FROM IMMUNITY TO HUMAN DIGNITY

FROM IMMUNITY TO HUMAN DIGNITY

Sequel to the demise of colonial occupation the new menace to human development in Africa was the Immunity Clause. An empowerment meant to give privileged footing to persons in power to enable for easy efficacy with minimal legal interferences, rather gave vent to more insidious notoriety than that the successful nationalists had succeeded to cause to retreat. ‘Animal Farm’ was born for real in Africa.

‘Squealer’ was here to stay and in no hurry to relinquish hold to power or popular sovereignty. From the appointment of ‘Yes men’ to massive pre-paid campaigns in his support. The conscience of the electorate was mortgaged by sell-outs. The uphill task of opposition was further roughened by the threat of stigma or outright violence.

Enter the O.A.U., with sub-regional potentials to network the ‘suzerain will’ of its component national leaders against each individual citizenry. ‘Independence’ was defined around a sub-culture of closed membership, whose mandate it was to reserve the exclusive identity to privileged personality, irrespective of claim to power or propriety of ascendancy

It was an organization that held in greater jealousy the autonomy of each member’s cherished dominion rather than it was concerned over the welfare of their subjects and how these Governments fared in their responsibilities. Inadvertently, membership to it, in practice, was of the participating personalities, rather than of states, as in theory. The memories of colonialism were to close for comfort to permit for restrictions of any kind from Western quarters.

State powers were worn like a garment with little respect for constitutional supremacy. The threat of sanctions by the wider international community was met with the steel will of the combined leaders’ forum, comprised of over-feds surer of their meals. Each was reluctant to interfere with the internal matters of the other such that come another day he may enjoy equal liberty of extra-constitutional preeminence.

Increasingly, their consultative forums bore the hallmarks of a cabal of self-accredited persons, intent upon doing the wrong thing. The devil took care of the rest more-than-hungry souls. Something had to give to righten this spring-of-evils: it was merely a question of time before the world community stepped in with juicy incentives that encouraged the transformation of the O.A.U. into the A.U.

Fundamentally the same in structure, priorities changed from centripetal interests of members statesmen to the perennial engaging problems of a materially challenged transnational society. The physiopathology of the menace left in its wake practices enshrined in certain hearts zealous to enjoy their late entry.

Sudan slaughters its citizenry in hope of instituting faulty structures for resource control of crude oil wealth along tribal preferences and expects the world to understand. So far, so good: that has been heard before. Nigeria may ‘keep the peace’ while the UN may not: this sounds more like a village scene with a tyrant, out of a cartoon; in an arena where the fouler determines the rules The Niger-Delta youth has picked up arms, where the military left off: in a country where constitutionalism is determined by the interludes between the change of magazines and the crack of gun-smoke.

The last straw that tipped with Rwanda seems comfortably far enough behind to accommodate another scandalous mayhem in human memoir. It is regrettable to know that the jus cogens of international convention permits the UN interference only after notable damage has occurred

Now the West has chosen to downplay on installation of heads of states or regime changes and to give respect and recognition to African leaders, why must the turntable register a crack in the record again? Wherein are built-in systems of inherent checks and balances to be installed among African leaders?

It will appear that the conscience and superego were lost in an improper disposition to self and the neighbor evaluated through values imbibed from Western standards that neither quality the hybrid for a Blackman and, even less a White.

The mirror makes a better image than the shadow can cast.

How ironic it is to know that the importation of equitable Western standards prescribed by the world community was superimposed by the irresistible dangle of carrots eagerly accepted by African leaders as the panacea to the self-inflicted African-vice of the Super-self. Even more paradoxical is the fact that greed for the gains of acceptance was the vehicle by which this ogre was renamed Goliath. ‘Ogre, sir!’ the beloved title was sacrificed for enfranchisement of lowly David.

Should the White-world care more for humanity than Africans care for their own brood?

Soon enough a voice shall be heard casting the blame for slave trade on the buyer rather than seller. New age slavery, which is ten times greater in volume, has the Blackman in the significant role of being both buyer and seller of souls: White inducement is mainly for sex. The tables have turned full circuit again.