A Reaction to Tunde Fagbenle on His view on Sanusi Lamido (IX) By Iroabuchi Onwuka

By Sampson Iroabuchi Onwuka


For one thing, Islam forbids lending of any kind with interest and in terms of Muslims of the same religion, Islam, condemns lending with interest to fellow Muslims (Haram). In many ways this poses a problem of equity in Mean sense of the word given the necessity to flip on real estate in secular societies. Islam under the Sharia however allows a form of deferred loan which they say is ‘benevolent loan’ (al-qard, al hasan). Angelo Vernados in his book ‘Islamic Banking and Finance in South East Asia’, suggested that the deferred loan therefore “has more relevance in relationship to the social welfare economy, or where there are social ramifications to a transaction as in the case of contracts involving the government, rather than in the private or commercial sectors”

Given perhaps the social leniency of the good will lending permitted by Islam and Sharia, which is by the way 2% of interest rate - fixed and unchanging - we may see the goods of Sanusi’s 2% recent discourses and experimentation as a social program, as opposed to secular banking which must survive by Investment and Commercial lending. In essence, you kill the market with a 2% flat, and when it remains fixed you never make a Taylor’s rule of nearly 4%. Above all, the misery index in bait of inflationary Chicago is neither ‘precipitation’ nor assumes the curve for ‘soft landing’ from facts of unemployment rate.

That is we are talking about Government project with beneficiary goods, a sort of class action that will perpetually benefit a collage of sorted class, who will likely invent a class society still alive in the North. This not unlike what we have in Arabic society, and the oil business is mainly derived from the set pieces of 2% interest on the Benefit’. In terms of international business and in terms of FASB - Financial Accounting Standards - and IAS International Accounting Standards, Nigerian Banking would now be forced to come up with its own measure.

To obtain the exact width of this very ill advised banking philosophy, we must look at what was happening in the years leading to Sanusi appointment. The former permanent Minster of secretary, Rilwanu Lukman, who was once a secretary of OPEC, carried an official atmosphere of someone outside the working dynamics of the Government.

Islamic debt financing contract, its Joint venture and so called profit sharing is useful for large conglomerates in control of many portions of Nigerian banks, many of which go as far as the National budget.

A society of religious others where banking activity would be judged by Islamic Koran may not work and is not likely acceptable. A civil society where banker’s conduct are judged by Shariah Advisory Board on banking in Nigeria - some of whom known only so much - is not likely to be fair, for how could others, of non Muslim background be considered anything but Criminal. But besides the culpability of the Bankers of non Muslim background, it will seem that we have run into a wall in Nigerian society that many would not have believed existed. This wall makes it difficult for either of the two groups to have a conversation that could benefit the society, each driven by their own background and each intending on seeing goodness through its own prism. This kind of separation always has its victims and in many parts of the same story these victims witnessed the improbable in 2008.

It goes without saying that Acts of Sanusi demanded casualties. The first of these casualties are those who held the other end of the knife from the Nigerian Civil War. Largely enough, the conditions of the war and its troubles after, allowed premier access of big bank to kowtow to Northern and Western Nigeria. The impact of those years led to major banks as part of the older economy, all in the years leading to extra-ordinary years of 80’s. These banks took on the extra weight on those years into the 90’s which saw the evolution of Investment Banks of all kinds. The speed of business growth in the 90’s and 2000s, made these banks highly kinetic in profit. Many of them very thin on the ground went down as well.

The nomination of Soludo and its direct impact on these local banks allowed the new economy banks to survive away from the old. Their smaller appendix in terms of loses and their overall aggregate through smaller investment and through trans-border trade especially in Ghana and in many parts of the world, gave them an opulence that could not have been explicated that easy. The profit also came through secularization which the man Sanusi had inveighed against, for it may yet be denied that Sanusi may not have swathed that direction, a fact of denying which may only be proved as accurate if Shariah approve of risk hedging and secularization. The Shariah do not. If the Shariah did not support ‘currency hedging’ that is by fact profiting from other people’s “uncertainty”, it may seen to explicate why frisson effect in Nigerian market was not the primary concern of Sanusi. He could create panic if he wanted and he did since his appointment and it marred our businesses abroad. With Sanusi it is impossible to see how Nigeria will eliminate the parallel economy which is one of the thorniest aspects of Nigerian currency market and one of the root causes of balkanization of the local currency, one which saw Soludo out of office.

The Acts of Sanusi as a CBN Governor are merely the doctrines of Islam unsuitable for a highly secular Nigerian society. Lamido Sanusi is called hero only because we assume our knowledge zero on his motivation and influences. Sanusi is called revolutionary as Soludo who began it all is become a villain. Sanusi may cream the popular front of the social media house and may have unqualified reviews about him, but he is to be noted for his action through a whole year and not in more candied months. Above all, we can say that in terms of Tunde Fagbenle, Sanusi is retained by the protean view of Messiah as if they exists a comparison to savior of Nigerian banking. But unlike the dying Messiah, this one has many casualties and victims, carry instruments of deliverance, of fire brigadier when there was nonesuch fire, of hero firing in all places which were mainly wrong. His Acts has all the whole make-up of a great soldier. Yet such activity may be right only if we are dealing on the Social and governmental activity, for such action exhibited by Sanusi is thoroughly governmental, thoroughly executive, and thoroughly messianic, altogether right for political office, but in banking we can say that the heroic Acts of Sanusi however righteous could only be wrong.

Nigeria as a country suffers from all kinds of sickness, much of it is psychological. The psychological problem of Nigeria and Nigerians is a hard case given the very history of the country in its formation years. It is fair to say that you can be right in the country if only you are wrong by identity. It is necessary that I build an argument on this matter since many will not see my indictments as objective. There will always be the issue of tribes, the issue of culture, the issue of parties and the issue of religion of Nigeria. But that is how we grow up, for we know that we are been women from day, children of our past, but childish behaviors and childish things are expected to be done away with.

For that, enough attention must be placed on what is factual and actual in matters of federal character, and on what is permissible within village square, and what is Law. That is not the whole reason behind my narrative of the undue influence of the Federal chartered office in the vise of Sanusi. The whole attitude of judgment without adequate facility of facts, and the commentary so far however subjective and however valid, or the more grasping matters of personal persuasion, should be discouraged and eschewed. As much as everyone is entitled to their opinion, it is only Nigerian to base the opinion on very concrete facts.

Tunde Fagbenle has hinted on a certain man who saw “the extent of rot within the system and the gargantuan corruption, nay evil, perpetuated by chief executives of some of the leading banks in the country, particularly Oceanic’s Cecelia Ibru and Intercontinental’s Erastus Akingbola, broke down in tears.”

What is wrong with the above statement is that the author, Fagbenle, began his essay by absolving the young man of public discloser, suggestive to rest of us that the young man in question is a mere declension, a generative so to speak and imaginative invention of Fagbenle, who supposedly cried at the debility of Nigerian Banking. This young man’s name is so worthy of exclusion, so worthy of curry favor that the author must include Oceanic’ Cecilia Ibru and Intercontinental’s Erastus Akingbola to demonstrate how guilty his accused are. There is no need to suggest that the first paragraph condemns the author for it seems clear that he is intent on passing a moral judgment as opposed to Banking, a moral judgment that is ripe from impressions of Nigerian society when we are dealing with secondary institution that is entirely earned through ranks of public.

The author from the above quoted lines, created an impression of an angry youth, a case that pales itself in plain comparison to the person/s of the author, for Mr. Tunde Fagbenle by his picture seem older, perhaps in imitation of his younger charisma whose more likely to know only so much. The greater chance that this invisible young man probably do not exist, does not necessarily mean that the author’s article seem extremely prejudicial, nor does it mean that the author is not aware of his invented persuasions. There is a chance that we are no longer looking at the article from banking perspective and from the angle on the one year anniversary of Sanusi as head of CBN, we are forced to bear in mind the faces of angry youth, who become entirely physical and evident in Fagbenle’s article as the young man. The young man theme is a form of parataxis that animate on emotion, the sentiment rather than logic.

It is well to however bear in mind that such impression may or may not have existed in the way we are led on. If we can say that there is no person called the young man, we can say that the improvising in the guise of the weeping young man bring in the fact he is probably not from banking based on declension.

What Tunde Fagbenle said about the young man that “Lamido took out his handkerchief and began to wipe the tears rolling down his eyes. He was shaking his head and you could see he was sobbing inside. It was a most sobering sight.”

The one punch verb sight, and the line ‘it was a most sobering sight’ seem to me an Ellipsis, for after the line, we are longer sure what the tears was about, the Aspect theory is here a misguide. So what are we led to accept by this? We are driven to buy the fact that Nigerian banking society had a problem of administration and trust, which forces us to accept that bad management of banks in Nigeria, led to fiscal irresponsibility and bad loans. For that to be true, Sanusi’ problem with debt recovery would have to be misleading, for now the whole argument is destined to sour since it is merely an issue of rectitude in Nigerian Banking rather the financial kamikaze leading to epic of 2008 financial.

Tunde Fagbenle said in his article that

“Sanusi could just not believe how any normal human being in whom the public reposed trust, could abuse such trust so wantonly and so inhumanly. He cried for Nigeria. At that point SLS swore with stern resolve that for as long as he remained the Governor of CBN, even if it would cost him his life, he would not relent until the culprits were brought to justice”.

There is pomposity is this paragraph I confess, a hint that perjure on what was entirely decadent with Nigerian banking, and what indignant propagation of the righteous ones will mainly do. Mr. Fagbenle composes lectionary on banking holiness that does not accord the reader with many matters significant on the ground in Nigeria. For the idea of attitude in terms of banking and morality of judgment is mainly of domesticated partisan in banking, peeping through the darkly stain of the always translucent money house which was would used process to kill more than one purpose. We are forced to accept quiquinine that a hero corpus that must rise to undo the damages done to the house of money.

What SLS found was simply unimaginable. And weeks and months down the line, even more and more revelations tumbled out. The banking system that hitherto was seen as the hallowed citadel of integrity and rectitude had been taken over by Lucifer and had become the cesspit of corruption. The identified CEOs had corruptly enriched themselves to inordinate levels, with choice mansions in the choicest cities of the world traced to them individually or their proxies.

The first line sets up the stage, like shrapnel, Fagbenle goes his distance in making it clear that the problems of banking in Nigeria was already known, that Sanusi knew who they were and he was going to bring justice to very noted ‘Lucifer’ of Nigerian Banking. Clearly we are so sold by the condemn motif since the title of Fagbenle’s article speculate on the left and right of messianic type, who only a year ago was a mange in the skins of just about everyone excluding his own. Sanusi is now he to be absorbed of the damages to many people which reflect a hint of recklessness on his past and a fickle of misjudgment on the part Tunde Fagbenle, for his praises of Sanusi is not that appropriate and entirely exaggerated. Is like the man Sanusi wanted to be disliked, if not hated, and that he was intent on actuary given his preconceived notion of ‘bomb and the bread’ clever mechanics on the divided Nigerian society.

The second paragraph betrays the author’s intent, for here a man who has never been heard before, was all of a sudden wonting to bring justice to the to the institution of banking. I shall say that if this was only true, there is no need to have written the article but we are reminded by our misunderstanding of the villainy of the man who was to appear before us a Justified in his deed even though they may or may not be wrong.