By James Tamba Lebbie
My visit to
Ecobank’s Siaka Stevens Street branch last Tuesday left me with
food for thought, even if the discussion that caught my attention was
nothing new to me. In fact, it was the late renowned journalist,
Richie Olu Awoonor-Gordon that first introduced the thesis – that
Sierra Leone is suffering from “illiterate thinking”.
A customer
standing at the counter close to me was explaining to his friend –
even though I was unable to decipher the context of the discussion -
that the assertion by many illiterate and half-baked people that
Sierra Leone’s predicament is as a result of educated people is
because those so-called elites are full of “illiterate thinking”.
A couple of
minutes later, a large flat-screen TV hanging on the wall for the
entainment of customers showed commentaries and footages of the
disgraced former CIA chief, General David
Howell Petraeus
on the Qatari-based Aljazeera channel. The sequence was followed by
another tragedy of resignation across the Atlantic; and this time it
was the former BBC director-general, George Entwistle. At that
point, I was able to connect the dots. He was lamenting over the
erosion of the moral fiber of our political elites in the country.
Indeed, a better
way to understand my friend’s lamentation over Sierra Leone’s
“illiterate thinking” scourge is to situate his point within the
context of the two high-profile resignations last week in the United
States of America and in the United Kingdom, which no doubt
demonstrated not only the decency that characterizes those two
democracies, but also the strong culture of accountability.
General Petraeus,
who was unanimously confirmed as the Director of the Central
Intelligence Agency by the U.S. Senate on 30 June 2011, resigned from
that position on 9 November, 2012, citing an extramarital affair that
was reportedly discovered in the course of an FBI investigation.
Before his appointment to the top job, Petraeus was commending U.S.
and NATO forces in Afghanistan, which he relinquished on 18 July,
2011, and subsequently retired from the U.S. Army on August 31, 2011.
His resignation last week marked a remarkable fall of a decent career
soldier who had given his unreserved service to his country and
countrymen. In spite of that, his action was considered unacceptable,
hence his swift resignation. And while there is no doubt about some
sympathy for him from some quarters, Americans generally agreed that
the compromising position of an official of such high standing
warrants some uproar. But the decency about is all this drama is that
General Petraeus was not asked to resign; he decided he should quit
apparently to avoid dragging the institution into the mud.
Across the
Atlantic in the United Kingdom a day later, another head rolled. And
this time, it was the director-general of the world’s leading
broadcaster, the BBC. George Entwistle announced his resignation from
the post of director-general of the BBC on the night of 10 November,
less than two months into his tenure. He had come under “mounting
pressure” to resign following an interview on Radio 4's Today
programme in which “he admitted being unaware of a Newsnight report
that led to Tory peer, Lord McAlpine being implicated in child abuse
until the day after it was broadcast”. Entwistle resigned saying it
was the “honourable thing” to do in light of a series of
journalistic scandals that have rocked the BBC.
And even though
the circumstances leading to the two resignations are quite
different, in both situations their respective societies generally
accepted their resignations as an acceptable way to behave. As far as
I know, there was no attempt at a cover up. And if anything, the two
separate institutions they were serving are still dealing with the
issues with the transparency and honest they deserve.
Sierra Leone is a
direct contrast to those two societies among many others. In out
tragic quagmire of “illiterate thinking”, the few educated people
surrounding our power elites have succeeded in transforming them into
demi-gods. And what is even sickening, they would justify one
wrong-doing with that of their opponents in the past. In other words,
so-called educated people in this country will condemn one wrong
doing when it is done by those in the opposite political camp, but
will justify the same wrong doing when it is done by officials of
their party in power by arguing that others did it in the past. The
point I am making is that a wrong doing is a wrong doing whether done
by Party X or Party Y or by Mr. X or Mr. Y. However, when people use
different yardsticks to judge the same act of wrong doing simple
because they served or otherwise their narrow partisan interest, that
constitutes a disease which Olu Gordon earlier referred to as
“illiterate thinking”.
For example, when
the opposition SLPP was in power over five years ago, they government
tried to cultivate a friendship with the late Libyan dictator,
Muhammad Gadhafi, a move that was generally unpopular among many
Sierra Leoneans. The APC in power now, then in the opposition,
shouted on rooftops denouncing the action of former President Tejan
Kabbah on the grounds that Gadhafi’s hands had blood on them (this
was because Gadhafi had been accused with some evidence that he had
supported rebellion in West Africa including the RUF in Sierra
Leone). In fact, Sierra Leoneans were asked to put on black mourning
garments to receive the late Libyan leader during one of his visits
to the country as a demonstration that he was not welcome to Sierra
Leone. Many people in the country backed the position of the APC
then. However, few years later when the opposition came to power,
they honored Muhammad Gadhafi by making him an honorary member of our
esteemed parliament. Interestingly, those, including literate people
who had earlier condemned the SLPP for politically romancing with
Gadhafi were now justifying the action of the APC.
Also, when Ernest
Bai Koroma was leader of the opposition before the 2007 parliamentary
and presidential elections, he complained officially to the
international community about SLPP’s monopolization of the state
broadcaster, SLBS at the expense of other opposition parties. Five
years on within which the state broadcaster has been transformed into
a public broadcaster, the Sierra Leone Broadcasting Corporation has
all the trappings of an integral organ of the APC party.
Similarly, when
the president was opposition leader before the 2007 polls, he
criticized the involvement of paramount chiefs and civil servants
into party politics. He also condemned the practice of vote buying by
the SLPP, which he accused of using state funds to bankroll their
campaign. In the 2012 elections, the situation is far serious than in
2007. I have never seen an election in Sierra Leone were money has
been lavished in a bid to gain acceptance and popularity like this.
And in the midst of these actions, you will see people justifying
this same action they had once condemned as unacceptable.
Besides, few weeks
ago, an “attack-dog” of the president, the leader of the United
Democratic Movement (UDM) attacked the United States Ambassador to
Sierra Leone on the grounds that he made a comment on radio that a
run-off would be likely. According to Mohamed Bangura, Ambassador
Owen’s diplomatic status was incompatible with his utterances.
However, when former Nigerian president, Olusegun Obansajo endorsed
President Koroma in Freetown, Bangura did not say that constitutes an
interference into Sierra Leone’s internal politics.
This political
cherry-picking is most often than not, influenced by “illiterate
thinking”. The point I am making is that if we are convinced that
an action done by our opponent is wrong, we should be courageous
enough to also condemn that same action when it is done by our
allies. After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.
In the case of
morality in politics, it is just non-existent in Sierra Leone. For
instance, over the years running into few months ago, our vice
president was besieged by a number of high-profiled scandals -
corruption allegation ranging from cocaine deals and illegal timber
logging to defrauding his international business partners. He refused
to resign in the face of mounting pressures and disgrace. In fact, at
a time when many independent and right-thinking Sierra Leoneans have
judged the vice president to be a political corpse, the president,
apparently out of political expediency, endorsed him as his running
mate for the polls scheduled for this weekend. And many so-called
literate people, including colleagues in the media were busy
defending him publicly all because of either parochial interest or
financial gains or both.
The problem in
Sierra Leone is not caused by literacy or education; it is caused by
“illiterate thinking”.
