My father once defined loyalty to me as an act of mutual reciprocity between a leader and the led, between friends and associates, , between kinsmen and lovers, and even between parents and children.
It was one of his favorite refrains that the essence of an omoluabi is standing firm with any of the aforementioned in times of crisis or emotional upheaval, what is commonly stated as a friend in need is a friend in deed.
Not necessarily in the financial or obligatory sense, but in that genuine support to see a loved one through a bad patch.
Now, this is not the eye service type, which you hold as a cudgel over the head of the aggrieved party. It is the one in which you realize that once the person bounces back, he or she may go back to their old ways and cast you aside as they make new friends or go back to the old ones.
it is a role you will play over and over again with different people over time.
That is why if a man occupying an office gives you free and total access to him, and was then removed under certain circumstances, it is imperative that you stay away from that environment for a respectable amount of time, no matter your relationship with the new occupier of the office.
I pride myself on the fact that I have never, and will never, abandon a friend in need. So when I see people who wined, dined and generally benefitted from a man, while professing their loyalty to him, do the same thing to his successor, barely a week after he left office,
while they are under no contractual obligation to do so, stinks.
I can understand if one is duty bound, but if you were just a friend, then the betrayal is gut wrenching.
While the man himself may not care, those that served in his office who are aware of your closeness to their former boss, will see you for what you really are:an opportunist without a sense of decency.
But again, who has decency hepp?
My Ten Kobo