The quality of penitence

By 

Levi Obijiofor

There is a television commercial in this part of the world which seeks to extol the near magical powers of a certain brand of hair shampoo. The commercial is directed at women because, as beauty theoreticians often argue, the beauty of every woman is dependent on the healthy state of her hair. I do not subscribe to this view although it is a common theme here. The state of a womans hair is also dependent on the quality of the nourishing cream and shampoo a woman uses. So much for the theories of hair and beauty! The commercial is of no use to balding men who have no hair to maintain. In this particular commercial, New Zealand TV star Rachel Hunter stretches her luxuriantly shinning hair on television. She also utters something quite instructive. All women aspiring to grow their hair to look like hers are encouraged to continue to use the advertised brand of shampoo if they hope to achieve a result. But she added a reassuring warning: "It may not happen overnight but it will happen." That is the miracle of patience.

The message in this TV shampoo commercial is obvious: good things dont come easily. Patience is the key. Imagine how long it has taken President Olusegun Obasanjo and his defence chiefs to decide whether it was prudent to expess regrets over the gruesome and deliberate murder of innocent Nigerian villagers by armed troops of the Nigerian nation.

When armed soldiers were despatched to Odi village in Bayelsa State to launch an extraordinary war on the same people the soldiers ought to protect, the Federal Government maintained an uneasy silence. Despite the weight of adverse public opinion on the government action, neither President Olusegun Obasanjo nor his defence chiefs expressed regret or sadness over the massacre that occurred. As far as the government was concerned, the massacre in Odi should serve as a dreadful reminder of the governments determination to meet force with force ñ measure for measure ñ whenever its core interests are threatened. But the grim incident in Odi also serves as a crude and unprecedented measure used by a democratically elected government to solve a crime.

The crime that obviously provoked the military invasion of Odi was the dastardly killing of about a dozen police officers on investigative duties in the community. The killing of the police officers by some militant villagers was a crude and unhelpful way to solve a festering problem in the oil-producing communities. The families of the deceased police officers have lost their breadwinners. The children will grow for the rest of their lives without the parental support and guidance of their fathers. No one must forget the gruesome murder of the policemen. Nevertheless the federal governments reaction to the abduction and subsequent murder of the police officers was equally unrefined. As much as the government could argue that it was forced to use extreme force to seek the criminals who murdered the police officers in cold blood, no amount of rhetorical explanation would justify the action of the soldiers in Odi. The soldiers sent to Odi killed innocent people, villagers who had nothing to do with the deaths of the police officers. If the government were to use soldiers to kill indiscriminately each time a similar disaster occurs, the implication is that the government elected by the people would have declared itself the unofficial terminator of the people of Nigeria. The disproportionate killing of innocent villagers in Odi was unjustified and can never be defended in any court of justice. The federal government must be aware that two wrongs never add up to a right. At all times, the government must act promptly but with caution. The government must act like a grandfather. Where there is rancour and animosity, the government must intervene peacefully and perhaps firmly. Where lives are lost, particularly lives of officers on national assignment, the government must apply prudence and investigative strategies to arrest and convict only the murderers and their agents.

Despite press celebrations over the so-called expression of regret credited to Defence Minister Lt.-Gen. Theophilus Danjuma (rtd), it appears the minister was not expressing regret but was indeed making an off-the-cuff (casual) observation. The minister reportedly told a visiting South African defence delegation: "Using the armed forces for purely police duties is dangerous." In the context of the statement, it could be said that the minister was uneasy about the use of soldiers in internal crisis situations where the police normally should take responsibility. But the minister also made an important admission. Soldiers by tradition and training are used for the defence of the country (to fight the countrys enemies) not to fight civilians within the country. In the light of these issues, on whose advice and authority were the soldiers sent to destroy Odi and its people?

The government needs to make a clear statement of regret on the mishandling of the crisis in Odi. In this regard, a high-ranking government delegation led possibly by the Defence Minister should be sent to Odi to express President Obasanjos sincere sadness over the military invasion and subsequent massacre of the people of Odi. The so-called regret (if, indeed, it could be classified as regret) was made in an inappropriate forum and at a wrong venue. The people of Odi were killed, hurt, and some permanently injured. The emotional scars would take more than a generation to heal. The nightmarish experiences of the people would require more than psychological counselling to overcome. The government has several avenues to offer genuine apology to the people of Odi and indeed to the people of Nigeria who were justifiably offended by the governments use of soldiers and bombs to annihilate innocent villagers. Any expression of regret or sadness should be made publicly in Odi or through television and radio channels and in languages that the people understand. The government should also try to assuage the suffering of the bereaved villagers through financial compensation. Financial compensation should be viewed as part of the healing process, not as replacement for lost lives. Money is never a substitute for lost lives.

Obijiofor is a professor of journalism in Queensland, Australia.