Opinion

Why Lt. Anele should be sent packing

5 Mins read

The video, which has gone viral, tells the story. It surfaced on Thursday, September 23. When I watched it, my stomach churned. And I was diminished as a human being.

It tells the story of abuse of power. It tells the story of wickedness. It tells the story of heartlessness. It tells the story of an army officer who is a sub-human being. It tells the story of an animal in Nigeria’s Army uniform, a uniform, which should ordinarily, be worn with national pride and utmost discipline. So, it tells the story of indiscipline of the worst order. And, finally, excuse this cliché, it tells the story of man’s inhumanity to man.

There, a grown woman, a National Youth Service Corps member, identified as Ezeiruaku Ifeyinwa Fidelia, was forced to kneel down by her fellow young woman, just because the oppressor was in an Army uniform. Ms. Ezeiruaku’s posture painted the picture of an innocent captive, waiting to be shot dead, or beheaded by ISIS terrorists. The difference: She was not wearing an orange prison uniform.

As she helplessly knelt down, in her full NYSC uniform, the young female Army officer, identified as Lt. Chika Viola Anele, put her through hell and back. She dehumanised her in every way possible.

She began by using a plastic bowl, vigorously rubbing it on the Corper’s head. Then she started scooping dirty water from a plastic container, using the plastic bowl, and pouring the water on Youth Corper Ezeiruaku from head to toe. As she poured the water on her (a number of times), she also hit her, on the face, (a number of times), with the bowl.

This shameful, sad, incident took place at the 13 Brigade Calabar, Cross River State. Ms. Ezeiruaku, a young graduate, was posted there for her Primary Assignment, and Lt. Anele is a junior officer at the Brigade Headquarters.

Nobody knows what the problem was. A man’s problem? An ego problem? Or just brazen show of power? Whatever it was, Lt Anele has behaved in a most disgusting, reprehensible, manner. And, she should be made to pay the price for her behaviour. She should lose her commission and her right to wear an Army uniform. Not even that of a Lance Corporal.

There are many reasons why she should pay this high price. It is, especially, for embarrassing the Army and, more especially, for disrespecting the Federal Government.

The uniform which she wore as she committed the shameful act, and derided Ms. Ezeiruaku, belongs to the Federal Government, not to her. The (undeserved) respect she commands each time she wears that uniform is because of the uniform, not because of her as a person. Otherwise, who cares about her?

That uniform represents the Federal Government of Nigeria, not her. This is why people are told not to insult a uniformed personnel. By her uncivilised, raw behaviour, she has dragged the Federal Government in the mud. Nothing could be more unpatriotic than that.

Two, Ms. Ezeiruaku, a Youth Corper, was also wearing her own uniform. That uniform too, belongs to the Federal Government. By pouring dirty water on her and the uniform, she has committed an unforgivable, jailable offence. Lt Anele does not deserve to wear that uniform a minute more than necessary.

Three, this officer has displayed gross indiscipline, and disgraced the Army. When you are a commissioned officer, you are, in spite of your crude self, regarded and referred to as an officer and a gentleman. Lt Anele, by her crude behaviour, is undeserving of being referred to as an officer, or a gentleman. She represents everything that an officer should not represent. She does not represent the Nigerian Army, especially those laying their lives down to protect us.

Four, talking about representation, Lt Anele represents everything a woman should not. Military or not, women usually have a softer side. Or, why does their breasts produce milk? But, not this Lt. She has, by her singular act of wickedness, shown the smelly side of her womanhood. She is one of those women who treat their househelps like animals.

They humiliate them. They dehumanise them. They beat them mercilessly. They starve them. They dress them in rags. They deny them of sleep. And strips them of every (human) dignity. It would be nice to find out if Lt Anele lives with a house help, even a relation, in order to confirm how she treats them.

As earlier stated, the beef Lt Anele had with Ms. Ezeiruaku is not yet public. It needs to be made public. The story out there is that the authorities at the 13 Brigade, Calabar are allegedly, trying to cover-up this scandal. Even though that has been denied by Army Spokesman, Brigadier General Onyema Nwachukwu who, in a statement on Thursday, September 23, said an investigation was already on, I pray there should be no cover-up from any quarters.

Again, here is why. The Army must separate the wheat from the chaff.

Ms Ezeiruaku was posted to them, and so, she is their responsibility. One of their responsibilities towards her is to protect her. They have already failed in that. They failed to protect her from Lt Anele. It will be a scandal if they, also, sweep any part of this scandal under the carpet. If they do, they should be told, in words and deed, that they are culpable or, in Military language, learnt during the regime of General Sani Abacha,  “accessories after the fact.”

Years back when I did my Youth Service in Bauchi State, those of us privileged to serve with the Army were very proud of that. We walked like we had wings attached to us. It was one of the best times of my youth. Serving with them helped me in life. And, a number of the invaluable relationships I have today date back to those good years, when we roamed freely, the whole of Bauchi, Jos, Kano, Gombe, without the fear of Bandits and Boko Haram and the lot. That I play squash till this day, is thanks to that period. Now, you can imagine if we had a Lt Anele to supervise us.

The authorities of the 13 Brigade Calabar should stand up for Ms Ezeiruaku. The authorities of the Nigerian Army should. They owe it to her. They owe it to themselves. And, they owe it to Nigeria and its people. They should do the right for her.

If Lt Anele is such a terror, they ought to know where to have sent her too. She should have been posted to the frontlines to meet with terrorists out there in parts of the North, terrorising innocent people.

Yet, in all these, where is the leadership of the NYSC in Cross River State? What is their response? Or have they not seen the viral video? What about the leadership at the national level? Did they deploy Ms Ezeiruaku to 13 Brigade Headquarters Calabar to be dehumanised? Where are the Youth Corpers posted to Cross River State? Have they lodged a protest in writing? Why are they playing deaf and dumb?

I also call on the Human Rights community and women, especially, Igbo women, to move into this case. Isn’t it an irony that Lt Anele would humiliate a fellow Igbo woman as she did? Instead of protecting and guiding her, she becomes the one to give her the “deepest cut.” I can almost assure you that no Northern or Yoruba female officer could have done that.

When they speak their dialect, it is “case closed.”  Lt Anele’s type is the reason why people erroneously say the Igbo don’t like one another. Hers is a clear case. When you speak Igbo to some of them in their “big-big” offices, it is even a crime. They either thumb their noses at you, or reply in English! The Igbo say they are not liked, they are being prosecuted, yet…! Isn’t that why, in the name of protesting the prosecution, the Igbo are killing themselves, destroying their Zone, and inflicting the worst form of punishment on themselves? Isn’t that why our Zone has been reduced to a war zone, and our people are afraid to visit home?

Finally, Ms Ezeiruaku should not leave her fate, absolutely, in the hands of others. She should sue Lt. Anele for everything she has got! What sort of country do we live in? Animal Kingdom?

Obi is the Editor-in-Chief/CEO of The Source (Magazine) comfortobisource@gmail.com

   

About author
Time Nigeria is a general interest Magazine with its headquarters in Abuja, the nation’s Capital.
Articles
Related posts
Cover StoryDevelopmentOpinion

Pedestrian Bridges: Rising Symbols of Renewed Hope in Abuja

2 Mins read
  By Ogefila Bayo Adewale Every morning, parents watch their children leave for school along Abuja highways, their hearts race each time…
Abuja FileDevelopmentEconomyEnergyFinanceInside LagosOpinionPerspective

The Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: Why Capital Still Fails to Become Infrastructure

6 Mins read
  By Chidi Nwafor  In October 2023, a Gulf sovereign wealth fund quietly closed a $2 billion allocation to global infrastructure, earmarked in part for emerging-market energy and transport assets. The announcement drew the usual applause: another sign, commentators said, that institutional capital was finally waking up to the infrastructure opportunity in the Global South. Eighteen months later, less than a tenth of that allocation had actually left the fund’s balance sheet. Not because the mandate had changed. Not because the fund had lost appetite. According to two people familiar with the portfolio, the constraint was simpler and more uncomfortable: there were not enough investable projects to put the money into. This is not a story about a reluctant investor. It is a story about capital that wants to move, cannot find enough places willing and able to receive it in a form it can underwrite, and quietly waits instead. Multiply that fund by the hundreds of pension schemes, sovereign wealth vehicles, commercial banks and infrastructure funds now carrying dedicated allocations for emerging-market infrastructure, and a pattern emerges that rarely makes it into a headline: the world is not short of capital for infrastructure. It has capital in historic abundance, sitting adjacent to a historic infrastructure gap, unable to cross the distance between the two. The Comfortable Explanation  The explanation on offer at every major infrastructure summit is a familiar one. Global infrastructure investment needs run into the tens of trillions of dollars over the coming decade; committed capital falls well short; therefore, the problem is one of insufficient funding, and the solution is more of it: more pledges, more blended-finance facilities, more climate funds, more multilateral capital increases. It is a comfortable explanation because it assigns responsibility clearly to governments who under-fund, institutions who under-commit, and it offers a clean remedy: raise more. It is also, on close inspection, not what the evidence shows. Pension funds globally hold trillions in assets under management with explicit infrastructure allocations that remain structurally underweight, not because trustees have rejected the asset class but because deal flow meeting their risk and governance thresholds has not materialised at the pace their mandates assume. Sovereign wealth funds report the same pattern. Commercial banks with dedicated project finance desks describe pipelines that look full at the term-sheet stage and thin dramatically by financial close. Development finance institutions, whose entire purpose is to absorb risk that commercial capital will not, routinely report that their binding constraint is not capital adequacy but the volume of bankable transactions their teams can originate and structure in a given year. None of this fits the scarcity narrative. All of it fits a different one. Availability Is Not Deployability  Capital availability and capital deployability are not the same condition, and the conflation of the two is doing real damage to how the world thinks about the infrastructure gap. Availability asks whether money exists somewhere with a mandate that could, in principle, be pointed at infrastructure. Deployability asks something much narrower and much harder: whether a specific project, at a specific moment, has been engineered, structured, documented and de-risked to the point where an investment committee can approve it without exception. The first condition is met, overwhelmingly, across nearly every category of capital that matters to infrastructure. The second is met by only a small fraction of the projects competing for it. The result is a market that looks, from the outside, like a financing gap, and functions, from the inside, like a conversion problem: an abundance of capital on one side, an abundance of infrastructure need on the other, and an underbuilt set of mechanisms in between capable of turning one into the other at any meaningful scale. Where the Conversion Breaks  The break does not happen at the ends of the process. It happens in the middle, in the unglamorous sequence of work that turns a plausible concept into an instrument a fiduciary can sign. A promising transmission project needs a feasibility study rigorous enough to survive institutional scrutiny rather than optimistic enough to attract early interest. It needs offtake arrangements that hold up under real counterparty and currency risk, not the counterparty risk assumed in a base case. It needs environmental and social documentation calibrated to the standards of the institutions being asked to fund it, not the standards of the jurisdiction hosting it. It needs a legal and commercial structure that allocates risk in ways a commercial lender, not only a development financier, will accept. It needs a sponsor capable of executing what has been proposed, not merely capable of proposing it. Each of these is ordinary project finance discipline. None of it is exotic, and in mature infrastructure markets it happens as a matter of course, absorbed into systems built over decades: specialist advisers, standard-form contracts, established procurement norms, deep pools of transaction expertise. What is missing in the markets where the infrastructure gap is largest is not the standard itself but the machinery that meets it. Projects arrive at investment committees with ambition intact and preparation incomplete, and that gap is treated, again and again, as an individual project’s failure rather than what it actually is: a structural absence in the systems responsible for producing investable transactions at scale. The Missing Middle  This is the Missing Middle of Infrastructure Finance: the institutional architecture that sits between capital that wants to move and infrastructure that needs building, and whose incompleteness explains far more of the global infrastructure gap than any shortfall in committed funds. It consists of project preparation facilities able to fund feasibility and structuring work before commercial viability has been proven. Transaction advisers capable of building deals that satisfy development mandates and commercial return thresholds at once, rather than treating the two as separate constituencies to be managed sequentially. Risk-sharing and guarantee instruments that convert political, regulatory and currency risk into something a commercial balance sheet can underwrite. Aggregation platforms that bundle smaller, individually sub-scale projects into portfolios large enough to justify institutional transaction costs. Standardised documentation that reduces the bespoke legal cost of every new deal. And coordination across ministries, regulators and financiers robust enough that a technically sound project does not die in bureaucratic sequencing after the money has already been found. None of these are new ideas in isolation. What is missing is their assembly into a coherent system, deliberately funded and institutionally accountable, rather than scattered across donor-funded pilots that end when the grant does. The African Dimension  Africa makes this dynamic unusually visible, and consequently offers an unusually clear opportunity to correct it. The continent’s infrastructure financing need, by any measure, is vast. Less understood is that the shortfall is disproportionately one of preparation rather than capital. Nigerian gas-to-power, off-grid solar and mini-grid developers have each demonstrated that individual projects can clear the bankability bar; what has not emerged is systemic pipeline scale, a steady stream of comparably prepared projects large enough to absorb the capital already circling the sector. The pattern repeats, with local variation, from grid infrastructure in East Africa to transport corridors in West Africa. Interested capital is rarely the scarce input. Investment-ready projects are. The Global Comparison  Mature markets solved this problem gradually and mostly invisibly, through decades of institution-building that predates the current infrastructure conversation: specialist project finance units inside banks, standardised PPP frameworks, established regulatory playbooks, deep benches of transaction lawyers and engineers who move between deals rather than between one-off assignments. Emerging and frontier markets are not being asked to meet a lower standard. They are being asked to meet the same standard without having built the same machinery, and then being told, when deals fail to close, that the problem is insufficient funding….
Abuja FileCover StoryOpinionPerspectivePolitics

Tinubu’s Reforms Deserve Continuity, Second Term Crucial — Onuigbo

4 Mins read
The President of Globe Legislators International, Rt. Hon. Sir Sam Onuigbo, has called on members and stakeholders of the All Progressives Congress…
Stay on the loop!

Subscribe to our latest news.

Leave a Reply

WP2Social Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com