The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • Fallout from Delta defections

    Fallout from Delta defections

    The ripple effects of the defections that upended political calculations in Delta State and the country as a whole will continue to manifest for some time until and after the 2027 poll. Any analysis of the ripple effects will, however, be done piecemeal until the next election is done and perhaps forgotten. As most commentators have noted, the Delta defections, which involved nearly everyone that mattered in the PDP, were unprecedented and cataclysmic. The governor defected, his predecessor defected, their estranged mentor is rumoured to be preparing to defect, and it is a shame that, going by the fever burning the state, traditional rulers could not follow suit because they are culturally and constitutionally insulated from politics.

    Two or three fallout present themselves boldly to the analyst, not necessarily because they are the most impactful or volcanic, but because they simply seem remarkable in the way they have presented to the public. Much more than Governor Sheriff Oborevwori, who pulled the whole edifice down on his former party, former governor Ifeanyi Okowa gave what seemed to be the most colourful, robust and enthusiastic account of the defections, including their justifications and future outcomes. Not only did he second-guess the political intentions of former vice president Atiku Abubakar, who was the PDP presidential candidate in the 2023 poll, he also denounced his motives and political judgement. Alhaji Atiku, Dr Okowa groaned, regrettably vied for the presidency when the mood of the country was for a southern candidate in line with the party’s informal rotational policy. He also scoffed his association with that deviant step against the wishes of Deltans. He did not say whether if the ticket had won the presidential poll he would entertain any doubt or remorse – in short whether he was not just being wise after the event.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

    And to add insult to injury, Dr Okowa predicted that that the former vice president was also probably on his way out of the PDP, making it difficult for the serial presidential contender to cavil at his former running mate’s joyous leap into the embrace of the All Progressives Congress (APC). Were the feelings of Alhaji Atiku injured by the apostasy of his former comrade-in-arms? He was actually sanguine about his former comrade’s defection, perhaps because his own fateful leap was pending. It turned out, though it was not initially clear, that Dr Okowa had alerted the former vice president of his plan to jettison the PDP. He did not say whether he told his former leader that he was headed for the hated APC. Nor was it clear at first whether Alhaji Atiku grasped the seismic import of the defections, and how insanely speculative and scurrilous a section of the public would be once the news got out. Now, if the former vice president planned to leap into a chasm of his own making, it would certainly be impolitic to begin castigating those who do, especially seeing that he had been a serial and enthusiastic defector, the leaping cat of the Federal Republic.

    Summing up why he was remorseless about defecting, Dr Okowa suggested that once it was clear that the PDP Governors’ Forum had rebuffed Alhaji Atiku’s newfangled coalition, he knew that the game was up. Whatever other motives a skeptical public had read into Dr Okowa’s defection, once the PDP governors made short shrift of the plot to assemble a coalition to face the APC, it would amount to tilting at the windmill to continue hoping for a miracle mediated by the leading opposition party. Everyone, except perhaps the former presidential candidate himself, knew that 2023 was his best chance to win the presidency. But characteristic of his poor judgement and consistent poor calls, he snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. He stood pat on the issue of rejigging the party’s zoning arrangement, remained intransigent on the subject of pacifying the G-5 PDP governors who broke ranks with him over his decision on the party’s zoning arrangement, trusted the wrong journeymen in the presidency who promised him support, and reposed unalloyed faith in the marabouts who promised him a rosy and glorious future on the throne.

    Who could have predicted also that in his response to the Delta defections, former senate president Bukola Saraki would sanctimoniously condemn Mr Oborevwori and his retinue for abandoning the PDP ship in the middle of the ocean? But he did, and piquantly for that matter, on his X handle two Thursdays ago. Sneering at the defectors, he said, “Yes, it is unbecoming and shocking for the running mate to the standard-bearer of a leading party to abandon ship to join the ruling party. This is unprecedented and nobody should try to justify such an act with the talk of being put under pressure. It is simply a sign of how low we have sunk as a polity.” He concluded with innuendoes by admonishing party faithful to stay the course. “The PDP is better with fewer members who are loyal, sincere, determined, dedicated, and committed to its ideals than with many who lack conviction,” he exhaled. He made no reference to his own past defections and political indiscretions, preferring instead to interpret the Delta defections from his episodic view of history, viewing them almost as a series of discontinuities.

    PDP chieftains, at least such among them as remained in the party, will buoy up themselves by exaggerating their capacity to reinvent their party. But they have had more than a decade to reform and reinvent their party, and they had before and after every electoral defeat spurned the need to engage in the customary and ineluctable introspection needed to reposition their party. Suddenly, the politically nomadic Dr Saraki has begun to believe that a reformation appears possible, and has glowingly spoken of that possibility in the context of the principles and nuances of democracy. He said with flourish: “Let the rest of us who want to stay concentrate on rebuilding the party and refocusing it to play the role of a viable opposition…Our democracy can only thrive with a strong opposition capable of holding the ruling party accountable and providing credible alternatives to the electorate.” Some people think it is a little too late for the PDP, which has now yielded so much space to the APC thereby strangulating itself. With double the number of states to the PDP’s, however, the APC must caution itself against any kind of exuberance. Today’s ruling party was once nearly down and out in their various legacy parties’ redoubts, as the PDP controlled about 28 governorship seats. The mill of justice grinds slowly, it is said, but it grinds finely. Nothing must ever be ruled out completely, not even when the polity is visited with volcanic eruptions of the kind that has sent Delta and the country reeling.

  • After the biggest party

    After the biggest party

    (The rise and fall of the PDP)

    It was a messy and dismal end. There are some deaths that are dignified and ennobling in their calm fortitude and heroic defiance. But not this one. The PDP has died as it lived: beyond its means and probably beyond the means of the country as well. A presidential capitulation quickly snowballed into an anarchic retreat and a rout ending in an electoral massacre on the scale of a Homeric battlefield.

    We will be counting the principal political casualties for many years to come. State orphans abound. The sixty year Reich has become the sixteen year wreck. There are no mourners in this Sambisa forest of the quick and the wounded; only rotund vultures and pot-bellied hyenas having a field day. It is an Eliotsian wasteland, and April is the cruelest month.

    Not even the greatest political soothsayer could have foreseen this distressing disintegration and death of the greatest party in Africa. One of its shrewd and astute founding fathers, in a moment of embattled lucidity, had cautioned that this was not a political party but a rally. A rally is just a collection of different mobs on parade. If there is food, the mob will stay quiet. But if there is no food, the mob will quickly dissolve into its component units, all heading in different directions. 

       After the greatest party comes the great hangover and headache. An army founded on the principles and ideology of loot can never survive the removal of its feeding bottle. The same fate also awaits any political party founded on such nefarious axioms. But we cannot afford to gloat too much on the horrid demise of the Nigerian behemoth. Like a festering corpse abandoned by even close relations, the PDP has become a national and public health hazard.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

       The methods, means, principalities and instrumentalities by which this maladroit mammoth met its timely end will be studied and analyzed by students of politics in multi-ethnic societies with self-cancelling pluralities of power fulcrums for years and generations to come. They are beyond the standard fares of conventional post-colonial Political Science. But it is also important for the Nigerian intelligentsia both at home and in the Diaspora to study and analyze what went wrong as a guide to the future in all its gripping immediacy. We are not out of the wood yet.

       In the long run, the PDP was a child and victim of the circumstances of its provenance and progeny. It was an army arrangement. It was never conceived as a genuine and organic political party or mass movement. You cannot give what you don’t have. The army does not do mass movements, except in battle formations. That is a contradiction in terms and offensively pejorative of its constituting ethos. The army thrives on hierarchy and rigid differentiation. All animals are not equal, and some are even more unequal than others. This is the pecking order of nature itself. Democracy is a product of human evolution away from the state of nature, but even then for democracy to thrive there are certain undemocratic institutions that must be permanently in place.

       Like its NPN forebear which met the same fate in a military putsch, the PDP was not conceived as a conventional political party, but as a gargantuan coalition of big people and power brokers whose influence and authority would be so all-encompassing as to guarantee national stability and ward off the centrifugal forces which have hobbled Nigeria since independence. In the event, the PDP was just a variation of an old theme by very much the same military aristocracy.

      On the face of it, it was a patriotic and nationalistic move. You cannot blame the military for being unable to envision a society beyond its own regimental and ideological purview. The Babangida political experimentation with a two-party system threw up a wildcat and a political maverick that could not be relied upon to guarantee military interests which under the long gestation of despotic rule had become national interests. In an attempt to forcibly liquidate the contrary forces, Abacha almost ended up liquidating the whole country.

       Under clever guidance and astute remote control, his successors were not about to make the same mistake. It is easy to forget that General Abubakar Abdulsalaam, in his first broadcast to the nation after General Sani Abacha’s demise, promised solemnly to see the Abacha transition programme to its speedy conclusion. But after being swiftly countermanded by those who put him there, a contrite general announced a new transition programme.

     But just as you cannot step into the same river twice, no two historical conjunctures can be completely alike whatever their outward similarities. 1998 was not 1993. If the military hierarchy had bothered to take a peep into the political horoscope, they would have noticed that population-wise, Nigeria was becoming a much younger country and the demographic condition was about to change forever. The relentless forces of globalization had led to a radical democratization of the means of violence as well as the methods of mass enlightenment.

       In the event, the logic that led the military to an Obasanjo also led to the eventual disintegration of the ruling party. Having exhausted its historical and political possibilities, the military hierarchy had to look for a safe pair of hands and a bluff retired general to cover its retreat to the barracks. The PDP opening convention was a classic case of a textbook military operation as the founding fathers of the party were muscled out by sheer military might. Obasanjo famously took his delegates to the convention in a sealed train and tellingly bivouacked outside the city.

       In the circumstances, the organic growth of party and the deepening of the democratic process were left in the hands of a man who by training and temperament is an authoritarian autocrat who had no truck with democratic niceties. When the retired general famously asked the Turaki of Adamawa whether he could obey simple instructions, many thought it was an eccentric joke. Atiku himself would later find out to his political peril that the Owu warlord meant every word.

    As for the deluded remaining founding fathers of the PDP, they soon found out that military khaki is not civilian brocade. As Obasanjo went for their political jugular, they began deserting the temple, one by one and two by two as the occasion demanded. The fiery autocrat next turned his caressing attention to the main opposition parties, engineering such momentous fissures that none of them survived the thunderous implosion.

       If the PDP ever had a soul it fled at the Jos convention. In other words, the party died in vitro. It was a mere vehicle for demilitarization which quickly transformed into a fascist terror machine for maintaining a hegemonic stranglehold on the nation. As Obasanjo has brilliantly demonstrated, it takes two to play at the fascist game of hegemonic domination. The same logic of the despotic suborning of a nation which made it possible for a military cabal to impose Obasanjo on the polity also made it possible for Obasanjo himself to impose two successors on the nation without heavens falling.

    The game could have gone on for quite some time, but for the dramatic intervention of hubris so overweening that it is beyond the ken of human comprehension. Yet it was a matter of time, with the PDP becoming a stalled behemoth unable to move itself or the country forward and with its monstrous proboscis sucking life out of the nation. 

       But only the bold and deeply cunning can call to the bold and deeply cunning. It took an inchoate and incongruous alliance to have the measure of the PDP in the remarkable political plot that brought the unflappable and wonderfully poker-faced Aminu Tambuwal to the speakership of the House of Representatives

    At  that point in time, political neophytes, particularly the traditional carrion feeders of the South West otherwise known as mainstreamers who did not know where the game was heading ,thought that the ACN had thrown away their pot of amala. But the PDP had been pole-axed and it was only a question of time before the mammoth would crash on the canvas with a resounding thud. As the end approached, even the wily patriarch openly tore his membership card.

      There are great lessons to be learnt from the rise and fall of a party that constituted itself into a nuisance and menace to the Nigerian polity. Despite the national euphoria that greeted the dethronement of the ruling party, the future is full of dark forebodings. Unfortunately if care is not taken, the same fate awaits the now dominant party. This is what should concern all patriotic Nigerians.

     As it was in the beginning, so it seems at the end of the beginning. Like the PDP, the APC remains an inchoate and incongruous alliance; a mere vehicle to capture power teeming with contrary characters and mutually contradictory elements all in a state of antagonistic but paradoxical complicity. In trying to outsmart and outwit the PDP, it has had to be like the PDP; or at best its veritable doppelganger. In other words, there is no qualitative difference or deep ideological divergence between the two parties.

     This is a veritable source of a coming anarchy. The ranking APC hierarchs must now find within themselves the deep reserves of strength and character to give the party a soul and a capacity for organic growth which will drive change and accelerated development for the country as a whole.

       Luckily, they don’t have to look very far for a driving template. The APC already has their two leading chieftains as shining exemplars of the power of a missionary envisioning of a new society. The APC should fuse the pragmatic Democratic Welfarism of a Bola Tinubu with the instinctive messianic populism of a Mohammadu Buhari to evolve a left of centre party whose developmental strides will resonate with Nigerians and the Black Race for generations to come. This is the only way to avoid the fate of the PDP.

    First published in April, 2015

  • Shifting cultivation among the Nigerian political class

    Shifting cultivation among the Nigerian political class

    Oh boy, oh boy, Nigerian politicians are something else. Whilst we are still on the subject of the death and disintegration, has anybody noticed the epic migration going on among the Nigerian political class since the PDP gave up the ghost? We do not know whether this is an attempt to evade death duties or the fear of imminent hunger which has induced the disease known in Northern Nigeria as Sokugo or wandering psychosis among Nigeria’s dissolute and irresponsible political class.

       What we know is that since the death of the PDP was announced, there has been a Gadarene rush to jump ship or to flee the sinking hulk of the biggest party in Africa. Hordes of internally displaced political prostitutes, homeless ideological destitute, rank-shifted renegades, politically homeless vagrants and other hobos and yobos of reactionary politics have taken to the road to Bourdillon as if it is a new highway to Babylon. In Yoruba folk parlance, it is known as eni ori ba yo odile. (If you survive, we shall meet at home)

    Read Also: Six Asian countries with cheapest visa fees for Nigerians

      Among these wastrel wayfarers is a notorious political scoundrel from the old Adamawa province who has betrayed just about anybody in contemporary Nigerian politics including the illustrious MKO even while mouthing meaningless Marxist mumbo-jumbo about pending and impending class conflagration. Another is a fugitive from American justice who seemed to be permanently encamped at the gate of the Lion of Bourdillon. Thrice he had attempted to gain forcible entry and thrice the fat fool has been driven away.

        Snooper has a political theory for these unprincipled gyrations and shameless gallivanting. It is taken from soil science. When native farmers exhaust the nutrients of a particular plot of land due to incessant and relentless cultivation, they simply abandon it and move on to the next plot of land until the entire farming space is crying for mercy. We are looking for a worthy son of the soil to marry soil science with political science in a compelling treatise on the habits and habitats of the Nigerian post-colonial political class.  So long then for shifting cultivation among contemporary Nigerian politicos.

      • First published in April, 2015

  • For FCCPC, another ‘haul’

    For FCCPC, another ‘haul’

    A barely-known commission floors another tech giant, Meta Platforms; parent company of WhatsApp, Facebook and Instagram

    Even if you are just returning to the country from wherever and you hear the name, Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), you would not be scratching your head trying to figure out what the hell they are talking about. Not anymore.

    At least not after the commission’s victories over two giants, MTN Nigeria and Meta Platforms.

    Let’s begin with the latter which just lost an appeal it filed against the commission’s $220million fine over discriminatory data practices against Nigerian users at the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) Tribunal.

    The FCCPC, according to a statement by its director for corporate affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, imposed the fine on Meta Platforms, the parent company of WhatsApp, Facebook, and Instagram.

    The three-member tribunal panel led by Thomas Okosun, which reviewed the FCCPC ruling not only reaffirmed the fine, it also ordered the tech giant to reimburse the commission the sum of $35,000, being the cost of investigation into the alleged abuses.

    Coming less than three months after the commission secured its landmark legal victory against MTN Nigeria, following the Federal High Court, Lagos’s, reaffirmation of its authority to regulate competition and consumer protection across all sectors, including telecommunications, the decisions on the two cases have come to reinforce the importance of the FCCPC in consumer protection and competition matters.

     A shareholder in MTN Nigeria, and a legal practitioner, Emeka Nnubia, had dragged the commission to court over its power on telecom matters.

    But the court disagreed with his view

    saying that Section 90 of the Nigerian Communications Act (NCA) 2003 which grants the NCC jurisdiction over competition matters in the telecom industry cannot be taken in isolation of Section 104 of the FCCPC Act (FCCPA) 2018. Being a more recent law, that, in fact, supersedes any conflicting provisions in the NCA 2003. This means both the FCCPC and NCC share concurrent authority, allowing for a coordinated regulatory approach that prioritises fair competition and consumer protection in the telecoms sector.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

    Furthermore, the court reinforced Section 105 of the FCCPA 2018, which mandates collaboration between FCCPC and sector regulators, including the NCC; it said this aligns with global best practices, which allow consumer protection agencies to work alongside industry-specific regulators for comprehensive oversight.

    Additionally, the court said that the FCCPC does not need to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with sector regulators before carrying out its own statutory functions but rather, it is the obligation of sector regulators to engage with FCCPC to define how they are to collaborate.

    The ruling said the FCCPC had the power to issue a Summons and Request to Produce to MTN Nigeria as part of its ongoing investigation into potential anti-competitive practices, and finally that the FCCPC’s actions were lawful and did not violate any data protection laws, as no personal data was requested.

    This was a landmark judgment that was enough to send the appropriate message to any institution about the extent or limits of the FCCPC’s powers.

    But it would seem Meta Platforms did not take adequate cognisance of this ruling; otherwise, it would have guided it in its own case against the FCCPC. Although it may be argued that the Meta matter had come up long before the court judgment on the question of the commission’s powers, it still tells us that many institutions, including giants in the land, were either truly oblivious that the commission had such enormous powers or Meta just decided to try its luck for some different result.

    According to Ijagwu, “The tribunal resolved Issues 1 to 7 largely in favour of the FCCPC, dismissing the appellants’ objections to the commission’s findings, orders, and legal competence.

    “One of the central issues (Issue 3), which alleged a breach of fair hearing, was decided in favour of the commission, with the tribunal affirming that the FCCPC fully discharged its quasi-judicial responsibilities by affording the appellants ample opportunity to respond. The tribunal found no violation of constitutional due process.’’

    As a matter of fact, the tribunal pointed out that Meta’s privacy laws were in conflict with Nigerian law, among others.

    Many organisations and individuals that had known next-to-nothing about the commission would now be waking up to the reality, not just of its existence but also its raison detre. Indeed, it is good that these giants are the ones involved in the infractions. If they could get the comeuppance that they got, then lesser organisations should know they have no hiding place if they get on the wrong side of the law bothering on consumer protection.

    But Nigeria would not be the first place where Meta Platforms would be fined such a huge amount.  The European Commission had cause to fine Meta €797.72 million as recently as last year, for breaching EU antitrust rules.

    Hear Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s Executive Vice-President in charge of competition policy, on the fine: ‘’Today we fine Meta €797.72 million for abusing its dominant positions in the markets for personal social network services and for online display advertising on social media platforms. Meta tied its online classified ads service Facebook Marketplace to its personal social network Facebook and imposed unfair trading conditions on other online classified ads service providers. It did so to benefit its own service Facebook Marketplace, thereby giving it advantages that other online classified ads service providers could not match. This is illegal under EU antitrust rules. Meta must now stop this behaviour.’’

    Before this, specifically in May 2023, Meta was fined a record 1.2 billion euros ($1.3 billion) and ordered to stop transferring data collected from Facebook users in Europe to the United States, in a major ruling against the social media company for violating European Union data protection rules.

    So, the fines are usually hefty; it’s not only about Nigeria, because Meta is also a heavy revenue spinner. A company that wants to operate in another country must be ready to abide by the laws of the host country instead of wanting to impose its own laws on others.

    So, rather than worry about the ‘huge’ fine, we should worry about how it would be spent in case Meta appealed and lost.

    Of course, as in the Nigerian experience, Meta has always defended its actions. It, for instance, described the EU punishment thus: “This isn’t just about a fine,” said Meta’s Chief Global Affairs Officer Joel Kaplan. “The commission forcing us to change our business model effectively imposes a multi-billion-dollar tariff on Meta while requiring us to offer an inferior service.”

    If all of these are happening in countries that are well structured, some with their anti-trust laws, we can only pity the consumer in Nigeria that has been robbed of his own crown a long time ago and is, in fact, still existing at the mercy of all manner of producers. From telecommunication to banking, digital broadcasting, air travels, products and services in virtually all sectors, Nigerian consumers face daily exploitation. What makes it very disturbing is the fact that it appears as if the practice has official stamp on it, in spite of complaints from the exploited consumers.

    But the government is not unaware of this. That was what informed its setting up of regulatory agencies in every sector. Thus we have

    NCC for telecoms, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission Forum (NERC Forum) for the electricity distribution companies (DisCos), the Central Bank of Nigeria regulates the banking sector, etc.

    But more often than not, their effects are hardly felt, sometimes due to corruption and often because they lack the capacity to carry out their onerous responsibilities.

    For instance, no matter how determined NERC Forum is, it cannot handle 30 per cent of the complaints in the power sector for the simple fact that most of the players there are too steeped in iniquities or unfair practices, to repent. The result is that the forum is overwhelmed. The same applies to the telecoms and other sectors.

    This is where the intervention of an organisation like the FCCPC is important.

    Mercifully the commission now has a tested technocrat with the will to succeed at the helm.

    It is often said that a tree cannot make a forest. In other words, a single individual might not be able to single-handedly turn things around in an establishment. But an individual with focus, determination and the requisite idea showing the way can make a lot of difference. We have that in an Ishaq Oloyede who has opened our eyes to the fact that the Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board (JAMB) that he heads is not the desert that we thought it was before he got there. Today, the Federal Government smiles to the bank every year, with the billions remitted by Oloyede’s JAMB.

    Since July, last year, that Bello came on board as executive vice chairman/ chief executive officer, he has similarly been trying to reposition the FCCPC that many people and institutions should know like the lines on their palms, but do not know. If ever they knew, we would not be having giants like MTN and Meta Platforms seeing it as a meddlesome interloper in a matter that it has primary jurisdiction.

    True, the two major cases recently resolved in the commission’s favour predate Bello’s appointment. But then, that the commission continued to pursue them to the very end symbolised his commitment to the cause of ensuring fair competition and consumer protection.

     The matters were concluded in his time because he supported the cause. We have had many instances where similar matters were surreptitiously swept under the carpet by some bosses in his shoes. We have had instances where even when such matters had already opened in court, the people expected to bring them to conclusion entered “nolle prosecui”. And that would be the end of the story. This is especially so with mega establishments like MTN and Meta Platforms that have the money to fight or play with.

    Not only has Bello supported the cases since his assumption of duties, he has also held workshops, road shows, etc. to publicise the commission’s activities, enlighten both producers and consumers on their rights and privileges as well as register the FCCPC in the consciousness of Nigerians.

    But there is still room for improvement. Consumers should be encouraged to continue reporting instances of poor service delivery or exploitative practices through the FCCPC’s official channels. But these channels should be well publicised for effectiveness.

    Nigerian consumers have since lost their crown. The way things are, they do not even have caps on their heads. Ask electricity consumers without meters; they will tell you the DisCos do not respect any such caps on billing issued by the regulatory agency!

    There is no doubt that a well-funded and equipped FCCPC will facilitate result that would gladden the hearts of Nigeria’s hapless consumers who are perpetually in the firm grips of shylocks who behave like pigs that you can hardly differentiate the first from the last born, as they all play in the mud.

    I commend the FCCPC’s teams responsible for these victories for diligently prosecuting the cases.

  • The rise, rise and rise of capitalism (XVIII)

    The rise, rise and rise of capitalism (XVIII)

    For the last hundred years, at least from the end of the First World War, the country that has flown the flag of capitalism from the highest mast has been without question, the USA. Some would even argue that the US had ruled the capitalist world for much longer than that. Right until the outbreak of the Great War, the case for which country set the pace for capitalism could very well be made for Britain and not only  because all that business of the industrial production of commodities started in Britain. It could also be for the evidence provided by the British empire to which 40% of the global population at the time owed some form of alliance. Britain at that time was clearly the leader in terms of her imperialistic credentials. And as you know, imperialism is the highest form of capitalism. Putting all those aside, the leading capitalist nation in the period after the war in terms of the sheer value of goods produced was the USA. That position has not been seriously challenged by any other capitalist country or society up till now.

    The colonisation of North America from Britain started rather inauspiciously towards the end of the sixteenth century. The first of the colonies that were planted in America was set up in 1607 but they really did not show much promise. Indeed, they were failures when judged purely on economic terms. They however contrived to survive the harsh conditions of their new environment on the eastern seaboard of North America. These colonies obtained charters from the English crown which made them the foundation colonies of what was to become the massive British empire from which they were only detached after an eight year war which the Americans call the Revolutionary war.

    Those early colonies depended solely on agriculture for their subsistence and they were hardly surviving. The only colony that seemed to have an economic future was Virginia which was able to get by through the cultivation of tobacco. It is through this exercise that the world was introduced to the filthy and enormously unhealthy habit of smoking or chewing tobacco. Thus the rise of capitalism cannot be disassociated from drug use as was the case with opium which the Chinese were forced to adopt to their detriment at the point of bayonets and bombardment from warships. The first drug lords in the world were acting on behalf of capitalism.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

    Virginia and indeed other colonies eventually came good but not before slaves were introduced from Africa. The point needs to be made that the first Africans to be landed in Jamestown in 1619 were not slaves. Tobacco is a labour intensive crop and before 1619 indentured servants were imported from Europe to work on tobacco fields. These servants were contracted to work for a defined length of time before being set free to become equal members of the society with their former masters. It was natural therefore that the first Africans to land in Jamestown were treated as indentured servants. They worked side by side on the basis of equality with white indentured servants with whom they must have produced some chocolate coloured offspring later on. However, as the demand for labour increased, the status of Africans was changed through legislation and by 1650, to be black in America was to be a slave, to be owned as property by other people. Furthermore, it was an inheritable condition to be passed down from one generation to another in perpetuity if possible. That arrangement became the foundation upon which all future American prosperity was built. Slavery was to last for more than two hundred years and given the experience of black people in America today, a case can be be made that there are still vestiges of slavery that must  be removed from contemporary American society. Without giving black Americans what is theirs by right, that society will forever be one in crisis.

    By the time that the Revolutionary war broke out in 1775, there were thirteen colonies on the Atlantic eastern seaboard of North America. Before the rebellion which led to war, the colonies were governed from London and the colonised people had no voice in their own governance leading them to question the justification for that arrangement. Eventually, the contrasting attitudes of the two sides in this argument precipitated the war which the British lost. Very early on in the war, representatives from each of the thirteen colonies met in Philadelphia in June 1776 to draw up the instrument of separation from Britain and the declaration of independence of the country they agreed to call the United States of America. Although a committee was set up to produce the desired document, it was decided that the draft was to be solely written by Thomas Jefferson representing the State of Virginia. The draft, which can only be described as the result of exalted inspiration, was ratified by Congress on the fourth of July 1776. As soon as that declaration was signed, a new nation was born even though the war of independence was not won until 1783. As a footnote to this discussion the bravery shown by all the signers of that declaration must be acknowledged. Had their side lost the war, every last one of them would have been hunted down, tried, tortured and then hanged for treason. They held their collective breath for the next seven years as the war which decided their fate dragged on. They were all men who were willing to risk everything including their very lives for freedom. Ironically, many of them including Thomas Jefferson were holding thousands of human beings as slaves. To compound his perfidy, Jefferson fathered no less than six children with Sally Heming, a slave he took into his bed when she was fourteen years old. All those children were slaves on their father’s plantation. And they retained their status as slaves until they turned twenty -one. They were then freed according to the pact which their mother extracted from Jefferson before the beginning of their sexual relationship.

    At the time of independence, the USA was no more than a rural backwater, a typical shit-hole country powered by slaves who were rated somewhat higher than mules. They were not even regarded as being remotely human by the framers of the constitution. They, who confidently asserted that all men are born equal and imbued with certain inalienable rights. All those rights which were brutally denied to black folk. That republic did not start off on the right note and has been singing off key since then, at least as far as fundamental human rights for blacks are concerned.

    The USA was not a rich country and quite probably would have remained so for a very long time. In 1803 however, fortune smiled on her when her geographical  size was doubled practically overnight through the Louisiana purchase from France. This purchase, which has been described, and quite rightly so, as the biggest real estate deal the world has ever seen can be regarded as having set the USA on the path of prosperity. If anything, it allowed the people who occupied the original thirteen states to spread out and occupy a continent, conquering the earth in every which way as they went along. To create a country which was bound on either side by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, they seized what are now the states of California, Texas and New Mexico after a war with Mexico together with the payment of nearly 20 million dollars to Mexico thus securing the present-day external borders of the USA. What went on next within this vast territory was to secure the internal borders through a systematic purge of the remnants of indigenous Indian tribes who were labouring under the misconception that the land and the fullness of it belonged to them. Today, they are herded into scattered arid portions of land into which they were pushed by a relentless US Army. This was the model for South Africa when they created the so called Bantustans into which the majority blacks were to be squeezed.

    The Industrial revolution was brought from Britain to America in the head of Samuel Slater in the closing years of the eighteenth century. It was illegal for any Brish citizen to facilitate the transfer of technology from Britain at the time. But the intrepid Mr. Slater simply memorised the entire blueprint of a textile factory and brought it in his head to the USA. Capitalism arrived in America as a crime. That crime has been compounded over and over again since then.

    The American landscape has turned out to be especially fertile for the growth of industrialisation. It stretches across four time zones from east to west and from the Canadian border in the north to the Gulf of Mexico to the south. Virtually all the raw material requirement for the industrial production of any commodity can be found somewhere in the USA. From around the middle of the nineteenth century, immigrants poured in from Europe in a seemingly unending stream to occupy the huge expanse of land which was being opened up for human occupation and exploitation. European immigrants poured in from across the Atlantic Ocean whilst the Chinese and Japanese immigrants landed from across the Pacific. Following the end of slavery in 1865, the immigrants from Asia provided the cheap labour with which the country was built. For example the labourers who built the first transcontinental railroad tracks from the west were mainly Chinese whilst predominantly Irish gangs laid down the lines from the east. The Irish, being Catholic and escaping starvation from their own country were regarded as only just racially superior to Asians. The immigrants came to America to make a new life for themselves and were prepared to work very hard to enhance their status within the country both social and economic. They were therefore a ready work force as well as providing a ready market for the products of their industry. This made the USA a capitalist paradise which did not need to get herself entangled in imperialistic adventures, at least initially. But, as early as 1823, the infant USA had attempted to lay down the foundation of an empire in her backyard.

  • Taking the wind out of Benjamin Kalu’s indigeneship bill

    Taking the wind out of Benjamin Kalu’s indigeneship bill

    It is not the intention of the columnist to stoke any ethnic particularities in the essay below. On the contrary, I will be exposing the very underpinnings of Hon Benjamin Kalu’s Indigeneship Bill, a bill he coyly presented as one to unite Nigeria. Nigerians must simply open their eyes.

    Hon. Benjamin Okezie Kalu, CON, of the All Progressive Congress(APC), is an Igbo politician and current  Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives.

    He represents the Bende federal constituency of Abia State.

    It is, therefore, not surprising that he is the sponsor of the Indigeneship Bill now before the House of Representatives.

    The Bill seeks to grant indigene status to individuals who have resided in a state for 10 years or married a native for the same length of time.

    It is deftly proposed as a progressive bill intended to cohere the country like the National Youth Corps  which mandates Nigerian University graduates, below a certain age, to serve for one year in a part of the country other than theirs as a way of fostering inter – ethnic unity in the country. But nothing can be further from the truth.

    Read Also: Six Asian countries with cheapest visa fees for Nigerians

    Given Igbo’s rather tiny piece of territory which, besides its miniscule size is landlocked, and thus impedes their truly industrious proclivities, they are spread so thin all over the country that there is hardly a community in the entire country where you will not find an Igbo community. Such is their gregariousness!

    While this in itself is not bad, Igbo’s inexplanable, and totally uncontrolled, desire to own things which belong to others, especially land, is the elephant in the room.

    This abhorrent Igbo characteristic tend to make others dislike them because they demonstrate it wherever they sojourn. But do not take my word alone for that allegation.

    Instead, see below, its typical and vivid  demonstration in a WhatsApp dialogue involving some Igbos and moderated by one  Okonkwo. It is only  one of several, concerning how they must expropriate Yoruba land, especially Lagos, which they see as a ‘No Man’s Land’, and for which they would kill without batting an eyelid.

    THEIR BOAST.

     Ndigbo Will Conquer and Rule Oduduwa Republic:

    “We must take Lagos. We must. Those who want to keep it are fighting themselves.Those of us who want to take it must fight harder.

    The people who want to keep it are threatening. We that want to take it must be prepared for that threat.

    There”s no new thing they are going to do now in Lagos. We already know what they will do.  Therefore, we must prepare ourselves in large numbers …

    Because if we do not take Lagos, I do not know if you can still stay in Lagos.

    To stay in Lagos, you have to take Lagos, to remain there we must win Lagos; to do that your business,  for your parents to go to that church, for you to enter that estate, to enter that bus (Marwa) we just must take Lagos – (Mind you, they don”t even want to win, but TAKE Lagos).

    … the only way is to defeat them; so we can lock them up.

    The only way to defeat them is to send them to jail”.

    Who will believe these are the words, and plans, of TOTAL STRANGERS IN YORUBALAND, a totally foreign land?

    Not only that, the speaker was hectoring in a stentorian voice reminiscent only of  Ojukwu’s effete boasts before he led millions of them to their early graves in the Biafran war, and promptly fled abroad.

    But that is not all to their plan to consummate which Hon Benjamin Kalu is now ferociously at work in the Peoples’ House.

    So they went on:

    “We will join Afenifere and soon be part of the powerhouses that will be eligible to be crowned Obas.

    We will get married to the daughters of Oduduwa , build mansions in their towns and villages and only visit our country home in the land of the rising sun, once a year, as usual.

    Gradually we will turn Oduduwa Republic into one of the most ethnically mixed countries in the world”.

    Can a war plan be more detailed?

    What Igbos are saying, put simply, is that they would do anything to TAKE Lagos state – rig, burn, kill etc,  come the next election.

    This is where, and why members of the National Assembly must be extremely careful, and not permit themselves be hoodwinked by any seeming dogooder/s.

    They already have their job cut out for them in the matter of the Indigeneship Bill.

    What all these poignantly remind me of is my article of 16 February, ’25 which, for lack of space, I shall only briefly summarise below.

    Titled: Non – Indigenes Should Be Barred From Contesting Governorship, Senate, House Of Representatives and State House Elections, I wrote:

     If for the sake of equity amongst Nigerian states,  representation in the senate is set at 3 members per state, and  constituency, 

     based on  population is the basis for allocating the number of Reps seats a state can have,  why are non- indigenes allowed to  contest for these positions outside their state of origin or geo political zone?

    I consider this practice grossly unfair in a country where, for instance, some states in the Southeast geo- political zone would not accept a cleric, even of the same Igbo ethnic stock, as their parish clergy – where so appointed by the Pope himself – if he comes from outside their state.This we have seen severally.

    It could, in fact, be  worse as happened when the entire indigenous peoples of Aba Ngwa not only rose, like one man, to reject a non- indgene as the Aba Mayor, but  dared their  governor, Alex Otti, to dare try – see  Vanguard October 19, 2023.

    These are the same people who come loaded with money, from all kind of sources, to try everything  to contest elections in Lagos.

    I could barely hold myself when this past week, on television,  Muiz Banire,a Senior Advocate of Nigeria,  glibly described this practice as signifying political freedom.

    What manner of political freedom? Why should this freedom, applicable to the geese, not also apply equally to the gander? Or where in Igbo land can a Yoruba man contest a senate seat?

    Whoever likes may call me an ethnic bigot but where, in all honesty,  has this been allowed to happen in the East?

    During the 2023 elections Peter Obi, not only ensured that Igbos predominated his party executives in both the North and the West, many of the party’s candidates for election, all over Nigeria, were Igbo.

    You can only imagine where a politician from Aboh Mbaise LGA (Imo state),  representing Amuwo -Odofin(Lagos state) in the House of Representatives, would  consider first for a  project between his Imo state and Lagos?

    If this is truly freedom, as Banire put it, then it should apply equally everywhere in the country.

    The National Assembly must move, with all speed, therefore, to abrogate the misnomer.

    It could, in future, be reversed when all Nigerians consider themselves brothers and sisters enough to jettison primordial considerations, the type these Igbos wanting to capture Lagos, and jail its citizens have abundantly shown us in their dialogue.

    In Nigeria, unlike in the U.S, the UK or the West in general, primary loyalty is to one’s place of birth as well as to one’s people, while scant attention is paid, if at all, to people from far fetched areas regardless of any domicile status.

    Kalu’s bill should nicely be returned to him  while the National Assembly proceeds, proactively, to make laws prohibiting non – indigenes of geo-political zones from contesting elections, in states where they are merely domiciled, but neither know well nor love.

    Igbos should be encouraged to go  and develop their land of the rising sun and vote, and be voted for, there.

     As  Gloria Adebajo – Frazer put in a well written piece on the subject:”The bill poses a serious threat to Nigeria’s federal structure, and inter-ethnic coexistence.

    It reopens ideological wounds from the past, threatens ancestral sovereignty, and risks sparking political and ethnic conflict under the guise of inclusion.

    Nigeria’s identity as a federation is rooted in the recognition of its diverse ethnic nationalities. Indigeneity is not a matter of administrative convenience—it is a sacred cultural and historical bond between people and land.

    Granting this status based on mere length of stay or marriage undermines this bond and sets the stage for future conflict.

    This bill will not bring harmony. Instead, it will pit communities against one another.

    Allowing non-indigenes to vote or run for office in states where they are not ancestrally connected would lead to serious political complications. Non-indigenes should vote in their states of origin, where their cultural and historical identity lie. To do otherwise is to create a situation where outsiders may legislate or govern communities they neither fully understand nor belong to, leading to resentment, unrest, and even violence”.

    A word should be enough for our wise men and women of the National Assembly as Nigeria already has far too many challenges for them to allow one Kalu, cladenstinely fighting a primordial ethnic cause, to add more.

  • On NELFUND’s alleged missing billions

    On NELFUND’s alleged missing billions

    In a nation such as ours, where accusations of corruption often precede evidence, where sometimes media trials are staged and the war against corruption seems to be sensationally fought on the pages of the Nigerian dailies, tabloids and online media as well as TV screens, an agency like NELFUND finds itself fighting a familiar battle on the same turf owing to the recent allegations of fund mismanagement, a whooping N71.2 bn was alleged to be missing  before the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission ICPC clarified its statement and claimed it was a misinterpretation due to an omitted word. Such a scenarios highlights Nigeria’s deep-seated skepticism toward government initiatives, here everyone in government is a rogue, just as every male lecturer in the Nigerian university  is a lecherous sex monger who would willingly dole out marks for that rite of passage! While I am glad that such isnt the case, one however beleives that for NELFUND, such an agonizing event provides the agency  a valuable opportunity to examine both our collective tendency to assume corruption and take  steps to build lasting trust.

    Nigeria’s history with public fund management has naturally conditioned many citizens to expect the abject worst from government agencies, now dont blame them when we are witnesses to billionaire generals and civilians who cannot really account for the cost lives they lived are still leaving even after leaving office. So when news broke suggesting N71.2 billion was unaccounted for, it fit neatly into the established narrative of public funds disappearing into private pockets. This immediate leap to skepticism, while understandable, can undermine promising initiatives before they have a chance to prove themselves.

    NELFUND’s zero-human-interface digital system represents a genuine attempt to break this cycle. By removing opportunities for interference, the fund has created a system designed specifically to prevent the corruption Nigerians have grown to expect. This progressive approach deserves recognition and cautious optimism.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

    I have listened to  Akintunde Sawyer speak on issues bothering NELFUND and I must say that I find him or can describe him as a passionate chap jeen on easing the burdens of indigent Nigerian students who prior to the introduction of the student loans scheme had to carry out their academic work without any assurance of completing it owing to their lack of funds, many delved into a number of survival methods just to pay their fees and trust me some of these methods were unsavoury, thankfully the Tinubu administration is working miracles through such a policy and this is one policy we must all guard with our hearts and minds

    While NELFUND’s digital implementation is commendable, several international best practices could further strengthen the agency’s operations and public trust:

    The first will be the implementation of Real-Time Transparency Dashboards, just as countries

    like Estonia and South Korea have revolutionized public trust through digital transparency. NELFUND should consider developing a public dashboard showing real-time fund allocations, disbursements, and beneficiary statistics (while protecting personal data). This would allow stakeholders to monitor operations without waiting for formal reports. I think they have this already but there is need to make its function quite seamless.

    Further  more, looking at successful student loan programs in Australia and the UK, one would find that they incorporate independent oversight bodies including academic experts, student representatives, and civil society members. NELFUND could create a similar multi-stakeholder committee with regular rotation of members to prevent capture by any group or cabal such a committee would report regularly to the MD and the Minister for Education, or probably still be empowered to publish their reports for the public.

    Regular independent evaluations measuring both quantitative outcomes (number of beneficiaries, graduation rates) and qualitative impacts (career advancement, socioeconomic mobility) would demonstrate NELFUND’s commitment to its mission beyond mere disbursement. Even before this NELFUND can conduct yearly evaluations to see how student beneficiaries are performing academically, this way too could also help the agency fine tune its interventions to ensuring that these funds are most likely to achieve what they were originally intended for.

    In countries like Canada and Germany have established structured channels for beneficiaries to report experiences and challenges. NELFUND should develop similar mechanisms to continuously improve based on student feedback, thus could help the agency disburse such funds in a quicker manner or arrest bottlenecks as presently witnessed within some tertiary institutions, at best NELFUND can establish NELFUND units within these institutions  to help coordinate its activities within each institution,  other channels too could be employed.

    The premature accusations against NELFUND demonstrate the difficulty of building public trust in Nigeria’s current climate. However, the agency’s digital-first approach represents a promising departure from past practices.

    NELFUND leadership should view the recent controversy not as a setback but as an opportunity to demonstrate unprecedented commitment to transparency. By adopting international best practices while addressing Nigeria’s unique educational challenges, NELFUND can become more than just another government agency—it can become a transformational force in Nigerian education and make the positives of Nigeria also happening to us in a very long time.

    The students who depend on these loans deserve both effective management and our collective patience as this young institution establishes itself. In a nation where educational access remains deeply unequal, NELFUND’s success is not just about efficient fund management—it’s about creating pathways to opportunity for millions of young Nigerians, who though are indigent deserve an education.

  • Labour Party’s compass

    Labour Party’s compass

    There’s the tendency for people to think that Labour Party (LP) – Nigeria – is a young party. But that’s really not the case. The party was formed by the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) in 2002 as the Party for Social Democracy (PSD), and its name was officially changed to Labour Party (LP) in 2003. The motto of the party is “Forward Ever”.

    According to its website, “the vision of the Labour Party is to urgently transform all facets of the Nigerian nation with a view to: Ensure job-led growth and transform the economy. Overcome under development, vicious backwardness and the paradox of poverty in a wealthy Nation. Redress the extremes of affluence and deprivation. Guarantee social justice for all. Cultivate a new Nigerian and African Personality. Build a knowledge-based society.” It also specifies its mission as the establishment of “a new social contract that must bring together committed and altruistic political actors for democratic consolidation in Nigeria.”

    Furthermore, it states: “In furtherance of our mission, the Party will embark on programs and policies aimed at but not, limited to the following: Programs and policies aimed at ensuring that national cohesion, peace, security, stability and prosperity shall be the collective concern of all because most Nigerians would be made to realistically feel, believe and see that Nigeria cares, inspires and exists for all. All processes aimed at entrenching a culture of democracy and development politics. All processes aimed at contesting elections. Transforming the Party into a vanguard for the defense and sustenance of democracy.”

    One of the first curious things about LP was that though it was formed during the tenure of Comrade Adams Oshiomhole as President of the NLC (1999 to 2007), he did not contest on the platform of the party in 2007 when he sought to be Governor of Edo State. Rather, he contested on the platform of Action Congress (AC). The candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Professor Osorheimen Osunbor, was declared winner of that election. Oshiomhole successfully challenged the declaration, and on 11 November, 2008, he assumed office as Governor of the state. He won a second term election in 2012, and was in office till 12 November, 2016.

    Read Also: Six Asian countries with cheapest visa fees for Nigerians

    The first major politician to launch LP into national prominence is Dr. Olusegun Mimiko. On 14 April, 2007, he contested, on the platform of the party, the governorship election of Ondo State against the incumbent Dr. Olusegun Agagu of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Mimiko was declared the loser in the election, but that electoral verdict was overturned on 23 February, 2009, when an Appeal Court ruling, citing irregularities in the 2007 election, replaced Agagu with Mimiko as the legitimate Governor.  LP also won some legislative seats in that election. On 20 October, 2012, Mimiko contested again on the platform of LP for a second term, and again, he won. However, in a surprise move, Mimiko returned to the PDP in 2014.

    Before then, as articulated by ABTC NG on 22 February, 2022, “Mimiko’s first political appointment saw him move to the position of commissioner of health and social services in Ondo State from 1992 till 1993 when a coup terminated the third democratic republic. Right after resumption to democratic government in Nigeria, Mimiko again served as a commissioner of health in Ondo State from 1999 to 2002. In 2003, he was appointed secretary to the Ondo State Government. He held this position till July 2005, when he was appointed as the federal minister of housing and urban development.”

    In spite of Mimiko’s return to the PDP, LP was becoming increasingly popular in the Southwest; and when some disaffected members of the PDP in Oyo State in 2015 and the APC in Osun State in 2023 were seeking succour and brighter electoral prospects, it was to LP that they turned.

    Unfortunately, its National Chairman, Alhaji Abdulkadir Abdulsalam, died on 29 December, 2020. According to Vanguard, the eulogy of the Coalition of United Political Parties (CUPP), read in part: “We received the sudden death of Alhaji A.A. Salam with utter shock and total disbelief. A.A. Salam was a major pillar and voice who formed the CUPP and remained committed to its ideals until he breathed his last. A very accommodating, intelligent, experienced, generous and patriotic leader, A.A. Salam was a true democrat and a fighter for justice. He was a father to all and always focused on anything he believed was right and just. … Alhaji Salam was a man with a good spirit, caring, loving and always positive. … We have lost a giant in the political space of Nigeria.”

    The death of Abdulsalam led to the election of the National Secretary at the time, Barrister Julius Abure, as the new National Chairman, by the National Executive Committee (NEC) of the party on 29 March, 2021, for a four-year term. With the ascension of Abure, Lamidi Apapa became his Deputy National Chairman (South).

    Peter Obi joined LP very close to the primaries of the party for the 2023 elections, and he put up a stunning performance in the presidential election of 25 February. However, the fortunes of the party declined sharply and LP won only one governorship seat in the state elections that held two weeks after.

    Meanwhile, Abure’s administration was bedevilled by various allegations of misdeed, including the betrayal of the party’s foundational principles, the use of the party for personal gain, and financial impropriety. Calls were therefore made, including by NLC, for his removal as National Chairman. Different court cases were also instituted across the aisle. The most notable of these is the Supreme Court judgement of 4 April, 2025, in which the Court held that leadership issues were internal affairs of parties and so courts had no jurisdiction over them. The Court therefore set aside the judgements of lower courts on the National Chairmanship of LP.

    Lamidi Apapa responded as follows in a press conference: “Following the decision of the Supreme Court on setting aside all judgments that recognise the leadership of Julius Abure as National Chairman, I, Alhaji Bashiru Lamidi Apapa, who is the most senior Deputy National Chairman of our great party and in consonance with our party constitution’s Article 14(2)(a)(b) hereby take over the running of affairs of our great party with effect from today, Wednesday, the 9th day of April, 2025, in acting capacity.”

    Senator Nenadi Usman, according to an 11 April, 2025 Arise News report declared: “It is with deep humility and a profound sense of responsibility that I accept the resolution passed at the NEC meeting [of 9 April, 2025], appointing me as the Acting National Chairperson of the Labour Party. I am grateful for the unanimous vote of confidence and for the trust you have placed in me to lead during this transitional period. We followed up this important milestone with a formal visit to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), where we presented the Supreme Court judgment affirming the legitimacy of our party’s leadership transition and communicated the outcome of our NEC proceedings.”

    On 24 April, 2025, Mr. Obiora Ifoh, the National Publicity Secretary of LP, of the Abure faction, addressed a press conference in which he said: “The Supreme Court judgement delivered on the 4th of April, 2025, … actually reaffirmed the national convention of the party held on the 27th of March, 2024 at Nnewi. … [which duly elected] … in line with the internal mechanisms of the party, the current NWC (National Working Committee) of the party [chaired by Julius Abure] …”  Ifoh also noted that the concept of an “expanded stakeholders meeting” which held on 4 September, 2024 and purportedly chose the Nenadi Usman “caretaker committee” was unknown to the constitution of LP, and was therefore illegal, and could at best be described as a mere “political jamboree”.

    The press statement then warned: “Consequently, we admonish Alex Otti, the Governor of Abia State, and Peter Obi, the former presidential candidate of the party in the 2023 general elections, who are the protagonists of the current division in the party to hear the Supreme Court loud and clear.”

    Moreover, in a 2 May, 2025 document titled “Resolutions Reached At The National Executive Council (NEC) Meeting Held On 02/05/2025 At The LP National Headquarters”, jointly released by Barrister Julius Abure, as National Chairman, and Alhaji Umar Farouk Ibrahim, as National Secretary, included the following: “NEC reviewed the anti party activities of Dr. Alex Otti, the Abia State Governor and other erring members and consequently sets up a disciplinary committee as follows: Ayo Olorunfemi – Chairman, Alhaji Umar Farouk Ibrahim – Secretary, Kehinde Edun – Member, Dudu Manuga – Member, Callistus Ihejiagwa – Member. The committee is given two weeks to submit its report.”

    In addition to the above-mentioned three claimants to the National Chairmanship of LP, there is the NLC which tries to exert proprietary influence on the party, but which meets resistance, because very many members of the union do not belong to the party. Just as it’s not clear who the National Secretary of PDP is, it’s not clear who the National Chairman of LP is. It was therefore not surprising for Governor Alex Otti, the only governor produced by the party in the 2023 election to give an ambivalent response to a question on whether he would remain in the LP until the 2027 elections.

    Peter Obi’s commitment to the party is even more tenuous as shown in the following exchange between him and Charles Aniagolu of Arise News on 1 April, 2025:

    Charles Aniagolu: “Are you going to stick with the Labour Party, given the disarray that’s in the Labour Party?

    Peter Obi: “The disarray is caused by the government.”

    Charles Aniagolu: “Yeah, but it doesn’t matter who caused it.”

    Peter Obi: “No, no, no. That’s what I’m telling you.”

    Charles Aniagolu; “Are going to stick …?”

    Peter Obi: “Yes, I’m in Labour Party.”

    Charles Aniagolu: “And are you going to stick with it?”

    Peter Obi: “Well, I’m there. It’s not something I can tell you now. I’m there today, and as time goes on, Charles, if things change, I will tell you. I’m a member of Labour Party. And this is one of the things I told you I will do. I will make sure that parties work.”

    Charles Aniagolu: “But the Labour Party, some would say, Labour Party isn’t working under you.”

    Peter Obi: “It has nothing to do with under me. I’m not the one running the party.”

    You can’t have two captains in a ship. So goes the naval proverb. Now, with four captains in the Labour Party’s ship, and with each captain with their own compass pointing in a different direction, how will it be determined which compass is pointing the right way? And what’s the fate of those onboard this drifting ship?

  • The worker, reformer and road ahead

    The worker, reformer and road ahead

    As the echoes of the 2025 International Workers’ Day celebrations fade into the national consciousness, one message rang clear and resounding: President Bola Ahmed Tinubu remains steadfast in his commitment to the ordinary Nigerian, the worker, the engine of the economy, and the silent architect of national progress. In a week that seemed quieter than usual from the Presidency, the May Day celebration emerged as a poignant reminder of the administration’s core values: inclusiveness, empathy, and resolute pursuit of reform.

    While there were no dramatic unveilings or major national policy shifts announced during the week, the tone of governance under President Tinubu remained reassuring. Two major events, the May Day celebration and the President’s two-day working visit to Katsina State, illustrated his silent but focused determination to keep the wheels of reform turning. These occasions served not just ceremonial functions, but practical affirmations of Tinubu’s longstanding promise to build a better Nigeria through policies centred on the welfare of its people.

    On Thursday, May 1st, President Tinubu took to his verified X (formerly Twitter) handle to share a personally penned Workers’ Day message. It was short but weighty, a note that captured not only the spirit of the moment, but also the President’s consistent alignment with the ordinary Nigerian. His words were more than protocol; they were deeply emotive and symbolic.

    “You are the engine of our economy and the secret to our nation’s growth”, he wrote, addressing all segments of the workforce. “Our administration has and will continue to prioritise workers’ welfare. Together, we will make Nigeria great again”.

    This message, coming directly from the President and not through proxies, was significant. It conveyed a leadership style that is present, participatory, and people-centric. The message also transcended bureaucratic formalities, it was a call to unity and a gesture of gratitude, honouring “everyone, young and old, entrepreneur or employee, private or government employed” who contribute to national development.

    The significance of the May Day message lay not just in its words, but in its context. Nigerian workers have endured turbulent years, particularly following the removal of fuel subsidies, a decision Tinubu himself has admitted was difficult but necessary. That decision came with considerable strain on households and pushed the administration to double the minimum wage from N35,000 to N70,000, with some states like Lagos and Rivers even going beyond to N85,000.

    Read Also: Eight degrees that can land you a high-paying UK job

    This year’s celebration at the Eagle Square in Abuja, where workers turned out in vibrant attire and spirited solidarity, reflected both the trials and triumphs of the Nigerian workforce. Although the President could not attend in person, his representation by the Minister of Labour and Employment, Muhammad Dingyadi, carried both substance and symbolism. Dingyadi delivered the President’s reaffirmation of support, while also highlighting 13 interventionist programmes aimed at improving worker welfare and advancing job creation.

    Labour leaders Joe Ajaero (NLC) and Festus Osifo (TUC) presented a 20-point demand list, reflecting the pressing concerns of the working population. These ranged from wage fairness to job security, healthcare, and protection of workers’ rights. The President’s response—delivered through the minister—was not defensive or dismissive, but empathetic and proactive.

    Notably, Tinubu reiterated Nigeria’s readiness to join the International Labour Organisation’s Global Coalition for Social Justice. This move aligns the nation’s labour ecosystem with global standards and shows his administration’s openness to international accountability mechanisms on labour equity, job creation, and social protection.

    More importantly, Tinubu’s May Day message was couched in the language of justice, inclusion, and transformation. “Let us work together to ensure that every worker, regardless of their role or background, has access to opportunities that enable them to thrive,” he said. These are not idle words. They mirror a governing philosophy rooted in the Renewed Hope Agenda—a plan that sees labour not as a tool, but as a partner in progress.

    From the nation’s capital to the northwest, President Tinubu capped off the week with a two-day visit to Katsina State, where his presence blended the political, the developmental, and the personal. While one element of the visit was social—attending the wedding of Governor Dikko Umar Radda’s daughter—the visit itself was anchored in governance.

    Security, the elephant in the room for many northern states, was at the heart of the President’s mission. Katsina, like many of its neighbours, has suffered from banditry and rural violence, phenomena that undermine both development and the morale of its working population, especially in the agriculture sector. Tinubu’s visit provided an opportunity to engage directly with local leaders and assess the security landscape firsthand.

    But the President didn’t stop at dialogue. He also inaugurated two key infrastructural projects that reflect the Dikko Radda administration’s commitment to development-led security. The launch of the Katsina Agricultural Mechanized Centre marks a strategic investment in modernising farming, an employment-heavy sector with the potential to absorb thousands of youths and smallholder farmers.

    The commissioning of a 24-kilometre dual carriageway also demonstrates Radda’s commitment to improving mobility and trade, which are essential for economic recovery and regional stability. Both projects serve the dual purpose of creating jobs and improving quality of life, tangible dividends of democracy that go beyond political slogans.

    In a week marked by relative quiet from the corridors of the presidency, Tinubu nonetheless made a powerful statement, not by fanfare, but by honouring the very people and institutions that make Nigeria resilient, hopeful, and forward-moving. While Workers’ Day celebrations and a strategic visit to Katsina commanded headlines, the President’s series of tributes, condolences, and congratulatory messages showed a leadership deeply attuned to the human stories that shape the nation’s soul.

    From the football field in Ikenne to the boardrooms of WEMA Bank, from the media trenches in Ikorodu to the prayer halls of northern Nigeria, President Tinubu’s words this past week served as a mirror of national identity — proud, enduring, diverse, and above all, rooted in shared purpose.

    On Monday, the President opened the week with an exuberant celebration of sporting excellence, congratulating Remo Stars Football Club for clinching their first Nigerian Premier Football League title. That the club, only four years into its top-flight status, could rise to national victory was for President Tinubu a moment of pride for Ogun State and Nigerian football. But more than that, it reflected the promise of youth, resilience, and ambition — values his administration continues to champion across sectors.

    In sharp contrast to celebration came a moment of national mourning. The death of Sheikh Mainasara Liman Habibi, a revered Islamic cleric and leader within the Tijjaniyya brotherhood, was met with heartfelt sorrow. Tinubu’s message praised the preacher’s lifelong commitment to religious scholarship and peace-building, virtues the President has consistently underscored as essential to Nigeria’s social stability. His grief was soon echoed again with the passing of another towering figure, Sheikh Abdur Rasheed Hadiyyatullah, President of the Supreme Council for Shariah in Nigeria. These losses, deeply felt in Nigeria’s Muslim communities, were acknowledged with humility and reverence by the President.

    But it was not all about mourning. The President also found time to mark milestones in Nigeria’s economic and journalistic spheres. In his tribute to Dr. Mike Adenuga, Chairman of Globacom, Tinubu extolled the billionaire entrepreneur as a national asset — a man whose footprints in telecommunications, banking, and oil and gas have left an indelible impact. “Nigeria is grateful”, he said simply, but powerfully. The same appreciation echoed in his message to Mr. Tony Attah, former NLNG boss and current CEO of Renaissance Africa, whose 60th birthday offered a moment to recognize key players in the nation’s energy reforms.

    On the media front, Tinubu paid glowing homage to Chief Monsor Olowosago, founder of Oriwu Sun newspaper, which turned 40 this week. The President called it “Nigeria’s most enduring community newspaper,” a nod to the role of grassroots journalism in preserving democracy and informing communities. For a President who rose through the rough and tumble of political organizing, such institutions of the fourth estate remain critical allies in the journey of reform.

    Elsewhere, President Tinubu kept faith with family and friends. His condolence message to the Edun family on the passing of Madam Olufunmilayo Edun, matriarch of an influential Lagos family, showed personal depth. His celebration of Archbishop Johnpraise Daniel at 65, Chief Pius Akinyelure at 80, and corporate tributes to WEMA Bank at 80 all carried a consistent theme: appreciation for those who have weathered storms to contribute to Nigeria’s collective progress.

    A week’s worth of headlines may not always scream policy or power, but President Tinubu’s statements — from condolence letters to birthday greetings — spoke volumes about the kind of leadership he seeks to embody. It is one that sees the human dimension behind the headlines; one that honours service, applauds innovation, respects faith, and treasures community.

    For a nation striving toward cohesion and greatness, this quieter aspect of presidential engagement is no less significant. It reminds Nigerians that at the helm of affairs is a leader who understands the value of people, the builders, thinkers, teachers, preachers, and quiet achievers, whose labour and lives stitch together the fabric of our country.

    Indeed, in President Tinubu’s Nigeria, the greatness of the nation is not just a matter of policy, but of people.

    Though the week may have seemed quiet on the surface, the President’s actions revealed a leadership style that prioritises long-term reform over media razzmatazz. Tinubu’s approach, especially as seen in this week’s engagements, has been deliberate, balancing empathy with action, symbolism with substance, and governance with grassroots presence.

    From Abuja’s parade ground to Katsina’s dusty roads, President Tinubu sent a consistent message: that the ordinary Nigerian, the worker, the farmer, the teacher, the artisan, is not forgotten. They are, in fact, the centerpiece of his administration’s vision.

    For a nation striving to recover from years of economic strain and political instability, this kind of leadership, measured, responsive, and grounded in real-world concerns, could very well be what Nigeria needs. As President Tinubu noted in his May Day message, “Let us stand united in our pursuit of a Nigeria where insecurity is replaced with stability, and where the civic space is a beacon of hope and progress.”

    That vision may still be unfolding, but if this past week is any indication, the President has not lost sight of the people for whom the nation is being rebuilt.

  • Dr John Ekundayo’s mirror on Tinubu’s trajectory to Nigeria’s presidency (1)

    Dr John Ekundayo’s mirror on Tinubu’s trajectory to Nigeria’s presidency (1)

    Nigeria’s 2023 general elections was one of the most critical, eventful and competitive contests in the country’s electoral history. It was a contest in which the the country’s three major ethnic groups, the Hausa-Fulani, Igbo and Yoruba, had three formidable candidates in the race – now President Bola Tinubu of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Alhaji Abubakar Atiku of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Mr Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP). President Tinubu ‘s tortuous and epochal path to his eventual victory presents a vivid scenario where reality unfolding before our very eyes often seemed stranger than fiction.

    His path was laden with mines. Granite boulders were hauled in his path by forces determined to abort what the tenacious political gladiator obviously saw as his manifest historical destiny. A number of books have already been written on Tinubu’s singleminded pursuit of his purpose, his deft side stepping of booby traps and delicate manouvering to dodge poisonous arrows aimed at destabilizing, knocking him off course and  cutting short his dream. And many works both on the historic contest and the man, Tinubu, by contemporary and future writers from diverse specializations and perspectives will continue to be turned out.

    Not many analysts can confidently and honestly aver that they envisaged Tinubu’s victory both at the APC presidential primaries and the election proper on February 27, 2023. But in his book on the election titled ‘Tinubu: Trajectory to the throne’, published in 2022, a year before the election, Dr John M. O. Ekundayo, obviously wrote with the confident expectation that the incumbent President would prevail in the fierce battle. Spanning 262 pages, the book is divided into three major parts, which are further subdivided into 25 chapters and seven annexures. Given the author’s variegated educational background, cross-cutting, disciplinary intellectual nurturing and enriching professional experience, it is not surprising that he brings fresh and unique perspectives to bear on his interrogation of what he calls ‘Tinubu’s trajectory to the throne’.

    This book is part historical narrative of the various events, incidents and episodes culminating in Tinubu’s eventual electoral triumph; it is part political analyses which x-rays the assorted political factors, variables and dynamics at play in the diverse power struggles in which Tinubu has been involved in his political career and evolution; it is part psychological investigation of the kind of steely disposition and determined mindset that propelled and motivated Tinubu to victory against phenomenal odds; it is part study of organizational politics and dynamics particularly with regard to Tinubu’s tenure as governor of Lagos State between 1999 and 2007, a period that was a critical phase in Tinubu’s systematic political evolution; it is part philosophical dilation on the purpose and essence of leadership and also part audacious spiritual, prophetic projection of a Tinubu victory that the author envisaged but which had not manifested at the time he was setting down his thoughts in writing.

    Read Also: Pastor Tunde Bakare and the state of the nation

    The author, Dr Ekundayo, obtained a B.Sc degree in Civil engineering from the then then University of Ife, now Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU and holds Master’s and Ph.D. degrees in Organizational leadership from universities in Singapore and Malaysia. His academic interest in the dynamics of leadership -follower relationship substantially informs his study of President Tinubu’s politics and leadership and makes this book a unique intellectual offering and not another hagiogaphic sycophancy. Although a serious and rigorous work particularly in the essentially theoretical first part, Dr Ekundayo writes in the breezy, readable style of a seasoned columnist. His scientific cast of mind is evident in his clinical systematization and methodical dissection of his subject matter.

    In the first two chapters of the book, Ekundayo explores various definitions of leadership while systematically guiding the reader through the assorted leadership models and styles identified in the literature on organizational and managerial leadership. These leadership typologies he discusses include transformational leadership, teansactional leadership, exemplary leadership, servant leadership, and situational leadership. He then goes on to focus on the elements of strategic leadership offering enriching insights into the processes of developing and nurturing appropriate driving visions on the part of leaders, motivating followers, charting a steady course, setting and achieving set targets, the essential nuggets of strategic planning and the psychological dimensions of organizational and political leadership.

    Examining leadership as a dialectical “relationship between those who aspire to lead and those who choose to follow, he succinctly defines leadership as “the process of influencing and facilitating an individual or group, within a context, to understand what what needs to be done to accomplish a mutual goal”. In the words of the author, one of the aims of the book is to provide “a window to learning strategic leadership as simplified and exemplified in practice by Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu in steering the ship of State in Lagos, especially in the adept and adroit manner he employed and exploited a robust combination of financial engineering and information communication technology (ICT) to shore up the economy of Lagos”. This theoretical framework offers the context within which the author goes on to examine in the book Tinubu’s navigation of the delicate pathway of power and politics in Nigeria’s complex polity.