Sometimes the decision we make comes down to individual temperament, understanding, how we perceive others, and how we think we’re perceived. I think these were at play in a recent event that saw an aide to the governor of Kwara State resign his appointment. Ibraheem Labaeka, singer and Islamic cleric, was until recently Special Assistant on Artiste Matters. In his resignation letter, he stated that he initially perceived his appointment to be a call to “service and an opportunity to showcase my talent. But I have not been able to achieve any of these things.” He feels his position in government is based on public trust, and “I cannot continue to break that trust by taking a salary for doing nothing.”
I pick a few points from his words and use them as the fulcrum for my intervention. These are “service,” “opportunity,” and “talent.” I shall return to them. First, I salute Labaeka for his forthrightness. Nonetheless, I have a friend who once behaved like Labaeka in one circumstance but didn’t in another circumstance. Both situations are relevant to my intervention here. As a young university graduate, my friend went straight into business, and being a “son of the soil,” he used to get contracts from the government. At one point he said he stopped bidding for contracts. His reason was that government officials made him sign huge amounts of money, much more than his contract sum and the balance he had to give to the officials concerned. “I don’t want to fleece my people of the funds that should be used for them,” my friend told me.
Later he went into politics, appointed senior special adviser on something-something. The government gave him a brand new car and a salary. I asked him where his office was and what the specifics of his assignment were. He didn’t have an office, and there was nothing regarding what he should be doing. He said whenever his principal attended a ceremony, he simply joined the entourage. Of course, the official recognition at events and the interviews where he praised the good work of His Excellency, which aired regularly on radio and TV, were useful for my friend’s career as a politician. When I advised him to use his initiative and create something to add value to the government, he said if he stepped out of line, suspicions would fly in every direction.
So, my friend put his hands where his principal placed them throughout the life of that administration. In the next administration, he was elevated and rewarded with a higher political appointment. He’s an establishment man, but one eager to use every opportunity to assist his people. He did assist many in every political office he held—elected or appointed—over the years. He believes in honesty and earning what he has, but he’s a politician, and politicians learn early how to remain within the fold and rise through the ranks. I return to Labaeka and the points he made, yet not before I state a few things about political appointments.
Political appointees don’t find it as rosy inside as it appears to their supporters on the outside. I know because I discuss with friends who are aides to presidents and state governors. The intrigue around politicians who appoint aides is thick. Politicians are human, wont to conduct themselves like other human beings. They get angry, get frustrated with situations and persons, they fear losing control of what they should have under control. They’re jealous. They watch out for rivals and those working for rivals, and above all, they want to secure the next term as well as rise in their political careers. Politicians don’t always make appointments for altruistic reasons but for their own political survival. It’s about the numbers. If ten thousand aides would bring in the votes, it’s the number they will appoint. Recently, a state governor threatened to sack aides who wouldn’t add value; he meant aides who wouldn’t help him remain popular and win in the next election cycle.
With a large retinue of aides, politicians don’t know each other, and frankly, most of them don’t care whether these aides do anything. Aides generally give a politician the opportunity to go to LGAs and brag that he appoints their sons and daughters into his government. LGAs that aren’t represented write petitions. A politician obviously can’t relate personally with the dozens of aides. Of all the political appointments politicians make, those who have the greatest access are the Chief of Staff, Secretary to the State Government, and the spokesperson. Sometimes the spokesperson is the closest, the foremost confidant, and may carry out other very personal roles for the principal, especially if they’re loyal and can keep secrets. I consider it ideal and indeed beneficial for a politician to have a spokesperson who is a confidant. The arrangement may differ from one politician to the other though. Yet even a spokesperson may not get to see the principal always, let alone discuss issues. So spokespersons often have to figure out what they should be saying and where to collect their facts on issues before addressing the press.Related News
Generally, no appointee is guaranteed compulsory audience. If a politician isn’t keen to see anyone, then aides have to do their job as best as they can. Election season is the most notorious. Politicians join stakeholders at the state and federal levels. This is the kind of loop most aides have learnt to manoeuvre in. They do only what they’re told to do. In any case, most of them strive to be good boys because they want to progress in their political careers. As such, they don’t take the kind of decision Labaeka took.
Now, Labaeka saw his appointment as a call to service. To him, it was an opportunity to add value as well as showcase his talent. No politician appoints an aide to show talent. They’re appointed to show their principal’s talent, or just say their principal has talent. It doesn’t matter if the principal’s talent is giving public funds to Julius Berger to construct roads and then announce himself as the most hardworking politician. Anything an aide does that draws attention to themselves rather than the principal is an unforgivable sin in politics. Words would soon get to the principal that the aide concerned wants to outshine him or her.
And if there’s an opportunity at all, it’s for an aide to seize it to let the people know that their principal is working and to praise the principal, most likely by attending events where he speaks glowingly about the principal. An aide doesn’t forget to appeal to people to continue to support the principal, ensure they collect their voters’ cards, and vote for him at the next election. That’s how most politicians expect aides to utilise any opportunity, aides being part of the political paraphernalia meant to garner support for them.
“Service” that Labaeka mentions shares some similarities. Service is service to the principal, helping him to look good, an aide being part of the long-sleeve agbada that distinguishes the politician from a soldier. Any service that makes an aide look like they work harder than the principal is regarded as a threat. The foregoing isn’t what I believe should happen to politicians’ aides, but it’s what is happening.
Nonetheless, I believe one can be an aide and make honest contributions in one’s own little way. An aide to a politician can use the resources they access to make a difference in the lives of the helpless. Labaeka obviously doesn’t need the money he’s paid to survive, but he can use it to organise empowerment programmes for the indigent. As a musician, he could have curated workshops for talented would-be musicians and done it in the name of his principal. He gets paid because he’s an assistant to his principal anyway. A principal will like such a move and take note. The important point in this situation is that Labaeka could have used his bigger profile to do something that makes a difference in the lives of the people. Wisdom is all it takes to navigate the murky waters of being an aide to a politician. If everyone jumps out of the ship as Labaeka has done, who then stays in the ship to make a difference in our nation?
