To sympathize or to crucify Sen. Ike Ekweremadu? This is exactly the question, I’m very sure, that, at the moment, will be wandering on the minds of those who have been following the story of the helpless David Ukpo, a 21-year-old street hawker and Sen Ike Ekweremadu, the former deputy senate president of the federal House of Assembly
Sonia Ekweremadu, the daughter of the
senator, who was studying for a masters degree at Newcastle University had to
put a stop to her study owing to her battle with kidney problem.
Her parents, Ekweremadu and wife, Beatrice,
both who wanted the best for their daughter thought it would be a shame if they
were unable to save Sonia, their daughter, from her ailment. Their daughter
must live by all means. Of course that was exactly what would preoccupied the
minds of loving and responsible parents who wanted their daughter to live.
David was a young man in the street of Lagos
whose parents had no wherewithal to help their son to have good education – the
entitlement he deserved from the government which Sen Ekweremadu was involved.
But because of the failure of Ekweremadu and other political leaders, David had
no choice but to resort to hawking phone accessories from a wheel barrow around
the streets of Lagos.
Considering the wide gulf between the
privileged and the underprivileged in Nigeria, no one would ever expect Sonia
and David to meet, but nature at times, is unpredictable. Both eventually met,
but they didn't meet to share their thoughts, or deliberate on issues. They met
because one must be exploited for the survival of the other.
No human being born of a woman like to
suffer. The life the poor boy, David, was living wasn’t his making for he
wasn’t a lazy youth, he was only unfortunate to come from a poor home. Nature
did not smile to him like it smiled to Sonia, who was blessed with good things
of life even right from the womb.
Unaware of what was coming, David, after that
particular day's work in the noisy Lagos, received a message of an offer to
travel to UK without providing any financial means from his end, even with
additional gift of some amount of money. Like an average underprivileged
Nigerian would do, the poor boy, without hesitation, jumped to accept the
offer.
Now the thought of becoming somebody in life
overwhelmed David. “Thank you, God. So, I won’t do this dirty and strenuous job
forever. So, I’ll also have a decent life to live…”. This was the mental
picture that preoccupied the mind of David the moment the news of traveling
abroad reached him. The poor boy eventually met his benefactor, and arrangement
was made.
David would donate one of his kidneys to a
lady in the UK with a reward of some amounts. He would act as Sonia
Ekweremadu’s cousin since the UK embassy would not grant a visa to a donor, who
had no close relationship with the patient.
Though David, according to the hospital where
the surgery was to take place, was informed of what he was going to UK to do, he was never told of the negative
effects or the pains he would go through throughout his life after the harvest
of his kidney. Even David cared less to have any knowledge of the aftermath as
long as his journey to the UK was guaranteed.
On getting to London for the kidney
transplant, the Royal Free Hospital discovered that David was not properly
informed about the risk he was about to take, and they believed the poor boy
had no financial capacity to handle the lifelong pains the surgery normally
caused to donors. Hence, he was declared unfit to undergo the kidney
transplant. And this was the beginning of the drama.
Ekweremadus, on discovering that they could not convince the London hospital to go ahead with the organ harvest, had to turn to Turkey to find another donor. They had to transport David back to Nigeria since he was no more useful for the purpose he was brought to the UK. But the poor boy was afraid to go back to the streets of Lagos after he had already bidden the rough life in Nigeria farewell.
“Going back to Nigeria to do
what? I rather die here than to go back to that unsettled and hopeless county”.
These were the thoughts that obsessed the mind of David Ukpo. After thinking of
what to do to escape being taken back to Nigeria, he eventually turned himself
to London police; reeled out and exposed what had transpired between him and
the Ekweremadus.
The London police frowned at this for,
according to the UK law, the donation of any part of the organs becomes
criminality when a donor is oferred a reward or rewards for doing so. They
believe the donor must act altruistically. And as a result of this, Ekweremadu,
his wife, Beatrice, and the doctor, Obinna Obeta, who helped to facilitate the
criminal act, had to face the full wrath of law.
The three were charged to court. They were
found guilty because the court believed that the poor David was planned to be
exploited for his kidney by Sen Ekweremadu. The senator was convicted of organ
trafficking which was a serious offence in UK. The court also ruled that David
was treated as a ‘disposable asset – spare part’ like most of our politicians
treat many Nigerians. Though Sonia Ekweremadu was free of blame over the whole
process, Sen Ekweremadu, his wife and the agent doctor were found guilty by the
court.
Now that the three had finally been sentenced
for being guilty of organ trafficking, shall we say that Sen Ekweremadu acted
out of ignorance? Sen Ekweremadu is a lawyer of repute. He’s a lawmaker, and he
was part of legislature who helped draw up Nigeria’s laws against organ
trafficking. I don’t think he was unaware of the offence he and others
attempted to commit.
Again, shall we believe that Sen Ekweremadu
acted out of love to save his daughter’s life? Of course as a loving parent, no
one will like to watch his/her child dying while he/she lives. But what I think
is if truly Sen Ekweremadu and his wife really wanted their daughter to live,
why wouldn’t one of the two donate one of their kidneys to save their daughter?
If Sen Ekweremadu and his wife were truly
loving parents, why would they submit the life of another parents' child, who
had already been exploited to give their daughter good things of life, to an
agony he might battle with for the rest of his life? What is really always on the
minds of the Nigerian leaders to the poor masses they lead? What do they take
us for? Is it true, like the UK court described it, that we are seen as
‘disposable assets and spare parts’ in the eyes of our leaders?
This story between the Ekweremadus and David
Ukpo is exactly a reflection of the relationship between the Nigerian leaders
and the Nigerians they lead.
I believe that the Ekweremadu’s trial and
conviction of exploiting the poor David will serve as a lesson to other
Nigerian leaders who still hold the idea that the common Nigerians are tools
they can use for their selfish ends.
Of course this, I believe, will also serve as
an example to the Nigeria police and the judiciary both which almost all
Nigerians have lost hope in their handling of criminal matters that involve who
is who in Nigeria. And the question is: If this incident had happened in
Nigeria, would David Ukpo, the underprivileged hawker, have gotten the deserved
justice?

Post a Comment