The Nation Newspaper

Category: Saturday

  • The silent erosion of true federalism: A challenge to Nigeria’s census panel composition

    The silent erosion of true federalism: A challenge to Nigeria’s census panel composition

    In the tapestry of Nigeria’s diverse heritage, where the threads of over two hundred million souls interweave to form the vibrant fabric of our nation, a conspicuous void has emerged—a void that speaks volumes about the precarious state of our federal structure. The recent composition of the national census panel stands as a testament to an oversight so glaring, so profound in its implications, that it calls into question our commitment to the principles of true federalism upon which our nation was founded. The mathematics of representation on this critical panel reveals a troubling equation of imbalance. In a country of over 200 million people, where NdiIgbo stand proudly as the single largest ethnic group in our federation’s tapestry, they have apparently been rendered invisible in the composition of the very panel tasked with counting our nation’s souls.

    Equally concerning is the absence of representation from the South-South and Northeast regions—creating a triumvirate of exclusion that cannot be dismissed as mere oversight. This mathematical anomaly transcends mere numbers; it represents the calculus of marginalization, where the value of entire regions and peoples is reduced to nothingness in the algorithm of national reckoning. In the delicate balance of our federal structure, such imbalance threatens not just equity but the structural integrity of our national architecture. The federal character principle was not conceived as mere political poetry but as the foundational pillar upon which the temple of our national unity stands. Enshrined in our constitution, it serves as the guardian of equitable representation, ensuring that no region feels the cold sting of exclusion from the national conversation. The absence of Southeast, South-South, and Northeast voices on the census panel while a particular region received 5 slots represents a departure from this sacred principle—a deviation that strikes at the very heart of the federal covenant and one that binds our diverse peoples into one nation. When critical regions find themselves without representation in a process as fundamental as determining our population, we must ask: Is this the federalism our founding fathers envisioned? A national census transcends the cold calculation of numerical strength; it is the very process by which a nation acknowledges the existence of its people. It determines political representation, resource allocation, and development planning for generations to come. To be excluded from the body that oversees this process is to be told, in essence, that your existence shall be determined and defined by others—a construct reminiscent of our colonial past that we believed was firmly behind us. In this light, the composition of the census panel becomes not merely administrative but existential in its significance. It represents the right of peoples to be counted, to be seen, to be acknowledged in the official narrative of nation-building. The exclusion of the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast from this narrative represents not just a procedural oversight but a fundamental challenge to the principle that all regions matter equally in our national story. Let us place this concern within its proper historical context. The story of our nation is written in chapters of struggle for equitable representation, for the recognition that in unity there must be respect for diversity. From the pre-independence constitutional conferences to the post-civil war reconciliation efforts, the question of how best to accommodate our differences while celebrating our commonalities has remained central to our national discourse. The exclusion of these regions from the census panel represents not an isolated incident but another verse in a concerning pattern that echoes through the chambers of our collective memory. From the distribution of infrastructure to appointments in federal institutions, any pattern of regional marginalization presents itself as a contradiction to the federal spirit—a contradiction that demands address not through divisive rhetoric but through principled realignment with our constitutional values. The concept of true federalism stands as a promise—a promise that every component unit of our nation shall have a voice in matters that affect the collective. When Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions find themselves without representation on a panel as crucial as that which conducts our national census, this promise rings hollow against the walls of practical experience. This is not merely about political correctness; it is about the practical implications of exclusion. How can regions trust that their populations will be accurately counted when they have no representatives in the room where methodologies are determined and implementation strategies are crafted? How can they be assured that their unique demographic challenges will be understood and addressed in the census process? The dignity of our nation’s diverse peoples requires their inclusion in processes that shape our collective destiny. When the Ndi’Igbo, as the single largest ethnic group in Nigeria, find themselves without representation on the census panel, alongside their brothers and sisters from the South-South and Northeast, we witness not just an administrative oversight but a fundamental challenge to the dignity that inclusion confers. True federalism demands not just the formal recognition of our diversity but the practical expression of that recognition through inclusive practices. The current composition of the census panel falls short of this standard, raising legitimate concerns about our commitment to the federal principle in practice rather than merely in theory. This moment calls not for recrimination but for realignment—a realignment with the constitutional principles that should guide our national journey. The federal character principle exists not as an optional guideline but as a constitutional imperative that safeguards the rights of all regions to meaningful participation in national life. We therefore respectfully call for the reconstitution of the census panel to reflect the true federal character of our nation, including adequate representation for the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions. This call emanates not from sectional interests but from a deep commitment to the constitutional values that should bind us together as one nation celebrating its diversity. The composition of the census panel presents not just a challenge but an opportunity—an opportunity to demonstrate our collective commitment to true federalism in action rather than merely in rhetoric. By ensuring that all regions are represented in this crucial process, we affirm that every thread in our national tapestry matters, that every voice deserves to be heard in our national conversation. NdiIgbo, as the single largest ethnic group in a country of over two hundred million souls, alongside their compatriots from the South-South and Northeast, deserve representation in every facet of national life, particularly in processes as fundamental as the census. The current exclusion stands as a deviation from the path of true federalism—a deviation that can and must be corrected if we are to honor the federal covenant that binds us together. As we navigate the complex waters of our national existence, let us be guided by the compass of true federalism—a compass that points always toward inclusion rather than exclusion, toward representation rather than marginalization, toward the recognition that our diversity is not a burden to be managed but a blessing to be celebrated. The current composition of the census panel represents a departure from this path—a departure that calls for correction not through divisive rhetoric but through principled realignment with our constitutional values. By ensuring that the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions are represented on this panel, we take a significant step toward the more perfect union that our founding fathers envisioned and that our children deserve to inherit.

    In the grand theater of our national existence, let this moment be remembered not as one of division but of renewal—a renewal of our commitment to the federal principle that each region, each people, each voice matters in the unfolding story of Nigeria. For in that commitment lies the promise of true federalism, and in that promise, the hope of a nation united in its diversity, strengthened by its differences, and committed to the dignity of all its peoples. : A Challenge to Nigeria’s Census Panel Composition

    In the tapestry of Nigeria’s diverse heritage, where the threads of over two hundred million souls interweave to form the vibrant fabric of our nation, a conspicuous void has emerged—a void that speaks volumes about the precarious state of our federal structure. The recent composition of the national census panel stands as a testament to an oversight so glaring, so profound in its implications, that it calls into question our commitment to the principles of true federalism upon which our nation was founded.

    The mathematics of representation on this critical panel reveals a troubling equation of imbalance. In a country of over 200 million people, where NdiIgbo stand proudly as the single largest ethnic group in our federation’s tapestry, they have apparently been rendered invisible in the composition of the very panel tasked with counting our nation’s souls. Equally concerning is the absence of representation from the South-South and Northeast regions—creating a triumvirate of exclusion that cannot be dismissed as mere oversight.

    Read Also: North, coalition formation and presumptions

    This mathematical anomaly transcends mere numbers; it represents the calculus of marginalization, where the value of entire regions and peoples is reduced to nothingness in the algorithm of national reckoning. In the delicate balance of our federal structure, such imbalance threatens not just equity but the structural integrity of our national architecture.

    The federal character principle was not conceived as mere political poetry but as the foundational pillar upon which the temple of our national unity stands. Enshrined in our constitution, it serves as the guardian of equitable representation, ensuring that no region feels the cold sting of exclusion from the national conversation.

    The absence of Southeast, South-South, and Northeast voices on the census panel while a particular region received 5 slots represents a departure from this sacred principle—a deviation that strikes at the very heart of the federal covenant and one that binds our diverse peoples into one nation. When critical regions find themselves without representation in a process as fundamental as determining our population, we must ask: Is this the federalism our founding fathers envisioned?

    A national census transcends the cold calculation of numerical strength; it is the very process by which a nation acknowledges the existence of its people. It determines political representation, resource allocation, and development planning for generations to come. To be excluded from the body that oversees this process is to be told, in essence, that your existence shall be determined and defined by others—a construct reminiscent of our colonial past that we believed was firmly behind us.

    In this light, the composition of the census panel becomes not merely administrative but existential in its significance. It represents the right of peoples to be counted, to be seen, to be acknowledged in the official narrative of nation-building. The exclusion of the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast from this narrative represents not just a procedural oversight but a fundamental challenge to the principle that all regions matter equally in our national story.

    Let us place this concern within its proper historical context. The story of our nation is written in chapters of struggle for equitable representation, for the recognition that in unity there must be respect for diversity. From the pre-independence constitutional conferences to the post-civil war reconciliation efforts, the question of how best to accommodate our differences while celebrating our commonalities has remained central to our national discourse.

    The exclusion of these regions from the census panel represents not an isolated incident but another verse in a concerning pattern that echoes through the chambers of our collective memory. From the distribution of infrastructure to appointments in federal institutions, any pattern of regional marginalization presents itself as a contradiction to the federal spirit—a contradiction that demands address not through divisive rhetoric but through principled realignment with our constitutional values.

    The concept of true federalism stands as a promise—a promise that every component unit of our nation shall have a voice in matters that affect the collective. When Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions find themselves without representation on a panel as crucial as that which conducts our national census, this promise rings hollow against the walls of practical experience.

    This is not merely about political correctness; it is about the practical implications of exclusion. How can regions trust that their populations will be accurately counted when they have no representatives in the room where methodologies are determined and implementation strategies are crafted? How can they be assured that their unique demographic challenges will be understood and addressed in the census process?

    The dignity of our nation’s diverse peoples requires their inclusion in processes that shape our collective destiny. When the Ndi’Igbo, as the single largest ethnic group in Nigeria, find themselves without representation on the census panel, alongside their brothers and sisters from the South-South and Northeast, we witness not just an administrative oversight but a fundamental challenge to the dignity that inclusion confers.

    True federalism demands not just the formal recognition of our diversity but the practical expression of that recognition through inclusive practices. The current composition of the census panel falls short of this standard, raising legitimate concerns about our commitment to the federal principle in practice rather than merely in theory.

    This moment calls not for recrimination but for realignment—a realignment with the constitutional principles that should guide our national journey. The federal character principle exists not as an optional guideline but as a constitutional imperative that safeguards the rights of all regions to meaningful participation in national life.

    We therefore respectfully call for the reconstitution of the census panel to reflect the true federal character of our nation, including adequate representation for the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions. This call emanates not from sectional interests but from a deep commitment to the constitutional values that should bind us together as one nation celebrating its diversity.

    The composition of the census panel presents not just a challenge but an opportunity—an opportunity to demonstrate our collective commitment to true federalism in action rather than merely in rhetoric. By ensuring that all regions are represented in this crucial process, we affirm that every thread in our national tapestry matters, that every voice deserves to be heard in our national conversation.

    NdiIgbo, as the single largest ethnic group in a country of over two hundred million souls, alongside their compatriots from the South-South and Northeast, deserve representation in every facet of national life, particularly in processes as fundamental as the census. The current exclusion stands as a deviation from the path of true federalism—a deviation that can and must be corrected if we are to honor the federal covenant that binds us together.

    As we navigate the complex waters of our national existence, let us be guided by the compass of true federalism—a compass that points always toward inclusion rather than exclusion, toward representation rather than marginalization, toward the recognition that our diversity is not a burden to be managed but a blessing to be celebrated.

    The current composition of the census panel represents a departure from this path—a departure that calls for correction not through divisive rhetoric but through principled realignment with our constitutional values. By ensuring that the Southeast, South-South, and Northeast regions are represented on this panel, we take a significant step toward the more perfect union that our founding fathers envisioned and that our children deserve to inherit.

    In the grand theater of our national existence, let this moment be remembered not as one of division but of renewal—a renewal of our commitment to the federal principle that each region, each people, each voice matters in the unfolding story of Nigeria. For in that commitment lies the promise of true federalism, and in that promise, the hope of a nation united in its diversity, strengthened by its differences, and committed to the dignity of all its peoples.

  • Reconciliation in Rivers

    Reconciliation in Rivers

    Six months in the life of an individual, state, or country could be considered a short period. But how the period is utilised may have far-reaching implications for a long time.

    The emergency rule in Rivers State is meant to make the main gladiators assess their actions and work for peace and unity. It also offers a good opportunity for learning, retracing steps, working for the state’s progress, and general reconciliation.

    Learning from the political impasse is necessary. It requires behavioural change through varied experiences, exposure, and lessons.

    If the opportunity is willfully misused, inappropriately exploited or stubbornly discarded, based on the counsel of local Ahitophels in the oil-rich state, Rivers may be back to square one after the emergency period.

    The onus is on Governor Siminalayi Fubara to take the initiative, embrace reality, weigh himself politically, do a critical self-assessment, and opt for genuine reconciliation. It is in his interest and that of his camp and the state.

    This moment calls for sober reflection. Both sides, which constituted a political family and were in a joyous mood on May 29, 2023, have made glaring mistakes and must have realised this by now.

    Read Also: Trump, immigration and capitalism’s global crisis

    While the governor should be less combative, his leader, godfather, and benefactor, Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Minister Nyeson Wike, should be less inflexible and more condescending. A prolonged war could be dangerous. In the final analysis, nobody can predict where it will end. The nature of war is that, sometimes, it also tends to consume the warriors.

    If both sides are sincere in their claims that they are serving the people, they should be ready to embrace dialogue, give concessions, and restore peace for the sake of the masses.

    Some critics have blamed the Federal Government for the critical intervention that led to the suspension of both the Executive and Legislative arms. Their criticisms are subjective. They are angry that Fubara was suspended. They are not sparing any thought for the plight of the 27 anti-governor lawmakers, whose constituencies were denied democratic representation. They uncritically took sides with the governor and the three lawmakers who, for over a year, made themselves the legally and constitutionally recognised House of Assembly.

    Already, Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors are threatening to institute a case against President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency, perhaps to determine the rightness or wrongness of the presidential action. The court will determine whether or not they have the locus standi.

    However, to objective analysts, an emergency rule is a blessing in disguise. It was the saving grace for Fubara. No member of the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF) wanted the career of their Rivers colleague to end on a disastrous note. Yet, they saw the danger coming, as manifested in the impeachable offences catalogued by the aggrieved 27 lawmakers who remained fiercely loyal to the former governor and the FCT minister.

    The lawmakers were strengthened by the Supreme Court judgment, which decried the recognition of only three members out of 30, the demolition of the Parliament building, the constitution of an illegal state executive council (Exco), and the implementation of an illegitimately approved budget.

    These issues and many others sparked tension in the state. The impeachment of the governor would not have been a walkover. Some unperceptive tough guys would have been angered if the impeachment option had sailed though. Perhaps, they might have taken the law into their hands by vandalising oil pipes, invading the temporary legislative chambers, and creating chaos. At such a stage, President Tinubu would have also come under criticism for inaction.

    Thus, when the President imposed an emergency rule, those who genuinely sympathised with Fubara in the NGF heaved a sigh of relief. They understood that the dangling axe of impeachment had been averted, a large-scale economic sabotage was prevented and the state’s slide into chaos was forestalled.

    The emergency rule has exposed Fubara to the two sides of the world. Before the presidential action, he was an effective governor with strong control over the state, incredible resources, governance apparatus, and instruments of coercion. But now on suspension, he gazes from afar at Administrator Ibok Ibas exercising part of those powers, even though as an unelected chief executive in the same Rivers Government House. During the week, Ibas took his seat at the National Economic Council (NEC) meeting.

    Gone, at least in the interim, are Fubara’s influence, privileges, and guarantee of institutional access to financial resources. Many subjective advisers are not bearing the brunt and burden of his suspension.

    He would only find solace in the fact that the political nightmare is temporary. The question is: what next after the emergency rule? The suspended governor needs to take some concrete steps. He is not expected to be combative in the course of finding solutions to the problems that culminated in his suspension.

    A hypocritical approach to reconciliation is counter-productive. In one breath, Fubara’s supporters are praising President Tinubu and declaring support for his second term. In another, they are denouncing his decision on Rivers, calling him a dictator.

    Fubara’s supporters have the right to continue their protest. It is both entertaining and engaging. Salvos are fired at the president and the FCT minister in far-away Abuja. The governor’s supporters are also not respecting the judiciary whenever they appear on radio and television. Would this lead to a truce in the politically divided state?

    Without dialogue and reconciliation, the state sits on a keg of gunpowder because the two camps will resume their hostilities after the emergency period. This is the type of tragedy that befell the old Western Region in the First Republic. The traditional rulers and party elders took sides after efforts to resolve the Awolowo/Akintola feud collapsed. After the emergency rule, Premier Samuel Ladoke Akintola regained power. But the region had lost its cohesion and peace. Awolowo was jailed. Akintola never had peace of mind. The chain of events led to the wild, wild West. Many people died. Properties were destroyed. The rest, as it is often said, is history.

    The onus is on the elders backing Fubara and those supporting Wike to sheathe their swords, close ranks, and reunite. This is possible because many of them reside in the state and belong to the same party, the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). The suspended governor should not be averse to this approach because it would help his cause.

    Fubara and Wike should meet and break the ice. Every political problem has a solution. Perceived disloyalty brews dissension and dissension sparks antagonism. It is important to embrace loyalty. This is often tested by circumstances. But it is still the most important recipe for political relationships.

    Sometimes, in the course of applying the solution, a huge loss might arise. It could also be a temporary loss of face. But mutual interest could align later. There is no permanent friend or foe in politics. The permanent thing in politics is interest.

    Politicians should always put egos aside and apologise when they make mistakes. A sincere apology should not be perceived as a sign of weakness. A gesture of remorse or an apology tendered should not be rejected by the political leader. Every human being is susceptible to mistakes.

    In politics, punishment is apportioned. The person under punishment should not see it as the end. In this circumstance, he could bounce back to reckoning, following attitudinal changes and remission of political sins.

    Politics is full of ups and downs. It may be rosy today and dull tomorrow. There is no shame in a man falling. What is important is how you rise and use the lessons from the experience.

  • Poverty of ideas

    Poverty of ideas

    The cliché of when you fail to plan you invariably plan to fail rings so true about the outcome of the meeting held between Super Eagles players and chieftains of the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) on the way out of the woods in the country’s quest for the sole qualification ticket for Group C, in the ongoing 2026 World Cup qualifiers. Over 209 countries under the FIFA umbrella have partaken in the qualifiers so far, with the big boys distinguishing themselves in the matches based on different models they adopted. These give them the solutions to the myriads of obstacles as they navigate the thorny path to World Cup qualification.

    These models have been tested and trusted over time by the different countries adopting them. When these models are to be adopted, suggestions meant to upgrade them are considered and adopted irrespective of the pedigree in the game of those proposing the changes. No one’s suggestion is waved aside as we have here in Nigeria where some people claim monopoly of all knowledge and wisdom, simply because they have the ears of those in the government.

    And so when the news broke last week Wednesday that Super Eagles players were credited with $1,000 each, the need to interrogative the veracity of the story and what the money was meant for became imminent. Why do we take delight in putting the cart before the horse? This meeting ought to have been held before the 2026 World Cup qualifiers began. It would have cost us nothing to get the models adopted by the top15 nations who have attended the Mundial in recent times to evaluate how they have gotten the players to prosecute their World Cup qualifiers devoid of crisis before, during and after competition as we have had, culminating in the threat by Super Eagles not to play the second round game against France in 2014, except they were paid their outstanding entitlements. The government averted the show of shame by sending $3.8 million to settle the debts. No prize for guessing right that France beat Nigeria 2-0 in that tie. Nemesis.

    According to Sportinglife’s source on Tuesday: ”In fact, the daily allowances for the Rwandan match hasn’t been paid. Note that it’s the NSC that is to pay. They have not yet released the daily allowances meant for the Rwanda match.

    Read Also: African Weightlifting Senior Championship: Team Nigeria leads Medal Table with gold rush in Mauritius

    ”I thought over time that you are aware of this matter as per how the NFF funds its teams. Well,  the NFF normally sends national teams’ budgets to the Federal Government through the Ministry/NSC for approval. If the money is released, then players and officials of various teams are paid. If not, they are owed.

    ”However, based on the availability of funds from the NFF sponsors, the federation uses such funds to settle the players and/or officials, pending when the government releases its funds. At times, it takes months/years for it to be released. When such funds are not available, teams are owed.

    ”Unfortunately, this is always the situation. I am not holding brief for the NFF though.  I’m just giving you information as to what obtains,” the source said.

    What stood out like a sore thumb was the fact that the NSC took charge directly in the payment, raising the poser whether it was part of their responsibilities beyond serving as the channel for sending out what had been approved for the NFF by the Federal Government to them. If there was the need to interrogate how the money was spent, who would the NSC men hold responsible if they made the payment? Of course, the responses from probing questions thrown at those who should at the Dankaro House in Abuja indicated that when the cash was delayed, they had to use monies outsourced through their marketing initiatives to settle the bills. The imminent question to ask would be what of the money disbursed by the NSC when they get it, what would it be used for? This arrangement is untidy.

    But I trust the NSC chiefs to immediately address this accounting flaw. However, this is part of the bureaucratic bottlenecks in governance in the country. Could it be that one of the parties involved in the chain of approvals didn’t do his job by delaying the process from his side? We need to know since it is one of the reasons the federation is always going cap in hand for cash.

    Back to the Super Eagles and the $1,000 paid into their different accounts, which is a decision worthy of applause. It would be easier to track the liars when needless disputes arise. This writer was told that the players and the NFF at one of their meetings agreed that players would each be paid $1,000 along with the daily allowances for the period of their stay in the camp preparatory to the game.

    The players went further to accept from the NFF the payment of World Cup qualification bonuses when the country eventually gets Group C’s sole qualification ticket for the 2026 World Cup to be co-hosted by the United States, Mexico and Canada. Need I say this arrangement is a no-brainer if we fail to qualify for the 2026 World Cup? This meeting succeeded in reducing the money spent on prosecuting the qualification ticket. Is this what other nations pay? Does this agreement guarantee the country the qualification ticket not just Group C’s, going forward?

    We need an all-embracing template that ensures every facet in the chain for progress recognises team bonding, unity among the players, and a healthy synergy between everyone in the squad and the management of the NFF. After all, they are no kids. Truth be told, Nigeria has the youngest set of players for the 2030 World Cup. And the time to start assembling those players is now. 2030 is just five years away with the oldest players being 22 years old now.

    To achieve some of these targets, we need to identify what we want to achieve and build on it. Most countries’ football growth stems from grassroots communities such that when new talents are discovered, it is easy to know where it all started because each community will celebrate its own. Simply put, sports, not just soccer, grows its stem from the catchment areas from ages four to six, where the kids can be taught the rudiments of the game. Since such schemes pervade all the communities, blue-chip firms can identify with sports of their choice – most times soccer because of its immense followership. What the communities provide are platforms to discover, nurture and expose their young ones to games that they like.

    Countries measure their growth in soccer by the number of domestic league players in their national teams. The ripple effect of this is that the domestic league matches are watched by a crowd of soccer lovers weekly, invariably increasing the revenue of the domestic clubs.  Our league games won’t attract foreigners like we had in the past if we play before an almost empty stadium and can’t offer good money to lure them here. It isn’t enough for the government to fund clubs. The governors should ensure that credible people manage the teams.

    They should be given targets and timelines to deliver on mandates given, otherwise, they are asked to go. One of the targets governors should give to those who administer clubs is to ensure they are listed by the Stock Exchange. It is laughable that none of the clubs’ value is public knowledge. How, then, do they expect the blue-chip firms to do business with them?

  • Angelina Pay My Money: NBA’s N300m ethical dilemma with Rivers State

    Angelina Pay My Money: NBA’s N300m ethical dilemma with Rivers State

    The late Rex Lawson could never have imagined his hit song “Angelina Pay My Money” would perfectly capture the financial standoff between the Nigerian Bar Association and Rivers State government over 300 million Naira in conference funding.

    At the heart of this controversy is a substantial sum of 300 million Naira that was allocated by the suspended Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, to the NBA for hosting their conference in Rivers State. However, following political developments including the declaration of a State of Emergency by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the appointment of a Sole Administrator (Ibok-Ete Ibas), the NBA decided to relocate its conference to Enugu State.

    The NBA justified this relocation citing concerns about the political climate in Rivers State, stating that the current governance structure under the Sole Administrator had created conditions unsuitable for hosting their significant legal gathering. Their position, representing eight branches in Rivers, was that the political environment no longer aligned with the legal community’s values and expectations in a democracy.

    This decision has created a critical ethical question: Should the NBA return the 300 million Naira now that the conference will no longer be held in Rivers State?

    For starters, the sheer size of the allocation raises pertinent questions about the association’s financial requirements for conference hosting. Three hundred million Naira represents a prodigious sum for a professional conference, even one of national significance. This leads to legitimate inquiries about the NBA’s budgetary framework and how such funds are typically deployed across venue procurement, logistics, accommodations, and other operational expenses. Professional associations worldwide typically operate with transparent financial protocols, particularly when receiving public funds. The NBA’s requirement for such a substantial government contribution warrants scrutiny in the context of professional governance standards and fiscal responsibility.

    Read Also: FULL LIST: Trump mulls shut down of US embassies in Africa

    Moreso, when funds are allocated for a specific purpose that subsequently becomes nullified for any reason, basic ethical principles of financial stewardship would suggest that restitution is the appropriate course of action. The moment the NBA determined that Rivers State would no longer serve as the conference venue, the association entered a moral labyrinth from which the clearest exit would be returning the funds to the coffers of the Rivers State Government.

    This position is strengthened by the fact that the money’s distribution was explicitly tied to a specific deliverable – hosting the conference in Rivers State. When that contractual premise dissolved, so too did the justification for retaining the funds. Had the money been provided as a general endowment or unconditional support for the NBA’s activities, then the ethical considerations might differ substantially.

    For an organization that represents the pinnacle of legal ethics and professional conduct, the NBA’s resistance to refunding the 300 million Naira creates a paradoxical situation. The legal profession stands as a bulwark of societal order, with practitioners sworn to uphold principles of justice, fairness, and integrity. The current financial impasse threatens to cast a penumbral shadow over the association’s moral standing.

    Professional honor in this instance would seem to dictate a straightforward approach: acknowledge that the conditions for fund utilization no longer exist and facilitate the return of public resources to their source. This would demonstrate the NBA’s commitment to fiscal rectitude and ethical conduct beyond reproach.

    The political dimension cannot be ignored in this financial dispute. The NBA’s decision to withdraw from Rivers State represents a significant political statement about the current administration, specifically the Sole Administrator’s governance approach. While the association has every right to make such assessments and act accordingly, those decisions carry implications that must be addressed with equivalent deliberation and integrity, if Rivers State is no longer suitable for a conference, it’s funds should also not be suitable in its kitty.

    The refusal to refund could be interpreted as an attempt to financially penalize a political entity with which the NBA has substantive disagreements. Such an approach would introduce a dangerous precedent wherein professional bodies might leverage financial mechanisms to express political disapprobation – a practice that could potentially undermine institutional neutrality.

    As this financial riptide continues to pull both parties into deeper controversy, the NBA finds itself at a critical juncture where its decisions will either reinforce or diminish its standing as an exemplar of professional ethics. This is not the kind of association it’s current President, Afam Osigwe promised Nigerians and the association must consider whether the temporary advantage of retaining these funds outweighs the potential long-term damage to its reputation for integrity and fair dealing.

    The honorable course appears unambiguous: the NBA should acknowledge that the specific purpose for which funds were provided will not be fulfilled and consequently return the 300 million Naira to Rivers State. This action would demonstrate that even in times of political discord, professional organizations can operate with unwavering commitment to ethical principles.

    The current dispute presents an opportunity for the NBA to reaffirm its dedication to probity by demonstrating that its ethical standards remain inviolable regardless of political circumstances. In doing so, it would set a powerful precedent for professional conduct in Nigeria’s sometimes tumultuous public sphere.

    The ongoing financial dispute between the NBA and Rivers State exemplifies how professional organizations must navigate the complex intersection of ethics, politics, and fiscal responsibility. While the association’s concerns about Rivers State’s political environment may be legitimate, these considerations cannot abrogate fundamental principles of integrity and financial accountability.

    For an organization entrusted with upholding justice and integrity within Nigeria’s legal framework, the path forward seems clear: honor the original purpose of the funds by returning them to their source. In doing so, the NBA would demonstrate that its commitment to ethical conduct remains steadfast, even amidst the turbulent political waters it now navigates.

  • The plight of Yoruba Northerners

    The plight of Yoruba Northerners

    The costly mistake that Afonja, the infamous Aare Ona Kankanfo of Yoruba land and rebellious subject of Alaafin of Oyo, made nearly two centuries ago has continued to produce costly consequences, following his thoughtless defiance against the eminent monarch.

    The great warrior asserted the independence of Ilorin, the legacy of his illustrious forebears – Alugbin and Pasin – after seeking help from a stranger who later plotted his disastrous end and whose descendants have continued to politically dominate the ancient outpost to this day.

    Through Afonja’s miscalculation and missteps, Ilorin became a part of the North and has since remained so. Majority of the indigenes of the town have not regained their voice and relevance, having been subjugated through conquest. Ilorin became an extension of the Sokoto Caliphate with adjoining vast districts having Yoruba-speaking people.

    The Yoruba northerners in Kwara and Kogi states suffer an identity crisis. They are not Hausa/Fulani and share no language and other cultural similarities with their neighbours who have strengthened their links with the far North through religion and politics. The only thing superlatively northern in Ilorin is the kingship, under which the republican nature of earlier aborigines has been suppressed.

    The Yoruba of Ilorin even fare better in the face of the political marginalisation of their kith and kin in Kogi whose aspiration to produce a governor has often met a brick wall. When the monarchical deprivation of the Yoruba in Lokoja is considered, their plight in the northern cage is better imagined.

    In these two states, the Yoruba are relegated into minority status. Since democracy is a game of numbers, the voice of minority ethnic groups is only heard; their legitimate aspiration is hardly upheld. To survive, it is either they continue to play the second fiddle or muster the will and strength to mount an effective resistance to the pattern of domination, marginalisation and exclusion for them to get some concessions.

    What exacerbated the problem was the improper grouping of tribes by the British interlopers during the colonial era for administrative convenience. But for the protest and plea by the Ewi of Ado, the British officer who came to Ekiti through the Kwara/Kogi axis would have grouped Otun and the entire Moba land under the North. The Ewi told the colonial rulers that the Oore of Otun occupied a strategic position among the children of Oduduwa, being the monarch exclusively saddled with the responsibility of announcing the passage of the Ooni of Ife, the acclaimed titular head of the Yoruba. He also said that grouping Otun with the North would have meant the severance of the cord binding it with Pelupelu, the famed Ekiti Confederation.

    An adjustment to the glaring tribal, linguistic and cultural differences imposed on the diverse ethnic groups forcefully lumped together in a local government, province, state or region remains a big challenge.

    To avert the consequential identity crisis, the then Western Region Premier, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, in his book, titled: ‘Path to Nigerian Freedom’ published in 1947, made a compelling argument for the redrawing of the administrative boundaries. He said: “The present three regions were constituted without regard to ethnological factors,” noting that there were “incompatibilities among the various tribes which militate against unification.”

    Read Also: Yoruba Wikimedians partner J. Randle Centre for Yoruba storytelling event

    Awo added: “The Yoruba of Ilorin, Offa, and Kabba are included with the Hausas in the Northern Region. The Ibos, who properly belong to the Eastern Zone, are grouped with the Yoruba in the West. There is no justification whatsoever for this arbitrary grouping. Certainly, these minority groups are at a considerable disadvantage when they are forced to be in the midst of other peoples who differ from them in language, culture and historical background.”

    The solution, the late sage suggested, was to constitute the scattered units into separate provinces “for better understanding and unity among the tribes” in order “to enable each group to make rapid progress”. He stressed that by doing this, the pace of the country would be considerably quickened towards a federal unity.

    As Premier Awolowo in later years began the implementation of free education in the defunct Western Region, the Yoruba of Northern Region could not benefit from the programme. At a lecture in Lagos, a former Kwara State governor, Chief Cornelius Adebayo, lamented the erroneous groupings of the country. He recalled that the Yoruba of Ilorin and Kabba Province, who envied their brethren in the Western Region, only gazed at the opportunities those in the Western Region enjoyed. They were helpless. Those who could benefit were those who migrated to the West.

    Southwest leaders are often seized by nostalgia, particularly the bond between the region and their politically and geographically separated relations in the Northcentral. Thus, concerned about the infrastructural inadequacy in the Kwara/Ekiti boundaries, former Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi constructed a road linking the two states to facilitate easy movement. Many people from Yoruba-speaking Kwara towns retain their emotional attachment to Ekiti where they trade every week.

    The battle against marginalisation shifted to the Willink Minority Commission where the oppressed minority ethnic nationalities pressed for a sense of belonging. But First Republic Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa declared that the myth of Fulani domination was nonsense, thus trivialising the people’s genuine concerns. He premised his argument on the historic mistake of Afonja, the Yoruba generalissimo. The prime minister said the Yoruba in Ilorin were different from those in the South. He said they had the choice of being a part of the North since the 19th century without any use of force by the Fulani. According to his biographer, Trevor Clark, the prime minister attributed the troubles in Offa, Ode Oke, and Ajasa to chieftaincy disputes, emphasising that all the calls for the transfer of Ilorin had been engineered from outside, as the Germans had arranged in Czech’s Sudetenland. According to him, the Yoruba in Dahomey (today’s Benin Republic) were not calling for a union with Nigeria and the Fulani were not calling for the cession of the French territory (in today’s Niger Republic) opposite Katsina.

    From Offa in Kwara State, Chief Sunday Olawoyin was elected on the platform of the Northern Peoples Congress (NPC) into the Northern Regional House of Assembly. He became the Leader of Opposition, like a sheep in the midst of wolves. There was no cultural congruity or religious similarity. He had canvassed the merger of Yoruba in the North with the West during the 1957 Constitutional Conference. The proposal was shot down. Perceived as the face of Awo’s Action Group (AG) in the North, Olawoyin faced tribulations. He was detained, imprisoned and humiliated. All this would not have occurred if there wasa proper grouping of the ethnic nationalities.

    Yoruba northerners’ fears were not mitigated by the subsequent creation of Kwara and, later, Kogi states, where they have continued to endure glaring marginalisation. Since the creation of the two states, no Yoruba has been governor, except for the three-month period Senator Adebayo became the Kwara State governor. That followed a split in the state chapter of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN). In the Third Republic, Olorunfemi made a serious attempt during the governorship poll in Kogi but without success. The second term bid of Mohammed Lawal in Kwara was truncated.

    The political and legal abracadabra of 2016 in Kogi underscored the stiff resistance to Yoruba’s quest for a sense of inclusion and belonging. The victim of the intra-ethnic suspicion, hostility and plot was James Faleke, a member of the House of Representatives who was prevented from politically returning home. He was rejected by a tiny but powerful Northcentral elite in league with influential and egocentric Fulani hatchet men. They insisted that an Asiwaju of Lagos should be stopped from making an inroad into the North at that time through the governorship victory of “his boy” from the Yoruba town of Ekinrin-Ade.

    As the final result of the governorship election was about to be announced, the symbol of the victory, Governor Audu Abubakar, unfortunately passed on. To debar his running mate from pressing forward, the election was suddenly declared inconclusive.

    Such was also the fate that befell Chief Sunday Bolorunduro Awoniyi, the Aro of Mopa, a retired Federal Permanent Secretary, Third Republic senator and prominent Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chieftain. His intellectual and radical kinsmen believed he was a collaborator with some perceived oppressors because Awoniyi had accepted his fate as a Yoruba northerner, following the geographical accident.

    But when he declared his interest in the national chairmanship of the then ruling party, former President Olusegun Obasanjo was said to have objected, saying: “I am Olusegun, you are Awoniyi. Both of us are Yoruba. A Yoruba man cannot be President and another the party chairman of the same party at the same time.”

    When Awoniyi protested, saying he was a northerner, his party men insisted that he was Yoruba. That sent him to a political retirement.

    In fact, many Yoruba politicians from Kwara suffer a similar identity crisis, which has been a factor in a presidential contest. They are northerners. But because they are also Yoruba, it becomes a key point in ambition and career ceiling. Even, any time Bukola Saraki throws his rat in the ring, they suddenly remember his Yoruba name.

    If those exploiting these scenarios have had their way, Bayo Ojulari, who was recently appointed the Group Managing Director of Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL), would not have been appointed by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, despite his eligibility and competence. The sin of Ojulari is that although he is a northerner, he is Yoruba.

    Perhaps, state creation would be the solution. But how viable is this option? The North should accommodate all northerners as northerners. Yoruba northerners should build bridges of cooperation with their neighbours. They need to understand that power is not served a la carte.

    Also, zoning or micro-zoning of the governorship ticket is crucial to the prevention of domination so that the ethnic groups can have access to power, influence and privileges along the principles of equity, fairness and justice.

  • Nigeria’s security conundrum

    Nigeria’s security conundrum

    Over two years in the life of President Bola Tinubu’s administration, the grave insecurity challenge which it inherited from previous successive governments was evidently concretely being ameliorated. Kidnapping, which had been an almost daily affair in many parts of the country, had largely abated. Intense military onslaughts, especially relentless bombardment by the Nigerian Air Force, had bandits’ backs to the wall in the North-West and their efficacy substantially blunted. In the North-East, Boko Haram had been effectively checkmated, and the extremist religious/terrorist groups’ epicentre, Borno State, was fast regaining its serenity, vibrancy and vitality. Herders-farmers violent clashes in the North-Central, which used to claim lives on an industrial scale, had significantly receded. The administration understandably sounded from the rooftops its accomplishment in scaling up the capacity of the state to safeguard lives and property, which is its primary reason for existence, in less than two years in power.

    All of a sudden, however, all the successes recorded in the security sphere appear to be fast receding, especially over the last several weeks. This is particularly evident in the large-scale killings in ethnic-inspired communal violence in Plateau and Benue States. There have also been gruesome murders in Adamawa while Borno State governor, Professor Babagana Zulum, recently had cause to cry out that Boko Haram is on the rebound in the state with several communities reportedly oçcupied by the insurgent sect. It certainly is not the case that the government has lost the political will to demonstrate and enforce its control and authority over every inch of Nigeria’s vast territory or that the security agencies have slackened in their resolve to live up to their constitutional responsibility to protect the country from internal implosion and external aggression.

    Rather, the problem is with the prevailing security architecture, which can hardly be expected to perform better than it is at the moment, no matter how much resources are poured into security or how desirous the government is to prevail over destabilizing non-governmental actors posing so grave a threat to lives and property across the country. With approximately 400,000 personnel, the Nigerian Police Force (NPF) is clearly insufficiently manned to effectively and efficiently maintain internal security in a complex polity of at least 200 million people. Thus, the military, which should focus on protecting the country’s territorial integrity from external intrusion, has been drafted to enforce law and order in virtually every state in the country through a multiplicity of military task forces. This distracts the military from its core responsibility and stretches it thin in terms of manpower and other resources, thus weakening the potency of its response to threats of terrorism and religious extremism that endanger national security and stability.

    Thus, with the existing security architecture, the nation is rendered vulnerable both to internal criminality and the danger of external infiltration and destabilization. Luckily, the solution to this undesirable and unsustainable situation is right before us and enjoys near-unanimous support across the length and breadth of the country. It is in the urgent decentralization of the security architecture as it is all too clear now that a unitary security system, particularly a police force centrally controlled which is deficient in manpower adequacy, modern equipment and financial viability, cannot effectively maintain security in a sprawling, ethnocultural, federal polity like Nigeria.

    Instructively, under the President Muhammadu Buhari administration, the Northern and Southern Governors Forum, respectively, as well as the Nigeria Governors Forum, unanimously gave their support to the creation of the State Police. Indeed, in response to the widespread clamour for the amendment of the Constitution to accommodate the State Police, the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) set up a committee headed by former Kaduna State governor Mallam Nasir ‘El Rufai to deliberate and report on the issue. The committee not only recommended the introduction of State Police but came up with draft constitutional amendments to help give effect to the realization of this objective. Unfortunately, not much more was heard of the issue after this.

    Read Also: Flying Eagles’ preparations for U-20 AFCON excites Zubairu

    The responsibility to nurture this idea to fruition now rests with President Tinubu especially as all other efforts to tame the monster of insecurity are so obviously not yielding the desired dividends. However, governance under our presidential constitution is collaborative despite the immense powers vested in the Office of the President. Thus, governors, who are most affected by insecurity in various states, must urgently seek an audience with the President to press the issue. In the same vein, the leadership of the National Assembly should prioritize immediate consultation with the President to deliberate on modalities for the requisite constitutional amendments to address a security conundrum that has become an existential threat.

    Of course, the fears of decentralizing policing in a fragile and easily combustible polity like Nigeria, where many governors are inclined to behave like emperors, is real and palpable. How, for example, would a governor who readily demolishes the State House of Assembly complex to prevent suspected impeachment or pulls down multimillion Naira structures owned by his opponents, use or abuse the control of State Police? This danger can be averted by meticulous and careful drafting of the law establishing State Police with necessary checks and balances built in. It has been suggested, for instance, that State Police can be patterned after the judicial system where there is an organic, intricate and interwoven relationship among federal and state judiciaries with ultimate responsibility for appointments and discipline resting with the National Judicial Council (NJC). It is an idea worth considering.

    The benefits of the State Police far outweigh its demerits. State Police outfits will be manned by personnel from the state who are well acquainted with its geographical terrain and linguistic as well as cultural peculiarities. They will have access to funding by the respective state governments thereby freeing the NPF from obligations to the states and thus enabling it to benefit more from federal funding. In any case, state chapters of the NPF are currently being substantially funded by the states. Again, operationally, the State Police will be able to act decisively and timeously to combat crime without having to wait for the approval of a distant centre with all the attendant bureaucratic delays.

    But beyond the security architecture, urgent attention ought to be paid to the structures for intelligence gathering across the various security agencies. Deficient intelligence gathering is clearly a key problem in effectively protecting lives and property in Nigeria. For one, the various criminal elements and groups operate with embarrassing freedom and boldness, obviously treating with utter contempt the intelligence-gathering capacity of the security agencies. With an alert and vigilant intelligence network, most of these acts of violence would have been nipped in the bud before being actualized. Besides, there is a strong possibility that much of the recurrent violence is sponsored by aggrieved political partisans to destabilize the country and discredit the government. Without the requisite intelligence network, it will be impossible to track the activities of such disgruntled and unpatriotic elements and bring them to book, no matter how highly placed.

  • Rivers State’s sole administrator so far 

    Rivers State’s sole administrator so far 

    It is certainly not due to his will or machination that Vice Admiral Ibok-Eke Ibas (Rtd) is Sole Administrator of Rivers State today for an initial period of six months following the state of emergency declared in the oil-rich state by President Bola Tinubu. There is no way that he can be held responsible for the inability of both former governor of the State and now Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Barrister Nyesom Wike, and his successor, Sir Siminaliyi Fubara, to settle their differences amicably in the light of reason with the best interest of the people of the State at heart. To make matters worse, elder statesmen and influential leaders in the state took sides in the crisis and added fuel to an already blazing fire rather than calming nerves and facilitating a peaceful settlement. This column disagrees with those who allege bad faith, abuse of power and a violation of democratic tenets by President Tinubu in declaring the state of emergency, suspending democratic structures in the state and appointing a Sole Administrator for six months in the first instance.

    What exactly would the President have been expected to do as the Wike-Fubara crisis relentlessly pushed the state to the very precipice of implosion, especially with at least two critical oil pipelines blown up after Fubara had openly and tactlessly called on youths to await further instructions which he did not state but was open to varying interpretations in an ever-escalating climate of fear? Had the President refrained from acting to prevent a descent to anarchy in Rivers, his critics would still have pilloried him for weakness and indecisiveness. Many, still smarting from the outcome of the 2023 presidential election, would have rejoiced inwardly if the breakdown of law and order in one state had spiralled to become a nationwide crisis, especially with the destruction of oil pipelines with catastrophic implications for the national economy.

    Read Also: Mbah vows to immortalise Chukwu on visit to legend’s family

    But having come to hold power as Sole Administrator due to circumstances, not his making, it is entirely the responsibility of Ibas to ensure that he plays the role he has been assigned with wisdom, restraint and utmost humility. He should not directly or indirectly create the impression that he is happy about the situation that compelled the declaration of a state of emergency in the state. He should play his role as unobtrusively as possible focussing essentially on maintaining security, promoting stability and facilitating greater inter-communal harmony towards the successful restoration of democratic governance in the state at the end of emergency rule.

    This column does not see the wisdom in the Sole Administrator undertaking the initiation of new projects for instance. And to run the local government councils, he could have utilized the senior leadership of the local government bureaucracy or quietly posted senior civil servants to oversee the councils in a manner that is non-obtruding. While he is not in a position to interfere in the political crisis that gave rise to the emergency, he can help bring about much needed healing in inter-personal and inter-group relations that Rivers so urgently needs now. But he is right in demanding the return to the Rivers State government of the N300 million donated by the Fubara administration towards the hosting in Port Harcourt of the 2025 Annual General Conference of the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). The NBA’s claim that the money is an ‘unconditional gift’ is immoral and unconscionable.

    The House of Representatives deserves commendation for setting up a 20-member oversight committee to oversee the actions of the Sole Administrator during the emergency period. This is because unaccountable power can easily be corrupt and subject to abuse. Equally heartwarming is the fact that the committee is headed by the cerebral and principled political scientist and leader of the House, Professor Julius Ihonvbere. Much is expected from the committee, and it should not let the people of Rivers State down.

  • $1,000 for what?

    $1,000 for what?

    According to the reports released by FIFA, the total prize money for the FIFA World Cup 2026 will be $896 million for the men’s event. Hmmmm! Who won’t go for it? At the least to have a bite from the Cherry. Any right-thinking group would stop at nothing to get an expert briefing on how to get one of the big banks to do business with them and how best to prosecute a seamless campaign for the 2026 World Cup, where for qualifying for the competition, every qualifying nation gets $12 million as a qualification bonus.

    These figures are mouth-watering for those who know how to make money, not those who lavish cash on nonsense or rely on government money, which is cheap and, most times, unaccountable. Only planless groups watch in awe or scratch their heads when the results of matches go awry. It becomes a tale of the unexpected. We have come to accept these mistakes as the norm despite Nigeria’s six (1994, 1998, 2002, 2010, 2014, and 2018) appearances at Senior World since our debut in 1994 in the United States (US).

    Our sports administrators are suffering from poverty of ideas for the good of the beautiful game here. Rather than get people to think for them, they prefer to stew in their mess. Pity. I was at the Atlanta’96 Olympic Games and one of the few in Nigeria who waited to see the outcome of the women’s long jump before heading for Georgia to watch the Dream Team 1’s crucial game. A classmate at the Government College Ughelli, who I had not seen since 1976, offered to drive a few of us to watch the football game.

    With a car on standby, we watched Chioma Ajuwa leap to glory for Nigeria with a gold medal in a field of world beaters in the women’s story. Goose pimples still run through me, watching Ajunwa trot towards a little girl holding the Nigeria flag to pick it up and continue her lap of honour for medallists. I won’t blame our sports chiefs who chose to travel early for the Dream Team 1 game. What Ajunwa did was magical. It changed the narrative among people, having been tagged a pariah nation due to the devious acts of the goggled one in that inglorious jackboot era of administration.

    Travelling aboard a Greyhound bus all through the night from Atlanta to Philadelphia after the Olympics was joyful as everywhere one went in Philly, the atmosphere changed the moment one was linked to the Games. Spontaneously, you would hear from appreciative Americans and other nationals present ”Nigeria. Kanu, Amokachi, Jay Jay Okocha e.t.c.” Not forgetting photo shots with them as if one bore any of the names mentioned.

    Read Also: Flying Eagles’ preparations for U-20 AFCON excites Zubairu

    Yes, sports is the biggest Public Relations (PR) tool any government can use to change people’s negative perception of any nation free of charge.

    Lottery schemes for funding such things concerning athletes’ welfare, career path growth, healthcare needs, planning such athletes’ future, etc. Others address their monetary problems for sports ambassadors through trust funds specifically for such needs, not otherwise.

    Those who run our football are either too forgetful (forgive me, please), or they intentionally cast an indulgent eye to imminent pitfalls ahead, only to say when such problems arise, ”But I warned earlier, you thought you knew it all.” This is the premise of all issues not only football but all the sports federations. The question to the federations is to plead with the National Sports Commission (NSC) to raise a memo to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to approve a sports budget which would ensure that all requests are accommodated on a four-yearly schedule or a two-year or even one-year to cater for all their needs. The question would be how do other countries run their sports without such hitches?

    It is an insult to pay Super Eagles stars $1,000 for beating Rwanda in Kigali. What can $1000 do for them? I’m sure the boys would have played for free instead of what they were paid weeks after the game. I hope when the players start to skip matches on flimsy grounds or collaborate with their European clubs to feign injuries, we will know where we courted the problem(s). Our administrators are poor students of history.

    We are in a tight corner. Rather than motivate the players with cash to be at their best, we are offering them what they won’t give to their friends. All countries reward their players handsomely. It is the reason they leave their clubs to play for their countries whenever there is a clash of fixtures with their national teams. Does it make any motivational sense for a sane player to leave his club and fly aboard the aircraft for between six to nine hours to Nigeria only to be paid $1,000? Who does that? Imagine what those boys go through for away fixtures taking cognisance of what the Libyans did to them, only to hear on their phones the alert sound for $1,000. What do the accompanying big men earn as estacodes or is it per diem?

    Let’s be fair. The lifespan of athletes is between one year and ten years, barring injuries. Therefore, they need to save for their future. It is the reason clubs splash big cash to sign them. No player would leave a club where he is sure of the three points which could fetch him between $30,000 and $50,000 for a Nigerian assignment to be paid $1,000 after nine weeks. It won’t happen, especially seeing former Nigerian players languishing in penury.  Nothing is free even in Freetown.

    How do you give Victor Osimhen $1000? How do you go from paying these players $10,000 for away victories to that paltry $1,000 fee and we want the boys to fight and qualify for the World Cup? We are NOT going anywhere. How much were the NFF officials paid for just travelling to watch the players while they sweat under harsh climatic conditions representing Nigeria? Is it not true that FIFA would pay us above $12000 for qualifying as a qualification bonus? So, why are we paying the players peanuts? Maybe the NFF should learn from other federations.

    The countries that excel in sporting events have systems that guarantee enough funds for the sportsmen and sportswomen to compete with the best such as tax rebates on sport-friendly firms, lotteries, and businesses owned by wealthy nationals who know what is in such a sponsorship that benefits them by the sitting government. Such financial taxes are spelt out to companies and wealthy citizens after agreements have been reached. These cast-in-stone policies are binding to all the parties to such an extent that breaches are adequately addressed to allow either of the parties to seek redress in court.

    The beauty of this organised method of funding is it gives all the concerned sponsors enough time to schedule their commitments to their operative management boards to provide for them in the yearly budgets for the duration of the contractual agreements with reliant government parastatals for the exercise.

    For Nigeria to achieve excellence and meet the objective requirement for the rapid development of our sports industry, then we must broaden the finance base of the industry and create the right conditions for private sector funding and investment in sports. But, the government must lead this movement by doing away with the fiscal budgets and introducing a sports budget that takes care of the annual, biannual, and quarterly sports competitions such as the World Cup, the Olympics, the Commonwealth Games e.t.c without qualms.

    What do you think, dear reader? You tell me.

  • When will killings in Plateau stop?

    When will killings in Plateau stop?

    For decades, the North Central Nigerian state of Plateau has been a flashpoint of intercommunal violence for decades. Once known as the “Home of Peace and Tourism,” Plateau has become synonymous with recurring cycles of bloodshed that have claimed thousands of lives. This crisis represents one of Nigeria’s most persistent security challenges, with root causes that seem to be complex and multifaceted.

    Looking through the context of history, the  violence in Plateau State stems from a complex interplay of factors. The region sits at the convergence of Nigeria’s predominantly Muslim north and predominantly Christian south, creating something of a religious fault line which should naturally not be a challenge if we in these climes adhere to their true teachings. However, reducing the conflict to only religion alone is an attempt to oversimplify a more nuanced reality.

    At its core, the Plateau crisis revolves around competition for scarce resources, particularly land. The indigenous ethnic groups of Plateau—primarily the Berom, Afizere, and Anaguta—are predominantly farmers and Christians. Over generations, Fulani pastoralists, who are mainly Muslims, have migrated to the region in search of grazing land for their cattle. Climate change has exacerbated this migration, as desertification pushes herders further south.

    Political marginalization also plays a significant role. The concept of “indigeneship” in Nigerian governance gives preferential rights to those considered original inhabitants of an area. This system has created tensions between those classified as “indigenes” and “settlers,” despite some families having lived in the region for generations.

    Thus the grim weaponization of ethnic and religious identities by political elites has further inflamed tensions. Politicians often exploit these divisions for electoral gain, deepening societal fractures rather than healing them.

    Since 2001, Plateau State has experienced numerous episodes of mass violence:

    – September 2001: Over 1,000 people were killed in Jos during riots triggered by political appointments and religious tensions. Apparently, what kicked off the riots was the appointment of a Muslim, Alhaji Mukhtar Mohammed as the state coordinator of the NAPEP poverty alleviation programme. By

    May 2004, more than 700 people were massacred in Yelwa-Shendam, with churches and mosques destroyed in retaliatory attacks, the attack was to then spread to Kano before President Olusegun Obasanjo declared a State of Emergency in the state.

    By November 2008, Following disputed local government elections, approximately 700 people were killed in Jos.

    Other timelines of such repeated orgies of blood and carnage include:

    January 2010: Ethnic clashes in Jos claimed over 300 lives within days.

    -March 2010: The Dogo Nahawa massacre saw over 500 people, mostly women and children, slaughtered in a night raid.

    December 2010-January 2011: Bombings and subsequent violence in Jos killed more than 200 people.

    July 2012: A funeral for victims of earlier attacks was ambushed, killing a federal senator, Gyang Dalyop Datong and a state lawmaker, Hon. James Fulani among dozens of others. That same year, the state witnessed  coordinated attacks on rural communities resulting in hundreds of deaths.

    2021-2023: Attacks intensified with dozens of mass casualty incidents in rural communities, including the Christmas Eve massacres of 2023 that claimed over 100 lives.

    2024- Present Date: The violence has continued unabated with several deadly attacks on farming communities, with the recent killing of 52 people by gunmen and the displacement of about 2,000 others.

    The reason for the attacks in six villages in Plateau’s Bokkos district last week was not immediately known but it is the worst outbreak of violence since December 2023, when over 100 people were massacred.

    These statistics represent not just numbers but thousands of individual tragedies—families destroyed, communities uprooted, and a societal fabric torn apart by sustained violence.  Such statistics represent a grim failure of the Nigerian state and it’s security apparatus.

    Read Also: Plateau killings: IG orders deployment of tactical squads, assets

    The blame for Plateau’s persistent violence must be distributed across multiple actors with the  Federal Government bearing significant responsibility for its failure to address the crisis effectively. Two vital takeaways from this bloodletting drama is the fact that successive administrations have reactively deployed security forces rather than doing such proactively, often withdrawing them prematurely, the other is the fact that our insisting on centralizing our security architecture will forever remain inadequate whilst addressing and seeking to end localized conflicts. This majorly points to a failure of intelligence despite the billions sunk into such agencies on an annual basis, it is even worse to note that on a number of occasions, security agents received sizable evidence off such attacks but failed to act on such until after the attacks were carried out.

     The government has failed to prosecute perpetrators, creating a culture of impunity and there are allegations that fifth columnists in the nation’s security apparatus are also aiding and abetting these criminals.

    State and Local Governments have often exacerbated tensions through discriminatory policies that favor certain ethnic or religious groups. Political leaders have exploited identity politics rather than promoting inclusive governance. In addition, community leaders on all sides have sometimes inflamed tensions through inflammatory rhetoric. Religious leaders have not always used their moral authority to promote peace and reconciliation.

    There is also the talk about the involvement of transnational criminal networks as also playing a heavy role in financing and arming the locals, thus exploiting the tensions and fueling such conflicts for economic gain.

    There are fears that should the killings in Plateau not cease, there is a tendency that the nation could be sitting on a keg of gun powder and such a crisis could escalate or help trigger another civil war or major disturbance. It is thus for this reason that the nation must  begin to search for that elusive  path to a just and  sustainable peace.

    This would surely require a hands on approach and a sincerity of purpose. A

    A thorough reform of our security architecture which would include restructuring its security architecture to improve response times and intelligence gathering as well as encourage responsible state and community policing initiatives that involve local stakeholders could enhance security at the grassroots level and help prevent or deter such attacks from occuring again.

    The establishment of  special tribunals to prosecute perpetrators of violence would help break the cycle of impunity. The government must demonstrate that there are dire consequences for the participation in such mass violence, long jail terms or even the death penalty could help reduce or deter such attacks on the innocent people of Jos.

    The setting up of ranches within the state could help the state reduce farmer-herder conflicts. The introduction of  modern ranching techniques should be promoted, encouraged and enforced  as alternatives to traditional pastoralism.

    While the indigene settler mentality may not abate for the next fifty years, successive state governments should run an inclusive government for all and help blur the indigene-settler dichotomy. Governance structures should ensure representation for all ethnic and religious groups irrespective of where they come from or in what deity they believe in. These successive governments must remember that a majority of us neither chose our ethnicity nor form of religion from birth, to now marginalize one because he is a Muslim or a settler is akin to punishing one or more people for choices they did not make themselves.

    Furthermore, the successive administrations including the present one must address the twin evils unemployment and poverty through targeted development initiatives. This way, the recruiting pools for such violent acts would steadily dwindle. Extras could also include the inclusion of peace education into the  curricula in  order  to  promote tolerance and peaceful coexistence. Inter-faith and inter-ethnic dialogue forums too should be encouraged helping build bridges between divided communities.

    The path to peace in Plateau State is challenging but not impossible. It requires political will, community engagement, and a commitment to addressing root causes rather than symptoms. The people of Plateau, regardless of ethnicity or religion, share common aspirations for security, prosperity, and dignity, we therefore should not allow a few brigands rob them of such God given rights.

    The persistent violence has extracted an unbearable human toll and threatens Nigeria’s national cohesion. When will the killings stop? They will stop when all stakeholders recognize that sustainable peace serves their long-term interests better than cycles of vengeance. They will stop when governance prioritizes justice over expediency, inclusion over division, and humanity over narrow identity politics.

    The question is not whether sustainable peace is possible in Plateau, but whether there is sufficient courage and commitment to make the difficult choices necessary to achieve it. The bloodshed can end when Nigerians decide that no political, religious or ethnic difference is worth justifying the senseless slaughter of men, women and children, that time is now.

  • FCCPC and corporate accountability

    FCCPC and corporate accountability

    In largely underdeveloped capitalist systems such as Nigeria with relatively low levels of institutionalization, weak judicial structures and processes as well as fragile law enforcement, the role of regulatory agencies established to mitigate the negative effects of the operations of market forces, check corporate abuse and irresponsibility and safeguard the interests of consumers and society at large is critical. The leading agency in Nigeria in this regard is the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), which was established through the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 to facilitate fair, rule-guided business practices while protecting the interests of consumers.

    As lucidly expressed in its mandate statement, the FCCPC’s oversight function is “geared towards promoting competition within the Nigerian economy while preventing any practices that could lead to the abuse of market dominance or monopolies, all for the benefit of consumers. In addition, it investigates anti-competitive practices, including price fixing, bid rigging, market allocation, and the abuse of dominant market positions, for possible legal actions against the involved parties”. Central to its operations is addressing consumer complaints and grievances as regards perceived exploitative prices, substandard goods and services and imposing sanctions or taking legal action against persistent corporate infractions.

    Under its current Chief Executive Officer/Executive Vice Chairman, Mr Olatunji Bello, renowned journalist, editor, lawyer and administrator, who assumed office in June 2024, the FCCPC has significantly scaled up its activities aggressively holding corporate organizations to account while meticulously addressing consumer complaints and grievances. In the statement announcing his appointment, President Tinubu had mandated Tunji Bello to “ensure the holistic realization of the Commission’s mandate of protecting and promoting the interest and welfare of Nigerian consumers, and ensuring the adoption of measures to guarantee the safety and quality of goods and services”. The role of the FCCPC has acquired added significance against the background of the economic hardships attendant on the painful but inevitable economic reforms of the Tinubu administration particularly the removal of fuel subsidy and the merger of the parallel foreign exchange markets that had engendered high inflationary spirals that are only gradually beginning to recede.

    Citing high operational costs, corporate organizations in different sectors have increased their tariffs to the consternation of already hard hit consumers despite the fact that many of them continue to report high profit levels. In the telecommunications sector, for instance, there has been a 50 per cent hike in tariffs. In the electricity industry, the regulatory authorities approved an increase in tariff for Band A customers from N68 KWh to N225 KWh but which was later pegged at N209.50. Banks have increased the cost of transacting on Automated Teller Machines (ATM). The Nation newspaper columnist, Sanya Oni, recently cited the example of the private entertainment company, MultiChoice and its subsidiary,  DSTV, and their penchant for arbitrary and incessant price increases.

    In the words of Oni, “For instance, in May 2023, premium package subscribers were hit with a 51.23% increment from N16,200 to N24,500. Six months after, another major increment of 20.41% would follow, pushing the price to N29,500. Yet again, in another six months, that is, in May 2024, the service provider would be back with a new price of N37,000, a leap by another 25.42%; and the latest adjustment effective Saturday, March 1, taking the package to N44,500, a 21% increase – representing over 300% increase using 2015 as a base year”.

    The new resurgent and activist FCCPC, under Tunji Bello, has not been dormant in the face of seemingly whimsical price increases by various corporate organizations. Some of them, unused to having their excesses challenged, have pushed back, outrightly flouting the regulatory agency’s directives or engaging it in legal duels.

    For instance, on Thursday, February 27, the FCCPC directed MultiChoice Nigeria not to effect any new price increases as it had announced until the conclusion of the Commission’s ongoing investigation into the proposed price hikes. It had earlier directed the Chief Executive Officer of the company, Mr John Ugbe, to appear before its investigative hearing to justify the envisaged increases. The FCCPC had stated that “Pursuant to this, MultiChoice is expressly instructed to maintain the existing price structure as of February 27, 2025, pending the Commission’s review and final determination on the matter. Maintaining the status quo on pricing is essential to prevent any potential consumer harm during this period”. However, in a reckless display of the highest disregard and contempt for not just the regulatory authority but Nigeria’s legal system, MultiChoice Nigeria proceeded with its price increase on March 1, 2025.

    Consequently, on March 5, the FCCPC instituted legal proceedings against MultiChoice Nigeria and its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe, “for violating regulatory directives, obstructing an ongoing inquiry and engaging in conduct deemed violations of the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPC). According to the FCCPC, “By disregarding the FCCPC’S directive and implementing the price hikes before appearing before the Commission’s investigative hearing on March 6, 2025, MultiChoice has not only flouted regulatory processes but also demonstrated a pattern of conduct that undermines consumer rights and fair competition”.  In any self-respecting country,  there should certainly be severe consequences for such contemptuous impunity especially by a foreign entity.

    Earlier, a shareholder of MTN Nigeria who is also a legal practitioner, Emeka Nnubia, had instituted legal proceedings against the FCCPC seeking to halt the regulatory agency’s investigation into suspected potential anti-competitive practices by the MTN. Nnubia contended that the FCCPC’s request for information from MTN violated data protection laws and that regulatory authority over MTN resided with the National Communications Commission (NCC) and not the FCCPC. In his ruling on February 7, 2025, Justice F.N. Ogazi, of the Federal High Court in Lagos, affirmed the statutory authority of the FCCPC to regulate competition and consumer protection across all sectors of the economy and that the regulatory agency’s request for information from MTN did not violate any data protection laws but was undertaken within its statutory powers.

    Read Also: Tariff hike: Court plans judgment for May 8 in MultiChoice suit against FCCPC

    When the NCC approved a 50% adjustment in telecommunications tariffs, the FCCPC warned that “Issues such as network congestion, dropped calls, inconsistent Internet speeds, unusual data depletion, and poor customer service have remained prevalent concerns. It is, therefore, crucial that tariff adjustments directly translate into demonstrable and tangible service enhancements for consumers.”. The FCCPC took on the Ikeja and Eko electricity distribution companies (IKEDC and EKEDC) when they contemplated charging consumers for the cost of replacing ‘obsolete’ meters insisting that the Discos must comply with the order by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) that “meter replacements must be prompt, without disrupting service and at no cost to the consumer; and ensuring that consumers are not subjected to estimated billing due to delayed installations”.

    The FCCPC had also, at various times, engaged other corporate giants like Guarantee Trust Bank (GTB) and Air Peace on alleged violations of consumer rights. It is certainly a new and welcome season of ensuring corporate accountability in Nigeria in the best interest of consumers and society at large.