The Nation Newspaper

Category: Emmanuel Oladesu

  • Southwest’s response to security emergency

    Southwest’s response to security emergency

    When the six governors of the Southwest states of Oyo, Ondo, Ogun, Osun, Ekiti, Lagos converged on Ibadan, its regional headquarters, for strategic security deliberations during the week, they were taking a cue from the wisdom of their forefathers during the pre-colonial and colonial days.

    Then, kingdoms were being conquered and chiefdoms subdued. Land and crowns were factors in the inter-tribal wars of yore. But later, the sea and the economic advantages it conferred on Yoruba land drew the envy of some powerful warmongers from distant tribes.

    Yoruba, the vast territory of the then Alaafin, came under siege. The tormentors depended on the powers of their horses, spears, bows, and arrows. They coveted the land they saw flourishing with the best of nature. Few among the Yoruba warriors had horses too. They could only face the onslaught with Dane guns, cutlasses, and well-crafted sticks called ponpo. Both sides were also known for possessing charms.

    Everybody’s attention, from Lagos to Akoko, Igbomina to Egba, Ebolo to Ijebu, and Oyo to Ondo, was in the war of resistance. Led by the brave Ibadan warriors, the Yoruba of Ekiti, Oyo, Akoko, Remo, Ijebu, Igbomina, Ijesa, Popo, and Isabe put their minor differences aside and confronted their common enemy, who wanted to annex their fatherland and impose an alien religious and political administration on their towns and villages.

    It was the battle of Osogbo in 1840 when the ambition of the jihadists to expand their territory collapsed. The Yoruba army from Ibadan was strengthened by their strong will, capacity, unity, and resolve to preserve their identity, their history and heritage. The soldiers fought with ideas and knowledge, propelled by the desire to defend their nation with the last drop of blood. The rest, as it is said, is history.

    Politically, the Southwest of today is not one, but the threat to the zone does not discriminate. It is gratifying that the Southwest Governors’ Forum (SGF) is proactive. This is not a time for rhetoric. The governors, like their illustrious grandsires who took their destiny in their hands, are taking the bull by the horns. But speed is required as any further delay could jeopardise the existing arrangement.

     If the ideas canvassed by its former leader, the late Rotimi Akeredolu, had seen the light of day, the region would today boast of a formidable regional security outfit capable of rising to the occasion.

    Nevertheless, the legacy of Amotekun has endured, reminding potential interlopers of a resistant apparatus that can marginally withstand a dosage of security challenges in regional interest.

    Governors Babajide Sanwo-Olu (Lagos State), Seyi Makinde (Oyo), Dapo Abiodun (Ogun), Lucky Aiyedatiwa (Ondo), Biodun Oyebanji (Ekiti), and Ademola Adeleke (Osun), who was represented by his deputy, Kola Adewusi, were in sober reflection, conscious of the fact that the region can only sleep on guard to its peril.

    The Yoruba kith and kin suffer in Eruku and Isapa in Kwara State, which is contiguous to Ekiti, Ondo, and Osun. It is a signal that danger is looming in the neighbourhood.

    The governors know that the bandits are not Yoruba. The total agenda of the evil men is unknown but bold. There is concrete evidence suggesting that the kidnapping business is booming. Others insinuate that the region’s vast natural endowments are the targets. Yet, others speculate that banditry and terrorism come with a message of religious subjugation. The Yoruba are the most religiously tolerant people with attendant peace across the region. They would never allow the merchants of chaos to occupy an inch of their land for a purpose that breaches the ethos of the region’s religious finesse.

    If the identities of the bandits, their sponsors, sources of funding, and other motivations are known in some quarters, it would be relatively easier to devise solutions.

    Yet, these cannot be said to be too hidden in a troubled country where some people have boldly come out to present themselves as negotiators and advocates of amnesty for terrorists and other known killers. The basic fact is that those who have pushed the country into a war have internal collaborators who maximally profit from insurgency.

    Compared to other regions, particularly the three northern zones, there is relative peace in the Southwest. The zone has plans for regional progress and prosperity, and the people look forward to the commencement of operations by the Southwest Development Commission, which is expected to be a model to its counterparts in the remaining five regions.

    The peace in the Southwest, therefore, should not be allowed to be compromised. The region is one, unique, and indivisible entity with a history of political accommodation and religious tolerance. The cohesion of the region is underscored by its conglomerado, Oodua Investment, jointly owned. Other regions can only copy this primal model.

    Read Also: Tinubu, First Lady, Shetimma, hail PFN at 40

    What Sanwo-Olu and his compatriots have done is to embark on a bold, pre-emptive, and strategic move to forestall terrorism incursion into the Southwest from the contiguous region.

    If there is a crisis in Ekiti, Ondo, or Osun, it has implications for Lagos, Oyo, and Ogun, and vice versa. That is why the leaders are mobilising ideas and resources to invest in prevention instead of cure.

    That Southwest is now setting up a Regional Security Fund under the Development Agenda for Western Nigeria (DAWN) Commission is salutary. The initiative is just beginning to catch up with the proposals envisioned by Lagos State over a decade ago. Nigeria should acknowledge the reality that a regional security outfit, once halted by the Muhammadu Buhari government but now bolstered by the right technological equipment, can indeed make a difference.

    This proposed regional security architecture, backed by a ‘Joint Security Intelligence Sharing and Communication Platform,’ would enhance early detection of threats, strange movements, and intended onslaught. The establishment of a live, digital intelligence-sharing platform among the six states would also enhance a collective surveillance due to the exchange of threat notifications, incident logs, and traveller and cargo alerts, resulting in a coordinated state-to-state rapid response.

    Also, an improved forest surveillance by the Nigerian Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), hunters, Amotekun Corps members and other security agencies is likely to flush out criminals who hide in the bushes.

    Terrorists do not strike without first spying on the targeted environment. They plan and assess their chances of escape ahead of carrying out their evil enterprise. Thus, vigilance is key.

    Since the Southwest is ready to provide the required personnel, the Federal Government should not wait any longer before deploying the forest guards.

    In the Southwest are strange faces, including herders whose identities and missions are unknown. There is freedom of movement, but this emergency time calls for the regulation of interstate migration, as proposed by the governors. If not well checked, it could actually snowball into a conduit for insecurity. As highlighted, it would involve stricter border or boundary monitoring, data collection and self-identification. This is why each of the six states would now work with the National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) for proper identification.

    A contributory factor to banditry is the porous borders. Over 1,000 of them are unguarded, serving as easy routes for systematic invasion by foreigners who come in to torment Nigerians in their land. Some of the foreigners are involved in illegal mining activities, which “threaten environmental safety, public health and security”.

    If there is a comprehensive licensing framework, monitoring mechanisms, and strict enforcement actions, as proposed by the governors, violators who want to perpetrate violent crimes under the guise of mining would be effectively checked.

    There is also the policing of the land, which is a critical issue. Almost three decades ago, the Southwest led the way in the clamour for restructuring and decentralisation of the security apparatus. Under the Buhari administration, the governors established a regional security outfit that was watered down by elements who uncritically perceived it as a signpost to regional autonomy within the federation.

    The presidential nod for the creation of state police has validated the claim of critics who have pointed out that the current defective and centralised policing structure is inadequate for a vast federal country like Nigeria. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s position on the issue makes state police optional. But it is an answered prayer for the six governors who are now expected to seize the opportunity, following the accelerated constitutional review by the National Assembly.

    It also implies that at the state level, more Southwesterners would be recruited, trained, and deployed within their region of birth to provide security and have a sense of patriotism and emotional attachment to their region and the nation-state.

    The anticipated constitution review is to pave the way for multi-layered policing. The relationship between the centralised and state police would have to be determined, and measures to guard against abuse at the sub-national level put in place.

    The Southwest appears to be rising to the occasion and the governors deserve the support of all and sundry – traditional rulers, who once lost four members to banditry in Ekiti; religious leaders whose colleagues have been victims in the North; security agencies who deserve continuous praise for facing the fire on the battle field; corporate organisations that need a conducive atmosphere to thrive; community development associations, and youths who are the future leaders of the nation.

  • Wadata House of Commotion

    Wadata House of Commotion

    It was an ugly spectacle. Dozens of men in well-laundered dresses and shimmering shoes filed out in the morning to enter the national secretariat of their party, Wadata Plaza, in the Zone 5 area of Abuja, for a meeting. They dressed like partygoers; some tucked their hands in the pockets of their Sunday dresses; others looked upset. There was hardly an exchange of banters expected from adults draped in such outfits befitting an important occasion. As they lined up to enter the beleaguered building, they were confronted by armed security men who had taken positions in different parts of the building and its surroundings. The security operatives, mostly policemen in battle gear, cut the image of men on a mission to repel an envisaged confrontation. Within minutes, there was pandemonium. The security agents refused to open the gate for some of the party men to enter the building. It became clear that the policemen were on an instruction to stop the rival politicians from entering the plaza. Obviously, one faction was using its power over the other to claim legitimacy for the landlord of Wadata Plaza. But the other faction was poised for resistance. There was a brawl. Some of the gentlemen who looked trim like guests at a wedding a few minutes earlier were hauled off the floor and thrown out like gate crashers.      

    The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) was fighting the PDP.

    Since losing the central power in 2015, the party has been experiencing the dark side of life. The platform has not got its bearings right since then.

    Ahead of 2027, its aggrieved, angered, divided, and disorganised leaders are locked in acrimony. They dissipate so much energy to worsen the party’s internal conflicts instead of presenting themselves as a united force ready for ready to form a formidable opposition.

    Reconciliation has totally broken down and more chieftains are cleverly jumping out of the sinking ship. That is now the fate of a party that loomed large for 16 years; the platform that produced three presidents – Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Yar’Adua, and Goodluck Jonathan.

    The PDP collapsed during the 2022 presidential primary. The factors in that collapse are Atiku Abubakar and Waziri Tambuwal, serial defectors and returnees to the party; Wike, a cantarkerous, ambitious moneybag and an acclaimed party financier; and Iyorchia Ayu, an ethnically-inclined and regionally-biased national party chairman who pronounced the former Sokoto governor as the hero of the presidential convention, following the success of an intra-party coup that left the zoning question unanswered.

    Some critics fear that the nation might be moving towards a gradual descent into a one-party state. The apprehension is unfounded as the constitution clearly makes Nigeria a multi-party, federal democracy. However, the opposition that should give operative content to the constitutional provision is floundering. That 27-year-old PDP is unable to put its house in order and reposition itself as a formidable alternative route is a disservice to the party system and plural democracy.

    READ ALSO: Policy flip-flops, power crisis behind North’s stunted growth, rising insecurity — Dangote

    Although its factional convention was ill-timed and unnecessary, the Damagun group, backed by the three musketeers – Governors Seyi Makinde of Oyo State, Bala Mohammed of Bauchi, and Ahmadu Fintiri of Adamawa – insisted on the thoughtless convention, despite serious warnings by discerning party stalwarts that the atmosphere was not right and more strategies were required to cross some hurdles.

    Their suggestion that a national caretaker committee saddled with the responsibility of uniting the two divides was blatantly and uncritically ignored. Sensing the looming disaster, they stayed away.

    Makinde appeared to be the moving spirit. He was the host and big financier who thought that the PDP should be preserved as an opposition that can bounce back. That altruism is polluted by a glaring presidential ambition, which is not a sin, but a source of concealed envy among his peers.

    The fourth governor, Caleb Mutfwang of Plateau, was like an observer at the Ibadan gathering. The suspicion that his body is in the party while his soul is elsewhere has continued to grow. Right there at Adamasingba Stadium, the lack of factional cohesion also came to the fore.

     The governors, definitely, were confused. The discomfort was visible. There was the feeling that something was amiss.

    Midway, the convention ran into turbulence. The convention organising committee chairman, Fintiri, detected an error. He sought to correct it, but he failed to garner support. It paled into a failure of courage. The Adamawa helmsman reasoned that since officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) were not on the ground to witness the jamboree, there was no point going ahead with the exercise.

    He, therefore, threw the challenge at the delegates, who barely understood the implications. When another party leader mounted the podium to move a motion that the convention should continue, the crowd chorused “yes.” The opportunity for self-correction was bungled.

    But the governors were not actually in one accord too. They were sharply divided over the critical matter of expulsion targeted at certain recalcitrant party colleagues, whose moles also witnessed the Ibadan gathering.

    Many delegates, in utter gullibility, cheered the expulsion of 11 chieftains, including Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike, National Secretary Senator Samuel Anyanwu, former Ekiti State Governor Ayodele Fayose, and National Organising Secretary Umar Bature.

    But two governors frowned. Although they could not openly protest, they rejected the dismissal on their X handles.

    The lack of agreement or cohesion set tongues wagging among other top leaders who applauded the rustication but could not find an explanation for its rejection by Fintiri and Mutfwang.

    The Adamawa governor, a good friend of Wike, feared that the action could escalate the crisis, lead to further disintegration of the party and block the path to unity. His Plateau counterpart gave a better explanation. He said the expulsion was never discussed at any meeting of the seven-member PDP governors’ forum and the National Executive Committee (NEC).

    That the two governors promptly dissociated themselves from the sanction underscored the lack of synergy and team spirit, and the absence of mutual understanding among the arrowheads or undertakers, as they are now aptly described, and unwillingness to collaborate without basis.

    It means that PDP battles with multiple cracks, as manifested by the exit of the Atiku group to form a camouflage coalition, using African Democratic Congress (ADC) as a borrowed platform; the split into two factions, led by Wike/Anyanwu and Damagum/Turaki; and the manifestation of suspicion, distrust and broken confidence among members of the PDP Governors’ Forum.

    At issue is the antagonist interest driving the different actions and positions taken by the warring PDP leaders. The core issue they are all responding to is the 2027 election. Today, they are working at cross purposes. After the presidential poll, which the PDP is not preparing to win, the gladiators would then retrace their steps from the perfidy, close ranks and embrace the reality that unity is the strength of a political party.

    The question is: why can’t they come together now instead of coming together after the next poll? Can the three factions – Atiku of ADC, Wike/Anyanwu, and Damagum/Turaki – really do without one another?

    Consequently, the convention paved the way for a further disaster instead of clearing the pathway to unity and understanding. It was organised amid contrasting court judgments, with the various armchair commentators within PDP indulging in false interpretations.

    A Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice James Omotosho, halted the preparations on the ground that they violated the PDP constitution and the Electoral Act.

    Another Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled that the congress should not hold until former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido, who was excluded from the chairmanship contest, is allowed to participate. The two court rulings were ignored.

    But there was a cover. Party leaders leaned on the ex parte order delivered by Justice Ladiran Akintola of the Ibadan High Court, granted and later extended till December 8, when the tenure of Damagum and his divided NWC will expire.

    That will be a defining day for the party in distress.

    But there is a puzzle begging for a solution: would Turaki or Abdulrahman assume the reins as national chairman or acting national chairman?

    Neither of the two factional leaders has been recognised by INEC, despite their show of shame on Monday at the Wadata Plaza national secretariat of the party, where their supporters engaged in a physical combat.

    The solution, therefore, would lie with the courts, where legal fireworks are expected to resume next month. The claim of Damagun/Turaki camp is that the Supreme Court had ruled that the national convention is an internal affair and cannot be entertained by the court.

    But the Wike/Anyanwu group has insisted that the process and provisions outlined by the party’s constitution and the Electoral Act should not be violated. The Wike/Anyanwu faction is being suspected by the Damagun/Anyanwu faction because Wike has declared his support for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for a second term. Lamido continues to cry foul, saying the convention that excluded him was held in error by “small boys” who were not around when he and other gerontocrats were sweating to form the party in 1998, contrary to the judgment in his favour.

    The division is likely to jeopardise the preparations for the Osun State governorship primary. Who conducts the primary between Turaki and Abdulrahman? Again, only the court can decide. But Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke, a PDP chieftain, is not leaving anything to chance. His application for defection has been turned down by the All Progressives Congress (APC) chapter. He has put on his thinking cap, liaising with other mushroom parties in a bid to avoid becoming “partyless”.

    So far, no politician of repute has defected to the PDP. The main opposition party is being avoided like a plague, despite its vast taproots across the 774 local governments.

    Will the party survive the current storm and stress? Only time, the silent monitor of human follies and foibles, will tell.

  • Vote-buying: A threat to democracy

    Vote-buying: A threat to democracy

    A democracy is as rugged or fragile as its election, the major pillar that props up the government of the people by the people and for the people. A compromised election is like a structure built with fake materials. It is only a matter of time before it crumbles. Thus, the credibility of an election lies with the people – all those who contribute the materials that are mixed to build the system. The politicians, the electoral umpire’s officials, the security agents, the voters, and the agents of the political parties involved in the conduct of the polls determine the extent of an election’s integrity or otherwise.

    Nations can dismantle their democracy after disputed elections, often due to the menace of vote-buying.

    But how does this menace creep into an election? How do politicians perceive this malpractice? What are the consequences of vote-buying on democracy? How could a nation systematically ease the menace out of its elections?

    Vote-buying, which connotes the intent to alter political behaviour and swing the votes through financial inducement, is perhaps the greatest threat to democratic elections in the country and many other parts of the world. For Nigeria, it has been conjoined with the electoral system, like Siamese twins. It is an affront on the sanctity of the ballot box; a special case of influence that elicits instant compliance at polling booths on election day, with severe losses to the unsuspecting or helpless opponents who may not be able to match the deep purse of desperate rivals, particularly the highest bidder.

    Many believe that this form of bribery is immoral, yet they find it irresistible. But sometimes, vote-buying is exaggerated. These days, it is also employed as a weapon of blackmail to discredit the integrity of a substantially free and fair election.

    At a time the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is working hard to deliver credible elections, vote-buying creates a dent on the nation’s electoral scorecard. It is a peculiar style of electoral fraud that may continue to defy solution, unless all stakeholders make concerted efforts to weed it out of the system, with the honest intention that it is an ill will that does no one any good. It may affect Part A today; tomorrow, it might wreck Party B. Vote-buying is a tsunami that spares no party. 

    The umpire is helpless in the face of the monetisation of voting before, during, and even after the electorate has cast their ballot. It lacks the power to curb the menace, which is the last trick of politicians to secure victory through the back door.

    Efforts by security agencies to also track the deviant behaviour have not succeeded to a large extent.

    It is a complex matter. Not all forms of vote-buying can be easily interrogated, especially when the shoddy action may not happen in broad daylight or very close to the polling booths during elections.

    Many have been arrested and prosecuted for electoral offences, such as ballot stuffing, hijacking of voting materials, thuggery, falsification of results, disruption of collation and violence. But vote-buyers often escape the eagle eyes of the law. While a few arrests were made in past electoral seasons, the trial of suspects never saw the light of day.

    As Nigeria began to experience political stability, the competition for power became stiffer. The urge to occupy political seats became more attractive and voters started making demands from politicians, both popular and unpopular, beyond their constitutional responsibilities of defending public welfare. The perception is that the money is with the politicians to spend.

    The gap between the political class and the voting public widened and interactions have paled into periodic engagements during electioneering. Those in power swim in opulence and the only way to warm themselves to the electorate is through clientelism, accompanied by the promise of cosmetic material empowerment in the post-election period.

    A few years ago, “di’bo koo se’be” (vote to cook soup) became a popular slogan of mobilisation in a part of the country. Attention shifted from previous achievements of political actors and campaign promises to the expectation of crumbs falling from the tables of power mongers. Monetary exchanges, distribution of food, and goods, particularly clothing materials, became the vogue. No matter how popular a candidate is now, party members believe that it is risky to dismiss patronage politics with a wave of the hand. Stomach infrastructure is accorded priority.

    Read Also: The missing opposition: Why Nigeria’s democracy is losing its pulse

    Buying and selling of votes is not peculiar to Nigeria. But it is a serious political infection that undermines the predictive value of elections and the accuracy of electoral outcomes. It is a secret affair, often concealed from the public glare. Direct buyers may not be candidates, but their skilled and overzealous agents who have acquired informal training on how to target and persuade potential voters, without the security agents knowing the plot.

    The agents are armed with a voter register, which enhances their spade work. They act as legitimate canvassers ahead of elections, and in the process of mobilisation, introduce the dimension of inducement.

    An essential feature of vote-buying is bargaining. The buyer and seller are familiar with each other because they reside in the same community. Clever voters engage in double dealings by playing along with agents of multiple candidates, although each voter has only one vote to donate. Ultimately, the highest bidder is favoured.

    In the rural areas, innocent elderly voters who are financially induced remain faithful to the deal. Although they are often aware that they mortage their conscience, they see it as a new way of life, especially when they see their neighbours also partaking in the sharing of money

    Generally, certain populations are clearly susceptible to accepting gifts or other forms of compensation in exchange for votes. Poverty is a factor, as vote-buying is targeted at people from the lower socio-economic stratum of society.

    The involvement of wealthy people raises concern about inordinate influence peddling. The high class and patrons of candidates and parties participate as middlemen by deploying their clout to organise, mobilise, and distribute money on behalf of the candidates to those in the neighbourhood who look up to them in the community as influencers.

    As voters accept money from them, they tend to impose on the electorate the obligation of compliance. As they vote for the particular candidate after collecting money, the rival candidate is deprived of the legitimate right to a fair contest. But in some cases, vote buyers also target those who have made up their minds to vote for only those who are ready to pay them, without the agents knowing.

    In the past, car booths of vote buyers were loaded with cash. These days, technology makes it easier. The money is transferred to the bank accounts of voters. This is evidence that the agents really target the voters. It also ensures accountability.

    The monitoring of compliance is challenging. It is a game. The players are locked in the infamy. Some voters renege on their promise to vote for a particular politician,  and criminals who induce them with money cannot report to the police. Some voters manage to enter the polling booth with their phones to snap the ballot paper, which serves as evidence of a duty fully discharged.

    Usually, the efficacy of vote-buying is measured by the outcome. Losers become winners, and democratic decline is inadvertently celebrated in their camps. But integrity is at stake. This is the first consequence of the malpractice.

    Also, popular votes cannot be ascertained and the genuineness of the authentic winner is suspect. To that extent, there is no popular choice. The autonomy or independence of voters is destroyed when voting behaviour is shaped by the crumbs falling off the tables of unpatriotic politicians.

    The greatest danger is the post-election behaviour of the winner. He sees an election as an investment that should enable him to garner returns. It is the baseline for graft in high places and bad governance.

    The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) is usually on the prowl during the off-cycle elections. During the general elections, the commission’s officials cannot go round all the voting units. They lack the resources – money, men, and materials.

    Obviously, an election is a joint responsibility involving all the stakeholders – candidates, parties, government, security agencies, traditional institutions, and the electorate. All hands must be on deck to sanitise the electoral system.

    INEC has called for the setting up of a special electoral tribunal for the trial of electoral offenders. It is up to the National Assembly to bring it into fruition. But the most effective solution is to educate the voters on the danger of selling their franchise to the highest bidder. The more enlightened electorate we have, the fewer cases of vote-buying we will record. The fewer case of the malpractice we record, the stronger this pillar of democracy will become.

  • Nigeria and the challenging times

    Nigeria and the challenging times

    On many occasions, the world’s most populous black nation, Nigeria, has passed through  dreadful and challenging moments that taxed the ability of its successive leaders and the adaptive capabilities of its diverse people.

    The country survived the mistrust of the 1950s, the political upheaval of the turbulent sixties, the destructive civil war, the dark period of the botched Third Republic, years of pestilence and global recession, and predictions of disintegration by foreign agencies.

    Nigeria’s major problem today is insecurity, occasioned by the persistent activities of terrorists, bandits, cattle rustlers, commercial kidnappers targeting ransom, and other agents of violence across the North.

    The threats to national peace by these unpatriotic elements are worrisome. Also disheartening are other forms of inhumanity of man to man in the South, as manifested by the activities of armed robbers, ritual killers and deadly ‘sit-at-home’ enforcers who maim, kill and destroy socio-economic activities.

    Peace has taken flight in many communities where the rich and the commoners hitherto coexisted in harmony. Murders are on the increase, despite efforts by the government to halt the embarrassing trend. Everybody is a target, a potential victim – physically, socially, economically and emotionally – whether Christians or Muslims.

    Across the globe, attention may have shifted to Nigeria, now a troubled nation that still shoulders enormous regional and continental responsibilities, despite the constraints.

    READ ALSO: ​FULL FACTS: New U.S. bill titled: “Nigeria Religious Freedom Accountability Act of 2025” by Senator Ted Cruz

    The searchlight and warning by the United States President Donald Trump may, in the final analysis, be a blessing in disguise. It is like a renewed wake-up call from afar in a world that has become a global village. The message of the American leader to Nigerian leaders is that they should put their house in order, rekindle efforts at liberating the country from the jaws of terror and create an enabling environment for all and sundry to thrive.

    Foreign relations require tact; a rare application of intelligence. Diplomacy requires in-depth skills, knowledge and mobilisation of networks. Only seasoned and experienced envoys can handle the sensitive assignment.

    But the situation at the home front is also crucial. Foreign policy is dictated by the home condition. Emergency experts in international relations are thrown up by the current circumstances. They are trying to twist facts and score cheap political points, oblivious of the fact that the more they dent the image of their country on social media, the more its reputation in the comity of nations is impaired.

    This is the time for Nigerians, irrespective of their political differences, religious leanings and ethnic backgrounds, to unite and stand against the deviants and unpatriotic elements consistently giving the country a nightmare for nearly two decades.

    The terrorists may be partly Nigerians and partly foreigners. Their capacity for consistent onslaught shows that their financial backers are not relenting. Nigerians – the government and the people – have to rise up to them.

    There is a clear understanding that the government of Bola Ahmed Tinubu, a little above two and a half years in office, is not responsible for the tragedy. The problems were inherited from the preceding administrations, whose leadership also tried their best to rid the country of the menace. It is also indisputable that government has made a concerted effort to halt the carnage. But the problem has persisted.

    Although ethnic and religious sentiments persist, the Tinubu administration comes across as a symbol of religious harmony and national unity that should be improved upon. President Tinubu legitimately holds the people’s mandate, and there is no national ethnic or religious discord that would have led to any genocide against any ethnic group or religious sect. He is a Muslim-husband of a Christian cleric-wife in a family that showcases the beauty of accommodation, religious tolerance, freedom of worship, association, and assembly.

    It is good that the Federal Government has reacted to the allegation of genocide against Christians by properly clarifying the circumstances that heralded the misrepresentation and misunderstanding of the true picture of the war by terrorists against all Nigerians – Muslims and Christians – in the North. It is a bad idea to view the current scenario as a major confrontation between the United States and Nigeria or between Trump and Tinubu.

    What makes it appear that Christians are the major or exclusive targets is that Christian bodies are more vociferous and confrontational in their responses to the killings, with further amplification by their networks abroad, unlike their hapless Muslim brothers and sisters at home, who submit to divine will.

    It is certain that since Muslims are in the larger population in the Northeast and the Northwest, most victims are likely to be Muslims in a terrain where insurgents and bandits kill indiscriminately. The conclusion that more Christians die from the unprovoked and unwarranted attacks needs to be objectively scrutinised.

    Nigeria needs to show depth and determination in handling the unfolding situation so that it does not risk further division between Christians and Muslims, who are collective victims of the current danger.

    What is discernible from the critical foreign intervention is that a baseline has been created for seeking a wider global support for tackling the mounting terror challenge, which is not peculiar to Nigeria.

    Speed is required. At a time the economy is improving and relief is not far in sight, Nigeria cannot afford to suffer reverses. The warning by the U.S. has implications for the investment drive and supply of aids. There would be fear of alienation. Diplomatic relations built over the years would be ruptured and the unfolding scenario might inadvertently pale into uncritical isolation or alienation of Nigeria, which has been a key partner in counter-terrorism and great factor in regional stability in West Africa and the entire African continent.

    It is possible that Nigerians in the Diaspora are worried and they may be eager to plead, on behalf of the government and people of Nigeria, for more understanding and assistance in terms of arms supply to combat the terrorists.

    Nigeria deserves the sympathy of humanity at this trying period. There is no evidence that this calamity is self-induced or brought by the government of the day. External influences cannot be ruled out. The North is a vast region sharing porous borders with a number of West African countries – Niger, Chad, Cameroon, and Benin Republic. Insurgent groups, identified and unidentified, visible or invisible, operate across the regions, apparently shifting bases and regressing to the crude tactics of targeting vulnerable populations whenever they are destabilised, before regaining strength.

    Also, some occasional bloody ethnic clashes that led to deaths of innocent Nigerians should not be confused with the onslaughts by Boko Haram and ISWAP.

    The war against insurgency should now be fought with much more vigour. It would be costly, but it is non-negotiable. More resources – human, financial, and military – have to be deployed until the desired result is attained. More recruitments in the military, equipment and much intelligence gathering are required.

    At the diplomatic level, there is a need for more engagements with the world powers, particularly the U.S., the Evangelical bloc, whose outcry led to the U.S. searchlight on Nigeria, and more coordinated strategy with neighbouring countries. It is also time to appoint envoys to major Western countries and the United Nations (UN).

    The immediate creation and effective activation of state police has become most urgent. It is the security structure for coordinating intelligence gathering in particular. The situation has become compelling for all hands to be on deck in the fight against the enemies of state, the terrorists and other agents of destabilisation.

  • Who will resolve PDP’s crisis?

    Who will resolve PDP’s crisis?

    The crisis assailing the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) does not appear ready to disappear. Like other opposition platforms, internal disharmony within the main opposition party has continued to worsen. But the injuries are self-inflicted.

    Having fallen from power some 10 years ago, the PDP has failed to display the prospects of a united front that can bounce back to power. Its political muscles, which it flexed for 16 years in power, have become feeble, like those of an ageing bully. Even the voices of its leading lights of yore have become faint against those who have turned the party into a battlefield.

    The failure to groom duteous politicians to succeed the blusterous first generation of the party gave birth to the current babel within. The “party of generals” that got to power in the wake of the current dispensation obviously forgot that nothing lasts forever. Today, neither its barracks mentality of “obey the last order” or democratic norms prevail.

    From the outset, the PDP never appeared like a party that was based on democratic pillars. Many of its chairmen were ousted unceremoniously. Imagine the national chairman of a party being asked to tender his resignation letter directly to the President after a meal of pounded yams and bush meat in his house.

    In the past two decades, the PDP has changed it chairman than any other party has. The same happened to its Senate presidents when the party was in power. They were not removed on health grounds but to satisfy the yearnings of some overbearing individuals. The party did not respect democratic principles. It was a matter of time for its internal transgressions to blow open.

    Now that the chicken has come home to roost, who, will salvage the once acclaimed largest party in Africa from self-ruin?

    The fate of the PDP should be a lesson, even to the ruling party. No political party is infallible. Pride could herald a fatal fall. That electoral disaster has been the lot of the party that once nursed the bogus ambition of ruling the country for 60 years.

    Read Also: Peterside  calls for credible administrators in NFF

    Its tenancy in Aso Villa, Abuja, was terminated few years after the bragging. The prolonged setback jolted the founding fathers from their delusion, making them to embrace, very late, that in the final analysis, power is transient.

    As the PDP prepares for its so-called elective National Convention scheduled for Ibadan, the Oyo State capital, this month, it writhes in the pains of division and disharmony. Its warring leaders are unable to put their house in order. A section of the party, led by the few governors stuck in the old circle, is insisting on the convention, despite the unresolved logjam.

    Another camp opposed to what it calls improper preparations for the convention is kicking. Led by Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike, this group has continued to draw attention to some unresolved abnormalities known to the two antagonistic camps. When the convention would hold or not is not as important as what would happen after the event.

    That chairmen of four state chapters went to court to challenge the validity of the convention means that something is amiss. The multiple crises have festered for three reasons.

    The first is that there is no uniting idea, a philosophy or ideology to which members subscribe beyond the goal of hijacking power. Thus, outside power, the party is like a fish out of water.

    The second is the lack of effective crisis resolution mechanism. No one among the warring lot is prepared to make a sacrifice for the platform to survive. Once there is a conflict, it is ‘fight to the finish.’ Reconciliation committees are set up to chase shadows. Once the chord of power that bound them was severed, things fell apart.

    The third is a lack of good leadership, one that commands respect. The PDP is deserted by its products; the presidents, vice presidents, senate presidents, and House of Representatives speakers it created in its own image. It is a special case of ‘use and dump’.

    It may also be that those former leaders it produced lack what it takes to lead a heterogeneous organisation, a blend of diverse interests and an abused organisation that was knocked down by their undemocratic tendencies.

    Latter-day party undertakers lack institutional memory. They forget the labours of their founding fathers, their condescending styles of self-abnegation and willingness to subject personal interest to collective agenda.

    But the founding fathers committed a fatal error, which has continued to haunt them. It was a great mistake that after the party had taken shape, its presidential ticket landed on the palm of a wrong person; a dictator and manipulator who later tore his party’s membership card.

    The PDP suffered internal instability arising from the crisis of leadership. In 27 years, it has produced 17 national chairmen, many of who left office unceremoniously.

    After the bruises, they took refuge in the opposition party that rallied Nigerians to drive PDP out of power.

    A crisis is an infection. It is highly contagious. This is the heritage of a party founded by sane leaders without future builders to build on the virile foundation. When the party was in power between 1999 and 2015, its leaders were carried away by government power. They thought that federal power was the only requirement for party nurturing. While the party was in government, it started decaying as the supremacy of its power-loaded president came to be perceived as party supremacy.

    Gradually, the founding fathers faded away without an opportunity to cleanse the party. A deep gulf had developed between them and the younger elements, whose gradual rise to stardom coincided with that period of party dictatorship which became the norm.

    The current battle stems from the split among the younger elements who gained total control of the party after the residual class of gerontocrats painfully relocated to the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

    They could not keep the dilapidated house together. As the crisis escalated, it provided an escape route for their colleagues to dump the distressed platform. Three governors – Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom State, Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta and Peter Mbah of Enugu – hurriedly jumped out of the sinking ship. Now, Douye Diri of Bayela is packing his load. He is said to be comparing notes with Agbu Kefas of Taraba. Reports said Plateau State Governor Caleb Mutfwang is feeling lonely and gazing at APC, whose National Chairman, Prof. Nentawe Yilwatda, is from the state and has hinted that more governors would follow.

    The danger now is that many stalwarts are willing and ready to work for the ruling party without defecting from the PDP.

    Those leaving in droves claim that the crisis is injurious to their ambitions. They fear the legal technicalities that can knock them out of the 2027 polls if the leadership crisis persists. The party’s secretary has insisted that the PDP is a party of signature forgers. Senator Sam Anyanwu is simply saying that he has no hand in the preparations for the convention as the party’s scribe. Lawyer Nyesom Wike, ‘governor of Abuja,’ is firing salvos, warning that an improper convention would not be acceptable.

    The preparations have polarised the PDP into two camps – that of governors and that of a few gerontocrats being excluded from the planned elective convention. Former Governors Sule Lamido and Ahmed Makarfi have said they loathe intimidation by “small boys” of yesterday now trying to push them around.

    The old method may still align with the new times, if certain conditions are met. Traditionally, national chairmen are foisted by the conclave of governors. But the key omission moe is proper consultation.

    If the position of the national chairman has been zoned to the North and micro-zoned to the Northwest, should the old men not be informed about the intention to impose Kabiru Tanimu Turaki by the governors from the Northcentral and the Northeast? If the governors are sure of themselves, why can’t they throw the contest open, allow democracy to take its course and prove that they are really in charge by mobilising party faithful to vote for their candidate at Ibadan on November 15?

    Given the unfolding scenarios, the outcome of the PDP national convention may further mar its efforts at having a harmonious platform. But it would be very interesting to see a party stalwart who can wield the magic wand that would save the party from drifting into anarchy.

    PDP is still the main opposition party. To be relevant, the warring chieftains should close ranks, do a soul-searching and erect building blocks of unity.

    It is possible. But it is a hard option for the party.

  • Towards a peaceful Ekiti APC primary (2)

    Towards a peaceful Ekiti APC primary (2)

    It is God’s design that the All Progressives Congress (APC) will hold a festival of unity, cohesion, and tranquility next Monday across the wards in Ekiti State.

    It is a popularity test without a competitor, rival or foe. Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji, fondly called BAO, will stand before the mirror of history. His character and performance wll be on the scale. Party men and women will consider his application for the ticket for the second time and give an instant verdict.

    The outcome of the unique shadow poll is predictable. There will be neither anxiety nor tension. In one accord, party faithful, represented by five delegates per ward, would chorus in unison at the special coronation that the 2026 consensus candidate of the Ekiti APC is also, more or less, the sole candidate of the over 130 towns and villages constituting Ekiti State in next year’s governorship election.

    Instructively, the exercise, coming barely two weeks after the third anniversary of the administration, will be a referendum on the scorecard of the governor across the sectors.

    There will be ‘no victor, no vanquished’ at the end of the exercise; only the wish of the majority will prevail.

    The lessons of this moment should not be forgotten. They are very instructive. It is now clear that membership of Ekiti APC entails a miniature financial responsibility that is often ignored until it is too late. Party dues must be paid and only financial members are entitled to play the roles of nominators and electors at the primary.

    READ ALSO: FULL PROFILE: Meet Chief of Defence Staff, Lt. General Olufemi Oluyede

    Also, seasonal or on-and-off politicians who appear during primaries and disappear into their shells, only to resurface in another election cycle, cannot be taken seriously by the chapter. 

    Once Ekiti indigenes decide, like their forefathers did in the days of their famed confederation (Pelupelu), there will be no going back. The lone dissenting voice becomes an exceptional and isolated player, boxed into obscurity for non-conformity with the collective formula for promoting group interest.

    Governors usually have the right of first refusal, especially when they are popular. But it is not absolute. They can be rightly challenged to a duel by other aspirants, in the exercise of their freedom of choice, association, and assembly.

    But when over ninety-nine per cent of the stakeholders decide to collectively endorse Oyebanji for a second term, discerning people should know that a vacancy does not exist in the Government House in Ado-Ekiti.

    The statewide endorsement was quite intimidating. A clear message was sent to potential aspirants that there is one crowd puller for now in the state. Their ambitions consequently paled into daydreaming.

    Twelve categories of people threw their weight behind Oyebanji ahead of the primary. Their influence is not in doubt.

    The first are the four former governors who never saw eye to eye but were united by their support for their successor. Governors Niyi Adebayo, Segun Oni, Ayodele Fayose, and Kayode Fayemi, despite their diverse political outlooks, collectively projected Oyebanji as their anointed candidate. Since the governor was endorsed by the former helmsmen, they have been campaigning for him.

    The second are other key opposition leaders, particularly those of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The governor began courting them, shortly after he won his first victory in 2022. For example, the PDP governorship candidate, Bisi Kolawole, teamed up with him. Two months ago, the most vital female opposition voice, Senator Biodun Olujimi, dumped the PDP for APC. Asked why they were supporting the governor, notable PDP chieftains explained that they were captivated by his laudable inclusive policies and programmes.

    The third category is mainly the party – its officers at the ward, local government, constituency, senatorial, and state levels. Analysts describe this category as the most potent structure for delivering any candidate at the intra-party election. These leadership structures coordinate party activities. Blessed is that governorship candidate who has the undiluted support and cooperation of the bulk of loyal, dedicated, and committed party men and women who are nominators for the primary. Many of them may not have high socio-economic status, but their fanatical loyalty to the platform is never in doubt. Their blood flows in the veins of the administration.

    The fourth category of stakeholders are elective public officers – three senators, nine House of Representatives members, 16 members of the House of Assembly, commissioners, advisers, and other appointees. They are from the different local governments, and they have a stake in the government.

    The fifth are elder statesmen who cannot be ignored in Ekiti. Not all of them are directly associated with political tendencies, but they command a high level of respect. The four legal luminaries – one from Ado-Ekiti, another one from Ikere-Ekiti and two from Ilawe-Ekiti – fall into this category. As a tribute, specific days are devoted to celebrating their contributions to the communities and the state. Their support is akin to the wall of Gibraltar.

    The sixth bloc is the class of founding fathers of the state. Members of this group agitated for the creation of the state. Oyebanji was their secretary during the struggle. It is natural that these gerontocrats should tilt their support towards their younger compatriot who served Ekiti at the prime of life, unknown that fate would catapult him to the number one position in the Fountain of Knowledge.

    The seventh group comprises influential traditional rulers, the home-based monitors of governance. They are objective in their assessment of the governor. Although they are expected to be non-partisan, their mood supports the push for continuity of the progressive governance beyond next year.

    In the eighth category are credible old students of Ekiti State University. They knew the governor, either as a schoolmate or as a young, energetic, and brilliant teacher in the Department of Political Science.

    The ninth bloc comprises colleague-governors in the Progressives Governors’ Forum (PGF) and the national leadership of the party. Those in this group are impressed by the loyalty to the platform, the style of the governor and his peaceful and non-controversial nature.

    The tenth is made up of state workers – civil servants, teachers, and local government workers. Many of them came together to purchase the nomination form for him.

    The eleventh group is made of up religious leaders who see Oyebanji as a promising administrator, a man of vision and servant-leader who is an embodiment of the highly valued Omoluabi ethos.

    The twelfth consists of the ordinary people who savour the atmosphere of peace in Ekiti under Oyebanji’s leadership. They are the authentic voters in elections. Unlike the big people who may stay indoors or travel out of the country during elections, members of this group are always out to exercise their civic duty in the rains or the heat. Oyebanji is also accessible to them. To everyone in Ekiti, he is a governor they can see, feel, touch, and interact with without restriction.

    However, beyond the primary is the challenge of the real election. Reminiscent of what he did to keep the party together after his 2022 victory, the governor has to rally all and sundry, including the supporters of fellow aspirants who floundered and could not cross the nomination hurdle. His post-primary activities should be conciliatory.

    In setting up the campaign structures, inclusion should be the watchword. Ekiti APC should always keep its house in order before, during, and after the poll. The party should strategically prepare for the antics of few aggrieved chieftains battling with deflated ego. They may not defect but stay on in the party to package internal rebellion to distract the governor and the party during the electioneering.

    Also, governance should not be allowed to suffer in the distribution of time and energy by the governor.

    Ekiti 2026 poll is a big election and the opposition will make a lot of noise. The governor, a political scientist, is not expected to underrate anybody on the ballot.

    The admonition of the Screening Committee, chaired by Tunji Ajuloopin Olawuyi, is apt. He urged the party to ensure that there is no crack after the primary. He also enjoined the aspirants to fulfil their promise to support the winner after the shadow poll.

    The Ekiti governorship poll is the first in the series of exercises that will hold ahead of the 2027 general election. The Ekiti APC, having endorsed Oyebanji and President Bola Ahmed Tinubu for re-election, should work hard to achieve victory. Power, as the President always said, is not served a la carte.

  • Challenging times for the opposition

    Challenging times for the opposition

    The beauty of democracy is that there is a wide space for the opposition to thrive and offer an alternative route to good governance, growth, and development.

    This critical role has its root in the 1999 Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of association and assembly, and the right of ruling and opposition platforms to jostle for power without let or hindrance.

    It is the duty of the opposition – political parties outside the government, individuals and groups holding opposing views on fundamental questions, and even the civil society pressing for a course of action in societal interest – to challenge the party in power and the government it has midwifed to a duel.

    Through constructive, lawful, and legitimate engagements, the government acknowledges the imperative of self-moderation. Those in power are kept on their toes, and policies and programes are properly evaluated to determine whether they meet public expectations or not. The greatest feedback on the government’s operations, machinery, and performance is offered by parties outside power through scrutiny and criticism.

    They become vital democratic assets when the alternatives they canvass are lucid, logical, objective, persuasive, convincing, and acceptable.

    Opposition parties should ordinarily be constitutional threats to ruling parties. In playing the crucial role, they need vision, skills, capacity, resources, as well as bold, brave, courageous, resourceful, and dynamic leadership. The authentic opposition should be poles apart from the cowardice of the hypocritical political parties masquerading as alternative platforms in the country. The lack of objective actions among the nation’s opposition parties has motivated critics to now blackmail the government that it is plotting to push the country into a one-party state.

    READ ALSO; What inspired me to write ‘Joromi’ song – Simi

    Since 2023, the major opposition parties – Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Labour Party (LP), and the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) – have not put their houses in order. Internal crises, multiple litigations and factionalisation have sapped the energies of their leaders who are not in one accord.

    Unable to resolve their internal problems, they deluded themselves into thinking that they could conjure up a coalition in distress, oblivious of the fact that Nigerians were not ready to follow them to perdition.

    The PDP is split, with pro-Atiku forces now taking temporary refuge in the borrowed platform, the African Democratic Congress (ADC). The two halves cannot electorally survive on their own. Yet, reconciliation cannot be contemplated ahead of the 2027 polls. After 2027, the PDP and ADC, after a fruitless search, will try to moot reconciliation.

    Why they cannot broker a truce now is that their leaders are driven by antagonistic ambitions, and they cannot subject their individual aspirations to group interest. Currently, within the main opposition, crisis resolution is nil. All PDP stalwarts perceive themselves as leaders and they cannot subject themselves to any overriding leadership that evolved in an atmosphere of equity, fairness, and justice.

    The party’s National Working Committee (NWC) is a divided and weak administrative structure that does not command respect. It was reported that the National Chairman, Ambassador Umar Damagum, and the National Legal Secretary, Kamaldeen Ajibade, openly clashed in court over legal representation for the party.

    Today, the National Convention scheduled for Ibadan next month is being threatened by malice, hate and strife. It was proposed as a special reunion. But Bayelsa State Governor Douye Diri, who was the Zoning Committee Chairman, and his Enugu counterpart, Peter Mbah, who was the Convention Committee Secretary, have dumped the party.

    Their defection trailed the departure of Governor Umo Eno of Akwa Ibom State and Governor Sheriff Oborevwori of Delta State. There are feelers that Taraba Governor Agbu Kefas may also call it quits with the main opposition.

    Those who have defected can be properly marked or tackled. But the danger for the PDP lies in the activities of those who have not defected, and may not defect but have their souls connected to the APC while their bodies remain in the PDP. They cannot be quoted as canvassing support for APC; they are actively mobilising for President Tinubu’s second-term ambition.

    ADC appears intact as an estranged PDP caucus, although the hosts – old ADC members – are at loggerheads with the new members, led by Atiku and David Mark. The snag is that the party is not waxing strong. Its membership drive has not drawn formidable politicians into its fold. Besides, there is an identity crisis for the dominant group in the party that abandoned its natural habitat, the crisis-ridden PDP.

    The NNPP is confined to Kano State, its only stronghold that is now ebbing away, unable to withstand the arrows of the APC members in the state, who deprived it of two constituencies during the recent by-elections.

    The Labour Party (LP) remains divided, the court verdict affirming the interim leadership of Esther Nenadi-Usman, notwithstanding. The party has a stunted growth, battered by in-fighting among cantankerous chieftains who cannot make sacrifices for the party to survive.

    The four opposition parties are gasping for breath, and they lack colour and character to attract patronage. Thus, their chieftains, particularly the governors, their aides, and lawmakers, are escaping from the sinking ships.

    Instructively, though the parties are in deep crises at the national level, the governors do not have problems with the state chapters they superintend as state party leaders. They also do not face serious opposition from the ruling party in their domains.

    By moving from their parties to the ruling platform, they oppose the opposing roles of the opposition.

    Those defecting claim to be captivated by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s style of leadership. But they are reluctant to learn and adopt his style, which led to the survival of the Action Congress (AC), the Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), and APC. Some analysts argue that it may be due to their lack of intellectual wherewithal, sound principles, consistency, perseverance, courage, and capacity for long-term planning, which sustained the president when he was the opposition leader. 

    Where Tinubu learnt his politics is arguably unknown. But it is obvious that he understands the language of politics more than his political rivals. The two leaders he followed – Shehu Yar’Adua of Peoples Democratic Movement (PDM) and Moshood Abiola – only bestrode the space as colossuses but never attained power. But, not only has Tinubu mastered their tactics; he has become the most electorally successful strategist of the Fourth Republic.

    While he was the arrowhead of the opposition from 2003 to 2015, he eschewed fear. He was focused and consistent. He was also honest in acknowledging certain limitations, one of which was that he or his progressive camp could not do it alone. He, therefore, constructed a bridge of understanding, attracting like-minds to the crusade to liberate the country from what the APC described as 16 years of misrule by the PDP.

    The tragedy of the opposition is the decimation of its ranks through defections, lack of unity, and absence of a trustworthy and unifying leader who can make sacrifices. Asiwaju Tinubu made a great personal sacrifice for his party to survive in 2015 when he lost the bid for the presidential running mate. That quality is lacking in the current scattered opposition leaders who are driven by self-serving agenda.

    The PDP of 2019 was strong and formidable. Four years later, the presidential candidate, Atiku, and his running mate, Peter Obi, parted ways. They became rivals in 2023. Ahead of 2027, PDP has now split into the mainstream PDP where Makinde/Fintiri/Bala forces do not see eye to eye with the Wike/Anyanwu camp; an ADC wallowing in self-deception and a frustrated Labour Party (LP).

    The Obi/Otti factor has its inherent limitations, both being PDP defectors  now hibernating in the LP.

    As the PDP gladiators prepare for the Ibadan Convention, they are not in one accord.

    It now boils down to the fact that while the widely advertised alliance or coalition of the opposition is crumbling, APC’s unannounced alliance and coalition with individual heavyweights it has attracted is taking shape.

    With the expectation that more opposition governors and other heavyweights will soon join the ruling party, the months ahead portend interesting times in Nigeria’s political space. But it is expected that the opposition would make frantic moves to stabilise their bases. Indeed, a stitch in time saves nine. All hopes are not lost for them to overcome their challenges.

  • What did Jonathan forget in Aso Villa?

    What did Jonathan forget in Aso Villa?

    Ten years after he was rejected at the poll, Dr. Goodluck Ebele Azikiwe Jonathan, like the wife of Lot, is trying to look back.

    He left, more or less in a blaze of glory, despite the general perception of his government as inept and clueless by many political actors, including former Vice President Atiku Abubakar, who vigorously campaigned against his stay in power beyond 2015.

    Generally perceived as a gentleman who could not frontally ruffle feathers, GEJ, as he is fondly called by some admirers, behaved responsibly and adjusted to life outside power. He became more popular outside Nigeria, particularly in the West African sub-region and the continent as an envoy and important observer during presidential elections.

    But since 2019, certain people who pose as his admirers have not allowed him to be himself. They have been urging him to terminate his blissful retirement. He now seems to pander to deceit, with the insatiable nature of man dominating his thought process.

    Jonathan has the right to contest for president, like other past leaders with unquenchable appetite for political control. Politicians are incurable optimists, even if they are contending with a fading influence. In the game of politics, retirement is never contemplated.

    Power is so alluring and highly captivating that former leaders always prefer to come back. What has saved Nigeria from the sit-tight syndrome is the primacy and potency of the constitution that sets the limit. It is not the desire for credible service that is the motivation. Their intention may be to return to power for personal gains, for ego, for a show-off, and for private accumulation.

    Kleptocracy is the political ideology of many African leaders. Those who eventually succeeded in regaining power have often left their countries worse than they found them in their second coming.

    None of them is insulated from the temptation, despite the realisation that power obsession could also lead to personal and national doom, as the power baron tends, with the passage of time, to equate himself with the nation he mischievously governs.

    The addiction to power is an all-consuming passion fueled by poor judgment and neglect of reality. Warning signals are ignored, and self-assessment becomes defective. Liars and manipulators mill around the kleptomaniac who ultimately falls into deception, only to be deserted after the collapse of the inordinate ambition. This is peculiar to Generals who had set themselves upon the country, brandishing the barrels of guns.

    Some examples offer instructive lessons. As politicians competed for available spaces in the ill-fated Third Republic, some elements, for reasons best known to them, suddenly remembered that former Military Head of State Gen. Yakubu Gowon was around. They, therefore, resolved to draft ‘Gentleman Jack’ to the presidential race. The former leader, a political scientist, was excited. The Ebora Owu, General Olusegun Obasanjo, frowned at the antics of those trying to draft his former boss to the murky waters of politics. He retorted: “What did Jack forget in the State House?”

    Mercifully, the plot crumbled at the initial stage of the laborious Option A4 experimentation.

    Obasanjo himself was lucky. But at the end of eight years, many Nigerians thought that it was better if he had not returned to power. Up to now, he has been haunted by the ghost of his infamous third-term agenda. OBJ handed power voluntarily, as often said, to democratically elected leaders in 1979. He elicited a round of applause. But by the time he left power again in 2007, the praises had evaporated. The then Deputy Senate President Ibrahim Mantu apologised to the bewildered nation over Obasanjo’s tenure elongation plot. Although Nigeria is also entitled to an apology over the flawed election that took Umaru Yar’Adua to power, none has been forthcoming from the man at the centre of the controversies.

    Read Also: Immigration Service introduces post amnesty documentation programme for foreigners on expired visa

    It could not be ascertained if the Evil Genius, former military President Ibrahim Babangida, had a pact with OBJ that he would succeed him. However, IBB, as fondly called by admirers and foes, threw his hat into the ring. A wealthy man who had stepped aside ingloriously after eight years of tossing around Nigerians and annulling the most credible election, Babangida embarked on a nationwide consultation until he was stopped by northern leaders who opted for Atiku Abubakar, who, in the end, failed at the poll.

    Although General Muhammadu Buhari returned, like OBJ, the soldierly steam he was famous for in his military heydays had deserted him. Active, energetic, and vibrant between 1984 and ‘85, the latter-day Buhari contrasted sharply with the Buhari the nation had known and the corrupt ones had feared, accompanied by a no-nonsense Ilorin-born Fulani soldier, Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon. While Buhari was hailed in 2015 as the symbol of change, he forfeited the adulation in 2023, with his ruling party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), battling with internal contradictions. Under his watch, the nation was grounded by self-imposed fuel scarcity, forex burden and punishment, and a curious currency change that made life unsavoury for the citizens for weeks.

    Since Jonathan was voted out of power, his intention to bounce back has been a subject of speculation. Naive and poor at self-assessment, the former president has often listened to Ahithophelean advisers who have continued to urge him on.

    Jonathan is not a strong politician, neither is he a giant of history. He was nevertheless catapulted to stardom by sheer luck. In every political position he held, he was about garnering experience when he was suddenly promoted to a higher pedestal.

    As a young lecturer, he was tipped for running mate to a boisterous boss with larger than life attitude, the self-style Governor-General of Ijaw Nation, Diepreye Alamieyeseigha. When the pompous governor of eight-local-government State of Bayelsa was run out of power, Jonathan, a spare tyre deputy governor, filled the void and finished his boss’ second term.

    No sooner had he secured the governorship nomination for 2007 than fate smiled on him again. At the presidential convention of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), he was surprisingly paired with Alhaji Umaru Yar’Adua as the running mate. His first boss was consumed by corruption. His second boss was down with a protracted illness. In the two instances, he became the chief beneficiary of unplanned power shift.

    The latter was not without hassles. As vice president, his ebullient and more strategic wife,  Dr. Dame Patience, complained about the position’s obscurity, alleging that having been sidelined in the high official quarters, he was reduced to a powerless deputy who consoled himself with reading newspapers.

    But the voice of reason made a solid case for him in the absence of President Yar’Adua. The doctrine of necessity was invoked and he moved up as Acting President. After Yar’Adua’s death, Jonathan became the number one citizen.

    It is important to note that Jonathan never struggled to get power at any level. Others struggled on his behalf or paved the way for him. Power always landed on his palm on a platter of gold. He, therefore, lacks the critical experience required for political competition, consultation, negotiation, mobilisation, strategic thinking, and evaluation.

    While in power, his poor experience often led to poor decisions. Jonathan received commendation for setting up a constitutional conference. Eminent Nigerians converged on Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), to chart a new course for Nigeria. It later paled into a jamboree, as Asiwaju Bola Tinubu had earlier warned. The confab produced a good report. But the former president developed cold feet overnight. He said the approaching general election deserved more priority than the implementation of the far-reaching recommendations. The non-implementation of the report amounted to a waste of time, resources and opportunity.

    The steps he had taken in his elusive search for power confirmed his gullibility. Ahead of 2015, when it was obvious that he could not penetrate the Southwest, unlike in 2011, he sealed a pact with some elements in the region who lacked grassroots appeal. His major Southwest allies then were an aggrieved Afenifere factional leader, a capitalist lawyer who masqueraded as a revolutionary and leader of a fierce self-determination group. At the close of the poll, reality dawned on him that he struck a deal with fake allies without political clout.

    Gazing at 2027, Jonathan’s approach is laughable, although it casts him in the mould of innocence and meekness. He is banking on hope, the elixir of life, without a formidable structure and networks.

    Since 2015, Jonathan has been more or less “partyless”. After his defeat, he could not offer leadership for the party he used as a vehicle to ride to power. The former president has never played any leadership and stabilising role in the PDP but was aloof as the crisis-ridden platform decayed. The party’s governors who are battling to save its soul at the intensive care unit do not draw inspiration from GEJ who abandoned the platform a decade ago.

    He also deluded himself into thinking that the African Democratic Congress (ADC) of Atiku Abubakar, his long-standing political foe, could offer him a temporary refuge. So ingenious was the Otuoke politician that he even applied for the ADC flag on the condition that no other aspirant, not even Atiku, should slug it out with him at the primary. Of course, he got the answer he deserved on the spot: “ADC is Atiku’s property and fortress.”

    Should Jonathan join the 2027 presidential race, he will most likely erase whatever is left of his political significance and sink into the abyss of irrelevance if he loses the poll. Nothing about the current state of the nation suggests otherwise.

  • Lessons of 65-year journey to nationhood

    Lessons of 65-year journey to nationhood

    Sixty-five years after attaining Independence, Nigeria is still struggling to fulfill the vision of its founding fathers. The consolation is that there is now hope on the horizon for the country, from all indications, under the Bola Ahmed Tinubu administration.

    The supposedly African giant has not been static since October 1, 1960, when Independence was restored after 75 years of colonial subjugation. Under successive indigenous leadership, much progress has been made across the sectors. But many errors have also been committed, which have limited the pace of development.

    As a complex heterogeneous country, Nigeria has been assailed by multiple crises of nation-building bordering on identity, political and economic participation, legitimacy of government structures, and divisive distributive politics.

    While the world powers predicted that by the mid-seventies, Nigeria would have become a medium-ranking power with a commanding influence in world affairs, the prediction has not been fulfilled.

    The failure of Nigeria to live up to expectations, despite its vast natural endowment and huge human capital, has wiped smiles from the faces of its citizens. The sad turn of events has also denied Africa a clear and towering leader who could lead and strategically champion the cause of the continent on the global stage.

    The journey of nationhood has passed through hills and valleys. There have been challenges and traumas; there have also been moments of jamboree and jocundity.

    The future was bright in 1960, but within six years, Nigeria ran into turbulence. The battle for political control through foul means, ethnicity and monumental corruption on the part of the early leaders led to the collapse of the First Republic.

    Up came the self-styled modernisers – the non-accountable power-thirsty soldiers – who toppled civilian authorities and pushed the bewildered country into a prolonged nightmare. Their methods were dictatorial. With the barrel of guns, they foisted on Nigeria a centralised system of government that was antithetical to the federal principle.

    The 1966 military coup deepened the distrust and suspicion among the unequal regions. The Unification Decree marked the beginning of a prolonged journey in national comatose.

    Up till now, the country has not fully recovered. The battle to keep Nigeria one was won, yet threats of secession by a certain ethnic group have not subsided.

    The Nigerian brand of federalism is on trial, confusing, divisive, provocative, and fundamentally unjust. Indisputably, the country has paled into a poor, ethnically-segmented nation-state battling to survive a unitary system, aptly foisted by military interlopers. State and local government creation was lopsided, and the census could not be held due to the fear of rigging the head count.

    There is a combative regression to the pre-independence battle cry for restructuring at a time developed countries expect the African giant to be a continental model of federal democracy.

    The defective federal principle became an albatross. It was a skewed arrangement with an in-built, lopsided, and marginalising distributive process. This heralded colossal injustice and induced intense agitation. The major bone of contention was the over-centralisation and monopolisation of power by a distant central government to the detriment of pauperised and disadvantaged component units in the highly heterogeneous country.

    Indeed, the notion of unity in diversity was displaced due to elongated perceived structural defects and institutional deformities, which denied the reality of peculiarities in a plural society.

    The military perceived Nigeria as a fiefdom, and the bitter power struggle broke out among its top echelon. They pushed the country into an avoidable civil war in which thousands of innocent lives were terminated. Coups became monotonous, and the prospects of popular rule dimmed.

    For 27 years, Nigeria was in the military cage. When the soldiers finally and reluctantly abdicated power in 1999, it was evident that they were not better than the civilian authorities they had illegitimately displaced. They were even more corrupt, promoting nepotism and stifling the growth as democracy.

    In 1999, those who took over power were also created in the same military image. They had a faulty compass – a severely flawed constitution that lied to and against itself.

    The ruling party at the beginning of the current dispensation was aptly called the party of generals for having the highest concentration of retired military officers of any other party. The ex-soldiers apparently thought it appropriate to assemble under the same umbrella to continue their jingoistic exploits. As Nigerians would say: they showed the country pepper. The then-ruling party boasted of retaining power for at least sixty years, confident that its jackboot tactics would fend off other parties from accessing legitimate democratic power.

    It was a harrowing experience. Under their leadership for 16 years, the country bled. Oil, the acclaimed black gold and blessing, became a curse. Its proceeds were grossly misused through the inordinate personalisation of power. The refineries remained moribund, despite the allocation of huge funds into their turnaround maintenance (TAM). The government was comfortable with a curious fuel subsidy regime, which was mercilessly exploited by the barons who held the country by the jugular.

    The country groaned. Life expectancy dropped abysmally. Basic amenities, including potable water, electricity, medical facilities and roads were in short supply. The quality of life among the citizens became abysmal. Youths deserted the country for an imaginary golden fleece in foreign lands. Many of them perished in harsh conditions while attempting to cross the Sahara Desert or the Mediterranean Sea to Europe in the search for scarce jobs.

    Graft and sleaze multiplied. Foreign debt piled up. Foreign reserves were depleted. The manufacturing sub-sector collapsed. Nigeria became a laughing stock. People started having a nostalgic feeling about the constitutional order of the First Republic, saying that presidential democracy had failed.

    As if the challenges were not enough to depress the soul of the nation, Nigeria started battling with insecurity, including banditry, terrorism, kidnapping for ransom, and other forms of violence.

    Ethnicity and religion became the willing tools exploited by unpatriotic elements to fan the embers of disunity. There was stiff resistance to change and progress.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu inherited the cumulative mess on May 29, 2023. It is possible that the problems he met were greater than the challenges he expected. But an experienced, competent, resourceful, and result-driven leader, he was adequately prepared for the job. The priority of the administration is to build institutions and erect lasting legacies, he has been telling his fellow compatriots.

    But to turn adversity into prosperity, the Tinubu administration had to embark on reforms across the sectors. Like a surgical operation, this has been painful. Only a bold and courageous leader like President Tinubu can take the decisive step, which has now been twisted by the cantankerous opposition as the imposition of hardship on the populace.

    Not afraid to step on toes in the national interest, the President removed fuel subsidy from day one, daring the economic saboteurs. He also dismantled corruption in the foreign exchange market. The review of the tax laws and strengthening of the revenue-generating agencies marked a clean break from the sordid past.

    More funds are now being distributed from the Federation Account to the sub-national units. If governors and council chairmen can demonstrate commitment, patriotism and discipline by channeling the money to development, all will be well.

    This is why the President urged the leaders at these tiers to wet the ground. It is puzzling to the common man, who is enjoined to be patient, that reform pains linger, and nobody seems prepared to understand the language of economic innovation that does not lead to food price affordability, no matter the macro-economic stability.

    More than a year after rail transportation was decentralised, no region in the country has taken the bull by the horns. The agitations for restructuring have continued, but, paradoxically, certain elements of devolution are either being opposed or resisted. Examples are the council autonomy and the initial reluctance of some states to welcome state police.

    Read Also: Nigeria at 65: Our economic journey and the promise of recent reforms

    A bridge builder and detribalised leader, President Tinubu has united the country through the exhibition of national outlook and promotion of inclusive policies and programmes. These are visible in the distribution of appointments and infrastructural projects, the establishment of regional commissions, and the promotion of cordial inter-governmental relations.

    The signature infrastructural projects of the administration are road construction across the six geopolitical zones. Of more significance now are the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Highway and the Badagry-Sokoto road, which will open many communities across the regions.

    Infrastructural gaps have to be bridged. A thriving and buoyant economy has to be sustained by connectivity. This is why an effective and efficient transportation system is key.

    As a corollary, reforms that can resolve the lingering energy crisis would be reassuring in light of the expected support for industrialisation or production, particularly the manufacturing sub-sector, which can yield the by-products of job creation, social progress, and high competitiveness.

    For youths, the student loan scheme comes in handy. It prevents dropouts in tertiary institutions and rekindles hope about the ability of the system to offer and guarantee succour.

    The Tinubu administration has fought terror with vigour and recorded outstanding success. The achievement has to be sustained.

    To discerning minds, the restructuring that would restore federalism has begun. The prospects of state policing or multi-level policing may be the baseline.

    President Tinubu is laying a firm foundation for a virile and better tomorrow. It is mobilising and planning for a better future.

    There are still some issues that need to be addressed collectively. One of them is that the cost of governance across the tiers is huge, often wasteful, and unaccounted for.  The current expenditure should not rival capital spending. The government’s spending should focus on productive activities.

    Also, elections are still controversial with fraud, vote-buying, and violence sitting at the heart of polls. A special tribunal or court for the trial of electoral offenders is necessary. The ballot box should not be desecrated. Also, losers should be courageous to concede defeat, as done in some advanced democracies, instead of embarking on unnecessary post-election litigations that waste the time of the court.

    If all election cases can be disposed of before the inauguration date, the nation would be the better for it

    The question now is: where should Nigeria be in the next 65 years? Would it become a technological giant, a great federal democracy, a secured country, a self-sufficient nation, a united nation-state, and a world power?   

    Nigeria should plan. It should also not fail to avert failure in the implementation of its plans. A plan is not about its name but the results it generates in the long run. Africa’s most populous nation should unleash its human and technical endowments towards building a resilient future in which the citizens will stand very tall across the world. This is the time to roll up our sleeves to accomplish the task. 

  • Lagos factor in Nigeria’s quest for global power

    Lagos factor in Nigeria’s quest for global power

    The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) was finally moved from Lagos to Abuja over 30 years ago. But the Atlantic Ocean, the ever-busy port, and indeed, other vast economic potentials, have remained immovable, drawing constant attention to the vast city as the business capital and economic nerve centre of the country.

    Although 75 per cent of the state is water, which earns it the sobriquet, ‘The State of Aquatic Splendour’, its recurrent ecological challenges, flash flooding, and overcrowding have not eroded its magnetism to people from diverse backgrounds. It has also remained a vital and viable destination for domestic and foreign investments.

    Lagos is the city of small and big commerce; a unique melting pot, an industrial and manufacturing hub, banks’ headquarters, host to representatives of all families in Nigeria, the preferred location for foreign embassies, home of modern theatre, host to the busiest airport, and a preferred tourist destination. These and many more account for its indisputable status as the fifth-largest economy in Africa.

    Lagos is the target of many youths seeking real and imagined greener pastures; it is a place to live, work, raise families and prosper. It is also, like other thriving cities, a hidden place for homeless deviants and the pride of miscreants appropriately labelled as ‘area boys’.

    How Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu has been able to tackle the mounting security challenges, like his predecessors, attests to the wonders of the Centre of Excellence.

    A diplomat, Dr. Dere Awosika, who chaired the recent Nigerian Institute of International Affairs (NIIA) maiden Distinguished Lecture delivered by the governor, paid tribute to the city’s resilience and its capacity to withstand the threats by the men of the underworld who trouble other states and make them unsafe.

    The lecture, titled: ‘Lagos and Nigeria 2030: Projections of a World Power, offered a veritable opportunity for the assessment of the “Lagos factor” in the making of Nigeria and how it can contribute more meaningfully, based on its endowment, to the nation’s latent ambition to be a world power.

    In the 1950s, the United Kingdom (UK), the United States (U.S.A.), and other world powers envisioned that by the mid-seventies, Nigeria, due to its vast natural resources and rising human capital, would have, at least, become a medium-ranking power and clear African leader in the comity of nations. It was a promising country that had television service before France got one.

    Read Also: Ondo police arrest ‘notorious gunrunner’ supplying arms to Osun, Kogi, Edo, Kwara

    However, its leaders never measured up after independence, causing the country to regress from the progressive ladder. While the Asian countries that were at the same level of development in the sixties rose to become tigers on the wings of visionary, dynamic, determined, dedicated, and transformational leaders, the opportunity eluded Nigeria.

    Historically, nations that have achieved prosperity endeavoured to lean on their resources, better managed by their leaders, before attracting partnerships with other forward-moving countries. There is inter-dependence among nations, but only healthy, resourceful and well-managed entities have the chance of survival. The motivation for development should come from within.

    It is by mobilising and maximising the human and material resources to fuel development that a country can achieve a breakthrough.

    The NIIA Director-General, Prof. Osaghe Eghosa, drew national attention to what Lagos can consistently contribute to making Nigeria a world power in the future – the quantity and quality of population, now put at 220 million, which makes it Africa’s growth centre. Thus, Lagos becomes the leading commercial city on the continent; a typical model mega city; a hub of civilisation, enterprise and culture; a sports city and producer of sports giants; the seat of judicial innovation; pioneer of the Alternative Dispute Resolution and Sexual Offences Court; the cradle of nationalistic struggle, civil society onslaughts and pro-democracy agitators who laid down their lives; the root of the private sector, big banks and systems that run African finance and the core of creative leadership.

    Lagos, perhaps, is far beyond what people see and how they perceive it. Its image, in every context, looms larger in national and continental reckoning than the residents might be able to decipher. Alas, a prophet is not sufficiently honoured in his domain.

    Echoing the political scholar, Sanwo-Olu alluded to the economic realities and potentials that make the former federal capital a factor in national growth.

    These include the Lekki Free Trade Zone, Dangote Refinery and Petrochemical plant, Eko Atlantic City, the Coastal Road, Badagry-Sokoto Road, Lagos-Ibadan Standard Gauge Rail, the Proposed Fourth Mainland Bridge, and the Lekki International Financial Centre, which make Lagos a hub of global commerce and finance.

    In addition are “the mass of undersea cables and state-of-the-art data centres heralding a digital revolution; the array of poise for unicorn status, an expanding light rail system that has carried over five million passengers so far without a single incident, and a network of stock and commodity exchanges that are driving unprecedented wealth creation, entrepreneurial and financial innovation.”

    The state has also set the pace in sub-national security trust fund, sub-national leadership in tax reform, and traffic management emergency response, which are being replicated in other states.

    Thus, as Sanwo-Olu contended, Nigeria’s economic ambitions will be enabled by industrial and free trade zones, logistics infrastructure, financial centres and 21st-century urban developments – all areas in which Lagos is showcasing leadership.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has declared the goal of making Nigeria a $1 trillion economy by 2030 and reiterated the national commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement that would halt gas flaring and the generation of electricity through renewable sources.

    In Lagos, the Sanwo-Olu administration has also unfolded the ‘Lagos State Development Plan 2052, which is a 30-year plan launched in 2022. It articulates the goal of Africa’s Model Mega City and a Global Economic and Financial Hub that is safe, secure, and productive.

    The Lagos 30-Year Plan is anchored on four pillars – thriving economy, modern infrastructure, human-centric city, and effective governance.  To the governor, Nigeria can actually become a global power in economy, diplomacy, technology, culture, defence, demography, resources, and endowment.

    Alluding to human capital development, he said if the human asset, which should be prioritised over and above oil and gas, marine and forest wealth, is properly harnessed, the country may as well be on the right path. Also, Sanwo-Olu said Nigeria should fully embrace tech knowledge and make itself felt in the areas of cutting-edge technical competencies, including cloud computing and artificial intelligence, adding that the state should become producers instead of consumers of foreign technology. The audience nodded affirmatively.

    Sanwo-Olu renewed the call for a special status for Lagos, not because other states do not matter. The governor stressed that the country can scale up its growth and development by treating the state as a pivotal leverage that can help unleash collective national potential.

    Long before he became governor,  Lagos leaders had intensified the agitation for special economic assistance to the state. The First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu, sponsored a Bill on the matter when she was a member of the Red Chamber some years ago. However, the proposed legislation was frustrated by other interest groups, even though many of them have family and business roots in the city-state.

    Since the Bill was rejected, no other federal legislator has attempted to renew the struggle. They limit their interventions to barking without biting; not thinking about raising a meaningful dialogue with their colleagues from other zones to see reason and buy their understanding on this issue.

    Many Nigerians and foreigners troop into Lagos daily, putting pressure on its social infrastructure and housing facilities. Most of them do not return to their roots. They join numerous others in the struggle for daily bread.

    A major challenge in Lagos is the refusal of many people and organisations to pay tax. Many companies operate in Lagos through the cul-de-sac. They neither have signboards or other means of showing their locations. They deliberately do this to evade the state’s signage agency.

    Lagos shoulders enormous national, regional, and continental responsibilities due to its distinct and peculiar position. This was among the reasons the Committee on the Relocation of the Federal Capital, chaired by the eminent jurist, the late Justice Akinola Aguda, recommended that Lagos should be accorded a special status along with Abuja, Kaduna, and Enugu. After the Federal Government officially relocated the federal capital to Abuja on December 12, 1991, it has failed to implement the recommendation.

    Why can’t Nigeria emulate Germany, Brazil, Malaysia, Australia, and Tanzania, all of which, after relocating their former capitals, never abandoned the old ones but have continued to develop them simultaneously?

    The pressure on Lagos as the first choice for economic survival makes it compelling for the public and the private sectors to work together in providing modern amenities that would make life easier for the residents. This should not be an issue for debate but a necessity to strengthen the nation’s economic nerve centre to absorb the daily influx of opportunity seekers and accommodate people of diverse characters.