The presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP), Peter Obi is at the twilight of his many battles. During the Easter break, Obi reportedly received a cold London reception. He could not have imagined that an arrest was in the offing.
While the dust on the controversial leaked telephone conversation (now dubbed “Yes Daddy”) between Obi and the founder of Living Faith Church, Bishop David Oyedepo, is yet to settle, the LP candidate has found himself in another dilemma.
Obi, still smarting from his defeat in the presidential polls, is in yet another bind. It was reported that he was arrested and detained by the United Kingdom (UK)’s immigration authorities. For someone who has been to the UK a couple of times in the past, this must be really embarrassing. What happened during his recent visit? What actually went wrong?
The UK authorities run in with Obi has generated a lot of controversy; while Obi’s supporters condem n the incident, those in the opposition make a casual joke from it. The myriads of comments on social media platforms border on a passionate rationalisation of his arrest by UK authorities and scathing ridicule from opposition camps.
Obi was detained for questioning on Friday, April 7, when he arrived at Heathrow Airport, in London, from Nigeria. He was accosted by an immigration officer who handed him a detention note and told him to step aside.
For some observers, they argued that this scenario is weighty enough, it should not be dismissed, and as such called on the Federal Government to ensure that the matter must be thoroughly investigated and the findings made public. Nigerians deserve to know the veracity or otherwise of the back-story, and if there are issues, Nigerians must know as well.
Obi’s Presidential Campaign Council first raised the alarm that Obi was detained over offenses believed to have been committed by an impostor. Obi’s army of supporters has since risen stoutly in his defense advancing various shades of rationalisation for his shameful experience.
Interestingly, Obi has remained silent on social media, leaving his aides to address the matter. His studied silence has befuddled his supporters who hold him in high esteem. But to some observers, his silence translates to deep-seated fear and trepidation about what shameful news may likely result from his arrest and grilling by the UK authorities.
It is equally instructive that, Obi, known for his penchant for sounding off on social media, has deliberately kept his distance from several platforms. Apprehension about his fate has also been exacerbated by his reluctance to come clean about the incident.
While no official reason has been given by the UK authorities for Obi’s arrest, the news is rife that he was subsequently deported back to Nigeria after being subjected to a gruelling interrogation while in detention.
Unwittingly, the Federal Government has also kept deafening silence on the issue. Meanwhile, UK government agencies typically respond to media enquiry within few hours, but they have been unusually silent.
A popular local aphorism clearly captures these denials and silence — While wasps and bees are individually denying responsibility for stinging the farmer, the farmer’s face shows severe swelling. But here lies Obi’s dilemma — the sentiments created around his reported arrest has elicited different narratives and this has kept supporters running from pillar to post, all in search of an elusive peace for their principal.
But this is not the first face-off between Obi and UK authorities. In 2021, UK authorities struck off Next International (UK) Limited, a company largely owned by Obi for failing to submit its annual accounts. The company was removed from the record in September 2021 following a first and second gazette notice of “compulsory” strike off of the entity.
In the UK, a compulsory strike off is imposed on a company by creditors or by the Companies House for non-submission of annual accounts or failure to notify Companies House about a change of official registered office address. Once a company is struck off, its details will be removed from Companies House register and the company ceases to exist.
Next International (UK) Limited failed to submit its annual accounts for the year 2020, hence, the company was struck off and dissolved in 2021.
But Obi’s handlers argued that the said company was voluntarily liquidated by its owners and not by the UK authorities as it was no longer in operation.
Also, in 2021, the Pandora Papers expose by a cohort of international investigative media accused Obi of serially violating the law by failing to declare to the Code of Conduct Bureau the companies and assets he tucked away in offshore havens.
The investigation, which was a part of the global International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ)-led Pandora Papers project saw 600 journalists from 150 news organisations around the world poring through a trove of 11.9 million confidential files, contextualising information, tracking down sources and analysing public records and other documents.
The leaked files were retrieved from some offshore services firms around the world that set up shell companies and other offshore entities for clients, many of them influential politicians, businesspersons and criminals, seeking to conceal their financial dealings.
The two-year collaboration revealed the financial secrets of not less than 35 current and former world leaders, more than 330 public officials in more than 91 countries and territories. Obi is one of the individuals whose hidden business activities was revealed by the project.
Beyond all of these, observers have argued that it is pertinent for any rational mind to raise posers about his ordeal in the UK: “Was Obi truly arrested and for how long? Did he enter London? Was he deported immediately or afterwards?
Other questions begging for answers are: “Why have the British authorities not offered an explanation on the issue? Is Obi’s party acting as agent provocateur just to appeal to people’s emotions? Who is plotting to frame Obi by impersonating him?”
Under the law, everyone is presumed innocent unless pronounced otherwise by a court of competent jurisdiction. So whatever the charge may be — “impostor” or not, the matter must be dutifully investigated. The grave implication of the offence is that the impersonator could be committing all kinds of weighty crimes and other dubious acts and it would be recorded in Obi’s name.
Or is this also a case of Identity theft? Because identity theft gives room for the impostor to have access and enough information about someone’s identity (such as their name, date of birth, and current or previous addresses) to commit fraud.
While the matter continues to gain momentum, what appears to be a “planted” story began to filter news outlets claiming the UK authorities had apologised to Obi, but it turned out to be false. Labour Party also denied receiving any apology.
Obi’s supporters have been deploying the usual repertoire of brickbats and cyber-bullying to silence his critics. If he was truly arrested and deported by UK authorities, it is a distasteful scenario and import about a man who recently vied to become Nigeria’s president. But if his arrest bordered on unlawful harassment, then the federal government must intervene to prevent undue torment of Nigerian citizens.
But if otherwise, the Labour Party may have shot itself in the foot by blowing up the matter out of proportion in its frantic bid to preempt uncomplimentary news and perception of its failed presidential candidate.
If the latter is the case, it is a perfidy taken too far, and a failed strategy.
Credit: The Nation.
