Ekaette’s dress code

IT is hard to comprehend the mindset of some members of the National Assembly. The other day, it was comedy galore when a Senator took the centre stage to make frivolous allegations about the dishonesty or criminality of some of his colleagues. He has since recanted and his colleagues have forgiven him. The interesting report doing the round is that the committee charged with the duty of investigating Senator Nuhu Aliyu’s unsubstantiated allegations has capitulated.According to newspaper reports, some members of the committee were not interested in probing the allegations lest they dug up the carcasses of their own follies.

But while the laughter generated by Senator Aliyu’s comic relief is yet to subside, some Senators created another uproarious event. Senator Eme Ufot Ekaette is the leader of the new drama troupe. Her bill on indecent dressing is already creating ripples of excitements across Nigeria. It is not certain what reason(s) the initiator of the bill gave for introducing such a contentious bill; what is not in contention is the fact of the bill’s violation of the fundamental human rights of the people it seeks to protect. And Nigerians are not mincing words in telling the lawmakers that they are either not busy in the hallowed chamber of the National Assembly or are very busy doing the wrong thing.

A Nigerian civil society group, Nigerian Feminists Federation (NFF), has joined other Nigerians to condemn what many Nigerians are calling a misdirected attention of the lawmakers. The organisation argued that the bill was a trivialisation of the serious problems Nigerian women face on a daily basis. According to the group’s executive director, Iheoma Obibi, the bill which prescribes six months jail term for offenders “is a gross violation of the fundamental human rigjhts of citizens and is not the most effective way to curb moral decadence in the society”.

Professor Wole Soyinka was less charitable with his criticisms of the bill and its sponsors. He called the sponsors “obsessed prudes” who must be called to order. The bill, according to the Nobel laureate, was a manifestation of the “creeping fundamental tendencies” of some so-called federal lawmakers. He advocated the bill to be thrown into the dustbin “before we become the laughing stock of the world as we start harassing our Indian residents and guests for wearing their sari…”

Professor Soyinka chided the lawmakers for giving in to frivolities and sensationalism when serious issues like the daily criminal activities in the creeks of the Niger Delta were begging for attention. Newspaper reports also claimed that some Senators like the former governor of Enugu State, Dr. Chimaroke Nnamani, argued that the bill would violate not only human rights but also the Nigerian Constitution, saying that problem of indecent dressing should be viewed from a sociological point of view. It could be linked to poverty, Dr. Nnamani was reported to have argued. But then, many other Senators also supported the bill. So, Senator Ekaette was certainly not acting her script alone. And the nation is in for a long laugh for as long as the bill continues to surface in the National Assembly.

Ordinarily, a bill making a case for decency in the society should not have attracted such wide condemnations. With a large number of young women and even men literally going about half-naked, the eagerness of Senator Ekaette to protect the chastity of women is well understood. She is concerned about the fast depreciating moral stock of women in the Nigerian society. It is true that women are fast becoming sex object or commodified sexual symbols. Go to the banks; there you will understand how women are used or allowed themselves to be used as traps to ensnare moneybags, investors and depositors.

Beautiful and sensuous young women are recruited as marketers by these banks. Armed to the teeth with the lethal weapon of sexual offensive, they go out on missions to raise millions of naira in targets. To succeed, they, in most cases, have to deploy their sexual arsenal to force a mutual surrender from their male targets.

It is not only in the banks that you find such, the campuses of the nation’s institutions of higher learning are viewing centres of indecent dressing. The campuses are hunting ground for lascivious politicians, many of who are now debating the bill. There is an unending free show of voluptuous flesh on the campuses. Probably it is all these that agitated Senator Ekaette and made her to volunteer herself as the carrier of a societal burden of moral decadence.

Unfortunately, the Senator chose a wrong period to offload her burden. Moral chastity is the least concern of a hungry, poverty-stricken soul. There are, in fact, sociological proofs that suggest a possible link between poverty and morality. Why, for instance, is it the poor that are usually prolific child bearers? The answer to this question should interest the lawmakers, especially Ekaette.

The majority of Nigerians are struggling to survive. Such a people may not even think much of their moral worth because it means little to them. And once they see their moral stock as a commodity that can be exchanged for the crumbs that will fill some space in their empty stomachs, such people will not hesitate to trade off their humanity and self-worth for even a cup of garri.

Besides, there are existing laws on indecent exposure and/or nudity, with conditions and punishments for violations. What happens to these laws? Are they not good enough that they must be replaced with another law? Does the in-vogue half-nude mode of dressing that is heating up Senator Ekaette violate existing laws on indecent exposure? These are questions that should have been asked before initiating a bill (on dress code) that has no meaning to the majority of Nigerians.

The laws Nigerians need are not too far to seek. The laws they need are those that will restore their prestige and humanity. They need laws that will create the jobs that will put food on their tables. They need laws that will permanently put those who raped their existence out of circulation. They need laws that will put a full stop to their country’s visionless drift and position it firmly in the orbit of prosperity and development.

It is only when their humanity has been restored that their moral stock will appreciate in value. It is then they will think about self-preservation and self-worth. Maybe Senator Ekaette can re-introduce the bill when such happens. But currently the moral stock of Nigerians is useless, because they are hungry and no dress code bill will shore up its (moral stock) value.