TheNigerianVoice Online Radio Center

620 Days Of Buhari Administration And Its 310 Lies Without Borders And Decorum

Click for Full Image Size

(Intersociety, Onitsha Nigeria: 15th February 2017)-It may most likely

be safe to hold that image and information management departments of

the Government of Nigeria headed by Retired Major Gen Muhammadu Buhari

have become liars without borders, decorum and decency to the extent

that in the past 620 days of the Administration (1st June 2015-15th

February 2017) or 20 months and a half; not less than 310 lies have

been presidentially told and taken beyond borders, decorum and

That is to say that at least one falsehood is presidentially dished

out and told in every two days since 1st June 2015. This presidential

lie policy has reduced the Buhari Government to a government of

hopelessness and made itself very difficult to be believed by most

Nigerians and international watchers.
It is recalled that the present Buhari Administration came to power

via a highly divisive federal poll on 29th May 2015. The lies under

reference, also called presidential falsehood or presidential info

virus; are told with reckless abandon in the presidential

pronouncements or government positions on key issues bordering on

defence and security including government handling of Boko Haram and

Nomad Fulani insurgencies and the recent IDP camp bombing; human

rights and rule of law including citizens and criminal justice

management; government killing of unarmed and nonviolent citizens such

as mass killing of Shiite Muslims and Pro Biafra Campaigners.

Others are economy including budget presentation, defence and

implementation and general economic policies; anti graft management

including placement of allegations or charges on citizens, their

arrest, detention and prosecution and government disobedience to court

decisions and pronouncements; executive-legislative relations; general

administration including non formation of federal cabinet for 150

days; lies associated with President Buhari’s ill-health, his vacation

and whereabouts; and regional and international relations and other

diplomatic conducts; to name but a few.
The official lies under reference also have mothers-general; and one

of the mothers-general is a recent official statement of the Buhari

Administration’s Information Minister, Mr. Lai Mohammed; to the effect

that “the stories of Muslims killing Christians anywhere in Nigeria

are fallacies”.
The presidential lie policy also took an international dimension

recently when the report of sketchy diplomatic call at the instance of

President Donald Trump to ailing President Muhammadu Buhari was

flamboyantly and noisily reported and celebrated by Nigeria’s

Presidency; forcing many informed and doubting Nigerians to instantly

pick holes particularly as it concerns who President Trump purportedly

called (Acting President Osibanjo or ailing President Buhari), the

location of the call and what was actually said or the true contents

of the call as well as government oiled media noise that accompanied

such a traditional and routine diplomatic exercise.

We had two days ago or on 13th February 2017 issued a statement on the

issue and held that the said diplomatic call between President Donald

Trump and President Muhammadu Buhari and its contents might most

likely not have taken place and were utterly sketchy; a position we

maintain till date. The link below contains the said statement of

ours: .

We had also on 22nd January 2017, issued another statement in which we

rose in strong condemnation of the wanton killing and widespread

wounding of unarmed and nonviolent Pro Biafra activists, who assembled

in Port Harcourt, Rivers State to mark the inauguration of Mr. Donald

Trump as the 45th President of the United States. Nigerians and

members of the international community were alerted to watch the

unfolding events in the coming weeks including the desperation of the

Government of Nigeria to turncoat so as to get the attention of the

new Government of the United States desperately or at all costs.

As we had correctly observed in the statement, less than two weeks

after same, the sketchy Trump’s call to Buhari, its contents and

accompanied controversies hit the global air and news waves. The link

below contains our statement under reference:

Our Resoluteness And Unresolved Controversies Trailing The Sketchy

Call And Its Contents:
(a) Criminologically and common-sensually, such weighty diplomatic

discussions or phone calls can only take place between two mentally

coherent and physically healthy Presidents. It is still a settled

opinion in general quarters that all is not well with President

Muhammadu Buhari of Nigeria in spite of wherever he is, with a serious

doubt rising day and night over his health capability to engage in

such weighty diplomatic conversations. The latest clarifications made

by the White Press Secretary, Mr. Sean Spicer has further worsened the

sketchy status of the said call and messed up its authenticity.

Agreed that under existing international diplomatic rules and

conventions including the Vienna Convention of 1961 on Diplomatic

Relations (ratified all member-States of UN including USA and Nigeria)

and the Vienna Convention of 1969 or Laws of the Treaties of 1969,

diplomatic conversations between two or more world leaders are routine

and periodical; provided laid down procedures are followed; such as

use of official modes of phone communications domiciled in respective

communicating governments’ seats of power.
The White House Press Secretary failed to say who President Trump

actually called as “Nigerian leader”, the location of the

guest-recipient of the purported call (i.e. President Buhari) and what

was truly said in the purported call. The White House’s website page

for press statements where the readout of President Trump’s phone

calls with foreign leaders are published has no update on the said

interaction with “Nigerian leader” till date; which has entered its

72hrs today.
(b) Circumstantially, affirmative statements contained in Mr. Femi

Adesina’s over blown statement, which were credited to President

Donald Trump, such as “striking a deal for the provision of military

weapons to Nigeria to fight Boko Haram”; “commendation of the Nigerian

military over its strides”; “commendation of President Buhari and

encouraging him to continue the good work he is doing”; and “bilateral

cooperation in the fight against terrorism” etc; are not only strongly

suspected to be Aso Rock planted, but also circumstantially premature

to be discussed by the Trump Administration barely one month of his

In other ways, several US policies including its policy on Nigeria are

apparently at “review stages” for the purpose of policy reversal, or

retention, or modification, or consolidation, etc. This is more so

when there is a change of guard at the White House (i.e. from out-gone

Democrat Government and its policies to the new Republican Government

and its new policies). We maintain that such affirmative diplomatic

statement on Nigeria possibly falsely credited to President Trump is

totally un-Trump and un-Republican like.
That is to say that the US Policy on Nigeria under the new Trump and

his Republican Administration is circumstantially and realistically at

review stage. If any call has taken place at the instance of President

Donald Trump to ailing President Buhari, who is missing in office for

more than three weeks now it should strictly be on commiserative and

health grounds. US Policy on Nigeria under the new Trump

Administration particularly in the area of military pact or supply of

weapons is most likely to undergo a surgical review; to be tailored in

the Leahy Law and the Republican Foreign Policy tradition.

“Encouraging and commending President Buhari to continue with the good

work he is doing” (i.e. raging State terrorism and widespread rights

abuses); is totally untenable and most likely Aso Rock planted.

(c) Diplomatically, Presidential diplomatic conversations or telephone

calls between two world leaders are totally official and

internationally customized and recorded. They are official to the

extent that official government communication facilities domiciled in

respective communicating governments’ seats of power are used. Such

call facilities may most likely exclude private or mobile phone lines

of the persons of the two leaders.
If this is the case, then our question is: does it mean that

President Muhammadu Buhari was quarantined wherever he is together the

Aso Rock seat of power call facilities? Or did President Trump call

President Muhammadu Buhari on his private mobile phone? Or was it that

Acting President Osibanjo that President Donald Trump called? Our

major point or ground of disagreement till date is that President

Donald Trump never called ailing President Muhammadu Buhari in the

atmosphere of physical and mental coherence and calling an ailing

President who is not on seat for over three weeks and who is outside

his sovereign territory; may not validly constitute international

diplomatic calls or conversations. Such a call, among other things, is

far from being official.
(d) What May Most Likely Have Transpired: It is recalled that the

Buhari Administration got enmeshed in diplomatic blunders when it

blindly and vindictively supported; some say in cash and kind, the

former and failed Obama Administration and its Democratic Party.

Following the emergence of the new Trump Administration, the Buhari

Government circumstantially and diplomatically became jittery and

desperate; fearing among other things, the possible policy shift by

the new Trump Administration particularly as it concerns the Buhari

Administration’s heinous and widespread rights abuses and its

hard-line posture towards Christians, the Igbo Race and Pro Biafra

Pacifist Self Determination Campaigns.
It is on account of the foregoing that we renew our earlier call on

the White House Spokesperson and the Assistant Secretary of State for

African Affairs of the new Donald Trump Administration to issue

detailed written statements or address the media over the issue with a

view to stating what actually transpired. Such clarifications must be

explicit and clearly answer the questions as: did President Donald

truly call “Nigerian leader”? If yes, who was the “Nigerian leader”

called (Acting President Osibanjo or ailing President Buhari? What did

President Trump tell the “Nigerian leader” that he purportedly called?

Through which communication modes was the purported call made? Private

mobile phone or domiciled call facilities in Nigeria’s seat of power

in Abuja?
Emeka Umeagbalasi, Board Chairman
International Society for Civil Liberties & the Rule of Law (Intersociety)

Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Mobile Line: +2348174090052
Barr Obianuju Igboeli
Head, Civil Liberties & Rule of Law Program
Mobile Line: +2348180771506

Disclaimer: "The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of The Nigerian Voice. The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Nigerian Voice will not be responsible or liable for any inaccurate or incorrect statements contained in this article." © INTERSOCIETY.