Well Read On
Ejusdem Generis is Latin for "of the same kind," used to interpret loosely written statutes. Where a
law lists specific classes of persons or things and then refers to them in general, the general
statements only apply to the same kind of persons or things specifically listed. Example: if a law refers
to automobiles, trucks, tractors, motorcycles and other motor-powered vehicles, "vehicles" would not
include airplanes, since the list was of land-based transportation.
Our interpretation for Ejusdem Generis
if a law refers to Nigerian Leaders who have been Soldiers, Politicians, and other corruption-powered
People, "People" would not include writers (wole soyinka), since the list was of Presidential-based
leaders.
Lagos—political calculations and/or miscalculations could solidify certain sainthood, definitely, it is
possible, it could diminish it. Furthermore, alleged Sainthood could come crumpling, turn to dust,
albatross, because man is just ordinary mortal despite alleged provocation at lunacy of actionable
journalistic responsibilities.
It is definitely, colossally disparaging that “Our Dear” respectable enough Noble Laureate is struggling
today to get away from “his friend IBB”—it must be tough on him despite his “pretended ignorance” at
Remi Oyeyemi’s article, ignorance of RepublicReport’s publications, ignorance of other institutional
publications in print and electronically by Nigeria Media out-lets, who got frustrated by Soyinka’s
unending romance with “Evil Genius” Ibrahim B. Babangida. This dubious romance dated back to 80s &
90s,when IBB appointed Soyinka—Chairman Federal Road Safety Commission [FRSC], an appointment
that “triggered” massive recruitment of Sea-Dog secrete Cult-Members to become Road Marshals to
protect the citizenry by the eminent professor, reports say.
Obviously this is followed by numerous visits to Aso-Rock of any administration in power [military or
civilian].
Nobel Laureate Soyinka admitted visited former President Obasanjo administration Headquartered in
Abuja, [1999-2007] many times.
Reporters observed that it was unusual for Soyinka to visit a sitting President in Aso Rock:
In response, the Nobel Laureate disclosed that he used to visit former President, Olusegun Obasanjo
in the Presidential Villa until he became disappointed in the retired General.
“Well, you know, people tend to forget that presidents are human beings, first of all, and they have
relationships. I used to visit Obasanjo, at least when I thought there was something in him to benefit
the nation. When I found there is nothing, I stopped. So it is not unusual for me to visit presidents,”
he said.
Wole Soyinka’s daughter was appointed Special Assistant to the presidency by Obasanjo
administration. She still serves in that capacity today under the present presidency. Obasanjo later
impregnated her according to News of the People’s Magazine, “Obasanjo impregnates Wole Soyinka’s
daughter, Mrs. Onijala, married to Mr. John Olutola Onijala, a Nigerian diplomat; breaks the marriage,
and husband seeks divorce.” People Magazine, February 12, 2008.
Some reports accused Wole Soyinka of, “Following the Money” all the time.
“Wole Soyinka we knew and read about yesterday is not the same Wole Soyinka that we know and
read about today, something is definitely a-mix from my crystal ball” one commentator added.
Despite major national, regional and international difficulties and challenges that we face, we are
encumbered with ‘op-ed’ rejoinder by Soyinka sweating and defending the indefensible such as, “Edo-
Rally & Tea Summit with IBB” under the invitation of Governor Oshomole’s “One-Man One Vote”
political symphonies at Edo-State-house. Who could have believed any iota of Wole Soyinka’s partial
admittance of fundamental elements of truisms of IBB’s interview two-weeks ago published in
Nigerian-Compass, RepublicRpeort, and now Remi Oyeyemi at SR?
“However, Ibrahim Babangida, in the account offered by Oyeyemi, was absolutely correct in one
aspect. I have no personal problem with him or with any other individual to whom I openly identify as
a political adversary. Babangida does however have a huge problem of political deficit with me, and
with the nation, and that is the albatross that constitutes his problem. I affirm that, if the State
House stewards had offered me tea with IBB, I would have declined, but it would only have been to
request something a little stronger, since I am no tea drinker. I am happy to note that Oyeyemi’s
strictures do not extend to having a drink with anyone on the other side of a profound political divide”
Professor Soyinka. How come it took you over two-weeks to react to troubling allegations until friend
sent you the link?
“Whose truth is this? Obviously Oyeyemi’s, not that of anyone else who was present in Oshiomole’s
visitors’ lounge, the airport, the Ikeja arrival lounge, or listened to my brief statement with the media
at Ikeja. Since when did the Oyeyemi of the world appropriate the right to interpret events at which
they were not present, and assign a ‘truth’ to the state of mind of the characters involved. What are
the credentials of Oyeyemi as a mind-reader? Has he spoken to Oshiomole? To his staff who organized
the event? To the team which whisked me to the airport? To Akande, Tinubu, Fayemi etc etc to whom
I spoke while organising my exit from Oshiomole’s guest house? Is any of that melodrama of any real
interest to busy and serious-minded people? Who is this faceless individual to compose his own
spurious scenario in his feverish mind and attempt to foist it on your readership?” Soyinka
Take it easy eminent professor—it is really tough on you these days—we indeed live in an interesting
time. Our eminent Professor of literature is asking Remi Oyeyemi to explain “earthshaking details of
this tea session:” “Was it milk, cream, sugar, biscuits on the side?” were served by Edo State house
stewards.
“Did Babangida really say we had tea together? I am learning of this weird claim for the first time. So
what should I do? Sue him for defamation? Oyeyemi owes it to his readers to unravel the earth-
shaking details of this tea session. Was it with milk? Cream? Sugar? Biscuits on the side? After all,
Oshiomole’s visitors’ lounge was constantly filled, from the beginning to the end. Someone must have
noticed some sinister details. The stewards must remember whom they served tea, and in whose
company. Oyeyemi should do his homework. Obviously these are weighty matters on which the future
of the nation depends” Wole Soyinka.
This is too mundane a defeatist expletives coming from our eminent professor of literature.
Authoritative source said, “Some virtual-truisms are disturbingly and holistically missing in these
dialogues, definitely disappointing his colleagues’ sensibilities at current prevailing intellectual culture”
that is bedevilled by intellectual fraud, however.
“Please, spare yourself and us the likes of those who throw around words like ‘truth’ and ‘integrity’
until they have learnt to respect their adjunct – ‘responsibility’” Wole Soyinka.
Evidently someone is not telling the whole truth about these exchanges of “editorial responsibilities”
—but what one thing is clinically clear in this dialogueis:—Professor of literature Wole Soyinka is
struggling to-get-away from IBB, because of their past political and secrete-cult-affinities—obviously,
it’s TOUGH on Nobel Laureate, “Tea Break In Naija” Rejoinder, notwithstanding.
Read full Wole Soyinka Rejoinder communication to Remi Oyeyemi’s article below:
Tea Break In Naija, Written By Wole Soyinka
While this intervention has been triggered off by an ‘op-ed’ in your online journal by one Remi
Oyeyemi, I have to let you know that I have taken the trouble to respond more out of a concern for the
editorial responsibilities of your journal than anything else. This is not the first such abuse of
SAHARAREPORTERS and, curiously enough, a former occasion had to do with the same subject
I.B.Babangida. I shall begin by acknowledging the extreme generosity of your contributor in allowing
me one full week of grace to respond to an interview I had never seen, nor knew anything about. In
his article, the sanctimonious Oyeyemi has again graciously imposed a deadline, albeit unspecified. I
shudder to think what would have happened if a concerned reader had not sent me a link, wondering
what this was all about. Virtual decapitation?
Now, to some pertinent issues: I remain in ignorance also of how the Nigerian media reported the Edo
incident. Beyond my brief comment on return to Ikeja airport, I declined to give any interviews on the
incident. I left the airport before the AC delegation. By agreement en route from Benin, they would do
the talking. My only interest was to return to my US engagements without further loss of valuable
time.
There is a deplorable tone of pomposity, of dictatorial conceit in Oyeyemi’s article that sets one’s
teeth on edge. Here is an article premised on a profusion of ‘ifs’, ‘maybes’, ‘mightbes’, ‘it is possible
that’, ‘alleged’, ‘reportedly’, yet filled with conclusive judgmental expressions and smug
censoriousness. Setting up oneself as a judge of political moralities requires a more rigorous approach
to the marshaling, and presentation of suppositions and facts. You do not impute a ‘cover-up’ on such
feeble, convenient, purely speculative terms – and over such trivia!
A surprise encounter, totally unexpected that took place in the presence of, and involving at least
thirty others in the reception room of a state governor is not, by any stretch of imagination, an
encounter to be tendentiously described as taking place ‘behind closed doors’. This was in the ‘public
domain’, and it is presumptuous for anyone to require that I give an account, as a public duty, to what
was clear to everyone in that formal and open space as a fortuitous encounter, and one with all
conversation audible to all, including a swarm of reporters and photographers that accompanied
Babangida into that lounge.
However, Ibrahim Babangida, in the account offered by Oyeyemi, was absolutely correct in one aspect.
I have no personal problem with him or with any other individual to whom I openly identify as a
political adversary. Babangida does however have a huge problem of political deficit with me, and with
the nation, and that is the albatross that constitutes his problem. I affirm that, if the State House
stewards had offered me tea with IBB, I would have declined, but it would only have been to request
something a little stronger, since I am no tea drinker. I am happy to note that Oyeyemi’s strictures do
not extend to having a drink with anyone on the other side of a profound political divide.
The purists of political contact are welcome to their position, but they should learn to mind their
language. ’Behind closed doors’! Is there no longer any respect for truth?
As already stated, I indeed met and exchanged ‘pleasantries’ with Babangida. When I discovered what
had brought him into Oshiomole’s visitors’ lounge – in company of at least some twenty-odd other
guests, including Governor Sylvia of Bayelsa – when I found that he had been invited to the rally, and
that David Mark was also invited as Guest of Honour, I organized my leave-taking as fusslessly and
efficiently as I know how, with a fortuitous timing that enabled me to hitch a ride in the chartered
plane that brought AC leaders to Edo. I especially did not want to embarrass my host, Adam
Oshiomole, who – I still feel – had invited me with less than expected candour and error of judgment.
I find Oyeyemi’s article pretentious, pompous and irresponsibly misleading. SAHARA REPORTERS could
have punctured this soufflé by contacting me and drawing my attention to Babangida’s interview. They
know how to find me. Other media have taken similar action in the past, sometimes only to decide not
even to publish my response when they judged that the issue merited no more than transient curiosity
– in journalese, considered unnewsworthy.
“But he owes the rest of us the TRUTH (my emphasis) that this was what transpired, and that he
changed his mind after having tea with him (IBB) that he did not want to be seen in public with him.
Misleading (?) the public that he turned back from Benin airport when this was not what happened…”
writes Mr. Remi Oyeyemi.
Whose truth is this? Obviously Oyeyemi’s, not that of anyone else who was present in Oshiomole’s
visitors’ lounge, the airport, the Ikeja arrival lounge, or listened to my brief statement with the media
at Ikeja. Since when did the Oyeyemi of the world appropriate the right to interpret events at which
they were not present, and assign a ‘truth’ to the state of mind of the characters involved. What are
the credentials of Oyeyemi as a mind-reader? Has he spoken to Oshiomole? To his staff who organized
the event? To the team which whisked me to the airport? To Akande, Tinubu, Fayemi etc etc to whom
I spoke while organising my exit from Oshiomole’s guest house? Is any of that melodrama of any real
interest to busy and serious-minded people? Who is this faceless individual to compose his own
spurious scenario in his feverish mind and attempt to foist it on your readership?
Tea is beginning to assume mythological proportions in Nigerian affairs – sadly and tragically, from
Tam David-West to Moshood Abiola. Perhaps this is responsible for the fictive ‘tea-party’ of Oyeyemi’s
imagination. If the fact that my arrival in Ikeja in an aircraft with AC leaders confused the press
awaiting the retreat, that element, that ‘weighty atom’ of tea leaves – even if it were real – is so
disproportionate to the main issue, which is that we all declined to participate in that rally, that I
cannot find the energy to pillory the media on its account. What remains is not even a storm, but
mere froth in a phantom teacup.
Did Babangida really say we had tea together? I am learning of this weird claim for the first time. So
what should I do? Sue him for defamation? Oyeyemi owes it to his readers to unravel the earth-
shaking details of this tea session. Was it with milk? Cream? Sugar? Biscuits on the side? After all,
Oshiomole’s visitors’ lounge was constantly filled, from the beginning to the end. Someone must have
noticed some sinister details. The stewards must remember whom they served tea, and in whose
company. Oyeyemi should do his homework. Obviously these are weighty matters on which the future
of the nation depends.
Please, spare yourself and us the likes of those who throw around words like ‘truth’ and ‘integrity’ until
they have learnt to respect their adjunct – ‘responsibility’.
Wole Soyinka
Wole Soyinka, Nigerian Media And The Edo Rally
To assume that our icon and respected professor of English Literature, Professor Wole Soyinka is
adjudged a “Saint” by many in Nigeria and the world would probably be a correct assumption. There is
nothing wrong in this because as we all know, the pantheon of saints is filled with men and women
who were once ordinary mortals. Given the length and substance of contributions of the revered
Professor to struggles for social and civil development in Nigeria and his constant quest for a fair
political system for the country, it is one’s candid opinion that he deserves his sainthood. When a
human being reaches the pedestal of sainthood, he is no longer a private property. He is like a comet.
He draws attention wherever he goes and wherever he shows up. He becomes the barometer with
which others are measured. He becomes the standard to which many aspire. He becomes the property
of all those who adore him and those who worship at his feet. He becomes a public figure whose all
acts and utterances would elicit more than ordinary interest and scrutiny. He is passionately admired
and reverently regarded. In the eyes of his devotees, he could hardly do any wrong. As a result of this,
much would always be conceded to him while much more would continue to be expected of him.
Responding to a “saint” who has many non-questioning admirers, is a difficult task because such a
venture is fraught with danger- yes, the danger of being misunderstood. But as Professor Soyinka
himself would testify as a proud son of Oodua, in Yorubaland we respect our elders very tremendously,
but we are never afraid to ask them questions and hold them accountable. Thus, in this follow up that
would be my final commentary on this issue regardless of what serves as its concomitants I would
maintain the respect I have for the revered Kongi in full.
I am sure that the Professor would be disappointed if I fail to respond having suggested in his “TEA
BREAK IN NAIJA,” that Remi Oyeyemi is “irresponsible.” He claimed that I, REMI OYEYEMI am “a
faceless individual.” WOW!! This is an incredible claim by a Professor known for his intellectual
prowess and diligence. After reading his piece, my first inkling was to let the matter rest. But it is
difficult to let the highly esteemed Professor get away with the less than classy act of calling this
writer “irresponsible” and a “faceless individual.”
It is amazing that this eminent Professor who accused me of not doing my “home work” is actually the
one who failed to do his home work. In his response to my initial piece, he implied that he has many
friends in the media who have decided against using some stories or articles about him (Soyinka) that
they deemed unworthy in the past. If he had bothered to ask around the same media circles that he
boasted about, at least one or two people would have told him that REMI OYEYEMI is not “faceless.”
Going beyond that he could have picked up his phone to speak to some of the political personalities
that he mentioned were on the plane with him on his escape from Benin to Lagos, and some of them
would have told him who REMI OYEYEMI is.
Professor Soyinka used the word “abuse” to describe the publication of my article by
SAHARAREPORTERS. In my book the use of this word is in itself an “abuse” by my dear Professor.
Needless to say that SAHARAREPORTERS is an unbiased medium that has often allowed the
publication of all sides of an issue. To use such words to describe the medium’s act of publishing my
article is a misuse of the word “abuse”. It is a serious challenge to have to say this about the
distinguished Egba Englishman famous for his seminal command of grammar and dexterous aptitude
for the use of diction.
The Professor suggested that SAHARAREPORTERS ought to have reached out to him and ask him about
the details of what was in my article, most of which have been in the public domain except the
questions that I raised. Wole Soyinka is advocating censorship? This is stranger than fiction! I am
flabbergasted about this because I know how the Professor has always condemned censorship in the
Nigerian society when some of our media houses were closed down especially during the era of the
deadly duo of Generals Mohammadu Buhari and Tunde Idiagbon. What could have changed in the years
gone by to get him to wantonly exhibit the same attitude that he called “dictatorial conceit” in
describing my article? Is this a case of “pot calling the kettle black” when Professor Soyinka accused
me of “deplorable tone of pomposity ……. that sets one’s teeth on edge.”
Before we move one, for purposes of clarity, it is important that the following “pertinent issues” as
Professor Soyinka called them in his response are noted by the readers:
a. Did Professor Wole Soyinka get to Oshiomole’s House in Benin or not?
b. If he did, why was the Media led to believe that he turned back at the Benin Airport?
c. Why was it not reported in the Media that he met with IBB in Oshiomole’s Home before deciding
not to attend the rally?
d. Why must Kongi wait until IBB’s controversial interview before telling the public that he actually
met with IBB whom he wishes the world to believe he is not supporting, in Benin as he admitted in his
response to Remi Oyeyemi?
e. Why did Kongi have to wait for Remi Oyeyemi’s article and about 54 days after the fact to now
suggest to the public (in Tea Break in Naija) that the Media reports of his visit to Edo State were not
very accurate?
Professor Soyinka wrote the following:
“…..I remain in ignorance also of how the Nigerian media reported the Edo incident. Beyond my brief
comment on return to Ikeja airport, I declined to give any interviews on the incident. I left the airport
before the AC delegation. By agreement en route from Benin, they would do the talking. My only
interest was to return to my US engagements without further loss of valuable time.”
The reports of what allegedly transpired in Edo State came out in all the national dailies on April 30,
2010. The Ibrahim Babangida’s interview came out 44 days after on June 13, 2010 in the COMPASS
Newspaper. My article which was a reaction to IBB’s interview was actually submitted within 30
minutes of its completion on June 20,2010. If the media had misreported what transpired in Edo State
in regard to Professor Soyinka as he implied in the quote above by claiming to be ignorant of “how the
Nigerian media reported the incident,” the esteemed Professor had 44 days to set the record straight,
before IBB had the chance to open the can of tea. But Professor Soyinka did not do so for reasons best
known to him.
Since he also admitted in the quote above that “By agreement en route from Benin, they (the AC
delegation) would do the talking,” where then is the fault of Remi Oyeyemi if Professor Soyinka’s
friends gave less than complete version of events to the Nigerian media? It is assumed that before the
Professor would agree that these friends of his (the AC delegation) should do the talking, he must
have had a modicum of trust in them and believed that they would do a good job of it. If Professor
Soyinka believed that the Nigerian Media did not do a good job reporting the events that occurred in
Edo State, where was he in the previous 44 days before the IBB interview? And what is wrong if Remi
Oyeyemi seeks clarification about the confusing reports?
Professor Soyinka was upset that my “article premised on a profusion of ‘ifs’, ‘maybes’, ‘might bes’, ‘it
is possible that’, ‘alleged’, ‘reportedly’.” It is surprising that my highly esteemed Kongi did not know
that the reason for that was because I, as a public commentator and admirer, was giving him benefit
of the doubt which I believe he richly deserved. I wanted him to come out and clear the air about the
insinuations that IBB was making in his interview. He has done that, but he was greatly mistaken by
trying to blame Remi Oyeyemi for omissions that are patently Wole Soyinka’s.
Then Professor Soyinka made the following confession:
“…..I indeed met and exchanged ‘pleasantries’ with Babangida. When I discovered what had brought
him into Oshiomole’s visitors’ lounge – in company of at least some twenty-odd other guests,
including Governor Sylvia of Bayelsa – when I found that he had been invited to the rally, and that
David Mark was also invited as Guest of Honour, I organized my leave-taking as fusslessly and
efficiently as I know how, with a fortuitous timing that enabled me to hitch a ride in the chartered
plane that brought AC leaders to Edo.”
Professor Soyinka needed to have gone beyond this mere confession to show Remi Oyeyemi’s
“irresponsibility.” Where in all the MEDIA REPORTS was it reported that the Professor “indeed met and
exchanged ‘pleasantries’ with Babangida?” It meant that if IBB, who probably have a different motive
for the revelation of that happenstance, did not reveal such in his COMPASS interview, the world would
have been made to believe that our revered Professor turned back from the Benin Airport? Doesn’t the
Professor know that it is better that the world be made aware of what happened as soon as it
happened rather than let it filter out? Does he not know that it would look “somehow” if this is heard
third hand? Does he not see the ramification for his credibility in this context? Does he think this
would be an issue if he had made the happenstance public before now rather than allow his friend IBB
do this?
With due respect, after Professor Soyinka made the above quoted confession that he actually met IBB
and exchanged pleasantries with him, it is highly preposterous, for the highly esteemed Professor to
contend that he finds “Oyeyemi’s article pretentious, pompous and irresponsibly misleading.” How is
Remi Oyeyemi’s article “misleading?” Have you not just confirmed and confessed to exchanging
“pleasantries” (whatever that means) with IBB? What is “pretentious” about Remi Oyeyemi’s article
when he (Oyeyemi) insisted that there was nothing wrong if you chose to drink tea with IBB and still
not support him, but just make that clear to the observing public so that your actions were not
misinterpreted? It is inaccurate to describe Oyeyemi’s article as “pompous” when all he was trying to
do is to get clarification to an obvious obfuscation, except that our esteemed Professor thinks he
ought not be questioned about his acts and utterances when such are unclear?
If this were to be the case it would be very unfortunate. Apart from the fact that it is against our
culture in Yorubaland to shut up a younger person who has a legitimate concern, Professor Soyinka has
put in about five decades of fight to creating a society where no one would be above the law and
everyone could be held accountable for their choices and actions. To try and suggest now that he has
to be an exception to this rule is rather baffling and confusing. Even the Great Obafemi Awolowo was
not immune from constructive criticism from both friends and detractors alike. So, why is Wole Soyinka
an exception?
In his “Tea Break in Naija,” Professor Wole Soyinka jabbed adroitly like Joe Frazier, pummelled nimbly
like George Foreman and deftly danced around like Mohammad Ali as he employed his arsenal of
diction to challenge the credibility and pertinence of my article. But dexterity at the usage of grammar
and adept application of Lexis and Structure to convey an abstract idea in a mechanically accurate way
does not necessarily equate unassailable facts. Some of the facts are as follows:
a. That it is true that Professor Wole Soyinka met IBB in Oshiomole’s house in Benin;
b. That Professor Wole Soyinka did not turn back from Benin Airport to return to Lagos as claimed in
the media;
c. That Professor Wole Soyinka contracted the Press Briefings on the Benin Saga to his political
friends some of whom I also happen to know;
d. That Professor Soyinka has a duty to check the media reports of the Benin Saga and ensure that
he was not misrepresented, but he chose not to do so;
e. That the ignorance claimed by Professor Soyinka about “how the Nigerian media reported the Edo
incident,” seemed a second thought and appeared to be a ploy to absolve himself of responsibility
about the inaccurate media reports (as he now suggests) on the Edo incident;
f. That Professor Wole Soyinka did not shun the Benin rally because of Babangida as the media and
the rest of us were made to believe but because of David Mark and he (Soyinka) confirmed this in his
article responding to Remi Oyeyemi;
g. That Remi Oyeyemi is not “irresponsible” as claimed by Professor Wole Soyinka in his article “TEA
BREAK IN NAIJA” for asking the germane questions that clarified these issues.
Professor Soyinka wrote inter alia:
“However, Ibrahim Babangida, in the account offered by Oyeyemi, was absolutely correct in one
aspect. I have no personal problem with him or with any other individual to whom I openly identify as
a political adversary. “ (emphasis mine)
This is very incorrect. Presently, I am not a reporter, just an op-ed contributor or public commentator. I
was not reporting from Edo State. The account referred to is not my account. It is IBB’s account of
events as reported in the interview granted to COMPASS Newspaper. It is amazing that Professor
Soyinka would falsely attribute this to me to make a case of “irresponsibility” when it was clear that
this was quoted as coming from COMPASS in my previous article. However, Professor Soyinka does not
have to be defensive about his relationship with IBB, more so they have worked together before. All of
us have the right to change our views or opinions about events and personalities.
Thus when Professor Soyinka added, “Babangida does however have a huge problem of political deficit
with me, and with the nation, and that is the albatross that constitutes his problem,” he was just
addressing the heart of the matter. This is the reason why dalliance with IBB should not be shrouded
in a cocoon of secrecy so that others might not misinterpret and have unnecessary suspicions. It is
also begging the question that Professor Soyinka would suggest that it was wrong for his choices and
actions to be scrutinized by members of the public like Remi Oyeyemi when in fact he is not just a
public figure he is also a celebrity adored by many and taken seriously by not just a few.
My highly esteemed Kongi also wrote as follows:
“Did Babangida really say we had tea together? I am learning of this weird claim for the first time. So
what should I do? Sue him for defamation? Oyeyemi owes it to his readers to unravel the earth-
shaking details of this tea session. Was it with milk? Cream? Sugar? Biscuits on the side?”
Sincerely speaking, I did not expect Professor Soyinka to be unduly ridiculous as he manifested in the
above quote. With due respects to the esteemed Professor, the questions in the above quote sound a
little languid as far as the issues at stake here are concerned. All Professor Soyinka had to do was to
call for a copy of the COMPASS Newspaper interview that I referenced in my article to confirm what
Babangida said or did not say. Remi Oyeyemi did not make anything up. The basis of my article was
the IBB interview which portrayed the Professor in a less than candid manner. All that was needed was
that the revered Professor should clear the air. Babangida has made his own revelation for whatever
reasons known to him, it is now up to Professor Soyinka to tell the world any yet unknown aspects of
the happenstance that IBB might have mischievously withheld and to sue IBB if he so desires. As to
“the earth-shaking details of the tea session,” it is one’s hope that the Professor would not wait until
another revealing interview comes out before he scrambles to scribble another tenuous defence of his
acts of omissions and or commissions.
Between Remi Oyeyemi and Wole Soyinka, only one person has worked for Babangida in the past and
that person is NOT Remi Oyeyemi. Thus for those readers who are quick to conclude that this criticism
of Uncle Kongi is as a result of my fondness of Ibrahim Badamosi Babangida I am recommending the
following past articles by Remi Oyeyemi to them – QUESTIONS IBB MUST ANSWER published on July
12, 2002; A TALE OF TWO TRAITORS published on December 27, 2002 and FALAE’S IBB GAMBIT
published on August 25, 2003 all of them on www.nigeriaworld.com. I have been involved in the media
either directly or indirectly for about 25 years now. I do not need any publicity stunt. And this is not
one either.
Hopefully by now, the highly esteemed Professor would have discovered that I, REMI OYEYEMI, am not
“faceless.” This he would have found out if he did a better home work in the media and political circles
that he was quick to flagrantly flaunt before rushing his rejoinder for publication. It is hoped the
esteemed Professor would cease throwing around words like “home work” until he is able to lead by a
personal example and spare the rest of us sanctimonious preachments. Regardless, I still maintain
that everyone has the right to drink tea, “something stronger” or whatever with whomever he so
chooses and can politically support whoever catches his or her fancy. But there is no reason to be
defensive and camouflage actualities from those who expect candour and openness from us. Simplicita.
And this is my final word on this issue.
