Some people provoked the feral instinct in me yesterday. One of them was a classmate of mine in the University and another, a stranger from God-knows where. But one may ask: what exactly did they do that stirred my spirit? I will explain.
Yesterday, after reading an article on Hon Pat Asadu on Facebook, which was apparently a cranky ploy to discredit, in the most dishonorable manner, the legislator, I decided to lay bare my contribution on the issue.
I was particularly drawn to respond to the article in question when I got to a point where the writer claimed that Hon Pat Asadu, member representing Nsukka/Igbo-eze South in the green chambers is a bench warmer in the Federal House of Representatives. I had to google Hon Pat Asadu immediately and what I saw, including video clips of him making meaning contributions in the house proved to be a striking contrast to the ill-concocted conjectures of the writer.
Personally speaking, I believe that one of the first duty of a writer is to uphold truth. And to do this, wrong narratives, be it connected to you or to a distant person, have to be countered to avert the danger of a single story. Chimamanda Adichie warned in one of her TED talks that a story repeatedly and persistently told against a persona becomes a single story of her/him. So I was moved to give a different narrative on Hon Pat Asadu. I did it because as a writer, it is one of my numerous callings – to beam a light of truth on burning issues in the society especially, issues that affect my immediate place of residence.
I started my article yesterday notifying my readers that I am not from Nsukka but I have lived there for more than eight years after which I gave my narratives on Hon Pat Asadu. However, some people who claimed to be wired with nsukka veins attacked me. And what was their reason for that? They claimed that I am not from Nsukka and that it’s he who wears a shoe that knows where it pinches.
I shuddered in utter disbelief after reading that comment. In short, nothing more myopic has ever been said. I want to ask my critics if indigeneship bestows one with the best brains for political analyses and commentary? I want to know when tales on political leadership has become a secret and sole preserve of an indigenous people; when non indigenes have been barred from commenting on political matters affecting their immediate place of residence?
The other person, in reply to my own narrative, claimed that “house of representative is not a perpetual post for one man.” And I ask again, what defines perpetuity vis-a-vis an electable post? Going by the commentator’s opinion, he is more concerned about rotation and not performance. What a skewed sense of reasoning!
But I charge the people who use indigeneship as a yardstick for measuring ones right to his/her views on political/social issues to make no mistake about these: that no electable post is subject to perpetuity, that Hon Pat Asadu was duly elected by those who trust his capacity to represent them, that in the constitution, there is no provision for “term” as far as legislative positions are concerned, that Hon Pat. Asadu was elected by the same people who felt the warmth in his representation and he will still be re-elected based on his achievements over the years.
— Okeke Franklin—