Wisdom of standing in front of a moving train

https://guardian.ng/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Nnamdi-Azikiwe.jpg

Late Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe

It was the late former President of Nigeria and Owelle of Onitsha, the great Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe who was reported to have said that only a mentally unstable person would stand in front of a moving train. By my own analysis, it can be inferred that what he meant was that, in all circumstances and activities no matter how laudable and sincere, one should be guided by the first principle of humanity, which is safety. In all of man's endeavors whether in our private, public or group capacity, we are repeatedly tutored that self preservation or personal safety is fundamental because only the living or survivors of an incident can tell the story in order to educate and provide insights for the benefit of humanity.

When people say, he who fights and runs away lives to fight another day, this is wisdom and not cowardice in any form, because it does not in any way encourage jettisoning whatever one believes in. It only means that there are so many channels for pursuing a cause of life and it is only someone who is deficient in wisdom and knowledge, who will insist that it is either this way or nothing. One has read reports on social media about Charlie boy and his group being attacked by traders in Wuse market, Federal Capital Territory Abuja where he went to pursue his campaign of #resume or resign.

While one totally condemns violence in any form, it is important to restate that the right to protest is a fundamental and natural right, but in exercising it, one must be guided by the fact that no right is absolute and thus must be civil, responsible and responsive to the right and sensibilities of others. While, one won't rush to judgment about the identity of the attackers of Charlie boy and others because that is the responsibility of the police to unravel, it is important that we properly situate this issue in order to avert a breakdown of law and order and in this regard, some questions are pertinent.

Did Charlie boy and his group inform and got approval for police protection for his market rally?
If the answer to the above is no, is it correct to state that Charlie boy and his group intentionally embarked on that action to incite and provoke a breakdown of law and order?

Agreed that he has the freedom of movement which does not restrict where the protest should be held, those who believe Charlie boy has done nothing wrong, what would be their reaction if he had taken his protest to the church or mosque or other religious places of worship?

In organising a protest, shouldn't one be guided by reason, logic and consideration for personal and societal safety?
Can we in all honesty encourage any person or group to embark on anti-Nnamdi Kanu or IPOB protest in any of the markets in the southeast states or on a campaign against Goodluck Jonathan in Bayelsa State and expect that such people would be hailed as heroes and patriots?

What is the essence of exercising one's right by organizing a public protest if it will endanger society by leading to a breakdown of law and order?
Is the exercise of one's right meant to endanger or ensure public peace and maintenance of law and order?

Without mincing words, what Charlie boy and his group did that day by taking their #resume or resign campaign to the Wuse market in Abuja can aptly be described as an act of standing in front of a moving train. It was a pure act of provocation meant to cause a breakdown of law and order and it is condemnable.

Thus, I am using this opportunity to call on the security agencies to investigate this matter and ensure justice for the Nigerian people because constitutionally, nobody has a right to take the law into his or her hands by resorting to self-help even when one is provoked. So the state must ensure that it's investigation takes into account the actions of both the agent provocateur and his attackers who must all be made to face the law.