The Nation Newspaper

Category: Columnists

  • Defence minister must first find his feet

    Defence minister must first find his feet

    General Christopher Musa had a very successful military career, and was well regarded as the former Chief of Defence Staff. Reappointed and elevated as Minister of Defence barely a month later, Nigerians, not to say those who appointed him, consequently have high hopes his infectious can-do spirit would galvanise the country into relieving the siege laid to Nigeria by bandits, terrorists, and insurgents grabbing land and seeking the fulfillment of caliphal dreams. Expectations, though high, may, however, need to be moderated. The retired general, now in civil office and obviously yet to find suitable civil dress, still needs to find his feet.

    It is possible he is a natural, and will fill the role with aplomb, uniting policy and implementation, and serving as an unbreakable bridge between the executive branch and the often imperial military class which guards their command structure and war plans sometimes very rigidly. In short, Gen Musa will henceforth have to be partly civilian and partly military. Walking that tight rope, a feat that eluded his predecessor, former Jigawa State governor Mohammed Badaru, will test both his resolve and his acumen in a way that may mystify him, try his soul, and temper his confident élan.

    Read Also: Nigeria must come first, COAS charges officers, soldiers

    Given the fact that insurgency and banditry had festered for so long, there will be no quick fixes. Indeed, bandits especially will be ecstatic to play the spoilsports. In addition, and more crucially, despite being a retired member of the top military brass, he will have to find ingenious ways of gaining the confidence of his former colleagues accustomed, in the Nigerian way, to jealously guarding their administrative turfs. Decades of military rule had corroded the hierarchical structure that should make the civil and military positions work seamlessly. It will, therefore, take a little longer to reset the structure to fit into a democracy. But Gen. Musa can pull it off if has the patience and the brilliance. Guided by the country’s high expectations, motivated by his confidence to put down the revolt breaking out in many parts of the country, and assured that there is no alternative but to succeed, the influential general may achieve the breakthrough everyone craves.

  • Kanu, Ekpa, Natasha and prolonged litigations

    Kanu, Ekpa, Natasha and prolonged litigations

    The trial and conviction of Biafran agitator, Simon Ekpa, in Finland present a contrast to the Nigerian justice system and expose the unsustainable and seemingly lackadaisical approach to criminal litigation. From all indications, the lawsuits involving Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan may also take eternity to resolve, or perhaps until everybody is tired or amenable to out-of-court settlement. The debilitating prolongation of court cases, however, poses grave risks to individual liberty and national security, as the IPOB leader Nnamdi Kanu case is showing. There is, therefore, a crying need for reform, reform capable of refining and streamlining legal and judicial procedures, and staving off the global ridicule directed at Nigeria’s justice system.

    Mr Kanu’s case took all of 10 years to resolve one way or the other, after years of drama that evoked escapades of The Scarlet Pimpernel, strong-arm military tactics, and indefensible legal twists and turns. Arrested in 2015, granted bail in 2017 and jumped bail shortly thereafter, rearrested in 2021 through extraordinary rendition and rearraigned, detoured to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court for about a year, and in 2025, shorn of any other legal trickery, he was finally taken through eight months of trial that culminated in his conviction last November. He had done and said enough, including botching his own case by his histrionics and self-representation, to merit conviction more than twice over. But it took 10 years of unflattering legal drama to reach that facile conclusion.

    Mr Ekpa is Finnish, and a soldier to boot. He is reportedly familiar with Finland’s legal field, having worked as an intern in his ex-wife’s law firm. It would be surprising if he thought Finland’s justice system was as laborious and inefficient as Nigeria’s. Perhaps his 2023 arrest and acquittal over alleged illegal fundraising lured him into the excesses that saw him rearrested and detained in November 2024. Whatever his motivations, once his trial on terrorism-related charges commenced in May 2024, it was slam-bang downhill until he was convicted and sentenced to six years in prison last September. Four crazy months, and it was all over, a solid two months before Mr Kanu, whose trial began about 10 years ago, was hauled into jail in Nigeria. It was a mortifying study in contrasts.

    But Nigeria is incurably optimistic about everything, never one to be taken aback by minor issues like prolonging a trial for more than a decade when a few months would be more than enough. So, the country does not learn from experience and history. Senator Natasha, as she is better known rather than the formal Sen. Akpoti-Uduaghan, appears also embroiled in a potentially elongated trial over criminal defamation and contempt charges. The suits, other than one from herself, were brought against her by the federal government, senate president Godswill Akpabio, and Mrs Akpabio. Begun in February 2025 with a suit against Sen. Akpabio for N100bn, the litigation has grown into a countersuit by Senator Akpabio for N200bn, by Mrs Akpabio for N350bn, and a follow-up criminal defamation suit by the federal government that promises to be exhilarating. Already, one of the cases has been adjourned till February 2026. It is just the beginning of lawsuits destined to be dragged into a long dark maze of legal sleights of hand.

    Read Also: India’s new envoy presents credentials to Tinubu, pledges stronger ties with Nigeria

    What baffles nearly everyone except defendants in these convoluted cases is how Nigeria’s judicial authorities have seemed helpless over the delay tactics often employed by litigants and their counsels. Land cases are even more notorious for elongation. In land disputes, a claimant gets all of 12 years to file his case, but as a result of gridlock in the court system, or procedural issues, or cross-appeals at multiple levels, or the difficulties encountered in evidence gathering, the suit can snake its way through the courts for decades. Nigerians seem to have reconciled themselves to that atrocious judicial slow motion. But to subject a crime case to 10 years of trial, not to talk of perhaps many more years of appeal, is truly bewildering. Reform is desperately needed, and Mr Ekpa’s case in Finland should shame Nigeria into looking for a way out.

    Reform is urgent, as Mr Kanu’s case makes very obvious. By prolonging a criminal trial, a charismatic defendant can sometimes turn the table against the state and complicate or even neutralise the charges. By lasting 10 years, Mr Kanu ended up becoming even more charismatic to his heedless supporters, and in the process entrancing, if not bewitching, a whole region. The enlightened probably saw through his legal chicaneries, and were horrified by Mr Kanu’s idiosyncrasies; but like most societies, the enlightened are often in the minority. The IPOB leader has signified his readiness to appeal; and if he loses at the Court of Appeal, it is certain he will take his case to the Supreme Court. The Southeast wants a political solution, but that is unlikely to happen until the litigation comes to an end.

    Mr Kanu’s case exposes nearly all the loopholes in Nigeria’s legal system. Judicial administrators cannot insist they don’t know what to do. The evidence is before them, and they have enough bright minds to determine what to do and how to plug the loopholes. They must not allow the Sen. Natasha case suffer the same excesses and manipulations as the Kanu case. If the Sen. Ike Ekweremadu organ harvesting case lasted a measly 10 and a half months from arrest to conviction in the United Kingdom, Nigeria’s judicial authorities should be deeply mortified that Mr Kanu took 10 years off them, and they still seem casually prepared to make the Sen. Natasha case last for years. By the next adjourned date, the senator’s case will be hugging one year. All for what? Nigeria must not forget that the Flt. Lt. John J. Rawlings court-martial did not last one month before he was sprung from detention because of his charismatic displays and other factors. Lengthy cases are a disservice to any nation, and can be very divisive, as the 1894-1906 Captain Alfred Dreyfus case also illustrated in France. Whatever they do, and notwithstanding the desire to be thorough, Nigeria’s judicial authorities must not be apathetical to the crucial matter of fighting the cancer of delayed justice or prolonged trial.

  • Insecurity: Northern govs solutions not far-reaching

    Insecurity: Northern govs solutions not far-reaching

    To demonstrate their earnestness in resolving the troubling matter of insecurity bedeviling the North, 19 northern governors and traditional rulers council met in Kaduna last week to determine what to do. The meeting, also attended by some security chiefs, was not short on the whys of insecurity. But, despite not been far-reaching enough, the communiqué was cryptic and perhaps epochal on solutions. Compared to previous meetings convened to deliberate on issues affecting the region, last week’s communiqué was neither long nor tedious as past communiqués. It may not be deep or wide-ranging enough, but the solution the governors and rulers suggest is anchored on three major pillars: Immediate suspension of all mining activities for six months; Establishment of a Northern Regional Security Trust Fund; and Full backing for state police.

    The governors argue that illegal mining has been a major driver for insecurity, which a temporary halt to operations in that sector and a carefully managed revalidation process could help realign with national security needs. They also believe that a monthly one billion naira contribution by the states deducted at source into a security trust fund might help ameliorate the frenzied drive towards apocalypse. They admit they have not worked out the details or the framework. One billion naira per month from each of the 19 states in the region should release N114bn for six months or N228bn for one year to the fund. That is substantial; assuming the framework for its spending can be trusted to be adequate. The third leg of the communiqué involves the region intensifying constitutional amendment efforts to create state police. If all the states buy this suggestion, it should give fillip to the national drive to decentralise policing and make governors more accountable on security.

    But the crisis in the North is much direr than the communiqué appears to suggest. The region is confronted by a plethora of other significant but deeply troubling and cataclysmic challenges which nothing they have suggested appears capable of dealing with fundamentally and substantially. What the governors and the traditional rulers have done is to scratch the problem on the surface and also probably demonstrate their unwillingness to grapple with the ugly face of the problem confronting them. They rightly see the problem as an existential challenge capable of causing the North to unravel, but they need far more courage, depth and readiness in dealing with it than they have shown so far. They are familiar with the rampant poverty in their region, the lack of access or low budgetary allocations to education and health sectors, and why they should urgently design policies to remake their society. They are also familiar with the debilitating consequences of climate change and creeping desertification, and are keenly aware that they could not afford to surrender to nature. Yes, they are right, but much more needs to be done.

    Indeed, there are other major factors predisposing the North to conflict and insecurity. If these factors are not tackled bravely they could make other measures such as the ones contained in the communiqué ineffective or redundant. The governors and traditional rulers must first come to grip with these other factors before they can proceed. The first factor is their inattentiveness to the issue of terror financiers, powerful but extremely wealthy individuals who have the North, if not the entire country, by the jugular. If the North cannot collectively press the federal government to deal with these well-known individuals and financiers who now clearly control militias and small armies, little will be achieved by the newfangled measures the governors have propounded in their communiqué. The terror financiers whose identities had been made public in 2017 after the United Arab Emirate (UAE) arrested six Northern Nigerians among dozens of other foreign terror suspects, and tried and convicted them in 2019, and upheld their convictions in 2020, still constitute an open wound. Linked to the six northerners were some other 40 individuals and entities in Nigeria implicated in the crime but who have not been prosecuted. What is evident is that both the North and the federal government are undecided what to do, even as terrorism has intensified and morphed into a multi-billion naira criminal kidnapping enterprise.

    Read Also: Naming and shaming of sponsors as solution to escalating terrorism in Nigeria

    The North also needs to deal with the second but closely related factor of redefining and refining their criminal justice system. The system is so messed up in the region that injustice in many instances has become normalised and unfortunately dichotomised between the faiths. Once the signal filters out that justice depends on a person’s class, faith and ethnicity, as is currently the norm in some areas of the region, impunity and exceptionalism will reign and spawn lawless groups, entities and individuals. This may at bottom explain why terror financiers have been left unpunished, why bandits and insurgents have become cult heroes, why insurgents are rehabilitated and reintegrated ahead of their victims, and why incredibly members of the regional elite have sought to draw a comparison between bandits/insurgents in the North and Niger Delta resource control activists. There is a deliberate and orchestrated plan to succour and appease northern insurgents and bandits.

    The third factor, sometimes regarded as an intangible for obvious reasons, relates to the indecision of the region to make a choice between modernism or moving into the embrace of religious conservatism. The region can’t have its cake and eat it. The fast developing countries of the Middle East, much more than North Africa, have seemed to make their choice between conservatism and progressivism. UAE, Saudi Arabia under Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, surprisingly Syria which is just emerging from al-Qaeda-led revolt against the more secularist Bashar al-Assad, and, until a few decades ago, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq, all demonstrate that balancing faith and development is neither anathema nor impossible. On the contrary, northern Nigeria has gone in the opposite direction, seemingly insisting that development appears to be anathema when it comes to issues of faith. This is not just conservatism; it is reactionary. Not only has the North lived in denial for years regarding the true identity and objectives of insurgents and bandits, they have extenuated the mindless savagery of the criminals.

    Pooling N114bn or N228bn to tackle the crisis in the North, support state police and reestablish firm control over legal mining or curbing illegal mining altogether are excellent ideas. But until the North defines who they are and properly frame their existential goals, particularly relating to the future of the region and what that future holds for generations to come, they will be tilting at windmills. The region is wracked by too many contradictions that do not lend themselves to the kind of solutions they have stated in their communiqué. Consequently, they must accept responsibility for the breakdown of law and order in their region and find courage to deal with the problems their inexpert approach to complex issues and probably cowardly refusal to grapple with the shifting dynamics of their region have inflicted upon the country. They have militarily and financially encumbered the rest of Nigeria with homegrown terrorism, and until last Monday have sometimes given the impression that the crisis in the region is a collective problem. There is nothing collective about the crisis. The northern elite need to repair the damage by themselves. They should make up their mind what they want: a progressive and secular society where justice and self-actualisation are not predicted on ethnicity or faith, or a theocracy as they seem unrepentantly enamoured of that dooms them into the embrace of international terrorists who see Nigeria as fertile ground for foolish hallucinations and endless bloodletting.

  • Goodluck Jonathan’s metamorphosis

    Goodluck Jonathan’s metamorphosis

    Former president Goodluck Jonathan had all along been known as a very cautious man, politician and president. His last assignment observing the November 24, 2025 Guinea-Bissau elections, and his incredibly perceptive and strong reaction to the coup that upstaged the polls, however, suggested that either Nigerians didn’t quite know the man or he had undergone an incredible metamorphosis since his misadventure into president election politics in 2022 and last October. Dr Jonathan had led the West African Elders Forum Election Observation Mission to monitor Guinea-Bissau’s presidential and legislative elections. The election pitted incumbent president Umaro Embalo, candidate of the Madem‑G15 party, against leading opposition candidate Fernando Dias, candidate of the Party for Social Renewal (PRS) and his coalition partners. But on November 26, a day before the results were officially released, the unimaginable occurred. The results were annulled, a coup was declared in the most unusual fashion, first by the president himself, and later by the coup leaders who were the president’s military allies, while a supposedly one-year transition regime was emplaced.

    The problem with the Guinea-Bissau polls is not just that the now ‘deposed’ president connived at a coup that subverted the elections, or that his military allies led the coup, or that he had in fact lost the election and needed an excuse not to hand over to the presumed winner, Mr Dias, or that this would be the third time he would flirt with coups d’etat, having assumed office on the back of a forcible claim to the office in 2019 via a 54 percent runoff vote. Or even that he repeated the evil ploy midway into his presidency in 2022, years before the latest chicanery. In fact, hapless Guinea-Bissau can have all the tragic drama it wants, and perhaps with a little help from outside can find a resolution that would power their democracy and lift the country out of the developmental doldrums years of leadership incompetence and corruption, and a national reputation as a drug courier hub, had sentenced the country. Furthermore, many commentators have made one or two uncomplimentary remarks about the lousy change of guard in Guinea-Bissau, including the increasingly impotent United Nations castrated and rendered spineless by the warmongering and apoplectic United States president Donald Trump.

    The problem is that former president Jonathan, who has seemed to acquire new political and leadership clothes, is giving Nigerians tough bones to chew and wearing odd clothes. The clothes are paradoxically fitting, but they were revealed by the Guinea-Bissau polls and the coup which trapped the former Nigerian president for a day in that country. Soon after he was evacuated from the coup-prone nation, Dr Jonathan unleashed a fusillade of denunciations against the ‘deposed’ President Embalo and the coup leaders. Though used to waffling, on this occasion, Dr Jonathan minced no words in damning the chicanery he believed the exiled Guinea-Bissau president had disreputably enacted. And he was quite assertive in his opinion, indeed very definitive.

    Read Also: Wike, Buratai and FCT land controversy

    Hear him at length: “What happened in Guinea-Bissau is quite disturbing to me, a person who believes in democracy. In fact, I feel more pain than the day I called Buhari to congratulate him when I lost the election as a sitting president. It is painful for me that President Embaló was the one announcing a military takeover of the government. It is totally unacceptable. What happened in Guinea-Bissau, I would not call it a coup; it was not a coup. For lack of a better word, I will say it was a ceremonial coup because it was President Embaló who announced the coup before the military later came up to address the world that they were in charge of the government.”

    Still animated and angry, he added: “Embaló had already announced that there was a coup, which is strange. Not only announcing the coup, but Embaló, while the coup took place, was using his phone and addressing media organisations across the world that he had been arrested. I’m a Nigerian close to 70, and I know how they keep Heads of State when a coup takes place. They cannot be playing pranks; nobody should call others fools. There is no way there will be a military coup at a time when they were about to announce election results, and the president was the person who announced the coup. It doesn’t happen anywhere.”

    Though there were a few moments in his denunciations when his characteristic inclination for excessive caution peered out, on the whole, however, he pulled the peroration off admirably. It was a relief to hear the former Nigerian president declaim convincingly on a subject dear to the hearts of many Nigerians and West Africans who had endured decades of terror under military jackboots. He was not as definitive after the 2023 presidential election despite its cleanness and fairness, and he inexplicably and unwisely tried to re-enter the 2027 presidential race for an office that obviously continues to tantalise him. But on the occasion of the Guinea-Bissau poll and the concomitant coup contrived against it, Dr Jonathan was firm and brilliant, in fact elegant. Nigerians will hope his new self is not an aberration, a caricature of his old self, or a gargoyle imitating his ambitious self.

  • Trump, Saudi Arabia shock the world

    Trump, Saudi Arabia shock the world

    US president Donald Trump has hosted all sorts of foreign leaders in his uninspiring pursuit of economic diplomacy and personal self-aggrandisement. Some of them he disrespects so intensely that it borders on bigotry, and some others he snivels before them that it is so befuddling. Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelensky and South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa are examples of leaders who could not seem to place a foot right; but Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman al Saud (famously called MBS), Qatar’sTamim bin Hamad Al Thani, and Syria’s new leader and former al-Qaeda-affiliated operative, Ahmed al-Sharaa, are examples of the other class whose business deals with Mr Trump appear to expiate their dangerous predilections.

    Mr Ramaphosa is of course completely innocent of the accusation of white genocide against White farmers, and Mr Zelensky is fighting for the freedom and independence of Ukraine. On the other hand, MBS, answering questions during his November visit to the White House, acknowledged that the murder of Saudi journalist and Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Turkey in 2018 was a ‘painful mistake, but denied ordering it. Despite US intelligence confirming MBS ordered the hit, Mr Trump did not so much as wince during the interaction. Instead, he growled at the journalist who asked the crown prince the question. Al Thani has many question marks on his head regarding his links to jihadist groups, but his plane gift to the US president obviously absolves him of every allegation. And Syria’s al-Sharaa, despite his past as an al-Qaeda commander, received the backing of MBS who goes on to orchestrate the former’s November visit to the White House.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    What probably shocked the world the most was how cavalierly and spontaneously Mr Trump came to the defence of MBS. He asked the reporter who queried MBS on the murder not to embarrass the Saudi crown prince, declared that MBS knew nothing about the crime, and dismissively suggested that Mr Khashoggi was controversial and not liked, and ‘things happen’. No one ever thought the day would come when an American president would treat murder so offhandedly. Well, the promise of ‘nearly $1 trillion Saudi investments in new US partnerships are obviously capable of rewriting American and global jurisprudence and moral code.

  • No objection, Mr. Trump

    No objection, Mr. Trump

    • America’s decision to impose visa ban on Nigerians with link to terrorism is welcome

    I wholeheartedly welcome President Donald Trump’s decision to restrict visas to Nigerians who violate religious rights. The U.S. Department of State said in a statement titled: ‘Combating Egregious Anti-Christian Violence in Nigeria and Globally,’ that the U.S. was taking a decisive action in response to the mass killings and violence against Christians by radical terrorists, ethnic militia and other violent actors in Nigeria and beyond.

    “A new policy under Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act will allow the State Department to restrict visa issuance to individuals who have directed, authorised, significantly supported, participated in, or carried out violations of religious freedom and, where appropriate, their immediate family members.”

    It added that “As President Trump made clear, the ‘United States cannot stand by while such atrocities are happening in Nigeria, and numerous other countries.’ This policy will apply to Nigeria and any other governments or individuals engaged in violations of religious freedom.”

    I would indeed appreciate it if the World’s Number One Citizen could extend such punishment to those responsible for corruption and bad governance generally because they are the ones that are making Nigeria and Nigerians a laughing stock all over the world, because of their exodus to places outside their God-chosen country, for sanctuary.

    Trump’s latest decision must have been informed by his unbending belief that there is religious genocide in Nigeria, despite the denials by the Federal Government and some other groups in and outside the country. Mr Trump is entitled to his opinion and I would not even mind whatever sanctions he applied to people violating religious rights because this is an inalienable right that even God Almighty had in His wisdom given to all humans, without exception. When He created us, he did not impose any particular religion on anyone. Indeed, God gave us the Free Will to decide between good and evil; including the freedom of what or which God or god to worship.

    I do not therefore know how some misguided, ill-educated individuals would impose it on themselves the power to want everybody else to sleep and face where they are facing religion-wise. Those who had been so indoctrinated constitute the chunk of those now troubling the nation. Unfortunately, what is paining me in all of these is the fact that it is the whole country that is picking the avoidable bills for such indoctrinations that were done with selfish class motives by some religious and political interests in the North for decades. People had been fed all manner of lies in the name of religion, whereas at the bottom of it all is the intention to keep the misguided perpetually ignorant and unable to differentiate their left from their right hand.

    We have seen the consequences of religious hate in several countries like Afghanistan, Sudan,  Somalia, Central African Republic (CAR), Lebanon, India and Pakistan, to mention only a few. Their experiences are not the kind of thing one would wish for Nigeria or even an enemy country. So, if help is going to come by way of sanctions for elites, political or religious, that fan the embers of such dichotomies, I have nothing against it. This is especially so in a situation where nothing else seems capable of checking such trend. Nigeria’s elites must be some of the most in the world that cannot do without travelling to the United States, and Trump knows this insatiable appetite on their part.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    I cannot understand, for instance, a situation like that which happened to Deborah Samuel Yakubu in 2022. That it could happen at all in 21st Century Nigeria was bad enough. It pained me to the marrows the more as a Christian. How could life just be snuffed out of a 21-year-old second-year student by her Muslim classmates who accused her of posting a “blasphemous” comment against the Islamic Prophet Muhammad in a student WhatsApp study group? She felt such a platform should be for sharing of things having to do with their studies only; a not particularly illegitimate statement.

    To think that this was the reason she was dragged out from the security post at Shehu Shagari College of Education in Sokoto, where she had been hidden, and stoned to death while her body was then set ablaze, took something off our humanity as a nation. Those who committed the heinous murder even had the temerity to exhibit their barbarity online by showing the video to the world. And that in a state where there is a sitting governor with all the instruments of power. That those accused of her murder are still walking free three years after leaves a sour taste in the mouth. This was despite the national outrage and international condemnation, highlighting ongoing issues with religious violence and blasphemy laws in the country.

    The governor of the state where such grievous harm was done may not have been guilty of directing or authorising violations of religious freedom; he is certainly guilty of vicariously supporting such violations by his inability to bring such murderers to justice. They are murderers; it is when Nigerians want to deodorise crimes that they look for all manner of technical subterfuge to describe it in order to lessen the import of the crimes. They cannot hide behind one finger by saying Miss Samuel’s killers did it for their religion. I do not know of any religion that permits people to take the lives of others in the name of blasphemy. 

    So, if sanction like the one that Trump just came up with will help rein in such barbarity by preventing the governor of such a state from entering a place like the United States where our big people crave to enter, so be it. May be that would force them to recall those they had fed with all manner of wrong indoctrinations so they could make them regurgitate them and now feed them aright spiritually.

    Every Nigerian would benefit from such re-indoctrination because it would save us the enormous costs we are spending to prosecute this needless war against banditry, terrorism and allied crimes. These are resources we could jolly well have deployed for the general good in the areas of power, health, roads, energy, and what have you.

    That the Deborah Samuel incident was not an isolated one is indeed depressing. There had been several other such incidents in parts of the North that went the way of Samuel’s. These are some of the things that many outsiders are seeing and calling genocide against Christians in Nigeria.

    AI overview defines genocide as ”the deliberate, systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, encompassing acts like killing, causing serious harm, imposing harsh living conditions, preventing births, or forcibly transferring children, all with the specific intent to eliminate the group as such, as defined by the UN Genocide Convention. Coined by Raphael Lemkin, it’s an international crime targeting a group’s identity, not just its members”. The operational word that many people look for in genocide is ‘mass killing’ or ‘mass murder’, or mass whatever that can systematically lead to the extermination of a particular group. Unfortunately, this is not the definition under International Law. Mass killing is not a mandatory element for the crime of genocide.

    It is little drops of water such as the Deborah Samuel’s that many people are now adding together to make up the mighty ocean of what they call genocide. It is not just the attacks on churches or abduction of students and children in Christian schools. These seemingly isolated cases are a national tragedy because it is their aggregate that is giving Nigeria the bad name or reputation of ‘Country of Particular Concern’.  Unfortunately, too, many of what eventually led to such classification are politically motivated.  This is why the Federal Government cannot stand aloof and see these cases as a matter concerning the states where they occur alone. It is the Federal Government that is absorbing the shocks of the inactions in states where these incidents occur. It is the one feeling the heat.

    There is no doubt that there is general insecurity in the land that has claimed many lives and we are probably still counting. Which is condemnable all the same.  Not even the Federal Government is denying this fact. And, to the extent that provision of adequate security for all citizens is a cardinal duty of government, the government has an abiding responsibility to protect them, irrespective of their faith or lack of it. 

    All said; whether it is insecurity or genocide, the government has a duty to ensure safety of all citizens. And it must continue to do that. But not many Nigerians are happy that the real big names behind terror in the country are not made public, not to talk of prosecuting them. Nigerians and indeed the international community would appreciate if these people can be named and shamed, and have their day in court. Terror is like fire; take out oxygen and the fire gets extinguished. Take out the financiers, it is a matter of time; terror itself would dry to its root. 

    But what the terrorists and their promoters do not seem to understand is that no particular religion has a monopoly of violence. The only thing is that the teachings of the religions differ. So many Christian leaders have been expressing frustration on these unprovoked attacks that have been given the country a name that is not its own. Some have told their members to be coming to church armed. The other day, one even went to the extent of telling his members to (ti ese ile bo) ‘look inwards’, that is take to unorthodox means to respond to the situation.

    What they are all saying is that the government has to be more drastic on this matter if we are to get out of it anytime soon. Two major sources of illicit funds for some people were erased when the Tinubu administration came in 2023. People that were benefitting from the fuel subsidy fraud and floating of the foreign exchange market have since been rendered jobless. Since nature abhors a vacuum, they must find an alternative source of illicit profits which the terror war promises to be, especially with sundry crimes like kidnapping for ransom, etc.

    Such people would look for all manner of ways to keep the war alive. But, can Nigeria continue to pour libation on this their new-found sources of illicit profits? I don’t think so. Even if the country is, it is unlikely the international community is. Terror against one, the world seems to have realised, is terror against all. That seems the message Trump has been harping on. If ‘protecting’ Christians provides a convenient excuse for that, why not exploit it?

  • Naming and shaming of sponsors as solution to escalating terrorism in Nigeria

    Naming and shaming of sponsors as solution to escalating terrorism in Nigeria

    I believe that with political will and cooperation of the Northern elite, we can flush out these vermin in our blood in six months.

    It is a choice, and not a difficult one. Bello Tunji and Dogo Gide are human beings. The bandits are not spirits. We only need to be spirited” –

    Sam Omatseye in ‘The Maidens of Maga’, Monday, December 1, 2025.

    “If Nigeria truly wants to break the cycle of insecurity, corruption in defence spending, weak intelligence coordination, and the embarrassing militarisation of internal policing, then the appointment of General Christopher Musa as Minister of Defence must come with a national agenda—clear, uncompromising, and measurable.

    Nigeria is too security-fractured for business as usual.

    We need a Defence Minister who will disrupt the old order, confront the rot, and rebuild trust between the armed forces and the citizens” –

    culled from Idowu Oboro’s:

    “If General Christopher Musa Becomes Minister of Defence: The Agenda Nigerians Must Demand”

    Last week on these pages I wrote, quoting Chima – Oforgu

    in his seminal work on terrorism in Nigeria: “Who is really paying for Nigeria’s bloodbath?

    We talk endlessly about “terrorists”, “Fulani herdsmen”, “bandits” – as if they are ghosts who appear from thin air, armed to the teeth, fuelled, fed and endlessly re-supplied by magic.

    They are not ghosts.

    They are funded.

    And the sponsors are not barefoot militants in the bush – they are people in suits, kaftans and uniforms; sitting in air-conditioned offices in Abuja, Lagos, Kaduna, Dubai and beyond”.

    The Nigerian security situation has just been brutally captured in a trending WhatsApp post which, mutatis mutandis, reads as follows:

    “Nigeria Is Being Taken Over slowly and in Silence.

    This Is Not INSECURITY. It’s a CONQUEST.

    Nigeria is currently undergoing a systematic territorial takeover by armed groups. This is not random criminality. It is not isolated insecurity. It is a coordinated expansion of hostile forces exercising real control over Nigerian territory determined, more than ever to turn Nigeria into a radical Islamic country.

    In the North-West, bandit networks are displacing entire communities, imposing illegal taxation, controlling farmland, and forcing civilians to either flee or submit. In the North-East, jihadist factions including ISWAP are consolidating safe operating zones, enforcing parallel governance under the pretext of “Sulhu” or peace talks, and building logistical routes deeper into the country.

    Both groups are advancing SOUTHWARD.

    Their operations are no longer confined to the peripheries.

    They are now penetrating Niger, Plateau, Benue, Kogi, and reaching the borders of the Federal Capital Territory.

    This is a strategic progression:

    Control the rural zones → dominate transportation corridors → threaten cities → challenge the state.

    The indicators are clear:

    1. Loss of state monopoly on violence in multiple LGAs.

    2. Parallel administrations emerging in forest regions.

    3. Mass abductions targeting schools and community leaders to cripple social confidence.

    4. Strategic raids near Abuja  to undermine national authority.

    5. Southward infiltration toward economic population centers aimed at causing maximum socio- economic dislocation.

    This is what territorial conquest looks like in the 21st century:

    Not declarations of war, but the state slowly losing ground to non-state actors who act like governments.

    Civil authority retreats.

    Armed actors remain.

    Communities adapt for survival”.

    What to do

    Terrorism in Nigeria is complex and multi – dimensional. It has led to devastating consequences, among them, loss of hundreds of thousands of lives, displacement of people, and monumental economic instability. One critical way of addressing insecurity in Nigeria is identifying, and tackling, the financial networks and individuals that sustain these terrorist groups.

    One approach is the naming and shaming of  terrorism sponsors, which can be a potent tool in curbing, in deed, defeating, terrorism since funding is terrorism’s live wire.

    Terrorist organisations rely heavily on funding, both internal and external, to carry out their terrible operations.

    These funds are often sourced from wealthy individuals, organizations or from even state actors who choose to support terrorist activities especially for religious purposes as we have here in Nigeria.

    In Nigeria, Boko Haram has been known to receive funding from various sources, including local and international sponsors.

    Naming and shaming involve publicly identifying individuals or organisations that support terrorist activities. This approach aims at isolating sponsors, disrupt their financial networks as well as deter others from providing similar support.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    Its effectiveness will depend on several factors, including the accuracy of information, international cooperation, and the willingness of governments to take action.

    On these pages last week, I proved conclusively, and beyond all reasonable doubt, that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu does not lack the political will to take important political decisions.

    What then are the

    potential benefits of publicly naming, and shaming, terrorism sponsors?

    These include

    deterrence, as doing so will naturally deter others from providing such support, fearing reputational damage as well as the legal consequences of  being so publicly outed.

    This will naturally reduce terrorism since funding, as I indicated earlier, is integral to their multi- pronged activities – be it weapons acquisition, training, kidnapping, killing etc

    Another benefit is International cooperation which is of critical importance in successfully fighting terrorism, especially in the Sahel region and neighbouring countries with their porous borders where it is now obvious no country can single – handedly defeat terrorism.

    International cooperation can also lead to sanctions such as asset seizures and, even arrests, across several countries, working in synergy.

    There is also the additional advantage of domestic pressure.

    As things stand today in Nigeria, there are clear evidence of some elements of state security working with terror sponsors, not only to facilitate attacks but, more importantly, to ensure that terrorists are protected from the long arms of the law.

    Naming sponsors will galvanise public opinion and push  government to take stringent actions against miscreants.

    Of course,  naming sponsors has its down side. It can lead to retaliation and can even put some lives at risk. Government should, however, be able to adequately protect whistle blowers as they will be providing intelligence against very powerful persons.

    Government  must also guide against inaccurate evidence which can lead to wrongful accusations thus damaging innocent individuals or organisations.

    To effectively do this, the policy should depend mostly on:

     Intelligence-led operations in disrupting terrorist networks. There must also be international  collaboration with global partners to share information and coordinate efforts.

    There must be proactive

    community engagement  to encourage reporting of suspicious activities.

    Highest importance must, however, go to information sourced  through financial intelligence – bank records, transfers, suspicious transaction reports etc.

    There is equally the very important role of the National Assembly which must waste no time in providing an appropriate legal frame work for the policy.

    Several countries have successfully implemented naming and shaming strategies to combat terrorism financing. For instance, the United States’ Terrorist Financing Targeting Center has been instrumental in identifying and sanctioning individuals and organizations supporting terrorist groups.

    Concluding, I am not in any way,  suggesting naming and shaming of terrorism sponsors as a monocausal solution to what we are seeing increasing in leaps and bounds in our country.

    On the contrary, it should be part of a comprehensive strategy to address the root causes of terrorism.

    By adopting a multifaceted approach, Nigeria can effectively tackle both the individuals, as well as the financial networks supporting terrorism in Nigeria and thus be able to create a safer environment for us all.

  • Where’s the list?

    Where’s the list?

    Five days after the promised publication date, Nigeria finds itself in a familiar yet troubling position. Thousands of candidates who sat for the Computer-Based Test (CBT) for positions within the Civil Defense, Correctional and Immigration Services Board remain in anxious limbo, their futures suspended in haughty bureaucratic silence. The board’s deafening muteness on the matter has sparked legitimate questions about what transpires behind closed doors when employment opportunities meet political influence in Africa’s most populous nation.

    What could possibly justify this delay? Is it mere administrative incompetence, the familiar Nigerian affliction of “go-slow” that has become our unofficial national anthem? Or are we witnessing something more sinister—a carefully orchestrated mop-up exercise where the children of the high and mighty are being slotted into positions supposedly earned through merit by ordinary Nigerians who lack the brass, connections, or godfather necessary to secure their rightful places?

    These questions naturally demand answers and in saner climes, heads would roll as apologies would flow but this is Nigeria! This pattern is distressingly familiar. Nigerian recruitment exercises have historically been fertile grounds for corruption, nepotism, and the subversion of meritocracy. The 2015 Central Bank of Nigeria recruitment stands as a monument to opacity in public service employment. That exercise was shrouded in such impenetrable secrecy that even Lavrenty Beria, Stalin’s ruthless spy chief who perfected the art of clandestine operations, would have nodded in grim appreciation. To this day, Nigerians cannot access comprehensive information about how candidates were selected, what criteria were employed, or whether merit genuinely triumphed over connection.

    Then we have the documented case of a serving minister who brazenly cornered employment slots for members of his community, with his own family members prominently featuring among the beneficiaries. This wasn’t whispered rumor or unfounded allegation—it was a scandal that played out in public view, yet consequences remained conspicuously absent. Such impunity sends a clear message: the rules exist for the powerless, while the powerful operate in a consequence-free zone.

    Even within the current recruitment exercise, troubling inconsistencies have emerged. Candidates who wrote the CBT examination on the first day reported seeing their scores immediately after completing the test—a transparent practice that should be standard procedure. However, by the second day, this feature had mysteriously disappeared. Candidates completing identical tests under identical conditions were suddenly denied immediate access to their results. The reason for this abrupt change? Your guess is as good as mine. But in a country where trust in public institutions hangs by a thread, such unexplained alterations inevitably feed suspicions of manipulation.

    Let us be clear: the elite have every right to see their children and wards employed in the nation’s public service. They are citizens too, and their offspring should not be automatically excluded from opportunities. However, as Napoleon Bonaparte wisely observed, such employment must be done “without the distinction of birth or fortune.” Merit must be the sovereign criterion. Competence, not connection, should determine who serves the public.

    When we consistently second only the candidates of the rich and powerful, we construct a nation where merit becomes a quaint abstraction, sacrificed on the altar of “who knows who.” We entrench a toxic value system where hard work is jettisoned for political alignment, where brilliance loses to belonging, where diligence is defeated by dynasty. This is not merely unfair—it is fundamentally destructive to national development.

    Consider the bitter irony: most of the powerful men now allegedly foisting their wards into these positions were not born with silver spoons. They clawed their way to prominence through determination, intelligence, and yes, often through systems that rewarded merit alongside connection. Had the system been as comprehensively skewed in their youth as it appears today, would these men have reached the zenith of their careers? Would they occupy the positions of influence they now leverage on behalf of their children, wards and even mistresses? The answer is almost certainly no. They are beneficiaries of whatever meritocratic elements existed in their time, yet they now actively undermine those same pathways for others.

    This represents not just hypocrisy but a fundamental betrayal of the social contract. It perpetuates inequality across generations, transforming temporary advantage into permanent privilege. It tells brilliant but connected Nigerian youth that their excellence matters less than their surnames, that their preparation pales beside their parents’ positions.

    The solution requires both immediate action and long-term reform. First, the authorities must release the recruitment list immediately, as originally promised. Transparency cannot be optional in public service employment. Second, the current administration must seriously consider introducing artificial intelligence technologies into the recruitment process for public servants. AI-driven systems, properly designed and monitored, can dramatically reduce human manipulation, eliminate bias, and ensure that merit genuinely determines outcomes.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    A nation’s public service remains the pride of any nation—or should be. We cannot continue wondering why Nigeria remains mired in underdevelopment despite our abundant human and natural resources when we employ “tiwa tiwa” (my own), “nkeanyi” (our own), and “na we we” (it’s us) as primary criteria for public service employment. These ethnic and familial loyalties, elevated above competence can only guarantee mediocrity in governance and perpetuate the very dysfunctions we claim to deplore.

    The candidates waiting for this list represent Nigeria’s potential. Many have prepared for months, sacrificed limited resources for examination fees, traveled distances for the tests, and placed their hopes in a system that promises fairness. They deserve better than silence. They deserve better than suspicion. They deserve a transparent process where their efforts matter more than their lack of powerful connections.

    The ball sits firmly in the board’s court. Publish the list. Restore faith. Prove that merit can still triumph in Nigeria. The alternative—continued silence and eventual publication of a suspiciously amended list—will only confirm our worst fears about who truly governs this nation: not the elected, but the connected; not the qualified, but the well-placed.

    Nigeria deserves better. Our youth deserve better. Merit deserves its day.

  • Language activism (II)

    Language activism (II)

    Long after Charles Darwin completed his ground breaking work on the theory of the evolution of species, he kept it under wraps and for good reason. He clearly recognised the explosive nature of that theory and being a rather mild mannered and religious man, he was reluctant to cause a cataclysmic detonation and so, he sat on it. Later on however, he got the inspiration to publish his work because Alfred Wallace working on the other side of the world from Darwin had come to the same conclusion as he had and there was no longer any excuse to maintain radio silence on his seminal work. He went ahead and published his work and created a new intellectual world. The reverberations from that publication are still shaking the world of science with some people standing staunchly with Darwin and others no less implacably opposed to him. It is therefore expedient to point out at this stage that this article is really not about the theory of evolution. It is, however, a convenient starting point for this article about the aspect of language activism that I have been writing about.

    Most people have only a vague knowledge about the theory of evolution but virtually everyone with more than a modicum of education will confidently tell you about the law of the  survival of the fittest. This has been used to explain why some people have power, influence and extravagant wealth. They are supposed to hold that position because they have been found out to be the fittest of their kind and deserve to corner all the riches of the world. This thinking has also been used to justify racism and white supremacy. That may indeed be so but nobody has been able to provide any clinching argument to support this. Nobody has been able to do this for the simple reason that Darwin’s work does not lend any support to this contention. Nature in all its vastness does not care about fitness. What it cares about is adaptability. Nature is dynamic and is frequently undergoing fundamental changes and so fitness at any point in time may become a dire liability at the next moment. This is why, it is those that can be adapted to change that will survive and go on to proliferate within any given set of conditions. Mankind in total, has been able to demonstrate great adaptability which is why we have been able to colonise the globe in its entirety. As it is with our species, so it is with the languages we speak. Those languages which can be adapted to changing situations will survive and by the iron laws of nature those that are found wanting in this particular regard, will become extinct in the manner of any plant or animal that is caught in the web of changing environments. No new languages are being formed anywhere in the world at this time and it is clear that the number of languages spoken in the world will be reduced at an increasing rate leading to a corresponding decrease in language diversity thereby going across the grain of evolution. This is because our collective future can only be guaranteed by increasing diversity. To put things in proper perspective, the less diversity we have, the greater the possibility of a massive clear out of a species leading to extinction and that goes against the grain of nature. We encounter this not only in terms of language but also in terms of the foods we eat and the cultures that govern our existence. We must therefore be conservationists in respect of our respective languages. One of the ways that this can be achieved is through multilingualism. The ideal situation is that we should all speak at least three or four different languages, especially since as children, we can effortlessly pick up any number of languages, the only limit being that we would be able to speak only those languages spoken to us in infancy. Whilst it is true that this is desirable from a social point of view, it is also desirable from a purely personal point of view. Ongoing studies suggest that the ability to speak several different languages not only improves individual confidence but also has the capacity to protect the brain from dementia and other such conditions as old age sets in. For the overwhelming majority of educated Nigerians, this is good news as they have at least two languages in their locker. As things stand, they at least speak their local language as well as English.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    Our ability to speak English is a fall out of our colonial past. In the nineteenth century as Europeans began their incursion into Africa, it was soon clear that the ability to speak the language of those interlopers was the source of a distinct advantage to those who could speak the newly grafted language. It made it possible for such people to be pulled into the orbit of the colonizers and in doing so becoming intermediaries between the colonizers and the indigenous peoples. At that time, the colonies were sorely dependent on commercial activities. They all provided a source of income and those intermediaries were able to create a profitable niche for themselves sometimes to the detriment of those on the other side of the language barrier. The situation has hardly changed since then and there are no signs of any impending change. On the other hand, many of those who have since gone through the educational system are determined to confer some advantage on their children by restricting them to the mastering of the English language in order for them to land elite jobs and propagate the method of recruitment into the upper classes.

    English is the official language of Nigeria as well as more than eighty countries in the world. This is because there was a time when more than a quarter of the world was under British colonial rule. That was a time when it was said that the sun never set on the British empire. Now that the sun has finally set on that empire in every sense of the world, the British have left their language as an unforgettable souvenir in all those countries and more because Rwanda and Burundi which were never colonised by the British have adopted English as their official language. In addition to all those countries which were once British colonies, the United States of America is an English speaking territory but even then it is worth remembering that the original states of the union were English colonies and as they expanded to cover fifty states, the English language also spread to cover all the states and so, of the two billion English speakers all over the world, close to 350 million of them are Americans and it may even be said that the continued influence of the English language is due to the cultural domination of the global space by American institutions. The world is kept entertained and acculturated by films made in Hollywood. The language of American technology which stands increasingly dominant is English and this technology is exploited the world over. We are all in the grip of social media and without a working knowledge of the English language, one is quickly left out of the loop and so, all over the world, people have English as their second language. For a lot of us therefore, having English as a second language as we do expedites the japa syndrome which gives us the valuable option of packing up and going away to another country. One is actually spoilt for choice as to where to relocate to. The one downside is that the situation we are in has become a threat to our local languages and the danger to language diversity all over the world looms increasingly large on the global horizon.

  • Femi Fani-Kayode’s ambassadorial nomination

    Femi Fani-Kayode’s ambassadorial nomination

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s announcement of ambassadorial nominations on 29 November, 2025 have produced a harvest of words. A calm look at the overabundance of comments and criticisms on the nominations yields a very clear understanding of what is meant by the ‘Dunning-Kruger Effect’.

    According to psychologist Kendra Cherry, “the Dunning-Kruger effect is when people overestimate their skills because they don’t know enough to see their own lack of knowledge or ability.” Cherry illustrates the Dunning-Kruger Effect with the following commonplace dinner table situation at a holiday family gathering: “Throughout the meal, a member of your extended family spouts off on a topic at length, boldly proclaiming that they are correct and that everyone else’s opinion is stupid, uninformed, and just plain wrong. While it may be evident that this person has no idea what they are talking about, they prattle on, blithely oblivious to their ignorance.”

    Just like this prattling family member and seemingly oblivious of the Yoruba proverbial counsel that many words do not fill a basket, all manner of commentators or critics have spoken extensively and passionately about the ambassadorial nominations. One of the non-career names on the list who has received particularly negative attention is Chief Femi Fani-Kayode who is an articulate lawyer, a former spokesperson to former President Olusegun Obasanjo of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and is also a former Minister of Aviation in the same administration.

    On 20 August, 2020, he called a Daily Trust journalist, Eyo Charles, “stupid” in Calabar, because the reporter asked him who was bankrolling his unofficial assessment tours of several southern state governments in Nigeria. Specifically, as the 26 August, 2020 issue of Daily Times Nigeria reported, Fani-Kayode responded: “What type of stupid question is that? Bankrolling who? Do you know who you are talking to? … What type of insulting question is that? Which bankroll? … Please don’t insult me here. … I could see from your face before you got here, how stupid you are … You have a small mind, very small mind. Don’t judge me by your own standards.”

    Fani-Kayode was further reported to have said to his audience: “I’m sorry, that was deeply insulting. I don’t often get annoyed in press conferences. I’ve been doing this kind of thing for very many, many years. … Bankroll who? … Don’t ever try that with me again o. Don’t, please. …  I have a very short fuse.” The former presidential spokesperson was widely condemned for this outburst.

    In response, in the same 26 August, 2020 issue of Daily Times Nigeria, Fani-Kayode was reported to have apologised as follows: “I met with my advisors till late last night and I wish to say the following. I hereby withdraw the word ‘stupid’ which I used in my encounter with a journalist in Calabar. I have many friends in the media whom I offended by losing my cool and using such words. I hereby express my regrets for doing so.”

    Considering the tendency by some Nigerians to see anything they believe to be wrong as peculiarly Nigerian and incapable of happening in ‘saner climes’, Fani-Kayode must have been in comfortable company, as shown in a 28 November, 2025 PBS (Public Broadcasting Service) News YouTube video titled “WATCH: ‘Are you stupid?’ Trump rebuffs reporter’s question on Afghan resettlement vetting.”

    In the video of a 27 November, 2025 interview, a CBS (Columbia Broadcasting System) reporter, Nancy Cordes, tried to deflect Trump’s castigation of the Joe Biden administration’s lack of vetting and checking of immigrants for allowing the entry into the United States of the Afghan man suspected of shooting two members of the United States National Guard on 26 November, 2025, in Washington, DC. Nancy Cordes noted: “Your DOJ IG [Department of Justice Inspector General] just reported this year that there was thorough vetting by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] and by the FBI [Federal Bureau of Investigation] of these Afghans who were brought into the U.S. So, why do you blame the Biden administration?”

    To this attempt to correct him, Trump interrupted her and said angrily: “Because they let them in. Are you stupid? Are you a stupid person? Because they came in on a plane along with thousands of other people that shouldn’t be here. And you’re just asking questions because you’re a stupid person.” The difference between the Fani-Kayode and Trump outbursts is that while the former Nigerian minister expressed regret and apologised for calling a journalist ‘stupid’, the American president showed no remorse.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    Opponents of Fani-Kayode’s nomination as ambassador discountenance his apologies and his claim that “I don’t often get annoyed in press conferences. I’ve been doing this kind of thing for very many, many years.” They also disregard his politeness to the other members of his audience when he said, “I’m sorry, that was deeply insulting.” Moreover, they ignore his statement that he was withdrawing the offensive word to assuage the feelings of his media friends. In fact, his detractors argue unforgivingly that his reaction to the Daily Trust reporter was evidence of the fact that he did not possess the temperament suitable for the efficient performance of the duties of an ambassador.

    Those who are against Fani-Kayode’s nomination as an ambassador also refer to previous statements in which he had castigated Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu with respect to the nomination of Professor Yemi Osinbajo as vice-presidential candidate to then-candidate Muhammadu Buhari of the All Progressives Congress (APC). In one of those statements during the PDP campaigns for the presidential elections, Fani-Kayode was shown on video to have said: “Senator Tinubu … is desperate to be president for his own selfish reasons.”

    However, as the Director, New Media of the Tinubu-Shettima Presidential Council, Femi Fani-Kayode said about candidate Tinubu in a 7 January, 2023 YouTube video of a TVC news interview titled, “Tinubu has distinctive policies for Nigerians”: “He’s the only man that’s truly sincere about moving this country forward. He wants power for the people. He wants electricity to be generated throughout the country. He has distinct policies that he wants to establish.”

    Moreover, Fani-Kayode was accused of inconsistency for refuting the claim of exclusive ‘Christians genocide’ in Nigeria. To this, he said in a 4 October, 2025 article titled, “The fiction of Christian genocide and the conspiracy against Nigeria,” on his website femifanikayode.org: “A number of years ago I was amongst those that erroneously believed that only Christians were being targetted and subjected to genocide by the terrorists in Nigeria. This was the case until 2020 when I went on a tour of the North West and North East and discovered that as many, if not more, Muslims and Muslim communities had been targetted and subjected to mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide as the Christian ones in that area.”

    Fani-Kayode continued: “What I witnessed in Zamfara, Sokoto, Katsina, Kaduna, Yobe, Borno, Bauchi, Adamawa, Gombe and other parts of the majority Muslim core North shocked and shattered me and constrained me to accept the assertion that this was not an onslaught against Christians and Christian communities alone but rather an attack on Nigerians of every faith. … From the day I came to appreciate all this I took an oath before God and man that I would speak out against the atrocities being perpetuated against not just Christians but also Muslims. I also accepted the fact that to do anything other than that would not only be inherently intellectually dishonest but also would add to the problem and make it worse rather than solve it.”

    Incidentally, his new views about the non-existence of exclusive ‘Christian genocide’ in Nigeria align with those of the Benue State Governor Hyacinth Alia who is a Catholic priest, Catholic Bishop of Sokoto Diocese Most Reverend Father Matthew Hassan Kukah, the Chairman of the Borno State Branch of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), and above all, the Federal Government of Nigeria. So, how does this agreement constitute a ground for disqualifying him as an ambassadorial nominee? Indeed, he has also written extensively and powerfully in support of Nigeria’s position on the Israeli carnage in Gaza.

    Regarding what is perceived as the inconsistency of Fani-Kayode, people seem to be judging him by standards harsher than the ones with which they judge themselves. In fact, who has not had cause to change their own position before? One common principle is that the only permanent thing in life is change. A related Yoruba musical proverb says: “T’órin bá ti yí, k’ílù yípadà” (‘Once the song changes, the accompanying drumming changes.’) Moreover, what is called inconsistency in some social contexts is called flexibility in politics. And in politics, flexibility is not a vice.

    In any case, who is to be preferred? One who had been a beneficiary of your generosity and large-heartedness in the past, had praised you to high heavens, and had told the whole world you were uniquely primed to be Nigeria’s president, but, when you strove for the high office, told the world how unsuitable you were for that office? Or one who worked for you to get to office, and then, due to impatience with the pace or nature of your reward system goes all out to bring you down? Or the person who first worked against you when you were striving to get to office, but who, in the midst of the struggle, had cause to change their views about you, and so supported your efforts during the campaigns and has gone the extra length to make you succeed in office?

    Should President Tinubu have thrown the baby away with the bath water? And should those now charged with screening Chief Femi Fani-Kayode for suitability as Nigeria’s ambassador discountenance his current value? One Rasheed Oniyangi, on Facebook, on 30 November, 2025, recalled this President Tinubu quote: “I plan for betrayal, I plan for backstabbing, I also plan for reunion and forgiveness long before they happen. In life, I expect nothing, I expect anything, I expect everything.” Why then do the critics of Fani-Kayode’s nomination take it upon themselves to cry more than the bereaved?

    In line with the principle that all actions shall be judged by intention, the opposition to Femi Fani-Kayode’s ambassadorial nomination raises a number of questions. Are the opponents of the nomination driven by goodwill to President Tinubu? Are they driven by ill-will and the desire to denude the president of the stout support this nominee has been giving him and the government? Are the opponents driven by the desire to penalise and discomfit the nominee for unabashedly supporting a president the detractors would rather see fail?

    Consider this 1 December, 2025 quote from “Deep Shallow Dive Podcast” on Facebook titled, “Hard Truth Time”: “Maybe it’s time we stop letting the loudest, angriest voices write the script.”