I recently got into a debate with a Facebook friend, also a pastor, regarding the barricading of the National Assembly by officers of the DSS recently.
The meat of the discussion was the importance of morality even while trying to enforce legality.
The conversation started when the Friend posted the following:
Beyond sacking the DSS DG, he should be arrested and prosecuted possibly for treason
But beyond looking at an action and responding to it, we should go further into background issues that led to that action.
I responded by saying,
How about the one who shut down an arm of government over personal travails?
Can we call this treason too, and arrest as necessary?
The response was that,
You may query a hidden agenda and personal interest for shutting down the assembly, but you can not accuse him of using illegal or unconstitutional means to do that.
Again, I agree, somewhat.
Many many things are legal but not moral. For example, a lot of cases of lying are perfectly legal (except in cases like perjury, or fraud). But we all knowing lying is immoral (in most cases).
But, how constitutional is it for an arm of government to be shut down the House in that cavalier version? It may not be illegal, but is it moral? Are we running institutions based on a personality?
We may need to look beyond the surface. The veracity is not certain, but sounds quite possible, based on antecedents.
There is the speculation that:
On the morning of the planned defection, the SP connived with Security agent moles to stage a fake blockage/Siege of his residence.
Therefore, he can claim to be unable go honour the “Alagbon Close” police invitation regarding the Offa Robbery, and more importantly whip up public sentiments that the Presidency is being heavy handed.
It is also being claimed that the barricade of the Assembly was also a ruse facilitated by the SP by organizing a staged-manage blockade so that the needed virement sitting won’t take place.
Like I said, all these may just be conjecture, but how the Senate leader got into position lends credence to these speculations, but the thrust is that the moral upstanding of elected officials should not be in doubt and should be of great importance to the governed.
Listen to this submission,
Moral issues are conscience issues. People are arrested for illegality and not for immorality.
Society is governed by law and not by moral codes, except in advanced democracies where strong institutions have developed to hold govt officials to account on moral issues.
I don’t think we can / should really divorce morality from legality, especially at this kind of high level of the personality involved.
Subterfuge and underhand tactics that are strongly indicated here is not what a sound society is built on and should be condemned wholeheartedly (if true)- if we are to make any positive stride.
Interestingly some things may be have no moral connotations but nonetheless be illegal. You need to have a current Driver’s License to legally drive even if you have been driving for decades and you are wealthy enough to take care of any mishaps that may happen while driving with no license.
As for society being governed by law and not by moral codes, should this be so? A society without morals is doomed. Society seems to be saying that, as long as something does not violate any legal codes, it is okay. Similar to courts of law being more interested in law over and above justice
It is my humble opinion that Leaders who are capable of tricks /subterfuge cannot be trusted to be on the side of the people, even if they haven’t committed any provable legal infractions.