Ochanya, Nafisa and Naziru and the battle for the children

As a country and as a people, Nigeria and Nigerians need to have an honest conversation about how to care for children and what should and should not be acceptable. In the last two weeks, two incidents have centred conversation around children and child care in a country where 31 million of its population are […]

As a country and as a people, Nigeria and Nigerians need to have an honest conversation about how to care for children and what should and should not be acceptable.

In the last two weeks, two incidents have centred conversation around children and child care in a country where 31 million of its population are under five years old and each year, seven million babies are born, according to UNICEF data.

No, I am not talking about the Chrisland scandal again. I am talking about the recent ruling by a High Court in Benue that acquitted Mr Andrew Ogbuja for allegedly serially raping a child, Ochanya Ogbanje, whose death in October 2018 triggered outrage and protests across the country. Her death was blamed on her sexual abuse by the Ogbuja father and son duo.

She was eight when the son, Victor, started raping her. When he was caught in the act and reported to his father, the father, reportedly scolded the son and turned round to rape the girl. The mother, Felicia Ochiga-Ogbuja, it would emerge, knew what her son was doing but did not see the need to intervene or protect the poor girl from the monster she was raising.

The state government had promised justice for Ochanya. A street was named after her in her local government. But in the opinion of the court, the prosecution failed to prove its case against Andrew Ogbuja, but sentenced his wife to five months in jail for failing to protect the child from the serial rape of Victor, who has been at large since 2018.

The second issue was a quarrel amongst friends, or frenemies, that got Arewa on social media talking, cursing and in some cases invoking the wrath of Allah. It was a fight between Naziru and Nafisa and yes, it had children at the centre of it, but not theirs.

The actress, Nafisa Abdullahi, made a comment advising parents not to have children they cannot cater for and her co-star in Labari Na, a popular Hausa TV series, Naziru Sarkin Waka, decided to put her and her argument down in a long rant video he posted on his social media page.

Nafisa’s conment was in relation to the 9.5 million children, by UNICEF’s estimates, roaming the streets in the name of almajirci, that ancient malaise the north has tied to the ankle of religion and decided to stay in bed with. Which was exactly the staid argument Naziru projected, for those who have the patience to suffer his rant. He went further to question Nafisa’s moral right to speak about such issues because of his unfavourable judgment of her morals and character and effectively concluded his argument by saying that it is better to birth 10 almajirai than one Kannywood star.

I confess I don’t know the personal context that would lead to such bitter comments from Naziru towards his co-star, and the basis for his sanctimonious posturing and wild condemnation of “yan fim” as the actors up north are called, despite being one himself. I suppose that is a personal issue for them to resolve but what interests me is the debate this tiff triggered.

While some people sided with Nafisa that parents should not shirk responsibility for their children by throwing them into a dangerously unregulated programme like the almajiri system, a very large number of others decided to support the system, echo Naziru’s postulation and shared their opinions about the admonition being a film star’s shot at the culture and the religion of a people.

One of the most bizarre reactions was that of a malam who recorded himself teaching the almajiri boys in his care and paused his lesson to curse Nafisa and pray for the continuation of the almajiri system with his rag-tag group of students, children long separated from their parents, answering ameen. The irony though is that next to him, this malam had his two daughters in their school uniforms, chorusing ameen. What is good for the goose in his case was just too good for the gander.

So, in what ways are the two incidents—the conclusion of the Ochanya trial and the wondering children peeve related?

Well, similarities lie in the fact that children, who have always been the most vulnerable demographic in the country and any country for that matter, need greater protection. Though Ochanya was not an almajira, poverty made her mother to entrust her to the care of relatives, who abused this trust in the most callous and hedonistic ways possible. While most parents of almajirai will argue that poverty is not a factor in their decision to send their children to live with strangers in a different town, roaming the streets, begging for change and leftover, they will often argue that at the heart of the decision is the desire for the child to gain the knowledge of the Qur’an, something that we know can be gained while they are under the care of their parents.

The system is ancient, dating back centuries but it no longer fits in this age and the more the north resists the desperate need to review this system, change this culture that pauperizes children, deprives them of the education they need to be properly functional humans, often desensitizes them to the basic human emotions of empathy and kindness, then there is a need for the authorities to take decisive steps to either stop the abuse or reform and regulate the system.

Blanket bans by state governments at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic is not a solution but a shirking of responsibility. What has changed since then? Authorities need to have a definitive plan of action and achievable timelines on how to address the situation, and precisely what to do with these children or the system that has continued, and will continue to hold them hostage and deprive them of fair opportunities to be productive and well adjusted members of the community while learning the Qur’an.

That Ochanya suffered this fate, and the almajiri question still lingers and causes serious vexations as it did, points to the glaring lack of a child welfare services in the country, which ordinarily would have done a fair bit to guarantee that children are protected, and in situations of abuse, are removed from harm’s way. A system that can hold parents and guardians accountable.

It might be sunset for Ochanya but out there, on the streets of Kano and Zaria, in the homes in Abakiliki and Sagamu, there are children running around with bowls or slaving and being molested in the care of their guardians.

The Child Rights law might have been enacted and adopted in some states, but they remain laws on paper, not in practice. In that case, of what use is it to children being told they are the leaders of tomorrow yet their today cannot be safeguarded by the country they are expected to serve, with faith, loyalty and honesty?