Bugri Naabu’s startling claims - Why I disagree with Kweku Baako
Bugri Naabu is a controversial figure. Sometimes he stirs too much controversy. Within the New Patriotic Party (NPP), he is considered a maverick…a blunt non-conformist. His utterances can be brutally acerbic; many times they startle but not necessarily in a positive sense.
Advertisement
So when in a spat with the Gender minister he says rather surprisingly that Madam Otiko and the Upper East Regional Minister, Mr Rockson Bukari, could have had a hand in the murder of the late Upper East Regional Chairman of the party who died after an acid bath, Mr Adams Mahama, many naturally said: “Treat this as utter rubbish.”
Yet, there are many others who will not let the matter just go. To them, there can be no smoke without fire! Indeed, for all issues he could have accused Madam Otiko of, why the connection to the death of Mr Mahama? And why drag a largely politically demure character in the person of Mr Bukari into the fray? These are mind-boggling! While Mr Bugri’s claims do not confirm the two as complicit in the murder of Chairman Adams, it cannot be dismissed with a wave of the hand.
Mr Bugri’s outbursts were a salvo at two people who many in the party don’t expect to be involved in any such act. Indeed, there is no evidence adduced to back a claim which he has now described as a “slip of the tongue”.
A puzzle becomes more puzzling
The very dastardly and unconscionable murder of Mr Mahama has largely remained a puzzle. Irrespective of the arrest of Mr Gregory Afoko, we cannot say with a great deal of certainty that we have the culprit. Mr Afoko has maintained that he is innocent; and irrespective of the tags that many may give Bugri Naabu’s utterances, there are many discerning people who will not simply be dismissive of the allegations without some thinking. There will be lingering questions; of all the issues that Bugri Naabu could have raised, why the death of Chairman Adams?
Not many people will think like Kweku Baako. He may easily deride the statements by the Northern regional chairman of the party as complete rubbish. Indeed, he has dismissed the statements as rubbish, but that is being too simplistic. The issue cannot easily be wished away with emotionally charged rhetoric and denials. Truth is, many Ghanaians will have lingering doubts.
A slip of the tongue
Mr Naabu has not necessarily denied an attachment to the claim he made. He said it was a slip of the tongue; a slip of the tongue could mean a non-factual statement or an unintended statement. It is quite baffling that he did not outrightly deny the statement with rather strong words with better clarity such as “false” or “untrue”. “Slip of tongue” appears to have been carefully chosen. It still leaves a lacuna; it is not an absolute detachment from the statement.
Will the police intervene?
That is a vital question. Certainly, even if the police should intervene, the likely outcome is known. Mr Naabu will appear before an investigative team. He will play down the allegations as empty talk. The police will caution him and discharge him. It will not necessarily change the equation, so the police would rather not go there. But the police still have a responsibility to delve into the matter. An allegation has been made and has been described as a slip of the tongue; was it an intended statement that slipped through the tongue or a non-factual statement made in the heat of a political spat? The lingering questions may be answered but the doubts still linger on.
