The Nation Newspaper

Category: Commentaries

  • ASUU: Inconvenient truth about varsity autonomy

    ASUU: Inconvenient truth about varsity autonomy

    • By Lekan Olayiwola

    Sir: Nigeria’s higher education debate has long been trapped in a false dichotomy between making universities “autonomous” and risking commercialization, fee hikes, and ideological anarchy on the one hand and letting them “state-controlled” and suffering bureaucracy, underfunding, and stagnation.

    This framing is both tired and misleading. Successful education systems—Germany, South Korea, India, even China—operate on a blended model: Strategic state stewardship over national priorities, equity, and standards and operational autonomy over curriculum, research, and internal governance.

    Nigeria’s problem is not that it controls its universities; it’s how it controls them through bureaucracy, patronage, and fear, not through performance, trust, or purpose. The result is paralysis disguised as policy. Every strike is treated as rebellion, every reform as surrender. The deeper question is: what exactly are universities for?

    Nigeria’s universities consume public funds but produce little in policy influence, research patents, or global standing. The reason is structural. Universities are funded as civil service appendages, not as knowledge industries.

    Vice Chancellors are treated like administrators, not visionaries. Research is funded episodically, not strategically. Budgets sustain bureaucracy, not innovation.

    Read Also: IMF urges Nigeria to prioritise infrastructure funding

    Autonomy, properly understood, would not mean withdrawal of funding. It would mean accountable freedom, a new covenant where funding follows performance, and performance is measured by impact, not by obedience.

    Until universities are allowed to function as strategic institutions competing for grants, solving national problems, shaping civic thought, funding will remain a ritual, not an investment.

    There is also a darker logic at work. Nigeria’s universities, in their weakened state, serve a quiet political purpose: they are containment zones.

    They absorb youth frustration, intellectual energy, and class anger, releasing them in predictable cycles of strikes and protests that never reach revolution. The dysfunction is not accidental; it is functional.

    A vibrant, independent university system would produce citizens harder to manipulate, thinkers harder to buy, and moral elite capable of demanding coherence from power. That is precisely why reform has been deferred, not because it’s impossible, but because it’s inconvenient.

    Rather than treating autonomy as separation from the state, it should be seen as shared authority with moral purpose based on four structural pivots that shift the conversation from confrontation to co-creation:

    Fear of autonomy: Redefine control as strategic stewardship. The federal government sets national learning goals—digital literacy, civic ethics, agricultural modernization—while universities determine how to meet them.

    Funding gaps: Create Sovereign Knowledge Funds, financed by royalties from natural resources and co-managed by academia and industry. These funds would reward research with measurable social impact.

    Intellectual stagnation: Build Think Clusters, cross-university labs competing for policy and innovation grants so lecturers no longer strike merely for survival, but strive for relevance.

    Public distrust: Mandate Transparency Dashboards, where universities publish open data on spending, research outputs, and community engagement.

    This is not privatization, but a purposeful decentralization where ownership remains public, but trust becomes the operating system. In this model, autonomy is not a prize to be won through strikes or decrees, but a status to be earned through competence, clarity, and contribution.

    What Nigeria needs is not another strike or another bailout, but a National Higher Education Compact—a covenant between government, academia, and the public. This compact would define what universities are for, what freedoms they require, what responsibilities they must bear.

    It would also enshrine a new moral logic that universities exist not merely to produce graduates, but to cultivate citizenship, conscience, and creativity. In such a vision, government becomes a steward of values, not a gatekeeper of thought; and ASUU becomes a vanguard of renewal, not an instrument of resistance.

    Nigeria must now face its inconvenient truth: autonomy is not an act of rebellion, but of responsibility. The university cannot remain both captive to politics and servant to progress. The real question is not who owns the university? But who controls the future?

    Nigeria must be a country where knowledge matters, where policy is evidence-driven, and where universities become engines of national intelligence.

    Both ASUU and the federal government must move beyond ritual negotiations to structural imagination that builds an education system which is not only autonomous but authoritative, purposeful, and indispensable.

    •Lekan Olayiwola,

    lekanolayiwola@gmail.com

  • Nigeria’s paradox of bumper harvest and poverty

    Nigeria’s paradox of bumper harvest and poverty

    • By Michael Adedotun Oke

    Sir: The air across Nigeria currently carries the unmistakable scent of harvest, a period that should mark prosperity and relief. Yet, for millions of farmers in the nation’s agricultural heartlands, the abundant yield is fast becoming a bitter paradox. The same bumper harvest that momentarily assures our food availability is simultaneously sinking farming communities deeper into economic peril.

    This is the great concern we must address: the current structure of our agricultural market is fundamentally unsustainable and poses a long-term threat to national food security.

    During the peak harvesting season, the immediate and massive influx of produce into local markets inevitably leads to a lowering of prices for agricultural goods. For the non-farming consumer, this temporary reduction in cost is a welcome relief. However, for the farmer, this period represents forced, low-margin selling.

    The reason for this economic compression is clear: the importance of the harvest is undeniable for current supply, but its inability to be stored effectively forces immediate, high-volume sales. Farmers are selling their produce at prices barely above, or sometimes below, their cost of production, simply because they have no facilities to hold the goods until demand stabilizes. This is where the structural fault lies, and its side effects are devastating. When the immediate bounty of the season is sold off cheaply, the farmer has little capital remaining to prepare for the next planting cycle.

    This crisis is not about lazy farmers or poor soil; it is about a profound national failure in post-harvest infrastructure. To ensure true food security and move farmers out of the cycle of life poverty, the central need is robust and accessible storage facility support.

    Investing in modern, secure storage facilities—silos, cold chains, and warehouses—is not merely an administrative detail; it is a critical necessity plan. Such infrastructure would allow farmers to withhold a portion of their yield during the glut, mitigating the sharp price reduction caused by oversupply. By bridging the gap between the peak harvest and the after-off demand periods, prices are stabilized, ensuring fairer returns for the producers and a consistent supply for the nation throughout the year.

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

    The government, policy makers, and private sector stakeholders must urgently recognize that the predictable drop in prices during harvest is a cyclical disaster that requires a structural, physical solution.

    Beyond mere storage, the long-term strategy must heavily emphasize the encouragement of processing and storage development. Supporting small to medium-scale food processing industries near production zones is a direct route to economic transformation.

    Processing converts perishable goods into shelf-stable, value-added products (like starches, flours, dried fruits, or canned goods). This strategy simultaneously achieves multiple critical goals:

    Reduces waste: It minimizes the shocking levels of post-harvest loss that currently plague the sector.

    Creates year-round demand: It generates sustained industrial demand for raw materials outside of the harvest window, further stabilizing prices.

    Generates rural wealth: Processing creates non-farm jobs, diversifies income streams, and moves communities “out of life poverty” by adding layers of value before the product reaches the consumer.

    Nigeria cannot afford to remain a nation whose food security is held hostage by the absence of a simple storage plan. The continuous failure to stabilize the rural economy through disciplined investment in post-harvest technology is a policy oversight whose cost is measured in the poverty of our farmers and the hunger of our populace. We must shift focus immediately from harvest celebration to infrastructural determination.

    •Michael Adedotun Oke,

    Abuja.

  • ASUU and strikes, five and six

    ASUU and strikes, five and six

    “Obuko de, oorun de!” is that picturesque Yoruba jive that speaks to the notoriety of the goat and its over-powering smell — “obuko de, oorun de!”

    You can very well say that of the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU).  It’s new executive appears anxious to prove its Aluta bona fides!  That’s clear from the latest warning strike declared by new ASUU President, Chris Piwuna, from October 13.

    To boot, on TVC, Prof. Piwuna appeared in full strike camouflage — a Nigeria Labour Congress-branded top, in all its organized Labour imperial majesty! His Excellency, the Aluta President of university egg-heads, was on air: Aluta yesterday, Aluta today, Aluta forever!  Aluta continua, victoria ascerta!

    By the way, shouldn’t university dons belong to the upper-suite Trade Union Congress (TUC), and not the shop-floor NLC?  In old Rome, that would have been patricians passing off as plebeians — a democratic choice, no crime!

    Still, pray: what’s that quip about madness — doing the same thing all over but expecting a different result, right?  But that must have been the last thing on the mind of the garlanded “strikers”, Piwuna and comrades! 

    Otherwise, shouldn’t there have been a troubling, tugging sense of deja vu?  Haven’t we seen these ill-thought strikes before?  What did they achieve? 

    Read Also: First Lady advocates stronger partnerships for health, education

    The last time, it was a grinding eight-month affair (14 February-14 October 2022), with the “strike heroes” nearly kissing bye-bye their salaries.  President Muhammadu Buhari (God bless his soul!) had enforced the no-work-no-pay rule — and rightly so!

    Though President Bola Tinubu came in and halved that liability, the Federal Government has already asked Vice Chancellors of federal universities to strictly apply that rule yet again — deja vu?  To think ASUU, which already added that four-month forfeited pay as “unpaid salary”, in its eternal agitation, is already threatening another “indefinite” strike!

    Will ASUU yet add pay for work not done for months — however this present action pans out — to its already rich stock of “unpaid salaries”?  Blessed — or is it blasted? — are this generation of delusional academics, for Aluta answers all questions?

    Not so, insist other unions on the academia.  The Congress of University Academics (CONUA) said no to the strike.  So has the National Association of Medical and Dental Academics (NAMDA) which, after decades of stomaching ASUU’s strikes-or-nothing rigidity, decided to opt out of the body.   Gradually the realm is melting but ASUU is too far gone to notice!

    Still, there are always two sides — or even more — to a story.  Between the ASUU and the Federal Government, hardly do you know who to believe. Nevertheless, the government should do everything within its power to ensure the strike is not prolonged.

    As for ASUU, no matter the merit of its case, its members ought by now to realize that they labour under a “strike” cabal.  That’s scandalous for academics that should think through problems, and not glory their lack of rigorous thinking with strikes.

    Dons in Denmark just gave the world “living” cement. Dons in Nigeria are luxuriating in strikes as cutting-edge thinking!  The earlier ASUU threw off the strike cabal undoing its destiny, the better for the Nigerian academia — and everyone!

  • Nigeria’s and the Nnamdi Kanu dilemma

    Nigeria’s and the Nnamdi Kanu dilemma

    Sir: Nnamdi Kanu’s trial long ago stopped being about one man or one movement. The case now extends beyond personal guilt or innocence, touching deep questions of regional loyalty, federal legitimacy, and the emotional residue of post-war Nigeria. Every adjournment, ruling, or protest is read less as a point of law than as a signal of power.

    A lenient ruling could unsettle parts of the security and political establishment, while a harsh one might ignite unrest in the Southeast. Caught between these fears, both the judiciary and the executive have settled into a cautious holding pattern, buying time under the guise of process, managing optics rather than enforcing justice. Each adjournment now feels less like due process and more like a rehearsal of fear.

    The prolonged detention of Nnamdi Kanu, leader of IPOB, has evolved beyond a legal matter; it now sits at the intersection of politics, power, and fear. What should have been a straightforward judicial process has turned into an emblem of how justice itself has been securitised in Nigeria.

    Years after his arrest, rendition, and multiple adjournments, Kanu’s case remains suspended between legal procedure and political hesitation. An acquittal might be read as weakness, potentially emboldening separatist sentiments in the Southeast. A conviction, on the other hand, could reignite anger and alienation, undoing fragile peace in a region already wary of federal authority. The case, once confined to the courtroom, has migrated into the bloodstream of national politics, where perception often outweighs law.

    The difficulty in resolving Kanu’s case lies in a convergence of overlapping fears—political, regional, institutional, and even personal. At the political level, the government worries that any leniency toward Kanu might be interpreted as surrender.

    Read Also: Explainer: How Nigeria can qualify for 2026 World Cup

    In a country still defined by ethnic arithmetic, every move carries electoral and symbolic weight. For the Tinubu administration, managing this legacy case involves balancing national unity with political survival.

    President Bola Tinubu inherited this case, but he now owns its outcome. With his administration struggling to stabilise the economy, the prevailing instinct within his circle is caution — a reluctance to open new fronts while the state is already stretched thin by economic strain and insecurity.

    Internationally, the memory of Kanu’s controversial rendition from Kenya still lingers. A transparent trial might reopen diplomatic wounds and challenge the legality of his extradition. Delay, therefore, becomes anesthesia numbing the wound without healing it. But nations do not heal by avoidance; they heal by courage.

    Nigeria is not the first country to face a dilemma where justice and national unity collide. Spain’s handling of the Catalan separatist movement offers a cautionary but useful comparison. After years of imprisonment and confrontation, Madrid shifted toward limited amnesty and structured dialogue, not as capitulation, but as a strategy of containment through inclusion.

    Ethiopia’s uneasy truce with Tigray rebels similarly reflected the painful recognition that no military or legal standoff can substitute for political accommodation. Even South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation process illustrates that sustainable peace requires moral imagination, the courage to see justice not merely as punishment, but as repair.

    Nigeria’s leadership could borrow from these lessons: that dialogue and due process are not signs of weakness, but of confidence in the institutions that define a modern state. The real question is not whether Kanu is guilty, but whether Nigeria’s institutions are capable of administering justice without fear.

    Allowing justice to run its course would send a powerful message that the Nigerian state still believes in the rule of law as the ultimate guarantor of security. Continuing to suspend it, however, implies that power, not principle, remains the true authority.

    •Lekan Olayiwola, lekanolayiwola@gmail.com

  • Varsities’ strike: Who’s to blame?

    Varsities’ strike: Who’s to blame?

    Sir: University strikes have become an all-too-familiar story, a recurring wound that never seems to heal. Each time the Academic Staff Union of Universities, ASUU announces an industrial action, lectures stop, campuses grow silent, and dreams are placed on hold. Politicians continue with their schedules, lecturers retreat to side jobs, but the students, the very heart of the education system, are left stranded. They lose time, motivation, and opportunities they can never fully recover.

    Yet, as the cycle repeats, one cannot help but ask: who truly bears the weight of these strikes, and who should take responsibility for the damage they cause?

    For decades, ASUU has justified its strikes as a means to pressure the government into honouring agreements on better funding, fair wages, and improved infrastructure. These demands are valid. Anyone who has walked through the corridors of a public university in Nigeria would agree that poor facilities, overcrowded lecture halls, and unpaid salaries reflect a deep neglect of education by successive governments.

    But while the union’s grievances are understandable, the methods have become controversial.

    The government, on the other hand, often accuses ASUU of holding the system hostage. It argues that the union’s insistence on strikes as the only bargaining tool cripples progress and punishes innocent students who have no hand in the dispute. In the end, both parties trade blame while the students, the most powerless group in the equation, pay the ultimate price.

    Let us be honest. Both parties are culpable. The government’s insensitivity and failure to prioritize education are unacceptable. Budgetary allocations to education consistently fall below UNESCO’s recommended 26 percent. Lecturers, too, must reflect on whether indefinite strikes remain the most effective way to demand change. It is one thing to fight for rights; it is another to destroy the bridge that connects those rights to the future.

    If universities had better funding, research grants, and prompt salaries, ASUU would have no reason to down tools. But if the union continues to rely solely on strikes without exploring alternative advocacy such as strategic legal action, citizen engagement, or performance-based protests, then students will remain collateral damage in every industrial action.

    The solution lies in sincerity from both sides. Government officials must stop making empty promises and start implementing lasting reforms. ASUU must adopt modern negotiation strategies that protect the interest of students first. The students themselves must also rise, through constructive activism, to demand accountability from all sides.

    Read Also: Why I prefer to raise my kids in Nigeria – M.I Abaga

    Education is not a privilege; it is a right. Every time it is disrupted, a generation loses part of its potential. The government and ASUU must remember that time is not renewable. Every month lost to a strike is a wound that never fully heals for a student.

    Some will argue that strikes have brought partial victories such as improved salaries, better agreements, and occasional funding. But these victories often come at too great a cost. Students spend longer years on campus, graduate late, and face tighter job markets. Many lose scholarships or opportunities abroad because their transcripts are delayed or their academic calendars are unpredictable.

    A society that allows this cycle to persist is one that undervalues its youth. The damage is not visible immediately, but it shows later in the frustration of jobless graduates, in the rise of social vices, and in the erosion of hope. When young people start believing that hard work no longer pays, the nation begins to decay silently.

    The truth is simple: when universities are on strike, everyone loses, but students lose the most. They lose time, morale, and faith. And no compensation can restore that lost time.

    Until the day Nigeria treats education as a national emergency, not a political bargaining chip, these strikes will continue, and the nation will keep producing delayed graduates and disappointed dreams.

    The next time a strike is declared, we should ask not just who is right or wrong, but who is hurting most. Because in the end, it is not the lecturers or the politicians who suffer, it is the students whose futures hang in the balance.

    •Lawan Bukar Maigana, lawanbukarmaigana@gmail.com

  • Nigeria’s AI moment: From national strategy to real impact

    Nigeria’s AI moment: From national strategy to real impact

    Sir: Every few years, technology delivers a new wave. Right now, it’s Artificial Intelligence. And unlike some past eras, this one may give Nigeria more than just catch-up: we have real chances to lead. We’ve got land, population, a young, adaptable workforce, and growing digital density.

    Combine that with recent investments in skilling and policy momentum and you have conditions where AI could power not only tech firms, but entire sectors. Look at energy, logistics, agriculture, telecoms: all filled with opportunity areas that AI can help fix. But what will really determine where Nigeria lands is how we turn potential into action by fixing gaps, building trust, and investing in real infrastructure.

    The government’s National AI Strategy signals that AI is no longer a pipe dream but a national priority to drive economic growth, social development, and technological leadership. That vision is now backed by real research and investment. Microsoft, in partnership with PwC and Lagos Business School, recently released a report outlining how Nigeria can accelerate AI adoption. Among its findings: the nation already shows early success across fintech, agriculture, and health tech. The report highlights the Three Million Technical Talent (3MTT) program and Microsoft’s AI Skills Navigator, both designed to close Nigeria’s digital skills gap. The roadmap emphasizes governance, infrastructure, and ethical frameworks as critical enablers for sustained AI progress.

    Few countries can match Nigeria’s combination of population, ambition, and raw data. With over 200 million citizens, growing smartphone penetration, and a vibrant start-up ecosystem, the data backbone for AI already exists.

    Read Also: Omokri challenges Cruz, others to name alleged perpetrators of Christian genocide in Nigeria

    The country’s chronic infrastructure issues, from unstable electricity to poor broadband, should no longer be treated solely as barriers. They are invitations for innovation and investment. The same instability that frustrates entrepreneurs could encourage smarter distributed energy networks (micro-grids) and more resilient edge computing systems to bring data processing closer to where it’s generated.

    But technology without governance is fragile. Meta’s recent $220 million fine by Nigeria’s data protection authority and competition commission for mishandling user data shows the cost of lagging in oversight. A second settlement worth $32.8 million this year reinforced the point. These cases underline the urgency of data sovereignty, ensuring Nigerian data fuels Nigerian growth, not foreign algorithms.

     Nigeria’s AI strategy and Microsoft’s roadmap offer a joint playbook: build capacity, enforce trust, and enable collaboration between public and private sectors. The government’s task now is execution, ensuring incentives for start-ups, reliable energy, and active monitoring of AI deployments.

    Through years of working on data and technology programs across different contexts, one insight has become clear: innovation thrives where infrastructure and ethics meet. For Nigeria, that intersection could define not only our digital future but our global influence.

    •Kevwe Onome-Irikefe, Society of Women Engineers, Columbia River Section, United States.

  • Nnaji certificate saga and the need to respect institutions

    Nnaji certificate saga and the need to respect institutions

    By Johnson Okolo

    Nigerians began the week on the note of a sizzling report by an online newspaper, Premium Times. The report centred around allegations that our own very Honourable Minister of Innovation, Science and Techonology, Chief Geoffrey Uche Nnaji, forged his university degree as well as National Youth Service Corp (NYSC) certificates.

    The reaction was instantaneous just as it was predictable. Outrage. And this was understable. Ever since Nigeria’s return to democracy in 1999, quite a number of high profile office holders have been caught in the web of one form of certificate forgery scandal or another.

    The distastful trend began in 1999 with two top principal officers of the National Assembly- Senate President Evan(s) Enwerem and the Speaker, House of Representatives, Salisu Buhari. While Salisu Buhari falsely claimed he attended the University of Toronto, Canada, senators- and indeed, Nigerians – couldn’t tell with certainty if their Senate President was Evan or Evans Enwerem.

    Ever since Evan or Evans Enwerem and Salisu Buhari, the issue of certificate forgeries has, like wild fire, caught up with members of the executive arm. For instance, Senator Douye Diri of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) is governor of Bayelsa State today simply because of the discrepancies in the name of the All Progressives Congress (APC) deputy governorship candidate in the state, Senator Degi-Eremienyo. This was in February 2020.

    Five years earlier, Minister of Finsnce, Mrs Kemi Adeosun resigned her appointment following a scandal concerning the alleged forgery of her NYSC certificate. Ms. Adeosun had been invited by President Muhammadu Buhari to return from her base in the United Kingdom to join his government. It ended in disgrace.

    Instances abound of several other high profile Nigerians who have been enmeshed in forged certficate scandals. This naturally raises the question of if after 65 years of Independence, Nigeria has no institutions to block such embarrassment.

    Read Also: Shell approves $2bn offshore gas project in Nigeria

    Enter the State Security Service (SSS) sometimes called Department of State Services (DSS).

    As far as the SSS Act is concerned, the Service is responsible for the internal security of Nigeria, VIP protection, and vetting of nominees for top positions. The SSS is also empowered to place persons of interest on watchlist- in addition to protecting the President from embarrassment (as in the cases of Salisu Buhari, Evan(s) Enwerem, Kemi Adeosun and now, Uche Nnaji) among other duties. Without mincing words, it is, safe to say that the SSS is a key institution of the Nigerian State.

    In her book, “Democracy: Stories from the Long Road to Freedom,”

    Condoleezza Rice, former national security adviser and secretary of state under President George W. Bush, believes that that institutions provide the bedrock for any successful democracy.

    In other words, weak institutions weaken democracy. Conversely, one of the ways to weaken democracy is to first weaken her institutions.

    One example that readily comes to mind on how we weaken an institution is the 2016 nomination of Ibrahim Magu as the chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). The EFCC Act states that a nominee for the office of the EFCC chairman shall be screened by the Senate.

    Even though it is the President that apoints the SSS DG, the secret police wasn’t comfortable that the president chose Magu. And the secret police didn’t hide their disapproval of Mr. President’s nominee.

    In a letter dated October 3, 2016, to the Clerk of the Senate, the SSS told the senators that Magu was not fit to hold the position of EFCC chairman.

    The secret police listed several alleged malpractices against the EFCC boss, saying his confirmation would frustrate the anti-graft drive of the administration then.

    Part of the allegations against Magu was his being in possession of EFCC documents in his private residence during the chairmanship of Farida Waziri.

    The DSS also made reference to the circumstances surrounding Magu’s arrest, detention and suspension by the Nigeria Police.

    In addition, the secret service alleged that the sum of N40m was paid for the rented apartment, which costs N20m per annum, where Magu lived.

    DSS added that Magu’s accommodation was not paid for from the commission’s account but by a presidential appointee, who had been under investigation. The DSS alleged that after renting the apartment for Magu, the friend awarded a N43 million contract for the furnishing of the accommodation.

    The only consequence of the DSS report was that each time he faced the senators, they failed to clear him. Even at that, the President then snubbed the lawmakers and kept Magu as acting EFCC chairman for close to five years.

    Thus, Magu became the poster boy of the futility of security reports and Senate screening when political leaders and policy makers choose to weaken our institutions.

    While it is convenient to talk about Magu, perhaps mention should be made of our lawyers, especially those who aspire to make it to the peak of the bar, called Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SAN). Oftentimes referred to as Learned Silk, to demonstrate the highest esteem to which they are held, these senior lawyers recently grabbed the headlines when they opposed the screening of their colleagues shortlisted for this coveted rank by the DSS.

    A former Nigerian Bar Association General Secretary, Olumuyiwa Akinboro, himself a SAN, described the security vetting as an attack on the independence of the legal profession. Human rights lawyer and former Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu was one of the few voices that supported the DSS.

    Odinkalu,who expressed surprise at Akinboro’s opposition, said the rule was introduced in 2022 by then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Olukayode Ariwoola, and had been applied to SAN conferments in 2022, 2023 and 2024 without protest.

    “These people are short of candour. The rules requiring screening of SAN candidates by DSS were made by Olukayode Ariwoola in 2022. They governed SAN conferment in 2022, ’23 & ’24,” noted Odinkalu.

    It has since emerged from the grapevine on the outcome of the DSS screening, that some of the nominees for the award of SAN are not fit and proper. Even with this DSS report, the same tainted nominees still managed to wangle their way to the swearing-in. They are now addressed as “learned silks!” Won’t be surprised if these SANs aren’t among those blaming the Senate and the DSS for “not doing a thorough job!”

    Now, to our own Minister Uche Nnaji. He resigned during the week. I’ve read and heard many people blame the Senate and the DSS for the lapses that made it possible to swear in Nnaji as Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology. Having set a dangerous precedent with Magu and many more that aren’t known, how are we sure the powers that be even allowed Nnaji to subject himself to the rigours of screening by the DSS? How are we sure he, in the name of security vetting, even stepped foot within the four walls of the SSS national headquarters in Abuja?

    The truth remains that over time, we failed to address the question of interference with institutions. Why should some governors, for instance, have the wherewithal to demand the deployment or removal of Police Commissioners to or from their states?

    Crying ourselves out won’t address the problem. We have to begin to address the issues that contribute to weakening our institutions. Without that, scandals like Nnaji’s will continue to dog our political trajectory and national life. It is hightine we rolled our sleeves to make out institutions strong. This, as Condoleezza Rice rightly noted,  will provide the bedrock for our successful democracy.

    •Okolo, a public affairs analyst, wrote from Umuahia

  • Oyetola: On the crest of maritime history

    Oyetola: On the crest of maritime history

    By Chima Nwana

    The introduction of the new Federal Ministry of Marine and Blue Economy by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu was a bold step in the right direction. It is a contemporary approach to ocean governance and its sustainability – a deliberate effort to tap into our extensive coastline and inland waters heritage.  

    The goal was to position Nigeria as a global maritime force, through harnessing our blue and brown water resources in an atmosphere of sustainability, inclusivity, job creation, and increased revenue in a consolidated format.

    When therefore in August 2024, Mr President appointed Gboyega Oyetola CON as the pioneer Minister of Marine and Blue Economy, many pondered, if not wondered, whether this seasoned administrator, insurance guru, astute politician and former governor of Osun State fitted the bill.  Both voices of skepticism, and soft tones of optimism, agreed that his scorecard should be the yardstick for his measurement.

    As an active player in the maritime industry myself, and infact one that has had the privilege of sharing views and perspectives on the sector with him up-close, I saw his birthday last month, not as an opportunity for sycophantic eulogies, but one for a fervent appraisal of the journey so far, some 2 years down the line.

    Gboyega Oyetola – fondly called ileri oluwa – is definitely not a noise maker, taciturn, soft-spoken, yet effective, he is more interested in results than accolades. The Honourable Minister is an avid team player running an inclusive management style, which inspiring optimism that cascades down the rank and file in the MDAs within the ministry.

    He has adopted a novel approach to superintending the sector, through innovative incursions into areas hitherto not given dedicated attention. He has highlighted emerging sub-sectors, like marine biotechnology, desalination of seawater, sustainable aquaculture, sea-mining and energy transition. He has emphasized on a meeting point between science, commerce and the livelihood of coastal and riverine communities.  Simply said, in his own words, “that while tapping into the economic potential of the nations maritime resources, we must maintain environmental sustainability”. He sees ‘our’ not just ocean, not just as an obligation, but also an opportunity. 

    Recognizing that the sector was plagued with poor infrastructure, outdated regulatory frameworks, he set out to pursue a “vision to build a robust blue economy framework that delivers prosperity while preserving the marine environment for future generations.”

    Oyetola has not only chaperoned the birthing of a bankable 10year strategy road map for his ministry (one that gives due attention to fishing and its derivatives, shipbuilding and repairs), he has ensured that, for once in a long while, major agencies in the sector are led by seasoned professionals. Here, the precise appointments of Dr Dayo Moboreala at the Nigeria Maritime Administration and Safety Agency NIMASA and Dr Abubakar Dantsoho of Nigeria Ports Authority NPA come to mind. These are part of a sector functional team that includes accomplished bureaucrats and intellectuals such as Mr Olufemi Oloruntola,        Dr Akinola and Prof Fakinlede.

    Building on this, he has made inter-agency co-operation and collaboration a priority.  This is best exemplified by the unified approach, guided by his ever able Permanent Secretary, in achieving a harmonized sector Economic Regulatory Bill.  It is instructive to note that, acknowledging this synergy, both the Senate and the House of Representatives passed this harmonized bill in plenary, uniquely without debate.

    In response to the deluge of boat mishaps on our inland waterways, the Honourable Minister commissioned a high-powered team to diligently look into these incidences and advice accordingly. The special Committee has since submitted its report and recommendations for implementation (including enhanced regulation), drawn from its findings, and the Minister has promised sweeping changes therefrom. This added to the nearly 50,000 life jackets he recently distributed, will no doubt reduce the scourge that has recently led to numerous loss of lives.

    The Honourable Minister of Marine and Blue Economy has kick-started the long awaited modernization of our port infrastructure nationwide.  This is a much awaited measure, as some of these terminals date back to nearly a century, and so revamping their archaic quay walls and aprons was long overdue.

    One factor that has limited the growth of indigenous participation in the sector is lack of capital. To address this, Mr Oyetola, in May this year, directed NIMASA to immediately commence the activation of disbursement of the Cabotage Vessel Financing Fund CVFF to indigenous operators.  The disbursement of these funds, he said, will be, “… a profound commitment to empowering Nigerian maritime operators”. Beyond CVFF, the Hon Minister has generally advocated for innovative financing for the blue economy.

    The Maritime Academy of Nigeria Oron is Nigeria’s prime admiralty training center. Oyetola has given it primary attention, through improved facilities and a pledge to ensure it is world standard and meets the requirements of the IMO.

    Minister Oyetola is setting up what he calls, Marine Protected Areas (MPAs).  This will be a unique/novel conservation initiative.  He is also an ardent supporter, and indeed anchor of the National Single Window project, a trade facilitation initiative that will reduce cargo down time, as well as ultimately save cost for traders, while increasing revenue for government.

    Read Also: Explainer: How Nigeria can qualify for 2026 World Cup

    One can go-on-and-on about his achievements thus far, but an area where he has made visible impact which you cannot skip is maritime security.  He has not only enlarged the scope of the flagship scheme – the deep blue project – he is renewing its focus to prevention, rather than just a reactionary approach to merchant marine security. And this, is while promoting stronger regional cooperation in the process.

    You will agree that the trajectory of Oyetola’s policy direction and intervention activity are all in conformity with the International Maritime Organization IMOs quest for cleaner oceans, and safer seas. 

    The question now is, will the IMO delegates (representing their various member states) recognize these strides as having an international sectoral impact and dimension, and elect Nigeria to sit on the category C of their Council in the upcoming December 2025 elections? Suffix it to say that this feat was last achieved by Nigeria some 15 years ago in 2009, despite several times of trying.  For Oyetola, this diplomatic validation will be a seal on the stamp of a worthy report card, an icing on the cake and a reward for veritable leadership.

    Just recently, the IMO Secretary General Mr Arsenio Dominguez, paid an official visit to Nigeria to see firsthand, the efforts made by the nation, under Oyetolas leadership, to meet up with its obligations and commitments as a member of the maritime committee of nations. Mr Dominguez commended Nigeria’s remarkable achievements in maritime security, particularly the 3 year zero piracy record and the Deep Blue project, which he described as a model for regional cooperation in the Gulf of Guinea.  The visit, and the IMO bosses comments in reference, are tacid endorsement of Nigerias growing admiralty reputation, especially when one considers that the Secretary General has only been on the saddle of the nearly 50 nation body, for a little over a year.

    Inspite of a seeming litany of successes the Hon Minister has made in the sector, a lot still needs to be done to satisfy the proverbial ‘shopping list’ of expectant sector stakeholders. Contemporary needs such as, sanitizing the fishing industry and ending illegal incursions by foreigners, ensuring genuine operators benefit from CVFF disbursements, beneficial utilization of Baro, Onitsha and other river ports, drastically reducing the effects of boat mishaps, regulating renewable energy such as wind turbines, commencement of the port modernization program, election to the IMO Council etc, should be addressed.

    All these will ultimately form part of his scorecard whenever he inevitably exits as Minister, and so require dedicated attention.   Either way, as Gboyega Oyetola marks another year of his birth, you will agree with me that he is indeed on the crest of maritime history.

    •Nwana a Maritime Lawyer, writes from Abuja

  • When protectors turn aggressors

    When protectors turn aggressors

    Residents of Akinlalu community in Ife North council area of Osun State are crying for justice over the killing of at least three of their members and injury of many others by operatives of Amotekun Corps in the state. Amotekun is the local security outfit raised by governments of South-west states to foster security at the grassroots in complement to operations of the Nigeria Police.

    Akinlalu residents said an unprovoked attack on their community by Amotekun personnel 30th September resulted in four fatalities, with eight others – mostly women and youths – severely injured. Among those killed were three children of the Aro of Akinlalu, Chief Kamorudeen Oyebamiji – two from his younger wife and one from the elder. “Hooded Amotekun corps killed my three children in a single day,” he was reported lamenting. Community ruler, Alakinlalu of Akinlalu, Oba Oluwabusola Oloyede, demanded justice for the slain and denied claims by Amotekun that persons killed were bandits. According to him, it was innocent residents attacked at the market square. He implored community youths to stay calm and trust in government’s ability to bring erring corpsmen to justice.

    The Osun Amotekun had in a statement claimed its operatives acted in self-defence after being ambushed by hoodlums, and that the encounter left three people suspected to be hoodlums dead. “Our men were ambushed while attempting to retrieve two rifles forcibly taken from them during an earlier confrontation with suspected thieves. In the exchange of gunfire that followed, three of the attackers were neutralised,” its statement read in part.

    Read Also: Nigerian youth parliament hails UN-Habitat’s Mlynár as global champion of youth inclusion

    But community members insisted it was wild cat aggression perpetrated by corpsmen suspected to be under the influence of drugs. Akinlalu Youth Leader, Musbau Adeboye, said: “We heard there was theft of farm produce at Abaoba, a village under Akinlalu. Amotekun men went there and arrested suspects. Later, we learnt two rifles were seized from them by the sons of a retired soldier. The next day, they returned heavily armed and started shooting indiscriminately. By the time I arrived, it was a gory sight. The whole community looked like a slaughter slab.”

    Osun State Governor Ademola Adeleke expressed shock over the violence and said he had ordered full-scale probe. “This matter is being investigated and any infraction will be dealt with within the context of the law,” he said in a statement by his spokesperson, Olawale Rasheed.

    The police said they would ensure those involved in the mayhem were apprehended and prosecuted. Last week, police personnel stormed Amotekun Corps’ operational bases in Oke-fia, Osogbo, and Ife Central division in Ile-Ife where they arrested a number of corpsmen and sealed off the facilities.

    The Akinlalu incident raises the red flag again about allowing secondary security outfits to bear lethal arms without worsening the challenge of misuse.

  • NDLEA’s position on cannabis oil

    NDLEA’s position on cannabis oil

    Sir: When reports surfaced that the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) had “approved” the export of cannabis oil, it quickly stirred debate and confusion across Nigeria’s policy and public health circles. A closer look, however, shows that the agency’s remarks were not an endorsement of cannabis use or a sign of legalization, but a scientific contribution to an ongoing national discussion.

    What really happened? The controversy began after NDLEA chairman and chief executive, Brig. Gen. Mohamed Buba Marwa (Retd.), spoke at a workshop organized by the Nigerian Academy of Science (NAS) in Abuja. During his presentation on the prospects of cannabis oil export, Marwa said the agency was “not averse to the controlled and regulated export of cannabis oil” for international markets, while maintaining its opposition to local use in line with existing law and the country’s high rate of drug abuse.

    His comments, made in a scientific forum, were intended as an academic opinion — not a policy announcement.

    Globally, several countries have explored the medicinal and economic potential of cannabis oil, particularly CBD — a non-psychoactive compound known for its therapeutic value. But Nigeria’s context is unique. The country’s drug abuse prevalence stands at 14.4 percent — nearly three times the global average, according to the 2018 National Drug Use Survey. Cannabis remains the most abused substance, with about 10.6 million users nationwide.

    Given these figures, the NDLEA’s cautious approach is rooted in public health realities. Premature legalization or commercial production could worsen addiction and mental health challenges already straining Nigeria’s healthcare system.

    Read Also: NAEE commends Tinubu’s macroeconomic policies, urges protection for vulnerable Nigerians

    Cannabis oil is extracted from the cannabis plant and contains cannabinoids — mainly THC (the psychoactive compound responsible for the “high”) and CBD (the non-psychoactive compound used for medical purposes in some countries).

    While CBD oil has recognized therapeutic benefits, products containing THC remain tightly controlled worldwide because of their potential for abuse. The NDLEA’s position, therefore, is that cannabis oil should be discussed only in the context of scientific research and possible regulated export — not local use or open trade.

    The NDLEA’s position is, therefore, not about legalizing cannabis — it’s about understanding it.

    By promoting open dialogue and commissioning research, the agency is ensuring that when Nigeria eventually decides on cannabis policy, it will do so with facts, not assumptions; with science, not speculation. In simple terms, NDLEA’s message is clear: Nigeria must “learn before it decides.”

    •As-Sayyidul Arafat Abdulrazaq,as.sayyid21@gmail.com.