News

The needless new anthem

June 5, 2024

The needless new anthem

Editorial By Tribune Newspaper

In a classic display of the proverbial misadventure of leaving leprosy unattended to while treating rashes, the Federal Government sprang a new national anthem on Nigerians last week. Forty six years after the adoption of the admittedly imperfect but nonetheless inspiring Arise, O compatriots, the Bola Tinubu administration repealed the anthem and restored the old national anthem which was shelved by the Olusegun Obasanjo military government. The re-adopted anthem, “Nigeria, We Hail Thee,” was written by Lillian Jean Williams, an expatriate, in 1959. Speaking on his first anniversary in office, President Tinubu claimed that the anthem, a vestige of colonialism dripping with imperialist tropes and sentiments, symbolised Nigeria’s diversity. In the same vein, Senate President Godswill Akpabio characterised it as the beginning of the revolution that Nigerians were yearning for. Tahir Mongunu, chairman of the parliamentary committee that pushed the bill, claimed that it was apt, timely and important, and would “undoubtedly inspire a zeal for patriotism and cooperation,” while promoting “cultural heritage.” Apparently not yet done, Tahir posited that “changing the national anthem will chart a path to greater unity.” The anthem was given phenomenal legislative speed and given presidential approval in the same fashion. Naturally, the move elicited widespread criticisms in the polity, with many prominent Nigerians thumbing down the government’s move and declaring that they would not sing the new anthem. However, the move received the endorsement of a few Nigerians who referenced the nostalgic feelings of their childhood and claimed that the re-adopted anthem had better musical accuracy.

Exit of multinational coys will hamper Nigeria’s $1trn GDP target; Analysts

FG warns organized labour against going ahead with strike over impending doom

Regardless of the arguments on both sides of the divide, it is not hard to see that the re-introduction of the colonially inspired and previously jettisoned anthem signposts the shabby and criminally cavalier treatment of the Nigerian people by Nigeria’s political class. It is beyond shocking that such a serious issue as a new national anthem was imposed on Nigerians in a way that the military government that promulgated the recently jettisoned anthem did not even dare to do in its day. A national anthem which is supposed to be an expression of the national resolve and philosophy was re-adopted without any consultation with the same Nigerian populace who are expected to sing it, internalise the promises therein, and reflect them in their relationship with the country and the rest of the world. That is a most blatant demonstration of absolute contempt for Nigeria’s civil populace.

Worse still, neither the National Assembly nor the Presidency provided cogent reasons for the anthem change. It is ludicrous to say that the restored anthem will spearhead Nigeria’s expected revolution. There is absolutely no evidence to back up the insinuation that Nigerians called upon the present government to give them a new anthem. What Nigerians were, and still are, asking for, as reported in the media, is the lifting of the climate of poverty and degradation foisted upon them by the Tinubu administration’s policies, including the removal of subsidy on petroleum, the increase in electricity tariff and the floating of the naira without any countervailing measures to lesson the impacts of these policies on their daily lives; the restructuring of the country to guarantee state police, among others, and the taming of insecurity. It is not hard to see why: the prices of food and other basic necessities of life have shot through the roof, worsening Nigeria’s sad profile as the poverty capital of the world. The value of the naira has so nosedived that it costs nearly a triple of the current minimum wage to buy a bag of rice. Life has been unbearable for Nigerians as hunger and terrorism hobble their existence and make it one long nightmare.’

Besides, it is shocking that in the face of the widespread insecurity, rising inflation and the foreign exchange crisis that Nigerians are daily battling with, the priority of the Tinubu-led government is a discarded anthem. It is no surprise that as President Tinubu endorsed the anthem law, millions of Nigerians were left completely stupefied, wondering what just happened in Abuja, the seat of power. Indeed, what kind of confusion is this? Even if members of the National Assembly and the Presidency were nostalgic about Nigeria’s past, are they saying that whatever good things they recalled were inspired by the pre-1978 anthem rather than the activities of the leaders of the First Republic? Why replace an anthem composed by a Nigerian with one composed by a foreigner? Where is the national pride? If the current anthem is defective, then why not harness the musical talents of Nigerians to create another? If the government wanted to curb military influence in the polity, why not give Nigeria a new constitution in tandem with the yearnings of the people? And why speedily enact an anthem law while the new minimum wage that will enable workers to quit living like slaves is still a mirage? Why is an anthem more important than the survival of Nigerian workers? What problem will the restored anthem solve? And what about the huge cost implications as government and private agencies tweak their documents to accommodate the new anthem? How can a government that has effectively pauperised the masses and presided over the haemorrhage of businesses impose additional burdens on them?

At the risk of sounding repetitive, we find it unconscionable that while the National Assembly and the Presidency have not given Nigerians state police in spite of the endless killings in the country, they have given Nigerians a new anthem. The conclusion is inevitable that the political class has no respect for Nigerians, and that Nigeria’s leadership recruitment process must be overhauled.

Tribune