By Damiete Braide

Nobel laureate, Prof Wole Soyinka, has condemned the attacks on non-indigenes in Lagos State during the just concluded general elections.

In a statement, yesterday, Soyinka also knocked Labour Party (LP) vice presidential candidate, Datti Baba-Ahmed, over aspects of his comments on the outcome of the presidential polls and swearing-in of president-elect, Bola Tinubu, during an interview with Channels Television.

Advertisement

Baba-Ahmed had said in the interview that whoever swears in Tinubu on May 29 may be aborting the nation’s democracy because the APC candidate did not meet the constitutional requirement to be declared president.

“Mr President, do not hold that inauguration. CJN your lordship, do not partake in unconstitutionality. I am taking this risks for the sake of my country.

“Yes, it is extreme and I am saying it. It was more extreme for Yakubu (INEC Chair) to issue that certificate (of return). It was reckless. He is putting all our lives in danger. All of us. I am telling you that on the 29th of May 2023, swear in Tinubu as this result is, you have ended democracy whoever you are.

“You cannot swear in people who have not met constitutional requirements. If you do that, you have done something unlawful, something unconstitutional. And I am repeating it, whoever does not meet the constitutional requirement must not, must never be sworn in. You said my name. If you like I can say it again. I am Datti Baba-Ahmed.”

However, Soyinka denounced the statement as unbecoming of a vice-presidential aspirant.

The statement read:  “What I have read at least, thus far, this morning, extracted from a one and a half long interview, conducted  a week ago with Channels Television, brings once more to the fore, the critical responsibility of the media in transmitting the spoken, even recorded – word  to the public. 

Advertisement

“This is especially crucial in a time of civic uncertainty. When remarks are taken out of context, spliced into a new one, provided a sensational headline, distortions become stamped on public receptivity, and the central intent of one’s remarks becomes completely unrecognizable.  I denounced the menacing utterances of a Vice-Presidential aspirant as unbecoming. It was a gladiatorial challenge directed at the judiciary and, by implication, the rest of the democratic polity. But what on earth has happened to my even more urgent condemnation of the physical violence inflicted on those designated “strangers” in Lagos in the lead up to, and during  governorship elections?  This prejudicial selectivity is a betrayal of trust, and I find it contemptuous of public deserving.  My critique of incipient fascism in the movement remains grounded in indisputable evidence. Throughout the interview, I continued to stress that the final word had yet to be pronounced on the elections – that omission renders the full message tendentious! 

“On a minor note, I remain concerned by the alleged complaint by me of people not following ‘instructions.’ If words are garbled in recording, the speaker can be reached for clarification – else, simply leave out the unclear section completely to avoid misrepresentation. After all, piecemeal transmission is legitimate proceeding, as long as a part is not presented as the whole. I am not a member of the Labour Party, so how can giving ‘instructions’ become my role? Like a number of others, I have admittedly contributed to the making of this moment  – going back several years – and it is painful to have the followers of such a movement send it slithering backwards and down the fascistic slope.  

“ I hope Channels television plans to  provide the entire interview.  After months of having to endure total fabrications of partisan utterances that are strange to me, even in their very choice of words, it is most aggravating to have this, the first I have conceded in my authenticated person, casually subjected to selective editing and dissemination.”

SUN