Connect with us

News and Report

REMEMBERING MY FATHER AND HIS YORUBA TRADITIONAL PHILOSOPHY FIVE YEARS AFTER HIS DEMISE

Published

7 years ago

on

BY: FEMI ODUFOWOKAN

Exactly five years today, 29th May 2013, my father, Chief John Abolaji Odufayo Odufowokan of Odunuga dynasty of Ijebu Land answered the call of Almighty. He died at an advanced age, about ninety years old.
He was a highly intelligent man despite the fact that he had little education (standard two) but equipped with the good dose of Yoruba traditional philosophy. He was a man that usually held strongly to his positions on issues unless you could convince him with superior positions or arguments. Sometimes, I had intentionally stuck to my position while I engaged him and not expecting him to easily detect my intent of wanting to engage him. He had told me on those occasions, “ti o ba gba temi, mo gba ti e” that is, “if you do not agree with my position, I agree with yours.” He would purposely say this statement to end the argument.
I remember him every day since his demise. One principle that he held and passed to those of us that lived with him and close to him is “Seven O’clock to Seven O’clock” (7 a.m. to 7 p.m.) principle. My father would not go out of his house before seven a.m., and as a matter of his principle, he must be back in his home by seven p.m. As a young boy living with him in Ibadan, he had explained the rationale behind his “7 to7” principle to me. He said that the society was full of wicked people and wicked people mostly operate under the covers of night. Wicked people are not necessarily diabolic or occult practitioners alone, but those who can physically harm another person. By seven a.m. and till seven p.m., you can see people coming behind you and people going in your front or sideways. If need be for you to run to safety you will run and if by a chance you are harmed people will see the person that is responsible. On further probing him as to who would want to harm me, a young boy of the elementary school.
He had answered, “Ti owo ko ba ka igi araba, owo a ka egbo idi igi araba.” which has a meaning that if araba tree is too big and strong to be cut down, the roots of araba tree would be easier to cut. He also told me that “oru ko mo eni owo” i.e. darkness does not know a man of honour. Since that time, “7 to7” principle has always been part of me. On some occasions when I have to stay outside beyond “7 to 7”, particularly for political activities or any other compelling reason, I am always conscious and careful. I carried this to the extreme sometimes, for an example, when my children some time ago wanted to go to the mall around 8:00 p.m., in that part of the world, the weather was just like 6 p.m. of Nigeria time. When I told them it was late and that my father had told me and that we should always obey “7 to 7” principle and the reason behind the principle.
They started laughing and replied that even though it was 8:00 p.m., but it was not dark and besides the place is 24 hours country with sufficient security architecture. Not knowing what to tell them, I restored in telling them that one must not disobey his or her father, my father had said “7 to7”, and I am also telling you same.
Another interesting Yoruba philosophy that I learned from my father was when he had told a man at Ibadan where my father was the head of motor spare parts sellers of people that are of Ijebu origin. The position entrusted to him required that he was settling disputes that concerned Ijebu spare parts sellers. This man came to my father for some advice. At that time when my siblings and I were back from school, we were staying with my father at his shop. The man told my father that he doubted the paternity of his last child from his wife. My father asked him if he had any full proof or evidence (eri ti o da ju) that the child was not his, (there was no DNA or probably not popular then), but he gave a negative response. At this time, my father responded that “eni to ni igi obi lo ni eso ori e” i.e., the owner of the kola-nut tree is the owner of the fruits or seeds on the tree. As the husband of the woman, that the man is the owner of the child. I didn’t understand the basis of such declaration by my father until I was in part three of law programme, where the late Prof. Jelili Adebisi Omotola (Omo T) was teaching us land law. He told us one Latin word and the meaning i.e. “qui qui patator, solo solo cedi” which means whatever that is attached to the land belongs to the land. If someone erects a permanent fixture on another person’s lawful land, such a structure belongs to the owner of the land. Explicitly, whatever that is found attached to the land or underneath the land (other than mineral resources) belongs to the owner of the land. I understood the professor’s lecture better with “eni to ni igi obi lo ni eso ori e” that I had heard from my father when I was young.
Among other interesting Yoruba wise sayings, I learned from my father is “omo eye to nko fifo to fe ba adan fiiye gba ara, ile lo ma ba ara e”, meaning a young bird that is learning the art of flying game with a bat will fall on the ground. Naturally, a bat is that species of bird that has both the features of a bird and a rat. It is so skillful in flying to the extent that it can turn its head upside down. I heard this from my father when a younger woman was trying to engage in a fight with another older woman. The younger woman was so abusive and had no regard or respect for the older woman and the generality. Not quite long, the younger woman lost one of her grandsons living with her. She was so pained while crying and wailing, she said she was punished and cheated. As a young boy when I asked my father who punished and cheated the woman and for what reasons? My father said a young or baby bird that is just learning the art of flying is engaging in flying games with the bat that is why the younger woman fell on the ground. After much pressure from me, he told me that if truly the younger woman was punished and cheated from the quarter she suspected, she must have passed her boundary and did not known the limit of her strength compared to the older woman.
Another related Yoruba saying/proverb to the above, but seems to be contradictory to the above wise saying is an acknowledgment of powerlessness,at times of supernatural human being. As a young qualified lawyer, I went to the village where I met my dad. He had gone to the village before me. On getting there, I met him with a woman from another village selling pap (my father favourite meal in the morning), after greetings, I wanted to sit down, but my father wanted me to go greet people at the village about fifteen houses before I settled down. The woman objected on the ground that people are wicked that my father should not allow me to do such as he introduced me to the woman as his newly qualified lawyer and son. My father said for two reasons I should go round. Firstly our village is unique in the sense that it is a neclus family settlement. We are all from the same grandfather or great-grandfather – Odunuga. There is nobody in the village that is not our family or relation. Secondly, and perhaps the gist of the matter, my father said, “Oju oso ati aje ni won se bi oba ilu.” Meaning, witches, and wizards were alive and aware when the king of a town was born. I comprehended the saying literarily to mean that, if super natural human beings are interested in harming you as an adult, they could have done that before you were born or when you are an infant. Anytime I reflect on his Yoruba philosophies, I usually agreed with his saying that “ogbon, imo ati oye ko dogba” i.e. wisdom, understanding and knowledge are not the same. Having knowledge of something or situation may not necessarily mean you have an understanding (which is deeper) and of course, wisdom transcends both knowledge and understanding. May the Almighty Lord grant and continue to endow us with the trinity of wisdom, knowledge and understanding. There is no better way for me to remember him than the usefulness of the lessons of his Yoruba traditional philosophy.
“Erimoje olodo bi ere, o ba obinrin sun tomu tomu, aduro ki oba lodo Esa, Odimoro omo olowo ape, Olalomi Olofamojo”. Sleep on, sleep well, my father and my friend. I am benefitting from many of your Yoruba Philosophies.

CHIEF FEMI ODUFOWKAN
****Chief Femi Odufowokan is the immediate past council Chairman of Ijebu North East Local Government in Ogun State and a Lagos based Legal Practitioner

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Advertisement

News and Report

Alleged 76bn, $31.5m Fraud: EFCC Arraigns Ex AMCON MD, Ahmed Kuru, Four Others in Lagos

Published

8 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

 

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) on Monday, 20 January, 2025 arraigned a former Managing Director of Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria AMCON, Ahmed Kuru and four others for allegedly defrauding Arik Airline N76 billion and $31.5 million, respectively.

 

Other defendants are former Receiver Manager of Arik Airline Ltd, Kamilu Omokide, Chief Executive Officer of the airline, Captain Roy Ilegbodu, and Super Bravo Ltd and Union Bank PLC.

 

The defendants were arraigned before Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court sitting in Ikeja, Lagos on a six-count charge bordering on theft, abuse of office and stealing by dishonestly taking the property of another.

 

The defendants, however, pleaded not guilty to all the six-count charges when they were read to them.

 

Count one reads: “That you, Union Bank Nigeria Plc, sometime in 2011 or thereabouts, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, with the intention of causing and/or inducing unwarranted sale of Arik Air loans and bank guarantees with Union Bank, made false statements to the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON), regarding Arik Air Limited’s performing loans, following which you transferred a bogus figure of N71,000,000,000.00 (Seventy-One Billion Naira) to AMCON.”

 

Count two reads: “That you, Ahmed Lawal Kuru, Kamilu Alaba Omokide as Receiver Manager of Arik Air Limited, and Captain Roy Ilegbodu, Chief Executive Officer of Arik Air Limited in Receivership, sometime in 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this honourable court, fraudulently converted to the use of NG Eagle Limited the total sum of N4,900,000,000.00 (Four Billion Nine Hundred Million Naira only), property of Arik Air Limited”.

 

Count five reads: “That you, Kamilu Alaba Omokide, Ahmed Lawal Kuru and Capt. Roy Ilegbodu, on the 12th day of February, 2022 or thereabout, in Lagos, within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, being public officers, directed to be done in abuse of the authority of your office and with intention of obtaining undue advantage for yourself and cronies an arbitrary act, to wit: intentionally authorizing the tear down and destruction of 5N-JEA with Serial No. 15058 valued at $31.5million (Thirty One Million, Five Hundred Thousand Dollars), an arbitrary act, which act is prejudicial to the economic stability of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Arik Air Limited”.

 

The counsel to the first and third defendants, Prof Taiwo Osipitan, SAN, informed the court of a motion for bail application dated November 28, 2024 and November 29, 2024 for the two defendants.

 

Osipitan prayed the court that the defendants be granted bail on liberal terms.  According to him, the first defendant had no criminal records and that the EFCC granted him administration bail  which he didn’t jump.  “We pray the court grants bail to the two defendants on the same liberal terms given to them by EFCC,” he said.

 

EFCC Counsel, Wahab Shittu SAN, filed counter-affidavits dated December 2, 2024 against the first defendant and also another counter affidavits dated December 22, 2024 against the third defendant.  Shittu prayed the court to dismiss their bail applications.

 

According to him, the two defendants are facing serious offences of economic sabotage. However, he agreed with the second and third defence counsel that they are presumed innocent pending the determination of the court. Shittu , however, added that the temptation of the defendants leaving the country was very high. He thereafter prayed that accelerated hearing be granted and the defendants’ international passports be seized by the court.

 

“But if my lord decides to be magnanimous to grant them bail, we shall be praying for stringent conditions because we are particular about their attendance in court. “We urge that they should submit their international passports with the court in order to ensure that they come for trial,” he said.

 

The counsel to the second defendant, Olasupo Shasore, SAN in his motion for bail dated December 6, 2024 and filed on the same day, urged the court to also grant bail to his client on self recognition.

 

The prosecuting counsel in his counter affidavits dated January 17, 2025, opposed the bail application of the second defendant.

 

He said the application for bail was incompetent and should be struck out. Shittu cited relevance laws to buttress his argument. “My lord, the record of this court is to the effect that the second defendant, at one point, absconded in which your lordship had to issue a bench warrant. “The learned silk for the second defendant is not the defendant on trial and it is very unhealthy for a counsel to stand as a surety for a defendant.

 

“I urge my lord, in exercising his discretion, to take all this into consideration because our concern is the appearance of the second defendant in court so that he does not abscond.”

 

After listening to the arguments from all the parties, Justice Dada granted bail to the defendants in the sum of N20 million Naira each with two sureties in like sum.   The sureties must be gainfully employed and deposed to means of identification.

 

She also directed that the defendants must submit their international passports with the registrar of the court.

 

Justice Dada adjourned the matter till March 17, 18, and 19, 2025 for commencement of trial.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Absence Of Oba Otudeko, Bisi Onasanya, Others Stalls Arraignment Over N12.3Billion Fraud As Otudeko’s Lawyer Protests In Court

Published

12 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

The counsel for Oba Otudeko, Chairman of Honeywell Group, who is facing charges of a N12.3 billion fraud, appeared before a Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday to protest the charge.

Mr. Bode Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that he was protesting because the charge had not been served on Otudeko or the two other individuals charged alongside him, the News Agency of Nigeria reports.

Olanipekun informed the court that, despite not being served with the charge, the defendants were shocked to learn about the planned arraignment through the media when the story broke last Thursday.

The 13-count charge was filed by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) against Oba Otudeko, former Managing Director of FirstBank Plc. Olabisi Onasanya, and former Honeywell board member Soji Akintayo.

Olanipekun is the counsel for the three defendants.

They were charged alongside the company, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

 

The EFCC alleges that the defendants obtained the sum under false pretenses.

 

According to the EFCC, the four committed the fraud in tranches of N5.2billion, N6.2billion, N6.150billion, N1.5billion and N500million, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos.

 

The 13-count charge, filed by EFCC counsel, Bilikisu Buhari, on January 16, 2025, further claimed that the defendants used forged documents to deceive the bank.

Specifically, count 1 accused the defendants of conspiring “to obtain the sum of N12.3Billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V-TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED and Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In Count 2, it was alleged that the defendants, on or about 26th day of November, 2013 in Lagos, “obtained the sum of N5.2 billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for by V TECH DYNAMIC LINKS LIMITED which representation you know to be false.”

 

The 3rd count alleged that the defendants, between 2013 and 2014 in Lagos, obtained N6.2billion from First Bank Limited on the pretence that the said sum represented credit facilities applied for and disbursed to Stallion Nigeria Limited, which representation you know to be false.”

 

In the 4th count, they were accused of conspiring to spend the N6.15billion, out of the monies.

According to the Commission, the offences contravened Section 8(a) of Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act 2006 and was punishable under Section 1(3) of the same Act.

Counts 5 reads: “That you, Chief Oba Otudeko, Stephen Olabisi Onasanya, Soji Akintayo and Anchorage Leisure Limited on or about 11th day of December, 2013 in Lagos, procured Honeywell Flour Mills Plc to retain the sum of N1.5 billion, which sum you reasonably ought to have known forms part of proceeds of your unlawful activities to wit: Obtaining by False Pretense and you thereby committed an offence contrary to Section 18(c), 15 (2) (d) of the Money Laundering (Prohibition) Act, 2011 (as amended) and punishable under Section 15(3) of the same Act.”

Meanwhile, Otudeko had reportedly fled Nigeria ahead of his scheduled arraignment on fraud charges.

 

According to TheCable Newspaper, Otudeko’s exit from the country is linked to the mounting legal pressures and financial disputes he is facing.

The newspaper reported that the businessman left the country via one of the land borders.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Loan controversy: Bisi Onasanya’s lawyer condemns media trial….Judge adjourns case to February 13

Published

12 hours ago

on

January 20, 2025

By

In line with his resolve to defend himself and clear his name, Dr. Bisi Onasanya through his lawyer, Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, at a session at the Federal High Court Lagos on Monday, January 20, 2025, demanded the service of proof of evidence and summons.

Onasanya, a chartered accountant and a former Group Managing Director of First Bank is defending himself against a controversial loan that allegedly occurred at First Bank 12 years ago. The retired banker is refuting the allegations alongside three others namely former Chairman of the bank, Chief Oba Otudeko, a former board member of Honeywell, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

At a hearing at the Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday, Fusika condemned the media trial his client had been subjected to, saying he was not formally invited by the EFCC or served a notice of the charge.

He expressed surprise at seeing news stories in major newspapers linking Dr Onasanya to a trial on loan controversy during his time as First Bank Group Managing Director without prior notification.

“My Lord, it is concerning that my client has been unduly exposed to media trial without being formally served. This is a procedural anomaly that undermines his right to a fair hearing and personal dignity,” Olumide-Fusika said.

The prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Oyedepo, denied any involvement by the EFCC in the media coverage of the case.

He stated that the commission had not issued a press statement and suggested that journalists may have obtained information through other means.

“My Lord, we disassociate ourselves from any media reports,” Oyedepo said.

The EFCC also applied for an ex parte motion to issue a bench warrant for the defenders’ arrest and sought permission to serve them through substituted means, alleging they had evaded service.

Olumide-Fusika opposed the motion, arguing that his client had always been available and had not evaded service. Demonstrating his determination to clear his name, the senior lawyer prayed to the court to have the EFCC serve the charge and the proof of evidence in the open court.

“This application is unwarranted and speculative. My client has neither avoided service nor absented himself from this matter. The claims of the prosecution are baseless. Since I am here and my client is ready to go ahead with this case, I ask to be served the charge and the proof of evidence here in the court,” Olumide-Fusika argued.

Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, who presided over the case, dismissed the EFCC’s motion for substituted service on Onasanya since he has accepted to be served in the open court.

The judge consequently ordered that the EFCC serve Olumide-Fusika the charge and proof of evidence in open court.

The EFCC complied with the directive, and Olumide-Fusika who confirmed the receipt of the document extracted a confirmation from the prosecution counsel that the proof of evidence submitted is exhaustive and there wouldn’t be an addendum. The defence counsel said EFCC’s confirmation should be on record, insisting that his client was ready to defend himself and clear his name.

Justice Aneke adjourned the case to February 13, 2025.

It will be recalled that Onasanya, through his Communication Advisor, Mr Michael Osunnuyi, had earlier dismissed allegations, describing the claims as baseless and an attempt to tarnish Onasanya’s stellar reputation for professionalism, integrity and humaneness.

Continue Reading

Trending