Deportation Of Nigerians: A Wake Up Call —Yemi Olagunju

Very early in the month of March 2012, some of our national newspapers reported the ‘deportation’ of some Nigerian nationals by the South African government on the ‘flimsy’ excuse that they (Nigeria Nationals) had no yellow fever vaccine card – one of the prerequisites for their stay in South Africa.

As a result of the deportation, many Nigerians, high and low, individuals, corporate bodies and even government officials reacted either in support of or against the South African government’s action.

Nigerian government reacted in such a way that it has never reacted to cases of ‘insults’ hauled at Nigerians and their nation by foreigners and their countries.

Some of the reactions by the government include the summoning of South African High Commissioner to Nigeria by our own Ministry of Foreign Affairs just to protest the deportation of Nigerians from South Africa and to really let the South African government know that Nigeria felt insulted by her unbridled way of breaking protocol and that Nigeria was ready to retaliate in full force. The South Africa envoy was received by the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Martin Uhomoibhi.

Under normal diplomatic atmosphere, the South African High Commissioner, Mr. Kinsley Mambolo, would have been received by Nigeria’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr. Gbenga Ashiru. It was sad that South Africa beat a diplomatic war drum and Nigeria danced frenziedly without minding the rhythm.

On 25 December, 2009, a 25-year old Nigerian, Farouk Abdulmutalab, was caught attempting to bomb a Detroit-bound flight 253 Delta Airline with 289 passengers on board.

In a swift reaction to the act, the American government listed Nigeria a terrorist nation, and there were sharp reactions from Nigerians home and abroad, who called on American government to rescind her decision. It took the involvement of the government of President Goodluck Jonathan before the American government removed Nigeria’s name from the list. But today, removal or no removal, we all know the status of Nigeria as far as terrorism is concerned, considering the ceaseless bloodletting by the Boko Haram extremists.

It is in this light that we should view the recent diplomatic impasse between the two African countries. I want to believe that the South African government would not have gone the whole length of deporting 125 Nigerian passengers en-mass if nothing incriminating was found on them, especially when the South African government knows the full diplomatic implication of her action.

Nigerians home and abroad are not painting Nigeria in good colours in the eyes of other foreign nationals, think about the spate of bombings rocking the nation and threatening her fragile peaceful co-existence. Consider the menace of kidnapping that had been reported locally and internationally; think about the rot in the judiciary as exemplified by the freedom a judge granted James Ibori following the 170 count-charge brought against him by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, EFCC, only for the same James Ibori to plead guilty to 23-count charge in a London court for money laundering. Think of the series of panels of inquiry set up to investigate one high level corrupt practices or the other in our country; think of the can of worms that were being opened during the probe of the oil sector by the National Assembly in the wake of the oil subsidy removal, which also exposed the ineptitude of the government.

The world is watching and it is forming negative opinions about us.

The deportation of those 125 Nigerians under any guise is just a reflection of the opinions being formed about Nigeria.

Government officials are not also helping matters. In The Punch of Tuesday, 6 March, 2012, while receiving the South African envoy and reacting to the deportation, the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Martins Uhomoibhi, was quoted as saying: “South Africans traveling to Nigeria, or those residing in Nigeria were not required to produce any evidence of vaccination against yellow fever, or for that matter against tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS, both of which are prevalent in South Africa.” What a way not to defend a nation in diplomatic tussle!

This defence portrays Nigeria as an unserious, compromising nation. Our leaders should know that government business is a serious and uncompromising business.

Supposing those South Africans from whom no evidence of vaccination against yellow fever, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS are carriers of those diseases? How would Nigeria handle the havoc they would wreak, health wise, on fellow Nigerians just because our leaders decided to be unserious? This ‘favour’ bestowed on South Africans must have also informed the South African government that in Nigeria, anything goes, so anything that comes out of Nigeria must be properly checked.

If our leaders are not ready to run governance as a serious business, they should resign and stop toying with our lives.

Instead of railroading South African government and her citizens, Nigeria should look inward and mend her roof wherever it is leaking. Nigerian leaders should stop reacting to issues, rather they should respond to them. I am very sure the leadership in Mandela’s country is not suffering from various chronic diseases Nigerian leadership is suffering from which are deafness, dumbness and blindness.

That the South African government apologised to Nigeria does not make Nigeria a champion. South Africa might be stooping to conquer.

•Olagunju wrote in from School of Basic Studies, Ota, 08027717246