Category: Letters

SIR: The Obidients are (with apologies to Governor Charles Soludo) “a headless mob” similar to the demonised and emotionally unhinged rabble that insisted on the crucifixion of our Lord Jesus Christ.

They are filled with the same violent, angry, divisive, rebellious, treacherous, mutinous, treasonous, deceitful, mendacious, deceptive, ungrateful, covetous, vain, insatiable and murderous spirit that possessed Lucifer, Son of the Dawn. 

Like Medusa the Gorgon, they are a hydra-headed monster comprising of confused, ignorant and frustrated souls with very low self-esteem, a maniacal sense of entitlement, insufferable arrogance and a desperate and psychotic lust for power. 

No matter how well masked, fascists will always be fascists and a leopard cannot change its spots. 

Despite all their seeming humility, false piety, fake righteousness and nauseous, grovelling “Yes daddy” expressions of insincere love, they are filled with unadulterated hatred for all those that do not share their views and that refuse to tow their obnoxious, venomous and poisonous line.

Vile words, hate speech, propaganda, falsehood, lies, threats, insults, turmoil, intrigue, betrayal, subterranean plots, violence, evil conspiracies and the inability to brook opposing views or tolerate dissenting voices are their hallmark and forte.

They are not just a political party or movement: they are a dark, sinister, insidious, destructive, malignant, malevolent, cancerous, divisive, fanatical and dangerous force of vicious and sociopathic subversives and religious and ethnic bigots who are heavily invested in the kingdom of darkness, who have strong connections in the international criminal underworld, who are under the power and influence of western intelligence agencies, who have poisoned the souls and fouled up the minds of millions of young Nigerians and who are hell bent on destroying the Nigerian state and dismembering our country.

They are not democrats in ANY sense of the word and they do not believe in democracy.

They believe in nothing but deceit, lies, propaganda, threats, violence and intimidation. They are the quintessential “unbelievers” who use God’s name to commit atrocities and to justify their monstrous behaviour, their psychopathic aggression and their wild delusions. 

They worship and serve a strange entity and occultic deity known as ‘Obidati’ at whose altar they offer praises, make sacrifices and serve blood in the bewitching hour of every morning.

They are evil. They are vicious. They are uncouth. They are uncharitable. They are unkind.

They are merciless. They are destructive. They are relentless. They are ruthless. They are unjust.

They must NEVER be allowed to come into the circles of power because they will divide, destroy and dismember our great country, bring her to her knees and cause her to perish.

•Femi Fani-Kayode,

Abuja.

By Ademola ‘Bablow’ Babalola

SIR: “A social movement that only moves people is merely a revolt. A movement that changes people and inculcates ideas is a true revolution” — Martin Luther king Jr.

After the advent of the protest, dubbed EndSARS, in 2020, I’ve since been keenly watching and observing the intractable exuberance being displayed by some Nigerian youths.

Of course, their leaderless and unguided protest, EndSARS, and other protests, which these youths had engaged in so far, have exposed their immature and mediocre way of handling things.

The method which they employed to carry out the EndSARS protest, undoubtedly, impaired and lessened the value of a protest which would have been seen as the most organized and most effective. But because those high-spirited and enthusiastic youths knew not when to stop, the protest was hijacked, and what would have earned them a commendation metamorphosed into condemnation.

And here comes another movement tagged Obidient. I do not see this as a visionary movement for it lacks ideas. An insightful movement, as being described by Martin Luther king Jr, moves ideas not only people.

These young guys have become terrors on social media and wherever they have engagement with anyone who’s out of tune with their movement. They only want to hear their own voices.

Before the conduct of the just concluded presidential election, Obidients, instead of telling the public exactly the reason they were supporting their candidate, Peter Obi – who was once a governor for eight years in Anambra State, but could hardly point to some achievements he had instituted while in office – they preferred to call for the head of whoever came out to ask their candidate to explain his antecedents. Obidients cared less about their candidate’s blueprint. They just wanted him to become a president by all means.

And after the electorate had spoken with their votes, and had chosen their preferred candidate, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, we thought that Obidients would go back to the drawing board; re-strategize, and wait for another opportunity in 2027. But instead, they went ahead to take up more arms on social media, and have been wielding the arms against anyone who’s not ready to join their movement. They want everyone to see Peter Obi, their candidate, as a saint.

Even Prof. Wole Soyinka could not escape their dagger. They came out in full force to attack the respected professor just because the running-mate to their messiah, Datti Yusuf, was corrected over his inciting comments on a television station. Kingsley Moghalu, the former deputy governor of Central Bank of Nigeria, was not also spared for trying to defend Soyinka’s submission. Moghalu had to apologize publicly to avoid Obidients’ endless sanctions on social media. What a confused generation!

Even the intelligentsias among Obidients also have joined these young guys to believe that the election process that gave their candidate victories in all the states in the southeast where their candidate came from, and also gave him, unprecedented victories in some parts of the middle belt, including the federal capital territory, Abuja, was not free and fair. Their candidate beat the winner of the election, Asiwaju Tinubu, in his home-ground, Lagos – a feat no candidate had ever come close to since the return of democracy in 1999. Yet, Obidients are not satisfied.

These young Obidients, of course, can be tolerated and be forgiven for their youthful enthusiasm and their ignorance, but how do one describe a renowned author and respected novelist, Chimamanda Adichie, who should have known that the only way that is allowed in the constitution to challenge the result of election in Nigeria is to go to the tribunal to seek redress, and wait for the decision of the court?

Chimamanda’s letter to the president of the United States of America, in which President Joe Biden was criticized for congratulating the president-elect, Asiwaju Bola Tinubu, is really mind boggling. Can we say that Chimamanda, as educated and as lettered as she was, was oblivious of the step to take to show one’s dissatisfaction over the outcome of an election? Or, was she trying to play the same game -engaging in self-deceit – the young Obidients are known for?

I think Chimamanda needs to be told and reminded that winning election, most especially presidential election, is quite different from winning a prize for literature. Just because the election did not go the way Chimamanda and her Obidients expected, does not warrant the condemnation of the whole process.

• Ademola ‘Bablow’ Babalola, babalolaademola39@gmail.com

By Rasheed Azeez (PhD)

SIR: The disconnect between university research and industry has long been recognized as a significant barrier to innovation. Universities tend to focus on fundamental research, which may not have immediate commercial applications. On the other hand, the industry is concerned with practical solutions that can be commercialized quickly. This difference in focus can result in a mismatch between the research outputs of universities and the needs of the industry.

The Valley of Death is the gap between these two worlds. It’s where promising research goes to die, as universities struggle to translate their discoveries into commercial products or services. In the absence of a robust industry-academic partnership, research often fails to make the transition from the lab to the market, leaving potential innovations unrealized.

To navigate the Valley of Death, universities must build stronger industry partnerships. This means developing a more collaborative approach to research, one that focuses on the needs of industry while still maintaining the academic rigour of university research.

The first step is to establish closer ties between researchers and industry partners. Universities should actively seek out industry partnerships and collaborations, identifying areas of mutual interest and developing joint research programmes. This will help align universities’ research objectives with industry needs, creating a more collaborative and productive research ecosystem.

Another key factor is the need for greater commercialization expertise within universities. While academics are experts in their field, they may not have the skills or knowledge to commercialize their research effectively. Universities can address this by creating dedicated technology transfer offices, which can provide researchers with the expertise and support they need to translate their research into viable commercial products.

In addition, universities need to develop a culture that encourages entrepreneurship and innovation. This can be achieved by providing incentives for researchers to pursue commercialization opportunities, such as offering funding or access to commercialization resources. By nurturing a culture of innovation, universities can encourage their researchers to think creatively and pursue commercial opportunities that may have previously been overlooked.

The Valley of Death is not an insurmountable obstacle, but it requires a concerted effort from both universities and industry to bridge the gap. By working together, universities and the industry can create a more productive research ecosystem that can better translate research into commercial products and services.

To achieve this, universities need to be proactive in seeking out industry partnerships, developing commercialization expertise, and nurturing a culture of innovation. By doing so, they can help to realign and reconnect the dislocations that exist between academia and industry, driving economic growth and creating new opportunities for innovation.

Companies can partner with universities to identify research opportunities and provide funding and expertise to support the development of new technologies. They can also work with universities to create pathways for technology transfer, ensuring that promising research is developed into commercial products and services.

In addition, the industry can provide valuable feedback to universities on the commercial viability of their research. By collaborating with industry partners, researchers can gain a better understanding of the market for their technologies, identifying potential challenges and opportunities for commercialization.

Finally, the industry can help to create an entrepreneurial culture within universities, by providing support for start-ups and spin-offs. This can include funding, mentoring, and access to resources such as incubators and accelerators. By supporting university start-ups, the industry can help to drive innovation and create new opportunities for commercialization.

• Rasheed Azeez (PhD) azeez2002@gmail.com

Sir: The Nigerian House of Representatives recently passed a contentious bill aimed at addressing the country’s medical personnel shortage. The proposed legislation requires doctors trained in Nigeria to practice within the country for a minimum of five years before being granted a license to practice abroad.

While the bill’s proponents argue that it will ensure quality healthcare services for Nigerians, critics contend that it is both unnecessary and unjust. It unjustly curtails the professional freedom of medical practitioners and violates their right to choose where to practice. Rather than addressing the root causes of the healthcare crisis in Nigeria, such as low wages, poor working conditions, and inadequate infrastructure, the bill threatens to exacerbate the brain drain by compelling doctors to leave the country earlier than expected.

The issue of professional autonomy lies at the crux of the proposed legislation that seeks to mandate medical professionals who have been trained in Nigeria to practice in the country for a minimum of five years before being granted a license to practice abroad. The legislation poses a significant threat to the basic right of medical professionals to make career choices based on their personal and professional goals. It limits the freedom of medical professionals and their professional mobility and flexibility and thus infringes on their autonomy. The proposed legislation fails to recognize the unique aspirations and goals of individual medical professionals, who may seek to explore diverse healthcare systems, pursue new research areas, or find better working conditions and higher wages elsewhere.

The proposed legislation has the potential for unintended consequences for the training of medical professionals in Nigeria. One such consequence is the possibility that the legislation may discourage individuals from pursuing medical training in the first place, exacerbating the current shortage of medical professionals in the country. Medical students in Nigeria may be deterred from pursuing medical training if they know that they will be required to practice in Nigeria for a minimum of five years before being granted a license to practice abroad. This could lead to a shortage of medical professionals in the long run, which would further strain the healthcare system in Nigeria.

Additionally, this may lead to a brain drain of individuals who may have otherwise pursued medical training but are now discouraged by the prospect of being required to practice in the country for a set period.

Policymakers must balance the desire to retain medical professionals in the country with the need to encourage individuals to pursue medical training in the first place. They must take a holistic approach to address the healthcare crisis in Nigeria, which includes not only retaining medical professionals but also encouraging more individuals to pursue medical training in the country.

Medical professionals often leave Nigeria due to poor working conditions, low pay, and inadequate healthcare infrastructure. While the proposed legislation aims to curb the brain drain, it fails to address these fundamental issues that have been driving the migration of medical practitioners from the country. Many medical professionals work long hours with heavy workloads and limited access to essential equipment, drugs, and supplies.

In addition, Nigeria’s healthcare system has been chronically underfunded, resulting in subpar infrastructure and a lack of resources. These conditions have made it challenging for medical professionals to provide quality healthcare services to their patients, which has led to frustration and a desire to seek better opportunities elsewhere. Policymakers must address the underlying issues of the healthcare system in Nigeria and provide better working conditions, increased pay, and investment in healthcare infrastructure and equipment to retain the country’s best and brightest medical talent.

The proposed legislation is thus a misguided attempt to address the shortage of medical professionals. Rather than imposing arbitrary restrictions on the mobility of medical professionals, policymakers should prioritize addressing the root causes of the problem, such as improving working conditions, increasing wages, and investing in healthcare infrastructure and equipment. Such measures would not only retain medical professionals in Nigeria but also attract more trained professionals to the country, thereby improving the quality of healthcare services available to Nigerians.

•Dr. Nicholas Aderinto,

LAUTECH Teaching Hospital, Ogbomoso.

Sir : One of the most significant rhetoric used by President Buhari before and during his presidency is his distaste for corruption. His integrity was his unique selling proposition amongst the masses who voted for him in 2015 and again in 2019. But as history, and indeed his eight-year tenure will show us, it takes more than a leader with integrity to rid a nation of corruption. A strong, independent anti-corruption institution and appropriate legislations will go a longer way in fighting corruption and corrupt people neck for neck.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), although an agency of the federal government, needs to operate with  zero interference from its employer, so much so that the head of the commission, in this case, Abdulrasheed Bawa, and his colleagues are given a mandatory legal and constitutional free hand to operate. This is the only way the public perception of the agency to serve as deterrent to those who commit financial crimes will stick.

A historical review of the past heads of the commission tells us that it usually does not end well for them. From Nuhu Ribadu to Ibrahim Magu, ‘corruption and undue interference’ have always prematurely ended their tenures in office. Things must not continue as such.

Bawa, the youngest ever head of the commission, is so far doing a swell job. With 3785 convictions secured in 2022, the commission performed more than any previous year of its existence, bar 2003, which was the year the commission was formed.  There is a glaring rise in total number of convictions (103 in 2015) since President Buhari took over to the numbers now (3785 in 2022), which is his last full year as president. Imagine what could be done if there were stronger legislations that ensure minimal interference and increased autonomy. Not only would there be an increased number for convictions from the record of 2022, but also a rise in the quality and gravity of these convictions. All Bawa needs now, for starters, is for politicians to keep their hands off him. This steady train must not be derailed. Not with the current momentum.

It is with great pleasure and renewed hope for the war against corruption that all well-meaning Nigerians welcome the bill being considered by the senate, which seeks to amend the EFCC Act by limiting the powers of the president to sack the EFCC chairman, by subjecting the decision to confirmation by the senate. This way, the security of the chairman’s tenure is guaranteed (somewhat). This will no doubt make it less convenient for the executive to terminate the appointment of a chairman and to ensure stability and consistency.

For example, the recent distractions and murmurs from seemingly selfish quarters, calling for the removal of EFCC’s chairman would die naturally with this bill being signed into law. Do not get me wrong, there are still several laws and reforms needed to ensure administrative and operational autonomy of the commission. This bill is however, a step in the right direction. Additional funding, expansion of jurisdictions and branches, as against just zonal commands, would also go a long way.

The autonomy of the EFCC will have a positive ripple effect. A truly independent EFCC will reverberate across the nation, thereby increasing the national corruption perception positively. More importantly, inter-agency collaboration to fight cross-border money laundering would improve, which would in turn lead to an improved score for the country in the global corruption perception index. This rating is used by investors and other countries who intend to trade with Nigeria, to determine their risk appetite to transacting with Nigeria.

Will this bill see the light of the day, and soon? Your guess is as good as mine. But for now, political leeches should keep their hands off the professionals at the EFCC, particularly its chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa.

•Aminu Yusuf,

Katsina.

Sir: Former Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II, has bemoaned the division of the country along ethnic and religious lines. In his opinion, we have never had such division since the time of the civil war.

I concur. But it didn’t begin with this election. It actually began with the 2015 election. Former President Goodluck Jonathan who was seeking re-election at that time began the ugly and unfortunate trend of going from one church to another canvassing for votes. Peter Obi, who was the deputy director general of the Goodluck/Sambo re-election campaign team, borrowed a leaf from his former boss, and used the same strategy in 2023. 

Many Christians see nothing wrong in using the altar to canvas for votes. They justify it with the claim that the Muslims in Northern Nigeria have been doing the same for many years. First and foremost, the 2022 Electoral Act expressly forbids the use of religious houses as campaign grounds. Secondly, assuming but not conceding that northern Muslims have been doing the same thing, they are not known for preaching incendiary messages against Christian politicians who are contesting in elections.

This election has shown that no single tribe, region or religion can singlehandedly produce Nigeria’s president. You have to build bridges and form alliances across ethnic and religious lines to secure victory at the polls. Nigerians should also know that politicians who resort to the use of tribalism and religion to campaign for office usually have nothing to offer. Those who have the pedigree and antecedents have no qualms with campaigning for office with past achievements.

It must be said that President Muhammadu Buhari didn’t do enough to heal the fault lines that emerged in our nation in 2015. Although he made amends in his second tenure but it was a little too late. First impressions matter a lot and the impression that he was a sectional leader had taken root especially in opposition strongholds.

The president-elect must avoid making the same mistake. He needs to show the nation through his initial appointments into public office that he is a father to all and intends to involve all tribes and religious groups in the administration of the country. He must adhere strictly to the federal character principle as enshrined in the constitution. Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu should also fix the economy so that there will be jobs for our teeming youths. A hungry man is an angry man. But when the people are well-fed, they most likely wouldn’t be bothered about the religion or tribe of their political leaders.

•Peter Ovie Akus,

New Jersey, USA.