The Man Died in Prof . Wole Soyinka before diatribe with Datti Baba-Ahmed – Opinion

I have followed with fascination and sometimes, chagrin the evolution of Nigerian politics and particularly, this year’s presidential elections. My interest is stoked mainly by the belief and hope that Nigeria’s liberation can inspire other youth movements across Africa.  

The issue that has left me feeling lightheaded and wondering about the future of democracy in Africa should Nigeria fail to deliver for its young people and their future, is the recent war of words between Nobel Laureate for Literature Prof Wole Soyinka and Datti Baba-Ahmed, the Labour Party’s Vice-Presidential candidate in the February 25 presidential election.

When Prof. Soyinka challenged Baba Ahmed to a public debate, following criticism of his condemnation of the latter’s denunciation of President-elect Bola Tinubu, the judiciary, and Nigeria’s democracy in an interview aired on Channels TV, I was aptly reminded of the African proverb which says “a bird with a weak skull does not challenge a woodpecker to a fight”.

Baba-Ahmed refusal to engage in such a debate with Prof. Soyinka for ‘cultural and political’ reasons was logical and expected. After all, what would be the focus of their debate? He is a politician, aspiring to lead the country, while Prof. Soyinka is a celebrated world playwright, novelist, poet, and a Nobel Prize winner – in fact the first Black African to win this coveted trophy.

What I did, however, find illogical, was Prof. Soyinka’s intervention, criticism of the Obi-Datti movement, and even his invitation to a debate in the first place.

In  Soyinka’s statement titled “Fascism on Course” wherein he tables his invitation,  he says that “What is at stake, ultimately is – Truth” and as such he chides Baba-Ahmed for his choice of words in challenging the outcome of the Nigerian elections saying that “when you are party to a conflict, you do not attempt to intimidate the arbiter, attempt to dictate the outcome, or impugn, without credible cause, his or her neutrality even before hearing has commenced. That is a ground rule of just proceeding. Short of this, Truth remains permanently elusive.”

The contradiction in Prof. Soyinka’s words comes within the same statement as he goes on to pick a side and criticise the whole Obi-Datti movement stating that “‘Obidients’ is one of the most repulsive, off-putting concoctions (he) ever encountered in any political arena”.  By denigrating the movement, condemning Baba-Ahmed, and tagging his followers “ignorant and susceptible”, “younger, confused generation”, and “rookie activists”, the Nobel Laureate, for all intents and purposes, takes a side – but sadly, it is not with the people of Nigeria and it is not in the interest of democracy. Prof. Soyinka has a strong voice in Nigeria and beyond, and by weighing in against one side, he contradicts the same ground rule of just proceeding and destroys his neutrality. In essence, Prof. Soyinka obliterates the truth and makes it hard for an impartial observer not to conclude that he was consciously or unconsciously attempting to determine the outcome of proceedings.

The fact remains that the only other side of this argument from an Obi-Datti standpoint is the current establishment, which Prof. Soyinka himself, in his interview with the Guardian UK, condemned within the context of the #EndSARS  protests, when he praised the actions of the younger generation who rather than “waiting for salvation, got its act together and took on these brutes called the Sars.” But more to it, Prof. Soyinka points to the fact that the Sars movement represented something greater “And of course, it wasn’t just the Sars. It was more than that. It was an expression of discontent. To see this structured movement, I felt rejuvenated”.

In the same spirit, Prof. Soyinka in a recent interview on Arise TV made a direct link between the emergence of Obi and the #EndSARS movement when he said: “For me, the emergence of the Peter Obi movement is the consequence of events like the EndSARS  movement, and all this is done with a democratic spirit, persuasion, campaigning, mobilizing and sometimes even tutoring a prospective candidate.”

Listening to Soyinka speak about the EndSARS movement and how he links it to Peter Obi’s emergence, would give the impression that the ‘Obidients’ movement was on the right side of history.

I, therefore, find it confusing and a tad distressing that a few days later, Prof. Soyinka is using strong derogatory terms to describe them, while inviting them to a public debate, to which there can be no obvious winner.

It is probably worth reminding Prof. Soyinka of his own words in his Prison Notes, “The man dies in all who keep silent in the face of tyranny.” This is given that most of the criticism he received stemmed from the fact that he has been silent on many issues that truly matter in Nigeria, not the least the general conduct of the last elections, which necessitated Baba-Ahmed to say it was ‘unconstitutional’ to swear in Bola Tinubu. By not speaking out in the face of the tyranny that has engulfed Nigeria, or should I daresay, by not taking action to stop it, the man in Prof. Soyinka would, by his own words have died, hence, the least he could have done at this stage would have been to remain silent.

This incident has led me to see the point Chinua Achebe was making when he wrote that: “The Nigerian problem is the unwillingness or inability of its leaders to rise to the responsibility, to the challenge of personal example which are the hallmarks of true leadership.”

Prof. Soyinka is clearly a leader in the literary world, but when it comes to Nigerian politics, he has failed, just as the hundreds of thousands of other intellectuals who do nothing but criticise those making efforts to bring about practical change.

To this effect, I will conclude by referring Prof Soyinka and all African intellectuals to the immortal words of Plato, who in the Republic stated: “Until philosophers rule as kings or those who are now called kings and leading men genuinely and adequately philosophise, that is, until political power and philosophy entirely coincide… poleis will have no rest from evils…there can be no happiness, either public or private, in any other polis.”

Unless and until this happens, Prof. Soyinka would have confirmed the views held by Athenians in Plato’s time that intellectuals (philosophers) were eternal adolescents, skulking in corners and muttering about the meaning of life, rather than taking an adult role in their country’s quest for power and success. As a matter of fact, the man has died in all who have been silent or inactive in the face of the tyranny that has characterised Nigeria since independence.

Kingsley Sheteh Newuh