PEOPLES DAILY, WEDNESDAY, MARCH 28, 2012
PAGE 15
FG, oil companies and host communities By Remi Oyeyemi
T
he explosion which occurred on January 16, this year, on Chevron’s Panama Rig led to huge gas fire and massive spill, a development that is still generating serious concern in the affected communities. According to media reports, the huge flames from the fire could be sighted deep in the Atlantic Ocean from the Kolouma River; and experts are worried that the gas was emitting dangerous gases and other toxic chemicals into the environment. It was also reported that because the Koluama River directly empties into the Atlantic Ocean, its polluted contents are streaming into the creeks and other neighbouring communities in the coastline. President Goodluck Jonathan’s visit to these Keffes area in Southern Ijaw and Brass Local Government areas in Bayelsa over the explosion did not give much hope to the indigenes of the area. My belief is that the visit was meant as a sympathetic one to assure the communities that they were not alone and that the government had not forsaken them. But the indigenes were not really satisfied by the time Jonathan left the area. There seemed to be an increased feeling of vulnerability by the people rather than that of assurance that things would be well. The President was said to have arrived at the Kolouma community to sympathise with the people on Monday, February 27, in a helicopter, accompanied
by his aides. Those that accompanied him were Governor Seriake Dickson; his Deputy, Rear Admiral John Jonah (retd.); Ministers of Petroleum Resources, Diezani Alison-Madueke; Niger Delta, Godsday Orubebe; Environment, Hazida Mailaifal; Group Managing Director of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, Austin Oniwon; and Managing Director of Chevron Nigeria Limited, Andrew Fawthrop.” To me, the President and the Managing Director of Chevron Nigeria Limited should not have been in the same helicopter and arrived at the scene together. Of course, Fawthrop had to be present at that occasion, because the issue at stake was related to the activities of his corporation. But the message being conveyed by that action was that athe President and the executives of Chevron are one and the same. To this end, if the people of the Keffes community did not get the justice they deserve eventually, it would be easier to point to this occasion, either rightly or wrongly, as evidence that Jonathan had been in collusion with the oil companies to the detriment of his own people. To make matters worse, the President went ahead to defend the oil company while chiding the people of the community. He had contended that “the oil companies were not charity organisations” while insisting “they (oil companies) cannot employ everybody that hails from an oil producing community.” No matter the good intention of the President in this circumstance, these sorts
of statements do not bode well for his image and for the interest of the people in Keffes. With these statements coming from the President, it is evident that he did not have an adequate understanding of the situation in which he was operating and had misunderstood the expectations of his own people. Apparently, the President did not speak well about his people and characterised them as “beggars” who were always waiting for “charity” from the oil companies. Unless the President has any evidence that the peoples of these communities have been asking for “charity” before this explosion, then he evidently misspoke. When Chevron gave relief materials to Keffes community, it was not charity. Chevron was trying to right some wrongs. When there were no explosions, the people of Keffes did not ask it for any handout. To now suggest that the people of this area were acting like beggars was unfair and uncalled for.The oil producing communities are not asking Chevron and other oil companies to employ everyone in their communities. But they have the right to expect that their children who are qualified are given adequate and appropriate consideration in employment opportunities in mutually inclusive way with other Nigerians. After all, it is their lands that are being left desolate; it is their people that are being displaced, and it is their rivers and creeks that are being poisoned. What the victims in Kolouma
and other oil communities are asking for is not “charity” from the oil companies in Nigeria but corporate social responsibility that is the standard practice in other parts of the world where oil explorations have become a major cause of environmental degradation, inducing poverty and misery in the creation of wealth. The oil communities in Nigeria are expecting that the oil companies, while trying to exploit the oil, need to be mindful of the impact of their activities on the peoples of the communities. Are there any proactive steps that could be taken to ensure that their farmlands are not destroyed? What could be done to minimise the poisoning of the rivers and the creeks which the indigenes rely on for fishing as a means of economic sustenance? Where damage has been done, and what remediation could be put in place to make the lives of the victims bearable? What are the activities of the oil companies that portray them as productive members of the communities where they make millions of dollars? These are the questions that Keffes and other Nigerian oil communities are asking of the oil companies and not “charity” as President Jonathan had suggested to those victims of Chevron. Even, if the statements made by the President were fundamentally sensible, they ought not to come from his mouth as the representative and protector-inchief of Nigerians. He should have allowed the executives of Chevron to make their case in a manner that the victims of their
actions would understand and be less restive. Obviously, the handlers of the President did not take into cognisance that more often than not perception trumps reality. Why one recognises that the oil companies generate funds for the country and that there was the need to encourage foreign investors to boost the economy, the President and his handlers have to realise that there was the need to as well constantly reassure Nigerians that their government is on their side. Anything that would suggest otherwise ought to be avoided like a plague. On the same occasion, the President had said he “would direct the National Management Emergency Agency to distribute relief materials to the communities to alleviate their plights.” But, why wait? The President knew there was a crisis in this community and this was why he was visiting the place. Why was he not proactive? He ought to have instructed NEMA to proceed immediately he got the news of the explosion to assess the situation and provide necessary relief and not wait until he was able to visit the place. Most Nigerians are already settled in their view that their government would rather kowtow to the whims and caprices of the oil companies rather than protect them. Anything that would further reinforce this perspective should not be encouraged by the government. Remi Oyeyemi posted this piece on saharareporters.com
A tale of two Davids and two Jonathans By Dipo Dosunmu
T
he Biblical story of David and Jonathan will forever remain a reference point for what true friendship should be. Jonathan, prince and son of Saul, was the heir apparent to the throne of Israel. On the other hand, David, the youngest son of Jesse, was a ruddy, brighteyed shepherd boy. David’s defeat of the giant Goliath signaled both the beginning of Jonathan and David’s friendship and their falling from love and favor in Saul’s eyes. David’s courage and bravery affected Jonathan deeply. Jonathan was moved to love him as much as his own life. He realized that they shared much in common in the areas of courage, bravery, strength, loyalty, trust and faith in God. From that day forward, they were the best of friends. Jonathan was moved to the point of giving David some of his treasured items: his robe, sword, bow and belt, and even his armour. David, the musician, also played the harp for King Saul and thus endeared
him the more to Jonathan. Jonathan and David’s bond was so strong that they promised to never let anything come between them. Jonathan told David of Saul’s plans to kill him and urged him to go far away where he would be safe. He asked David to remember that they would always be friends. So great was their friendship that at one of their partings they kissed one another, and wept one with another. David reacted to Jonathan’s eventual demise in this manner - “How are the mighty fallen in the midst of the battle! Jonathan is slain upon thy high places” - (2 Samuel 1:25). David even adopted Jonathan’s son Mephibosheth. The following are some of the qualities of a good friendship: honesty (telling each other the truth), unconditional love (love that transcends the “seasons” of life), service (friends help one another), loyalty (a friend sticks with you in good times and bad), receiving (when a friend helps the other friend, he receives by allowing the other
friend to help him in return). The tale of the other David and Jonathan is all about a political friendship. The fate and future of over 160 million human beings is currently tied to their actions and inactions. David was alleged to have once stated that telephones are not for the poor. While other patriots “stood”, he was said to have “sat” on June 12. Jonathan on the other hand is the “shoeless” one renowned to have patiently and regularly benefitted from others’ misfortunes. Some rascals find his choice of words unbefitting for his status but obviously he does not agree. Can these qualities of good friendship be found in them? Has David ever tried to tell Jonathan the home truths or is he just another sycophant? Are the home truths not that the people want good, quality standard of living, adequate security of lives and properties and an enabling, corruptionfree environment to utilize their God-given talents to the fullest? The people desire leadership by example, even if it means public
assets declaration. They want free and fair elections rather than ballot snatching and scientific rigging. They are fed up with over-bloated government machinery subsisting on fat salaries and allowances. They want moral compass to be regained, fairness, justice and equity. They want the corrupt to be ostracized and penalized. They do not wish the cabal well. They are tired of committees and special task forces. They want wastages and leakages to stop. They crave for accountability. They yearn for evidences of good governance. They long for the basic infrastructures electricity, good roads, potable water, quality schools and functioning refineries amongst other things. Since their faith is not in doubt, have David and Jonathan acquainted themselves with these scriptures? : Matthew 20:26 - But among you it will be different. Whoever wants to be a leader among you must be your servant. Proverbs 29:2 - When the upright have power, the people are glad; when an evil
man is ruler, grief comes on the people. Proverbs 14:34 Righteousness lifts up a nation, but sin is a disgrace in any society. 2 Chronicles 7:14 - If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Proverbs 31: 8-9 - Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. Speak up and judge fairly; defend the rights of the poor and needy. 2 Corinthians 5:10 - For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil. Have they shown unconditional love towards each other? Have they displayed service, loyalty and acts of service, as enunciated above? Only time will tell. In fact, 2015 is just around the corner. Will the mighty fall? Or is it rather a case of how? Dipo Dosumu lives in Lagos