Category: Sunday

  • Dangote on my mind

    Dangote on my mind

    There are not many Nigerians who have not had Dangote on their mind at one time or the other. At least,not now that the health of the country depends so much on the health of his enterprises, especially that of his truly enormous refinery. I doubt that the Nigerian economy would show any signs of life by now, but for the continued good health of that plant in Lekki.

    Dangote has been a household name in Nigeria for quite some time now as he has been the nation’s leading industrialist for more than three decades. More than that, or perhaps because of it, Dangote has been the richest man, not only in Nigeria but in the whole of Africa. But, even he took a hit at the time when he had to divert a hefty portion of his wealth to the building of his refinery. There was a time when his name was more prominent than it is now on the list of the richest men in the world, But, not only are there new billionaires being minted somewhere on the globe every week, the wealth credited to the richest men in the world these days is simply mind boggling. Given the current situation, it is not surprising that the arrival of the first trillionaire in the world now has an air of inevitability about it. But, this astonishing phenomenon is clearly beyond the scope of this article and will be allowed to rest at this point, at least for now.

    Dangote came to prominence at a time when Nigeria became a dumping ground for cement. Ships from all parts of the world sailed into the ports in Lagos bearing cargoes of cement in what quickly became a scam as each ship had to queue up at the port for considerably long periods of time during which they claimed demurrage payments for their owners even when the cement in their hold was of questions or quality and origin. Some of the ships were old junks which had limped into port on their last steam and made more money standing off the coast of Nigeria than actually plying the blue seas as part of global maritime commerce. That situation arose because of the virtual collapse of the local cement industry which had been active even before the war. There was the famous Nkalagu cement factory, the cement plant at Ewekoro and another one in Gboko but the demand far outstripped production hence the cement scarcity within Nigeria. Dangote, a young business man at the time stepped into the breach which existed then and the plant at Gboko was given a new lease of life under his management

    Read Also: LAUTECH working with police to unravel student’s death off-campus – Registrar

     Today, Nigeria is a net exporter of cement. More than that, Dangote has built a cement empire in no less than ten African countries and created many thousand jobs all over the continent. He has planted his footsteps far and wide and made a name for himself and for Nigeria.

    What Dangote has done for cement, he has also done for sugar. He was enabled to produce cement because of the availability of limestone, the principal raw material of cement in several parts of Nigeria. What is needed for the production of sugar is sugar cane, which can be planted in many parts of the country. This provided the cornerstone for the government policy of backward integration which persuaded Dangote to explore the possibility of producing sugar and it’s ancillary products from sugar cane grown in Nigeria. Today, Dangote produces refined sugar in the largest sugar refinery in Africa at Apapa. To supply this refinery with needed raw materials, the Dangote Sugar company is involved in the planting and harvesting of sugar cane from huge plantations along the banks of River Benue in both Adamawa and Nassarawa states. The contribution of these activities to the Nigerian economy is not only immense but growing as production activities expand within the growing Nigerian market as thousands of jobs, both direct and indirect are created. In addition, this also has a positive effect on our foreign exchange situation as the hard currency required for the importation of sugar is conserved. With his involvement in the refining of sugar, Dangote has been responsible for the inflow of foreign currency from Ghana where he has set up a sugar production facility in the same way that he built cement factories in other African countries. Here, he has introduced the backward integration policy of the Nigerian government into the neighbouring country of Ghana from where it is set to spread further afield.

    There was a time, a long time ago it has to be said, when I listened very attentively to any speech coming from the Head of State of Nigeria. I considered all of them to be of great political importance and faithfully listened with the hope of hearing something of great importance. I never did learn anything of consequence from those speeches over the years so I began to treat them with studied indifference. However I was more or less entreated to listen to the last inauguration speech by a friend, which is why I was able to hear first hand that petroleum subsidy payments had been brought to an immediate end. My immediate response to this announcement was to scoff at it. After all, the same announcement had been made from all successive governments starting from Babangida nearly thirty years before when local government refineries had broken down irreparably as we discovered many years later.

    Petroleum subsidy removals were always couched in the same way. The promise was made that all monies accruing from the subsidy removals were to be used for the building of roads and other such socially useful infrastructure. Only one government, ironically that of Abacha, made a significant move towards keeping that promise. Subsidies were duly removed, the price of fuel ballooned oppressively but no infrastructural development followed in its wake. Another thing was that subsidies always came back, to be removed all over again time after time. This formed the basis of my belief that sooner or later, there would be a return of the subsidy regime under the current regime. It is becoming apparent however that to all intents and purposes, petrol subsidies have not made a surreptitious return by the backdoor and the objective difference this time around has been the Dangote refinery.

    By the time the removal of  fuel subsidies had become a government policy plank, hopes of the resurrection of our moribund refineries in Port Harcourt and other places were making the rounds. But if the government had any hope in the ability of those refineries to give any backing to the removal of fuel subsidies, those hopes have now been seen to have been  sadly misplaced. Day after day, news of fuel production in those refineries raised our hopes only for them to be dashed again and again. Finally, we are coming to terms with the inability of all the king’s men and all his horses to put back our broken Humpty Dumpty together again. There is now talk of selling those enormous white elephants presumably as scrap. We now have little choice but to pin our economic hope on Dangote’s refinery. In the light of what has happened since then, it is worth speculating  that it was the imminence of fuel production by Dangote that encouraged that announcement of subsidy removal ab initio. If it was not, the removal of subsidies and the coming of the refinery can now be described as a happy accident.

    I shudder to think of what would have happened to our economy in the absence of that refinery. It is now clear that subsidy was being paid on fuel which was not consumed in Nigeria. This is because the volume of petrol now used in Nigeria is hardly more than half of what it was in the bad days before the removal of the fuel subsidy. This has confirmed the suspicion in many quarters that the fuel subsidy thing was a gigantic scam. And the perpetrators of that scam are still fighting a bitter rearguard action to protect their turf. This cannot but be the case as the loot which was pocketed by the fuel subsidy perpetrators was humungous to say the least. All the rent seekers who have been gorging, mosquito-like on the riches of the land can be recognised by their united and unprincipled opposition to the Dangote refinery. That is what stands between them and paradise, to the detriment of the rest of us.

  • To God be the glory: I am 80

    To God be the glory: I am 80

    To God be the glory, great things He hath done,

    so loved He the world that He gave us His Son,

    who yielded His life an atonement for sin,

    and opened the life-gate that all may go in.

    Refrain:

    Praise the Lord, praise the Lord,

    let the earth hear His voice!

    Praise the Lord, praise the Lord,

    let the people rejoice!

    O come to the Father through Jesus the Son,

    and give Him the glory, great things He hath done.

    By His grace, come Wednesday, 24 September, 2025 I shall be 80 years old on terra firma.

    It can only be God’s grace,.anywhere in the world, to live to that age but in the particular case of Nigeria, it calls for celebration.

    I was born on that day in the beautiful town called Are – Ekiti, in what was then in the Ekiti Central Division of the state.

    In his Autobiography, ‘Remember Whose Son Thou Art’, published in 2005, the incomparable Architect,  Chief Isaac Fola Alade, OFR, made it clear that to be born in those parts, about the time I was, and to live into one’s 60’s, is to know that you truly owe God.

    So please, dear reader, join me on this glorious occasion in thanking and heaping praises upon praises on God Almighty.

    I actually  have a lot more to thank God for.  Among these is the fact that through all viccititudes of life, He has kept me and my entire family safe. Also, this epochal date, that is, my 80th, coincides with what I can describe as the crowning glory of my 20 year-long sojourn as a columnist with The Nation on Sunday, and it’s predecessor newspaper, the COMET (2years only).

    I speak here of my book, the 619-page ‘simply a citizen journalist’

    There hardly could have been anything worthier for me, these past 20 years, than  being a columnist with a national newspaper of such great repute at a time of absolutelutely monumental socio- political developments in our country.

    Being a columnist, especially on the Nation on Sunday  has  afforded me the opportunity to learn from, as well as, rob shoulders with the incredibly brilliant writers within The paper’s commentariat which, without a doubt, parades some of the country’s very best.

    The book, mostly a compilation of selected articles in the column, and much more, will be unveiled during the birthday celebrations with the Lead Presenter being none other than my friend, and co- GREAT – IFE Alum, the Baba oba of ifewara, Chief Dele Fajemirokun.

    In addition to discussing, analysing and periscoping issues within the Nigerian polity in the past 20 years (2006 -2025) I took time out in ‘Simply a Citizen Journalist’ to celebrate some eminent Nigerians who I deem to have positively impacted our country through their respective life works, and so deserved to be publicly celebrated.

    Among them are public servants, administrators, scholars as well as politicians, industrialists and Philantropists.

    I personally feel obliged, and honour bound, to etch their illustrious lives’ achievements in history if only to serve as examples to others.

    This piece, if space permits, will give a list of these distinguished Nigerians directly after the article.

    Rather than bore you with my life history on this August occasion, or waste your time making you read an article about Nigeria’s perennial Presidential candidate who, since the bonfire in Nepal has been going about shouting ‘revolution, revolution’, in Nigeria, (forgetting he could be one of those to be consumed for dealing rapaciously with Nigeria) let me titillate  you with an article on somebody ever so deserving.

    As honour must go to one deserving, that individual is no other than the current President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, Ashiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR, in an article I wrote on  March 12, 2012  on his 60th birthday 13 years ago, when the forever calculating tactician had probably never mentioned his ambition to wear the ultimate Nigerian diadem to anybody besides Oluremi, his jewel of inestimable value, to quote Awo.

    The article is truly representative of the many I wrote on some other  deserving Nigerians.

    Read Also: LAUTECH working with police to unravel student’s death off-campus – Registrar

    Happy reading.

    Ashiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu: the contemporary non Pareil at 60

    Without a doubt, history is delineated in epochs and, critical to this compartmentalisation is the individual. I must quickly admit that in Philosophy there is the raging controversy as to which of holism or individualism is superior.

    My view, without a scintilla of doubt, supports the latter because it is the individual  that shapes events and what is history if not a constellation of events?

    The Avatar, Chief Obafemi  Awolowo, already has his name cast in gold in Nigerian history but more so in the  history of the Yoruba.  Equally, without a doubt, is  the truism that Tinubu’s place in Yoruba and Nigerian history is irreplaceably written on the positive side. As I wrote recently on the public presentation of the DAWN document, we owe our place in contemporary Nigerian political history to none other than the man I am setting out to celebrate in this piece.

    Standing on opposite sides of contemporary Yoruba history today, are two strong-willed personalities, namely: former Nigerian President, General Olusegun Obasanjo and Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Jagaban Borgu.

    Without a doubt, some there are who swear by General Obasanjo’s name in Yoruba land but they are largely individuals who profited from his illicit acts; products of impunity, like election rigging and outright cronyism. These are acts that have been severally confirmed at the court of Appeal and for which reason the court has poignantly declared that some individuals, though sat in state houses are, legally unknown to law or to the Nigerian constitution) as governors of their states.

    In sharp contradistinction is Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu who steadfastly led  the charge, not only against poll rigging but, in a single-minded manner, against a  ludicrous and thoroughly meaningless mainstreaming which left Yoruba land nearly completely decapitated. 

    While our road infrastructure has totally deteriorated, Education, where Chief Awolowo gave us a head start, not only in Nigeria, but internationally, has collapsed, and reached rock bottom.  Nothing attests more to this fact than the fact that one of the first actions of the current governors in the Southwest geo-political zone was to chart a way forward for resuscitating this vital organ of development by setting up Education Committees whose recommendations were subsequently taken to an Education Summit to make concrete recommendations for government action.

    As a member of Agbajo Yoruba Agbaye, under the sterling leadership of one of Yoruba’s very best, namely,  Lt. General Alani Akinrinade, I served as a member of a rapid response team, headed by another distinguished son of Oduduwa, Prof Jide

    Osuntokun, to react to our shame and disappointment that while, under the leadership of  General Obasanjo, water projects, in billions of naira, were monthly being awarded to Northern Nigeria, with Alhaji Muktar Shagari as Water Resources Minister, nothing was coming to the South-West even though our people were panting for drinkable water as well as for irrigation purposes since agriculture belongs, anachronistically, under federal might.

    While these serial anachronisms continued, Tinubu,, through deft political engineering and incredible networking which continue to rob him of sound sleep as he works literally 25 hours daily, has been able to put together throughout the region, Ondo state inclusive, a team of people-loving governors whose credo is service to the people.

    While politics in the ACN surely differs from that of Ondo’s Labour Party and nothing will gladden us more than to add that state to the ACN family, nobody will dispute the fact that there is a world of difference between what governor Mimiko is doing today and that of his PDP predecessor.

    I state this fact to celebrate Ashiwaju who spared nothing to see that the stolen mandate in that state was restored.

    I personally believe that the governor can still pause, think and give honour to whom honour is due for his victory, i.e. Ashiwaju Bola Tinubu.

    That Lagos state has become a world brand today says a lot for Ashiwaju’s perspicacity; his building blocks and the seamless manner in which his thorough-bred successor, Raji Fashola gelled, and built upon the foundations he laid.

    I laugh heartily when I see ignorance on display: when I hear that he wants to annex not only Oyo, Ogun, Ekiti, Ondo but also Edo to Lagos State and that this underpins his unstinting support for democracy.

    My perpetual question to such people then is to where he wants to annex Ghana, Sierra-Leone or even nearby Benin where he had been equally untiring in helping cement, and expand the frontiers of democracy by collaborating, and sparing no  resources to ensure that credible individuals emerge leaders to help re-define the African politician who is seen, the world over, as nothing but corrupt.

    Ashiwaju remains a role model, whose door is always open just as his heart is, to all those who are heavy laden.

    You have in this one-man battalion, a ready army to fight political infidels who believe they can use the paraphernalia of federal  power and money with which to buy, not only the judiciary but even electoral officials as well as its usually high-handed security personnel to defeat the peoples’ aspirations.

    What has Tinubu not been made to suffer as we recently saw in the Code of Conduct Bureau’s attempt to undermine him.

    Only this past week, Governor Raji Fashola, SAN, wrote of Asiwaju: “Let me say generally about his public image that I do not remember one public contest where he has lost the war.

    I speak of many battle fronts; from Oyo, to Borgu, Ife, Ibadan, Lagos and Anambra to mention but a few. Of course, he bears many battle scars and these attest to his tactical ability to surrender battles in order to win wars”.

    What more can one say?

    To Asiwaju and a few other gallant leaders like General Akinrinade go the credit for the roaring success NADECO was, again sparing neither his time nor resources or can we forget that to the ‘Baffday Boy’ goes e – introduction of forensic science as a veritable tool in humbling poll robbers, no matter how entrenched in power they may be. Without a Bola Ahmed Tinubu, there would never have been an Adrian Forty in the annals of Nigerian electoral history. And how were we to have known how palm kernel became the choice tool of incorrigible riggers?

    And Adrian Forty, God rest his soul, didn’t come cheap!

    In concluding this brief article into the place of Asiwaju in our contemporary political history we must thank God for giving him his precious jewel, his wife, friend and companion of many decades who has seen as much deprivation and humbug as the husband. An Amazon of no mean repute, who today ably represents not only Lagos State but Nigerian women at the Upper Chamber. Senator Remi Tinubu must have, countless times, been the shoulder on which Ashiwaju must have leaned in those agonising days of man’s inhumanity to man. She has been the loyal overseer and controller of the home front and today, Lagos state can be proud to say it has two for the price of one because, like Hillary Clinton, the U.S Secretary of state to his affable Bill, Senator Tinubu must be bouncing a whole lot of ideas off Asiwaju just so that

    Nigeria can be better than what the rapacious mainstreamers have made of it.

    To Asiwaju, here is saying: Happy Birthday, Leader in a million; Long May you live in blossoming health.

  • Nigeria @ 65: Of hope, hurdles and an unbending will

    Nigeria @ 65: Of hope, hurdles and an unbending will

    Nigeria will be 65, as an independent country, on 1 October, 2025. That means the country has come a long way since its 1 October, 1960 Independence Day, and the country has had a chequered history. This nation has had high hopes. One of the key indicators of this hope was in the introduction of Nigeria on the floor of the United Nations Organisation on 7 October, 1960, prior to the speech of the Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa. The United Nations compere said: “We are confident that as a member of the United Nations [Nigeria] will contribute much in making speedy solutions and wise solutions. We are confident that in our deliberations we will benefit from their wisdom, from their ingenuity of thought.”

    The compere said further: “In this Assembly, we are sure that their entrance will give our deliberations more vitality and more speedy progress. Apart from that, Mr. President, we are also certain that Nigeria as an independent country, Nigeria, in facing their problems, Nigeria, solving their problems, will also give inspiration to all of us especially to the newly independent countries. The methods in which she is solving her problems, either politically, economically or technically or socially will certainly will be of great advantage for other nations, especially the newly independent countries or the technically underdeveloped countries.” The introduction received resounding applause.

    In his speech, Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa said: “Mr. President, Last Saturday, the country which I have the honour to represent, the Federation of Nigeria, became independent and assumed the rights and the responsibilities of a sovereign state. Today, Nigeria has been admitted into the United Nations Organisation and assumed still more responsibilities. On behalf of my countrymen in Nigeria, I thank you all most sincerely for accepting us as a fellow member in this organisation.”

    Moreover, the Prime Minister said: “First, it is the desire of Nigeria as I have said already to remain on friendly terms with all nations and to participate actively in the work of the United Nations Organisation. Secondly, Nigeria, a large and populous country, of over thirty five million, has absolutely no territorial or expansionist intentions. Thirdly, we shall not forget our old friends and we are proud to have been accepted as a member of the British Commonwealth. But nevertheless, we do not intend to align ourselves as a matter of routine with any of the power blocs. … Fourthly, Nigeria hopes to work with other African states for the progress of Africa and to assist in bringing all African territories to a state of responsible independence.”

    Moreover, the famous United States President John F. Kennedy invited Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa to America on a state visit from 25 July, 1961. Watching the United States Information Service documentary of that visit, it is difficult not to be proud to be a Nigerian. The Prime Minister was received at the airport by US Vice-President Lyndon Johnson and American officials, with elaborate and colourful military honours. This was coupled with Sir Tafawa Balewa’s self-assured and rhetorically skillful speech delivery which justified his endearing naming as the “Golden Voice of Africa”.

    But most striking of all was the spectacle of ordinary American citizens lining up to catch a glimpse of the Nigerian Prime Minister and waving as he arrived. Among other places of note, Sir Tafawa Balewa visited a number of American universities, which could have been motivated by his fascination with education.

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

    He also visited the Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, site of one of the 1863 decisive battles of the American civil war, and took photographs at the site. This is ironical, because six years later, on 30 May, 1967, a civil war broke out in Nigeria itself. The Nigerian civil war was a fallout of the unprecedented military coup of January 1966 which was an ill-advised reaction to ethno-religious disagreements. In that coup which was predominantly carried out by Igbo soldiers, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, along with many other non-Igbo leaders, was brutally killed. The virtually exclusively non-Igbo casualties of that coup stoked ethnic suspicions, and an ethnically-coloured retaliatory counter coup took place in July 1966. Ripples from the coups precipitated the 1967 civil war which went on until January 1970.

    Considering the fact that some Nigerians are readily threatening war today if their demands are not fulfilled, it is important to look at some examples of the rhetoric of that war. Addressing Biafrans, the Biafran war leader Lt. Col. Odumegwu Ojukwu said: “Fellow Biafrans, on the occasion of your rally to demonstrate your solidarity with the struggles of your kith and kin back home, I send to you all fraternal greetings. As one who has been entrusted with the onerous responsibilities of guiding our young republic through these difficult times, I must confess that it is always a source of deep pleasure and encouragement to me to receive assurances of the support of the people and their continuing determination to persevere until complete victory is achieved.”

    He went on: “You are all aware that for over four months now, Nigeria has been waging a war of aggression to destroy Biafra and her people. This invasion by Nigerian hordes was mounted because the people of the former Eastern Region of Nigeria were forced on May the 30th, 1967 to declare themselves the Independent State of Biafra in order to assure the security of their lives and property. … The inordinate ambition of the Hausa-Fulani oligarchy to continue to dominate the whole of what was formerly the Federation of Nigeria, the unrealistic desire to acquire the wealth and resources of Biafra while rejecting their people, the mad and homicidal desire to exterminate from the face of the earth fourteen million Biafrans drove Gowon and his clique towards unleashing a costly war to attain the unattainable – the subjugation of this young, but promising republic.”

    He said further: “Even with the vast resources of the former Federation of Nigeria with which they prosecute the war, even with the active collaboration of those international opportunists, Britain and the Soviet Union, an unholy alliance of vested interests, even with their attempt to subvert our government by suborning some of our highly-placed military and civilian personnel, an attempt which was foiled at the nick of time, Gowon has failed to make good his boast to crush Biafra – a campaign which he bragged would take only forty-eight hours to accomplish has now dragged on for almost five months and will drag on for as long as it takes Gowon and his clique, both Nigerian and others, to realise that nothing can shake the will or crush the spirit of a determined people.”

    Around two and a half years after that speech, Ojukwu, the Biafran war Commander, fled Nigeria, and Col. Olusegun Obasanjo, the Commander of the 3rd Marine Division received the instrument of surrender from Col. Effiong the Biafran Army Commander on 15 January, 1970; and the war came to an end. The occasion provided an opportunity for the Head of State at the time, Col. Yakubu Gowon, to respond to Ojukwu’s negative comments on him.

    Gowon was asked by the media “Why do you think Ojukwu left Biafra?” He responded: “The foreign press seemed to know him better than we do. … You seem to give him all sorts of excellent qualities. … Ojukwu the gallant chap who said I will fight to the last man and I will be the last man to fall. What a pity! How are the mighty fallen and in such a cowardly way! If he had done a Hitler, probably [he could have been a man] of courage. He didn’t do a Hitler. Hitler took poison, died and ordered his body to be burned up.”

    Some estimates put the number of Nigerians who died in that war at around three million. So, it was not an experience any patriotic Nigerian should wish for. This is why it is bothersome that a Chieftain of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Buba Galadima, said in an ARISE News interview on 16 September, 2025: “Come November, there are rumours all over the place that this [Tinubu] government is nominating a just retired Court of Appeal judge who is known for notoriety to be the Chairman of INEC. I wish it is not true, because if that man becomes the Chairman of INEC, be rest assured that this government is inviting a civil war in this country.”

      Another dimension of the unpatriotic disposition of some Nigerians is that, ironically, a nation which the UN in 1960 hoped would provide a guide to other nations on how to solve their problems has now become seemingly unable to solve its own problems, and at every turn, some individuals or collectives of Nigerians have the tendency to invite foreign powers to help solve the country’s problems. One of the latest examples of this was former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s invitation of the international community to come and help the country out of Atiku’s presumed problems with the widely-commended 30 August, 2025 Rivers State Local Government elections.

    One other obstacle to the fulfillment of the dream of Nigeria’s independence is the perverse promotion of negative narratives about the country by some Nigerians. It is heartening that as the ‘Niger-pessimists’ continue to sink deeper in their self-defeating obsession, new associations of ‘Niger-optimists’ are emerging. One of them is the Transformative Governance Forum (TGF) – a self-motivated and self-sustaining group of patriotic Nigerians of diverse professional callings within and outside the country.

    The TGF specifies its philosophy as follows: “Conscious of the enduring socio-political and economic challenges confronting our people; challenged by the erosion of public trust in governance, and the dwindling spirits of patriotism; believing in the power of communal solidarity and grassroots democracy to transform society; recognising that the challenges of our time demand collective courage and unwavering commitment to progressive values in our polity; some Social Welfarists within the Progressive camps constitute themselves as the Transformative Governance Forum, to work for a social democratic Federal Republic of Nigeria; a nation where no child sleeps hungry, no elderly suffer unaffordable healthcare, and no talent is squandered by want.”

    The interim National Coordinator of the TGF is Aare Mojeed Alabi, a Professor of Law and former Honourable Speaker of the Osun State House of Assembly. Members of the Board of Trustees include Her Majesty Ambassador Dr Omolola Ogunwusi, Dr. Ademola Rabiu, CEng, Lady Nkechi Fidimaiye, Dr Abiola Oshodi, Prof Anthony Okoh, Lt Gen Abdulrahman Dambazau, Hon Kayode Adebiyi, Prof Amuda-Kannike (SAN), Aare Mojeed Alabi, and Hajiya Zainab Mohammed Pawa. The TGF has scheduled a range of activities, including the inauguration of its National Executive, for 22 to 23 September, 2025 in Abuja.

  • In Rivers, Tinubu walked into storm, steadiedship, brought it safely back to harbour

    In Rivers, Tinubu walked into storm, steadiedship, brought it safely back to harbour

    Last week was another of those periods when President Bola Ahmed Tinubu seemed to operate quietly from the background, with fewer public appearances and personal engagements. Yet, it turned out to be a decisive week, one that underscored the weight of leadership not by sheer presence but by the quality of actions taken. The President returned to Abuja on Tuesday evening, cutting short his annual working vacation in Europe, and by the following day, he made one of the most consequential pronouncements of his administration: the end of the six-month state of emergency in Rivers State.

    The decision was not a routine announcement. It marked the conclusion of a difficult but necessary intervention that had occupied the national conversation for months. When President Tinubu proclaimed a state of emergency in Rivers on March 18, 2025, it was met with an outpouring of opinions—legal, political, and civic. Many described it as unconstitutional, a federal overreach, or a needless imposition. Yet, standing firm in his conviction, Tinubu had insisted that the declaration was the only available tool to halt the drift into anarchy in one of Nigeria’s most economically strategic states.

    Now, six months later, with the emergency lifted and democratic governance restored, the wisdom of that action shines through. What once seemed like a radical overreach has proven to be an act of foresight, averting what could have been a prolonged paralysis with grave consequences for both Rivers State and the nation at large.

    At the heart of the Rivers crisis was a complete breakdown of governance. The Governor and the State House of Assembly were locked in open conflict, with only four lawmakers supporting the executive while 27 others lined up behind the Speaker in opposition. The standoff meant that the governor could not present an appropriation bill, leaving the machinery of government starved of funds. Critical economic assets, including vital oil pipelines, were increasingly exposed to vandalism, while legal disputes between both arms of government multiplied without resolution.

    The situation was so dire that even the Supreme Court, in one of several judgments arising from the crisis, acknowledged that there was effectively “no government in Rivers State.” For a state that contributes significantly to Nigeria’s oil wealth and stands as a hub of commercial activity, such paralysis was untenable.

    Efforts at reconciliation, including interventions from elder statesmen and traditional rulers, failed to thaw the hardened positions of both camps. It was against this backdrop that Tinubu invoked Section 305 of the Constitution to proclaim the state of emergency, suspending the governor, his deputy, and the House of Assembly for six months.

    It was a painful decision, as the President himself admitted in his address last week. But it was also an act of responsibility, guided not by political expediency but by the need to preserve order, protect national assets, and safeguard the people of Rivers State from descending into chaos.

    From the moment the proclamation was made, critics pounced. Legal experts questioned the validity of suspending duly elected officials. Rights activists argued that the will of the people had been undermined. Opposition politicians claimed it was an abuse of power. Over 40 cases were filed in courts across Abuja, Port Harcourt, and Yenagoa to challenge the emergency rule.

    Tinubu, however, did not shy away from these voices of dissent. Rather, he welcomed them as part of the democratic process. As he reminded Nigerians in his address, “That is the way it should be in a democratic setting.” The courts, after all, exist to test the limits of executive power and ensure accountability. But he also stressed that the Constitution itself provides for a state of emergency precisely for moments when ordinary governance mechanisms collapse.

    And collapse they did in Rivers. The President’s refusal to succumb to pressure and his insistence on deploying the constitutional safety valve showed not authoritarian impulse but democratic responsibility. It was the harder choice—one that carried political risk but was anchored in the broader interest of peace and order.

    The six months of suspended governance were not a wasted period. On the contrary, they created a necessary pause, giving all parties the time and space to reflect. Without the daily theatrics of a hostile Assembly and an isolated executive, Rivers’ political actors were forced into sober consideration of the larger picture—the welfare of their people.

    President Tinubu’s decision effectively pulled the brakes on a runaway conflict. It prevented the crisis from spilling into violent confrontations on the streets of Port Harcourt. It shielded critical oil infrastructure from opportunistic saboteurs. And most importantly, it gave the people of Rivers the assurance that the federation would not abandon them in their hour of governance collapse.

    By September, intelligence available to the Presidency indicated a remarkable shift in attitudes. Stakeholders across the divide had begun to show “a groundswell of a new spirit of understanding, a robust readiness, and potent enthusiasm” to resume normal governance, as Tinubu noted in his declaration. The embattled governor, Siminalayi Fubara, and Speaker Martins Amaewhule, once bitter rivals, had begun to signal a willingness to find common ground.

    On Wednesday, President Tinubu announced the end of the emergency, effective midnight, and restored the governor, his deputy, and the members of the State House of Assembly to their offices. With that, a painful chapter closed, and Rivers State re-entered the mainstream of democratic governance.

    But the more significant outcome lies in the lesson it offers. By intervening when he did, Tinubu ensured that the people of Rivers would not remain hostages to political brinkmanship. He reminded governors and legislatures nationwide that power is a trust held in the service of citizens, not a weapon for factional battles.

    “People who voted us into power expect to reap the fruits of democracy. However, that expectation will remain unrealizable in an atmosphere of violence, anarchy, and insecurity borne by misguided political activism,” the President observed. His words cut to the core of the crisis—not just in Rivers, but as a warning to the entire federation.

    What if Tinubu had not acted? The picture is chilling. Rivers might have remained without a functional government, with civil servants unpaid and state services grinding to a halt. The fragile peace of Port Harcourt could have broken into factional violence, spreading instability across the Niger Delta. Oil production, already beset with challenges, might have plummeted further. And Nigeria, at a delicate economic moment, could ill afford the turbulence.

    By declaring an emergency, Tinubu prevented this grim scenario. In so doing, he showed not only political courage but also a deep sense of responsibility. Leadership, at its core, is the ability to make difficult choices that others shrink from.

    Today, as Rivers State resumes normal governance, the wisdom of Tinubu’s action is apparent. What his critics derided as overreach has, in hindsight, proven to be a demonstration of goodwill and foresight. By absorbing the criticisms, braving the lawsuits, and standing firm in the storm, the President created the conditions for reconciliation.

    Read Also: Tinubu’s Kaduna visit a political masterstroke beyond 2027 – DOJ

    The people of Rivers now have a renewed opportunity to demand governance that works for their welfare and prosperity. Their leaders have been reminded that office is not a prize for partisan battles but a platform for service. And the nation has been shown, once again, that constitutional tools exist not as ornaments but as safeguards for democracy.

    The Rivers state of emergency will remain one of the defining moments of Tinubu’s presidency. It illustrates the delicate balance between respecting democratic freedoms and ensuring that democracy itself does not collapse under the weight of reckless politics.

    By bringing the emergency to an end after six months—no longer, no shorter—Tinubu demonstrated both firmness and restraint. He neither prolonged extraordinary measures unnecessarily nor shirked from wielding them when required. In doing so, he reinforced the principle that governance exists for the people and that no political stalemate should ever compromise their welfare.

    Leadership is sometimes about walking into storms others flee. In Rivers, Tinubu walked into the storm, steadied the ship, and brought it safely back to harbour. And for that, the people of Rivers—and indeed Nigeria—owe him a measure of gratitude.

    Meanwhile, besides the Rivers emergency rule expiration and his pronouncement of the return of proper democracy, President Tinubu’s week was marked by other events and activities, both solemn reflection and significant engagements, with his visit to the family of the late former President Muhammadu Buhari in Kaduna taking centre stage.

    On Friday, the President assured Buhari’s widow, Aisha, and other family members that his administration would uphold the legacy of honesty, patriotism, and integrity left behind by the late leader. “A loss in flesh is not a loss in the spirit, and the spirit that he left with us is a spirit of hard work, dedication, patriotism and honesty, and we are doing that,” Tinubu said, pledging to carry forward Buhari’s values for the unity and progress of Nigeria. In her response, Mrs Buhari described the visit as a source of comfort and urged Nigerians to emulate her husband’s virtues.

    The President’s presence in Kaduna also extended to a more joyous occasion as he attended the wedding of Nasirudeen Abdulaziz Yari, son of Senator Abdulaziz Yari, to Safiyya Shehu Idris. At the Sultan Bello Mosque, Tinubu formally received the bride’s hand-in-marriage on behalf of the Yari family and advised the young couple to build their union on faith and mutual respect.

    Earlier in the week, the President approved portfolios for five new executive directors of the North Central Development Commission, underscoring his commitment to regional development. He also congratulated Nigerian achievers, including business leader Farouk Gumel, hurdler Tobi Amusan, and transport engineer Biodun Otunola, for their feats on the global stage. Midweek, he hailed former Inspector-General of Police Mohammed Adamu on his birthday, while on Thursday, he condoled with families affected by the tragic fire at Afriland Towers in Lagos, urging greater vigilance to avert future disasters.

    The President capped the week with tributes to HID Awolowo on her 10th remembrance anniversary, congratulations to FAAN boss Olubunmi Kuku on her election as ACI Africa Vice-President, and heartfelt condolences over the passing of renowned physician Prof Oyinade Elebute. He also joined Nigerians in celebrating music icon 2Baba at 50, lauding his artistry and global impact.

  • Ageing, conservative Atiku as revolutionary

    Ageing, conservative Atiku as revolutionary

    DAYS after his spokesman, Paul Ibe, issued a statement on his behalf waxing ebullient about revolutions, former vice president Atiku Abubakar has still not disavowed it. His statements, many Nigerians and the media have come to understand, must be taken with caution, especially when they are posted on his social media handles. To conclude that his posts inevitably represent his views may, for this budding but really ageing revolutionary, be fallacious. Last Monday, Mr Ibe quoted the former vice president as warning the Bola Tinubu presidency to beware of looming revolution because of hunger, thus simplistically correlating sundry crimes with hunger. He had bellowed: “The most violent socio-political eruptions and revolutions all over the world had often been powered by pervasive hunger and unbearable material conditions – especially the paradox of squalor amidst plenty in our land.” He also added grimly: “The current unacceptable situation offers an opportunity for reflection, (in line with) the French Revolution, the 1917 Russian Revolution, and the Arab Spring in which a young man caught in the maelstrom of unbearable frustration set himself ablaze in a development which occasioned violent socio-political eruptions starting out from Tunisia and engulfing the Middle-East and North Africa.”

    Not done, he then added: “Back home here in Nigeria, it may not be out of place to argue that even the ‘ENDSARS’ protest was fuelled by the traumatising  frustration of hunger and  insensitivity on the part of the government.” Alhaji Atiku’s love for theorising and abstractions is legendary. Whether he really understands the foundations of his beliefs or the dynamics of the social forces he declaims about so magisterially is another thing entirely. Indeed, as his records show, when any of his pontifications proves unpopular, he disowns them instantly.

    On May 13, 2022, one day after Deborah Samuel, a student of the College of Education Sokoto, was lynched by fellow students in an appalling case of murder carried out before a global audience, Alhaji Atiku was rightly outraged enough to denounce the murder. Said he on Twitter: “There cannot be a justification for such gruesome murder. Deborah Yakubu was murdered and all those behind her death must be brought to justice. My condolences to her family and friends.” His tweet, however, attracted a swift backlash from some northerners, perhaps Sokoto indigenes, who swore not to vote for him should he win the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) presidential nomination yet to be conducted at the time. And with alacrity, and writing in Hausa language on facebook that same evening, he recanted his belief and outrage, posting: “This evening I received information that a post was made that doesn’t agree with my orders. I use this to announce that any post without A. A. is not from me. May God protect us.” So, what about the murdered Miss Samuel? Silence, ponderous and crushing silence.

    Read Also: Tribalism a malignant disease hindering Nigeria’s progress – Atiku

    In late August, speaking through his representative Ola Olateju, a professor, Alhaji Atiku declared that he was not as desperate to be president as he was in midwifing a new and prosperous Nigeria. The genial professor spoke on behalf of the former vice president at a ceremony in Lagos welcoming defectors into the African Democratic Congress (ADC), the special purpose vehicle the coalition of opposition forces planned to use to unseat President Tinubu. Hear Prof. Olateju: “Atiku Abubakar’s plan is to build a better Nigeria. So, it’s not about him being the president. It’s about having a better government, a good government able to deliver for Nigerians. It’s not a personal thing for him, and that’s why some of us are with him. It’s not about Atiku having to be president at all costs…It’s not about a personal thing that he must be president. No, it is not a matter of must. The must is for him to see Nigeria deliver as wished by all…” The ink had not dried on that awkward ascription of altruism to Alhaji Atiku before he denounced the ascription.

    Another of the former vice president’s spokesmen, Tunde Olusunle, issued a swift rebuttal on facebook a day or two later, insisting that his principal would vie for the presidency in 2027. Quoting Alhaji Atiku, Dr Olusunle posted: “I did not issue that statement. When people stand in for me at events, we preview my thoughts on the instant subject and what my contribution or intervention will be, so that we are on the same page. In this particular instance, there was no engagement with me to distill my thoughts. Prof. Olateju was not speaking for me. I will run in 2027.” In the Miss Samuel case, the former vice president cowardly and mystifyingly placed his ambition above his principles, if not his character. In the Prof Olateju case, Alhaji Atiku was sadly unable to even recognise when his unflattering image as a vacillator and opportunist was being burnished.

    And then came the revolutionary buncombe. When he anchored his belief on a looming revolution on the examples of Russian and French revolutions as well as the Arab Spring, it was all but certain that Alhaji Atiku had very superficial understanding of the forces he casually referenced in his statement. Not only was he ignorant of the remote and immediate causes of the revolutions, he also failed abysmally to draw the right lessons from the social earthquakes that sundered those countries and defeated the objectives of the revolutions. It has indeed become fashionable to talk of revolution, even by conservative and reactionary politicians who, like the former vice president, cannot be trusted to stand for anything.

  • US, social media and Charlie Kirk murder

    US, social media and Charlie Kirk murder

    Last Tuesday, the Department of State Service (DSS) sued activist Omoyele Sowore for calling the president names on social media. Sued along with him were tech giants Facebook and X. The activist has also countersued, insisting that he was merely exercising his constitutional right to free speech. Weeks ago, the social media set Nepal on fire because of warped perception of freedom of speech. There, the courts intervened strongly and determined that boundaries should be set, including getting tech giants operating in that country to register with the Communications and Technology ministry. The proscription of the tech giants that followed the non-adherence to regulations triggered massive and violent protests that led to the burning of public buildings, looting, raping and the death of dozens of protesters, policemen and innocent bystanders.

    Right-wing activist and United States president Donald Trump’s ally, Charlie Kirk, was also shot and killed in the State of Utah by a white man, Tyler Robinson, radicalised by extreme and fierce political rhetoric online. As the governor, Spencer Cox, said in an interview last Sunday, “I believe that social media has played a direct role in every single assassination and assassination attempt that we have seen over the last five, six years.” President Trump has also filed a $15bn lawsuit against New York Times for defamation, even though his own incendiary speeches and statements on social media have been inflammatory and divisive. The tech giants are by their permissiveness clearly nudging the world, not just Nepal or Nigeria, into chaos. The world may very well get there sooner than expected.

    Read Also: Who really was Charlie Kirk?

    What Mr Sowore can’t figure out is that though he is at liberty to oppose or dislike any president or even individual he wants, that freedom is circumscribed by propriety and law. Otherwise, one day, someone will also post on social media hurtful things about his family and plead free speech or any other justification. It is, therefore, up to the courts to determine what boundaries should be set for commentaries or whether the society is, as it now seems, defenceless against slurs, innuendoes, and outright hurtful fabrications authored by malevolent and dysfunctional personalities.

  • Citizens, citoyens and fellow compatriots

    Citizens, citoyens and fellow compatriots

    As Nigeria’s sixty fifth birthday anniversary approaches, it is imperative, beyond partisan considerations, to ask some questions about the fate and fortunes of liberal democracy in the greatest conglomeration of Black people in the world. The question is even more pressing in the light of notable developments in Western nations, particularly the rise of rightwing populism and xenophobic nationalism in leading western nations such as America, England and France. As this column has noted several times in the last few years, these developments may suggest some fraying at the edges of the nation-state paradigm itself and the possibility of its undergoing some radical mutations as historical developments unfold.

      If this were to be the case, it will amount to double jeopardy for African nations that are yet to inculcate the habits and operational procedures of the nation-state after the epoch of empires before they are frog-marched once again into uncharted territory. The question must now be broached as to why western-type liberal democracy seems to be taking its time to take root in Africa. Why has it proved difficult for Africans to internalize and interiorize its habits and norms? At the superficial level, the question can be converted to its own answer. Africa is not Western Europe or America for that matter. The mode of acculturation and socialization of each entity is different. So is their historic trajectory. Africa is the last bastion of traditional feudal autocracy.

     But something far more profound and fundamental seems to be afoot. Early developmental economists such as Samir Amin, the iconic, Egyptian-born radical economist, historian and social philosopher, suggested that Europe, America, Australia, New Zealand were able to overpower and overcome the contradictions of feudalism so rapidly ironically because they were at the periphery unlike its classical formation in China, India, Ethiopia, the Arab countries and core Africa. As a matter of fact, the United States is supposed to represent a complete new beginning for humanity founded on the ashes of feudal Europe.

      Even then it took several centuries of turmoil and bloody strife preceding the signing and sealing of the Magna Carta in June 1215 through subsequent civil wars and a revolution to domesticate and naturalize the democratic franchise in Britain. It was only in the last century that adult suffrage was extended to all male and later women. In America despite the self-declared “self-evident” truths that all men are born equal, it took centuries of protests and violent confrontations on the streets for Black people to be declassified as sub-human curios not worthy of voting or being voted for. Democracy is not a Kayo-kayo festival.

       When African postcolonial elites cotton on to the heroic struggles for self-emancipation of other people to demand same for their nation without having expended the same toil, tears and sufferings for the emancipation of their own people not to talk of immersing themselves in their analogous struggles except when it confers certain privileges and political advantages on them, that is breastfeeding democracy leading to empty caterwauling and the sulking of colonial sucklings. They quote John Locke’s theory of social contract without understanding its limited universal applicability, what led to what and the context and circumstances.

    They warmly approve of Rousseau’s famous saying that man is born free but is in chains everywhere, without appreciating the fact that not all “men” fall into that social category or genetic classification.  Rather than coming to grip with their intellectual, political and moral limitations and go back to the drawing board, they resort to hoary prescriptions and demagoguery about how to move democracy forward and safeguard votes which is dead on arrival because it is founded on peer-envy and losers’ fatigue. Seeing through the hegemonic ruse, elites from countervailing cultural formations dismiss it all with contempt and hostility, a development which reinforces the extant ethnic temples and drives the prospects of liberal democracy further away. You cannot buy into a game of numbers and ethnic herd-count after conducting your own tribal census and then buy out midgame. That is electoral disruption, or isn’t it?

    Read Also: Who really was Charlie Kirk?

      This is the bane of democratic growth and expansion in Nigeria with the nuclear caucus of each dominant group gaming away to snatch the supreme laurel on the basis of extant strengths and advantages rather than relying on a pan-national consensus. In such circumstances, it is the dominant group that is able to claw away at the electoral strengths of rival power formations and cobble together the semblance of a national consensus that is bound to prevail at the centre. This is what happened in 2023 and may yet repeat itself in 2027 given the enormous economic and strategic resources that have since accrued to those that have found themselves controlling the levers of power at the centre despite the wailings about pangs of hunger.

    It is a precarious situation and the circumstances are far from rosy. It is an established fact that in conditions of depressing and distressing economic indices, elite contestation for power which involves fanning the embers of religious and cultural identities in an already severely polarized polity may eventuate in political disorder and ethnic confrontation on a prohibitive scale. The western powers that used to nudge Nigeria in the direction of democratic rectitude and restitution are all embroiled in internal contradictions and existential complications of their own which leaves no room for international do-gooding.

      It reminds one of an anecdote about Charles de Gaulle, the greatest Frenchman of the last century. After surviving another of the numerous attempts on his life, the get-away car conveying him to safety had barely left the scene when it developed a flat tyre. The tall looping figure of Charles de Gaulle craned out and then ruefully noted that those who were trying to save his life were as incompetent as those who were trying to kill him. Democracy has many night nurses who often turn out to be daylight killer-medics.

    Democracy may be a permanent work in progress. But when improperly and incompetently handled, it is also prone to quick regression and summary retrogression. We have seen this in the many coups, countercoups, civil uprisings, religious upheavals, military annulment of election and the consequent abridgement of democratic growth as well as the instances of civilian autocracy that this country has hosted since independence. They all point at something very fundamental: the lack of nourishments and nutrients on which a viable and sustainable democratic culture can grow and flourish.

       To compound our predicament, this foundational lack is complicated by the vestiges of traditional authoritarian rule which we inherited from our forebears and which has survived the most outlandish onslaught of colonization. The rich irony is that traditional authoritarian rule had its unique checks and balances which allowed empires, kingdoms and autonomous principalities to flourish until the colonial irruption. Had it been that we had listened to some of our visionary founding fathers who insisted that what has been handed to us is not a real nation in the classical sense of the word but a pastiche and mosaic of countervailing ethnicities with different cultures and different historical trajectories, we could have fared much better because the scope and enormity of the task ahead would have been apparent.

       For example, while the Yoruba spent most of a previous century fighting themselves in a series of interlocking civil wars, the Igbo people were in a world of their own with periodic eruptions of internecine bloodletting while the Fulani conquerors had just completed a systematic decimation and takeover of Hausaland. To beat all these together into an organic whole would have required masters of violent homogeneity or a political surgeon of uncommon skill of surgical disentanglement and unbundling. But with the heady beat of independence, rather than facing the fundamental issues squarely, we headed straight off to uncharted territory. Six years later, the whole thing fell apart and we are still at it sixty years later.

     So, let us by all means continue with our quarrelling and bickering about the validity of the military-ordained 1999 constitution, the need for a national dialogue, the tragic unraveling of the judiciary, INEC and its failings, the need for state police, devolution of power and the messy constitutional impasse about Local Government which speak to the tyranny of overbearing centralization and its strangulation of genuine democratic aspiration of Nigerians for over sixty years. But let us also revive debates about certain issues that are even more germane and foundational to our democratic evolution, particularly our inability to throw up a genuine nationalist and patriotic political class, the drastic decline of civic consciousness and the continuing absence of an authentic citizenry to act as guardrails against democratic derailment.

       So far, what we have in the context fierce elite contestation for power without a coherent and holistic nationalist ideology of development and democratic growth is ethnic citizenship or nationalism in furious reverse gear in which primordial loyalty to tribal origins and aspirations trump all considerations for the larger nation. In the ensuing collision of tribal temples and templates, the soul and essence of the nation is lost leaving an amorphous mass of contending ethnic nationalities. Having been handed Nigeria by the colonial masters, we are finding the task of creating Nigerians a mission impossible, except by default.

       We must thank the authorities for restoring the teaching of history to our school curriculum. This is the way to go. The original decision to expunge history from our pedagogical space is so bizarre in its malicious intent and conception that it could only have come from the philistine mindset of a perverse egomaniac. As we noted only last week, It has led to a rupture of heroic remembrance and a short-circuiting of institutional memory. We must shudder at the effect and impact of this on a whole generation of our youngsters. Unfortunately, while the teaching of history can be restored and civic consciousness imparted by boosting and enhancing national literacy levels, not so authentic citizenship which is an integral and organic bastion of the storied history of a united people in all their shared destiny, their shared inspirations and aspirations and their shared faith in the orgiastic future.

       It is the absence of authentic citizenship aided by a historical void and the collapse of civic consciousness which opens the door and a pathway to the phenomenon of “fellow countrymen”, the false narrative beloved of military despotism and civilian autocracy alike in which there is no fellow feeling or compatriots but the barbarity of cave-dwellers. Fortunately as that phenomenon recedes into remote and malignant antiquity, we have the opportunity to create the nation anew. If the opportunity slips, the alternative is too dark and sinister to contemplate. Happy anniversary to the nation.

  • Non-humans to regulate human behavior: Advantage Albania ?

    Non-humans to regulate human behavior: Advantage Albania ?

    Oh boy, oh boy, we surely live in interesting times. It is not only Africa that is in trouble, other parts of the world, particularly Europe and America, are experiencing unique tremors. The human species has never appeared more troubled and tormented by its own foibles and the toxic effluence and side-effects of sheer genius. Has anybody ever heard the song Spirits in a Material World? As President Donald Trump’s Air Force1 glided gracefully into the clouds on Thursday at Stansted Airport on departure from Britain after a historic state visit, one prayed that some astral gliders would not swoop on the plane and forcibly reroute it to an unknown destination.

     One had prayed for the day never to arrive when robotic machines infused with artificial intelligence would develop enough initiative and nous to overwhelm and overpower their human masters and take over the affairs of humanity. If it seems like unrealizable Science Fiction please be guided that future reality sometimes begins like unactualizable fiction. Albania, a remote semi-European country just a stone’s throw from Italy but essentially of Balkan provenance, has taken the bull by the horn. A land of heroic warriors and doughty fighters, the Albanians are just peeping out to the outside world after many centuries and epochs of serial entombments by Roman, Ottoman and modern European civilizations. They even survived a nasty spell of communist inquisition under the notoriously savage rule of an Islamic tyrant known as Enver Hoxha who took the country and its people back to the Stone Age only for the country to succumb to a protracted siege of economic anarchy and political turmoil. Corruption and mismanagement of scarce resources became rife.

    Read Also: CCII rallies Ibadan indigenes for Ladoja’s coronation

       It is said that when flies are eating up a madman no one seems to be bothered, it is only when a madman begins to gobble up his tormentors that eyebrows are raised. The Albanians seem to tire of that nonsense. They have decided to place their fate in the hands of non-human or in-human actors. According to a report: “Albania has become the first country in the world to appoint an IA as a minister.  The virtual official, named Dijella (“ sun in Albanian”) will oversee public procurement. Ministries will submit their application for tenders, and Dijella will process them and make decisions. Her role? Oversee government contracts, block favouritism & bribery and boost transparency…”

      It is a way of arriving at modernity and the impersonal rigours of western bureaucracy by other means. This is how advances in science in the modern world can come to the aid of less developed countries on their own terms as Lee Kuan Yew famously demonstrated in Singapore. Western scientific discoveries come in handy when it comes to inculcating Weberian rigour and rationality in permissive epistemologies. Fred Engels chuckled that economically backward countries can play first violin in Music. The bet is that they didn’t make the violin in the first instance. Oh Dijella, if you are ever persuaded to stray or wander to some shorelines in Africa, you will be lucky if you are not abducted or stolen away in the first instance. This is what the Yoruba people call “Amodemaja” or he who abducts both the hunter and his dog. Welcome to the real McCoy.

  • DAWN PERAMBULATOR

    DAWN PERAMBULATOR

    Those long legs

         How do they gage your gait

    As you walk each morning

         To meet the opening day

    Who hears the whisper

         Between your sole

    And the listening earth

         In what dialect, their dialogue

    How loud, the ditty of the dust

         The powdery prowess of its message

    Read Also: Shettima to lead Nigeria’s delegation to 80th UN General Assembly

    The granular grandeur

         Of its soft, embracing patience

    How do those long arms

         Paddle you through

    The ocean of the wind

         And its liquid lore

    At dawns resonant with untold tales

         Of the dreams of yester-nights

    The chimeric metaphysics of metaphors

         So indigenous to your figurative versatility

    The sweet sweat of gentle jogs

         The huff and puff of grateful lungs

    And muscles honed and toned for

         Endless promenades in the Orchard of Grace

  • Obasanjo gets it wrong at Jonathan Democracy Dialogue

    Obasanjo gets it wrong at Jonathan Democracy Dialogue

    Last week, the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation hosted its fourth edition of Democracy Dialogue in Accra, Ghana. Loftily themed ‘Why Democracies Die’, it attracted high-profile personalities, including Ghana’s president John Mahama, ex-Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo, 2023 Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate Peter Obi. This piece is not about what all of them said during the dialogue: it would be boring and repetitive. It is not even about the gentle admonition the keynote speaker, Bishop Mathew Hassan Kukah, gave former president Goodluck Jonathan regarding the 2027 presidential election. He had warned the ex-president: “The voice of the devil is not so far from the voice of God. Listen very carefully to those who want to use you as an instrument for the elongation of their interests, and not your interests or the interests of Nigeria.”

    The piece is also not about Mr Obi’s customarily simplistic ratiocinations on national issues. He had wildly generalised that democracy was dying in Nigeria, saying: “Nigeria is a typical example of where democracy is dying because it no longer serves the needs of the people and is no longer accountable to them. In Nigeria, democracy has become a process of elite state capture, granting access to public resources for personal and family interests. To reverse this situation, Nigerians must take democracy and elections seriously by ensuring that only people with competence, capacity, character, compassion, and commitment to service are elected.” It was unclear whether he was playing to the gallery, or whether his statement reflected how far his mind could take him, or he was simply trying to ape and please Chief Obasanjo, his newfound master and choreographer.

    It was also, as a matter of fact, certainly not about Dr Jonathan himself, despite the foundation being his. All he could think about, his mind ineluctably drawn to the judiciary, is that “…No businessman can bring his money to invest in a country where the judiciary is compromised, where a government functionary can dictate to judges what judgment they will give. No man brings his money to invest in that economy because they are taking a big risk…If we must build a nation for our children and grandchildren, no matter how painful it is, we must strive to do what is right.” Dr Jonathan probably identified with the cacophony on social media suggesting that the courts compromised the lawsuits that followed the last elections. It is significant that he has said nothing about those lawsuits and the presidential poll directly. If only he was capable of giving his audience something deep relating to the theme of the dialogue, something about why democracies die, or whether a country must run Western-type democracy in order to advance the interests of its citizens.

    Read Also: FG may invite EFCC, ICPC over slow progress on Abuja–Lokoja road project

    Chief Obasanjo was the chairman of the dialogue, and he, as usual, made a few highfalutin and patently contradictory statements tangential to the subject matter of dying democracies. He is, therefore, the reason for this piece. This write-up will focus on two or three points he made during the panel discussion. Responding to the question of where Africa got it wrong in terms of democracy, especially in view of incompetent sit-tight leaders as well as leaders who manipulate the constitution to stay on and on, Chief Obasanjo launched into a rigmarole inspired and propelled by his interactions with Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame. He said he once discussed the subject of succession with Mr Kagame who told him of his unsuccessful efforts to mentor two potential successors, both of whom betrayed him and betrayed Rwanda. As a result, the Rwandan leader inspired a constitutional amendment to elongate his tenure than originally envisaged. Chief Obasanjo added that he embarked on a vox pop incognito in Kigali during which he questioned some 10 Rwandese, eight of whom admitted that they would be willing to give Mr Kagame 10 more terms should he ask for it and as long as he continued to rule well as he was doing.

    Here was Chief Obasanjo supposedly providing insight into why democracies fail and what could be done to prevent that failure in Africa but ending up making peace with tenure elongation on the excuse that potential successors failed the Rwandan president. Did he by any chance inquire into why the potential successors ‘betrayed’ Mr Kagame? What is evident from Chief Obasanjo’s rambling anecdotes and thespian imageries, particularly his conclusion that the Rwandan leader amended the constitution ‘perfectly’, is that Mr Kagame’s tenure elongation aligned exquisitely with his abjuration of Western-style democracy. He made another anecdotal reference to an African sit-tight leader, possibly Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, whom he encountered somewhere in Europe in the thick of impeachment attempts against him in Abuja, and who had counseled him to go back home and amend the Nigerian constitution. Not only was he flattered by the suggestion, but juxtaposing that counsel with his half-baked idea of democracy, he felt it unnecessary to delve deeper into the continent’s checquered democratic journey, let alone question Mr Kagame’s untenable justifications. For if the Rwandan leader could not find the right successor, supposing he dropped dead suddenly, would the country not find an answer to their existential riddle one way or the other?

    Even more mystifying is how to explain why Chief Obasanjo keeps evading a more structured and fundamental consideration of the continent’s democratic longings, a task that never crossed his mind as president, nor has he contemplated it or tasked himself after his presidency. Midway into the panel discussion, he had initially spoken about the weaknesses or failings of Western liberal democracy, that Eureka moment coming only after he had ruled for eight years and unsuccessfully tried to amend the constitution to suit his objective. But he made no rigorous or original suggestion to explicate the subject matter other than his usual self-righteous conclusions anchored on a terrible misreading of political history. He claimed, without any substantiation, that Europe’s development could be attributable largely to the reign of monarchies, stable monarchies that supposedly allowed for longevity of ideas, visions and developmental plans and executions. In other words, tenure extension for rulers like him and Mr Kagame would have produced economic development. Absolute piffle.

    Indeed, Chief Obasanjo even argued, sadly unchallenged, that America, which was founded as a protest against Europe, had no term limit until 1951, after President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the passage and ratification of the 22nd Amendment. The devil is, however, in the detail. Three of the foundational presidents of the United States to wit, George Washington (1st), James Madison (4th), and Thomas Jefferson (3rd), kept strictly and deliberately to two terms, with the third president insisting that to aspire to more than two terms was to strive to be a king. That king, concluded President Jefferson, could very well rule until his ‘dotard’ sustained by the ‘attachments and indulgence’ of the people. While Nigeria struggled to amend its constitution to bar a third term for presidents who complete the term of another, and managed to obfuscate it, the US constitution amended for the same purpose was explicit. It provides that “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”

    Chief Obasanjo has clearly not found time to study political history or understand the US system to which he made glib reference, nor given proper thought to the unstructured political systems often manipulated or exploited by malevolent and messianic leaders. On the one hand, he denounced presidents who schemed for life presidency, but on the other hand spoke wistfully of presidents who satisfied ‘certain fundamentals such as peace, security, unity that are taken as sacrosanct’ to stay longer in office. Drawing from the Rwandan example and contrasting it with the unnamed president who advised him to amend the Nigerian constitution, he gave the impression that once a president governed well or brilliantly, term limit should not rob the country of his expertise. But how could anyone tell when a brilliant and popular president has had enough? The moderator of course saw through Chief Obasanjo’s baffling logic, and unfazed by his anecdotes, decided to probe him further on his alleged third term ambition.

    Responding to the question on third term, Chief Obasanjo sought refuge in theology. He was no fool, he snickered, boasting that he would have had it had he wanted. He based his confidence on the far-fetched comparison between third term and debt relief. According to him, securing debt relief was infinitely tougher and more complex than getting third term. If he could achieve the more complicated task of securing debt relief for Nigeria, every other thing was cakewalk. Only Chief Obasanjo was capable of such comparisons. But for the rest of Nigeria, no such comparison or contrast exists. In any case, he said dismissively, no one alive or dead could accuse him of asking or scheming for a third term in office, a lie many national lawmakers and political leaders had repeatedly debunked. They described his style as plausible deniability. What Chief Obasanjo didn’t know is that contrary to the impression he tried to create of his altruism and leadership acumen, nearly all his responses to the moderator’s question in Accra last Wednesday gave indication that he saw nothing wrong with tenure elongation, regretted that he could not pull it off in 2007, and is still bitter against those who robbed him of the chance to rule until he was tired or in his dotage. And if he could not even master the art of mentoring a successor, why would he think his legacy was extraordinary enough to gift him tenure elongation? Yes, he is still mentally sound, but that soundness, not to say his sanctimoniousness, has never mitigated his lack of depth and altruism.