Category: Thursday

  • Power of mercy

    Power of mercy

    The President was only doing his job by granting state pardon to some convicts. But, he unknowingly stirred the hornet’s nest. Some queried the rationale for his action, wondering why pardon was granted  to Herbert Macaulay and Maryam Sanda, especially. As the President, he has the power to exercise the prerogative of mercy. It is not about justice which had already been served, but about the constitutionality of his action, which is beyond reproach.

    Read Also: IMF urges Nigeria to prioritise infrastructure funding

    According to the Bible, “mercy triumphs over judgment”. The President did not quash the courts’ judgments, he only had mercy on convicts who had served part of their punishment. As Shakespeare wrote: “the quality of mercy is not strained; it drops as the gentle rain from heaven upon the place beneath. It is twice blessed: It blesses him that gives, and him that takes”.

    It is the prerogative of the President to do what he deems fit. God put it this way: “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy…”  It is easy to criticise these things when the shoe is on the other foot. Ask Maryam Sanda’s father-in-law who has been pushing all these years for her pardon despite being convicted for killing his son, who was her husband.

  • Spotless

    Spotless

    Since Prof Joash Amupitan’s appointment as the nation’s new chief electoral umpire last week, he has come under intense scrutiny by politicians and their paid agents. They have tried and are still trying to rake up muck against him.. In their desperate search for a non-existent ‘skeleton’ in his cupboard, they have been hitting a brickwall. They are not going to relent and the earlier Amupitan knows this the better. His resume, his professional and social life, and his ancestry will come under attack, as we argued here last week.

    Read Also: Lokpobiri, Wike, others okay Diri’s exit from PDP

    He has to develop a thick stick to absorb whatever may be thrown at him. So far, the traducers have failed in their missions. But as long as he occupies the INEC Chair for which he would soon be screened and be likely cleared by the Senate, he must watch his back. I do not envy you, Prof.

  • God’s chosen

    God’s chosen

    War breaks out in Ethiopia, and a faction of self-identifying Zionists, aka Beta Israel, flees grievous persecution. The United States and Europe intervene, pleading with Nigeria to temporarily harbour them.

    They are relocated to key parts of Nigeria, namely: Abuja, Lagos, Borno, Kaduna, Plateau, Sokoto, Taraba, Oyo, Kogi, Ogun, Niger Delta, Calabar and Akwa Ibom.

    The refugees apply for citizenship, and approval is expedited – thanks to Western diplomacy and Nigeria’s overzealous Zionist divide. Predictably, the new Nigerians are affectionately called “God’s Chosen.”

    A few months after they attain citizenship, skirmishes break out between them and their “non-chosen” host communities over political privileges and economic resources. The conflicts are stoked by local and international actors into religious wars between Muslims and Christians on one hand and indigenes-settlers crisis on the other hand.

    You reprise your role as devil’s advocate, defending the predatory sweep of the refugees turned God’s Chosen, across Nigeria’s fertile tracts, claiming that since they have been granted citizenship, they may call dibs on privileges, land, and resources, even over their native hosts. You argue: “People must welcome progress…The resources were there all along, and we did nothing good with them.”

    You cite God’s Chosen’s exploits in the extractive industries, financial, agricultural and technological sectors, to rationalise their more daring sweep across the socioeconomic and political circuits.

    Like an over-exuberant choirboy, you validate the ‘seizure’ by proxies, of public governance, business and politics by God’s Chosen, arguing that its in Nigeria’s best interests. “We must let more able hands exploit our industries and manage our affairs,” you claim, amid the scariest forms of media and state capture.

    God’s Chosen permanently displace over 30 million Nigerians from their homes in resource-rich regions. They demolish 8,000 towns and built an apartheid structure that relegated Nigerians to state-sanctioned categorisation as “cattle” and imposed citizenship at a subhuman level.

    Read Also: Senate probes rising aviation incidents, seeks urgent safety reforms

    Yet, you condemn revolt, justify apartheid and the cleansing of indigenous peoples by  God’s Chosen as an expedient measure. In over two decades of oppression, Nigerians suffer segregation, state-sanctioned murder and incarceration of children, youths and the elderly.

    Justifiably, the oppressed rise in rebellion on Nigeria’s Independence Day, October 1. Shots fired by the insurgents and friendly fire from God’s Chosen special forces kill hundreds of civilians and armed fighters on both sides of the divide.

    God’s Chosen seize the opportunity to assert absolute grip on the country. Snipers, proxy militia, and AI-guided killer drones are deployed to murder children, journalists, medics and aid workers. They carpet bomb schools, hospitals, churches, mosques and capital cities, displacing 70 per cent of targeted domains and killing over 10 million.

    As your reward for being unquestioning lapdogs, the God’s Chosen-led government grant you and fellow journalists residence in a less segregated section of the apartheid state, yet far from the boulevards of First Class citizenry.

    Then, the final phase of the cleansing begins. Bloody insurrections erupt and escalate across the Lake Chad region, Mambilla Plateau, Lagos, Niger Delta, and other resource-rich regions. You see God’s Chosen execute false flag attacks against their own: multiple explosions rock foreign consulates on Nigerian soil, killing scores and injuring more.

    Simultaneously, Western-sponsored ‘Islamist militia’ lay siege to Christian communities across the country. It’s a classic script used to justify pogroms, “the protection of Christians,” and ethnic cleansing in parts of the country deemed hostile to imperialist interests.

    Amid the siege, the press and intelligentsia are systemically purged: you see brilliant and defiant colleagues get murdered, and you embrace speaking doctored truths, in self-preservation.  You justify your cowardice as a “sensible” acceptance of what you cannot change, unlike Hamas, which poked the bear by attacking Israel on October 7.” 

     You soullessly applaud the occupiers’ tactics until your ancestral home gets bombed with your parents indoors. For inexplicable reasons, your neighbourhood gets invaded, on Christmas Day, by God’s Chosen forces. Your wife, daughters and sons are sodomised. You saw this happen to your Muslim compatriots during Eid celebrations and rationalised it with a slanted editorial and a shrug.

    Now, it’s your turn, and you are outraged. You wonder why such an attack was carried out on Christmas day, but the occupiers simply toss you a half-hearted “Sorry” and scoff at you, stating that to you it was Christmas, but to them, it was December 25, just another date of statutory siege.

    All pretensions cease, and the diplomatic mask comes off. You find that beneath every God’s Chosen smile is a sneer; whether Christian or Muslim, adult or minor, male or female, clergy or politician, you are all fair game to occupying forces.

    They call it reclamation, a divine repossession of ancestral land. Thus, on every hilltop and billboard, they hoist legendary totems of unfamiliar messiahs. As the terror persists, you seek global support, but the international community urge you to either accept bloody domination or a two-state solution. Either way, you lose.

    You learn to kowtow to external powers behind the throne at the Presidential Villa and several states of captured Nigeria. “We were promised Nigeria before your time. We have simply taken back what’s ours,” says God’s Chosen. Thus, over 200 million Nigerians, comprising 250 Nigerian ethnic groups, become mere tenants overstaying a divine lease as God’s Chosen collect rent in blood and precious tracts.

    The cameras roll, but you conveniently ignore the genocide and civil deaths as blind spots of your reportage, lest you suffer a grisly end as journalists in war-torn Gaza. You discover your true fate beneath the totem pole as a “disposable pawn” and “useful idiot.”

    Sadly, you experience what you call “justice” and “not genocide” in Gaza. The same murderousness you quoted scriptures and brazen lies to validate, now resonates to you in your native accent.

    “What’s our sin? All we did was offer you refuge?” you cry, as you are herded into a Nigerian equivalent of Gaza’s open-air prison.

    You forget that cruelty, once applauded, migrates to find new theatre, fresh flag and victims. Now, you understand why the Palestinians fought through seven decades of occupation till October 7.

    E gún esin ní keke, e ló ńt’àpá, baba ta ni won máa ki irin bò ní’kùn tí kò ní ju apá? (You spurred a horse and wondered why it kicked; who’d be struck with steel in the belly and not react?)

    You justified massacre abroad while sneering at the carcasses of the victims. So the heavens farmed karma into your soil.

    “No, it was different,” you claim. “I supported righteousness.” But righteousness wears many uniforms. Today, it wore occupier amulets. Tomorrow, it may resurge with Nigerian charm.

    Your torment persists like an unpaid debt as God’s Chosen proclaim, in the tenor of your oft misinterpreted scripture, that the Niger River must redden with sacrificial blood before peace could return.

    Across Nigeria, silence becomes a currency dearer than the proverbial black gold as once fiery patriots flee to undisclosed havens abroad. You witness, in real time, the complete suppression of the press and civil society.

    You, who once glorified siege in cocky and slanted editorials, have eventually savoured its flavour: the taste of ash and septic breath.

    You, who once flooded your timelines with praise for Israel’s bombs, fall disconcertingly quiet under Zionist occupation.

    Je kí ńfi ìdí hee, lálejò fi ńti onílé sóde: Let me hang in here is how a guest takes over the house from a host.

    The siege you once spiritualised has arrived at your doorstep. Now, you understand that in every occupied territory, there are no chosen people, only chosen victims.

  • Gen. Irabor’s scars and Tinubu challenge

    Gen. Irabor’s scars and Tinubu challenge

    General Lucky Irabor (retd) can at best be described as intellectual in military uniform. But that only reminds us of the glorious days of the Nigerian military before criminals in uniform mindlessly murdered their colleagues and Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha turned the military into “an army of anything is possible”. Irabor speaking last week at the public presentation of his book, Scars: Nigeria’s Journey and the Boko Haram Conundrum reminded us of some of those truths about ourselves we have tried to ignore. He told us that the book is “not an indictment, but a national soul-searching presentation; an awakening reality to either act dutifully for progress, or do nothing and turn towards extinction”. He wants the book “to serve as an opportunity for Nigerians to reflect on past experiences and recommit to justice, equity, and peace”.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu  could not have agreed any less. Speaking as special guest of honour through his Minister of Defence, Mohammed Badaru during the launch, he admitted that Scars tells a story, reminds us of pain but it also proves that survival is possible adding that the book “will provide guidance and serve as a roadmap for the nation to build a safer future” because it reminds us that “the scar we carry as a nation are evidence of our resilience and of the sacrifice of our heroes past, soldiers, displaced families, and communities”. He therefore wants Nigerians to “use the occasion not only to acknowledge the book but also to affirm our commitment to working together toward a future where every Nigerian can live without fear, thrive in peace, and contribute to the nation’s greatness”.

    The book could not have come at a better time for embattled President Bola Tinubu. Those who love Nigeria and who understand that we have been fighting tribal wars by another name since independence, for two years have mounted pressure on him to address the national question. They have all argued that all our woes, including corruption, poverty, Fulani terrorism/banditry and economic crisis arising from fuel subsidy scam and foreign currency speculation, are all but symptoms of our failure to first seek the kingdom of politics, as advised by the great Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana. We need to first define who owns Nigeria.

    The Patriots led by  Chief Emeka Anyaoku, an elder statesman and former Secretary General of the Commonwealth not too long ago visited the president making two demands. First, was: “The convening of a National Constituent Assembly of directly elected individuals, on a non-political basis, from the 36 states of the federation, possibly three individuals per state, and one from the FCT with the mandate to produce a draft people’s democratic constitution. And that  “the draft constitution produced by the constituent assembly, to be put to a national referendum and if approved, should then be signed by the president as the genuine Nigerian people’s constitution”. 

    The president while assuring them of “listening to their two major requests on the path to referendum which should lead to constitutional measures that will fit our diversity and governance so that we avoid conflicts and break-ups”, however insisted that he is “currently preoccupied with economic reform, his first priority after which he would “look at other options, including constitutional review as recommended along other options, as soon as possible”.

    Before the Patriots’ last call was Olu Falae, a former secretary to the government of the federation. Canvassing that the regions which used to be federating units, in today’s Nigeria, to now be called federal regions because states have been created in the regions, he wants us to go “back to that arrangement which all of us agreed at independence and not what Abacha imposed on us”.

    Of course we have had other groups including the late  nationalist, Pa Enahoro’s ‘Movement for National Reformation’ ( MNR), Pro-National Conference Organisation (PRONACO),  National Democratic Coalition (NADECO), foremost socio-cultural  ethnic groups such as Afenifere, Ohaneze, Pan Niger Deltal Forum (PANDEF) and Middle Belt Forum, (MDF) for whom periodic agitation for restructuring of the country was a crusade.

    President Tinubu who is always working ahead of his colleagues probably understand better that the rain started to beat us since the run up to independence because of lack of elite consensus or consensus of military-baked newbreed that bred corruption.

     The three dominant Nigerian ethnic groups and their leaders have different worldviews of how Nigeria should be run. The Yoruba who by nature are federalist wanted federal arrangement, a social system that has demonstrated in Europe and in over half of the world where it is adopted as capable of ensuring unity in diversity in deeply divided societies like ours. In fact, Awo wrote his Path to Nigeria Progress in the late 1940s where he advocated for a Nigerian federation based on the major ethic groups.

    Of course, the Fulani hegemonic powers in the north have never hidden their desire to conquer Nigeria for their fellow stateless Fulani all over Africa. Uthman dan Fodio demonstrated this when after his 1804 Jihad and conquest of the Hausa states, 12 of the 13 people he appointed as Emirs were his Fulani compatriots while only one Hausa was found pious enough to be appointed an emir in an area where Islam had thrived for over 400 years before Dan Fodio, the Fulani revered Islamic teacher who first appeared in Gobir as the guest of the King Yuma.

    But Nnamdi Azikiwe, the foremost nationalist that up to 1959 insisted on unitary system for a multi-ethnic Nigeria was less sincere.  What he and his Igbo colleagues, from a landlocked country of hostile neighbours wanted in truth was a Nigeria where their highly resourceful youths who like the Jews thrive in other peoples land, can operate without hindrance.

    I am also sure he understood this is the source of periodic tribal wars in Nigeria since independence. The first victim was Awolowo and his Yoruba people (1962-63). With one leg of a tripod that held Nigeria together removed, the next tribal war was between Igbo and Fulani (1964-1970). In 1993 when MKO Abiola pan-Nigerian mandate was annulled, the victim was unarguably Yoruba with Arthur Nzeribe placing advert in various newspapers saying Igbo will not accept a Yoruba president.

    South-south was the victim between 2011 and 2015. The northern elite kept their peace when Boko Haram first started attacking Christians and churches. In fact, it was claimed that late president, Buhari insisted Boko Haram insurgents should be treated like Niger Delta freedom fighters with monthly stipend from government.

    Read Also: UPDATED: CJN Kekere-Ekun hails Nigeria’s admission into global judges’s body 

    Of course Tinubu understands he and his Yoruba people are the victim since 2022 when Igbo, supported by Obasanjo and Pa Ayo Adebanjo, started to accuse him and his Yoruba people of betrayal for not ceding the presidency to the East. Even though he was out of power for 16 years while Igbo political elite ate with their 10 fingers. Two years into his presidency, the tribal wars has only become more fierce.

    But President Tinubu is a unique politician who has probably moved beyond call for a return to pre-independence constitution because he understands the need for an elite consensus. Today, he has sufficient support from the east and the north to be held down by old prejudices. He has quietly worked toward mobilization of the elite because he knows the elite that “often determine the direction of their country even for the purpose of self-preservation” (Yemi Osinbajo). And that democracy is best preserved, enhanced and stabilized on existing consensus among political elite (Rustow).

    While his opponents are busy abusing him, questioning the authenticity of his university degree and even his identity, he was busy and quietly trying to win the confidence of elected members of the elite. And today, with close to his party’s control of close to 80 members of the red chamber from its modest 59 in at inauguration in 2023, and about 265 in the Green Chamber from 175 in 2023, with about 22 governors, his labour has not been in vain. He now has an historic opportunity to take our country back to ‘the Path to Nigeria Progress’ never taken.

    With a rancorous National Assembly whose result will never be acceptable to those who have held Nigeria hostage for 85 years, I think his establishment of development commissions in all the six geo-political zones is a step in the right direction. For those who are passionate about their independence and who do not want anyone in Abuja to dictate to us the education of our children, the road we pass through or the water we drink, they have an answer in the development commissions which have the potential to become the building block for our new Nigeria. Just imagine if the states covered by each commission decided to come up with one police force with local police and community police running their states.

  • Nnaji and his accusers

    Nnaji and his accusers

    On Tuesday, Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology Uche Nnaji resigned amid his spirited defence of the allegations of forgery against him by Premium Times, an online newspaper. The resignation came as a surprise, considering how he, his aides and friends were returning fire for fire. Really, it is good that he resigned so that he can have enough time to face his accusers.

    Read Also: Breaking News: Nigerians Now Approved to Earn in Dollars from 2025

    His resignation should not be the end of the matter. It should be the beginning of it. What the publication accused him of is criminal in nature. The paper has published its findings following its investigation. Nnaji is disputing the publication’s claims. Who is telling the truth? Who is lying? We will soon know as the matter is in court. Does that not amount to putting the cart before the horse?

    Why were the police not called in before the matter was taken to court? It would have been the appropriate thing to do because of the alleged crime. For now, all fingers are crossed as the public waits for Nnaji’s next move.

  • INEC chair: Who ‘ll he be?

    INEC chair: Who ‘ll he be?

    It is the moment of truth. A new Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) may be announced anytime from now, following the handover of Prof Mahmood Yakubu to the most senior National Commissioner, Mrs May Agbamuche-Mbu, on Tuesday. Yakubu’s tenure formally ends next month after serving a two-term of 10 years.

    There have been speculations in the social and traditional media for long on who the next chairman will be. Nigerians are interested in who gets the job because it comes with enormous responsibility. It  is the most delicate of jobs – thankless, nerve-wracking and time consuming. The occupier of the office, no matter how capable he is or how good his intentions are, cannot satisfy everybody.

    In most cases, it is those who hail him at some point, shouting “hossana” – we have found the umpire in whom we are well pleased – that will boo and call him names later, crying “crucify him, crucify him”. This is the price of being the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of the nation. So, the Electoral Officer General of the Federation (EOGF) must have a thick skin. He must be ready to absorb all kinds of insults; be prepared to be called names and be told the history of his ancestry.

    It is a burden to be the INEC Chair. Yet, it is a job that must be done; a duty to be performed to country and in satisfaction of one’s conscience, with utmost good faith, because of what is at stake. There can be nothing more greater than the affairs of a nation which are in the hands of the INEC Chair during the periodic four-year elections. How he manages the elections goes a long way in keeping the country together. A well managed election guarantees peace and stability, even if some of the contestants are aggrieved with the outcome.

    Their grievances will be assuaged by the fact that the exercise was free, fair, open and transparent. A lot depends on the INEC Chair if we are to have a free and fair election in a society like ours where persons holding that office are viewed from the outset as having come to do their master’s bidding. The master in this case is the President, who is the appointing authority. Even if the President appoints an angel as INEC Chair, the appointee would still be viewed suspiciously. “Nothing good can come out of him”, the opposition and their supporters  would sneer.

    But given the same opportunity, they would do something worse. This is, however, not to say that the INEC Chair should lack honour. In fact, his honour should not be in doubt and his word should be his bond. He must be seen to stake that honour before the over 200 million Nigerians from among who he was chosen to head INEC and assure them that the commission would do good by him. He does not have to be a saint to do the job. All he has to do is to allow his commitment, capacity, competence and capability to speak for him.

    Politicians will not believe him, no matter what he does. But the people, the millions that would stand in the rain and under the sun, to vote during the elections will stand by him – if he is really diligent. Politicians can make all tbe noise in the world, but they know that they cannot push their luck too far with the people. The man (or woman) that will lead INEC is out there somewhere, waiting to be called upon to take up this onerous task. The responsibility of choosing the person rests with President Bola Tinubu.

      Has he found the man? Will he unveil him before the Council of State (CoS) which meets in Abuja today? The President does not have to listen to the noise of the market in making his choice. He should go for the man that best suits the job. A man of honour, character, intelligence, and integrity. A man that can stand his ground when push becomes shove. A man that cannot be intimidated by those whose stock-in-trade is to besmear and tar every INEC Chair with the same brush just because they had no say in the appointment. 

    Read Also: Nigeria has exited phase of economic instability — Shettima

    The President’s duty is to the people. He is not beholden to the opposition who, if they had their way, would prefer someone that they can dictate to as the INEC Chair. The President should be guided by the provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) in his choice of the INEC Chair. He should not listen to those seeking to come in through the back alley to influence the process. Some of them had the opportunity in the past in one capacity or the other, and did not come up with all these their ‘beautiful ideas’ on how to appoint the INEC Chair.

    Their suggestions are however noted, as they are good on paper. Come to think of it, is it not too late in the day to be calling for a change in the rule of appointing the INEC Chair when Yakubu’s time is up? The man is formally leaving office on November 9, a few days from now. So, what time is there to implement these ‘grand ideas’ on how to appoint his successor? Many of these suggestions border on mischief and they are a way of preparing the grounds for condemning and challenging the outcome of the 2027 elections, which are still about 16 months away.

    According to the Constitution under which the President derives the power to appoint the INEC Chair and members, he “shall” do so in consultation with the Council of State. This august body meets in Abuja today. The nation waits with bated breath for the outcome of the meeting, and most likely the name of the new INEC Chair. Your road is going to be rough sir, and this is not a curse.

  • Nigeria since the return to democratic governance

    Nigeria since the return to democratic governance

    General Olusegun Obasanjo came back to power in 1999 when General Abubakar Abdul Salami after a rapid transition and transfer of power to what looked like a civilian regime. Obasanjo appeared to be divinely chosen to impose some form of disciplined stability on the country having suffered and survived Abacha’s humiliation and possible plot to get rid of him permanently, but the problem however strong he might have been, seemed to defy solution. He assembled a team of experienced people some of them with global financial experience and expertise and also local experience. He succeeded to get rid of the debt overhang that made reforms difficult. He also brought into being special anti-corruption organizations like the Independent Corrupt Practices Commission (ICPC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). There were other fighting instruments in the police and other bodies but the two new committees were established to give teeth to the president’s fight against corruption. The president also got a reduction of Nigeria’s external debt by substantial reduction while paying off what was left so that Nigeria could begin all over again. In the eight years of the regime, all seemed well even though the internal infrastructure of the country appeared to have been neglected and in the euphoria of not having been bogged down by the debt overhang, the president seemed to have been obsessed with getting the whole of Africa along with his development scheme with his South African colleague Thabo Mbeki forming institutions to pull Africa toward development. 

    Ironically the scheme was tied substantially to western financial development grants and foreign direct investment if Africa cleaned up its administrations, purged of corruption and policed by African governments calling corrupt regimes to order.  This was to be called New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) which was to ensure the flow into Africa of billions of dollars. Some $60 billion was estimated as what Africa needed in investment and grants to develop its primitive infrastructure.

    It was premised on Africa attracting this huge amount for ten years. At the end of one year, little came in since the capitalist western world must have laughed at this ambitious program running into billions of dollars yearly for say about 10 years to develop African infrastructure while African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM ) was designed to monitor each country’s performance and call to orders the guilty or laggard.

    Much time was needed for the maturation of this grandiose new scheme. Not much investment came in the first year and soon the program ceased being a serious scheme as soon as Obasanjo and Mbeki left the stage followed by a sick but well-meaning Umaru Yar’Adua in Nigeria.

    He was succeeded in office following a national movement led by Pastor Tunde Bakare that Yar’Adua’s vice president Goodluck Jonathan should be made to succeed the deceased President Umaru Yar’Adua. The Jonathan regime’s unsure hold on power made it dependent on pressure groups mostly from the East and the North without solid national support until edged out in 2015 by General Muhammadu Buhari whose eight years of its stay in power was remarkable for its corruption, effeteness and additional burden for the future by borrowing foreign loans with little to show for them. The president was not in control of his government because he was hobbled down by illness and constant traveling to London sometimes for months.

    It is too early to pass judgement on the Bola Ahmed Tinubu government except to say if it succeeds on its infrastructure drive of building trans-Nigerian roads from Lagos to Calabar and Badagry to Sokoto, it would have made serious impact on the economic development where its current record of stabilizing the national economy and the Naira marks a great departure from the free fall of the economy during the Muhammadu Buhari era. There is however the challenge of making this macro-economic success translate into micro-economic success and money in the pockets of Nigerians.

    Unfortunately the two recurring decimals of corruption and tribalism are as high as in previous years. There is also an attempt to create regional bodies to diffuse more power from the centre to the periphery but it is on top of the 36 states and the 774 local governments administration areas creating another layer of administrative organs in already over bureaucratized country all dependent on federal funding and whose staffing demonstrate all the signs of political jobbery. What this shows is that there is a need for wholesale review of the present constitution to move away from the concentration of power into the hands of a pooh-bah in a plural country. There is so much emphasis on politics in this country and little or no emphasis on the economy.

    There is ever a thriving discussion on sharing of the national cake and very little discussion on baking the cake and yet it is clear to all intelligent observers that if we expand the economy and there is work for those who want to work, it would not matter who occupies what office because people will be too tired after work that what they need is rest after a hard day’s work. What we have in today’s Nigeria is that we abdicate the demands for work and pray for breakthrough in our churches and mosques and we talk about making heaven when we have not made a much easier success on earth!

    The founder of the CITADEL Church publicly presented a plan for economic development for this country in which he emphasized the role of Biblical Joseph in saving ancient Egypt at the time of global famine. It was based on dividing the country into economic zones and each zone producing on the basis of economic advantages. It made so much impression on me that I hope the managers of our economy would factor it into their plan for economic revival of our country. There is much to be done in this country and little time left for us to do it. We should learn from countries like India, Russia and Canada whose vast territories and complex linguistic diversity did not hinder their development and countries like Germany and Japan which were destroyed by the Western allies during the Second World War and having no natural resources but depending on the grey matter of their people and their grit and determination, pulled out of economic ruin because they paid more attention to merit than any other consideration.

    Nigeria is not devoid of this and we owe it to our people and those coming after us that there is nothing wrong with our stars but only with us. We can do it only if we plan to succeed. We may be an artificial country yet most countries are like us, there are very few countries that were created naturally. Think about this.

    Read Also: BBYDI launches AI literacy for everyday people to complement Nigeria’s new curriculum

    Finally I have decided to leave the issue of our country’s relevance in the comity of nations till the last on the basis of the fact that a country’s foreign policy, power or influence is linked with how the country is doing at home; in other words, there is a link between the domestic power of a country and its influence abroad. When Nigeria fought the civil war, substantial portions of the international community were appalled at the suffering of children, women and the elderly. The French under General Charles de Gaulle was so touched that but for the British pressure, France would have recognized Biafra. The British were on Nigeria’s side because of the economic ties between Britain and Nigeria and the influence Nigeria‘s presence in the Commonwealth of nations. But for British influence on  our side, President Richard Nixon  of America would have swung to the side of Biafra  because of the powerful influence of Biafran propaganda in the west. The Egyptian pilots who flew the MIG29 jets sold to us by the Russians were probably driven by Islamic motive. Whatever were the motives of each nations involved in the Nigerian-Biafran civil war, the underlying work of diplomats was very important. It is true that global communication advances are eroding the traditional influence of diplomatic representations but we must not completely cut off ourselves from showing the flag where it truly matters. The current economic situation in our country may not make full diplomatic representation at the highest level wise but we can rationalize our representation to our traditional trading partners and to the capitals of the greatest powers in the world starting from the capitals of all members of the Security Council of the United Nations and to the UN itself. We can reduce the crowd of representatives in African countries and have double representation – accreditation in most of them on regional basis.

    I do not believe that we should leave all our embassies manned by charge d’affaires ad interim. It sends the wrong signals that our country is bankrupt and cannot be taken serious by economic actors where it really matters. At our level of development, we cannot afford to be taken as a basket case.

    The reasons why the Tinubu administration does not have principal representatives of the country is understandable but not overwhelming. Our African brothers are beginning to lose interest in us and we cannot afford this at the same time we are batting for influence in the world and claiming that a reformed UN must have African representation on the UN Security Council. We have put our country forward as the natural African leader. We have to work to earn the leadership of Africa and the Black world.

  • They will not tell you it’s a trap

    They will not tell you it’s a trap

    Every deadly storm starts with a drizzle. Thus, Nigerians must exercise greater caution in their civic agitation, lest they are slaughtered as sacrificial lambs by rights activists baiting a revolutionary flood.

    Let us be guided by the parable of the maleficent rainmaker, who summons the rain from his safe spot at the mountaintop, knowing only the valleys below will get submerged in flood.

    Right now, it is pouring slogans and expletives at the summit of Nigeria’s civic space. Leading the proceedings are civic actors luring Nigerians to frolic in their rub-a-dub of rage. Think of them as witch-doctors inciting the populace into a primordial dance with unknown gods; when the beat segues to a bloody tempo of rage, they will disappear without a trace. As the consequences manifest, no magical chant will save us.

    Every revolution, in the end, manifests with a torrent of storms: protracted anarchy, maniacal rape of women and children, ethnoreligious conflict, and widespread disillusionment. They will not tell you it’s a trap.

    Any patriot inciting you to violent insurrection must be seen and treated as an enemy of the people. There is a reason the ‘woke’ activist affects a dramatic rage tailored for camera lights. His visions of social justice are often conceived, like a blind Homer, fiddling epic arcs of cinematic light. Always camera-ready, his every thought and action seem streamlined for media coverage.

    This is their familiar modus operandi: a failed politician, NGO-entrepreneur or crusading journalist likens himself to a rights activist cum revolutionary. His followers call him a truth-sayer and the voice of the youth. Thus, several youths idolise him. He is the romanticised revolutionary, who transfigures by patriotic ecstasy and defeats all odds hurled at him by the predatory ruling class.

    To achieve this, he assures them that Nigeria must implode and, through that implosion, welcome him as the messiah who would rescue all from the stranglehold of the incumbent political class. But for a snag, this romanticised revolutionary is also a predator.

    His activism is funded, inspired by shady non-profits and diplomatic actors, and supported from the war rooms of intelligence agencies abroad and foreign consulates on Nigerian soil.

    Like a situational hero sculpted of spunk and spittle, this self-styled patriot-activist invites the ambling spectator and spiritless wanderer to admire his votive rant against the incumbent political class. No doubt, there is a lot to accuse every incumbent government of. History, by default, absolves him of his righteous rage, as Nigeria wilts to policy failure, unemployment, nepotism, farmer-herdsman conflict, organised crime, ethnoreligious carnage, terrorism – all ushering the country to the precipice. Nonetheless, the ageing leadership hold tenaciously to power, never letting go. When they do let go, they reinsert themselves via stooges, their children and sworn associates.

    This is what the revolutionnaire promises to dispel. In his world, citizenry angst and disillusionment with the ruling class are frantically poked into patriotic rage. Thus, he turns disgruntled citizens into pawns. And this is how he creates a cult-following. It’s frantic populism at its finest.

    In time, there is a split. There is always a split, as the masses soon find out, as they did during the Arab Spring, that regime change through violent protest is never what it’s cracked up to be.

    Revolutions throw up hierarchies, thus new castes are dramatised in the noisy climax of every sloganeer. The castes are scary. Rather than sound off on a fallacy, Nigerian youths will do well to sensitise themselves to a more visionary, peaceful revolution, founded on altruistic ideals. And this brings us to the quality of youth mooting #RevolutionNow, #10DaysofRage, among others.

    Let it be known that if Nigeria ever implodes Nepali-Gen-Z-style, many of us would have to live in closer quarters and with less protection from the monstrosity we dread. The Nigerian tragedy persists because it is a human tragedy and not a quirk interred in some mythical ‘system.’ Some Nigerians, for instance, are beasts in the closet. Left to their devices, they display unforgivable inhumaneness and lack of character.

    Who will forget in a hurry the dastardly murder of Favour Daley-Oladele, 22, who was decapitated and had parts of her eaten up by her supposed boyfriend, Owolabi Adeeko and his mum, in fulfilment of a money-making ritual. Of course, the Adeekos and their spiritual father, Pastor Segun Phillip, are ‘ordinary people.’ You could hardly ascribe such grotesqueness to them, close up, or from a distance. Of course, Owolabi is hardly the poster image of the Nigerian youth, but he projects the burgeoning mentality driving hordes of Nigerian terrorists, kidnappers, advance fee fraudsters (Yahoo Boys), call girls, armed robbers and political thugs in their youth. This is the quality of the youths we’d all be forced to live with if anarchy were to persist in contemporary Nigeria.

    A casual surf of the World Wide Web will reveal the magnitude of disillusionment affected by the citizenry towards the political class. And in apparent counteraction to their angst, growing support for the President Bola Tinubu-led administration subsists. Yet, a curious dissonance persists, even as you read, between anti-government and pro-government forces, thus rendering cyber-Nigeria a toxic space.

    The youths’ angst is understandable in a clime where elected leaders treat them with contempt. But rage will not save Nigeria; if unchecked, it will devastate the present and hopes for the future.

    Nigeria must avoid the fate of nations afflicted by the Arab Spring, where the promise of revolution gave way to brutal dictatorships. President Tinubu must take more proactive steps to humanely engage with the people. He could counsel his political class to make grand gestures of sacrifice in identification with the people’s plight while enforcing accountability at all levels of governance.

    Read Also: Nigerian Navy, French, regional allies hold joint exercise for improved security

    Federal interventions can play a critical role in state accountability; state access to local and international funds must be tied to certain performance benchmarks in delivering public services and meeting financial obligations. Poor-performing states should see reductions in allocations or a complete loss of aid, with those funds redirected to responsible local governments or projects.

    President Tinubu’s bid to decentralise power by strengthening local governments with more control over statutory funds is laudable, but even this measure seems dead on delivery, no thanks to sabotage by state governors.

    Yet, while the ruling class has much to answer for, the citizenry, especially the more literate and insightful among us, must display greater tact and caution in our push for social justice. Journalists and rights activists, in particular, must desist from inciting the populace and inflaming the polity with partisan views and fabrications.

    They must understand that the dubious demagogues pulling their strings—those who lost at the 2023 elections—have second and third addresses abroad. If Nigeria implodes, they will flee, leaving us to bear the brunt of the chaos they helped incite.

    And no foreign intervention is worth our attention if it comes seeded with carnage. Nigerians must wholeheartedly refute and avoid the discursive mechanisms through which they seek public support for the cause – be it #10DaysofRage, #RevolutionNow, #EndSARS or #OurMumuDonDo – their language of revolt often buries the possibility of citizen death and a descent to worse conditions of living.

    Of course, Nigerians possess the inalienable right to protest against perceived oppression and governance failure. But whenever and wherever this must be done, it must be done right. The language of civic activism must never be used as a political and cultural tool to validate and make mass atrocities socially acceptable.

  • Oshiomhole and union leaders

    Oshiomhole and union leaders

    Senator Adams Oshiomhole, former Nigeria Labour Congress, (NLC) president, is one labour leader that has earned the respect of Nigerians. His pursuit of justice, fairness and equity for all Nigerians was perhaps behind his success in labour as in politics where he fought many debilitating wars.

    Starting from his native Edo State, he retired the powerful late Chief Anthony Akhakon Anenih, regarded as PDP’s “Mr. Fixer” before taming both Chief Gabriel Igbinedion and his son, Lucky, who was later indicted by the court for financial malfeasance against Edo State.

    He then moved to Kwara State where he retired Bukola Saraki, former Senate President and owner of Kwara fiefdom, before crossing over to Imo State where he ended Rochas Okorocha’s dream of establishing a dynasty in Imo Government House. 

    When Oshiomhole, who no doubt must have been watching  the siege of NUPENG, PENGASSAN and IPMAN on Nigeria in the last few years, last week took a temporary leave from politics  to  return to Labour, his natural habitat, it was on the side of besieged Nigeria.

    Admonishing the unions while speaking in an interview with Arise Television last Friday, he had said: “that in seeking to protect a particular set of workers, you do not then risk the jobs of several other workers. When you are pursuing a dispute, the tools you deploy must be such that they do not undermine other people’s jobs”. Oshiomhole cited his deft handling of the Union Bank crisis which ensured innocent banks did not suffer collateral damage.

    Unlike the current era of terrorism, lies, bullying, intimidation etc., leaders, including those in labour in the past, earned their position through strategic planning. I first saw Oshiomhole demonstrate this sometimes in 2001 when he was invited to NUJ, The Guardian chapter, to resolve the dispute between its members and The Guardian management.

    The Guardian had been shut down for two weeks over salary dispute.  All efforts, including the intervention of Ministry of Labour, failed. Oshiomhole, who by his level of interaction probably knew more about The Guardian than those within, was brought in at the last minute, I suspect by his friend in the house who had thought he would be on their side. 

    Read Also: FULL LIST: 10 Most affordable Nigerian states to live in 2025

    As soon as Oshiomhole who was hailed in settled down, he took one look at our management side led by the late Andy Akporugo, the Executive Consultant, Editorial and said “I don’t even know if you people put ‘otumopo’ (juju) in your paper  which  forced readers to pick your paper as the paper of first choice”. Of course, he knew we were the highest circulating newspaper and that we were about the only paper paying salaries as at when due within the industry.

    Turning to the NUJ executives without showing any interest in the papers and figures they had bandied around for two weeks, he said “there is NUJ Guardian because there is the flagship. You guys cannot make a demand that will kill the flagship”. The idea that our journalists would do anything that would affect the health of the flagship was inconceivable. In truth, salary was not one of the motivations for the flagship journalists. The Guardian journalists were attracted to the paper because The Guardian  gave them so much freedom to practice their profession at a period, government’s take-over of The Daily Times and New Nigerian have turned the papers into ‘government ‘views papers’. Journalists of the era were proud to work for The Guardian”. Oketunbi, leading the NUJ sprang to his feet to counter Oshiomhole, adding at the end that NUJ was returning to RUTAM House to sort out issues with the management.

    And I think that was classic Oshiomhole. His commitment to just, fair and peaceful resolution of disputes and skills to negotiate, persuade and make consensus” were skills Oshiomhole  promised to deploy to help the executive  and legislature to find a common ground” if he became chairman of APC.

    Unfortunately, what we today have are lawlessness, lies and terror tactics by noisy union leaders. For instance, NUPENG and PENGASSAN openly lied by claiming they were fighting because of some 800 staff sacked by Dangote. Those staff have since denied being sacked, claiming they were only transferred to other subsidiaries, an exercise within the prerogative of the employer.

    But hiding under such lies, NUPENG and PENGASSAN that have nothing at stake, decided to, in the words of Oshiomhole, shut down facilities of the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and other firms because of issues at Dangote – an act that was “ill-considered”.

    Other NUPENG and PENGASSAN lies include their claim that Dangote sacked all Nigerian workers in the refinery even when over 3000 Nigerians, according to Dangote work in the refinery.

    Finally, unlike sponsors of Boko Haram, terrorists and bandits that have remained elusive for 15 years, Nigerians can identify their oil sector enemies: They include NNPC, regarded as the cesspool of corruption; NUPENG and PENGASSAN that bullied the Yar’Adua government into rescinding the sales of Port Harcourt and Kaduna refineries for $750 to BlueStar Consortium led by Dangote in 2007 while their staff members have continued to draw salaries from dysfunctional refineries.

    Those who vandalized the 4,900 kilometres pipeline commissioned in 1979, to ferry oil products from Lagos to all parts of Nigeria; IPMAN and their truck drivers who secured NNPC contract to store NNPC imported products and distribute same across the nation; IPMAN whose trucks ferry petroleum products across the border; those opposed to “the Nigeria First Policy” announced by President Tinubu, particularly that it should apply to petroleum sector and all other sectors even when America, Canada and European countries are doing the same to protect local investors, and of course those  opposed to Dangote’s 4,000 brand-new compressed natural gas (CNG) trucks, capable of eliminating an estimated N1.07 trillion yearly in fuel distribution costs.

    Finally, if Dangote Refinery is a national asset as argued by many Nigerians, what it urgently needs is government protection and not procrastination.

  • Revolution is not cooking spice

    Revolution is not cooking spice

    Revolution isn’t cooking spice. It is not something you purchase in small nylon sachets on a busy street. Yet, folk sell it like spices, summoning its aroma in flavoured words, promising to make everything taste new.

    The sellers shout and the crowd leans in, clutching their coins and heady fantasies. But Nigeria is not a kitchen stall; it is an ecology of households and habits, of private demons and public horrors.

    If Nigeria is to mark 65 years of independence with anything resembling true rebirth, let that rebirth be a deliberate, internal jihad. It’s about time we shunned the fireworks of rage and mob grandeur frequently broadcast by conflict profiteers and romanticised by the disillusioned.

    Revolutions that do not tend to the seedbed of civic character result in anarchy. The consequences are better imagined: ethnic cleansing, random murders, rampant rape, burning markets, crushed neighbourhoods, displaced families and orphaned children.

    We must reject the rage-fuelled template. History and recent memory establish that uprisings, especially in a fragile polity, can be a match that sets dry tinder aflame; and the fire rarely knows the difference between palaces and boondocks. The so-called Arab Spring began as an earnest cry against corruption and tyranny; in places it yielded openings, but elsewhere it snowballed into protracted internecine wars, destructive vacuums and authoritarian relapse. Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Yemen, among others, show how revolutionary fervor without robust institutions or measured stewardship can produce catastrophe as often as it produces reform.

    The lesson is not that people must never act, but that action divorced from civic preparation and a plan for long-term governance risks annihilation of the very goods people seek: safety, livelihoods and dignity. Those who romanticise a fast, thunderous overthrow: demagogues, disgruntled election losers, and entrepreneurial rabble-rousers who dress ambition as moral crusade are desperate actors, who are less interested in the public good than in the power and patronage that follow breakdown.

    Others, sometimes foreign actors or ideologues, exploit youthful anger and digital fervour to accelerate outcomes that suit external agendas. Movements started online can be genuine, righteous and necessary; they can also be manipulated, redirected and weaponised. The #EndSARS movement of 2020, for example, began as a clarion call against police brutality and produced powerful civic energy and urgent reforms. But like most mass uprisings, its narrative was complex: genuine grassroots anger, social media amplification, and contested claims of outside manipulation and incendiary messaging all coexisted. The movement’s tragic collapse is a reminder that popular protest can be a force for accountability and also a prism through which external interests and local secessionist tensions play out, often leaving scars between communities.

    Nations do not emerge fully formed from constitutions or borderlines. Nations are neither remade nor redeemed by violent uprisings, but by the character of the citizenry. And the latter, in turn, are shaped by their most intimate institution: the family. The family is the receptacle in which the values of a nation are first kindled or corrupted. It is where character and social conscience are either nurtured or strangled in the cradle. The integrity of our public life, therefore, depends on the morality of our private lives.

    Family is key. From this sacred unit, a people’s sense of self, place, and purpose begins. If the family is compromised, then society itself becomes a ghost town of ethics: full of laws but lacking justice and compassion; rich in rhetoric but bankrupt of vision. Societal growth, therefore, cannot be engineered solely by policies or economic indices. It must be cultivated through the slow, careful evolution of the human spirit.

    Our collective persona as a nation is reflected in the governor who once stole $4.2 million from his state’s coffers and stashed it to fund his vanities abroad, not minding what good such loot could do in resolving the educational, healthcare, and infrastructure woes of his state. It is reflected in the shenanigans of the former Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) governor who currently seeks a plea bargain to escape punishment for fraud running into billions of naira, among others.

    It is reflected in the former female Minister of Petroleum, who aggravated fuel scarcity and economic recession through reckless looting of public fund. Yet she fights to walk free.

    Our collective personae flourishes in the antics of youths feverishly flying ethnic flags in defense of their ‘brother’ and ‘sister’ lawmaker, governor, minister, and ex-CBN governor irrespective of the atrocities committed by them and the criminal charges levelled against them.

    Our public offices aid and abett dubious citizenship. They legitimise our culture of being, which enables and justifies a public officer’s immediate descent into a basement of opportunism right after emerging as an elected representative. The latter locks himself or herself in that amoral cellar and embarks on a quest of inordinate acquisition, counting his spoils in material possessions.

    Such characters are, however, mere fragments of our bigger cultural dilemma. They are our decadence; our disease.

    Yet even as we have rightly identified their emergence as an affliction of the eye and disease of the mind, our chances at healing are hindered by chinks in our surgical armour: the fissures of ethnoreligious bias, illiteracy, willful degeneracy, greed, poverty, savage ego, and sheer malevolence.

    Nigeria’s geographic, religious and ethnic  fault lines make reckless upheaval especially dangerous. Where social trust is thin, identities are layered and historical grievances fester unhealed, the romanticised revolt too often degenerates into intercommunal violence.

    Read Also: “Nigeria’s leadership and commitment to peace and security on the continent”. At the briefing were Mr Wale Edun

    We must therefore be honest: to overthrow a corrupt structure is not the same as constructing a just polity. Too often the poor pay the heaviest price for our experiments in instant remaking. Thus, must teach a new civic grammar: that the right to revolt is philosophically bound to responsibility and respect for rule of law.

    President Bola Tinubu’s administration,on his part, must build institutions that make governance responsive, humane and honorable. His government must measure policy success by lives improved, not by patronage expanded. The incumbent ruling class must avoid financial recklessness and obscenities while urging the citizenry to tighten their belts.

    The youth on their part must be sceptical of leaders who promise instant catharsis. They must look beyond what their rhetoric destroys to see what it builds. Those who live by humiliation, intimidation and petty cruelty will never make a humane state.

    The revolution Nigeria needs must be borne of patience. It will not photograph as readily as a burning barricade, but its fruits are durable: trust, predictable markets, better schools, safer streets, and a political class kept honest by a public unwilling to tolerate theft.

    If Nigeria is to become a decisive actor in Africa’s future, economically, culturally and politically, it must first become a more decent assembly of persons. Nations rarely thrive by grand treaties and trade deals; they are made by how neighbours treat each other, how families rear children and citizens stand for truth. Every country’s reach in the world is directly proportional to the nature of its civic interior.

    It’s about time we renounced our easy romance of rage. We must stop inciting our youths to equate destruction with virtue and instead cultivate a different heroism: the courage to be honest when it costs us convenience and the patience to build institutions that outlast us. That is the revolution we must espouse; the type that moulds citizens into caretakers of our common destiny and Nigeria into an inheritance worth passing on.