What does Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah want?

Following mostly unfavourable reactions to his ChannelsTV interview, I had hoped that Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah would give up on the kite he was flying in search of reprieve for President Goodluck Jonathan. It is noteworthy that President Jonathan is yet to be charged for anything. Rather, specific untoward acts of institutions and public officers […]

Following mostly unfavourable reactions to his ChannelsTV interview, I had hoped that Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah would give up on the kite he was flying in search of reprieve for President Goodluck Jonathan. It is noteworthy that President Jonathan is yet to be charged for anything. Rather, specific untoward acts of institutions and public officers under his watch, are the apparent focus of President Muhammadu Buhari. I wish even for the fact that he is a member of the National Peace Committee, the highly respected Bishop Kukah just kept his mouth shut. The extended interview he gave proposing the same warped position to different organs of the news media is worrisome in the extent to which it diminishes the Bishop’s standing given the many contradictions in his positions. He is not opposed to probes, but Jonathan should not be probed seems to me like contradiction Bishop Kukah can ill afford.
In the ChannelsTV interview, Kukah says among other contentious matters:-
“What everybody should focus on is that it might be Jonathan today, and we don’t have a case against Jonathan on the table. Even if we do, this public lynching is not going to help anybody. Nobody knows whether when Buhari steps aside, he might face the same thing.”
“Even if you are going to go into a probe, it is not a substitute for governance and we are interested in the fact that every sane Nigerian must be conscious of the fact that it might be another person today and might be you tomorrow. And I think that we should not become so preoccupied with Jonathan to the extent that we forget the spectacular benefit that we gained under his presidency. Politics has ended and now is the time for governance”.
Now, this threat to Buhari that it would be his turn to face inquisition in the future, laced with the punchline that “probes is no substitute for governance” had me and I believe a majority of Nigerians upset. Bishop Kukah has for years earned their respects counselling the nation to goodness, even in difficult times. He wrote the admonitional series The Mustard Seed in the now rested New Nigerian Newspaper, and indeed a book in that name. He has been the voice of reason and  reconciliation during difficult times in this country. Notably he it was that defended Buhari in his travails following reports that he (Buhari) had canvassed for Muslims not to vote a Christian. Bishop Kukah in assuage of Northern Christians fervently vouched for Buhari and restored the confidence of particularly Northern Christians. Yet against the daily revelations of humongous pillages under Jonathan’s watch, the Bishop seemed compromised, and hence contradictory and incoherent. This is worrisome.
I am not surprised that the Bishop is this protective of President Jonathan. It is his calling to forgive sin if the sinner confesses and does penance. He is used to sitting in the hooded cubicle of a confessional and hearing sinners proclaim “Father Forgive me for I have sinned”. There is no limit to the magnitude of the sin methinks. Besides, even to the Lord Jesus Christ, President Jonathan if he prays for forgiveness stands justified after being forgiven.
One of Bishop Kukah’s reason for canvassing against any subjection of President Jonathan to a probe is that Jonathan “did his best”. Who would not be adjudged to have done his best? Even one that ran in a race and came last, did his best. But should the runner who came last be found to have cheated with performance enhancement drugs in a random sampling, is it sensible that he should be forgiven of that simply because by coming last, he did his best? I am afraid not all Nigerians will understand Bishop Kukah on this one. The logic is priestly, but this is not religion. This is politics. The issues are simple. Under President Jonathan the economy was mismanaged in seemingly clear breeches of the laws and the constitution. The law ought to take its course and any mortals found to have breached the laws ought to face the consequences. Recovery must be made of funds misappropriated to individual pockets otherwise we will suffer economic and sociopolitical distortions that such ill acquired wealth would cause to the detriment of the regime. It is about restoration of confidence in governance in Nigeria, a country that has suffered leadership deficits in lack of accountability, probity, and good governance.
I think that Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah should use his capacity and opportunity to canvass a definition of corruption that specifies what is occasioned by the Nigerian political economy and determine what and how much can be condoned and even reviewed with a view to institutionalising. Nigerian Politics is run on State Funds acquired through unavoidable though corrupt ways and means. Indeed without alternatives, the Buhari Administration may find its operatives resorting to the same “corrupt” ways and means and indeed yes, it will be Buhari’s turn in the future to face “public lynching”. Our corruption should be first defined and specific acts be determined for letting off but recovery of looted funds is a must. This to me is being realistic. Nigeria will never be run by saints, even if we pretend it could be so.
I agree with Bishop Kukah that President Jonathan’s act of conceding defeat and congratulating Buhari was a masterstroke akin to Obasanjo willingly handing over in 1979, or General Abubakar Abdulsalam condescending to hand over quickly in 1999. We of course can not forget President Obasanjo’s ignominious third term gambit. But truth is sacrosanct. Jonathan lost the election and was bound by the Constitution to concede. History it is that judges and rewards that act of benevolence which says Kukah, saved the nation from chaos. Just may be, but may be not. Still I but yet it fails to absolves the so called hypocrites around Jonathan who took advantage of his naivete (common to leaders of his type) to brazenly loot. I believe that President Jonathan is himself shocked and filled with angst at some of the acts unfolding as having taken place under his watch.
Probes should be carried out professionally and thoroughly under a defined policy that determines specific measures. I worry that we are satisfied with mere smear and embarrassment of notably political opponents and apparently those accused and embarrassed will continue to walk the streets with wealth and honour which amounts to impunity that is our bane.
All told, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah is an advocate of mercy and pardon for President Jonathan. He has defined red flags in the President Buhari approach to his rule. The exceptionally brilliant Bishop has in typical scholarly fashion, wrapped his sermon on sparing Jonathan in a shroud of caution to President Buhari on how not go about ruling the country, with heartfelt concerns about the President’s character of absolutism. History is judging President Jonathan today. President Buhari is making his own history.