The Nation Newspaper

Category: Comments

  • Urgent need to breathe new life into state electoral commissions

    Urgent need to breathe new life into state electoral commissions

    • By Frank Ojeme Anyasi

    Local governments play crucial roles in actualising grassroots democracy and development.   They ensure that the gains of democracy get to the ordinary man. The local governments provide the most essential public services such as health and safety, transportation, sanitation, sustenance of the environment as well as the provision and maintenance of utilities. 

    Nigeria used to be a unitary state. This was from January 1900 to 1954 when it changed to a federation. The adoption of a federal system of government came with the introduction of the native authorities as a tier of government. However, under that arrangement, the native authorities they were each under the control of the regional government. That trend continued until the local government reform of 1976. The reform revolutionized the local government administration in the country and its official recognition as the third tier of government. The reform sought to address the role of local government in Nigeria. Some of the features of the reform include the creation of more local government areas, introduction of elective principles into the local government administration and the exclusion of the traditional rulers in the administration of local government councils. Local governments were to be financed by both the federal and local government councils. In fact, the current local government system was predicated on the 1976 reform.

    In a landmark decision delivered by the Supreme Court on July 11, the court reinforced the autonomy of local governments in Nigeria by affirming their status as a distinct third tier of government. That judgement addressed the crucial constitutional issues surrounding the financial independence of the local government. The court directed the federal government to ensure that the funds allocated to local governments are paid directly to the accounts of democratically elected local government councils. That decision has been welcomed by well-meaning Nigerians as laudable but not far-reaching enough to guarantee total autonomy to local governments. This is because the credibility and quality of the elections into local government remain to be sorted out. 

    Following the Supreme Court ruling, the states embarked on local government elections but the ruling party in the states always clear the polls. This has led to voter apathy and loss of confidence in the outcomes of the local government elections. Consequently, there have been calls from some quarters to transfer the functions of the State Independent Electoral Commissions to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to ensure efficiency and transparency.

    Proponents  of the centralized local government elections argue that the State Independent Electoral Commission is unduly influenced and  compromised by the  state governors and, therefore, cannot independently carry out its  duties with the integrity expected. As such when the council polls are held, they fall short of the principles of free, fair and credible elections, with only the party in power in the  states always winning overwhelmingly or complete majority .

    Unlike the 1989 Constitution that states that local government elections be held every three years, the 1999 basic law of the country is silent over this. So the local governments exist at the whims and caprices of the governors and the state Houses of Assembly. There is therefore, need to amend the constitution to provide for the tenure of the local government councils.

    Read Also: DHQ lauds Simon Ekpa’s arrest, key victory in anti-terror fight

    Transferring local government elections to (INEC) will not serve any meaningful purpose. It will only rob the local governments of their hard won autonomy and further concentrate more power in the centre. It would also further undermine the country’s federal system of government.  After all, politics is local and people should be allowed to manage their electoral process at the local level.  State Independent Electoral Commission should put measures in place that will make the use of technology in the  determination of election results   mandatory, in line with international best practices.

    Though the 1999 Constitution established the SIECs to organize, undertake  and supervise all elections to  local  government  councils, it did  not provide for the administrative and  financial independence for  the commission that  will guarantee its autonomy .

    Some people want microwave solution to political problems.

    The nation’s universities should be asked to assist in providing solutions to the election challenges plaguing the local government councils. Some university dons have contributed to advancing the frontiers of knowledge in local government administration. Their wealth of knowledge and experience should be utilized to ameliorate the challenge of local government elections. The attitudes of some informed citizens are discouraging. They do not show any interest in the local government affairs.  Some of them do not know the local government secretariats in their communities. Rather they are concerned with the political activities at federal and state levels. 

    Everyone needs to stand up and fight for the soul of the local government system. The citizens should demand transparency and accountability from their local government chairmen and councillors. They should also insist that governors prioritize free and fair local government elections over personal political interests.

    The prime reason for the creation of local governments which is to bring development to the local communities and reduce the rural/urban migration cannot be over emphasized. Many years ago, I travelled to Pittsburgh, USA, for a training programme. Part of the programme was a study tour of Washington DC. One of the course facilitators told me he was excited about the tour because it would afford him the opportunity of visiting Washington DC for the first time, a journey of about four hours 25 minutes. He noticed that I was surprised, and immediately told me that he had no need to travel to the city because all the social amenities he needed were in his county. Every local government should aspire to do same in its area.

    Governors should  realise that the  pursuit of their personal political  interests at the  expense of efficient local government administration, have consequences, most of which are not only borne by the  governors and their co-travellers but by Nigerians who are eagerly looking forward to a local government system that works in line with international standards.

    •Anyasi writes from Abuja.

  • Obasanjo, INEC and need for a balanced review of Nigeria’s elections

    Obasanjo, INEC and need for a balanced review of Nigeria’s elections

    By Ezenwa Nwagwu

    The dust from the Ondo State Governorship Election is yet to settle when former President Olusegun Obasanjo fired a salvo, calling for the sack of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu and other officials at all levels.

    The former president made the call during his address at the prestigious Chinua Achebe Leadership Forum held at Yale University in the United States, where he presented a paper titled “Leadership Failure and State Capture in Nigeria.”

    As expected, the statement by the former president has stirred backlash. However, it is my opinion that Obasanjo’s statement provides a critical opportunity to contextualize Nigeria’s electoral journey, the progress made, and the challenges that persist despite attempts to reform our processes.

    We must not miss this opportunity to remind and educate the younger generation, who had the privilege of participating in Nigeria’s elections for the first time in 2023. We must use this opportunity to remind young Nigerians where we are coming from and the progress that we have made in our elections and democracy.

    For the younger generation, it is essential to understand the context of Nigeria’s electoral history, why and how we arrived at reforms like BVAS and IReV which represent a departure from the irregularities of the past.

    This is an opportunity to remind Nigerians that in 2022, under this current leadership, INEC opened itself to scrutiny by publishing the voters register online for the first time. Many Nigerians may have forgotten what our voters’ register looks or how it is inundated with various forms of irregularities ranging from registration of minors, multiple registrations and registration of foreigners or aliens.

    Read Also: FCCPC warns against smuggled low-quality sugar in Nigerian markets

    In fact, Nigeria’s voters register used to contain fictitious names such as Muhammed Alli, Mike Tyson, Michael Jackson, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, to concoct victory for political parties. This was how some states “manufacture” two million votes in past elections. A feat they couldn’t achieve in 2023 due to reforms by INEC.

    While, INEC under its current leadership has come under criticism due to the functionality of the IReV portal, it is important to respectfully note that the IReV portal is an INEC initiative to improve access to election results. It may not have worked perfectly during the 2023 election, but there is no doubt that we have made progress.

    That Nigerians have a result viewing portal or that Nigerians can do simultaneous accreditation and voting is a significant lift from what we had in the past. In the past, elections lasted into midnight because people had to do accreditation, go home and come back later to vote.

    That Nigerians do not hear of people being killed on election day or ballot boxes being snatched and stuffed with ballot paper is significant progress.

    While these reforms are not perfect, they have shifted Nigeria’s elections towards greater credibility.

    Since Obasanjo’s comment coincided with the Ondo governorship election, let me provide some context into how this election is far better from what we had in the past.

    The Ondo State election that held on Saturday had 111 domestic and international accredited observer organisations. Reports from the groups acknowledged challenges like vote buying and electoral violence, while commending early opening of polls and the rapid uploading of results to the INEC Results Viewing Portal (IReV). As at 7pm on Election Day, 90% of the results were available online, a feat that demonstrates the impact of technological reforms implemented by INEC.

    To understand the strides made in Nigeria’s electoral process, and why this context of Ondo election is important, it is essential to reflect on where we started in Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999.

    A check on Wikipedia shows that during the 2003 Edo State gubernatorial election, PDP’s Lucky Igbinedion reportedly garnered 969,747 votes, while his opponents scored zero. Such blatant irregularities were characteristic of elections conducted under Obasanjo’s administration. Similarly, the 2007 general elections were marred by massive irregularities, with instances of results being announced while voting was still ongoing.

    It was the same Obasanjo who pressured the then INEC leadership to declare Prof Oserheimen Osunbor the winner of the 2007 governorship election won by Adams Oshiomhole.

    These were dark chapters in Nigerians electoral history, marked by lack of transparency, manipulation, and disregard for democratic principles. It was so bad that during the 2007 general election in Rivers State, election results were being declared while voting was still in progress.

    In fact, the winner of that election, President Musa Yar’Adua was so embarrassed by the outcome that he vowed to review the election. That review gave birth to the Justice Uwais committee. Interesting, the current INEC leadership had commenced the implementation of that committee report. Nine recommendations that relate to INEC from that committee have been fully implemented, especially biometric registration of voters.

    As someone who is invested in the electoral process, I’m concerned that former President Obasanjo’s critique of INEC could be considered part of a broader resistance to reforms that reduce the control of elites over electoral outcomes. The democratization of Nigeria’s elections has transferred power from political kingmakers to the people. This shift has alarmed those accustomed to manipulating the system.

    We may argue that our elections are now characterized by vote buying – an unfortunate reality of desperation by the political class. Sadly, vote buying reflects a moral and societal issue rather than an institutional failure by INEC. Nigerians must address this problem collectively rather than placing undue blame on the electoral body. Issues of electoral violence and voting buying are issues that politicians and security agencies must address.

    Imagine your child was performing poorly in school, failing nearly all their subjects. As a parent, you responded with scolding and punishments. Over time, the child began to improve, excelling in some subjects while still struggling in a few. Interestingly, the child has shown commitment to further improve in those areas where he or she is still struggling.

    I imagine that the sensible thing to do at this point would be to acknowledge and praise the areas of improvement, while perhaps hiring a tutor to help with the remaining challenges. However, continuing to berate the child and label them as dull, despite their visible efforts, would be unfair. Yes, you want your child to excel, but it’s important to balance criticism with encouragement—commending their progress while addressing areas that still need work.

    INEC, under successive leaderships, has made deliberate efforts to address the flaws of the past. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and IReV has brought significant improvements. These technologies ensure transparent voter accreditation, faster result uploads, and greater public access to election results in real time.

    As Nigerians, we must acknowledge that our elections are not yet perfect, but they have improved significantly.

    The road to credible elections is a marathon, not a sprint. It requires collaboration between INEC, political actors, civil society, and citizens. Let us celebrate the progress made while remaining committed to addressing the challenges that persist. Nigerians remember, and history will judge us all by how we uphold the principles of democracy.

    I will end by quoting former President Obasanjo in his address at the Leon Sullivan dialogue on Nigeria at the National Press Club, Washington DC, on April 29, 2010.

    The former president said: “with all due respect, if Jesus Christ could come to the world and be the chairman of INEC, any election he would conduct will be disputed.

    “Since I got here three days ago, I understand that the chairman of INEC has been asked to go on leave. People have also talked about electoral reform.

    “Quite honestly, I have said that I don’t understand in detail what this electoral reform is. One thing that we need to reform in our own society is the politician. We need to reform politicians.”

    •Nwagwu is the executive director, Peering Advocacy and Advancement Centre in Africa (PAACA).

  • Transforming sanitation in Nigeria’s public spaces

    Transforming sanitation in Nigeria’s public spaces

    By Elvis Eromosele

    I had the opportunity to visit a number of Nigerian cities in recent weeks, from Lagos to Bayelsa, through Benin, and Warri. Although these cities provided rich cultural experiences and stunning scenery, one prevalent problem that caught my attention was the condition of public sanitation, especially in motor parks and markets. The unpleasant stench, overflowing trash, and unhygienic conditions of many of these areas confirmed the urgent need for significant improvements in sanitation in Nigeria’s public parks and markets. 

    In commemoration of World Toilet Day 2024, a global observance dedicated to raising awareness about sanitation, it is time to reflect on the need for cleaner, healthier environments in our communities, especially in places where large numbers of people gather.

    World Toilet Day, commemorated annually on November 19, highlights the critical issue of global sanitation and aims to ensure that everyone, everywhere, has access to safe and clean toilets. This year’s theme, ‘Toilets – A Place for Peace’, underscores the connection between sanitation and the broader goal of peace and well-being. While it may seem like a simple issue, access to proper sanitation is a fundamental human right that remains out of reach for millions around the world, including in Nigeria. With rapid urbanization, population growth, and the increasing movement of people in and out of public spaces, the absence of adequate sanitation facilities has become an even more pressing issue.

    In Benin and Warri, overcrowded motor parks and markets often lacked basic sanitation facilities, forcing people to resort to open defecation or dispose of waste improperly. The unpleasant odours that emanated from these places were a stark reminder of the poor waste management systems in place and the lack of public toilets.

    Read Also: Nigerian children suffer poverty more than adults – FG

    In motor parks, from which millions of people travel, the absence of functioning restrooms makes the experience less enjoyable and even unhealthy. In markets, where tens of thousands of people shop and interact daily, the lack of toilets is not just a matter of convenience—it’s a matter of public health and dignity. Poor sanitation contributes to the spread of diseases such as cholera, typhoid, and dysentery, which are prevalent in many parts of Nigeria due to inadequate waste management systems.

     World Toilet Day 2024 calls on governments, organisations, and individuals to take urgent action to address the sanitation crisis. In line with this year’s theme, I’d like to say that sanitation is not just about hygiene; it’s about health, safety, and human rights. Without access to toilets, people are forced to endure the indignity of open defecation, which often leads to contamination of water sources, the spread of diseases, and, in some cases, even violence or exploitation.

    While the challenges of inadequate sanitation in public spaces are significant, practical, scalable solutions exist that can help address this issue.

    Firstly, private-public partnership (PPP). Yes, partnerships between the government and private businesses to build and maintain public toilets will jumpstart progress. These partnerships can include companies specializing in sanitation and waste management, offering their expertise and resources to ensure that toilets are clean, functional, and regularly serviced.

    Secondly, the government should provide incentives for the construction of affordable, sustainable public toilets. These toilets should be accessible to all, regardless of socio-economic status, and placed strategically in motor parks, markets, and other public spaces. The focus should be on maintaining hygiene standards, and ensuring toilets are well-kept and functional.

    Thirdly, local communities should be encouraged to take ownership of sanitation in their areas. This can include setting up volunteer groups to monitor and clean public toilets or establishing waste management campaigns to raise awareness of the importance of keeping public spaces clean. Community engagement can go a long way in changing attitudes towards sanitation and ensuring that facilities are used properly. Community Development Associations (CDAs) should come into play here.

    In addition, to complement the construction of toilets, there must be a concerted effort to improve waste management. Proper waste collection, disposal, and recycling systems ensure that public spaces remain clean. Local governments should invest in infrastructure that makes waste disposal easy and efficient, reducing the likelihood of littering and improper disposal. Cart pushers, who dump refuse indiscriminately, must be addressed here.

    Moreover, raising awareness about the importance of sanitation and the need for better facilities in public spaces is critical. The government, NGOs, and community organisations must work together here. We must consider innovative solutions such as composting toilets, bio-digesters, mobile toilets and other water-saving systems.

    Again, the theme, ‘Toilets – A Place for Peace’, reminds us that sanitation is not just about hygiene, but about providing dignity and safety to everyone.

     The time to act is now. Our motor parks, markets, and public spaces can and must be transformed into places that promote health, dignity, and peace. By prioritizing sanitation in these spaces, we can take a significant step towards addressing Nigeria’s sanitation crisis and improving the quality of life for all its citizens.

    •Eromosele, a corporate communication professional writes via: elviseroms@gmail.com

  • Lakurawa terrorists’ invasion of Nigeria

    Lakurawa terrorists’ invasion of Nigeria

    • By Mike Kebonkwu

    Another terrorists group berthing in the Northwest of Nigeria is one trouble too many. The people are already sedated with insecurity, and suffering from acute migraine from the combined onslaught from Boko Haram terrorists and bandits in the entire northern fringes. When an old woman falls twice on her way to the market, the wares in her basket can be counted. So everything should be done to delete the group with despatch.

    The entire country has become a war theatre from home grown terrorists and kidnappers. Killer herdsmen are laying waste swathe of land in the Middle Belt  disrupting  the agrarian lifestyle of the people; with Plateau, Benue and Kaduna states turning into killing fields.  “Unknown” gunmen, Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) and Eastern Security Network (ESN) have almost set up a parallel government in the Southeast, collecting taxes, declaring sit-at-home and killing the commercial and entrepreneurial spirits of Ndigbo. The South-south is not yet weaned from the siege mentality of militancy, kidnapping, blood sucking cultists, Yahoo Plus (Ritualists), and internet fraudsters.  The Southwest is smarting from marauding herders, kidnappers and epidemic of ritual killings.  Unlike the other major ethnic nationalities, the Yoruba elites have wisely reined in the Odua’s Peoples’ Congress (OPC) which started off like an ethnic militia police.

    The police is completely overwhelmed by the internal security problems and have almost become part of the problem due to corruption and lack of purposeful leadership. 

    On the other hand, the security forces have been struggling to deal with insecurity which has run a ring round the entire country with little result.  To now hear and watch some posts on the social media though not verified of a heavily armed group with the name of Lakurawa in the Northwest again, it may well be a goodbye to our dear old Nigeria on the road to the dissolution.  There is elite’s lack of consensus on how to tackle the pervasive insecurity in the country.

    The emergence of this new group is a testimonial to failing security architecture and weak political structures that are compromised. Why are individuals and ethnic militias allowed to own offensive military grade weapons? Why is the government unable to disarm these individuals and groups? The Nigerian security should never have allowed the incubation of this new group because it sends a dangerous signal of a total loss of initiative and control of our political space as a country. 

    As far as ordinary Nigerians are concerned, rightly or wrongly, dealing with the security problems in the country lies squarely on the shoulders of the military. This is the time for the Armed Forces to do a self-critique and review of its methodology from the foundation; recruitment, training and armament. The military has to resist patronage and the interpenetration of the divisive political virus into its bloodstream; remaining neutral in discharge of its constitutional duties. While interface and synergy with other security agencies should be encouraged, the line must be drawn on operational matters.  Eagles and pigeons do not flock together. The doctrine of military training is offensive in all ramifications; there should be no mix-up. You cannot deploy civilians to fight along soldiers in the same theatre; it is a bad mix in military doctrine. 

    Read Also: EFCC fires two staff over corrupt practices

    We are militarizing the psyche of the people when we create and arm civilians and baptize it, “Civilian Joint Task Force (CJTF) to operate with soldiers. 

    The Police and Civil Defence have their different roles and duties even in conflict areas, peculiar to their training. They are not trained like soldiers for offensive action.  At best, the Police and Civil Defence can take care of liberated areas and provide intelligence to the fighting force. When soldiers are deployed on the same platform fighting along CJTF, Police and Civil Defence in the same theatre, it will affect the delivery of its fire power in the face of the enemy; not to talk about discipline, command and control. By their training the Police and Civil Defence are to provide services for the civil populace and not really carrying offensive weapon as we are gradually militarizing them.

    The core of operation and fight against insecurity should be intelligence driven to locate the criminals and enemies in order to extract them by whatever means; not to dialogue, not to de-radicalize them.  That is for the clergy and human rights people. A soldier is trained to shoot and kill, and the enemies of the state and people, do not deserve any less fate.  Allowing non-state actors to collect taxes from communities, declaring sit at home and commercial kidnapping is an indication of state failure as is happening in the northern and eastern parts of the country. The government has allowed criminal elements with political connection to contests for space in the polity. 

    African brotherhood permits us to welcome kinsmen and accommodate strangers. This is not the same thing as giving sanctuaries to criminals, gangsters, invaders and foreign fighters no matter how close in blood and religion. We have tried to rationalize Boko Haram and banditry to be caused by poverty and neglect; with all due respect I beg to differ.  They are driven by politics and religious ideologies with franchise to international terrorists organizations; let us call a spade a spade!  If we fail to give the right prescription we will also miss the treatment.  With what is happening today in the security circle, Nigeria risk becoming like Somalia; you will say, God forbid! Look all around you, the signs are there; from Niger, Zamfara, Sokoto, Katsina, Kaduna, down to south-eastern states. Poverty and neglect may have made recruitment process easier; but again that is a product of failure of the state.

    Banditry and kidnapping is pure criminality caused by greed.  We should not clothe it with the politics of poverty or illiteracy. It deserves measured response not justification otherwise we will pay a heavy price as we are paying already.   We should not be talking or discussing creating ministries for criminals to rehabilitate or de-radicalize them. 

    Again, one believes that the military has the capacity and capability to deal with the criminal elements destabilizing Nigeria but has not been able to exercise its full authority due political and sectarian tendencies hitherto alien to the armed forces. The military is not trained to dialogue with criminals and terrorists; that cannot be a 21st Century model or theory of warfare.  I do not know where we are copying this from! In any case, it will also be wrong to import concept lock-stock-and-barrel due to different environmental factors and culture.  Seemingly, we are having dearth of military thinkers in our part of the world because of ethno-religious politics. 

    This is why it is shocking when some apparently knowledgeable security and military experts come to speak, you begin to doubt the integrity and honesty of their postulations.  To deal with insecurity in Nigeria, we need kinetic force, period! We should focus on carrying the battles to the criminals and terrorists and disarm them. Let us stop the media hypes and statistics of casualties inflicted on these criminals; make the country safe for people to engage in their economic activities and for farmers to go back to farm. It is not just the northern fringes; kidnappers and terrorists make it impossible for people even in Delta State to engage in farming activities.   

    There is a viral video of the new emerging group Lakurawa holding meeting somewhere in Kebbi State, not verified.  The military has come out with statements confirming the existence of the group.  If you allow this group to settle down, then it is bye-bye to Nigeria.  Those who want the government to dialogue with terrorists or defend actions of bandits and other criminal elements are collaborators or enemies of the state.  Those defending their human rights have some interest to serve; local or international.  We are always parroting human rights for criminals and terrorists when their activities appear remote to us, but when someone close to us becomes a victim we realize the beasts are just fit candidates to be neutralised. 

    The fact that these groups emerge formidable and well-armed clearly shows the failure of government agencies and institutions responsible for the security of our country; no politics intended!  How did the military grade weapons get into the hands of these elements unnoticed?  We are not just telling ourselves the truth.  The military should stay true to its role and re-calibrate to deal decisively with the security problems in the country and get rid of these foreign jihadists.  We are living in unusual times!

    •Kebonkwu Esq, an Abuja-based attorney, writes via mikekebonkwu@yahoo.com

  • Obasanjo, INEC and need for a balanced review of Nigeria’s elections

    Obasanjo, INEC and need for a balanced review of Nigeria’s elections

    •  By Ezenwa Nwagwu

    The dust from the Ondo State Governorship Election is yet to settle when former President Olusegun Obasanjo fired a salvo, calling for the sack of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu and other officials at all levels.

    The former president made the call during his address at the prestigious Chinua Achebe Leadership Forum held at Yale University in the United States, where he presented a paper titled “Leadership Failure and State Capture in Nigeria.”

    As expected, the statement by the former president has stirred backlash. However, it is my opinion that Obasanjo’s statement provides a critical opportunity to contextualize Nigeria’s electoral journey, the progress made, and the challenges that persist despite attempts to reform our processes.

    We must not miss this opportunity to remind and educate the younger generation, who had the privilege of participating in Nigeria’s elections for the first time in 2023. We must use this opportunity to remind young Nigerians where we are coming from and the progress that we have made in our elections and democracy.

    For the younger generation, it is essential to understand the context of Nigeria’s electoral history, why and how we arrived at reforms like BVAS and IReV which represent a departure from the irregularities of the past.

    This is an opportunity to remind Nigerians that in 2022, under this current leadership, INEC opened itself to scrutiny by publishing the voters register online for the first time. Many Nigerians may have forgotten what our voters’ register looks or how it is inundated with various forms of irregularities ranging from registration of minors, multiple registrations and registration of foreigners or aliens.

    In fact, Nigeria’s voters register used to contain fictitious names such as Muhammed Alli, Mike Tyson, Michael Jackson, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, to concoct victory for political parties. This was how some states “manufacture” two million votes in past elections. A feat they couldn’t achieve in 2023 due to reforms by INEC.

    While, INEC under its current leadership has come under criticism due to the functionality of the IReV portal, it is important to respectfully note that the IReV portal is an INEC initiative to improve access to election results. It may not have worked perfectly during the 2023 election, but there is no doubt that we have made progress.

    That Nigerians have a result viewing portal or that Nigerians can do simultaneous accreditation and voting is a significant lift from what we had in the past. In the past, elections lasted into midnight because people had to do accreditation, go home and come back later to vote.

    That Nigerians do not hear of people being killed on election day or ballot boxes being snatched and stuffed with ballot paper is significant progress.

    While these reforms are not perfect, they have shifted Nigeria’s elections towards greater credibility.

    Since Obasanjo’s comment coincided with the Ondo governorship election, let me provide some context into how this election is far better from what we had in the past.

    The Ondo State election that held on Saturday had 111 domestic and international accredited observer organisations. Reports from the groups acknowledged challenges like vote buying and electoral violence, while commending early opening of polls and the rapid uploading of results to the INEC Results Viewing Portal (IReV). As at 7pm on Election Day, 90% of the results were available online, a feat that demonstrates the impact of technological reforms implemented by INEC.

    To understand the strides made in Nigeria’s electoral process, and why this context of Ondo election is important, it is essential to reflect on where we started in Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999.

    A check on Wikipedia shows that during the 2003 Edo State gubernatorial election, PDP’s Lucky Igbinedion reportedly garnered 969,747 votes, while his opponents scored zero. Such blatant irregularities were characteristic of elections conducted under Obasanjo’s administration. Similarly, the 2007 general elections were marred by massive irregularities, with instances of results being announced while voting was still ongoing.

    Read Also: ICPC tracks N610b constituency, executive projects in 22 states

    It was the same Obasanjo who pressured the then INEC leadership to declare Prof Oserheimen Osunbor the winner of the 2007 governorship election won by Adams Oshiomhole.

    These were dark chapters in Nigerians electoral history, marked by lack of transparency, manipulation, and disregard for democratic principles. It was so bad that during the 2007 general election in Rivers State, election results were being declared while voting was still in progress.

    In fact, the winner of that election, President Musa Yar’Adua was so embarrassed by the outcome that he vowed to review the election. That review gave birth to the Justice Uwais committee. Interesting, the current INEC leadership had commenced the implementation of that committee report. Nine recommendations that relate to INEC from that committee have been fully implemented, especially biometric registration of voters.

    As someone who is invested in the electoral process, I’m concerned that former President Obasanjo’s critique of INEC could be considered part of a broader resistance to reforms that reduce the control of elites over electoral outcomes. The democratization of Nigeria’s elections has transferred power from political kingmakers to the people. This shift has alarmed those accustomed to manipulating the system.

    We may argue that our elections are now characterized by vote buying – an unfortunate reality of desperation by the political class. Sadly, vote buying reflects a moral and societal issue rather than an institutional failure by INEC. Nigerians must address this problem collectively rather than placing undue blame on the electoral body. Issues of electoral violence and voting buying are issues that politicians and security agencies must address.

    Imagine your child was performing poorly in school, failing nearly all their subjects. As a parent, you responded with scolding and punishments. Over time, the child began to improve, excelling in some subjects while still struggling in a few. Interestingly, the child has shown commitment to further improve in those areas where he or she is still struggling.

    I imagine that the sensible thing to do at this point would be to acknowledge and praise the areas of improvement, while perhaps hiring a tutor to help with the remaining challenges. However, continuing to berate the child and label them as dull, despite their visible efforts, would be unfair. Yes, you want your child to excel, but it’s important to balance criticism with encouragement—commending their progress while addressing areas that still need work.

    INEC, under successive leaderships, has made deliberate efforts to address the flaws of the past. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and IReV has brought significant improvements. These technologies ensure transparent voter accreditation, faster result uploads, and greater public access to election results in real time.

    As Nigerians, we must acknowledge that our elections are not yet perfect, but they have improved significantly.

    The road to credible elections is a marathon, not a sprint. It requires collaboration between INEC, political actors, civil society, and citizens. Let us celebrate the progress made while remaining committed to addressing the challenges that persist. Nigerians remember, and history will judge us all by how we uphold the principles of democracy.

    I will end by quoting former President Obasanjo in his address at the Leon Sullivan dialogue on Nigeria at the National Press Club, Washington DC, on April 29, 2010.

    The former president said: “with all due respect, if Jesus Christ could come to the world and be the chairman of INEC, any election he would conduct will be disputed.

    “Since I got here three days ago, I understand that the chairman of INEC has been asked to go on leave. People have also talked about electoral reform.

    “Quite honestly, I have said that I don’t understand in detail what this electoral reform is. One thing that we need to reform in our own society is the politician. We need to reform politicians.”

    •Nwagwu is the executive director, Peering Advocacy and Advancement Centre in Africa (PAACA).

  • Transforming sanitation in Nigeria’s public spaces

    Transforming sanitation in Nigeria’s public spaces

    • By Elvis Eromosele

    I had the opportunity to visit a number of Nigerian cities in recent weeks, from Lagos to Bayelsa, through Benin, and Warri. Although these cities provided rich cultural experiences and stunning scenery, one prevalent problem that caught my attention was the condition of public sanitation, especially in motor parks and markets. The unpleasant stench, overflowing trash, and unhygienic conditions of many of these areas confirmed the urgent need for significant improvements in sanitation in Nigeria’s public parks and markets. 

    In commemoration of World Toilet Day 2024, a global observance dedicated to raising awareness about sanitation, it is time to reflect on the need for cleaner, healthier environments in our communities, especially in places where large numbers of people gather.

    World Toilet Day, commemorated annually on November 19, highlights the critical issue of global sanitation and aims to ensure that everyone, everywhere, has access to safe and clean toilets. This year’s theme, ‘Toilets – A Place for Peace’, underscores the connection between sanitation and the broader goal of peace and well-being. While it may seem like a simple issue, access to proper sanitation is a fundamental human right that remains out of reach for millions around the world, including in Nigeria. With rapid urbanization, population growth, and the increasing movement of people in and out of public spaces, the absence of adequate sanitation facilities has become an even more pressing issue.

    In Benin and Warri, overcrowded motor parks and markets often lacked basic sanitation facilities, forcing people to resort to open defecation or dispose of waste improperly. The unpleasant odours that emanated from these places were a stark reminder of the poor waste management systems in place and the lack of public toilets.

    Read Also: EFCC fires two staff over corrupt practices

    In motor parks, from which millions of people travel, the absence of functioning restrooms makes the experience less enjoyable and even unhealthy. In markets, where tens of thousands of people shop and interact daily, the lack of toilets is not just a matter of convenience—it’s a matter of public health and dignity. Poor sanitation contributes to the spread of diseases such as cholera, typhoid, and dysentery, which are prevalent in many parts of Nigeria due to inadequate waste management systems.

     World Toilet Day 2024 calls on governments, organisations, and individuals to take urgent action to address the sanitation crisis. In line with this year’s theme, I’d like to say that sanitation is not just about hygiene; it’s about health, safety, and human rights. Without access to toilets, people are forced to endure the indignity of open defecation, which often leads to contamination of water sources, the spread of diseases, and, in some cases, even violence or exploitation.

    While the challenges of inadequate sanitation in public spaces are significant, practical, scalable solutions exist that can help address this issue.

    Firstly, private-public partnership (PPP). Yes, partnerships between the government and private businesses to build and maintain public toilets will jumpstart progress. These partnerships can include companies specializing in sanitation and waste management, offering their expertise and resources to ensure that toilets are clean, functional, and regularly serviced.

    Secondly, the government should provide incentives for the construction of affordable, sustainable public toilets. These toilets should be accessible to all, regardless of socio-economic status, and placed strategically in motor parks, markets, and other public spaces. The focus should be on maintaining hygiene standards, and ensuring toilets are well-kept and functional.

    Thirdly, local communities should be encouraged to take ownership of sanitation in their areas. This can include setting up volunteer groups to monitor and clean public toilets or establishing waste management campaigns to raise awareness of the importance of keeping public spaces clean. Community engagement can go a long way in changing attitudes towards sanitation and ensuring that facilities are used properly. Community Development Associations (CDAs) should come into play here.

    In addition, to complement the construction of toilets, there must be a concerted effort to improve waste management. Proper waste collection, disposal, and recycling systems ensure that public spaces remain clean. Local governments should invest in infrastructure that makes waste disposal easy and efficient, reducing the likelihood of littering and improper disposal. Cart pushers, who dump refuse indiscriminately, must be addressed here.

    Moreover, raising awareness about the importance of sanitation and the need for better facilities in public spaces is critical. The government, NGOs, and community organisations must work together here. We must consider innovative solutions such as composting toilets, bio-digesters, mobile toilets and other water-saving systems.

    Again, the theme, ‘Toilets – A Place for Peace’, reminds us that sanitation is not just about hygiene, but about providing dignity and safety to everyone.

     The time to act is now. Our motor parks, markets, and public spaces can and must be transformed into places that promote health, dignity, and peace. By prioritizing sanitation in these spaces, we can take a significant step towards addressing Nigeria’s sanitation crisis and improving the quality of life for all its citizens.

    •Eromosele, a corporate communication professional writes via: elviseroms@gmail.com

  • Gowon/Ojukwu: Who was wrong?

    Gowon/Ojukwu: Who was wrong?

    Ray Ekpu

    A former Nigeria Head of State General Yakubu Gowon has just clocked 90 years. His admission into the nonagenarian club has brought to the fore his role in Nigerian affairs especially his role in the Biafran war aka Nigerian civil war: A prominent Igbo politician and presidential candidate of the Labour Party (LP) had the decency to congratulate Gowon. Some of his followers have demonized him for his charm offensive. They probably think that since Gowon was at the other end of the Biafran war in which many Igbos and other Easterners died, he deserves no goodwill message from Peter Obi who has now become the most prominent Igbo politician in our polity.

    But Peter Obi is a politician who needs the goodwill of Nigerians from all parts of the country to make an electoral impact in future presidential elections. If he despises Gowon because of the civil war, those who admire Gowon for conducting the war in a humane manner may also despise him when he needs their votes. Besides, behaving in a statesmanly manner puts Obi in the good books of those who believe in propriety, who believe that our past, particularly our bad past, must not be allowed to haunt us forever.

    In any case, the man at the other end of the war, Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu was treated by Obi very decently and respectfully. When Ojukwu was sick in 2011, Obi who was the governor of Anambra State then arranged for Ojukwu to be treated in a hospital in London. He visited Ojukwu there several times. His wife Margaret was with Ojukwu’s wife, Bianca at his bedside in London throughout his ailing days. Ojukwu, too, had supported Obi when he had political problems in his party the All Progressive Grand Alliance (APGA). Ojukwu went to Onitsha to campaign for Obi. He said: “Why I came is for it to be clear to everybody that Igboland is not a bush but a land owned by somebody. The owners of Igboland are Igbo. What I want everybody to know today is that Igboland is Igboland and that Igbos agreed that their leader is Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu. All the Igbos have agreed that wherever I go they will go. What I am telling you is that I have come out again so that I will tell you where I am going.” With Ojukwu’s support, Obi won the election. But Obi had since done his political arithmetic and come to the inescapable conclusion that APGA does not have the national spread that he needs if he wants to play at the national level. He had since abandoned APGA for PDP and also abandoned PDP for Labour Party (LP) where he has now pitched his tent.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Nigeria lose 2-1 to Rwanda

    But it is the height of partisanship to condemn Gowon only for the civil war. Neither Gowon nor Ojukwu can be free from blame on the civil war. Every war is avoidable if the leaders do not think that pacifism is a disguise for cowardice. It is not. The only alternative to co-existence is co-destruction.

    Yes, we had a coup on January 15, 1966 that took the lives of some politicians from some parts of the country especially the north and set the nation on edge. Yes, on May 29, 1966 a number of Eastern Nigerians, most of them Igbos, were killed in the north. As the body bags arrived in the Eastern Region, Ojukwu, the military governor of Eastern Region described the incident as pogrom. Yes, on July 29, 1966 another coup occurred which was called revenge coup. This coup took the lives of several people from the Eastern Region including that of the Head of State Major General J.T.U Aguiyi Ironsi. These three killing scenarios compounded the ethnic and political problems of Nigeria, problems that needed concessions rather than confrontations for solutions to be arrived at. Gowon and Ojukwu carried themselves to Aburi in Ghana in January 1967 and under the leadership of Ghana’s Head of State, General Joseph Ankrah, they sought for a way out of the imbroglio. They arrived at a series of decisions that Nigerians thought were the magic formula for our unity and co-existence. On arriving back in Nigeria, some federal civil servants thought that Gowon had given away too much to Ojukwu. Ojukwu and his advisers insisted on the full implementation of the Aburi accord. The slogan “on Aburi we stand” was born.

     For six months, the country was drifting to the edge of the precipice. Tension ran high. You could cut it with a knife. On May 27, 1967, Gowon came up with a master stroke. He announced a 12-state structure for the country, equally divided between the north and the south. That was Gowon’s way of solving the problem of the minorities in the South who had been campaigning for Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers States (COR) without success. That creation definitely complicated for Ojukwu the problem of unity in the region. However, on May 30, 1967 Ojukwu declared the Eastern Region an independent country and named it the Republic of Biafra. On July 6, 1967 the guns boomed from Ogoja in present day Cross River State. A civil war had begun.

    Did Ojukwu expect to get away with the declaration of secession? He was too smart to think so. My belief is that he thought he would get enough global support because of oil in the region. He got recognition from five countries namely; Tanzania, Gabon, Ivory Coast, Zambia and Haiti. None of them was a major power so their support meant next to nothing for Biafra or Ojukwu.

    It was also surprising that Ojukwu, a military officer who knew the military strength of Nigeria chose to engage in such a frivolous, volatile gamble. Here are the facts: Major Abubakar A. Atofaran had in his work titled, “The Nigerian Civil War Causes, Strategies and Lessons Learnt” had listed the major military installations in Nigeria before the 1966 coup. In Northern Nigeria there were 14 military institutions namely 3rd battalion, 15th battalion, 1 Field Battery, 1 Field Squadron, 88 Transport Regiment, Nigeria Defence Academy, Ordinance Depot, 44 Military Hospital, Nigeria Military Training College, Recon Squadron & Regiment, Nigerian Air Force, Ammunitions Factory, Recruit Training Depot and Nigerian Military School. All of these facilities were located in Kaduna except three that were located in Zaria and Kano. There were three facilities located in Western Nigeria. These were 4th Battalion, 2 Field Battery (Arty), 2 Room Squadron. Two of these were located in Abeokuta and one in Ibadan.

    In Eastern Nigeria there was only one, yes one, the 1st Battalion which was located in Enugu. With such a huge difference between what was in the Eastern Region and what was in the other two regions, why did Ojukwu make the Eastern Region a war target? Was he tempted or lured by the fact that there were no demonstrations or protests in the Eastern Region against the secession?

    Again, my theory is that Ojukwu thought that some foreign powers would probably back Biafra because of the oil in the region. Ojukwu, a man who was a demagogue and a rhetorician even said that “even the grass would fight.” I lived in the Eastern Region throughout the war; I did not see the grass fight. It was the soldiers on both sides of the war that killed the grass as they marched through the bushes with their big boots.

    Neither Ojukwu nor Gowon was or is a hero. War is a coward’s way of escaping from the problem of acquiring peace. In war soldiers kill soldiers but in every war they kill more civilians, directly or indirectly. So the truth is that in the long run all wars are lost; they bring only losers, no winners. In the Nigerian civil war Biafra surrendered to Nigeria but Nigeria was not a winner. The problems of that war are still with us today. Biafra has been resurrected by young people who have no idea about the monstrosity of a war. So whether you choose to queue up behind Gowon or Ojukwu simply bear in mind that none of them is a hero of the Nigerian project because they both failed to avoid war. They both contributed to the dire consequences of that avoidable war in which over one million lives were lost and unquantifiable property destroyed.

  • Badenoch’s identity blues

    Badenoch’s identity blues

    Meursault in Albert Camus’ 1942 novel, ‘The Outsider’, is an anti-hero who lives in acute anomie towards his socio-cultural milieu. He is supremely detached at the death of his mother, as indicated in the famous opening lines of the novel’s first-person narration: “Mother died today. Or maybe it was yesterday, I don’t know.” He intensifies his apathy at the mother’s funeral where he sits through the vigil without showing any outward sign of distress, unlike copious expressions of grief by community members all around him. Meursault’s detachment continues through all of his relationships, both platonic and romantic, and provides a reference point for his sentencing to death by guillotine when tried for his inadvertent killing of a friend’s assailant named ‘the Arab’ in the novel.

    Newly-elected leader of opposition Conservative Party in the United Kingdom, Kemi Badenoch, is like Camus’ anti-hero Nigeria where she has her ancestral roots, but towards which she exhibits acute anomie. Only that her detachment isn’t existential like Meursault’s because she harbors an inversely intense affectation for her adopted country, the UK. But give it to her: she’s made good for herself in British politics. She is the first Black woman to lead a major political party in that country and, at 44 years of age, she is only an election away from the possibility of becoming the prime minister. She surmounted historical barriers of sexism and racial bias that she ironically won’t acknowledge to attain that height, and she represents the right wing of the right-of-the-centre Tory party. She has indeed come a long way, only that some things don’t change no matter what. Hence, she remains a leading British politician with undeniable African roots.

    Badenoch was elected on 2nd November to replace former Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who stepped down from the party helm upon leading Tories to their worst defeat in modern history in elections last July that produced Keir Starmer of the Labour Party as prime minister. She emerged the new Conservative Party leader by winning 57 percent of members’ votes to defeat fellow right-wing candidate and former immigration minister, Robert Jenrick. But she attained that feat, many would argue, by not just repudiating her nativity but also actively denigrating it.

    A strong advocate of the British system as merit-based, Badenoch once said she preferred not to focus on her race and would like the colour of her skin to be of no more significance than the colour of her hair or eyes. At the Conservative Party conference in October 2023, she said she often told her children that Britain is the “best country in the world to be Black because the country sees people, not labels.” She opposes teaching in UK schools of critical race theory – an academic concept based on the premise that racial bias is ingrained in Western civilisation.

    The circumstance of Badenoch’s early years underpinned her identity crisis. Born Olukemi Adegoke in London in 1980 to well-to-do Nigerian parents (a doctor and an academic), she had her childhood and early education in Nigeria and at age 16 returned to the UK amidst harsh economic conditions that apparently informed her hubristic narrative of this country. “I grew up somewhere where the lights didn’t come on, where we ran out of fuel frequently despite being an oil-producing country,” she told the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) recently. “I don’t take what we have in this country for granted. I meet a lot of people who assume that things are good here because they are and always will be. They don’t realise just how much work and sacrifice was required in order to get that,” she added.

    Read Also; APC chieftain, ex-lawmaker, others strategise to unseat Adeleke in 2026

    In 2012, the software engineer-turned politician married a banker, Hamish Badenoch, with whom she has three children. She is no newcomer to commanding heights of British politics, having held a series of government positions in the 2019-2022 administration of Prime Minister Boris Johnson before joining a mass exodus of ministers in July 2022 over ethics scandals that forced the premier to resign. Badenoch ran to succeed Johnson and failed, but her profile was boosted in the process. She got appointed as trade secretary under the administration of Prime Minister Liz Truss, whose 49-day tenure ranked among the shortest in UK premiership; and she served as business secretary under Sunak’s administration. The purge of Tories from the House of Commons in the July poll that saw Labour Party winning a huge majority and Conservatives culled to 121 lawmakers in the 650-seat parliament spared Badenoch, who held onto her seat as MP for North West Essex. Her political career that began with being elected to the London Assembly in 2015  has seen her retain her membership of the Commons since 2017.

    But Badenoch plies her career in British politics on two major planks: running the gauntlet as modern-day defender of the colonial empire and denigrating all links that detract from her Britishness, including her ancestral roots. She once argued it is fallacious for developing countries to always blame their underdevelopment on British colonialism. “There are many countries that want to use guilt to try and exploit the UK: they ask for reparation. I saw it as a trade minister. It is not a culture war,” she said, adding: “We need to make sure we put this country first… There are many things the British empire got wrong, but there are many amazing things the British empire also did. We need to be honest about it and stop pretending that it was all bad. The British empire ended slavery, the Atlantic slave trade. We need to talk about that more.”

    Badenoch dismissed demands by formerly colonised countries for reparations from colonial powers as a “scam” because it would be wrong, in her view, to attribute the UK’s wealth and economic success to its colonial history or racial privilege. Rather, she argued, it was “the Glorious Revolution of 1688,” leading to the development of UK’s political system, that should be credited for providing the economic certainty that paved the way for the Industrial Revolution. Speaking at an international conference in London last April, she said: “It matters, because if people genuinely believe that the UK only grew and developed into an advanced economy because of exploitation and oppression, then the solutions they will devise will make our growth and productivity problem even worse. It matters in other countries too, because if developing nations do not understand how the West became rich, they cannot follow in its footsteps. And it matters when, as your trade secretary, I go to the World Trade Organisation conference negotiating on the UK’s behalf, and some of my counterparts spend the entire time in meetings talking about colonialism, blame the West for their economic difficulties and make demands that would make all of us – not just in this country, but around the world – poorer.”

    Her nationalist hubris is such that she is perceived as loving the colonial empire more than the empire trustees. Following her victory in the party leadership race, British media cited Conservative shadow culture secretary, Julia Lopez, saying Badenoch would likely be “deeply sceptical” of dropping the word “empire” from British honours. The Mail on Sunday had earlier reported that royal officials were considering offering those recognised with an OBE (Order of the British Empire) the option of receiving an Order of British Excellence instead. Another option, the Order of Elizabeth, was also proposed in the change that would have to be signed off on by the government. Asked by Sky News what the newly-elected Conservative leader would think, Lopez said she thinks Badenoch would be against it. “My gut feeling is that she would be deeply sceptical towards that. Because there’s an implication that the empire is something that is a source of shame. And I don’t think that she’s ever thought that it is,” Lopez told the programme anchor.

    Now, we know that Badenoch pointedly spurned overtures to identify with her ancestral roots. Chairperson of Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM), Abike Dabiri-Erewa, recently said on a Channels Television programme that she ignored overtures made to her, adding: “We don’t force people to accept to be Nigerian.” But neither is the anti-racism community in Britain excited by Badenoch’s feat. They argue that she’s a  tool in the hands of racist Britain to gaslight their concerns by conveying racism without having to deal with the baggage of being labelled racist, since the rhetoric has been outsourced to a Black person.

    Well, Lady Badenoch is riding high in British politics and having fun. Lucky her! But she should be wary of being on the wrong side of history, because there is no alchemy of circumstance that can change the identity she seems keen to wish away.

    •Please join me on kayodeidowu.blogspot.be for conversation 

  • Palestinian statehood, defining liminal moment of our time

    Palestinian statehood, defining liminal moment of our time

    • By Yusuf Maitama Tuggar

    A liminal moment is a time of realization that the way things are is no longer sustainable, yet the way thing will become is yet to happen. In other words, a liminal moment is a period of transition. The quest of Palestinians for statehood and the right to exist is going through a transition period in which the world is awakening to the fact that Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank and the institutionalised system of segregation used to administer the territories is neither tenable nor sustainable.

    Although the violence and carnage being meted out to the Palestinians appears at first glance to strengthen the hands of the Israeli government and provides opportunity for settlers to expand territorial ambitions, a closer examination reveals it to be a pyrrhic victory. The resolve of the innocent civilians on the receiving end is only getting stronger, determined to avert another Nakba, the term referring to the exodus that followed the 1948 partitioning that created the state of Israel. Many Palestinians lost their homes in the event, never to return again. Families still clutch on to the keys of their houses as mementos of a mistake passed down from one generation to another that must never be repeated again. The struggle for Palestinian statehood is the liminal moment of our time.

    When it comes to standing up against injustice and racial discrimination, Nigeria has maintained an admirable consistency. We deployed resources and energy over three decades towards the liberation of Angola, Mozambique, Zimbabwe, Namibia and Apartheid South Africa. Nigeria follows the dictum of international relations guru, Hans Morgenthau of making ethical foreign policy behaviour an integral part of its state objective.

    President Bola Tinubu continued this tradition when he spoke out equably for an end to the violence in Palestine and Lebanon during the Arab-OIC Extraordinary Summit in Riyadh on November 11, calling for the actual implementation of the two-state solution that has been the subject of several UN Resolutions, dating back to Resolutions 242 and 338 of 1967. President Tinubu’s intervention was considered by other countries in attendance as providing the missing mechanism when he suggested the creation of a secretariat to monitor implementation of the Summit’s resolutions and provide regular reports to the leadership, until peace is achieved. This was unanimously adopted as a late addition to the draft resolution and hailed as a departure from previous ones that lacked implementation mechanisms.

    President Tinubu has remained deeply concerned by the human suffering in Gaza, especially of children and women. For this reason, Nigeria worked with Red Cross officials and employed its diplomatic channels to facilitate the evacuation of sick and injured children to Egypt, UAE and Jordan. Today three-year-old Alaa Madhon, nine-month-old Salma Chagu of Khan Yunus, another three-month-old baby Alaa and baby Suhail are all alive with the help of Nigeria’s back channel diplomatic efforts. In his speech, President Tinubu reminded the world that the conflict did not begin on October 7, contrary to media reporting that often gives the impression that the Hamas attack and kidnapping of civilians was the casus belli that justified Israeli aggression and discounting the daily aggression meted out to Palestinians living under the apartheid system in Gaza and the West Bank.  He   candidly challenged leaders by stating it was not enough to issue empty condemnations and although all countries in a rules-based international order had the right to self-defence, they had to take into account the proportionality of violence they applied, especially on innocent civilians.

    Read Also; APC chieftain, ex-lawmaker, others strategise to unseat Adeleke in 2026

    President Tinubu pointed out that an entire civilian population cannot be dismissed as collateral, in meting out revenge for October 7. The contradiction of justifying the Israeli aggression against innocent civilians within the context of a rules-based international law and order is that the whole point of international law is to rule out revenge. Justice is antithetical to revenge.

    Those who attempt to give religious colouration to standing up for what is right and just betray a lack of understanding of the Palestinian quest for statehood. Some of the most prominent figures in that struggle have been Christians; academic Edward Said, PLFP founder, George Habash and political activist Hanan Ashrawi are among the recognisable names. And within the state of Israel exist Arabs that are Muslim, Christian and Druze. The Republic of South Africa that instituted a genocide case against Israel in the International Court of Justice is 82% Christian. The nationhood journey of South Africa and the struggle against apartheid make it the most morally appropriate nation to file such a case against Israel where a similar apartheid system confines over 2.2 million people in an open-air prison called Gaza. Like South African Bantustans or homelands, those living within require passes to move around, their fundamental human rights restricted. So South Africans can identify more easily with the plight of the Palestinians as non-citizens on their own land.

    But Nigeria can also identify with such a system and share the pain because of our own journey to nationhood. Apartheid was simply an extreme form of indirect rule. The system designed by Lord Lugard and Jan Smuts to answer the native question was to segregate a black majority, creating Sabon Garis and Zangos that restricted movement and mingling among the owners of the land. Black people were not allowed to venture into the Government Reservation Areas (GRAs) of Ikoyi in Lagos and Nasarawa in Kano else one would be arrested for “wandering”. Late Ibrahim Gusau (who later became a minister in the first republic) was punished by the colonial authorities for being found in Sabon Gari, with a copy of the West African Pilot, published by anti-colonial agitator Nnamdi Azikiwe.

    It was therefore not surprising that after gaining independence, Nigeria’s foreign policy maintained a proclivity for standing up against discrimination and injustice. Apart from supporting liberation movements to free others from the colonial choke hold, Nigeria refused to sell oil to Apartheid South Africa and penalised businesses that dealt with racist regimes on the continent.

    The Balewa government lobbied for the expulsion of South Africa from the Commonwealth and set up the National Committee Against Apartheid across the country, the Gowon government helped strengthen the United Nations Committee Against Apartheid and pushed for recognition of Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde as independent states, the Murtala/Obasanjo administration created the Southern Africa Relief Fund (SAFR) or Mandela tax as it was popularly known, and the Shagari government engineered the Lancaster House Conference that paved the way for Zimbabwe’s independence. President Tinubu continues this noble tradition by standing up for the actualisation of the two-state solution.

    Nigeria’s diversity gives it an advantage on the world stage in consensus building through the hard work of conversation and virtues of principled compromise. Though this may be taken for granted at home because it comes naturally to us, it remains an uncommon trait abroad much admired by others. It is a gift that we must continue to tap into in our share political project both at home and abroad.

    •Tuggar is Minister of Foreign Affairs

  • On Obasanjo and the other forgetful African misrulers

    On Obasanjo and the other forgetful African misrulers

    • By Femi Akomolafe

    (A note on African leaders who became wise ONLY after leaving office!)

    I was going to write an article about former President Olusegun Obasanjo and his constant criticism of Nigeria and African mis-rulers.

    However, I got seriously carried away by some important geopolitical developments that required attention.

    I will now return to them after paying my homage to global issues.

    According to a report in the Punch Newspaper, Nigeria’s three-time leader, General Olusegun Obasanjo, did what he does best: criticized current Nigerian/African misrulers.

    Excerpts: “Where I was born should not be the enemy of my ‘Nigerianess.’ I will be increasing by being a Nigerian rather than being a member of the Republic of Oodua.

    “I am undoubtedly proud to be a Yoruba but my being a Nigerian should not be the enemy of my being a Yoruba…we must get the best man for the job, it doesn’t matter where he comes from. We must get our acts together.”

    The former President lamented Nigeria’s current situation, saying the country had disappointed the black race and the world at large.

    The African continent, the black race and the entire world are looking up unto us. When we got our Independence, what they were calling us was giant in the sun but is that the situation today?

    We have disappointed ourselves, we have disappointed the black race, Africa and the world at large…

    He noted that he would forever remain a Pan-Africanist, a patriotic and nationalistic Nigerian and a proud black man from the black race…” – https://punchng.com/im-better-as.a.nigerian-than.in.oodua.republic.says.obasanjo/

    Hmmm.

    While we do not begrudge the Ota Farmer and Chief his right to voice his opinions on national, continental, or global issues, it is important to point out to OBJ that the conditions he vociferates passionately against today in Nigeria would not have existed were he to have done the correct things when, with little effort on his part, fate twice handed him the power to rule Nigeria.

    For those of us not conversant with Nigeria’s political history or who were not old enough to remember Obasanjo’s rules, first as a cruel and brutal dictator and secondly as a civilian president who was essentially (s)elected to placate his Yoruba people, who were wronged by the annulment of the election of MKO Abiola in the 1993 elections, we will shed some light and question Obasanjo’s sanctimonious posturing.

    Please do not get me wrong. I respect my elders and do my best not to allow my professional writing to be motivated by personal emotions or malice.

    As a matter of record, in 2007, I wrote an article, “Obasanjo’s Agonistes,” to offer support when the Ota Chief was unduly hammered in the media. Link: https://alaye.biz/obasanjo-agonistes-2/

    But that should not stop us from calling on OBJ to have some moment of self-reflection before he continues to pontificate loudly!

    His self-reverential is just too disgusting.

    OBJ epitomizes the mendacity of African leaders who appear to acquire oracular wisdom ONLY after they leave office.

    As mentioned supra, Obasanjo twice had the opportunity to turn Nigeria around, first as a military dictator and second as a two-term Democratic president. History will judge him rather harshly for failing to build the Nigeria of his dreams when he had the chance(s).

    We know what his contemporaries in South Korea did and what the Chinese did.

    Obasanjo claimed to have spent US$16 billion on Nigeria’s electricity sector. Yet, there was nothing to show for it as the country struggled to generate and distribute enough electricity for citizens and industries.

    Read Also: Obasanjo to Aiyedatiwa: I wish you well

    Today, he pontificates loudly and appears to have all the answers to Nigeria, Africa, and global problems.

    While OBJ’s critique of African leadership failures, ranging from corruption to authoritarianism, might resonate widely, especially with those who know little about Nigeria or Africa, his legacy should invite scrutiny.

    Let us examine four main themes of Obasanjo’s incessant criticism:

    1. Corruption: While Obasanjo repeatedly points to corruption as a fundamental problem in African leadership, we should not forget that similar allegations plagued his administration.

    To those old enough to remember his first rule, irony does not even describe Obasanjo’s current anti-corruption posturing.

    When he talks about corruption, did OBJ develop amnesia over the International Telephone & Telegraph (ITT) scandal, which his kinsman, the legendary Fela, immortalized in the song “International Thief Thief?” “ITT,” with allegations of Obasanjo’s partnership with ITT, allegedly included massive kickbacks on contracts that left Nigeria in debt but without significant telecom infrastructure development.

    As a civilian president from 1999 to 2007, Obasanjo was implicated in the Halliburton and Siemens bribery scandals. These companies allegedly paid Nigerian government officials millions of dollars in bribes to secure lucrative contracts.

    The most significant corruption scandal during Obasanjo’s presidency involved his vice president, Atiku Abubakar, who was implicated in several corruption cases, including allegations of diverting public funds and using government resources for personal gain.

    Did Chief Obasanjo forget that he was accused of using the anti-corruption agencies as a political tool to silence opposition rather than a genuine effort to root out graft?

    One of Obasanjo’s administration’s most glaring failures was the mismanagement of funds allocated to the power sector. Despite reportedly spending over $16 billion to improve Nigeria’s electricity infrastructure, there were few results. The power supply remained unreliable, and many Nigerians continued to experience regular blackouts.

    Maybe the Ota Chief should tell the world what he spent $16 billion of Nigeria’s money on before he mounts the rostrum in self-righteous condemnation of corruption.

    2. Obasanjo’s accusation of African leaders’ abuse of human rights

    Blessed are those with short selective memory!

    Human rights violations were constant features of Obasanjo’s administration, both as a military dictator and as an elected president. Accusations of abuse of power and heavy-handed tactics against dissenters characterized his rules.

    Does OBJ need reminding about the “Ali Must Go,’ student riots

    Did OBJ forget about the Odi massacre in 1999 and the Zaki Biam massacre in 2001? In Odi, a town in Bayelsa State, a military operation was ordered in response to the killing of police officers by militants. The military action led to significant civilian casualties and widespread destruction. Similarly, in Zaki Biam, Benue State, an army operation in response to local violence resulted in deaths and widespread displacement. Human rights organizations widely condemned these incidents, highlighting Obasanjo’s willingness to use force rather than dialogue.

    Chief Obasanjo should not forget that his government was accused of using state institutions to suppress opposition and of using the EFCC, ostensibly created to fight corruption, against his political opponents.

    3. Reluctance to Relinquish Power

    When Chief Obasanjo berate African leaders for attempting to cling to power

    did he forget that one of the most contentious episodes of his presidency was his attempt to secure a third term?

    Ha.

    This is interesting because Obasanjo attempted to elongate his terms, as attested by this claim by a person in the known. “Former Senate President Adolphus Wabara has revealed that he rejected the sum of N250 million to support the third-term agenda during former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s administration.

    In an excerpt from the YouTube interview series “Untold Stories with Adesuwa,” released on Monday, when asked about the truthfulness of this assertion, he said, “That’s very correct.” https://www.vanguardngr.com/2024/07/why-i-turned-down-n250-million-for-third-term-agenda-wabara/

    4. Economic Mismanagement: Another of Obasanjo’s criticisms is often the economic challenges Africa faces, citing poor decisions and lack of accountability.

    As I argued in the article “Obasanjo Agonistes,” referred to above, while there is no denying the fact that OBJ performed better than previous leaders, his achievements were often overshadowed by other economic missteps and unfulfilled promises.

    He should not be under the illusion that under him, Nigeria was one paradisical bliss.

    To Round it all up.

    Obasanjo’s complex legacy in Nigerian politics includes both achievements and significant shortcomings. Chief Obasanjo undoubtedly contributed majorly to Nigeria’s development.

    Our intention is not to deny him his earned kudos, but he needs to be reminded that his administration was plagued by many of the same issues he now criticizes.

    His attempts to consolidate power, his administration’s uneven approach to anti-corruption, and his mixed record on human rights undermine his credibility as a critic of Nigeria’s present challenges.

    How can one forget that it was the Obasanjo’s regime that sent troops to burn Fela’s shrine and set up the kangaroo court that came up with the nebulous verdict that “Unknown Soldiers” performed the perfidy?

    ©️ Fẹ́mi Akọ́mọláfẹ́

    (Farmer, Writer, Published Author, and Social Commentator.T)