New 100 Naira note: much ado about nothing, by Kelechi Deca

 GUEST BLOG POST

Photo Credit: Kelechi Deca

Since today, the Nigerian public narrative space has been awash with indignation over what some call the removal of the 'Ajami' from the Commemorative N100 note. I don’t want to go into reasons why anything Ajami or not should not be on any currency because the reasons those in favour of the Ajami have been giving me are quite weak. I will return to this.

I was surprised that those who went to town declaring that President Jonathan and his brother the CBN Governor have replaced the Ajami with the Star of David, don’t even know what the Star of David looks like. It amuses me that they picked the Star of David. I won’t go into that too.

But if they cared to get information, the CBN Governor did say while explaining the features that the currency has a spark feature of a rolling manila bar which was the instrument used during the slave trade era. What they term Star of David is a rolling manilla bar.

For those who care little about history: Manillas were used as currency in many parts of West Africa as early as the 15th century till 1948 but it was more popular in today’s South Eastern and South Southern Nigeria due to early trade with the Portuguese. However, the Native Currency Proclamation of 1902 in Nigeria prohibited the import of manillas except with the High Commissioner's permit. 

The proclamation was to encourage the use of coined money. Although manillas were legal tender, they floated against British and French West African currencies and the palm-oil trading companies manipulated their value to advantage during the market season. The British undertook a major recall dubbed "operation manilla" in 1948 to replace them with British West African currency. The campaign was largely successful and over 32 million pieces were bought up and resold as scrap.

The manilla, a lingering reminder of the slave trade, ceased to be legal tender in British West Africa on April 1, 1949 after a six-month period of withdrawal. People were permitted to keep a maximum of 200 for ceremonies such as marriages and burials.

Today some parts of Igboland still call money Okpogho, but that was the name manilas were called then. Some called it Okombo and abi. I saw some of them when I was a kid, my people called it Ejemma, it came after the one we called the Eze ego. At the Benin River in those days, a young woman can be bought for 12 manillas.

Now to the reasons some gave for having the Ajami on the notes: You do not need education to distinguish between N100 and N1000, if you doubt me try play a game on any of these beggars on the road, you will discover that they are more financially literate than most of us. We distinguish our currencies more from their colour, size and feel than their nominal value inscription. How many times have you looked at a N1000 note to make sure the 1000 inscription was there?

It is not Star of David. It is Manilla which captured our economic history. Stop projecting ignorance please. 

 -------------------------------------------
~My quick and brief takes on the removal of the Ajami inscription can be read here~

Archived: On Ajami's Removal from Nigeria's National Currency

~My quick and brief takes on the removal of the Ajami inscription. This 2-tier intervention was done as Facebook updates. I later decided to archive it here for it is certain, that sooner or later, the debate will still be revisited. Knowing Nigeria as a metaphor for controversy since 1960~

 

 On Ajami's Removal from Nigeria's National Currency

 

Photo Credit: Kelechi Deca

I. REMOVAL OF AJAMI AND THE HYSTERIA OF THE VICTIMS OF ARAB EXPANSIONISM

I don't know if anyone will prefer a Naira, because of an Arabicalised (not Arabic) inscription, to a Dollar with One-eyed symbol, depicting 'Godless' society. I really doubt so. Much ado about nothing. Yea! Nuffin!!

It tells that it is material consciousness that fuels our existential experience, not idealistic leaning in the name of ethnicity or religion. Holding to a cultural representation of an Arabic-based language (script), as social identity, is a feature of poor people, not wanting to detach themselves from the shackles of Arab expansionism in this 21st century. Our often experienced friction has always show that back people accord more sanctity to an Arab blood over an African's.

Considering the pro and anti debate, for and aganinst the removal of Ajami inscription on our national currency, the most disturbing colouration of the ongoing brickbats is its Muslims vs. Christians' hue. No! It should not be, because it is not so, and it is not so
because it is not Arabic that is removed, it is Ajami (Arabicalised) words. And, I have been looking for what is Islam, or Muslim there, I could not find it. Help me!!

On the other hand, what must be Muslim or Islam on our national currency, a legal tender of a country that has no state-adopted religion? If the words are religious (which are not), its removal MUST be welcomed as a giant stride towards reclaiming our secular nature, which the present team of lootocrats has replaced with political clericalism. 

And to those who are ignorantly or mischievously spreading that fat lie that the removed inscription is replaced with 'Star of David' symbol, you should read Kelechi Deca's Facebook intervention on this debate here.

Even, if we are not old enough to know about Manilla (thanks to Buroda Kelechi for the education), does that symbol look like what you find on State of Israel's flag? Some clicks away will save you from maligning your reputation, for goodness sake.

II. FINAL RANTS ON THE REMOVAL OF AJAMI'S INSCRIPTION

First and foremost, the essence of this debate is its educational advantage, and the need to overhaul our national integration machine, towards a true Nigeria that is above ethnic or religious sentiment. The antagonists of the Ajami inscription should not, for the purpose of public sanity, bring anti-Islam argument into the discourse, because Ajami is not Islamic. Issues of national concern must not be treated by fellows suffering from prejudice or bigotry. No matter how blur the separating thin line between Islam and Arabism is, it is discernible for those with quality sight.

Again, this much controversial removal is not Goodluck Jonathan's doing. This is dated back to Olusegun Obasanjo's government, when Prof. Soludo was the CBN governor. It will amount to mischief to add this to the numerous unforgivable sins of our shoeless President. I have read two major essays in support of the Ajami inscriptions - the Mohammed Haruna's The New Naira Notes, Obasanjo, Soludo and Soyinka, and Nowa's New Naira Notes - Languages and Scripts; Can of Worms. Both are essays of sound historical lessons on Nigeria and her disparate national identities, but none is strong enough to justify the continuous existence of Ajami on our national currency. Readers can dig the internet to read about  both opposing camps' argument, for an informed stand based on reason and not emotion. And also, to properly contextualize my disagreement with the duo.

First, it is lack of civic nationalism that is causing this national disparity, and mutual suspicion on issues that are neither economic-driven, nor social inspiring. If we are truly a nation, this debate will never come up. If Shuwa Arab, speaking Arabic, is one of the 400 nationalities in Nigeria, of what purpose is favouring the Arabic or its version (Ajami) over Nupe, or Tiv, which are also the minorities. Or is Nowa suggesting that all the 400 languages of the minorities be written on our currency note? This argument is weak, water-loose. We will only discard the roman and arabic numerals if we can have an indigenous version for the same purpose. Even, fellows, pushing this argument cannot muster a replacement to Roman numerals. 

I have equally responded to the inherent weakness of comparing Arabic numbering system that has a different history to the domination of a section of Nigeria constituents nationalities on our national symbols and insignia. That Hausa, Yoruba and Igbo are major languages of this nations-state is in public knowledge. It does not demand revisionism. Arabic, if at all has history with Nigeria, falls into the minority. Hence, it cannot be accorded recognition, in the midst of other 400 minority languages.

If Latin is still on any of our national objects, it should be removed. This cannot be extended to schools' mottos because learning centres, historically, is always a reflection of the culture and religion of the founding fathers. Even if Ahmadu Bello University (ABU), Uthman Dan Fodio University (USU), are federal schools, their creations and the founding philosophy cannot be divorced from the ethno-religious particularity of the founders. This is why you cannot find any university in the South West to study Islamic Law. The nearest is UniIorin, and history is on that side. Almost all courses in humanities in the universities in the North has Islamic version as part of its synopsis -Islamic Accounting, Islamic finance, Islamic Philosophy, and all whatnot. This is not obtainable in the South. This features the peculiar ethno-religious background of the constituents nations that form Nigeria -a geographical expression. So, we need to know what we collectively adopt to be Nigerian, and what we do not, till we are able to peacefully undo the deed of Lord Luggard.

Second, Mohammed Haruna's argument that Nigeria's acceptance among her Arab business partner-countries necessitates the retention of the Ajami inscription is equally laughable. These inscriptions depict Hausa, merely written in adapted Arabic. Hausa is different from Arabic, and the mere 'arabicalization' will never make it understandable to the Arab countries, the business partners that must be put into consideration, in Haruna's argument. 

This debate, nevertheless, has further showed the necessity of regional government, regional autonomy to the constituents nations of this state, as a way of fostering peace. We are not synonymous, and as one side is not ready for compromise in its cultural identity, the others is not accepting dominance. Even though nationally bonded entities and/or objects will still be shared by the constituent regions, it avails each region to instill its cultural ethos into her government without risking the allegation of fostering dominance on others.