By Biodun Olamosu
Written during the Easter period, April 1996, in Kaduna while on the run away from Kano where four people associated with the author were arrested and detained as they were told to produce him. The article was later published as a chapter of a book titled: Politics, Governance and Fighters for Democracy in Contemporary Nigeria. The chapter is hereby reproduced in honour of Comrade Frank Kokoro that passed on late in early December 2023.
A lot have been said and written about Pa Michael Imoudu militant role in labour movement. He will forever be remembered for the struggle he waged at three fronts: within labour against the reactionary labour leadership, against the colonialist state and its attendant economic institutions (like GBO, UAC, Leventis, John Holt, Lever Brothers, Railway Corporation, etc.); and later the neo-colonial comprador bourgeoisie that took over the reign of political power from the colonialist after Nigeria independence in 1960. And the subsequent military regimes that came to power with a promise to correct the misdeeds of the preceding civilian rulers only to spoil the matter the more.
There is no gain saying that though Pa Imoudu is still alive today (1996) but old age has taken away the ferment of struggle from him; but the tradition of struggle he left behind has been a source of reminder to both reactionary and radical forces within Nigerian Labour of what the standard should be.
So despite the refusal of the labour leadership personified by Pascal Bafyau to intervene in the present crisis Nigerians are thrown into by General Ibrahim Babangida regime for the annulment of June 12, 1993 presidential election, all hope is not lost in the labour movement. For if the leadership is corrupt and innate in its responsibility, an alternative force that speaks the voice of the generality of the masses becomes inevitable.
Frank Kokori, the General Secretary of oil workers union, NUPENG personified this alternative. It was his union together with PENGASSAN that took the bull by the horn and embark on a general strike to back up their demands for an end to military rule and they called for the release of MKO Abiola (that won the June 12, 1993 presidential election) from detention and that he should be sworn in as the president.
There is no doubt that these are political demands. It is only characteristic of Imoudu era. After Imoudu, unions have been made to renounce political demands and aspiration. While Imoudu will forever remain our hero past, Kokori is at the threshold of future hero. History of Nigerian struggle especially the one at hand will not but judged him as such.
The two personalities under discussion have a lot of things in common and so do they have their differences too. First and foremost is putting to bear one of the fundamental theories of changing society by the working class. The theory which best put, anchor on the unity and struggle of the opposite, recognising the unity of all forces like workers, employers and others in the capitalist production processes. This at the same time reveals their intrinsic different antagonistic interests which are responsible for the recurrent class struggle among them. No wonder Marx observed that the capitalist will be their own grave digger by the new condition of centralising labour that they brought into place. So, unlike other labour leadership, who are in labour movement only to earn a living for that matter, who as careerist perceives the working class as a lame force that is not dependable; Imoudu and Kokori see labour as a social force that is dependable and formidable in transforming society into a better one. This accounted for the reason why they often employ the weapon of strike to checkmate the colonialist, the corrupt politicians and the military juntas.
In the period of Imoudu, the strategic position of railway was overwhelming because it was the means through which the natural resources (like coal, tin, timber, iron ore, palm oil, rubber cocoa, groundnut, cotton, etc) were being transported from the hinterland through their networks to the coast at the port where the country’s resources were ultimately carted away offshore beyond the country. Beyond this, the importance of Railwaymen came to its peak with the great economic depression of 1929 when the unbearable conditions existing among workers turned them to be militant. It was a period when there was little or no industrial establishment, so the only source of wealth remains the trading posts of foreign corporations, agricultural products and the solid minerals. The Railway Workers Union was the most powerful union of the period. In 1940 alone 18,162 workers were employed by Nigerian Railway Corporation. National products like cocoa, tin, iron ore, coal, etc. were the sources of foreign earnings in the colonial period, crude oil became the most important and valuable source of national revenue later in the post-colonial period since 1970s.
This is more so now that the economy has become mono-structured and we are therefore at the mercy of oil earnings coming from oil today. Hence, the strategic position of oil workers in the structure of Nigerian economy cannot but be the most powerful unions in the land despite their numerical weakness when compared with other mass based unions like National Union of Teachers, Non-Academic Staff of Universities, National Union of Food, Tobacco and Beverage Workers, Civil Service Workers Union, Amalgamated Union of Public Corporation, Technical and Recreation Employees and others.
Though one can see the demarcation in the situation in which both comrades waged their struggles at different times but one common denominator of both is that their struggles were geared towards emancipating the poor working people from oppression of the colonialist and the all mighty military dictatorship; so they were involved in the struggle for true democratisation of the society, a way by which the working people can be made to participate in the decisions that affect their lives. This in short goes a long way to emphasise the issue of rule of law that could guarantee equality, freedom and justice.
Going back a little to the background of the two personalities, one might give an insight into why they played such historical role. Pa Michael Athokhamieu Ominus Imoudu who was born on November 20, 1906 from a humble family in Ora-Oke in Afemai division, in the present Edo State. He attended several schools before he completed his elementary education at Agbor Government School in 1927. In 1928 he started his career at Post and Telegraph Department as a linesman before shifting to Nigerian Railway Corporation as a machinist – a junior staff for that matter. He was catalysed into labour activism by the oppressive situation and the racist discrimination the black workers (his colleagues) passed through. As a lover of freedom, he was often irritated by act of injustice going on around him and on several occasions exhibited his anger by personally and directly intervening against racist assaults meted against his counterparts. According to Pa Michael Imoudu (himself) own account at a function in Ibadan, he stated that: “There was a time a white man, the chief mechanical engineer of Nigerian Railway Corporation dealt a blow on a worker and blood gushed out of the worker’s nose, when I saw this, without wasting time, I took up the challenge by inflicting a serious counter blow on that particular white man in retaliation.” He stated further that: “I did not leave him to go until blood also came out of his own nose.” It was after this way of reciprocity that a strike was declared by the workers to flex their muzzle against abuse of workers by the corporation’s officials. This way of Imoudu associating himself on the side of the oppressed workers and his style of carrying out the fight for their interests marked him out for recognition. This was unlike other official union leaders that tried to be too official in avoiding confrontation with the management in the face of assault, cheating, discrimination, exploitation and oppression. Ultimately, all his leadership qualities as one that could best represent the interest of the workers became open.
Imoudu was among the pioneer leaders of Railway Workers Union. The formation can be directly linked up with his activities in the corporation. In one of these occasions, Wogu Ananaba recalled how Michael Imoudu who was a turner in the establishment on reading the notice pasted by the Railway management, announcing the date of commencement of the hourly system of calculating wages only a day previous to the commencement of this system. Imoudu upon reading the notice removed it from the notice board. At the close of work he summoned a general meeting of the workers and told them that the hourly system was a device by the management to get cheap labour. He announced to the rest of the workers that: “The per hour system will be started tomorrow, according to the notice. We cannot write now, the only thing is to stop work tomorrow and interview the chief mechanical engineer. The crowd yelled in approval, and the following day the strike began. On the following day, workers delegation interviewed the CME who assured them that the new system would not bring about a reduction in the workers’ pay packets. On the basis of this assurance the workers agreed to return to work. But to their surprise, on receiving their pay at the end of the month, the reality of their payment (salaries) was contrary to this assurance.” Before this incident, Nigerian railway workers that were also part of the erstwhile Civil Service Union were already disgusted with the union for its lacklustre bureaucratic attitude and policies towards workers. The incident therefore catalysed the formation of a separate union of railway workers called Railway Workers Association later known as Railway Workers Union and today it is officially referred to as Nigeria Union Railwaymen (NUR). This was the beginning of an ebullient and militant trade unionism in Nigeria as represented and pioneered by Railway workers Union.
Imoudu’s leadership of Railway Workers Union was the beginning of the leadership role he played in the later years in labour movement generally. At different times he was the president of the labour central body, the first NLC and the political parties organised by labour in 1963, Socialist Workers, Farmers and Youth Party (SWFYP), Nigeria Labour Party (NLP) in 1964 and leader of the only left party in the second republic, Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) among other positions held.
On Kokori’s part, he began his labour activism after a university degree from University of Ibadan. The political influence of socialist ideological leanings of the period that has its root at the University of Ibadan and spread like wild fire to all other universities and tertiary institutions across the country must have had great influence on Kokori like many other UI students of 1960s and 70s. Kokori activism at school was not totally in doubt. He was said to be active at the level of hostel politics. A resident of Zik Hall, His hostel, Zik hall, was and till date known for its ebullience and militancy at UI. It was a common knowledge that most struggle waged by the students of the university emanated from Zik hall. A typical example was the 1971 UI student protest over poor welfare condition and against a dictatorial hall warden that culminated into the death of a student martyr, Kunle Adepeju. No wonder that Zikites turned out more than 80percent of union activists of the university.
The courage, determination and commitment of Kokori could be seen from his decision to take up union job. This is against the background of the disparaging outlook of labour at that period. Labour union was misconstrued as a place for the failures i.e. non enterprising and unsuccessful people. There is no doubt that Kokori had many options than union job at the time he left school. The economy was not as battered as we witness it today to warrant graduate unemployment. Many opportunities were available for new choice. Most importantly, the need for money could not have been responsible for his choice because trade unionists were not known for richness as we know them today. At the period, they had to work before they could eat. Check off dues was not automatic as it is today. It was not an idle assertion to get workers to sign for membership of unions. This largely depends on how active the union can best represent their interest. And the population of unionised members so convinced and won over largely determine the financial solvency and strength of any union.
At the same time, the picture of the period was not without its blemish. Remember, it was during the period of cold war between the East and the West when labour unions were organised internationally under World Federation of Trade Union and International Confederation of Free Trade Union respectively with the former under the ideological influence of Soviet Union and the latter under the ideological influence of USA. So, both sides were funding unions to gain support and influence among workers especially the leadership. There have been complaints of embezzlement of such funds by some union leaders, and this has caused rancour among the labour leadership of the period. But despite this problem of the period, activism and militancy of workers was not as weakened compared with what we have today. If anything, it was better probably due to the existing competition.
As hinted earlier, both Imoudu and Kokori were active in the politics of their periods; Imoudu took active part in organising left political movements and party formations which he led. He was one of the delegates of NCNC to Britain to protest against the regionalist Richard Constitution of 1946. Other members of the delegates included Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe leader of NCNC delegation, Oged Macaulay and Mrs Funmilayo Ramsome_Kuti (a woman activist) among others. Imoudu never for a time believe labour should be separated from politics; because the poverty state of workers is largely influenced due to political decisions, so the argument is that if workers resorted to have nothing to do with politics as some believe. It will amount to condemn them to perpetual poverty since they will never have the opportunity in influencing such decision that is responsible for the conditions of their lives. Though the way labour subscribed itself into National Council of Nigerian Citizens did not go without criticism and this was responsible for a later break in the relationship; Labour thereafter formed Socialist Workers and Farmers Party in 1963. The party did not last long before another split in 1964. Imoudu emerged out of SWFP disintegration as the leader of the new Labour Party. The weakness of both parties were responsible for its disbandment just like other parties (NCNC, AG, NEPU, NPC, UMBC, etc.) of the period disbanded by the military regime through a coup against civil rule in January 15, 1966 without any resistance coming from the political elites or groupings.
Kokori on his part took active part in the ill-fated third republic politics put in place by Babangida. As against public outcry that labour should have nothing to do with such plan-to-fail Babangida’s transition programme. Instead of evaluating the situation correctly, labour was even used by the military junta to accord the wasteful programme credibility. Instead of mobilising its forces to resist the dissolution of parties formed by various groups including Nigeria Laabour Party (NLP), Labour quickly joined the bandwagons and rationalised the new created parties of Babangida’s government and stated that Social Democratic Party was meant for labour and the other National Republican Convention was for the capitalist. This classification also tally with the government’s own description of the parties as “a little to the left and a little to the right”
There is no doubt that many of the labour leaders were ignorant of the political consequences of their action then but events later proof that Pascal Bafyau that was the NLC President was ready to do anything at the will of Babangida’s military junta. He felt more at home with military rule than civil rule despite all his pretension. This became glaring when a general strike was declared to press home the outcome of the June 12, 1993 election but Bafyau used his personal position to abort the efforts.
For him to have gone away with such action shows the level of degeneration in labour movement in the country. This was what made Kokori to take an independent action in 1994 when the result of the pressure on labour to take a collective action in the previous year was aborted. This is where Kokori’s commitment to the struggle for democracy readily comes handy. The strike led by him that involved other unions in the oil sector held the country into ransom for two months before his arrest and subsequent detention for four years. This also led to the dissolution of NUPENG and PENGASSAN together with NLC. His active role in the short third republic bagged him at various times the position of being the sole administrator in Oyo and Osun States and lastly the national financial secretary of SDP. He came out of this office with his head unbowed and hand unsoiled. Kokori remains one of the few participants in the third republic that stood to the last in defending the democratic gains of the people on the June 12 1993 presidential election annulled by Babangida’s military junta; which his other colleagues two-for-kobo politicians have been bought over either by Babangida junta or the new devil that replaced him in person of Abacha.
Kokori unlike Imoudu, did only have sympathy for left wing ideological politics. This must have been responsible for his lack of understanding the weapon of strike at his disposal. An indefinite strike on its own could not topple government. Political strike of short duration could have been declared either to educate the workers and the people in respect of the ongoing situation or to pressurise the state and warn it of worst thing to come if it did not amend its path. But for an indefinite strike to be declared with impunity for the purpose of forcing out the government, a revolutionary plan like insurrection must have been put in place under the guidance of a strong revolutionary party. “Revolutionary is not a dinner’s party.” The shortcoming of this method was responsible for its failure. Its impact cannot be under estimated. Transportation system collapsed, workers could not go to work. Even power generation system could not function for lack of fuel. The entire country turned a ghost land. The strike was the only one in the recent past that could be compared with Imoudu general strike of 1945.
The general strike of 1945 was a political strike like that of 1994 about 50years thereafter. It was organised into demonstration and many unions took part in the strike. The arrest and detention of Imoudu after the strike instantly made him a hero. Imoudu carried the struggle to the prison where he made efforts to campaign against the inhuman living conditions of the place. Owing to the influence this action was having on the prisoners, he was taken out to be put in a house arrest in his home town. Peasant revolt was the result of this because he made efforts to educate the peasants around on how they were being exploited which was the source of their abject poverty in the face of plenty. When he was eventually left to breathe the air of freedom, Lagos was agog with carnival in the mould of festival of the oppressed; in welcoming their true leader into the Metropolitan Lagos City.
Like 1945 strike, 1994 oil workers strike caught the government unaware and seriously shook the foundation of Nigerian state. Abacha will never forgive Kokori for nearly grinding the government machinery and exposing it for what it was, an usurper and unpopular government. This action earned Kokori four years of incarceration under the most hatch prison condition in Maiduguri without trial. Maiduguri is known as the most hot belt part of the country. It can best be compared with Ziberia that is the most cold belt part of Russia that accommodated arrested revolutionaries under the Tsar of Russia.
Campaign machinery was put in place by Campaign for Independent Unionism led by Comrade Ayodele Akele calling for his release. NUPENG and PENGASSAN also played important role in the campaign for the release of Kokori and Dabibi respectively. This campaign was also internationalised. For an upward of two years, Nigeria was isolated from participating in the ILO Convention in Geneva. All efforts by Abacha’s labour minister, Senator Uba Ahmed, who was the former general secretary of a conservative National Party of Nigeria in the second republic failed in his attempt to convince the international labour movement that Kokori case was criminal in nature and his hand-picked labour union leaders that followed him to Geneva were refused to participate as delegates. So, the ghost of Kokori haunted the government of Abacha till its demise.
When Kokori was ultimately arrested upon months of searching for him by the security agents, he thought the likes of Bafyau, Oshiomole, etc whom providence repose on them as the official leadership of the labour movement in Nigeria would come to his aid; but such expectation could not be anything but fantasy. This is more so that the history of Bafyau personality has been interwoven with treachery. Bafyau role in the 11-NEPA men arrested and detained for strike is still fresh in our memory. He argued that they were not part of NLC affiliates. One may wish to ask: “And So what?” So was the role he played in collaborating with the state in sending the radical labour leaders like Pa Michael Imoudu, Wahab Goodluck, Bassey, etc out of trade unions in 1975.There is no gain saying that both Imoudu and Kokori came from the same geo-political location. They are from Bendel State previously known as Mid-Western Region since 1963 when it was carved out of the old Western Region. This has recently been separated into two – Edo and Delta States by Babangida led military government.
This geo-political location best refer to as Niger Delta has produced a lot of talents in all field of endeavours especially in arts, politics, trade unionism, economy, etc. Apart from the fact that Pa Michael Imoudu was a leader of note in trade union movement and revolutionary politics in Nigeria, he has also produced a lot of lieutenants across the country; but Bendel State will be remembered as a fertile ground for the growth of revolutionary politics. To mention a few among many are: Nduka Eze, Kolagbodi, Tony Enahaoro, Paul, Omafume Onoge, Festus Iyayi, Lasisi Osunde, Itsa Sagay, G. G. Darah, Osagie Obayuwana, Ken Saro-Wiwa, Isaac Adaka Boro. Other rank and file workers, students and women activists also fall within this category.
Though the struggle of Imoudu, Kokori and others were at the national level, nevertheless the old Bendel State is well known as a volatile state in the world of struggle where initiative has been taken umpteenth time against oppression. This tradition of struggle in the place has remained regular pattern since the colonial period to date, in the era of military dictatorship. Among struggle waged in the recent past was the demonstration of market women against the imposition of various forms of taxes introduced by the Buhari led regime, the struggle for the actualisation of June 12, 1993 presidential election result, the struggle against Babangida’s economic programme of structural adjustment programme (SAP); also the recent demonstration in October against the government skyrocketed increase of school fees in post-primary institutions and against retrenchment of their parents in the public service.
The correlation between the environment where these activists were brought up and their militancy cannot be denounced as teleological. This forms a whole area in Montesquieu study in sociology. A comparison of this geo-political factor can be made with the situation in Russia at the early period of the 20th century when about 50percent of the revolutionaries were Jews. Many interpretations have been raised in analysing the reason for this. Some believe this was because of the persecution of the Jews in Russia like in other parts of Europe; while some others adduced the reason to their genes which they claimed was susceptible to adventurism.
The unfortunate thing in the reality of events unfolding itself in Niger Delta is that despite abundant human and natural resources the land is endowed with, the place is subjected to wanton neglect and abandonment. This accounted for their attitudes and behaviours, irritation, anger and restiveness of the people in this geo-political area. As it is a common saying that: “to whom much is given, much is expected.” Put another way, to who is much oppressed and exploited, much should be expected to fight back. Niger Delta people are just doing that.
