The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • Rivers: What next after emergency period?

    Rivers: What next after emergency period?

    Like a flash of lightning, six months have passed since Sir Siminalayi Fubara temporarily lost his job as governor of Rivers State. Like a chicken beaten by the rain, he is now sober as he regained the seat two days ago, following the expiration of the emergency period.

    Members of the House of Assembly, led by authentic Speaker Martins Amaewhule, who suffered a collateral damage during the constitutional sanction, also returned to the legislative chambers with an eagerness to start legislation and oversight duties.

    The lawmakers have unveiled plans to review the “emergency rule budget” that guided the interim leadership. They are also likely to beam the searchlight on the alleged frivolous spending of N5 billion monthly before the declaration of emergency rule.

    But the lawmakers are now more likely to be conciliatory in an atmosphere of cooperative separation of powers and accompanying checks and balances, if the governor improves on the reconciliation or dialogue with them.

    In his absence, the state was kept afloat by a caretaker, Air Vice Marshall Ibok-Ete Ibas, an unelected person who managed to restore tranquility where the governor had failed woefully. This puts a question mark on politicians’ ability to manage a crisis before it gets out of hands. This is because democracy is also about problem-solving by an elected representative.

    READ ALSO: Nigerian artistes dominate UK Afrobeats chart top

    Also, the structure of the state, particularly at the grassroots, has changed dramatically. At the local government, Fubara has to reconcile himself with the inevitability of working with newly elected chairmen and councillors who were not created in his image but in the likeness of his estranged power-loaded benefactor, Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyesom Wike.

    Details of the underground reconciliation between the previously combative governor and the determined lawmakers, who enjoyed and still enjoy the backing of the godfather, are unknown.

    But it is expected that the state will not remain the same again. By now, the right lessons should have been learnt by the parties in the protracted political dispute. The lifting of the emergency is not the end of the matter. The nation looks forward to a cordial relationship between the Executive and Legislative arms. It is critical to the consolidation of peace and recovery of the lost grounds.

    On March 18, the President warned that the emergency period could be extended, if reason did not prevail and the combatants decided to further plunge the state into violence.

    The proclamation of the emergency rule became inevitable, following what that the President described as “a total paralysis of governance” in the state, which aptly manifested in the prolonged face-off between Fubara and the House of Assembly. The three-member House of Assembly presided over by an impostor masquerading as Speaker became a national embarrassment. Much havoc was wrecked when the fake Speaker, Victor Oko-Jumbo, presided over the screening of some elements who were erroneously sworn in as commissioners and special advisers.

    The protracted rift stalled the passage of budgets. Of course, the Assembly was in flames; crippled, desolate, helpless, and impotent. Protests became violent and properties were serially destroyed. The President described Fubara as the aggressor and autocratic leader who stood on the way of democracy by trying to prevent the parliament from performing its constitutional roles.

    The obvious collapse of governance prompted the Supreme Court to rule that there was effectively “no government” in Rivers at the time. Instead of closing ranks, some Rivers elders took sides in the clearly divisive issue, making outsiders to doubt their capacity for peace-building and gerontocratic monitoring.

    As the jungle was about to mature in Rivers, Nigeria and its constitution, ably deployed by a thinking President, averted the disaster. History will record that although Fubara was elected for four years, he could only effectively spend three and a half years in office. His place at the Nigerian Governors’ Forum and the Council of State was vacant for six months due to his inability to manage the power the electorate gave him on behalf of the state.

    For the first time in two years, peace reigned in the Southsouth state as the emergency period doused tension, the vituperation of anti-emergency rule campaigners in the media and other negligible litigants, notwithstanding.

    Administrator Ibas, who was recalled from his blissful retirement to restore order into the troubled state, was focused, firm, and goal-oriented, despite the empty threats and distractions by some aggrieved stakeholders.

    The emergency rule, having been ratified by the National Assembly, Ibas governed the state by federal parliamentary backing in accordance with the emergency regulations. It was, nevertheless, an emergency rule with a human face; no restriction order on any of the warring actors, no probe of the Fubara administration by any commission of enquiry and there was no witch-hunting of any kind, unlike what happened under the revious dispensations that introduced the same measure to avert anarchy.

    Reflecting on the period, President Tinubu noted that the positive signals made it unnecessary to extend the emergency rule beyond its initial six-month duration.

    For the period, Rivers was off the democratic radar. Popular rule was put on hold, but other forms of freedom were not tampered with. Gladiators were denied a battle ground. Bands of hired thugs and miscreants spoiling for proxy wars were automatically disbanded. Mass processions became ineffective and rival supporters of leading actors locked in the curious war of attrition were dispersed. The ordinary man on the street heaved a sigh of relief.

    Many observers believe that the emergency rule was a blessing in disguise for Rivers, and in particular its elected chief executive, who escaped the hammer of angry lawmakers plotting his impeachment.

    Unknown to Fubara, he was the man on the defensive, from the beginning of the logjam. His tenure was full of tension, and he would have been consumed by the fire, especially when the lawmakers unconditionally insisted on a pound of flesh.

    Had the governor fully embraced the peace deal brokered by President Tinubu, the calamity would have been averted. It involved making sacrifices, giving concessions and self-abnegation which only a statesman can attempt. Fubara dismissed the pact, saying it was mere advisory. A big opportunity for concessions, consensus, and ‘win-win’ was bungled without sparing a thought for the consequences. The pact collapsed and the combatants intensified the onslaught in a manner akin to mutually assured destruction.

    Wike was labelled as an over-bearing godfather always eager to impose his wishes on the governor. Some critics chided him for undue interference or meddlesomeness in Rivers affairs, in spite of his busy schedule as Abuja minister. Others alleged that he instigated the crisis, using the lawmakers as fronts.

    The minister’s argument was that the governor had deviated from the plan of the party that conferred on him the rare privilege. Wike explained that since he rode on a formidable structure to power, the structure should not be desecrated but strengthened in a manner that befitted a ruling party. In his view, Fubara was courting those who opposed his aspiration to the detriment of party members who laboured to put him in office. He frowned at the governor’s penchant for allocating positions and privileges to those who worked against his victory while neglecting members of the dominant camp who weathered the electoral storm with him during the 2023 polls.

    Fubara’s reliance on Oko-Jumbo’s three-member House of Assembly stood logic on its head.

    The illegal House of Assembly screened the commissioner-nominees and passed the 2024 and 2025 budgets. Illegal council polls were conducted and violence engulfed the state.

     Although the governor claimed that the 27 members, led by Amaewhule, had defected from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), the court disagreed.

    The court also declared that Rivers had no budget and those in the illegal state executive council were carrying out the duties of commissioners and special advisers in error.

    At that stage, the handwriting was boldly on the wall. Yet, it was ignored. But the end of impunity was near.

    Fubara could be said to have seen the lightning. The thunder that followed evoked fear and produced a shock wave. It could also be a warning. So also was the avoidable mistake that heralded the loss of political control. To men of wisdom, such a folly should never be repeated.

    The lessons of the entire saga are very instructive. The imbroglio in Rivers boils down to two issues. The first is the peculiar predecessor-successor crisis due to wrong calculation or a faulty succession plan. The second is the violation of the constitution and the rule of law in the governor’s  bid to consolidate his hold on power.

    Now is the time for the warriors on both sides to sheathe their swords in the interest of the state. The governor, despite wielding executive power, should appreciate some limitations to his powers. The delicate parliamentary/executive balance is a major test for the actors on both sides.

    Dialogue, which was once rejected, is still the way forward. In democracy, it should be continuous. There is a need for him to reconcile with the lawmakers who will screen his commissioner-nominees. Fubara would need an experienced and competent parliamentary liaison officer or adviser who is versed in the intricacies of executive/legislative relationship in a presidential system. He would also need a good legal adviser who should always interpret the law correctly so that he would not be misled. The advisers should not be partisan elders who can lead him astray because they have scores to settle with Fubara’s predecessor.

    Some aspects of the discarded pact that are still relevant to the search for amity should be sincerely implemented.

    There should no room for vendetta by either the executive or the legislature. Vengeance would lead to renewed discord and escalation of repressed tension.

  • Eye-witness account of #ENDSARS panel of inquiry

    Eye-witness account of #ENDSARS panel of inquiry

    For almost two weeks from 8th to 21st October, 2020, various parts of the country were gripped by fervent protests, mostly organized and actualized by aggrieved youths, tagged #ENDSARS, which expressed the widespread fury, disillusionment and exasperation of large numbers of Nigerians at the atrocities and human rights violations routinely perpetrated by the now defunct unit of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) known as the Federal Special Anti-Robbery Squad (FSARS). Perhaps because of the role and status of Lagos State as the country’s commercial nerve centre and industrial hub; it being a melting pot of the diverse ethno-regional components of Nigeria where people of virtually every ethnic group reside, and the understandable concentration of the highest number of youth population in the state, Lagos was the epicentre of the anti-SARS demonstrations.

    What started as peaceful protests against brazen and rampant violations of the human rights and dignity of Nigerian citizens by the FSARS soon degenerated into mindless violence resulting in bitter harvests of blood, sorrow and tears no less gruesome than the pains and torture inflicted on mostly innocent people by a police outfit maintained by public funds and established to protect, not and tyrannize members of the Public. Unfortunately, Lagos was the worst victim of this degeneration of the protests and its hijack by hoodlums and criminals who were not actuated by the high-minded ideals of the original organisers of the protests. Thus, the level of destruction of private and public property, business and infrastructure in the state resulted in losses estimated at no less than N2 trillion. Yet, the NPF is an outfit of the federal government and not Lagos State.

    The disbandment of the FSARS by the then Inspector General of Police on the  11th of October 2020, and the federal government’s acceding to the 5-point demand of the protesters did not, unfortunately, stem the tide of the protests. Rather, the intensity of the demonstrations heightened as the protesters widened the scope of their demands and thus, inadvertently, allowing those with an utterly different agenda to perpetrate arson on public property and private businesses, commit arrant criminality, and launch destructive assaults on security personnel as well as their work stations and residential barracks and inflicting grievous injuries on many while snuffing out several lives. The police were the most affected by this onslaught, and again Lagos was the site of the worst devastations and depredations in this regard.

    Read Also: Tinubu commissions Tantita-sponsored projects at Kaduna’s Central Mosque

    Following the directive of the National Economic Council (NEC) to the various state governments on 14th October, 2020, to establish panels of inquiry to look into petitions of reported cases of brutality, abuse of human rights and the rule of law by the FSARS, the Lagos State government set up the Judicial Panel of Inquiry and Restitution to investigate allegations of human rights abuses by the FSARS in the state, determine degree of culpability of affected police officers with a view to recommending requisite punishment for those found guilty as well as paying compensation to victims of police brutality and oppression.

    As governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu noted while swearing in members of the tribunal, “In Lagos, beyond setting up this Panel which we hope will serve as a representation of our broader interests, we have established a N200 million fund for compensation to families and individuals who have been victimised by officers of the disbanded SARS”. The 9-member Panel was headed by a retired jurist, Justice Doris Okuwobi, and had representatives of civil society, the ENDSARS protesters, the police and the National Human Rights Commission as members. Although initially billed to sit for six months from 27 October 2020, the Panel sat until 18th October 2021, given the volume of petitions and complaints brought before it.

    In a new landmark publication, a well-known civil rights and pro-democracy activist, public affairs commentator and analyst on the print, electronic and social media and seasoned election observer and monitor, Mr Nelson Ekujimi, has documented in exhaustive detail an eyewitness account of the deliberations of the Judicial Panel of Inquiry and Restitution, which lasted for one year. The compendium spanning 1139 pages features reports on not less than 128 petitions and complaints brought before the Panel and the decisions reached by the Panel in several cases.

    Mr Ekujimi acknowledges the support of various journalists that covered the deliberations of the Panel for the one year duration including reporters and correspondents from Television Continental (TVC), Channels Television and Lagos Television, as well as the legal team of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) and the legal team of the Nigeria Police Force “who came to our rescue when some EndSars movement members harassed and assaulted the team leader for the offence of covering and reporting the Panel ‘s work as witnessed instead of embellishing it; in line with vested interest narratives.”

    Suffice it to say that this document of invaluable historical record was possible because of the fidelity of the governor Sanwo-Olu administration to its promise to ensure that the Panel did a meticulous job in probing the alleged injustices suffered by citizens at the hands of the FSARS and recommending the requisite compensation. To achieve this objective, the Panel was given a free hand to operate by the state government, which also made the necessary resources available to ensure the success of the Panel’s deliberations. Earlier, the governor had been widely commended for the composition of the Panel, which included well known civil society activists who had been known to be highly critical of government at all levels over the years, representatives of the aggrieved ENDSARS protesters, the police, the NBA and of course, the Chairman, a respected retired jurist not known for any partisan political proclivities.

    The petitions and cases pleaded before the Panel, which are copiously documented in this book, vividly portray the depth of dehumanization of mostly innocent citizens by the FSARS. Many of the stories of injustices suffered by the various victims are harrowing and heart-rending. As Nelson Ekujimi states in the preface to the book, “The Lagos State Judicial Panel on Restitution for Victims of SARS Related Abuse and other matters sitting afforded the Nigerian people the opportunity to hear directly from the victims of security agencies’ abuses and brutality in an atmosphere devoid of the regular court procedures and tension. The Panel allowed indigent victims to air their petition with the assistance of pro bono services from the Nigerian Bar Association, in a record time that the workload of the regular courts will not allow for the quick dispensation of justice, as witnessed. Through the Panel sitting, one heard of the painful and bitter experiences of what some victims encountered in the hands of the disbanded notorious Nigeria Police unit, SARS, which could best be described as “man’s inhumanity to man”.

    But then, there were also unsavoury sides to the proceedings, which were clearly unveiled in the verbatim reports of the proceedings as recorded in this book. Thus, the impression was created, for instance, that some members of the Panel, lawyers, civil society activists, and sections of the media were determined to reinforce and impose on the public consciousness the allegation that a massacre actually occurred at the Lekki Toll Gate where soldiers detailed to enforce the curfew imposed by the state government at the height of the degeneration of the protests to sheer anarchy allegedly fired live bullets into a crowd of protesting youths.

    According to Ekujimi, “We also heard of some testimonies that on the scale of probability, could best be described as fiction or a film making session, most especially the petitions of the “Lekki Toll Gate incident, where alleged victims and even a volunteer, narrated how the Nigerian Army personnel were firing live ammunition indiscriminately at protesters and they were dodging bullets by running in a zigzag manner, dodging and escaping being shot at, while at the same time during the indiscriminate shooting period, were helping those who were shot to be ferried to the hospital for treatment. These bizarre stories are more fiction-like than reality; they can best be described as magical.”

    The author notes that the thoroughness and diligence with which the Panel discharged its duties during its sittings were not reflected in its conclusions and recommendations, especially on the Lekki Toll Gate incident of 20th October, 2020. In the words of Ekujimi, the Panel “stated that there was a “Massacre in context” and even went ahead to name victims of the massacre whose deaths were never proven through police report, medical report,  case notes, autopsy report and death certificate throughout the Panel’s sittings. Not one of the alleged victims’ testimony was substantiated with the critical elements of fact and evidence but shockingly, the Panel went out of its way to even affirm that a petitioner who petitioned the Panel over the death of his brother and testified before the Panel in September 2021, was listed as one of the alleged “victims of the massacre of 20th October, 2020”.

    Among anomalies cited by Ekujimi included “medical experts who issued medical reports not based on case notes of victims treated, but based on a victim’s inconsistent oral statements on the cause of injury and when confronted with the contradictions in the medical report and case note, distance themselves from the report or, in some cases, were exposed as liars under oath. We also had a medical practitioner who wrote a medical report on an incident of October 2020 in June 2021, based on a phone conversation between a nurse in the hospital and the brother of the victim, after receiving the Panel summons in 2021. The Panel sittings witnessed all manner of absurdities that questioned the sincerity and integrity of some of the stakeholders.”

    The good thing about this book is that it factually reports the proceedings at the Panel’s sittings without any opinionated commentaries, thus affording readers the opportunity of ascertaining the veracity or otherwise of the author’s prefatory remarks by reading the reports of the various cases before the Panel. Also listed in an appendix to the book are the names of 69 persons whose petitions were successful and who were awarded various sums in compensation ranging between N750,000 and N10 million. Significantly, the victims received their monetary awards immediately, even before the Panel formally wound up its sittings. This is no doubt a publication of tremendous importance on a momentous event in the annals of the country’s history that will facilitate productive reflections on the root causes of the protests, the benefits gained and the avoidable errors on all sides that should be useful in guiding future actions in similar circumstances.

  • Be wary of match fixing

    Be wary of match fixing

    The incurable optimists are on the prowl. They are praying the South Africa and Republic of Benin slip in their last two 2026 World Cup qualifiers. They argue that with these unholy prayer sessions, Nigeria will finish with 17 points. They have forgotten that the South Africans’ last two group matches would be played on their soil, having been chosen by their ‘hosts’ Zimbabwe and against Rwanda as Bafana Bafana’s last home.

    Only a dreamer deep in illusory thoughts would predict that the South Africans would bottle up these clear hurdles. Those jokers who administer our football hardly remember that our penultimate game is against Lesotho in one of the South African cities. And with the way our players have played so far in the qualifiers, it would take more than prayers and luck for Nigeria to beat Lesotho in South Africa with South Africans rooting for Lesotho. Did I hear you ask if Nigeria beat Lesotho in Uyo in the first leg tie? You have started again. No. Nigeria came from behind to play 1-1 draw with Lesotho in the first World Cup qualifying match.

    Where were these incurable optimists when South Africa inadvertently had eight home games in a World Cup qualifier when Lesotho, Rwanda and Zimbabwe opted to play their home games in South African cities? That was the day Bafana Bafana clinched Group C’s sole qualification ticket. What the NFF and NSC people are doing now is to shift the goalposts after the damage has been done. The talk of miracle favouring Nigeria always is bunkum.

    I appreciate the fact that the South Africans joined the debate about the deduction of three points of 17; which means that Bafana Bafana would have 14 points like Benin Republic, but only if FIFA rules against them. But I smell a rat. We wait. However, with two matches remaining for Bafana Bafana, all which will be played in South African cities, it is safe to say that they have 20 points, going by their matches up to th last stage of two matches. By the same token, it is safe to say that Nigeria should win her two matches to jump to 19. But, there is a caveat. This means that Nigeria must beat Republic of Benin in Uyo in the all-systems-go tie.

    Read Also: Ezekiel Nathaniel sets new Nigerian 400m hurdles record, finishes fourth in Tokyo final 

    This will be crunchy because Benin would be having 17 points from her last home game. It remains to be seen if Nigeria would beat Lesotho in South Africa. Already, Lesotho have perfected plans to drag the Eagles to Nelson Mandela Bay Stadium, Port Elizabeth in South Africa. Concerns were raised about the conditions of the stadium’s pitch in the preceding match days 7 and 8 that pitted Lesotho with South Africa and South Africa versus Nigeria. Don’t we see this match venue uncertainty as some form of mind games meant to unsettle the Super Eagles on October 6? Could it also be an attempt to take the game to a city where our players would be guzzling water like camels due to altitude issues? All is said to be fair in warfare, isn’t it?

    Do our sports chieftains know about these undercurrents? Did you say yes, dear reader? People who didn’t know that the South Africans inadvertently had eight home games as soon as Lesotho, Zimbabwe and Rwanda opted to play in South Africa cities?

    “The negotiations are just at the beginning. People bid to host games, and then it’s what they can offer. We will compare the two deals, then the one which is better…” Mohapi told Soccer Laduma.

    The decision will be crucial for both teams as Nigeria pushes to secure maximum points away from home in a tightly contested group. Nigeria has no business being in this permutations, given the armada of stars we have playing in the European leagues. A few times in my quiet moments I ask myself if our players can’t speak to themselves and beat some of the countries that have humbled us in competitions as a result of poor coaching?

    Since Monday, I have avoided participating in the debates of FIFA’s likelihood of deducting three points from South Africa’s 17, because most of the arguments are warp. Whereas, they reckon that the Super Eagles will win the next two games, these pundits are saying that Bafana Bafana would lose theirs. Indeed. I envisage a situation where both Nigeria and South Africa would win their two matches, culminating in 17 points for Nigeria and 20 points for South Africa, that is if FIFA find them guilty. Gravevine talks suggested that Lesotho filed their protest out of time as they say in law.

    When will FIFA release their findings and punishments? It has to be before October 6, such that all the countries in Group C can know where they stand on the table and how to go about their remaining games. I must warn here that our soccer chiefs should be wary of match fixing. Nigeria won’t cease being a sovereign country, if Super Eagles fail to qualify for the 2026 World Cup to be co-hosted by Mexico, Canada and the United States. Heaven didn’t fall when Nigeria failed to qualify in 2006 World Cup in Germany and at the Qatar 2022 World Cup.

    Only back-to-back defeats for South Africa against already-eliminated Zimbabwe and Rwanda will give Nigeria any chance of topping the section.

    What we should talking about is how to use the next two World Cup matches to rebuild the Super Eagles for the 2025 AFCON in December. How prepared are the NFF members for the competition coming on the heels another likely 2026 World Cup fiasco.

    According to Google: ‘’AFCON 2025 gets underway on 21 December 2025 when Morocco will host Comoros at the Prince Moulay Abdellah Stadium in Rabat. The 24 teams have been drawn into six groups of four, where they will play a round-robin format, facing each of the other three teams in their group stage.”

    It would be foolhardy for Nigeria to parade the same set of players who prosecuted our last two World Cup qualifiers against Rwanda in Uyo and against Bafana Bafana at the Free State Toyota Stadium in Bloemfontein on September 9 wholesale and expect to clinch the Group C’s sole qualification ticket.

    Already, one of our topmost defenders, Ola Aina returned to Forest, and the extent of his injury was confirmed. The former Chelsea player’s earliest return is expected by December, hinting that he could miss the Super Eagles’ AFCON 2025 campaign in Morocco. Aina underwent his first surgery on a torn hamstring in his right leg and is out of the country’s preparations.

    “On the 13th of September [four days ago], I had my operation. Thank you for all the support and all the messages and stuff.

    “I just finished having my surgery. It’s my first one, but yeah, I just want to say thank you for all the messages.

    “We move. It’s all in God’s timing; this is God’s plan.” Aina said in the clip he posted.

    Troost Ekong can be elevated to an administrative role in the Eagles among others whose time for Nigeria have reached the bus stop. They truly have to disembark and do other things.

    The perennial crises associated with Nigeria’s elimination from the senior World Cup is always ferocious. It could scuttle our attempt to surpass last edition, where Nigeria lost 2-1 in the finals to the host nation, Ivory Coast.

  • Ekwunife and Soludo’s voyeurism

    Ekwunife and Soludo’s voyeurism

    In the arena of Nigerian politics, where theatrical displays and verbal jousting are considered par for the course, there exists an unwritten code that separates legitimate political discourse from the unseemly. Governor Charles Soludo of Anambra State appears to have crossed this line with his peculiar and increasingly uncomfortable fixation on Senator Uche Ekwunife, the Deputy Governor candidate for the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    What emanates from my governor  is not political strategy but something far more disturbing—a voyeuristic obsession that reveals more about the observer than the observed.The spectacle of a sitting Governor, who should be ostensibly focused on governance and development, repeatedly turning his attention to dissecting, diminishing, and attempting to delegitimize a female political opponent raises fundamental questions about leadership, professionalism, and the quality of our democratic discourse.

    Soludo’s fixation on Ekwunife has become so pronounced that it borders on the pathological—a Governor who seems more preoccupied with one woman’s political aspirations than with the manifold challenges facing his state.This obsession becomes even more troubling when viewed through the lens of Soludo’s academic credentials and supposed intellectual sophistication.

    Here is a man who apparently has walked the corridors of international finance, who has lectured in prestigious universities, and who has advised governments on economic policy. Yet, when faced with a formidable female political opponent, he has chosen to descend into the gutter, trading his alleged intellectual capital for cheap political point-scoring. The question that begs asking is: why would an academic of Soludo’s supposed stature engage in such profane political theater?

    READ ALSO: FULL LIST: Countries with largest military air fleets in 2025

    The answer might lie in recognition—a grudging acknowledgment that Senator Ekwunife represents everything his administration is not or apparently lacks. Her political curriculum vitae reads like a masterclass in public service excellence. From her distinguished career in the private sector to her impactful tenure in both chambers of the National Assembly, where she championed numerous legislative initiatives and consistently delivered democratic dividends to her constituents, Ekwunife embodies the kind of competent, results-oriented leadership that Anambra desperately needs. Her track record in both the public and private sectors should indeed “scare the jitters” out of Soludo and his cheerleaders, for it presents a stark contrast to his own governance style.

    Faced with this formidable opponent, Soludo has resorted to the lowest common denominator of political warfare. His attempt to portray Ekwunife as a certificate forger represents perhaps the most desperate and unfounded attack in recent Anambra political history. Without evidence, without substantiation, and without regard for the damage such baseless accusations might inflict on our democratic processes, the Governor chose to impugn the integrity of a woman whose educational credentials and professional achievements are matters of public record.

    This reckless accusation not only failed to diminish Ekwunife’s stature but succeeded brilliantly in exposing the paucity of Soludo’s own political arsenal.

    Even more shocking was Soludo’s declaration that Ekwunife cannot be Governor of Anambra State because, despite hailing from Igbo Ukwu, she is married to a man from Nri. In the 21st century, when the world is systematically dismantling barriers and embracing inclusivity, Governor Soludo, with his supposed national and global exposure, has chosen to behave like a political dinosaur. His position that a woman, by virtue of her marriage, forfeits her right to aspire to govern her home state represents not just archaic thinking but a fundamental assault on the principles of gender equality and women’s rights.This retrograde stance raises critical questions about the silence of feminist organizations and female activists who should be screaming “blue murder” at such blatant discrimination. Where are the voices that have championed women’s political participation? Where are the organizations that have fought tirelessly for gender inclusivity in governance? Their silence in the face of such overt misogyny is as troubling as the original statement itself, for Soludo’s position essentially argues that marriage transforms a woman from a full citizen with political rights into some form of political helot, forever bound by the geographical origins of her spouse rather than the distinction of competence.The irony of this position becomes even more pronounced when one considers that Ekwunife’s marriage, rather than diminishing her connection to Anambra, has actually deepened her understanding of the state’s diverse communities and challenges. Her dual perspective as both an Igbo Ukwu indigene and an Nri resident should be viewed as an asset, providing her with broader insights into the needs and aspirations of different constituencies within the state.

    Soludo’s attempts to diminish Ekwunife’s political stature have achieved the exact opposite of their intended effect. Rather than undermining her credibility, they have succeeded in diminishing his own persona and reducing the overall quality of political discourse in Anambra State. Each attack, each baseless accusation, each desperate attempt at character assassination has stripped away another layer of the intellectual veneer that once defined the Soludo brand. The academic who once commanded respect in international financial circles has transformed himself into a political street fighter, and the transformation has been anything but flattering.This devolution raises a more fundamental question about the Soludo administration’s governance priorities.

    Why is a sitting Governor spending so much time and energy focused on a Deputy Governor candidate rather than showcasing his own achievements? Why is the administration not campaigning on its performance record, which is what any serious, achievement-oriented government would naturally do?The answer to this question is both simple and damning: the Soludo administration cannot run on its record because, after four years in office, there is precious little record to run on. The absence of significant developmental milestones, the lack of transformative projects, and the failure to address the fundamental challenges facing Anambra State have left the administration with no choice but to resort to personal attacks and character assassination. When you have nothing to sell, you attempt to destroy the competition—a strategy that reveals more about your own inadequacies than those of your opponents.

    The tragedy of Soludo’s fixation on Ekwunife lies not just in its voyeuristic nature or its contribution to the degradation of political discourse, but in what it represents: the spectacle of a failed administration desperately trying to distract from four years of underachievement by manufacturing controversies around a competent opponent. In choosing this path, Soludo has not only diminished himself but has also disserviced the people of Anambra State, who deserve leaders focused on solutions rather than distractions, on development rather than destruction, and on progress rather than petty political gamesmanship.

  • Rethinking local government autonomy

    Rethinking local government autonomy

    This week, the National Union of Local Government Employees (NULGE), at the end of its National Executive Council (NEC) meeting, called on President Bola Tinubu to enforce the judgement of the Supreme Court granting local government councils what amounted to financial and administrative autonomy, consistently advocated by many as critical to the effective functioning of that level of government. In its judgement delivered on July 11, 2024, the apex court granted a request by the Tinubu administration that the local government councils be paid their statutory allocations from the Federation Account directly, such that such funds would no longer be subject to alleged widespread deductions and diversions by state governments to the detriment of meaningful grassroots development.

    The NULGE was piqued that, over a year after what was widely celebrated in many quarters as a landmark judgement that would considerably enhance the capacity of local governments to discharge their constitutional responsibilities, the decision of the country’s highest court is nowhere near being implemented. State governments continue to be the recipients and distributors of local government statutory allocations from the Federation Account through the State Joint Local Government Account. The desired financial autonomy at that level, which presumably motivated the federal Government’s legal action, thus remains largely in abeyance, rendering the apex court verdict essentially theoretical so far.

    It is thus understandable that NULGE views the continuing non-enforcement of the judgement as an “undue delay” that “undermines the principles of democracy and denies the people at the grassroots the numerous benefits associated with the autonomy of local government administration” while stressing that “It is expected that a democratic and people-oriented government should abide by the tenets of democracy and respect the rule of law”. The union reiterates the conventional wisdom that an autonomous local government system would facilitate better service delivery, accountability and participatory governance, thus ensuring more effective realisation of governance dividends at the community level.

    But can it be that there are concrete and complex intricacies and impediments that make the attainment of the desired degree of autonomy at the local government level less straightforward and feasible than it appears, thus placing formidable obstacles on the path of the smooth implementation of the Supreme Court judgement? This column has always taken exception to the view expressed in certain quarters that the idea of the local government as a constitutionally recognised tier of government and thus part of the federal compact violates the federal principle and is thus undesirable and unworkable.

    Although Brazil is one of the very few federal systems that, like Nigeria, confer constitutional recognition on local governments, objections to the desired autonomy of a third layer of community governance that spurred this initiative cannot, in my view, be predicated on reflexive, doctrinaire and ideological considerations. With its relentless foray into areas hitherto considered exclusive preserves of sub-national jurisdiction in the United States, for instance, the Trump administration is demonstrating with the continued backing of the country’s Supreme Court so far that assumed ideal models of federal practice are essentially mythical.

    However, in his contribution to public discourse on the matter in a recent interview on national television, former Lagos State governor, federal Minister and senior lawyer, Mr Babatunde Fashola, opened fresh dimensions of thinking on the issue of local government autonomy not on the basis of ideology but concrete legal, political and administrative considerations. Arguing that the Constitution did not envisage autonomous local government councils, he pointed out that this is demonstrated by the fact that state Houses of Assembly are empowered to make laws guiding local government economic activities in contradiction to the assumed principle of autonomy.

    As he put it, “If you look at the legal and ordinary meaning of the word autonomy, it suggests that you are acting independently without any outside influence. So, when a State Assembly makes laws for how a local government functions, that is clearly external influence”. Again, with reference to the responsibilities of local governments as provided for in the Fourth Schedule of the Constitution including primary education, healthcare, road construction, cemeteries and the operation of slaughter houses, Fashola contended that these functions are largely dependent on land, which is controlled by state governments.

    In his words, “Those responsibilities are all dependent on one item – land. To the extent that state governments control land, I don’t think that autonomy was intended. What I think was intended was some form of collaboration, supervision, or oversight by states over local governments”. It was the need for such supervision over local government finances, informed by the experience of most local governments defaulting on meeting their financial obligations to their workers including primary school teachers and primary healthcare workers when they received direct allocations from Federation Account before 1999, he noted, that necessitated Section 162 of the constitution, “which provides for the State Joint Local Government Account as a deliberate mechanism of financial oversight”.

    Strongly opposing Fashola’s position, Chief Niyi Aborisade, lawyer, human rights activist and governorship aspirant in Oyo State in 2027 on the platform of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), contended that “I cannot subscribe to what the former governor said. Local government autonomy is realistic. It is the governors of states that arrogate power to themselves. The law is clear on the autonomy of local government.  We have done it before. What we have now is due to the excessive power of the governors to control money; now, many governors are just giving out peanuts to the local government Chairmen and using them as effective tools to control the people. That is why there is no longer development in the local government.”

    But it would appear to me that, beyond emotions, Fashola has raised concrete issues on local government subordination to states – constitutional regulatory functions of states over local councils and control of land by states – which have implications for state-local government relations and cannot be easily glossed over. There is also Section 7(3) of the 1999 Constitution, which, as explicated by Wikipedia, “mandates that a local government council must participate in economic planning and development within its area, and that the State House of Assembly must enact a law to establish an economic planning board to facilitate this. This section ensures that local councils have a role in their area’s economic activities, requiring state governments to provide the legal framework for such boards”.

    It is difficult to credibly fault the position that local governments are too territorially intertwined with states to allow for the kind of autonomy that is difficult to distinguish from independence that a union like NULGE understandably desires. And the Constitution demonstrably makes no provision for such. But is the current situation, where most state governments incapacitate local governments financially and thus obstruct meaningful development at the grassroots with negative implications for national progress and transformation, desirable or sustainable in the long run? Most certainly, no. What then is to be done?

    Fashola has demonstrated that the Constitution envisages collaboration between states and local governments, and even some degree of supervision of the latter by the former. But is this incompatible with a reasonable amplitude of autonomy on the part of community-level governments? Again, I don’t think so. However, the most critical emphasis must be on the democratic autonomy of the local government councils, which in my view is even more critical and fundamental than financial or administrative autonomy, which were the main areas of focus of the former governor.

    Read Also: Nigerian stock market prepares to shorten trading cycle

    Indeed, the Supreme Court judgement in question directly addressed this problem when it made it illegal for state governors to dissolve elected local government councils or appoint caretaker committees for the councils. Indeed, this decision has been complied with across the country, with all state governments now conducting local government elections at which officials to run the councils are chosen by the electorate. The critical question now is that of the integrity and credibility of local government elections in which parties in control of the state governments win virtually all Chairmanship and councillorship positions. Such elections are farcical and constitute a gross waste of time and financial resources. Such flawed and perverse electoral systems at the grassroots will necessarily render nugatory any assumed benefits to be derived from granting greater financial or administrative autonomy to local governments.

    It is unfortunate that the anchor of the television programme on which Mr Fashola featured did not seek to tap his insights on how democratic governance can be deepened and made more meaningful and realistic at the grassroots. Some have advocated that the responsibility for conducting local government elections be transferred from state electoral commissions to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). It is just the same way that fears are expressed on the likelihood of State governors abusing the control of state police if sub-national police outfits are constitutionally sanctioned. We cannot perpetually run away from instituting the requisite checks and balances that will enable sub-national jurisdictions to discharge with credibility and integrity, responsibilities that they must bear in a federal system.

    If the votes of the people counted at the grassroots and local government elections reflect the will of the people as expressed in free and fair elections, it will not matter if councils receive their statutory allocations directly or through Joint State Local Government Accounts. Rather, non-performing councils will be aware that they will face the verdict of the people in polls that are difficult to manipulate by state governments. But is the direct payment of statutory allocations to local government a sufficient condition to guarantee accountable, efficient and maximally productive governance at the grassroots? Mr Fashola has raised issues of the capacity, both of skilled personnel and resilient administrative and organisational structures at that level, which are critical for financial autonomy to achieve the desired objectives.

  • Another fish to fry

    Another fish to fry

    The blame game begins. Where did we get it wrong? Not for the first time. Our soccer buffs have repeatedly shown their lack of leadership when picking coaches for our national teams. They rely on frivolous criteria, including name dropping of elite European managers recommending our morbid choices.  We are always told that such choices served as countless assistants to big and successful coaches just to browbeat us over their individual tactical savvy. Nobody dares to interrogate those picked since Nigerians only get to know the next coach at odd hours of the day through press releases.

    Lilliputian coaches are recruited without throwing the offer open to knowledgeable tacticians with credible credentials to attend interviews where they are drilled, so that the best are picked. Instead, we employ journeymen who sign mercenary contracts where they would be living in Europe to watch our boys most times on television, rather than attending those matches to establish good rapport with our players’ European managers.

    With this tardy arrangement, the coaches only remember Nigeria when they are challenged by their employers to either submit the lists of players to be invited for games, which could be done by mails or to find out when they would be in Nigeria for important competitions such as the World Cup, Africa Cup of Nations, the Olympic Games, WAFU e.t.c. Nobody sees anything wrong with the setting, since our federation chieftains don’t have to bother about the manager’s welfare and other logistics to keep him in Nigeria without an official car, house and other domestic staff to make his stay worth his time spent.

    With handicapped coaches, we would find ourselves in a position where they can’t control our big boys. Our federation buffs forget that our better exposed players know good coaches when they see them. Such coaches’ philosophies prepare the players’ minds of what to expect from them. The result is the discotheque manner in which they report to camp for critical matches. Whereas other countries’ players who play regularly than our boys in the different European clubs get to their home countries 24 hours after their club matches, ours are spotted in parts of the country attending to family matters. The result is the chaotic manner in which our teams are prepared for competitions.

    Read Also: Batista’s sack casts doubts on Venezuela’s Friendly with Nigeria

    Equally disgusting is the impudence with which our players are kitted with gadgets tied around their necks and mouths while preparing for the days’ training sessions. This underscores the low quality of the coaches we employ to train the team. The other day when the players were taking a walk around their hotel, almost all of them had their ear drums covered with different gadgets dangling around their shoulders. Of course, wires are seen around their waists. Pray, our players can’t try this hogwash in their respective clubs. Let me save you dear reader, the thought of how disjointed they walked around the hotel’s premises, with the big boys strolling behind the other players leading the exercise from the front.

    One wonders why we are always late to take decisions on the future of the game here even when the broken roofs have killed many people and maimed others for life. The ugliness of football is such that we drew four of our home game, yet we expect to be ta the 2026 World Cup. It won’t happen. Our fire brigade approach to sporting events is primarily the reason for the dearth of sports in Nigeria, where influence peddlers get jobs that they’re ill-equipped for.

    If we know what is good for the game here, the government should make the task of rebuilding the Super Eagles such that the ultimate target would be to qualify the country for the 2030 World Cup with four matches to the end of the qualifiers. It is achievable with the right coaches and a group of not more than five knowledgeable Nigerians to reinvent the Super Eagles of our collective dream.

    If we ask the right people the coaches we need and how to interface with them through their agents, meetings can be organised to get the best man for the job before the end of October, especially if we start the search for a new coach now. The argument that the time to search for a new coach is too close is unacceptable. Super Eagles, the way it is structured and the coach that we have, including the federation chiefs and their NSC supervisors are bereft of ideas to stem the rot and would only lead us into another ditch.

    If we compute how much it has cost Nigeria to prosecute these World Cup qualifiers, we would recognise our folly that if only we had stepped back from the tearful past to recruit a Grade A European coach. England for her claim of being the originators of the beautiful game are going to the 2026 World Cup with a German coach Thomas Tuchel, who needs no introduction in world football. Tuchel and England have an 18 months contract which I dare say would be extended after the Mundial. England’s Three Lions have won all her five matches without conceding a goal, and only on Tuesday beat Serbia at home in Belgrade 5-0.

    According to a Reuters’ report on the Tuesday match: ”England have a maximum 15 points from five games and could even seal automatic qualification as group winners next month. Criticised for a laboured 2-0 home defeat of Andorra on Saturday, England produced their best performance under head coach Thomas Tuchel to punish a timid Serbia display.” I digress.

    My problem with those insisting on having a Nigerian coaching bench is that they are quick to multiply the going rate of the naira to the dollar when the figure of what foreign coaches earn comes to the fore. They forget the huge returns on this kind of investment if the team does well in such a major soccer competition as the senior World Cup. Nigeria is in very big trouble. The country must wake up to the fact our national flag won’t be hoisted among the comity of nations at the 2026 World Cup to be co-hosted by the USA, Canada and Mexico. I’m not an alarmist.

    Nigeria doesn’t need journeymen European coaches who have traversed the continent losing games with aplomb. Indeed, we need young and enterprising coaches hungry for glory.

    The Super Eagles next game is an away match to Lesotho at the Toyota Stadium in Bloemfontein, South Africa, on Oct. 10, before wrapping up their campaign on Oct. 16 against Benin Republic in Uyo. South Africa will play against Zimbabwe inside the Orlando Pirates Stadium in South Africa. Of course, Bafana Bafana’s last game is with Rwanda in South Africa, yet we are deluding ourselves that they won’t win Group C’s sole qualification ticket. These are fishes for the South Africans to fry on match days. They won’t bottle it.

    As it stands, South Africa remain in a strong position to top the group with 17 points from eight matches, while second placed Benin Republic are on 14 points.

    Fourth-placed Rwanda are tied on 11 points with Nigeria, while Lesotho (6 points) and Zimbabwe (4 points) complete the six-team table.

  • Towards a peaceful Ekiti APC primary (1)

    Towards a peaceful Ekiti APC primary (1)

    Nigeria’s Fountain of Knowledge, Ekiti State, is on the cusp of making a peculiar political statement. Whichever way the governorship primary of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) ends, Ekiti is set to tell the world something worth paying attention to.

    If the incumbent wins the contest, he would have broken a jinx that erected a barrier on the path of his predecessors from securing two straight terms. But if he loses the primary, it would be a foregone conclusion that the state is haunted by a second-term spook. 

    So far, there is nothing to show that victory would elude the incumbent.

    As preparations for the primary intensify, there is no doubt that the wheat will be separated from the chaff, ultimately. The main contender and the pretenders will be known on October 27.

     After the exercise, the losers, with bruised and deflated ego, would reconcile with the predictable winner. The lessons of the contest would be very instructive, although they may be lost on the gullible and those who draw the wool over their eyes.

    The primary is the first critical step in the ruling party’s push for continuity. The bigger game is next year’s poll, which will herald a similar contest in the neighbouring Osun State involving the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and APC.

    These elections would lay the foundation for the 2027 general election, which is nearer than imagined. Thus, the governorship polls may have a predictive value.

    Morning shows the day. While other contestants appear to be spoiling for war in a no-war zone, engaging in character assassination and indulging in curious revisionism in the Ekiti APC, the expected winner has remained focused. He is consolidating his hold on the party as he looks forward to the contest with confident hope and optimism.

    There are, understandably, few deserters from the vehicle to the primary. But that partisan behaviour is not really a foul play. The transient shift in loyalty may be a normal element of intra-party contest that does not totally pale into anti-party activity.

    What is striking in Ekiti APC is that a few alarmists are creating the impression of a looming stiff contest. Although the chapter is not threatened by external forces – the PDP, the relic of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and the split PDP masquerading as the African Democratic Congress (ADC) – it may be battling with some negligible internal contradictions.

    Read Also: First Lady to female CEOs: mentor, empower, replicate yourselves in others

    After the statewide endorsement for Governor Biodun Abayomi Oyebanji (BAO), the coast was clear that a vacancy does not exist for now at the Government House in Ado-Ekiti, the state capital. But a tiny fraction of those who initially were part of the endorsement are exercising their constitutional right to look for temporary trading opportunities with other contenders ahead of the primary.

    Politics is in the air in the rustic, far-flung hilly state. Eyes are on a sub-regional unit where principled actors are wrongly labelled by outsiders as stubborn folks. Everybody’s attention is on the imminent battle. There are permutations, series of cajoling, rumour mongering and propaganda by hired consultants and spin doctors.

    Gladiators have returned to the drawing board to perfect strategies for intrigues. Social media warriors are locked in reputational damage. There are accusations and counter-accusations by antagonistic supporters and followers.

    Lightweights are showing nude bravado, building castles in the air. It is one of the wonders of the game that the weak is trying to bully the strong while simultaneously resorting to direct blackmail, with their ‘disarticulated’ followers crying foul where there is none.

    Facts are also deliberately distorted. Some storytellers are trying to rewrite the history of Ekiti State’s creation. It smacks of jealousy. As they try to dismiss the governor’s involvement in the historic agitation as scanty or negligible, observers find fault with their claim. The questions are: where were these opponents during the popular clamour for state creation? What was the contribution of these adversaries? Are they entitled to any footnote when the history of state creation is fully written?

    To those who keep records, these scenarios are not new. Politics is about competition and antagonism. In some quarters, the elements of ‘do-or-die’ cannot be totally ruled out by bitter actors. The point of departure is that that unruly partisan behaviour connotes political immaturity.

    But should the sordid past be re-enacted?

    The Ondo-Ekiti axis was usually enveloped in tension during governorship primaries in the progressive bloc. The only exception was the 1979 primary of the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) involving Chief Adekunle Ajasin, Senator Ayo Fasanmi, and Rev. Iluyomade, a former Principal of International School at the University of Ibadan (UI).

    The primary of 1982 contested by Ajasin, Chief Akin Omoboriowo, and Senator Banji Akintoye divided the progressive camp. But those who defected from the Unity Party of Nigeria (UPN) to the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) never recovered from the public opprobrium that followed their action.

    In the Third Republic, the Social Democratic Party (SDP) primary was fiercely contested among aspirants of Ekiti origin – Evangelist Bamidele Olumilua, Dr. Kunle Olajide, Prof. David Oke (Pick a Gem), Akinyemi, and Prof. Opeyemi Ola – after the ticket was zoned to Ekiti. Ajasin gave instructions from his Owo bedroom that delegates should vote for Olumilua, who won.

    In 1999, the Alliance for Democracy (AD) primary between Otunba Niyi Adebayo and Chief S. K. Kolawole was moderated by Lagos-based Afenifere leaders of Ogun State origin. It generated bitterness. Babalola, an Awoist, surprisingly left for the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). He never returned to his natural political habitat.

    In 2007, Ekiti AD/Action Congress (AC) was in turmoil after Dr. Kayode Fayemi won the ticket. Other aspirants – Prince Dayo Adeyeye, Ayo Arise, and Joseph Odetola – hurriedly defected to the PDP. The governorship poll that followed was chaotic. The result was disputed. For the next three years, peace took a flight from the state.

    Also, anxiety enveloped Ekiti APC during the 2017 primary. No fewer than 30 chieftains showed interest. On the eve of the primary, there was commotion. The national chairman, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, who was taken aback by the rancorous atmosphere, wondered why the National Leader could not rein in his ‘boys’ in Ekiti. It took the wisdom of party elders to restore order in a state of pandemonium.

    However, three years ago, there was a semblance of orderliness. The handwriting on the wall was clear to featherweights who initially threw their hats in the ring. The party was in one accord when BAO got the ticket and won the poll.

    In all these shadow polls, a key element of success was the structure of the aspirant. This factor, among others, will shape the anticipated exercise, which may be through a direct or indirect method, since the consensus option has been ruled out.

    Other associated issues, which also have a linkage with the structure of the contenders, are personal and political networks, relationship with the party, service to the political family, experience, record of performance in public service, and financial war chest.

    Others are: the incumbency factor, support of the four predecessors, public perception, and the guided position of the delegates.

    All these factors, without mincing words, comparatively favour Oyebanji more than his rivals. If other aspirants challenge the governor to a debate, he would be rated above them in terms of public service experience, knowledge of the state, and a good understanding of its multiple problems.

    While the governor is in a vantage position to tender his scorecard, his rivals would have nothing comparable to show.

    Contestants Kayode Ojo and Abimbola Olajumoke have attained good heights in their chosen professions. As Nigerians, and indeed, indigenes of Ekiti, they have the inalienable right to seek the ticket. But the political gap between the governor and the two contenders is wide. Many party stalwarts perceive them as starters who would be making promises to Ekiti on what they intend to do, unlike the governor, who has applied for mandate renewal based on what he has accomplished, and what more he is still doing as an incumbent.

    The Ekiti APC is the dominant structure that is critical to the primary. It would not be strange if over 80 per cent of the membership queues behind BAO if the exercise is based on the delegate system.

    Oyebanji has been an important and faithful member of the family from the inception of the Fourth Republic and throughout his political career as a Personal Assistant, Chief of Staff, Commissioner, Director-General, Secretary to the State Government, governor and state party leader.

    Undiluted loyalty is key to the structure. In times of storm, stress and tension, members of the structure have often elevated group interest over personal agenda. BAO is a product of the time-tested tradition.

    Loyal stalwarts have always embraced intra-party crisis-resolution mechanisms in the chapter. These committed and dedicated chieftains are poles apart from political neonates who opted to take the party to court to ventilate grievances before and after elections.

    The party knows BAO, who also knows the party leaders across the wards, local governments, constituencies, and districts, unlike his challengers, who have to be newly introduced to critical stakeholders in many local councils and at the state level.

    However, to avoid a post-primary crisis, the national leadership should endeavour to conduct a free and fair primary, leaving no room for any loophole that can be capitalised upon by the symbols of internal contradiction in the chapter.

  • From allies to foes: How Amaechi, Fayemi’s friendship collapsed

    From allies to foes: How Amaechi, Fayemi’s friendship collapsed

    Theirs is a classic instance of the thin line between friendship and enmity, and how quickly one can turn into another.

    Since their days as governors of Ekiti and Rivers states until recently, Sir Kayode Fayemi and Hon. Rotimi Amaechi carried on as the best of friends. Such was the bond between them that they became the brains behind the adoption of African Democratic Congress (ADC) as the rallying point for Atiku, El-Rufai and other political enemies of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to pursue their mission of stopping his return for a second term in 2027.

    But in an instance of the instability of human relationships, the mission that united them became their veritable source of animosity, so much so that Amaechi was said to have complained loudly that Fayemi no longer picks his calls.

    But how did things go wrong between them?

    Recall that both Amaechi and Fayemi were candidates in the presidential primaries that produced Tinubu as the APC candidate in the build-up to the 2023 elections. Fayemi, however, toed the path of other aspirants like Senator Godswill Akpabio, former Ogun State governor Ibikunle Amosun and former Speaker of the House of Representatives Dimeji Bankole, who stepped down forTinubu moments before the the votes were cast at the Eagle Square venue of the primary election and set the stage for Tinubu to roundly defeat Amaechi, former Vice President Yemi Osinbajo and other party stalwarts who contested the election.

    Read Also: I have fulfilled presidential mandate, says Ibas

    Smarting from his defeat at the presidential primaries, Amaechi resolved to work against Tinubu’s interest, eventually drafting Fayemi, whose hope of getting a slot in Tinubu’s cabinet did not materialise. In their pursuit of this unholy scheme, they hit on the idea of joining forces with other anti-Tinubu forces on a mission to frustrate his administration and make his return in 2027 impossible.

    However, while Amaechi chose to be open about his opposition to Tinubu’s presidency, Fayemi, fearing a backlash, chose to be clandestine. But as it has turned out, their differing approach became the sore point as Amaechi drew Fayemi’s anger with his public declaration that he and the former Ekiti State governor masterminded anti-Tinubu elements’ choice of ADC as the vehicle for the anti-Tinubu mission.

    Apparently embarrassed by Amaechi’s revelation, Fayemi tried to dismiss it with a wave of the hand. “In an era where fabricated or distorted statements are often attributed to public figures for malicious purposes, we are cautious about engaging with potentially manufactured controversies designed to provoke or profit,” he said.

    He added that “it is possible that Hon. Amaechi did not make the statement or was misquoted” and also claimed that there was no video of Amaechi making the claims attributed to him.

    Determined, however, to prove that he is the one to be believed in this game of claims and counter-claims, Amaechi released an audio providing incontrovertible details and naming names to vindicate himself and permanently silence his political ally.

    Amaechi said: “ADC has overgrown those that started it. The coalition started between Fayemi and I in the house of Nasiru Danu, with Salihu Mohammed and others.

    “When we met, Salihu commenced the meeting. He wanted us to reconcile. After reconciliation, we agreed to broaden it so that it would involve more than just the two of us talking about starting a new party.

    “Then we got a consultant to help us look at the political structure and that of INEC to determine which party will be most suitable.

    “Then we expanded by getting (Senator Aminu) Tambuwal and others. By the time we did that, we had grown to about 20 to 30.

    “We thereafter set up a committee to look for any of the available parties to join.

    “The committee, after negotiating with several parties like AA (Action Alliance), Accord Party, ended up with ADC.

    “One of the requirements we set was that the party must give up its leadership so that everyone can join.”

    Amaechi’s detailed explanation has sseen driven Fayemi into absolute silence while Amaechi is going about promoting his presidential ambition. Any surprise that Fayemi is no longer picking his calls?

  • Garlands for Governor Hope Uzodinma

    Garlands for Governor Hope Uzodinma

    In an era where Nigerian workers across various states grapple with economic hardship and delayed salary payments, amidst other poor working conditions, Governor Hope Uzodinma of Imo State has emerged as a shining example of what leadership with a human face truly means. His recent approval of a groundbreaking N104,000 minimum wage for Imo State civil servants represents more than just a salary adjustment—it is a powerful statement about the dignity of public service and the transformative potential of good governance in Nigeria.

    Governor Uzodinma’s decision to increase the minimum wage from N76,000 to N104,000 transcends traditional wage adjustments, it is indeed revolutionary. This bold move represents a fundamental shift in how state governments can approach the welfare of their workforce. By setting the new minimum wage significantly above the national standard of N70,000, Uzodinma has demonstrated that Nigerian states can indeed prioritize the economic wellbeing of their citizens without compromising fiscal responsibility.

    This increase is not merely about numbers on a paycheck—it is about ensuring that Imo civil servants can earn a living income that upholds their dignity as state mandarins. For too long, public servants across Nigeria have endured wages that barely meet basic subsistence needs, forcing many into secondary employment , lack of motivation, corruption and financial distress. Uzodinma’s initiative acknowledges that civil servants are the backbone of effective governance and deserve compensation that reflects their vital contribution to state development.

    The governor’s vision extends far beyond the basic minimum wage adjustment. The comprehensive nature of his wage review demonstrates a deep understanding of the diverse needs within the civil service ecosystem. By increasing doctors’ salaries from N215,000 to N503,000, Uzodinma has recognized the critical role healthcare professionals play in ensuring the wellbeing of Imo citizens. This substantial increase can address the brain drain that has plagued Nigeria’s healthcare sector on one hand where qualified medical personnel often seek better opportunities abroad or in the private sector whilst making the state healthcare system more attractive and efficient.

    READ ALSO: How long can Wike walk the tightrope?

    Similarly, the increase in teachers’ salaries in tertiary institutions from N119,000 to N222,000 reflects Uzodinma’s commitment to educational excellence. By investing in educators, the governor is investing in the future of Imo State, ensuring that the next generation receives quality education from motivated and fairly compensated teachers. This holistic approach to wage adjustment demonstrates that Uzodinma views governance not as a series of isolated policies but as an interconnected system where each component’s wellbeing affects the whole.

    Governor Uzodinma’s achievement becomes even more remarkable when viewed against the backdrop of Nigeria’s current economic challenges. Across the nation, numerous state governments struggle to meet their basic obligations to workers, with salary arrears mounting and civil servants enduring months without pay. In this context, Uzodinma’s decision to not only pay regularly but to significantly increase wages represents a masterclass in fiscal management and priority setting.

    While his counterparts in other states cite revenue constraints and federal allocation dependencies as barriers to worker welfare, Uzodinma has proven that creative governance can overcome these challenges. His administration’s success in boosting internally generated revenue has provided the fiscal foundation for this wage increase, demonstrating that states can reduce their dependence on federal allocations through strategic economic policies and efficient revenue collection.

    Likewise, the  psychological and social impact of Uzodinma’s wage policy extends far beyond the immediate financial relief it provides. For years, civil servants across Nigeria have endured the indignity of wages that fail to reflect their education, experience, and contribution to society.

    By ensuring that civil servants earn a living wage, Governor Uzodinma has restored pride to public service in Imo State. When civil servants can afford decent housing, quality education for their children, and healthcare for their families without financial stress, they can focus entirely on their professional responsibilities. This creates a virtuous cycle where improved worker welfare translates to better service delivery and enhanced public satisfaction with government performance.

    The ripple effects of Uzodinma’s progressive wage policy extend beyond Imo State’s borders. The Nigeria Labour Congress has already called on federal and other state governments to emulate Imo’s example, recognizing the transformative potential of such policies. This external validation underscores the national significance of Uzodinma’s achievement and positions him as a thought leader in Nigerian governance.

    Other governors now face increased pressure from their civil servants and organized labor to justify why they cannot replicate Imo’s success. This healthy competition among states could catalyze a nationwide improvement in worker welfare, potentially breaking the cycle of poverty wages that have characterized public service in Nigeria for decades.

    Beyond the immediate impact on civil servants, Uzodinma’s wage increase will generate significant economic multiplier effects throughout Imo State. When workers have more disposable income, they increase their consumption of goods and services, stimulating local businesses and creating additional employment opportunities. This increased economic activity generates more tax revenue for the state, creating a sustainable cycle of prosperity.

    Local markets, housing sectors, educational institutions, and service providers will all benefit from the increased purchasing power of civil servants. This economic stimulus effect demonstrates that investing in worker welfare is not just a moral imperative but also a sound economic strategy that benefits the entire state.

    Governor Hope Uzodinma’s minimum wage initiative stands as a testament to what is possible when Nigerian leaders prioritize the welfare of their citizens over personal aggrandizement. His administration has proven that the oft-cited excuse of insufficient resources is often a reflection of misplaced priorities rather than genuine fiscal constraints.

    In a political landscape often characterized by unfulfilled promises and policy reversals, Uzodinma’s swift implementation of this wage increase demonstrates his commitment to action over rhetoric. This decisive leadership style has not only improved the lives of Imo civil servants but has also restored faith in the possibility of responsive, caring governance in Nigeria.

    As Nigeria continues to grapple with economic challenges and social tensions, Governor Hope Uzodinma’s example provides a roadmap for how dedicated leadership can make a tangible difference in citizens’ lives. His minimum wage policy is more than a salary adjustment—it is a powerful demonstration that governance in Nigeria can indeed have a human face, prioritizing the dignity and welfare of those who serve the public good. Through this bold initiative, Uzodinma has not only transformed the lives of Imo civil servants but has also set a new standard for compassionate leadership across Nigeria.

  • Royal rivalry in Yorubaland (2)

    Royal rivalry in Yorubaland (2)

    Ahead of independence and after independence, many Yoruba sub-ethnic groups never perceived themselves as equals. The Egba, the Ijebu, and the Ibadan would refer to Ekiti, Akoko, Igbomina, and Ebolo as “ara ilu oke” (natives of yonder).

    Traders in the days of yore trying to cross Ijebuland to the Ejirin market and Lagos coast suffered in the hands of fellow Yoruba brothers who imposed levies on them. Proximity to the sea was a mark of class and distinction.

    Even, in a civilised era, lawyer and Agent-General Apena Toye Coker sighted Regional Minister Chief Oduola Osuntokun and exclaimed derisively: ‘Ekiti Kete.’ Osuntokun, a very educated and intelligent Ekiti man, rejected the label of group inferiority and protested instantly. Sensing the brewing trouble, Premier Obafemi Awolowo cleverly introduced a new topic to divert their attention and restore peace.

    Many Yoruba traditional rulers were divided by political leanings in those days of hot politics. After the split in the Action Group (AG) in 1962, monarchs who supported Awolowo, Leader of Federal Opposition, became the foes of their brother obas who gravitated towards Chief Ladoke Akintola, Premier of Western Region.

    In ancient towns, there are unresolved age-long suspicion and repressed tension over the inexplicable and unfading dichotomy between townspeople who perceived themselves as aborigines and others who were classified as settlers. According to observers, that rivalry shaped the relationship between Oba Adeyemi 111 and the late Ashipa of Oyo, Chief Amuda Olorunkosebi.

    READ ALSO; BBNaija and the evolution of Nigeria’s entertainment industry

    Up to now, the descendants of founder of Ago Oja are unrelented in their agitation for a crown, even if is a lesser one, as a tribute to the pathfinding and pacific exploits of their forefathers.

    In the eighties and nineties, there was commotion in the Oyo State Council of Obas. The Alaafin rejected the permanent chairmanship position allotted to the Ooni. When Osun State was created, the Owa also raised the same complaint. In Oyo State, the Olubadan said the Alaafin cannot be the permanent chairman of the Council of Obas. The monarchs wanted rotational chairmanship, which the Alaafin rejected in Oyo and the Ooni rejected in Osun.

    Now, long standing politician, former governor and Olubadan-designate, Oba Senator Rashidi Adewolu Ladoja, has jocularly sent a notice that on rotational chairmanship he stands, and that since the matter is within the purview of the Oyo State House of Assembly, people should know that the highly populous Ibadan, with 16 of 32 members, and in a situation where the Speaker would not vote, would always have an edge in any contest.

    But in the pre-colonial and colonial days, Alaafin usually sent his choice ‘Ilari’ to place ‘ewe akoko’ on the head of Ibadan ruler, signalling his installation either as Balogun, Basorun, Aare or Baale. In the 20s, an Alaafin even deposed Baale Shitu (Omo Aare) of Ibadan. A high chief of Ibadan, Adebisi Idikan, had to beg an Alaafin for his life with lots of money and gifts for appearing in a more expensive costume during the unveiling of Mapo Hall in Ibadan where the Alaafin was guest of honour. The rich businessman was accused of stealing the show during the ceremony.

    In Osun, caution was thrown to the wind when the Oluwo of Iwo, Oba AbdulRasheed Akanbi, Telu, allegedly beat up another traditional ruler, the Agbowu of Ogbagba, Oba Dhikrulahi Akinropo, claiming that he had interrupted him during his speech at a meeting by calling him a madman.

    In many communities, many obas also oppressed their chiefs by treating them as  personal assistants. Protest, in many cases, led to suspension or dethronment.

    Eminent Yoruba leaders should not take sides in the Ooni/Alaafin feud. They should appeal to the two influential rulers to bury their hatchet and allow the sleeping dog to lie. The two foremost obas should cooperate. Today, the Ooni is establishing industries all over Yoruba land and creating jobs for youths. The Alaafin should complement this effort. The two royal fathers should be concerned about the plight of the Yoruba in Kwara and Kogi states, who are politically marginalised. They should be concerned about the Yoruba language that is going into extinction. What should bother them is the collapse of moral values among the young population.

    The Yoruba race needs to embrace the reality that it has two towering monarchs with antagonistic claims of supremacy. It is not illogical that both are usually right when they tender their facts, which nobody can contradict. In short, the Yoruba race has two fathers – the Ooni and the Alaafin.

    There should be a proposal along the line of a symbolic collegiate monarchial order in Yoruba land. This should be organised in an atmosphere of mutual respect.

    The historical records show that the Alaafin was acknowledged as the King – political and administrative head – of the Yoruba by the colonial authorities, being the head of the Oyo Empire. The British Government signed the treaty with him. While inviting the British to assist him in ending the 16-year-long Kiriji War, Alaafin Adeyemi 1 said the Yoruba race was a gift to his forefathers from God.

    The Alaafin installs the Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yoruba land, the Iyalode of Yoruba land, and even the Mayegun of Yoruba land, and there is no controversy or dispute. The Alaafin keeps a deep memory of the ancient Oyo Empire of his illustrious forebears. That kingdom no longer exists. But the past cannot be obliterated.

    The Ooni installs the Odole of Ife, or the Odole of the Source; the Yeyeoba of Ife, or the Yeye Oodua. But when the late Alayeluwa Okunade Sijuwade wanted to install Chief Tom Ikimi as the Akinrogun of Yoruba land, the late Alaafin Lamidi Adeyemi III objected and his complaint was upheld by the government. He said the Ooni could only install an Akinrogun of Ife. He delved into history, emerging with the evidence of how the title of Akinrogun can only be conferred on an Egba man.

    Yet, the Ooni also elicits awe, reverence, honour, and admiration of all and sundry as the custodian of Ile Ife, the “Orirun.” He is recognised and respected as the father and head of the ancient town and giver of crowns to Yoruba obas.

     When Owoni Adenekan Olubuse was invited to Lagos by the British to shed light on some knotty problems of crown and land ownership in the Ijebu axis, the Yoruba nation knew that he took up the assignment on behalf of the race. As Owoni Olubuse left his palace, all Yoruba obas, including the Alaafin, left their palaces and resided in their “ehin odi” as a mark of respect, until he returned to Ile-Ife, the cradle. That was in 1901. The venerable Obanikoro of Lagos, High Chief Ajayi Bembe, was the interpreter between the Colonial Governor William MacGregor and the Owoni.

    In fact, the British Government bore the expenses of the unusual journey from Ife to Lagos. Goats were slaughtered as sacrifice whenever Ooni was about to cross any river.

    All the foremost Yoruba rulers, including the Alaafin, trace their backgrounds and crowns to Ife. An account even said that Oranmiyan, the grandson of Oduduwa, founder of Oyo Kingdom and progenitor of the Obas of Benin, was buried at Ife. Up to now, there is “Opa Oranmiyan” at Ife. In fact, Ooni presided over the rotational meetings of Yoruba Obas from 1934.

    It is to the credit of Ooni Sijuwade and Eleko of Lagos Oba Adeyinka Oyekan that some high chiefs and baales were elevated to obaship in sensitivity to the fact that the clamour for autonomy, as it were, and the preservation of identity are the anthems of the millennium.

    It is only in Yorubaland that the royal rivalry is serious, protracted and destabilising. Some scholars have even attributed the division among Yoruba to the curse that oozed out of the mouth of Alaafin Aole during the dispute between him and the legendary Aare Ona Kankanfo Afonja of Ilorin.

    Other ethnic groups tend to manage the clevages better. In the North – the Muslim North – the Sultan of Sokoto, who calls the shots from the Caliphate, is the undisputed Number One. He is the Commander of the Faithful. His deputy is Elkanemi, the Shehu of Borno. Other revered monarchs, nevertheless, have their local sphere of influence in the vast North. The Ohinoyi (or Attah) is the overall ruler of Ebira land, comprising five local governments in Kogi State. The Tor Tiv is the leader of the Tiv nation, the dominant ethnic group in Benue State. Attah is the ruler of Igala nation. The Lamido reigns supreme in Adamawa. Etsu Nupe is the paramount ruler of Nupe Kingdom.

    In the Southsouth, The Olu, whose kingdom has links with Yorubaland, is the ruler of Itsekiti and Warri. The Obong of Calabar is the king in his town and its environs. Opobo is ruled by the Amanyanabo. The Igbo society is presumed kingless; only warrant chiefs subsist in the area. The community elders are in charge. This age-long system works for their society.

    The Yoruba need to agree that they have two fathers who are from the same source, Oduduwa. The two have incontrovertible claims. There is no need for rivalry. The two royal fathers, and indeed, all royal fathers in the country, should also constantly acknowledge the restrictions on their influence by the ‘republican order.’

    The people of Yoruba land should maintain an abiding fidelity to tradition, history, and precedence in an atmosphere of mutual respect and brotherhood. If there are other grey areas that fuel conflicts, eminent Yoruba leaders should reconcile the two topmost monarchs. Miscreants in the social media should pull the break and halt indecent postings and portrayals. Yoruba deserve its peace.

    So, between the Ooni and the Alaafin, who is superior? More questions, elusive answers.

    The questions may not be necessary after all.