One of the tenets of a democratic society is the assurance of freedom of speech and expression for its citizens. This includes the right to speak and criticise in order to ensure that society does not derail in upholding its values. The test of democracy is not at the point of comfortable tolerance of these rights but in allowing everyone to, even at the greatest inconvenience, manifest the utmost freedom granted to them by law and nature.
Criticism is an innate attitude. Humans criticise others and themselves, either when they achieve something or when they disagree with an act. It is not for us to decide but for us to tolerate. But would one be allowed to act and enjoy those rights perpetually without any form of constraint? When does a right become a burden or an infringement on the same or other rights enjoyed by others? Could the concept of a free person truly mean freedom in all ramifications? Would this not put others in bondage too? While these rights abound, they are qualified by the right of others to protect their dignity, reputation, and the hard work put into careers they have built over decades.
I see the brawl between Aare Afe Babalola and Dele Farotimi as the clash of these two rights – the former defending dignity and reputation and the latter exercising the freedom of speech and criticism. Farotimi has built a reputation as a respected activist, author, and social commentator, even more so than as a lawyer. His views on equity, justice, and the actual enjoyment of human rights have recently topped the voices of freedom in the country. He has waged war against corruption and inequalities, often dragging inefficient and unscrupulous politicians for public evaluation. As an activist, Farotimi has championed causes aimed at encouraging citizens to believe in a promising future for the country, as he often calls for the dismantling of the very foundations on which contemporary Nigeria is built. However, one thing is fundamental about Farotimi: he does not hold back or fear – he speaks out, regardless of who is affected.
Chief Afe Babalola is a famous Nigerian who represents the echelon of success in many endeavours. He has climbed up the professional and social ladder to the point that achieving half of his accomplishments would be enough to say that an individual has led a good life and to write such a person’s name in history. Babalola is a foremost educationist, legal practitioner, and philanthropist, among other worthy achievements. Having built a reputation over 70 years of active service, business, and engagements, he is one of those who we could conclusively say has a name to protect and would go to great lengths to do so.
It is within Farotimi’s right to make accusations based on facts he knows and can prove. The hallmark of freedom guarantees that he is afforded the right to express himself if his claims are based on verifiable facts. Farotimi makes some accusations in his book, and I am convinced that he is not a man who would make unfounded propositions against someone of Babalola’s status, so I expect him to prove his claims. Likewise, Babalola has the right to preserve and defend his rights and reputation. I am convinced that many of those who have condemned his actions would have gone far and beyond to protect their accomplishments, just as he has allegedly done.
Well, this is not a piece to decide who is right or who is overreacting. While clashes often arise from the exercise of these rights, as it is common in many cases, societal institutions like the Nigerian Police are charged with the duty of ensuring orderliness. It is the legal and professional duty of the Nigerian Police and other law enforcement agents to ensure everyone’s equal standing and fair hearing in the prosecution of matters, with the goal of ensuring that justice is served. The aim of the law is not to persecute but to prosecute offenders, yet the Farotimi saga suggests that the Police are standing in the ease of the former rather than the latter. I mean, it has been reported that the Nigerian Police, with remarkable agility, tracked Farotimi from Ekiti State to Lagos to effect his arrest.
One of the common complaints and excuses the Nigerian Police often give victims of crimes and alleged crimes is that the Force lacks the facilities and means to effect arrests and investigate troubling situations. They claim a lack of vehicles or even money to fuel them. These excuses have allowed countless dangerous criminals to escape justice. What about the criminal herdsmen who disturb people’s farms and livelihoods yet remain at large? What about the hardened criminals who do not look one in the face twice before ending it all? The security challenges on highways and other problems militating against the peace of the nation? Is it that the Police now feel the headache more than the owner of the head, or is their commitment to the protection of a stateman suddenly becoming a matter of national interest?
The Police are charged with the duty of maintaining law and order, while protecting the interests of citizens. However, their actions in this case seem to align with an agenda to suppress the freedom of expression – a perennial complaint of citizens. With this duty to maintain order comes the responsibility to investigate without bias, to give both the victim and the defendant equal playing ground. Still, they have acted with such conviction of guilt and are ready to take Farotimi to the slaughter.
The Nigerian Police’s reaction only reinforces the people’s fear of the Force being used to pursue personal interests. What immediate benefit would the urgent and aggressive prosecution of Farotimi bring, compared to the already many pressing issues the Police are faced with? It only allows the citizens to suspect foul play. Do not get me wrong: my position is not that Farotimi should not be tried for any suspicion of criminal infractions, but he should be prosecuted, not persecuted in the way the Nigerian Police have handled the matter.
Remanding Farotimi is an unnecessary and apparent misuse of state power, seemingly aimed at punishing a “child” for insulting an elder. The charges against him do not warrant that the accused be incarcerated while an investigation is done. The Nigerian Police have granted administrative bail to people who have committed more serious crimes. Farotimi is a well-known public figure with an office, family, and other responsibilities attributable to him, which should guarantee his responsiveness.
It is now clear that when there is enough motivation and interest in a case, the Police will act accordingly and within the required time. This highlights the need for greater accountability and reform within the Nigerian Police. The Nigerian Police must evolve beyond being mere instruments in the hands of the powerful. They must prosecute when the state is offended, not to persecute when private interests are affected. Farotimi has been taught an unnecessary lesson, but the joke is still being broadcast to the Nigerian Police!
PS: This piece was written at Gombe State University, Gombe, on 10 December. I appreciate the management of the university for allowing me to use their space.
Toyin Falola, is emeritus professor of History.
Credit: Toyin Falola