The Nation Newspaper

Category: Monday

  •  Olunloyo: Rich man, Poor Man

     Olunloyo: Rich man, Poor Man

    Omololu Olunloyo’s passing throws up the consequences of politics for family, a subject many don’t address.

    Recently, his daughter Kemi announced she has renounced the family.

    But it is not a joking matter. She told the story of how about 25 touts defiled her at 13 and wounded her brother when they were on a journey.

    Her father’s political enemies were after a pound of flesh. Many should not underestimate the extent of that trauma, and there is no way it might not have damaged something in her for the rest of her life and brother’s.

    Recently, Femi Fani-Kayode gave a graphic account of how as a boy the army stormed their home at night and bullied his father with their arms and uniforms and voices.

    Read Also: Tompolo predicts Fubara’s return as Rivers gov, calls for peace in Niger Delta

    It was during the 1966 coup. The children watched, and no one can underestimate how such an experience in such an age can turn a person upside down.

    Olunloyo might also have been ravaged by that experience of his children. Yet, he kept an ebullient persona throughout his life.

    I recall in the 1980’s at the Concord Press when he paid a visit.

    Mike Awoyinfa, Dele Momodu, Ohi Alegbe and Femi Ojudu  and myself engaged him for over an hour. We were all on our feet at the car park, and we discussed everything from the anomaly of army rule, to the dearth of intellectualism in Nigeria and the meltdown of the Soviet Union.

     It was a feast on our feet.

    He invited me to view his Ibadan library.

     I never obliged.

    The following Saturday, Awoyinfa captured the ferment in his column and titled it, Rich man, Poor Man.

  • It’s about power

    It’s about power

    Governor Sheriff Oborevwori put his finger on the power of investment in the investment in power. This, I think,  should be the model for governors who are trying to take advantage of the opening up of many watts to states to ease the federal burden. In signing a slew of bills into law, especially the Delta State Electricity Power Sector law 2024, Governor Oborevwori said it would “unlock a plethora of investment opportunities in the power generation, transmission and distribution…” it’s a trinity bomb.

    Read Also: Reps name 19-member committee to oversee emergency rule in Rivers state

    If each state sees power as not just light in a darkness, it will help turn states that see it in terms of dollar investments. It is a huge industry. For a state like Delta with more metropolitan areas than any other in the federation, it is a boon door for its citizens and the country. A city like Warri that is gradually waking up under him from its long slumber, it is power to the city!

  • Justice or interest of the stronger?

    Justice or interest of the stronger?

    There appears a re-awakened zeal by leaders in Africa to grill some of the universal concepts that guide economic, social and political action. Observed weaknesses of these concepts, especially their inability to approximate their real essence are some of the issues that reinforce the desirability for such inquisition.

    Of late, former president, Olusegun Obasanjo, had cause to interrogate western liberal democracy and returned a verdict that it does not suit African needs. Curiously also, the military president of Burkina Faso, Captain Ibrahim Traore joined the fray last week, with the claim that no country has developed under democracy.

    “It is impossible to name a country that has developed in democracy. Democracy is only the result” he said. Traore may have been moved to this conclusion by the recurring political instability and deficiencies in the deliverability of that governance framework.

    But even as the suitability of western liberal democracy to the African cause remains a moot issue, justice is another concept whose real meaning and application will continue to confound observers especially in the manner it finds practical expression in Nigeria.

    It does seem ours is a vague notion of justice that means different things in different situations. The inability to discern universalism or some form of regularity in the application and enforcement of justice in the country has continued to raise questions regarding its real meaning and essence.

    This is not entirely new as it preoccupied the attention of early philosophers, dividing them along the line. Socrates saw justice as the equitable and fair treatment of others. “Justice is a virtue that must be cultivated in order to lead a fulfilling life and injustice is a fault that leads to misery and failure”, he said.

    But Thrasymachus argued in Plato’s Republic that justice is nothing more than the advantage of the stronger- justice is simply what the rulers or those in power deem to be in their own interest. The other strand of his argument was that justice is not an inherent good or a natural principle but rather a tool used by the strong to maintain their dominance and ensure their own interests are served.

    Read Also: Nothing new in FBI report on Tinubu, says Onanuga

    Karl Marx provided yet a third perspective to the definitional and philosophical issues embodied in the concept of justice when he categorised it as tied to the mode of production and the historical stage of the society. The main thesis of his presentation is that the current capitalist system’s legal and political structures are designed to maintain the status quo and benefit the ruling class rather promoting genuine justice.

     Socrates’ notion of justice as the equitable and fair treatment of persons aligns with our general understanding of the concept. But the perceived inability of justice to guarantee fairness and equity to all was the driving force for the positions shared by Thrasymachus and Karl Marx. And they seem to find ample support in the serial double standards in the application of justice in societies especially the developing ones.

    These were the feelings evoked when former senator, Adamu Bulkachuwa confessed before his colleagues at the 9th Senate of influencing the decisions of his wife Zainab while she served as a judge and President of the Court of Appeal.

    He had in a valedictory speech at the 9th Senate, spoken of his “wife whose freedom and independence I encroached upon while (she) was in office, and she has been very tolerant and accepted my encroachment and extended her help to my colleagues”. Despite attempts by the senate president to stop him from spilling the bean, he refused to bulge.

    The same feelings thrown up by the revelations of Bulkachuwa are behind the euphemism “Go to court”. Go to court has become the popular response of politicians accused of brazen electoral malpractices. Yes, our laws provide ample avenue for those dissatisfied with the outcome of elections to seek legal remedy. That is not what those who readily ask complainants of obvious electoral fraud to go to court imply. It is deployed in a pejorative sense.

    Where this leaves the judiciary and justice is anybody’s guess. But it highlights the curious electoral judgments that sometimes emanate from our courts, including the Supreme Court. A contestant that came fourth in a governorship election was declared overall winner by the apex court in circumstances that have remained confounding.

    It is not for nothing that the prompt handling by the federal government of the brutal killing of 16 northerner travellers in Uromi, Edo State, resonated feelings of inequitable and unfair treatment of past victims of such lawless acts across the country. Yes, the federal authorities and the police did the right thing by promptly responding and arresting some suspects for interrogation.

    The heavy deployment of security agencies to restore order and avert further relapse, are part of the responses demanded by the situation. But the attention given to the Uromi incident appears a marked departure from the responses of the authorities to similar bloodletting across the country in the past.

    Just before the dust raised by the Uromi incident was about to settle, more than 50 innocent citizens were murdered by a band of terrorists in some communities of Plateau State. Plateau and many states in the north-central have been home to frequent attacks and despoliation of their communities by a band of terrorists suspected to be Fulani herdsman. Though the federal government is giving similar attention to the Plateau case, such responses were at best tepid, in past incidents.

    Governor, Caleb Muftwang captured the double standard in handling such killings when he said last week that the attacks have been going on for 10 years without gathering national attention. Hear him: “If these attacks have been going on for close to 10 years, it tells you there is a deliberate, conscious attempt to clean up the population”.

    Muftwang must have also shocked the nation when he revealed that more than 64 communities in the state have been taken over by the bandits and renamed after sacking the original owners.

    The north-central is not alone in this unfortunate fate. Similar acts of terrorism have also seen many innocent citizens in the southern parts of the country sent to their early graves. Curiously, the criminals are rarely arrested and prosecuted. They simply disappear into the thin air with the government seemingly helpless.

    Even then, Global Terrorism Watch had since 2014 named Fulani herdsmen, the fourth deadliest terrorist group in the world. Despite this rating, the authorities are yet to call that group by its rightful name. Little wonder they have been operating with an air of near invincibility leaving in their trail blood, sorrow and awe.

    When the federal government responded to the Uromi incident in the manner it did in the face of the uproar and threats from sections of the north for reprisals, our commitment to justice for all was bound to face serious inquisition. That is not to diminish the efforts put in by the government to discourage and punish resort to lawlessness in the Uromi incident. No!

    Rather, it is a demand for commensurate response to the serial attacks, killings and despoliation of communities by rampaging herdsmen across the country. Where were those threatening reprisals and fanning embers of discord when communities in Benue State were serially attacked with innocent people massacred and displaced? Why did the northern ‘crusaders for justice’ not find their voices during the massacre at Uzo-Uwani in Enugu and similar atrocities committed by the herdsmen? Or is it a verity of George Orwell’s Animal Farm where all animals are equal but some are more equal than others?

    Ironically, there has emerged the phenomenon of gun-wielding ‘hunters’ from the north going to the south on hunting expedition. Curiously, the government sees nothing wrong with it in the face of kidnappings and sundry acts of terrorism by those taking advantage of the forests to kill and maim their victims.

     Yet, we want to stem the tide of insecurity in the south linked to the masquerades hiding in the forests? If gun-wielding hunters from the south cannot similarly invade forests in the north without clearance from the local authorities, something must be wrong with the manner of hunters that invade southern forests in the face of subsisting insecurity.

    These are issues of double standards that challenge our notion of equity, fairness and justice. They interrogate the actions and responses of the government and influence the swing of opinion between our conventional notion of justice and its characterisation by Thrasymachus and Karl Marx.

  • The general and shadowy kidnappers

    The general and shadowy kidnappers

    Where are the kidnappers of retired Brig. Gen. Maharazu Tsiga, former Director-General of the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC), who was kidnapped from his Katsina State home on February 5? The National Security Adviser (NSA), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu, said nothing about the kidnappers when he reunited Tsiga with his family at the National Counter Terrorism Centre (NCTC), Abuja, on April 3. He had spent more than 50 days in captivity before he regained his freedom. He narrated his hellish experience in captivity, saying he endured “beatings.”

    Eighteen other kidnap victims were reunited with their families at the event. They included Amb. Gideon Yohanna, former Deputy Chief of Mission to Pretoria, South Africa, who was kidnapped in January, in Kaduna State.

    Ribadu said: “We have done a couple of handovers in the past as a result of the work of our armed forces and other security services, we are able to rescue and bring back.

    “Now we have done it again. This time, it involves very powerful and important personalities…  We are grateful to those who made their rescue possible.”

    He added: “These people have been rescued, but those perpetrators of this evil will pay for it, dearly. The work we are doing today is a work in progress. We are not there yet.”

    Read Also: Umahi: Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway will withstand flood for 50 years

    Was this a hint that the kidnappers had not been captured? If that is the case, why is it so? To say the victims were “rescued” suggests that they were taken from their abductors. If that was the case, what happened to the abductors?  A rescue suggests physical action on the part of the rescuers.  If the abductors released the captives, possibly after the payment of ransom, that can’t be strictly described as a rescue.

    A “Note of Appreciation,” dated April 4, 2025, signed by Brig. Gen. Ismaila Abdullahi (retd), surfaced online. It gave an insight into how Tsiga regained his freedom. Abdullahi said after the abduction, Tsiga’s friends and associates had created “a WhatsApp platform that we named simply “TSIGA.” He stated that the kidnappers had demanded N400 million as ransom.

    “We decided to solicit donations on our TSIGA PLATFORM. The response was overwhelming. On this platform, we had over 300 members,” he said, adding, “I feel fulfilled as our collective efforts have finally yielded a very positive outcome.”

    Does this mean that Tsiga was released after his kidnappers had collected ransom? This contradicts the official narrative that he was rescued by security agents.

     When the authorities are silent about kidnappers in kidnap cases in which kidnappees regain their freedom after the intervention of security agencies, it suggests that the kidnappers are free and may well strike again. That’s dangerous.

    It is disturbing that kidnappings not only continue in the country but are also on the rise.  More than 3, 600 people were kidnapped in Nigeria last year, according to Armed Conflict Location and Event Data figures; this was described as “the most ever” recorded.  

    More than 2,000 people were reported kidnapped across 24 states of the country between January and July 2024, according to SUNDAY PUNCH. The newspaper’s research focused on reports of kidnapping published in four Nigerian newspapers in the period, namely The PUNCH, The Guardian, The Nation, and Vanguard.

     The research showed alarming figures of kidnap victims in the seven-month period: 193 people in January, 101 in February, 543 in March, 112 in April, 977 in May, 97 in June, and 117 in July, totalling 2,140. Among these were 280 pupils and teachers kidnapped by bandits from Government Secondary School and LEA Primary School, Kuriga, Kaduna State, in March; and about 500 people abducted by bandits from 50 villages in Zamfara State, in May.

    Also, the research showed that the families of 62 kidnap victims paid N389 million as ransom to kidnappers for the release of their relatives in the period. The cases of ransom payment included N60 million paid to kidnappers for the release of five sisters abducted from their house in Abuja, in January; and N50 million paid to kidnappers in May before the Paramount Ruler of the Mbo Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State, Ogwong Okon Abang, regained his freedom.

    Notably, in August 2024, the kidnap story of 20 medical students made the headlines. They were kidnapped by gunmen in Benue State, on their way to a conference, and freed after more than a week in captivity. The authorities said no ransom was paid for their release.

    The range of kidnap victims indicates that those involved in kidnapping for ransom are no respecter of persons. The gravity of the problem prompted a law in 2021 that controversially prescribed at least a 15-year imprisonment for paying a ransom to free someone who has been kidnapped. The law also made the crime of abduction punishable by death in cases where victims die.

    Last year, the Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun, inaugurated officers of the new Special Intervention Squad, saying it was created “to confront the most formidable challenges that beset our nation today — challenges like kidnapping, banditry, and other violent crimes that have sown discord and fear across various regions.” 

    The creation of the 169-man squad to fight kidnapping and banditry further underscored the country’s security crisis, and also suggested that the authorities were taking the issue more seriously. However, it was unclear how the new security squad will operate, and whether its operations will make a difference.

    Egbetokun said the officers had been trained for “advanced tactical operations, intelligence gathering, crisis negotiation, and community engagement,” among others, and described their work as a “critical national assignment.” They were trained for seven weeks in Lagos and the Police Mobile Force Training College, Ende Hills, Nasarawa State.

    The scale of the country’s security crisis, which includes kidnapping and banditry, demands more than establishing a new ad hoc squad of less than 200 officers. In August 2023, Egbetokun was reported saying the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) “requires an additional 190,000 personnel to be at par with the United Nations (UN) recommendation,” adding that inadequate manpower had resulted in “low police presence.” The UN-recommended ratio is one police officer to about 450 citizens.

     There is no doubt that the country needs to increase its police personnel, particularly in the context of a complicated security crisis. Nigeria is critically under-policed, which is bad for security as well as law and order.

    Ultimately, there are more questions than answers on the Tsiga kidnapping incident and its resolution.  Who will answer the questions?

  • The Uromi killings

    The Uromi killings

    The killing of 16 travellers of northern extraction by a vigilante group in Uromi, Esan North East Local Government Area of Edo State, has exposed the dangers in the quasi security outfits that emerged in response to the festering insecurity in the country.

    More than anything, the chilling incident highlights scant regard to law and order, due process and sanctity of the human life. In it can also be located a culture of violence that is increasingly enveloping this country and increasingly threatening its social fabric. If this culture of violence, mistrust and easy resort to self-help is not urgently stemmed, it may soon begin to define us as a people.

    But can we afford the relapse to a state of anomie without dire existential consequences? That is the searing question thrown up by the circumstances of the killing of the travelling hunters in the most dastardly and callous manner by the vigilante group. What were the issues?

    A group of northerners now officially identified as hunters were travelling from Port Harcourt in Rivers State to Kano State in a truck. Somewhere in Uromi, Edo State, their vehicle was flagged down by a vigilante group ostensibly for a routine security check. They ordered the driver and passengers down and proceeded to search the truck. In the process, they discovered some locally made guns and hunting tools.

    The discovery sparked off suspicion with the vigilante concluding that the travellers were kidnappers especially as some undisclosed sums of money were found in their possession. They may have also been influenced in their conclusions by incidents of kidnapping for ransom rampant in the country including the axis the travellers were accosted.

    What followed defied rationality and will continue to assail public sensibilities for a very long time. The vigilante group descended heavily on the travellers beating and visiting jungle justice on them even as their pleas of innocence fell on deaf ears.

    Soon, a mob gathered, lynched and set fire on the bodies of the travellers. It was a despicable scene to behold even as it raised questions as to what has become of our collective senses of empathy and regard for the sanctity of the human life. Sadly, as this act of bestiality and man’s inhumanity to his fellow man was going on, nothing was heard of the intervention of the security agencies to save the situation.

    Neither is there any record that the vigilante group alerted the security agencies on their discoveries and suspicion. In matters of this nature, the right thing is for the vigilante group to hand over the suspects to the police authorities for profiling and further investigations. Nothing of such happened. The laws of this country do not permit any person to take human life. Only the courts have that right as guaranteed by the constitution. But the vigilante group opted to take laws into their hands and levy jungle justice on the travellers.

    One of the victims who managed to escape narrated how they were made to lie down and mercilessly flogged by their traducers. He said he ran away when some of the people that gathered, probably out of sympathy, shouted that they should run for their lives. According to him, as he made to run, two of the vigilante men pursued him. But he outpaced them and hid in an uncompleted building from where he saw all that happened. He saw how his friend was so beaten that he could not run, only to be killed by the vigilante in the most inhuman manner.

    Read Also: Umahi: Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway will withstand flood for 50 years

    The circumstances of the killings raised tempers and have been roundly condemned with demands on the security agencies to fish out the culprits to face the raw teeth of the law. Security agencies were quick to swing into action following President Tinubu’s directive to that effect. Arrests have been made and 14 suspects have been taken to Abuja to ensure proper interrogation.  Two other suspects said to be key to the investigations have also been apprehended.

    The swiftness and prompt response of the high echelon of the police to the incident is reassuring. That should be their standard response to such infractions anywhere they happen in the country.

    Before then, Edo State governor, Monday Okpebholo had embarked on peace building mission to douse tempers inflamed by the incident. He visited his Kano State counterpart and families of the victims most of whom hail from two local government areas of Kano State. He also promised to aid the bereaved families.

    These are very reassuring measures that go to show the various levels of government can still rise up to their primary duty of maintaining law and order. It is also instructive that the response came at a time cascading insecurity across the country had begun to erode public confidence in the capacity of the government to maintain law and order; guarantees the sanctity of lives and property.

    But the investigations must be thorough and comprehensive for the country to identify and realistically address the issues that incubate incidents of this nature. One is the immediate response of security agencies in the areas where such killings take place. Nothing was heard of the role of the police and other security agencies in Uromi as the situation escalated.

    How come all the hullaballoo unfolded in the manner they did without any form of intervention from them? The role of the security agencies is a critical lead in the investigations. The responsible officials should be interrogated on the issue. They will definitely have something of value to the investigations.

    The role of the vigilante is another issue. Understandably, they were set up by the state and local governments to provide some form of security assistance in the wake of the assortment of security challenges that have continued to assail the country. It may be uncharitable to dismiss their place within the security architecture. But their operations in some states have lent themselves to brazen abuses with heavy toll on human lives.

    The Uromi incident is a serious case of such costly and avoidable abuses. There was also the killing a few years back, of seven wedding guests returning to their community in Otulu, Oru East Local Government Area of Imo State by gunmen suspected to be operatives of the Ebubeagu security outfit. They were riding back home on motorcycles when from nowhere, bullets were rained on them on suspicion that they were members of the outlawed Indigenous People of Biafra IPOB.

    Such has been the excesses of quasi security outfits that go by various names across the country. This is in addition to many cases of unaccounted killings and disappearance of persons that are often blamed on them. This is the time to interrogate the type of training and mandate given to these quasi security outfits. Investigations will unravel whether their excesses and resort to jungle justice are as a result of weaknesses in their training or part of their brief. Such findings will aid in refining their operations for better effect and permanently put a stop to the brazen abuses that have taken serious toll on human life.

    The nature of hunting that brings a group of armed men from one far-flung state to another is a key issue of investigation. The Uromi vigilante discovered local guns and hunting tools in the vehicle and erroneously concluded that the travellers were either kidnappers or terrorists. All efforts to explain to them that they were hunters returning to Kano from Port Harcourt failed to convince them.

    They were apparently not convinced that people could travel from Kano to hunt in Rivers State that is predominantly a riverine state. It was a cultural mismatch and misunderstanding. Incidentally, this is not the first time such claims of hunting by a group of people wielding guns together with dogs marching into the forests in southern parts of the country has been challenged by the local communities.

    Not long ago, the Amotekun security outfit in Ondo State arrested 149 suspected criminals posing as hunters in three local government areas of the state. Even as they claimed to be hunters, they were at the time of their arrest found with different weapons concealed inside their luggage and kept in the truck. There was an earlier arrest and profiling of a similar incident in Delta State with the police authorities clearing them as hunters.   

    There was discomfort and outcry in Imo State when a group of northerners earlier offloaded by a trailer in some parts of Owerri, Imo State together with their dogs headed into the forests for what was said to be hunting expedition without clearance from the authorities. It is clear from these arrests, suspicions and mistrust that the manner of hunting that takes a group of northerners to states in the south for hunting expedition without clearance from the local authorities is largely misunderstood by the host communities.

    That may have been the situation in the Uromi incident. The people of Uromi may not be that heartless as the leader of the Arewa community in Edo State Badamasi Sally admitted: “it was the people of Uromi who rescued some of the victims from the assailants”. Rampant cases of kidnapping for ransom by criminals taking advantage of the forests may have played a role in the ensuing confusion. It is vital to highlight this dimension for the security agencies to interrogate. The times are dire and dangerous. Suspicion is everywhere as insecurity reigns supreme. Any activity capable of injecting a modicum of suspicion of complicity into the cycle of violence that has enveloped the country must be avoided at all costs. But the authorities must fish out and bring to book all those fanning embers of discord despite measures to douse tempers frayed by the unfortunate incident.

  • Trump and the Nigerian Christian

    Trump and the Nigerian Christian

    It is a pity that we have to discuss the Nigerian surrender to tyranny in another land. But that is the case with Donald Trump. He just released for the world a slew of tariffs. For Nigeria, he gave us 14 percent. When I read it, I had pity on Nigerians in diaspora.

    I pity more the Christians who voted for him. They were the persons who thought they were voting for God. Rather they were voting in their hater, hugging the demon. For one, the tariffs will jack up the cost of their food. So, the garri, ewedu, ogbono and goat meat will now force them to dig deeper into their pockets to secure a seat on the dinner table.

    That will take some slice away from the money they will send to pay that school fee or that rent in Lagos or Enugu. It is not that alone that worries this essayist. It is the result of a delusion.

    The church leaders told their folks to vote for the party of God, apologies to Saint Augustine. Nigerians abhor racism because they are victims. They voted in a racist. The reason, and genuinely too, they were afraid of the scourge of the gay, and the ferocity of abortions. Some of their children had begun to change to lesbians, and their boys are liking boys. Their girls are sweet on girls. The scripture won’t have it. The parents won’t stomach it.

    Therefore, forget the fear of race. Take shelter under the shadow of the almighty. But they were mistaken. First, they did not know that race, and people like Nigerians who are now in the Japa mode are making the bigots like Trump quake. They are afraid of a post-racial society.

    They want a Lilly-white paradise. Trump was going to give it to them. But while the blacks and many Hispanics were voting on one side of culture, that is a genuine love of Christ, the whites were voting on another. They had a genuine fear, not of God, but of a society where Trump himself feared when he said, “we won’t have a country anymore.”

    The whites were voting for man in the name of God. The same blacks, by no means a majority, voted for God but ended up endorsing a white supremacy. It is the irony of democracy. We can call this the great delusion.

    Now, the same Republican Party that invited a Nigerian gospel singer to entertain them, mostly white audiences in Trump’s inauguration, is now sending their dogs after the Christians in New York. They worship in fear, not the sort of fear that God said we should fear Him with. The fear of the Lord is to hate evil. This fear is evil.

    Read Also: Edo moves to resolve dispute over ceding of oil wells to Delta state

    It is the archaeology of the past that we are seeing today in the United States. Those who belonged to a time of fear and tyranny, the whips of slavery and suffocation of racial contempt. We cannot say the Nigerians knew that they will also work in fear, eat their garri while thinking whether the ghouls are at their doorstep, or work and expect the call of the wild man of the ICE.

    During the elections, many of those polled said they were going to vote mainly because of cost of living. The cost of things were too high. Costs had dwarfed their paychecks and bank accounts. They loathed Biden for making life so hard. But a few months in, the man says costs would continue to go high, yet the man’s approval rating is still holding up. What does that say? That they like what he is doing by sacking a top black military general, they cherish the fear in the streets, the hounding of those who lashed out at the American government in the media, immigrants who protested Israeli carnage, universities who continue to bring the foreigners into their country.

    Trump is avowedly against democracy, but he needs democracy in his own image. Hence he despised the elections he lost and exaggerates the one he won. Some are afraid he might outlaw an election. He is after lawyers, media, judges. He does not care if the system fails, so long as he succeeds.

    This is the flipside of democracy. It does not always work as democracy. Hence Winston Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.” Humans are not natural democrats. Democracy has been a blip in human history, and it may leave us if we do not protect it. As Maxim Gorky wrote, “the only people who deserve freedom are those who fight for it every day.”

    The church in America is divided, and it has always been so. But today, it is showing a side of victory that is appalling. This is because systems are more about people than about law, justice and institutions.  When a human acts like Hobbes’ leviathan, systems pack up, as we saw under Hitler, Franco and Mussolini. Some of the colourful tyrants of today were voted in, like Putin, Erdogan, Duterte and Orban. Democracy voted out democracy in ancient Greece. We are seeing it in America today.

    Hence the church should be careful how it endorses candidates. The Nigerian church leaders who counselled voting for Trump are struggling with church attendance with the implication for faith, especially for tithes and offerings.

    In the US, the white church leaders see their mission to save the culture for Christ. In his book, The False White Gospel, Jim Wallis demonstrates how white church leaders choose career over integrity. If they support a multi-racial ethos, they will lose their jobs. The spiritual takes a back step to money. Some live in denial. In his new biography titled: Reagan, Max Boot says Reagan said he was not aware of racism in the 1930’s. This is the same man who campaigned in Mississippi decades later to proclaim, “I believe in state’s rights,” a coda for racism.

    When big men take over democracy, they must act like beasts. They must also be populist beasts. It is populism that brought Trump, Duterte, Erdogan and Orban. It is populism that lionised Hitler. When beasts take on democracy, they are worse, just like Samuel Johnson defined them. “He who makes himself a beast gets rid of the pain of being a man.”

    Hence Trump is tearing apart people’s lives and is still playing golf. It is variety of madness. Michel Foucault, the tormented genius, tracked the history of mad people in his classic Madness and Civilisation. He showed that definitions of madness have changed from age to age. I wonder how he will characterize madness of the trump iteration.

    Shakespeare and the Greek Playwrights knew some of them, playwrights like Sophocles and Aeschylus. But Shakespeare gave us King Lear about a father and king who gives inheritance to the daughters who loath him and dispatches the only one who loves him. In creative tour de force, he makes Lear in sync with a fool as he loses his sight.

  • Eyes on Ojulari

    Eyes on Ojulari

    What observers have missed out about Nigeria’s new oil helmsman Bayo Ojulari is not just that the caps fits, which is a gorgeous cliché. It is that President Bola Tinubu has chosen the right man for this moment in Nigerian oil. After the oil act, the country needs a man of industry steeped in the commerce and mechanics of oil. As Mele Kyari passes on the torch as a transitional figure, Ojulari now has the chance to light the tinder of the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPCL) as Nigeria’s fortress of oil.

    Read Also: Tinubu deserves second term in 2027 — LP Senator Imasuen declares

    The president picked him because Ojulari has the past for the present. He is an engineer who has traversed such mainstays as Shell where he worked at the very top, straddling policy and commerce, mechanics and philosophy. This is a well-rounded way of taking on the state of oil with its grappling with prices, the revving up of two refineries and many that are small and modular. With a behemoth like Dangote in the mix, he has the heft and pedigree to relate. It is also a time to confront further the power of crude cabals stealing in the creeks. He can now rejig the sector and set out, barreling ahead with our output per day.

    He is gifted with good executives, including Rowland Ewubare and Adedapo Segun. Ewubare is an old boy of Government College, Ughelli.

    Ojulari has swum in oil at the world stage. He has been in the upstream and downstream sectors. He knows the ins and outs of the industry. He can now set it onstream.

  • Wema Bank’s ex-employees hold 80th  anniversary reunion

    Wema Bank’s ex-employees hold 80th  anniversary reunion

    Former staff of Wema Bank Plc are organizing their second reunion to celebrate 80th anniversary of the financial institution.

    The former employees under the aegis of Wema Ex-Colleagues Group have lined up a series of activities to commemorate the milestone achievement of the Bank.

    The reunion tagged “Oluyole 2025” with the theme: “Wema @80: Navigating the intersection of past, present and future- A stakeholder centric approach to sustainability and growth” will hold on Saturday, 26th April, 2025 at Jogor Event Centre, Ibadan.

    Read Also: Ex-Minister backs Sterling Bank’s zero transfer fees, opens account

    Mr. Demola Adebise, former Group Managing Director of Wema Bank, will speak on the theme as the guest speaker, and will be supported by seasoned guest discussants

    According to a statement by Dr. Eddy Ademosu, the Group’s Brand Consultant, the Chairman, Odu’a Group of Companies, Otunba Bimbo Ashiru, is the special guest of honour while High Chief Olu Okuboyejo and Alhaji S.T Adepoju are Fathers of the day.

  • Nwosu’s heroic status

    Nwosu’s heroic status

    In its wisdom, the Senate concluded that Prof. Humphrey Nwosu, the late former chairman of the National Electoral Commission (NEC), did not deserve more than the observance of a minute of silence by members of the upper chamber of the National Assembly. He died in America on October 24, 2024, and was buried in his hometown, Ajalli, Anambra State, on March 28.  He was 83. 

    On the eve of his burial, the Senate rejected, by an unclear voice vote, a motion to immortalise him by naming the headquarters of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Abuja, after him.    

    Senator Eyinnaya Abaribe (representing Abia South), who presented the motion, praised Nwosu’s “courageous defence of democratic electoral process during the 1993 presidential election,” and “his unwavering stand as an umpire.” He argued that Nwosu “laid a landmark foundation” for the present INEC. He also requested the Federal Government to give him a posthumous national honour.

    Senators who opposed the motion, and apparently carried the day, argued that Nwosu could not be described as a hero because he failed to declare the full results of the 1993 presidential election. They claimed that he lacked courage when it mattered.

    Interestingly, the House of Representatives is not on the same page with the Senate on the question of Nwosu’s heroism. In July 2024, about three months before his death, the House, recognising his contributions to the country’s political development, had urged the Federal Government to “immortalise” him “when he is still alive by conferring on him a national honour” and naming the headquarters of INEC after him.  He was described as a “hero of our democracy.” The House had passed the resolution following the adoption of a motion jointly sponsored by Peter Ifeanyi Uzokwe and Nnabuife Chinwe Clara.

    There is no denying the fact that as the then NEC chairman, he heroically conducted Nigeria’s historic June 12, 1993 presidential election, which is acclaimed as the “freest and fairest” in the country’s political history.

    He was NEC boss from 1989 to 1993 and introduced ‘Option A4,’ an open ballot system of voting that required voters to openly queue in front of the picture of their candidate in an election. This innovation reflected his expertise as a former professor of Political Science at the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.

    What might have happened if he had lacked the courage to disregard an anomalous court order against the holding of the poll remains a matter of speculation. President Bola Tinubu, in a posthumous tribute, notably described him as “a bold and courageous administrator as well as a patriot and national asset.” There is no doubt that he was a champion of democracy who played a significant role in momentous events which, in his words, “marked a turning point in Nigeria’s tortuous journey towards a democratic polity.” His death highlighted the twists and turns of the country’s democratic experience.

    In his 2008 book, ‘Laying the Foundation for Nigeria’s Democracy: My Account of June 12, 1993, Presidential Election and its Annulment,’ Nwosu said the military authorities had wanted him to “postpone the election at least for one week.” He also said they accused him of conducting “a presidential election the court prohibited” and “helped to cause… confusion.”

    A group ironically known as Association for Better Nigeria (ABN) had encouraged the continuity of military rule under Gen. Ibrahim Babangida, who had designed a convoluted and deceptive programme to restore democracy. As the country looked forward animatedly to democratic governance after eight years under Babangida, the ABN, alleging corruption, dramatically obtained a mysterious high court injunction stopping the election two days before the event. The court order was reported to have been issued at night.

     However, Nwosu ensured that the election was held as scheduled, stating that the court lacked authority to stop it. The contest was between M.K.O. Abiola of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) and Bashir Tofa of the National Republican Convention (NRC).

    Three days after the poll, in the middle of the collation of the votes, the ABN dramatically obtained another court injunction to halt the counting and verification. The electoral body, this time, bowed to the court order in the face of intimidation by the military authorities, and suspended the announcement of the election results the following day.

    By this time, however, NEC had begun announcing the election results.  Of the 6.6 million votes that had been announced, Abiola had received 4.3 million and Tofa 2.3 million. The final result was later leaked and revealed that Abiola had won by a 58 percent majority.

    The Babangida regime subsequently annulled the election, triggering street protests, particularly in Abiola’s Southwest base, that led to the reported killing of more than 100 people by security forces. Nwosu went into exile.  The annulment of the election led to the emergence of two other military regimes before democracy was restored in 1999 and the death of Abiola in military detention. 

    Nwosu was an unlikely hero, considering the circumstances that led to his appointment as NEC chairman. He had served in the government of a former military governor of old Anambra State. He was chosen to head the NEC following the resignation of his predecessor and former mentor, Prof.  Eme Awa, after a disagreement with Babangida. Indeed, he disappointed those who had thought he would be a yes-man.

    Read Read Also: ‘Nigerians, other Africans have a lotto learn from UAE real estate market’

    He left a legacy of innovative thinking and heroism in the pursuit of democracy. In 2018, he was reported saying, “the democratic system of governance is the best, especially for a multi-ethnic nation like ours,” adding that “expanding the frontiers of democracy will provide economic, social and developmental benefits that will certainly make Nigeria a great nation not only in Africa but across the world.”

     It is noteworthy that Babangida, during the launch of his autobiography, ‘A Journey in Service,’ in February, said “there was no doubt that MKO Abiola won the June 12 election,” claiming that military officers led by Sani Abacha, his chief of defence staff who later became military head of state, annulled the June 12 election “without his permission.” In the 420-page memoir, he acknowledged that the 1993 presidential election was “credible, free and fair.”

    Those who deny Nwosu’s heroism because he was eventually overwhelmed by the military dictatorship are unrealistic. His place is undeniable in the hierarchy of heroism concerning the 1993 presidential election.

  • One judgment, two interpretations

    One judgment, two interpretations

    It is difficult to brush aside the conflicting interpretations by sections of the media of recent Supreme Court judgment on the rightful occupant of the office of the National Secretary of the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP). The reportage of that ruling left many seemingly confused regarding the proper meaning of the apex court’s judgment.

    It might be helpful to take a brief review of a few headlines of some national dailies and online newspapers on the judgment to appreciate the extent such reports left the public confused. Conflicting claims to victory by constants to that office after the ruling did not help matters. Rather, they further bloated the air of ambiguity regarding the proper reading of the apex court’s verdict.

    But was the ruling by the Supreme Court actually ambiguous? Answers to this question will come clearer after a perusal of some newspaper headlines and other opinions on the issue. One of the leading national dailies had as its lead headline, “Supreme Court restores Samuel Anyanwu as PDP’s national secretary”. Its introductory paragraph amplified this further:  ‘The Supreme Court has pronounced Senator Samuel Anyanwu as the authentic national secretary of the People’s Democratic Party, putting an end to the legal contest over the post’.

    Another popular online newspaper wrote, “Supreme Court declares Wike’s loyalist, Anyanwu, as the PDP national secretary amid party crisis”. It went on: ‘In a fresh twist to the deepening crisis in the Peoples’ Democratic Party, the Supreme Court has declared Samuel Anyanwu, an ally of Federal Capital Territory Minister, Nyesom Wike, as the party’s national secretary.

    Yet, a mainstream national daily deviated from this pattern of headline when it wrote, “Supreme Court asks PDP to decide its national secretary”. It pushed this angle further in the first paragraph… ‘The Supreme Court on Friday ruled that no court has the powers to decide who become officers of a political party. It also set aside the concurrent judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court and declined Anyanwu’s prayer to be declared the party’s national secretary.

    This national daily got an ally in a national television report with the headline, “Supreme Court declares PDP national secretary an internal party matter, both factions claim victory”. The same pattern of varying interpretations of the apex court’s ruling was reflected in the headlines of some other publications.

    True to this pattern of mixed interpretations, the parties to the contest were quick to lay separate claims to victory. Anyanwu saw the ruling as victory for him especially with the setting aside by the apex court of the concurrent judgments of the Appeal Court and the Federal High Court challenging his claims to that office.

    He may have reasoned that with the setting aside of the case challenging his claim to that office, the ruling automatically translates to his affirmation as the authentic national secretary of the PDP. Thus his claim to victory.

    But the PDP holds a different opinion on the issue. In a statement by its national publicity secretary, Debo Ologunagba, the party said the judgment of the Supreme Court affirmed Sunday Udeh Okoye as the national secretary. The party based its position on the ruling of the apex court that party leadership positions including that of the national secretary fall within the internal affair of the party requiring only internal party mechanisms for resolution to which the courts have no jurisdiction.

    According to Ologunagba, the ruling affirms the standing position of the party and emphatically settles the emergence of Udeh Okoye as the substantive national secretary of the PDP having been duly nominated, endorsed and ratified through the internal mechanisms of the PDP’s statutory organs and bodies in line with its constitution (as amended in 2017).

    Read Also: Court fixes May 8 for judgment in MultiChoice suit against FCCPC

    The party further cited its NWC’s decision at its 576th meeting of October 11, 2023 which directed the Southeast Zonal Executive Committee to nominate a replacement for Anyanwu upon his nomination as the governorship candidate of the PDP for the November 2023 election in Imo State. Following that directive, it said the Southeast Zonal Executive Committee at its meeting on October 20, 2023 passed a resolution nominating and forwarding the name of Udeh Okoye to the NWC as the national secretary of the party.

    And at its 577th meeting of November, 2023, the NWC received, deliberated upon, accepted and approved the emergence of Udeh Okoye as the national secretary of the party. That appointment has since been endorsed by the relevant organs of the party and bodies including the Board of Trustees BOT, Southeast zonal caucus, the PDP governors’ forum and officially communicated to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), the publicity secretary clarified.

    What was the actual judgment of the apex court? We shall rely on reports which in our estimation captured the proper meaning of the Supreme Court’s judgment. This will entail an abridgment of two reports taken from different media publications.

    The report will be reproduced without necessarily quoting the contents. Here it goes: The Supreme Court has nullified the judgments of the Court of Appeal and the Federal High Court which had earlier, sacked Samuel Anyanwu as the national secretary of the Peoples’ Democratic Party PDP.

    A five-member panel of the court headed by Jamilu Tukur held that matters relating to the leadership or membership of a political party fall strictly within the internal affairs of the party and should not be the business of the court to adjudicate. Justice Tukur said the exceptional circumstances that would have given jurisdiction for the court to decide on the internal affairs of a political party were ‘missing’.

    Such exceptional circumstances according to the court, include if the Nigerian constitution grants the judiciary jurisdiction over the matter, if a crime has been committed, or if there is a violation of contractual rights.  

     The court also held that the plaintiff, Aniagu Emmanuel who initiated the suit at the trial court lacked the necessary legal backing to do so since he did not show how he was affected by who is the national secretary of the PDP. That is the summary of the Supreme Court ruling.

    As can be seen from the above, the apex court set aside the concurrent judgments of the Appeal Court and the Federal High Court on two grounds. The first is that both courts lacked the powers to entertain the suit in the first place because it borders on the internal leadership affairs of the political party which the apex court said are not justiciable.

    The second reason for which the case was thrown out was that Aniagu Emmanuel who originated the case at the trial court did not have the necessary legal rights to do so because he failed to demonstrate how he would be affected by who the national secretary of the PDP is. In other words, he was an interloper. These were the basis on which the Supreme Court set aside the concurrent judgments of the Appeal Court and the Federal High Court.

    There is nowhere in the entire judgment the apex court reinstated Samuel Anyanwu as the substantive national secretary of the PDP. There was nothing like that. Neither did the apex court explicitly affirm Udeh Okoye as the substantive national secretary of the party. No!

    One is therefore at a loss on how and from where some media organisations generated such misleading headlines as: “Supreme Court restores Samuel Anyanwu as PDP’s national secretary’ or ‘Supreme Court declares Wike’s loyalist, Anyanwu, as the PDP national secretary amid party crisis’. There is no evidence of such restoration or declaration of Samuel Anyanwu as the national secretary of the PDP in the ruling of the Supreme Court. Nothing like that.

    The newspapers may have been misled by the setting aside of the concurrent judgments of the Appeal Court and the Federal High Court on grounds of lack of jurisdiction as victory for Anyanwu. But that is far from it given the further ruling that matters relating to political party positions are internal affairs of the parties for which the courts cannot adjudicate.

    This is more so as the apex court even demonstrated the grounds on which it can intervene but declared them missing in the instant case. The case was set aside for lack of jurisdiction.  It did not give explicit victory to any of the parties.

    That brings us to the headlines that are closer to the real meaning of the ruling: ‘Supreme Court declares PDP national secretary an internal party affair’ and ‘Supreme Court asks PDP to decide its national secretary’. There was no explicit order on the PDP to decide its national secretary but that is the proper reading of the ruling that political party leadership positions are internal affairs of the parties for which the courts lack jurisdiction to entertain.

    Between Anyanwu and Udeh Okoye, who is supported by the party’s constitutional provisions as the national secretary? Ologunagba said Udeh Okoye is the person and has shown evidence of compliance with the PDP constitutional requirements for the selection of the national secretary. So, the battle now is within the PDP as the apex court did not explicitly give that post either to Anyanwu or Udeh Okoye.

    If the evidence of compliance with the PDP constitution in the selection of Udeh Okoye and the surrounding circumstance are anything to go by, then the coast is clear for Udeh Okoye. How the PDP resolves the matter in the days ahead will make an interesting watch.