a democratic dispensation where political office holders should be held accountable to their oaths of office and pre-election promises, comments of respected social critics are weapons that opposition parties and vigilant electorates can use to chastise indolent regimes to action. But ,when remarks are just made to create attention, in a disguised, sanctimonious pretense for rectitude, neither the government nor the people benefit from such comments. Whatever anyone may construe out of the comments of social critics the fact remains that in a cloudy and foggy political climate like ours such is to ensure a thorough sit-up for effective delivery of positive governance.
For governments whose self-conceived ideals of governance, are off the path of a nations tradition enshrined in its political culture, social critics are only of nuisance value and must not be tolerated. Extreme measures in rare cases could lead to arrest, molestation and sometimes outright incarceration.Even with the obvious hazards that come with being identified as a social critic the gains are real for they are held in high esteem. Their views are well informed, balanced and weighed against reason and logic and well articulate, and capable of sending the right message across.Such being the case comments oozing out of the domain of any intending social critic must be thorough, well informed and laced with facts and figures that cannot be refuted. This in any case serves the interest of the social critic who may wish to be taken serious; whilst on the path of where such comments are directed, to be used as safeguard against mistakes and areas of errors, and in the interest of public good.In the sense that our society is still battling to reclaim its lost values to the clairvoyance dominance of material ideology comments from critics these days are often taken with a pinch of salt. It has often been noticed that some critics after a short-lived, well crafted output of action-show dissolve into oblivion - a clear case of plain attention - seeking agenda.
If critical comments do not rest on the plank of aiding sitting governments to duties of office and effective governance they had better be swallowed because they could send the wrong signal behind noble intention which we believe Major Umar has for the good people of Kaduna State.This was the risk Major Umar took when he failed to advice Namadi after a constrained tale of errors and weakness he noticed. We feel that he ought to have embraced the better side of engaging Namadi to the path of alternative approach to arrears of errors, and mistakes he noticed rather than just zero his comment on the note of 'failure'.Even if one can excuse Major Umar for choosing a low-rated Newspaper to express his view, the limited areas of attention he used to arrive at a hurried conclusion of failure bounds off the walls of logic and rationality. A performance assessment devoid of statistical references, facts and figures is hollow enough to stand the chance of credibility. If he had keyed in more details, enriched his findings with facts and figures and expand his areas of attention, his total configuration of Namadi stewardship so far would have discharged the full content of empirical validity.
This is where remarks squares with reason, logic and information base to give a clear picture and undisguised intention in public affairs commentary.In the self-assigned task of performance evaluation of the Namadi administration we observe that Major Umar choose to be terminally evasive in depth, curiously brief in sighted instances thereby corrupting the smooth edges of convincing argument and logical analysis. In exploring the full text of his remark we were lost in the constrained path of unhemmed mixtures of arguments, informations and logics. If Major Umar seeks to return Namadi government from the run-away path of ineffective performance as perceived by him, the disordered sequence of remark and reality and the terrible disconnect in language and subject matter have combined to send the wrong signal. It may be argued that given the penchant for sensational reporting and screaming headline in most Newspapers Umar may not have used the exact word of 'failure' as a descriptive term of evaluation but his outright dismissal and total crucifixion of Namadi gave his interviewers the soft-edge to ride on in that rude craftsmanship of exaggeration.In the hurried rush to pin-point areas of weakness and consign a young administration to the dustbin of failure Major Umar laid bare his proclivity for hard-hitting critical comment even at the wrong instance. On this, one may be forced to agree that this instance was one venturesome endeavour calculated to marry negative ends of personal sentiments with reality.
As we proceed to look at the issues that Major Umar raised, our approach will be to skirt around them, not too deep as to suggest that we are holding brief for Namadi's media aide,yet, deep enough to open other windows of views that can afford a neutral mind the gauging capacity of fair assessment of the Namadi administration vis-a -vis Major Umar remarks and comments.Major Umar claims that government hospitals in the state lacked common drugs like analgesics. Since Major Umar did not tell us which of the state hospitals he attends, we would assume that he frequents all the state government hospitals and his observations apply to all of them. But has Umar cared to asked the nurses and doctors and other such health personnel in the state whether drugs were supplied in the first place, or will he claim ignorance of sharp practices common among health workers where sophisticated channels have been designed to hide drugs and later sell those drugs at odd hours? recently, the Lagos Governor, Fashola disguised himself into one of the state government hospital and his discovery was startling enough. Once the information got round that the Governor was around, all ineffective segments became active; drugs that were hitherto unavailable as claimed became available instantly. We believe that the extent to which Namadi is committed to free medical treatment for pregnant women and children under the age of five (5) cannot be washed away except if Major Umar doesn't think such treatments rendered freely are services that should have cost implication and the source of internally generated revenue for the government.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
