Category: ARINZE IGBOELI

  • The tragic collapse of Nigerian football

    The tragic collapse of Nigerian football

    The night of November 16, 2025, in Rabat will remain etched in the consciousness of Nigerian football as a monument to institutional failure. Nigeria, a one time pride of African football and a nation of over 250 million people lost to war-torn DR Congo 4-3 on penalties following a lackluster 1-1 draw in which the DR Congo did most of the playing while the Super Eagles or should I say Super Chickens just ran aimlessly round the pitch.  This loss condemned the Super Eagles to miss a second consecutive World Cup—an unprecedented failure for a nation that once dominated African football.

    Surely, Eric Chelle deserves commendation for his tactical acumen in the semifinal against Gabon, and for getting the team to such a place following a very shambolic start to the qualifiers under Finidi George. However, his team selection for the Congo match was nothing short of catastrophic. Chelle made two changes to the side that beat Gabon, bringing in Semi Ajayi and Frank Onyeka for Bright Osayi-Samuel and Akor Adams  . While Onyeka scored early, giving Nigeria the lead within three minutes, the overall performance was not merely disappointing—it was a horror show of epic proportions. Players looked disjointed, lacked cohesion, and appeared mentally unprepared for the magnitude of the occasion.

    Nigerian football seems to be performing a vanishing act, I recall there was a time when Nigerian youth teams were the undisputed kings of world football. Nigeria’s U-17 team is the most successful in international football for their age group, winning a record five FIFA U-17 World Cup titles , while the U-20 team has won a record seven African U-20 Cup of Nations titles.  Those glory days now feel like ancient history with the current reality humiliating. Nigeria’s U-17 team, the Golden Eaglets, has failed to qualify for the African U-17 Cup of Nations three consecutive times. The Flying Eagles recently lost 4-0 to Argentina in the round of 16 at the FIFA U-20 World Cup . These aren’t just losses—they represent the systematic destruction of Nigeria’s once-formidable youth development pipeline.

    Even when these teams qualify, the selection process has become so politicized and compromised that one wonders whether merit plays any role whatsoever.

    READ ALSO: Ulerawa: How Oyebanji’s reforms is turning Ekiti public hospitals into centre of hope

    If there’s one word that defines the current state of Nigerian football, it is corruption. The Nigeria Football Federation, NFF has become what one observer aptly described as a crime scene that must undergo total overhaul.

    The House of Representatives established a Special Investigative Committee to probe how the NFF handled financial grants amounting to $25 million from FIFA and CAF and these  details are staggering: a physical inspection of the Birnin Kebbi facility, built under the FIFA Forward Programme, a facility  meant to symbolise progress in grassroots football has been described as  a substandard facility that cannot justify the sum of $1.2 million claimed to have been spent by the NFF.

    Also, despite President Bola Tinubu’s approval of ₦12 billion in January 2024 to settle outstanding national team debts, players still went unpaid, with debts dating as far back as 2019. Can we sit and assimilate this? Players representing their country are owed money from six years ago, despite billions being released specifically to settle those debts. In pidgin parlance, one is forced to ask “Where the money go?”

    Former Sports Minister Solomon Dalung attributed years of decline to corruption and impunity, recalling an encounter with a ministry cleaner who told him: “We work harder for failure than for success,” because officials benefit when teams fail early in tournaments as unspent funds go unaccounted for. This is the depth of the rot we seem to be  dealing with—a system where failure is more profitable than success.

    The administrative chaos extends to coaching appointments. The revolving Super Eagles coaching door in the last four years saw the exits of Gernot Rohr, Austin Eguavoen (twice), Jose Peseiro, and Finidi George ( Both Eguavoen and Finidi have no business coaching any team playing football in this 21st Century) How can any team build continuity with such instability? Three coaches managed the team in six qualifying matches , a recipe for disaster that predictably led to catastrophic failure.

    The domestic league, which should serve as the foundation for national team success, is in complete disarray. The NPFL, the primary talent pipeline, is plagued by corruption, poor officiating, and lack of structure. Without a functional domestic league, Nigeria has become overly dependent on foreign-based players, many of whom only discover their “Nigerian roots” after failing to break into European national teams.

    Only the Uyo and Abeokuta stadiums are qualified to host CAF matches in the whole of Nigeria, while even the National Stadium in Abuja, which was built with N85 billion of taxpayers’ money, was downgraded by CAF . This infrastructure deficit is a national embarrassment that speaks volumes about misplaced priorities.

    Perhaps the most disheartening aspect of Nigeria’s decline is the visible lack of passion many players display when donning the green and white. Watch these same players for their clubs—Manchester United, Napoli, Chelsea, Leicester, Galatasaray—and you witness transformation, commitment, and desire. But when they wear Nigeria’s colors, too often we see lackluster performances, half-hearted runs, and a disturbing detachment from the national cause.

    This is particularly galling when one considers that representing Nigeria at youth level is precisely what gave many of these players their breakthrough opportunities in European football. Without the visibility gained from playing for Nigeria, many would never have secured those lucrative club contracts. Yet they seem to have forgotten this debt of gratitude. When the national team calls, they should respond with the same fervor they display for their clubs—anything less is a betrayal of the jersey and the millions of Nigerians who live and breathe for the Super Eagles.

    The road back to dominance requires radical, comprehensive reforms:

    1. Total Administrative Overhaul: The NFF requires transparent budgeting, merit-based hiring, zero tolerance for interference, external audits of tournament spending, and clear KPIs beyond short-term qualifications,it’s  current leadership must be dissolved and replaced with individuals who have demonstrated integrity and competence.

    2. Adopt the Babangida-Westerhof Model: During Nigeria’s golden era in the 1990s, Dutch coach Clemens Westerhof enjoyed unhindered access to the presidency under General Ibrahim Babangida, allowing him to work without undue interference. Under Westerhof, Nigeria won the 1994 African Cup of Nations after winning silver in Algiers 1990 and bronze in Senegal 92 whilst also qualifying for the first time to the FIFA World Cup with a brilliant second round finish, an impressive feat for a first time appearance.   Westerhof is credited with turning Nigeria into a powerhouse in African football, discovering the likes of Jay-Jay Okocha, Sunday Oliseh, Dan Amokachi, Finidi George, Emmanuel Amunike and Rashidi Yekini.

    The next coach—whether Nigerian or foreign—must have direct access to the presidency, insulated from the meddling and corruption of NFF bureaucrats. This model worked brilliantly in the past and can work again if properly implemented.

    3. Rebuild Youth Development From the Ground Up: Nigeria needs regular youth competitions at U13, U15, U17, and U20 levels, with a consolidated national pathway for converting unrefined talent into elite football .Names such as  former Golden Eaglets captain Nduka Ugbade emphasizes the urgent need for comprehensive development structures and proper football development systems from the grassroots level.

    4. Establish Coaching Continuity and Football Philosophy: Nigeria must establish a consistent football philosophy, adopting long-term four to eight-year planning cycles, investing in youth pathways and coaching stability . Countries like Morocco, Senegal, and Egypt have pulled ahead precisely because they build from the ground up with clear long-term vision.

    5. Revitalize the Domestic League: Massive investment in the NPFL is non-negotiable. Better officiating, improved stadium infrastructure, commercial viability, and zero tolerance for corruption must become the norm rather than the exception.

    6. Demand Player Accountability: Players must be made to understand that representing Nigeria is a privilege, not a right. Those who cannot commit fully should be excluded, regardless of their club pedigree. Create a culture where passion for the national team is non-negotiable.

    7. Engage Private Sector Leadership: Let’s have business leaders like Aliko Dangote, and others who have already succeeded in life partner with the NFF, Let’s have former football players like Jay Jay Okocha and Sunday Oliseh run the NFF,  they can add immense value to the football culture just as the late Senator Ifeanyi Ubah did and just as former players in other nations are doing.

    Nigeria’s failure to qualify for consecutive World Cups is not merely a sporting disappointment—it is a national crisis that exposes decades of systemic rot, corruption, and institutional decay. In a world where countries like Curacao, Haiti  Panama and Jordan are heading to the world cup we have squandered yet another  generation of talent in African football history through administrative incompetence and moral bankruptcy.

    The question facing Nigeria is stark: Do we have the courage to implement the radical reforms necessary to reclaim our rightful place at the summit of African and world football? Or will we continue down this path of mediocrity, content with excuses and empty promises while our rivals forge ahead?

    Anything less is unacceptable. The time for excuses is over. The time for action is now.

  • Osun 2026: APC and the zoning question

    Osun 2026: APC and the zoning question

    The 2026 Osun State gubernatorial election readily presents the All Progressives Congress (APC) with both a challenge and an opportunity. While some have advocated zoning the ticket to Osun West, a detailed examination of political realities, party performance data, and the current administration’s failures reveals that the Osun East Senatorial District represents the APC’s most strategic path to victory.

    Since assuming office in 2022, Governor Ademola Adeleke’s PDP led administration has failed to advance Osun State despite substantial resources at its disposal. The evidence is stark:

    Education in Crisis: Osun State University (UNIOSUN), once a beacon of academic excellence, has deteriorated to subpar levels compared to peer institutions in the region. Also the governor’s decision to sack 1,500 teachers without replacement has created a vacuum in the education sector that undermines the future of Osun’s children.

    Employment Scandals: Successful job applicants who paid application fees remain in limbo, with the administration delaying their employment indefinitely. This betrayal of young Osun residents speaks to a government more concerned with political optics than delivering tangible results.

    Health and Security Decline: Both sectors have witnessed measurable deterioration under the current administration, with citizens feeling increasingly vulnerable and underserved.

    Governance by Performance: While Governor Adeleke has earned the moniker “dancing governor,” his penchant for celebration has not translated into policy substance. Allegations of crass hedonism and lack of focus have overshadowed any meaningful governance achievements.

    Read Also: Fresh posers as 315 confirmed abducted from Niger school

    This record of failure creates an opening for the APC—but only if the party makes the right strategic choice.

    As the countdown to Osun 2026 draws nigh, several opinions have reared their heads or rent the political atmosphere. A minority like analysis have sprung up in favour of zoning the ticket to Osun West where the wobbling incumbent hails from. These yesmen naively tout the “ Edo Template” but have failed to see that the factors which favoured a Monday Okpebholo’s  emergence as Edo State Governor is lacking or non-existent in the Osun scenario.  I will give a few examples here.

    First, Governor Adeleke will definitely run for a second term as the constitution permits him, in the Edo Template, Okpebholo was running not against an incumbent but a newbie in Asue Ighodalo, even a five year old can differentiate between the two scenarios. In addition to this, let us note that Senator Okpebholo was a sitting senator, something Osun West APC presently lacks.

     Third, is the fact that Obaseki was at war with the powerful Oba of Benin, his estranged predecessor, Adams Oshiomole and his erstwhile loyal deputy, Philip Shuaibu amongst many other interest groups within the PDP at both national and state levels( Wike and Dan Orbih respectively), the same cannot be said of Adeleke who maintains strong traditional relationships and controls the party machinery.

    Then there is the reputed voting strength of the Adeleke’s in Osun West, particularly in Ede North and South, such voting patterns witnessed in the days of the late Isiaka Adeleke( Serubawon) in 1992 , 2007, 2011, 2014 and then in 2017,  both Isiaka and Ademola Adeleke have  dominated Osun West with overwhelming margins.Both figures did consistently deliver crushing victories with massive margins which resemble some sort of cult following, the verdict is simple:  any APC candidate from Osun West would face Adeleke’s home advantage without any meaningful end result. The APC has no strong man from Osun West,  who can match Adeleke’s gubernatorial incumbency advantage.

    While it is agreed that the principle of zoning exists to ensure equity for politically disadvantaged areas, however, Osun West has produced two governors since state creation—both from Ede Federal Constituency. Now,  if fairness guides zoning, the logical approach would be: Zone  to other areas within Osun West, either  to Ikire or Iwo Federal Constituencies (never represented),and  yet even with the number disparity,  the stark reality is that Adeleke’s dominance in Ede and Osun West as a whole will readily take the wind out of such sails. In addition to this, why would the rest of Osun readily vote another son from Osun West for a possible tenure of eight years when they can pitch their tent with Adeleke, and have power shift to another zone or district?  After all 4 will always be better than eight!

    Again, the principle of zoning exists to ensure equity for politically disadvantaged areas. Osun West haven produced two governors since state creation—both from Ede Federal Constituency should require that another zone be presented for the election proper. If indeed fairness guides zoning, the logical approach would be to recognize zones or constituencies  that have not produced a governor. Constituencies like —Ile-Ife, Ijebu-Jesa and Osogbo. This makes the equity argument favor Osun East much more stronger than  any claim from Osun West, since another term for Adeleke will give Osun West three stints in Government House Oshogbo, Osun East would have only had two compared with Osun Central which has also had three stints.

    The Omisore Factor?

    Senator Iyiola Omisore as a political juggernaut embodies the required  experience and structure to give Adeleke a good fight and return Osun APC to power.  A one time deputy governor, senator,  two time guber candidate and party scribe, we can readily recall how as the ‘beautiful bride’ in 2018, he helped rescue Oyetola and the APC from the jaws of defeat and it did not just end there, Omisore’s Osun East Senatorial District was the only district that delivered victory for APC in 2022 with the same Oyetola winning five local governments in Osun East.

    In addition to this, readers must note that Osun East is the only district where all National Assembly members belong to APC—the senator and all representatives; why should APC then reward another zone that cannot boast of such credentials with a guber ticket?

    Osun East also boasts of huge voter populations with Ife East ranking second  (114,404) and Ife Central (113,232) ranking third respectively in voter strength statewide, trailing only Osogbo, a combination of these factors and

      decades of Omisore’s commanding presence in Osun’s politics is the fillip for an Osun APC victory in 2026. An Omisore candidacy should guarantee that all 10 local governments in Osun East would be in the APC ‘ s kitty and serve as a springboard to the party’s victory.

    In conclusion, the APC must nominate an Osun East candidate, specifically Iyiola Omisore, to defeat the incumbent in 2026. Osun East offers not only strong APC institutional presence across all legislative seats, but also proven party loyalty, electoral resilience, and high voter concentration in strategic areas. The zone can maximize margins while competing effectively in Osun  Central and making inroads in Osun West.

    In contrast, Osun West presents Adeleke’s overwhelming incumbency advantage in his home zone, weak APC infrastructure, and the risk of splitting the home district while failing to dominate elsewhere. Omisore has likewise demonstrated unwavering APC loyalty through total commitment and unequivocal sacrifices, along with the ability to mobilize Osun East while building coalitions in Central and West districts.

    The victory formula requires maximizing margins in Osun East to create an insurmountable lead, competing strongly in Osun Central by leveraging senatorial and ministerial influence, and targeting disaffected voters in Osun West by exploiting Adeleke’s performance gaps. Drawing lessons from past elections, the APC must prioritize strategy and political realities above zoning sentiments. These considerations are indeed  essential for reclaiming Osun State via an Omisore candidacy.

  • On the Wike-Yerima incident

    On the Wike-Yerima incident

    In a nation still bearing the scars from years of military rule, where our democratic institutions remain frail and the supremacy of civilian authority over the armed forces is a hard-won principle, a section of Nigerians recently found themselves cheering what amounts to an affront on the Nigerian constitution.  The incident involving Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, and a naval officer identified as Lieutenant Yerima, who blocked the minister’s access to inspect a contentious piece of land in Abuja, has generated a peculiar kind of national jubilation—one that reveals more about our collective democratic immaturity than it does about accountability.

    The facts are straightforward, even if the public reaction has been anything but. Wike attempted to inspect a parcel of land in the FCT that had allegedly been irregularly allocated. According to available information, the land was originally acquired by the government for the construction of a recreational park—a public amenity meant to serve the residents of the Federal Capital Territory. However, somewhere along the administrative chain, this public land was reportedly subdivided and sold off for residential purposes, transforming what should have been a communal green space into private real estate. When the Minister sought to inspect the property in line with his statutory duties, he was met by naval personnel who refused him entry, with Officer Yerima leading the resistance.

    The confrontation that ensued was captured on video and rapidly circulated across social media platforms, generating what can only be described as a national spectacle. Nigerians, it seemed, had found their hero—not in the minister attempting to investigate alleged land fraud, but in the military officer who stood in his way. The hoopla was immediate and deafening. On Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram, Nigerians celebrated Yerima’s defiance with memes, adulatory posts, and commentary that framed the incident as a David-versus-Goliath narrative, with the naval officer cast as the righteous underdog standing up to a bullying minister.

    But this narrative, as emotionally satisfying as it might be for those who harbor personal distaste for Wike, fundamentally misunderstands what transpired and, more dangerously, what it represents.

    Section 11 of the Land Use Act is unambiguous: the Minister of the FCT, or any public officer duly authorized by him, has the statutory right to enter upon and inspect any land held under a statutory right of occupancy at reasonable hours. This is not a courtesy or a privilege—it is a legal mandate designed to enable government to monitor land use, prevent illegal allocations, and ensure compliance with approved purposes. The occupier of such land has a corresponding duty to grant access. There is no exception carved out for military installations, no clause that permits armed personnel to substitute their judgment for that of the law.

    Officer Yerima’s obstruction, therefore, was not an act of courage or principle—it was a violation of the law. More troublingly, it was an assertion of military authority over civilian governance, a regression to a mentality that should have been buried with our last military regime. Section 217(2)(c) of the 1999 Constitution explicitly subjects the armed forces to civilian authority. This is not decorative language; it is the bedrock principle that distinguishes democracies from military states. When a uniformed officer prevents a civilian minister from exercising his lawful functions, alleging that he is under orders he is not defending order—he is subverting it.

    Read Also: Wike, Yerima face-off: We owe Gambo nothing but gratitude

    Yet Nigerians, blinded by their antipathy toward Wike, chose to celebrate this subversion. The irony is as bitter as it is dangerous. A population that spent decades chafing under military dictatorship, that watched soldiers truncate elections and suspend constitutions, that mourned journalists and activists who died resisting military impunity—this same population now applauds a military officer for obstructing civilian authority because of the civilian in question.

    This is the peril of allowing personal sentiment to override legal principle. Wike is undoubtedly a polarizing figure. His tenure as Rivers State governor was marked by controversies, his political maneuvering has earned him enemies across party lines, and his confrontational style alarms  many. These are legitimate grounds for criticism. But they are not grounds for suspending the rule of law or celebrating its violation. The law does not discriminate based on likability. It applies to the charming and the abrasive alike, to the beloved and the reviled.

    When we cheer its breach because we dislike the intended beneficiary, we are not striking a blow for justice—we are undermining the very framework that protects all of us.

    Consider the implications. If a military officer can lawfully prevent a minister from inspecting land today because some Nigerians find that minister distasteful, what prevents another officer from preventing an election official from accessing a polling station tomorrow? What stops a colonel from obstructing a governor he dislikes, or a brigadier from overruling a judge whose decisions he finds inconvenient?

     The principle of civilian supremacy is indivisible. Once breached, it invites a cascade of violations, each justified by the subjective grievances of those wielding arms.

    To be sure, Wike himself is not blameless in how the situation unfolded. Many watched the minister resort to hurling insults at Officer Yerima—language that was unnecessary and unbecoming of his office. As a senior government official, Wike could have simply documented the obstruction, presented the evidence to military authorities and, if necessary, escalated the matter to the President. A measured, procedural response would have demonstrated the dignity of civilian authority without descending into a shouting match. His decision to exchange barbs with the officer muddied what should have been a clear-cut case of lawful authority being unlawfully obstructed.

    But even acknowledging Wike’s missteps, the central issue remains: what the officer did was illegal, and what Nigerians celebrated was the erosion of a constitutional principle. We cannot afford to be so consumed by our dislike of individuals that we lose sight of the institutions and norms that sustain our democracy.

    The land at the center of this controversy reportedly represents yet another instance of the endemic corruption that has turned Abuja’s public spaces into private commodities. Land meant for a recreational park—a space where families could gather, children could play, and communities could find respite—was allegedly carved up and sold to the privileged few who could afford it. This is the real scandal, the genuine outrage. Yet instead of demanding accountability for this theft of public patrimony, Nigerians directed their attention to the personality clash, choosing sides based not on law or principle but on which party they found more objectionable.

    This is how we lose our democracy—not to a sudden coup, but to a gradual acceptance of illegality whenever it serves our immediate emotional needs. We must do better. We must learn to separate our assessment of individuals from our defense of institutions. We must recognize that celebrating a military officer’s defiance of civilian authority, regardless of the civilian involved, is a betrayal of every Nigerian who fought, bled, and died to end military rule.

    Nigeria’s democracy is young and fragile. It requires constant vigilance, not just against obvious threats like electoral fraud or executive overreach, but against the subtler danger of our own inconsistency—our willingness to abandon principle when personality intervenes. The Wike-Yerima incident should serve as a wake-up call: our hatred for individuals must never eclipse our commitment to the rule of law. The alternative is a return to the chaos we claim to have left behind.

  • The Christian genocide question in Nigeria: a nuanced examination

    The Christian genocide question in Nigeria: a nuanced examination

    The question of whether Christians in Nigeria are experiencing systematic genocide has become increasingly prominent in international discourse, particularly in Western media and political circles. Such characterization, while capturing the very real suffering of Christian communities in certain regions, requires careful examination to avoid oversimplifying a complex humanitarian crisis that has claimed lives across religious lines.

    Nigeria’s security challenges cannot be reduced to a single narrative of religious persecution. The violence that has plagued the country, particularly in its northern and Middle Belt regions, stems from multiple interlocking crises: the Boko Haram insurgency, banditry in the Northwest, farmer-herder conflicts, and broader governance failures. While it is undeniable that Christians have been targeted in specific incidents, particularly during religious and civil disturbances, the reality on the ground reveals a more troubling picture—one where violence has consumed communities regardless of their faith.

    Since the emergence of Boko Haram in 2009, Muslims have borne an enormous share of casualties. The terrorist group, whose name roughly translates to “Western education is forbidden,” has killed tens of thousands of people, the majority of them Muslims. Towns and villages across Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa states—predominantly Muslim areas—have been razed, with entire populations displaced. Mosques have been bombed during Friday prayers, and Islamic scholars who speak against the group’s extremist ideology have been systematically assassinated.

    Similarly, the banditry crisis that has devastated Northwest Nigeria, particularly Zamfara, Katsina, and Kaduna states, has primarily affected Muslim communities. Armed criminal gangs have attacked villages, kidnapped thousands for ransom, and disrupted agricultural activities, creating a humanitarian catastrophe. These bandits, motivated primarily by economic gain rather than religious ideology, have shown no hesitation in targeting Muslim communities, schools, and places of worship.

    A crucial aspect often overlooked in the genocide narrative is that terrorist groups operating in Nigeria have demonstrated a consistent pattern of indiscriminate violence. Boko Haram and its offshoot, the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP), Ansaru and Lakurawa have attacked both Christian and Muslim targets. Their ideology views any Nigerian who does not subscribe to their extreme interpretation of Islam as a legitimate target—this includes the vast majority of Nigerian Muslims.

    Read Also: Genocide claim: Clerics urge courage, justice, divine intervention

    The terrorists’ strategic objectives center on destabilizing the Nigerian state, controlling territory, and imposing their governance system. While they have certainly attacked churches, Christian communities, and used anti-Christian rhetoric, they have simultaneously waged sustained campaigns against Muslim institutions, traditional leaders, and government structures. Their violence is totalizing, aimed at anyone who resists their authority or represents the existing order.

    To characterize this as a genocide against Christians specifically is to misunderstand the nature of the threat and inadvertently minimize the suffering of Muslim victims who have died in equal or greater numbers. It also plays into the terrorists’ strategy of sowing religious division, which serves their interest in fragmenting Nigerian society along religious lines.

    The violence in states like Plateau, Benue, and Taraba presents additional complications to the genocide narrative. These states have experienced horrific bloodshed, often framed as attacks by Fulani Muslim herders against Christian farming communities. There is truth to this characterization in specific incidents—Christian villages have been attacked, churches burned, and entire communities displaced in what appears to be religiously motivated violence.

    However, a closer examination reveals that these conflicts are rooted in competition over land and resources, exacerbated by climate change, population growth, and the breakdown of traditional conflict resolution mechanisms. While the religious dimension cannot be ignored—the perpetrators are often Muslim herders and the victims Christian farmers—the underlying drivers are economic and environmental.

    Critically, these conflicts have not been one-sided. Reprisal attacks carried out by Christian communities against Muslim herders communities and settlements have also occurred, resulting in significant Muslim casualties. Villages with Muslim populations have been attacked, mosques destroyed, and innocent Muslim herders killed in revenge for earlier attacks. This cycle of violence and counter-violence demonstrates that the situation is more accurately described as communal conflict rather than systematic genocide.

    The framing of these incidents solely as persecution of Christians ignores the Muslim victims and obscures the need for comprehensive solutions that address land use, climate adaptation, and intercommunal reconciliation. It also risks entrenching the very religious divisions that perpetuate the violence.

    Thus recent statements from the U.S. President,  Donald Trump regarding potential military intervention to protect Christians in Nigeria have sparked controversy and concern. While the international community’s attention to Nigeria’s security crisis is welcome, and assistance in defeating terrorist groups would be beneficial, such support must respect Nigeria’s territorial sovereignty and constitutional order.

    Nigeria is a sovereign nation with its own military and security apparatus. Any form of intervention must be conducted through proper diplomatic channels, with the consent of the Nigerian government, and in accordance with international law. Unilateral military action or intervention justified solely on the basis of protecting one religious community would be both illegal and counterproductive.

    Moreover, conspiracy theories have emerged suggesting that such intervention rhetoric is connected to Nigeria’s 2027 elections, potentially aimed at influencing domestic politics or supporting particular candidates. Whether or not these theories have merit, they highlight the danger of external actors inserting themselves into Nigeria’s internal affairs in ways that could destabilize rather than help the country.

    True Nigerians—those committed to the country’s unity and progress—must resist narratives that oversimplify the nation’s security challenges or seek to divide its people along religious lines. The violence affecting the country is real and demands urgent action, but that action must be based on accurate understanding of the problem.

    What Nigeria needs is comprehensive security sector reform, investment in affected communities regardless of their religious composition, genuine reconciliation efforts, and governance that delivers justice and economic opportunity to all citizens. International support should take the form of intelligence sharing, training, equipment, and diplomatic backing—not interventions that undermine sovereignty or reinforce religious divisions.

    The suffering of Christians in Nigeria is real and deserves attention. But so too is the suffering of Muslims, and of all Nigerians caught in the crossfire of terrorism, banditry, and communal violence. Only by acknowledging the full scope of the crisis can we hope to address it effectively. The goal should not be to protect one religious community at the expense of truth, but to protect all Nigerians and build a country where security, justice, and dignity are available to everyone, regardless of their faith.

  • On Anambra 2025…

    On Anambra 2025…

    In the annals of our history as a state, there are moments that stand as watersheds between mediocrity and magnificence, between the twilight of decline and the dawn of renewal. Anambra State now stands at such a precipice, gazing into an abyss of unfulfilled potential on one side and the luminous horizon of transformation on the other. The choice before Ndi Anambra transcends partisan allegiance—it is a sacred covenant with posterity, a referendum on whether the Light of the Nation shall continue to flicker in darkness or blaze forth with renewed brilliance.

    The numbers speak with a clarity that lofty  rhetoric, and highfalutin words cannot obscure. From 8th position to 34th among Nigeria’s 36 states—a precipitous descent of 26 places that tells the story of a great state humbled by inadequate stewardship. This is not merely statistical adumbration; it is the lived reality of millions whose dreams have been deferred, whose aspirations have collided with the harsh walls of governmental dysfunction.

    Consider the cruel irony: Anambra, blessed with industrious sons and daughters whose entrepreneurial spirit has conquered markets from Lagos to London, now ranks 33rd in capital expenditure per capita. The state that produced titans of commerce and scholarship now languishes at 33rd in educational infrastructure, while our children—those bright-eyed inheritors of a once-glorious legacy—sit in classrooms that mock their potential. In public health delivery, we have plummeted to 30th position, as if the wellbeing of our people has become an afterthought in the calculus of governance.

    READ ALSO: Femi Kuti reveals secret of longevity in music industry

    Most damning of all, in the metric of “State Attractiveness,” Anambra now shares ignominious company with Bayelsa and bandit-ravaged Zamfara as among the least preferred destinations for relocation. Let that sink into the collective consciousness of a people whose ancestors transformed swamps into citadels of civilization. We who once attracted the world now repel even our own.

    Into such a  landscape of despair strides a figure whose very biography reads as a repudiation of mediocrity. Prince Dr. Nicholas Ukachukwu (MFR) comes not as a political neophyte trafficking in empty promises, but as a seasoned architect of transformation whose antecedents speak volumes before his lips move. Here is a man who understands that governance is not performance art but the process of delivering tangible improvements to people’s lives.

    His credentials are not manufactured for electoral consumption—they are forged in the crucible of real-world achievement. From construction and infrastructure development to public service, Ukachukwu has demonstrated the rare amalgamation of technical competence, visionary thinking, and unwavering integrity that defines transformative leadership. Where others have seen obstacles, he has engineered solutions. Where others have preached development, he has built it with his own hands.

    Ukachukwu’s vision for Anambra is encapsulated in his Eight Enablers—a comprehensive blueprint that addresses the totality of our state’s challenges with the precision of a surgeon and the scope of a master planner.

    Ukachukwu understands with crystalline clarity what current leadership has failed to grasp: without security, every other development initiative becomes an exercise in futility. His security framework goes beyond the rustic employment of thieves and cutthroats who now in turn harass innocent civilians, whilst crimes are repeatedly committed even within precincts close to the seat of government.  Through meaningful youth engagement, job creation via industrialization, community policing, and collaboration with traditional institutions,  Anambra will be transformed from a theater of fear into a sanctuary of safety.

    Consider this: 103 industries have fled our state, markets close in apprehension, and the industrious spirit of Ndi Anambra withers under the shadow of unknown gunmen. Ukachukwu recognizes that idle youth become vulnerable to criminal recruitment, and his integrated approach combines immediate security responses with long-term solutions addressing poverty, unemployment, and marginalization.

    With proven expertise in construction and infrastructure development, Ukachukwu brings to governance what it has sorely lacked—technical competence married to project management excellence. Unlike the current administration’s haphazard approach that has left our roads scarred with potholes and collapsed sections despite quintupled federal allocations, Ikukuoma will build infrastructure to international standards.

    His strategic approach prioritizes roads with maximum economic impact—connecting agricultural areas to markets, linking industrial zones, and facilitating commerce. Erosion control will be integrated into every project, addressing environmental challenges comprehensively. Through Public-Private Partnerships and modern construction techniques, he will create road networks that last, using his construction background not as theoretical knowledge but as practical wisdom gained from executing complex projects successfully.

    In Ikukuoma’s Anambra, electricity ceases to be a luxury and becomes the right of every citizen. His power revolution strategy recognizes that every kilowatt generated catalyzes transformation, every power line erected bridges the gap between subsistence and prosperity. This is not about lighting bulbs—it is about illuminating the boundless possibilities that have remained dormant in darkness.

    “Akwukwo bu ife”—education is wealth, our ancestors proclaimed. Yet what wealth can we bequeath when our educational infrastructure crumbles and our teachers labor under poor welfare? Ukachukwu’s education agenda transcends cosmetic improvements to encompass teacher welfare, digital literacy, vocational training, and infrastructure that honors the sanctity of learning. He will restore Anambra’s schools from monuments of neglect to citadels of excellence that once produced professors, engineers, and captains of industry.

    Ikukuoma envisions a comprehensive three-level healthcare system: primary care facilities providing essential community services, secondary care offering specialized treatment, and tertiary centers delivering advanced medical expertise. Twenty-one general hospitals will ensure accessible healthcare throughout the state, while three reference hospitals will provide specialized services, potentially positioning Anambra as a regional healthcare hub attracting medical tourism.

    Perhaps nothing captures the transformative nature of Ukachukwu’s vision like his revolutionary concept of three industrial clusters—one in each senatorial zone. These are not mere economic zones; they are cathedrals of commerce, destinies being forged in steel and silicon. Each cluster will serve as an engine of prosperity, creating thousands of jobs, attracting investment, and transforming Anambra into the economic powerhouse it was destined to be.

    In Ikukuoma’s Anambra, agriculture transcends subsistence to become agribusiness, farmers evolve into entrepreneurs, and rural communities emerge as centers of wealth creation. His uptakers program ensures every harvest translates to prosperity, every farmer rises from survival to success. This is agriculture reimagined and rural communities transformed.

    Recognizing that a generation of talented young people currently watches their skills rust from disuse, Ukachukwu will create pathways to prosperity through entrepreneurship programs, skills acquisition, and job creation. No longer will our youth be condemned to unemployment despite their brilliance.

    While the current administration engages in propaganda about “One Youth, One Skill” programs that exist more in press releases than reality, while it presides over the collapse of 101 industries and the descent from 8th to 34th position nationally, while it watches our state become synonymous with insecurity alongside Zamfara—Ukachukwu offers something radical: competence, integrity, and a proven track record of delivery.

    The opposition may attempt to paint him as a stranger to the party, conveniently forgetting that he comes from legacy parties that formed the APC. They may concoct elaborate falsehoods about his relationship with the presidency, ignoring that he is resident in the Villa and enjoys direct access to President Tinubu. They may criticize his choice of running mate and campaign leadership, revealing their own descent into gutter politics while avoiding discussion of the issues that matter.

    But the discerning people of Anambra obviously can see through such chicanery. They recognize desperation when they see it—the flailing of an administration that has squandered the quintupled federal allocations and increased IGR on poor stewardship while delivering deteriorating infrastructure, worsening security, and declining state rankings.

    The Igbo philosophy of collective advancement finds its truest expression in Ukachukwu’s vision of inclusive development across all 179 communities. This is not the politics of exclusion or zonal favoritism—it is governance that recognizes every community’s right to participate in Anambra’s renaissance. From Aguata to Ogbaru, from Onitsha to Nnewi, from Awka to Ekwulobia, every corner of our beloved state will feel the transformative touch of purposeful leadership.

    “Ife ojoo ga-agafe”—bad times will pass, our elders say. But bad times do not pass through wishful thinking; they pass through decisive action, through the courage to choose differently, through the collective will to demand and deliver excellence.

    November 8th is not merely another date on the calendar—it is our generation’s answer to destiny’s call. It is the day we declare “O zugo!”—Enough! Enough of decline disguised as development. Enough of rhetoric substituting for results. Enough of watching our state’s light dim while leadership fiddles.

    This is the Anambra we can build—the Anambra we must build—if we summon the courage to choose wisely on November 8th.

    “Ihe eji mara nwoke bu uka ya”—a person is known by their footprints. What footprints are we leaving for our children and their children? Can we, in good conscience, pass on this burden of dysfunction and decay? Or will we bequeath to them an Anambra transformed, a state restored to its rightful place among Nigeria’s best?

    November 8 is our date with destiny!

  • Paradox of presidential pardons: tale of two cases

    Paradox of presidential pardons: tale of two cases

    Nigeria’s justice system has once again become a subject of intense national debate, with two cases highlighting the apparent contradictions in how mercy and justice are dispensed in the country. On one hand, there is the continued detention of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu, leader of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), since 2021, and on the other, the controversial pardon granted by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to Maryam Sanda and other notable convicts. These contrasting situations raise fundamental questions about equity, justice, and the true meaning of presidential clemency in Nigeria’s democracy.

    The question of a pardon for Nnamdi Kanu presents itself as a double-edged sword that cuts across ethnic, political, and moral lines. Since his extraordinary rendition to Nigeria in 2021, Kanu has remained in detention, sparking continuous agitation and counter-agitation across the nation. His supporters view him as a freedom fighter championing the cause of the marginalized Southeast, while his critics including my good self see him as a misguided secessionist whose activities have brought untold hardship to the very region he claims to liberate.

    The complexity of Kanu’s case lies in acknowledging certain uncomfortable truths. It is undeniable that Kanu was, at some point, pushed onto the path he undertook—a path that has led to scenarios from which the Southeast region has yet to fully recover. The sit-at-home orders, the violence, the economic stagnation, and the climate of fear that has characterized the region in recent years cannot be divorced from the IPOB phenomenon. The anger and frustration many feel toward what IPOB and Kanu have turned the Southeast into is legitimate and deeply felt.

    However, this anger must be tempered within certain historical perspectives and context. The agitation Kanu led is not fundamentally different from the wars waged against the Nigerian state by figures like Ganiyu Adams of the Oodua People’s Congress, Asari Dokubo, Ateke Tom, and Government Tompolo in the Niger Delta. These men took up arms, disrupted oil production, and challenged federal authority in ways that cost Nigeria billions of dollars and numerous lives. Yet today, they walk free. Some have even been co-opted into the very system they once fought against, receiving contracts and positions of influence. If the Nigerian state found it expedient to grant amnesty to these individuals, what makes Kanu’s case fundamentally different?

    One must sympathize with those who lost loved ones, properties, and businesses during the turbulent period of IPOB’s ascendancy. Their pain is real, their losses immeasurable, and their anger justified. However, to lay the entirety of this blame solely at Kanu’s feet would be to engage in the age-old practice of giving a dog a bad name just to hang it.

    Read Also: Police arrest IBBU student over alleged cybercrimes against Bago

    A significant number of the violent activities that terrorized the Southeast were carried out by charlatans and criminals who merely masqueraded under the IPOB banner. Like parasites that attach themselves to a larger organism, these criminal elements exploited the movement’s rhetoric and symbolism to advance their own nefarious agendas—armed robbery, kidnapping, extortion, and score-settling. To attribute every crime committed in the Southeast between 2020 and now to Kanu’s direct command or influence is not only factually inaccurate but also strategically counterproductive to finding lasting peace in the region.

    The continued detention of Kanu has not brought peace to the Southeast; if anything, it has become a rallying point for continued agitation and a justification for ongoing violence. The region’s economy continues to suffer, investor confidence remains low, and the psychological trauma inflicted on ordinary citizens compounds daily. A presidential pardon, conditional or otherwise, could be the circuit breaker needed to interrupt this cycle of violence and counter-violence.

     The Maryam Sanda  and Others Paradox

    Against this backdrop of continued detention for Kanu comes the shocking news of President Tinubu’s pardon for Maryam Sanda, convicted of murdering her husband in a particularly gruesome manner, along with other notable convicts. This pardon has raised eyebrows across the nation and exposed what many perceive as a fundamental inequity in how justice is administered.

    How does one reconcile granting clemency to a convicted murderer while keeping a secessionist agitator—whose direct culpability for specific violent acts remains contested—in indefinite detention? What criteria guide these presidential pardons? Is it political expediency, ethnic considerations, personal connections, or genuine considerations of justice and national interest?

    The Sanda pardon, in particular, has been viewed by many as a slap in the face of justice, especially to his maternal  family of the deceased and to associates who had seen her conviction as a rare instance where privilege could not shield one from the consequences of violent crime. The message it sends is deeply troubling: that in Nigeria, justice remains a respecter of persons, and presidential mercy is distributed not according to any transparent criteria but according to opaque considerations known only to those in the corridors of power, forget the talk about his father allegedly asking for mercy? What role did he play in Bilyaminu’s life and then one day he shows up and voila’ she gets a pardon!

    I am sorry, but maybe the president, oh sorry the Council of State should also consider a pardon for Akolade Arowolo and other persons standing trial for spousal murders too, who also can say if the Sanda pardon will not offer persons a blank cheque to murder their spouses and have their deadbeat fathers appear to plead for mercy.

    Whilst I must commend the president for the pardons to the likes of late Mamman Vasta and the late Ogoni 9, as a fan of the president, I am a bit flustered by the pardon to drug peddlers and notorious kidnappers, the presidency alleges that they are now good citizens but pray are we not setting a morally wrong precedent to a generation battling the ills of drug and substance abuse?

    Nigeria stands at a crossroads. The nation must decide whether it will continue down the path of selective justice and arbitrary mercy or whether it will establish clear, transparent, and equitable standards for presidential pardons. The cases of Nnamdi Kanu and Maryam Sanda, though different in nature, together illustrate the urgent need for this national conversation.

    If we have found it expedient to pardon those who made war against the state, surely we can find the wisdom to extend mercy to those whose agitations, however misguided, stemmed from legitimate grievances about marginalization and injustice.

    And if we are to grant pardons to convicted criminals, let it be done according to standards that the common citizen can understand and accept, not according to considerations that breed cynicism and erode what little faith remains in our justice system.

    The question before Nigeria is not just about Kanu or Sanda as individuals—it is about what kind of nation we aspire to be. A nation where justice is blind, or one where it merely squints selectively? The answer to this question will define us for generations to come.

  • Remembering the Asaba Massacre

    Remembering the Asaba Massacre

    On October 7, 1967, the streets of Asaba ran red with innocent blood. What began as a peaceful demonstration of loyalty to a unified Nigeria ended in one of the most brutal civilian massacres in the nation’s history. Over one thousand men and boys were systematically executed by advancing Nigerian federal troops in an atrocity that has remained largely unacknowledged for decades. This dark chapter in Nigeria’s civil war history demands not only remembrance but also official recognition and apology from the government.

    The descent into such madness occurred when Federal troops entered Asaba around October 5, 1967, during the Nigerian Civil War. The town, located on the western bank of the Niger River, found itself in the path of advancing forces seeking to push troops of the secessionist Republic of Biafra back into Biafran territory. What was to follow was three days of terror that would forever scar the community and leave an indelible stain on Nigeria’s national conscience.

    From the moment of their arrival, federal soldiers began ransacking houses and killing civilians indiscriminately, justifying their actions by claiming the victims were Biafran sympathizers. Reports indicate that several hundred innocent males were killed individually and in small groups at various locations throughout the town during these initial days of occupation. The violence was arbitrary, merciless, and seemingly without military purpose beyond instilling terror.

    Desperate to end the bloodshed, Asaba’s traditional leaders made a fateful decision. They summoned the townspeople to assemble on the morning of October 7, hoping that a mass demonstration of loyalty to “One Nigeria” would satisfy the federal troops and halt the killings. It was a gamble born of desperation, a plea for mercy robed in patriotic fervor.

    Hundreds of men, women, and children responded to the call. They dressed in Asaba’s ceremonial akwa ocha— the pristine white attire symbolizing peace and purity—and paraded along the main street. They sang, they danced, they chanted “One Nigeria” with voices raised in hope and supplication. It was a powerful display of unity, a community literally clothing itself in symbols of peace while proclaiming allegiance to the very nation whose soldiers were terrorizing them.

    Read Also: Olubadan: CCII, Mogajis, others honour Oba Ladoja at Jumat Thanksgiving

    Hope was however to transform into horror at a junction along the parade route. Federal troops ordered the separation of men and teenage boys from women and young children. The males were gathered in an open square at Ogbe-Osowa village, confusion and fear mounting as machine guns were revealed and trained upon the assembled crowd. Then came the order—allegedly from a Second-in-Command Major Ibrahim Taiwo—that would echo through generations; there is also mention of Murtala Mohammed, then a Colonel, as the man who gave the order.

    The machine guns delivered death with devastating finality to hundreds of unarmed men and boys, still dressed in their white ceremonial attire now stained crimson. Fathers and sons, brothers and uncles, neighbors and friends—all cut down in a hail of bullets. The air filled with screams, gunfire, and the acrid smell of cordite. By the time the shooting stopped, the square had become an abattoir, and the white garments of peace had become funeral shrouds.

    Most of the killing ended by October 7,although another round of killings would occur again in 1968. The trauma was only beginning. Some families managed to retrieve the bodies of their loved ones, carrying them home for private burial. Most victims, however, were unceremoniously dumped into mass graves, denied even the dignity of proper funeral rites. Many extended families lost dozens of men and boys in a single day, leaving behind widows, orphans, and a community hollowed out by grief.

    Federal troops occupied Asaba for many months following the massacre. During this period, much of the town was systematically destroyed. As was the practice by Federal troops during the war, women and girls were subjected to rape and sexual violence; some were forcibly “married” to soldiers in arrangements that were little more than legalized captivity. Large numbers of citizens fled Asaba, many not returning until after the war ended in 1970. Those who remained lived under occupation, surrounded by the ghosts of the murdered and the ruins of their former lives.

    The Asaba Massacre isn’t an isolated incident in Nigeria’s troubled history. The pogroms of July and September 1966, which targeted Igbo populations in northern Nigeria, preceded the massacre and helped precipitate the civil war itself. In more recent times, the killings in Odi in 1999 and Zaki Biam in 2001 demonstrated that the pattern of excessive military force against civilian populations continued long after the civil war ended. Each of these atrocities shares common features: disproportionate use of force, targeting of innocent civilians, and a disturbing lack of accountability for perpetrators.

    This pattern reveals a systemic problem in Nigeria’s approach to internal conflict and military conduct. Without acknowledgment and accountability, these atrocities become normalized, establishing dangerous precedents that enable future violations. The silence surrounding events like the Asaba Massacre sends a chilling message: that civilian lives can be extinguished with impunity when the state deems it expedient.

    It is long past time for the Nigerian government to formally apologize to the victims of the Asaba Massacre and their descendants. Such an apology would not erase the pain or resurrect the dead—nothing can accomplish that impossible feat. The women who were widowed that day will never again embrace their husbands. The children who watched their fathers fall will carry that trauma to their graves. The mass graves of Asaba bear witness to a wound that can never fully heal.

    Yet a formal apology matters profoundly. It represents official acknowledgment of wrong, a rejection of the narratives that sought to justify the unjustifiable. It validates the suffering of survivors who have lived for decades with their pain dismissed or ignored. It places the massacre in the national historical record not as a footnote or military necessity, but as the atrocity it was.

    Moreover, an apology could serve as a foundation for institutional reform. It should be accompanied by the establishment of robust legal frameworks and institutions designed to prevent such atrocities in the future. Any person—regardless of rank or position—who perpetrates similar actions against civilians must face severe legal consequences. The principle of “never again” requires not just words but structural safeguards, clear rules of engagement that protect civilian populations, and enforcement mechanisms with teeth.

    As the sun sets on the Niger River, casting long shadows across the town of Asaba, those shadows seem to whisper the names of the murdered—a litany of loss that echoes through the generations. The blood that soaked into the soil of Ogbe-Osowa square on that terrible October morning has long since dried, but the stain on Nigeria’s national conscience remains, indelible and accusing.

    To move forward as a nation, Nigeria must first look back with unflinching honesty. It must speak the names of the dead, acknowledge the magnitude of the wrong, and pledge with absolute conviction that such horrors will never again be visited upon its citizens. In that acknowledgment lies not weakness but strength—the strength to confront uncomfortable truths, the courage to make amends, and the wisdom to learn from history’s darkest chapters.

     Let their memory be a beacon calling Nigeria toward a future where lives are sacred, where accountability is assured, and where the machinery of state serves to protect rather than destroy. Only then can the souls of Asaba rest, and only then can Nigeria truly claim to have learned from the past and build a foundation worthy of the future its citizens deserve.

  • Independence Blues: Nigeria at 65: A broken promise?

    Independence Blues: Nigeria at 65: A broken promise?

    Sixty-five years ago, on October 1, 1960, the green-white-green flag was hoisted in Lagos amidst jubilation and boundless hope. With pride Nigeria stood at the threshold of greatness, a giant awakening from its colonial bonds.  The air was thick with promise—promises of prosperity, unity, and continental leadership. Recently, as we marked another independence anniversary, those promises still ring hollow, echoing through the years a collective disappointment, like a dirge for dreams deferred.

    The indices tell a story our patriotic songs and anthems cannot drown out. A nation blessed with abundant crude oil reserves remains trapped in fuel queues. A country with some of Africa’s most fertile lands cannot feed its people. A populace that produces some of the world’s brightest minds watches helplessly as millions of its youth flee in waves of desperation, seeking dignity in foreign lands. This is not the Nigeria our founding fathers envisioned. This is not the beacon of black excellence that Kwame Nkrumah, Jomo Kenyatta, Nelson Mandela and millions across the African diaspora looked toward with anticipation.

    The most painful indictment of post-independence Nigeria lies squarely at the feet of our political elite and leadership class—a brotherhood that has consistently chosen self-enrichment over nation-building. From military dictators to civilian kleptocrats, Nigeria’s leadership has exhibited a breathtaking capacity for plunder and an equally stunning deficit of vision.

    Our leaders inherited institutions, infrastructure, and an economy that, while nascent, held promise. What have they bequeathed to succeeding generations? An educational system in ruins, where universities are shuttered for months due to strikes while politicians’ children study abroad. A healthcare sector so decrepit that those who govern it flee to foreign hospitals at the first sign of illness. An infrastructure deficit so profound that businesses generate their own electricity, build their own roads, and provide their own security—essentially paying taxes for services never rendered.

    The political elite have perfected the art of primitive accumulation. They loot treasuries with impunity, stash billions in foreign accounts, and when caught, receive mere slaps on the wrist. They weaponize ethnicity and religion to divide the populace, ensuring that Nigerians fight each other rather than demand accountability from those who govern. They have transformed public service into private enterprise, viewing political office not as a call to duty but as an opportunity for wealth extraction.

    Read Also: Tinubu assures northern Christians of fairness

    Perhaps most tragically, this leadership class has failed in the fundamental task of nation-building. Sixty-five years after independence, Nigeria remains a mere geographical expression—a collection of ethnic nations held together by the fragile threads of mutual suspicion and the strong-arm of federal might. We have built no shared national identity, no unifying ethos beyond, corruption,  the naira and the Super Eagles. Our diversity, which should have been our strength, has been cynically exploited by leaders who benefit from our divisions.

    Yet, in this tale of national tragedy, the Nigerian citizen is also complicit, yes! You and I cannot claim innocence. We are not merely victims of bad leadership; we are, in many ways, its enablers. We have cultivated a political culture that rewards mediocrity and celebrates brigandage. We applaud politicians who throw rice and cash at us during campaigns, then act surprised when they steal billions once in office.

    The average Nigerian condemns corruption loudly—until their kinsman is the one being investigated. We demand merit and competence—except when it disadvantages our ethnic group or religious community. We cry out against injustice—unless we are the beneficiaries of that injustice. This moral schizophrenia has created a society where wrong is right if it favors “our own,” and right is irrelevant if it doesn’t serve our immediate interests.

    Our tolerance for dysfunction has become legendary. We have normalized the abnormal. We celebrate citizens who provide basic amenities in their communities—water, roads, electricity—things that governments should provide as a matter of course. We have become so accustomed to failure that we praise minimal competence as extraordinary achievement. We have set the bar so low that it now lies buried underground.

    Furthermore, too many Nigerians have become complicit in the system of exploitation. From the civil servant who demands bribes to process legitimate documents, to the police officer who extorts motorists at checkpoints, to the lecturer who demands gratification for grades—corruption has metastasized from the political class into the social fabric. We have created a society where cutting corners is celebrated as smartness, and integrity is dismissed as foolishness.

    But Nigeria need not remain trapped in this cycle of mediocrity and failure. The dreams of our founding fathers—Nnamdi Azikiwe, Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello, and others—were not foolish fantasies, nor were they tales of Sugar Candy land. They were achievable visions grounded in Nigeria’s enormous potential. What we lack is not resources or capability, but the political will and moral courage to build the nation we deserve.

    The founding fathers believed in Nigeria. Marcus Garvey dreamed of it. W.E.B. Du Bois anticipated its greatness. Millions of black people worldwide once looked to Nigeria as proof that black self-governance could succeed, that we could build nations rivaling any in the world. That faith, though battered, is not dead. But it requires resurrection through action.

    This resurrection demands transformative leadership that prioritizes education, healthcare, infrastructure, and security. It requires leaders who understand that development is not about white-elephant projects but about creating systems that work for ordinary citizens. It demands an end to impunity and the establishment of true accountability. Most fundamentally, it requires a commitment to building a genuine nation where every citizen, regardless of ethnicity or religion, feels valued and protected.

    Sixty-five years of failure is enough. Nigerians deserve better. Africa deserves a Nigeria that fulfills its promise. The world deserves a  black nation that will raise it’s brows at the maltreatment of any black man in any part of the world. The question is whether those in positions of power and influence—political leaders, business elites, traditional rulers, religious leaders, and every citizen—have the courage to make it happen.

    The independence blues need not be our permanent state. But changing the tune requires each Nigerian to demand more from our leaders and from ourselves. The giant of Africa must finally awaken, not to rhetoric and empty promises, but to purposeful action and genuine transformation. Our founding fathers lit a torch sixty-five years ago. It is time we stopped letting it flicker and instead let it blaze, illuminating a path to the Nigeria that was promised, the Nigeria that is possible, the Nigeria that must be.

  • Why Anambra State deserves Ukachukwu: The case for pragmatic leadership

    Why Anambra State deserves Ukachukwu: The case for pragmatic leadership

    Anambra State stands at a critical juncture in its developmental trajectory. Despite receiving unprecedented resource allocation under the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration—quadruple what the last three administrations received in 19 years—the state’s performance under Governor Chukwuma Soludo has been deeply concerning. The recently released 2025 State Performance Index starkly illustrates this decline, with Anambra plummeting from 8th position in 2024 to 34th out of 36 states—a precipitous fall of 26 positions representing one of the steepest declines in the index.

    This dramatic ranking decline reflects systemic failures across multiple governance indicators. In Education and Infrastructure, Anambra ranked a distant 33rd relative to population size, indicating substantial gaps in educational facilities and resources. Capital Expenditure placed the state in 33rd position for per capita capital spending, suggesting severely limited reinvestment in critical infrastructure despite the massive federal allocations received.

    Public Health Delivery, a cornerstone of effective governance, witnessed the state lagging at 30th place. Most damning is the “State Attractiveness” metric, where Anambra was identified among the least preferred destinations for relocation, sharing this dubious distinction with Bayelsa and bandit-ridden Zamfara states. Perhaps most telling, despite the state’s immense potential and human capital, Anambra has failed to attract a single dollar in foreign direct investment since Soludo’s administration began.

    Read Also: Advocacy group celebrates Nigeria’s next generation of game changers

    Security remains paramount across southeastern Nigeria, yet Governor Soludo’s approach has been particularly troubling. While counterpart governors have deployed comprehensive security strategies, Soludo has relied on deploying untrained youths as his answer to the security conundrum. These operatives, lacking proper training and oversight, have been documented harassing innocent citizens and denigrating women through degrading searches. This approach has transformed Anambra into what resembles Hobbes’s description of life as “nasty and brutish.”

    Governor Soludo’s development philosophy raises serious questions about resource allocation. An academic leader touting a refurbished New Government House and Amusement Park as important to the state’s development index, while neglecting to build power plants that could serve Anambra’s industrial and commercial capacity, represents a fundamental misunderstanding of development priorities. States like Akwa Ibom have demonstrated the importance of addressing energy poverty through strategic power projects—a lesson seemingly lost on the current administration.

     The Ukachukwu Alternative

    Prince Dr. Nicholas Ukachukwu (MFR) represents a dialectical opposite to the current technocratic model that has failed Anambra. While he may not possess the academic hauteur of his opponent, history demonstrates that brilliant administrators were often not intellectuals in their own right, yet they achieved marvels where intellectuals failed. What benefit derives from having an intellectual governor whose theoretical frameworks have consistently failed to uplift Anambra society?

    Ukachukwu’s approach emphasizes practical problem-solving, stakeholder management, and resource allocation wisdom—qualities essential for effective governance. His track record speaks volumes: aside from his tenure as Chairman of Abuja Municipal Area Council and four years as a Representative member, no politician in the state, save the late Senator Ifeanyi Ubah, has touched lives like Ukachukwu has consistently done.

    His selection of Senator Uche Ekwunife as running mate further demonstrates strategic political wisdom, creating a formidable ticket that has clearly unsettled the current administration, as evidenced by recent smear campaigns—the desperate lurch of a failed administration running scared of being voted out.

  • Constitutional review: The challenge before National Assembly

    Constitutional review: The challenge before National Assembly

    Nigeria’s 1999 Constitution, despite serving as the supreme law for over two decades, faces mounting criticism for its inadequacy in addressing the complex realities of modern Nigeria. As the National Assembly’s Constitutional Review Committees grapple with the monumental task of reform, they must confront fundamental questions about federalism, such as resource control, state police  and democratic governance that have plagued the nation since independence.

    The 1999 Constitution, hurriedly crafted during the military-to-civilian transition, bears the hallmarks of its military origins. Critics argue that it created an overly centralized federal system that contradicts the principles of true federalism. This hyper-centralization has manifested in various ways: an over-bloated federal government that controls critical sectors like education, healthcare, and natural resources that should ideally be managed by states and local governments.

    The constitution’s deficiencies have also contributed to persistent challenges including ethnic tensions, resource conflicts, security crises, and economic underdevelopment. The current structure concentrates power in Abuja while starving states and local governments of the autonomy and resources necessary for progressive and meaningful development. This has created a dependency syndrome where states rely heavily on federal allocations rather than developing their internal revenue generation capacity as well as charting their own development as the component regions did in the 60’s prior to the coups of 1966.

    Eminent Nigerians such as The  Patriots, a group of distinguished Nigerians including elder statesmen like Chief Emeka Anyaoku, have consistently advocated for restructuring Nigeria into a true federal system. Their proposals center on devolving powers from the federal government to states and regions, allowing for greater autonomy in governance, resource management, and development strategies.

    Read Also: Ajaero’s planned inauguration of caretaker committee splits Edo NLC

    The Constitutional Review Committees should consider adopting a more decentralized federal structure similar to successful federations like Germany, Canada, or Australia. This would involve transferring significant legislative powers from the exclusive legislative list to the concurrent or residual lists, enabling states to legislate on matters affecting their local circumstances.

    One of the most contentious issues in Nigeria’s political discourse is resource control. The current constitution grants the federal government control over natural resources, creating a rentier state mentality and fueling conflicts in resource-rich regions. The Niger Delta crisis, Boko Haram insurgency, and farmer-herder conflicts all have roots in resource control disputes.

    The Constitutional Review Committees should consider implementing a more equitable resource control framework. This could include ensuring a 40/30/30 formula between the oil and gas-producing Local Government Areas, the states in which they are domiciled and the center current, while also recognizing other natural resources like solid minerals. Additionally, Local Government Areas within states should have greater control over resources found within their territories, subject to appropriate federal oversight and environmental regulations, this way Nigeria would unleash it’s development potentials as not only would states compete amongst themselves , such competition would trickle down to the local governments spurring them to initiate policies for massive growth.

    Local governments in Nigeria exist more in name than in substance, largely due to constitutional provisions that make them appendages of state governments. The Constitution Review Committees should grant full autonomy to local governments, not by  direct funding from the federation account but by the suggestions above, the  constitutional review process should also ensure protection from arbitrary dissolution, and clear delineation of functions.

    This reform would bring governance closer to the people, improve service delivery at the grassroots level, and reduce the burden on state and federal governments. Local governments should also have constitutional powers to generate revenue through taxes, licenses, and fees within their jurisdictions.

    On electoral reforms and elections, the  1999 Constitution’s electoral provisions require significant updates to address contemporary challenges. The Constitutional Review Committees should consider incorporating provisions for electronic voting, diaspora voting, and independent candidacy. The constitution should also strengthen democratic institutions like INEC, giving them full financial and operational autonomy.

    The winner-takes-all electoral system has contributed to political tensions and violence. The committees should explore alternative electoral systems like proportional representation or the alternative vote system that could promote more inclusive governance and reduce electoral conflicts.

    Nigeria’s security challenges demand a fundamental review of the constitutional provisions governing security agencies. The current centralized security system has proven inadequate in addressing diverse security threats across the country’s vast territory.

    The constitution should provide for state and regional security outfits with clearly defined roles and coordination mechanisms with federal security agencies. This would enable more responsive and context-specific security solutions while maintaining national coordination for cross-border and national security threats.

    The judiciary requires constitutional strengthening to ensure its independence and effectiveness. The Constitutional Review Committees should consider provisions for autonomous funding of the judiciary, transparent appointment processes for judicial officers, and enhanced disciplinary mechanisms.

    The constitution should also address the multiplicity of courts and jurisdictions that often create conflicts and delays in the administration of justice. A more streamlined judicial system with clear hierarchies and jurisdictions would improve access to justice for ordinary Nigerians.

    To achieve the above, The Constitutional Review Committees must ensure broad-based consultation with all segments of Nigerian society. This should include traditional rulers, civil society organizations, professional bodies, religious groups, women’s organizations, and youth groups. The Patriots and similar groups of elder statesmen should be given prominent roles in providing guidance based on their extensive experience and institutional memory.

    Regional and zonal public hearings, I understand, have been held, however the process of collation and deliberation  should be transparent, with regular updates to the public on progress and key decisions. Likewise, given the complexity of constitutional reform, the committees should consider a phased implementation approach. Priority should be given to reforms that address the most pressing national challenges, such as security, resource control, and local government autonomy.

    Less controversial reforms could be implemented first to build momentum and public confidence in the process, while more complex issues requiring broader consensus could be addressed in subsequent phases.

    I also recommend  a comprehensive public education campaign should accompany the constitutional review process. Many Nigerians lack adequate understanding of constitutional provisions and their implications. The committees should partner with civil society organizations, media houses, and educational institutions to educate the public about proposed reforms and their benefits.

    The task before the National Assembly’s Constitutional Review Committees is both challenging and historic. They have the opportunity to address fundamental structural problems that have hindered Nigeria’s development and democratic consolidation. Success requires political will, broad consultation, and commitment to putting national interest above partisan considerations.

    The committees must learn from previous unsuccessful attempts at constitutional reform and adopt strategies that ensure popular ownership of the process. By incorporating insights from groups like the Patriots and other stakeholders, they can craft a constitution that truly reflects Nigeria’s diversity while providing a framework for unity, progress, and prosperity.

    The time for incremental changes has passed. Nigeria needs transformative constitutional reforms that will position the country for greatness in the 21st century. The Constitutional Review Committees hold the key to unlocking Nigeria’s potential through a constitution that works for all Nigerians.