Category: Comments

  • Not yet Madam President

    Not yet Madam President

    Like Harris, like Clinton. Eight years ago, we had thought America was set to have its first female president in Hilary Clinton. But Donald J Trump stopped her. On Tuesday, the hope of Kamala Harris, 59, breaking the record to emerge the first woman to become President of the United States of America was also checkmated by Trump. It’s unsure what lies ahead for the daughter of two immigrants in segregated California.

    Like Hillary Clinton, Harris smelled the pudding but couldn’t taste it. Like Clinton, Harris has what it takes to lead America. Her story is the sort legends are made of.

    Harris, the author of ‘The Truths We Hold’, is unconventional. She is the eldest daughter of Shyamala Gopalan Harris, a single mother, a disciplinarian, a breast cancer researcher originally from India who had her at 26 and exerted so much influence on her. Her mother came to America at the age of 19 for better education. Her parents were together until she turned five. From then on, her economist father, Donald Jasper Harris, originally from Jamaica, became a scarce figure. She believes her parents’ marriage would have survived had they been more emotionally matured. Donald was Shyamala’s first boyfriend and husband. The divorce led to a contentious custody battle, which Shyamala eventually won but Donald got the right to see them for alternating weekends for sixty days in summer, and he used the opportunity to take them to Jamaica to meet his family.

    Read Also: IGP orders police officers to wear black bands over Lagbaja’s death

    But, till date, Donald remains just a footnote to Kamala and he hardly features in her discussion about growing up. She is her mother’s daughter. And despite losing her mother in 2009, Shyamala remains in her daughter’s life, and Kamala is said to always share nuggets from the deceased while the one who is alive is dead to her world.

    In her official biography during her time as California’s Attorney-General, she simply described herself as “the daughter of Dr. Shyamala Gopalan, a Tamilian breast cancer specialist who travelled to the United States from Chennai, India, to pursue her graduate studies at UC Berkeley”.

    As a 29-year-old, she began a romantic relationship with Willie Brown, one-time Speaker of the California Assembly and the state’s most powerful man who proudly called himself the “Ayatollah of the Assembly”.

    With her inability to transform from the first female vice president to the first female president, it’s unlikely she will have another chance at leading the world’s greatest nation.

  • Akpuru-Aja: Tribute to a teacher par excellence

    Akpuru-Aja: Tribute to a teacher par excellence

    • By Jasper Uche

    The recently celebrated World Teachers’ Day afforded me the opportunity to reminisce about the fallen intellectual colossus, late Professor Aja Akpuru-Aja, the Ebonyi State-born international scholar who will be sorely missed for his “grand, grandiose and grandiloquent” footprints and social capital.

    I started hearing of him before I gained admission for my first degree at Abia State University, Uturu, in December 1997. He was admired beyond his department. His influence pervaded the entire campus landscape. His people skills, language power, friendly disposition, and unique way of teaching, endeared him to virtually all and sundry. He loomed larger than life. I got hugely inspired by a letter of commendation to him, personally endorsed by the then incumbent US president, Bill Clinton, on account of his book, ‘United States Presidential Personalities and Power of Persuasion in Foreign Policy.’

    Aja’s routine lectures were held at the university auditorium because of the large number of students (including those who were from other departments) that turned up to pick his brain. Students looked up to his masterful interventions and robust dissection of public-interest issues during the University Public Lecture Series.  Indeed, Aja’s charisma as a political scientist was palpable.

    His academic trajectory was capped with a doctorate in International Relations from the University of Port-Harcourt. During his doctoral studies, his shining brilliance earned him a stint as a non-permanent teaching staff in the Department of Political Science. He was always fond of his PhD supervisor, late Professor Olatunde J.B. Ojo.  It was through Aja’s eulogies that I developed interest in the works of neo-Marxist scholars like Claude Ake, Julius Ihonvbere, Eme Ekekwe, Daniel Offiong, Bode Onimode, among others. He linked me up with Prof. Bola Akinterinwa (a world-class international relations scholar) during my postgraduate research, and encouraged me to become an Associate Fellow of Nigeria Institute of International Affairs (NIIA), Lagos. Until his death, Aja was a professor of International Relations & Strategic Studies at Abia State University, Uturu.

    His five-year appointment as a Directing Staff in the prestigious National Institute for Peace & Strategic Studies (NIPSS) Kuru, Plateau State, gave me joy.  I visited Kuru for the first time on his invitation. He was at various times a visiting scholar at the Nigeria Defence Academy, Kaduna; Nigeria Defence College, Abuja; Foreign Service Academy; and Nigeria Institute for Security Studies, Bwari, Abuja. His books are highly resourceful in the defence, security and intelligence formations. He was a PhD external examiner to numerous universities.

    My friendship with him was nurtured when I became Students Union Government (SUG) president of ABSU in 2000 and it remained till his death. Hence, his death is a big personal loss to me. Prof. Aja was my number one academic inspirer. He was a mentor, a senior friend and a life coach.  During my lonely travails on account of students’ unionism, he made sure that I didn’t have emotional trauma. He resonated hope in me with appropriate soothing words. His guidance was full of tough love.

    During my stint as a local government chairman in my state, he invited me over to his village in Okposi, Ebonyi State. I slept in his guest house. My driver and the police orderly attached to me were also accommodated and lavishly entertained. That night, we nearly brought down the roof of his expansive living room with our debates and analysis of local and international politics. He was always willing to teach and impart knowledge. In fact, anyone around him must imbibe a lifestyle of security consciousness and strategic line of thought in all issues.

    Aja was a man with a large heart. I acquired some humane values through him.  I co-authored my first three academic articles with him. He exposed me to audiences I dreaded. The most significant of such outings was when in 2008, he instructed me to prepare and deliver a paper on his behalf at a workshop on ‘Conflict Resolution’ held at Ladi Kwali Hall, Sheraton Hotel, Abuja, now Abuja Continental Hotel. Before I returned to the Southeast, the organizers had called him and spoke about me in glowing terms. He was proud of me and I was humbled by the high level of confidence in me as a budding scholar.

    Read Also: Freeze Edo accounts, lawyers tell EFCC, Police

    It was his wish to be my postgraduate degrees supervisor but I preferred do the programmes at one of the first generation universities in Nigeria (UNN) since my parents couldn’t afford overseas education. He tried in vain to convince me to run the programmes at ABSU. He didn’t like my fixation for UNN.  But I was clear about what I wanted. However, he kept a tab on my academic forays. After my PhD at UNN in 2015, he persuaded me to join the teaching staff in the department of political science of ABSU, so that, according to him, I would be a role model to the students. I obliged. My application was expressly approved by the then Vice Chancellor – Prof. Uche Ikonne.

    After a year and three months, I embraced the opportunity to join the teaching staff at UNN. But Aja protested against it, for two reasons. One, his thinking was that I would grow faster and become more relevant at ABSU, since I am from Abia State. Two, he believed that my political adversaries could latch on it to blackmail me. I humbly told him that I had personal reasons for leaving, and today, it has remained one of my best decisions.

    He couldn’t attend my book launch in Enugu in 2021 but he found time to read the complimentary copy and personally visited with a cheque in support of the academic stride. When I informed him that I was nominated for deputy governorship position by PDP in Abia State in the 2023 general elections, he wished me well and advised that I prioritize my personal safety and security. That was vintage Aja!

    Indeed, the country has lost a consummate humanist, a teacher of teachers, and an unassailable authority in strategic studies..

     •Dr. Uche wrote in from Abuja

  • The road not seen

    The road not seen

    By Iboro Otongaran

    The title of this intervention is a tribute to a poem that performs for me a therapy every time I read it—and I have read it countless times, each instance with undiminished ecstasy.

    The conversation on the road to the development of Akwa Ibom State has come alive again on the heels of the ground-breaking ceremony for the construction on Victoria Island, Lagos, of an 18-storey high riser brand named Ibom Towers. The state governor, Pastor Umo Eno, initially stoked interest in the matter about two months ago in a gush of project intentions underscoring the policy goal of his administration. Governor Eno had announced that he would build an artificial lake in Uyo, develop deluxe estates for government big shots, roll out a new set of housing for heads of local councils, build a three-star hotel in Abuja and cap off the extravaganza with an 18-storey luxury skyscraper in Lagos to be known as Ibom Towers.

    Announcement of the project intentions was followed by an apparently orchestrated and frenetic defence of government priorities, particularly the 18-storey tower, the three-star hotel and the artificial lake as a means to diversification of revenue sources for the state. The defence attracted a somewhat muted pushback, probably because those with a contrary view on the government’s project to-do list did not think that what government announced was anything more than kite-flying. The intentions were so inconsistent with the development needs of the state that only a few would actually have thought that the government would follow through with them.  It also seems the opposition was like, well, the defence is fine. Whatever can bring more money into the till with which government could provide services to the people would always be welcomed.

    Though they didn’t speak out volubly, a lot of people, I imagine, must have demurred on and concluded that the building of an artificial lake in a riverine state as a pathway to revenue mobilisation and diversification rings weird, however one looks at it. The pitch from the artificial lake apologists inviting those who differ to savour the beauty of artificial lakes in Dubai misses the point. Dubai is in a dessert. The Emirati leaders, by focus and right priority, gave to their country what God did not give them, a direct opposite of what the leadership in Akwa Ibom State wants to do with the artificial lake project.

    The justification for the other projects is equally hard to see. The planned luxury gardens are not what the state needs now. The vast majority of the people in the state are so poor they cannot afford housing, even bare-knuckle roofs over their heads, a situation that calls for investment in mass housing, rather than in luxury estates. The claim of the potential viability of the 18-storey rental edifice in Lagos is bogus. There is deja vu ring to it. It reminds us of all the projections by the government of the day at the time of the 21-storey so-called smart building in Uyo, now renamed Udom Emmanuel Towers. The Uyo skyscraper, whose cost is a guarded secret, has just one tenant, which is the Bank of Industry, more than five years after it was completed and put on the market, representing unthinking sterilisation of public funds, which have more immediate relevant uses. Even the Bank of Industry, I learn, is in the building rent-free in a bid to mitigate the most damning optics of a completely vacant monument nearly six years after it was built!

    Read Also: Makinde approves N80,000 minimum wage for Oyo workers

    The hotel in Abuja will be equally a regrettable misstep. The challenge with these government choices in project selection is not really about their being located outside the state, though that is also an added downside. The real issue is that none of these ill-advised projects will change the development trajectory of Akwa Ibom State as the poorest state in the South-south, where unemployment, lack of access to electricity, potable water, and other negative human development indices are above the average in the region. The reason for such pessimistic picture is that these projects cannot impact the fundamentals of the economy of the state. Such projects foster only the luxuriation of a “local enclave economy.” They are not connected to the lives and struggles of the vast majority of Akwa Ibom people. Apart from the tiny few, around 0.01% of the population, who will skim off the procurement contracts for these projects, Akwa Ibom people stand to gain almost nothing from them.

    How much has the mass of our people profited from the Udom Emmanuel Towers? The tiny elite with access to power had pocketed their cut in the forms of commissions and margins on that project procurement contracts, but about six years after the people of Akwa Ibom State are still waiting for their pay day from that investment.

    Yet these unreflective commitments of state resources are against the backdrop of serious development needs facing more than six million people, whose welfare demands that most, if not all, spending decisions should be based on the elementary imperative of economics as a field that is concerned with rational application of scarce resources that have alternative uses. In my judgement, the compelling alternative use for the N50 billion to be sterilised, if not wasted, in the tower in Lagos is the supply of adequate and quality public power in the state. What makes this a default recourse is that the government would not have to start from scratch in any plan to deliver reliable and quality power to the state. Ibom Power, subpar as it is operating currently, can be revamped and optimised to function as a game-changing infrastructure for the state.

    Unlike the tower in Lagos or hotel in Abuja, the positive impact of a restreamed and optimised Ibom Power will be felt in every home, every community, every office, every business, big or small in the state. It will deliver the needed oxygen to energise small and big businesses, and serve as the reason for owners of investment capital elsewhere to think first of Akwa Ibom when they are considering where to take their money to, because a key expense item in their budget would have been definitively moderated by a wise priority of government on power.

    I learn from professionals in Ibom Power that the budget needed to refurbish, or procure new, turbines for the power utility and string new transmission and distribution lines is within the finances of the state. I learn that even if the entire power plant were to be replaced along with transmission and distribution lines to generate 70mw of power, which would be more than enough to meet the current power need of the state, the maximum cost outlay would be around $90 million (or N150 billion at the going exchange rate). If the costs of the Lagos tower at N50 billion, Abuja hotel, artificial lake in Uyo, and the luxury gardens are tallied up, we would end up with what it would take to deliver adequate power to the state for the critical mass impact that is far in excess of the combined benefits of the advertised projects on the to-do list of the current government.

    It is interesting that while the Akwa Ibom state government is overlooking the all-important place of power in the development calculus, a heavily distracted Governor Sim Fubara of Rivers State has the presence of mind to invest in power to drive the economy of his state. The governor of Ekiti State is also making power the driving force of the development plan of his government.

    We cannot say it too strongly or too often. Unless government decides on development priorities that empower the critical mass in the state and help them to make more money for themselves, the state will remain ensnared in mass poverty. This was the reason I sent a note to the state governor to express my appreciation of his commitment to initiate agriculture-led industrialisation of the state through oil palm processing during his recent visit to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. In the note I suggested to the governor that he should add cassava to the crops to be prioritised in his agro-industrialisation programme. The reason the governor’s pronouncement excited me is that if oil palm and cassava were used as the launch pad to industrialisation of the state, the impact would be catholic. These two crops are the mainstay of the rural economy of Akwa Ibom, and so turning them into engine of development would deliver benefits to every home in the state.

    •Otongaran, a Communication Artist, writes from Lagos

  • The Nigerian leadership myth: A satirical safari…

    The Nigerian leadership myth: A satirical safari…

    By Charles Dickson

    The recent arraignment of minors for treason in Nigeria has sparked widespread outrage and condemnation from various quarters. Their arraignment has raised concerns about the handling of juvenile cases and the implications of such actions on the children’s future. The federal government’s position on the matter has been criticized, with many calling for the immediate release of the minors. Sadly, it’s going to come and go like all such matters, no one will be held liable or accountable.

    The incident highlights the challenges of leadership in Nigeria, so, let me tell us the story of leadership—a satirical safari through power and promise.

    Nigerian leadership. Say those words in any social setting, and watch the room split into chuckles, sighs, and, sometimes, heated monologues. Nigerian leadership is a tale that could rival any Hollywood blockbuster in plot twists, suspense, and emotional rollercoasters. However, it’s also a tale layered with the mystique of myths—idealized versions of what leadership is supposed to be versus what we often get.

    We are a comedy of errors…Nigeria, a land of contrasts, a nation blessed with immense potential, yet plagued by a leadership conundrum that seems to defy logic. The recurring theme is a leadership that promises much and delivers little, a leadership that often seems more interested in personal enrichment than national development. This has led many to question the very concept of Nigerian leadership, to wonder if it’s not just a grand illusion, a mirage in the desert of hope.

    The Nigerian leader, in popular imagination, is a peculiar creature. He (and it’s almost always a he) is often portrayed as a demi-god, a messiah who will miraculously transform the nation overnight. He is expected to solve all problems, from poverty and corruption to insecurity and infrastructure decay.

    Yet, time and again, these leaders fail to live up to the hype. They are often more concerned with power retention than problem-solving, more interested in enriching themselves and their cronies than uplifting the masses.

    The myth of Nigerian leadership has had a devastating impact on the country. It has led to a culture of cynicism and apathy, where people have lost faith in the ability of their leaders to make a difference. This has, in turn, led to a decline in civic engagement and a rise in social unrest.

    Let us start with the allure of the “Messiah Complex”. There’s a strange ritual that occurs every four years. Nigerians from all walks of life gather, united in collective hope, as politicians-turned-Messiahs make promises that sound like poetry. We’ve been told of visions of transforming deserts into oases and turning debts into riches. We’ve heard of a future filled with functional electricity, pothole-free roads, and hospitals that will make a Swiss watchmaker green with envy. These messianic figures appear every election season with a well-rehearsed script and an arsenal of grandiose claims that even Aesop himself would have had trouble believing.

    Read Also: Senate urges Fed Govt to initiate policies for local miners

    Every so often, however, Nigerians fall for the shiny charisma, the promises of change, and the proclamations of patriotism. The hope is intoxicating. “Maybe this time it’s different,” people think. However, the “Messiah” quickly devolves into the “Excuse Machine,” because just like clockwork, the mirage fades and the landscape of reality becomes all too clear.

    The myth of transformation. A word often sprinkled into campaign speeches and government slogans, like salt in a pot of jollof rice. Politicians sell transformation as if it were a buy-one-get-one-free deal at a Lagos market. The truth, however, is more of a slow simmer than a fast boil. Promises are made with the certainty of a Shakespearean tragedy. Our leaders assure us of mega-cities, free education, and top-tier health care — not unlike New York, Tokyo, or Paris — only to end up delivering results closer to rural Ajegunle, where even basic amenities are hard to come by.

    Every politician tells us they’ll be different. They swear to bridge the gap between rich and poor, elevate the standard of living, and make Nigeria great again (though no one quite remembers when Nigeria was “great” by their implied standards). They preach transformation, yet reality reminds us more of the song “Nothing new under the sun.” And while “transformation” sounds beautiful in theory, it often translates to moving from one ineffective policy to the next, with very little real change in sight.

    Now, here’s a real mystery: Nigerian leaders often amass incredible wealth while they’re in service to the nation. It’s almost as if there’s an invisible ATM in every office. Take a simple councillor position, and it might magically pay enough to build a mansion, fly first-class, and send children to Ivy League schools abroad. It is the paradox of wealth and service.

    Surely, one must wonder: Is public office in Nigeria blessed with some hidden oil well that the rest of us common folk don’t know about? Or maybe, just maybe, the lines between “public servant” and “private business mogul” are so blurred that even Picasso would have difficulty painting it.

    There is a cultural paradox here too. In Nigeria, if a person “makes it” in government, they become a hero in their village. While the rest of the country might bemoan corruption, friends and family back home celebrate their “son’s” success. This celebration of political “achievement” is ingrained, and while the culture venerates “serving the people,” the individuals themselves are often held up as “untouchable” figures, immune to scrutiny or criticism. It’s a complex paradox, and one that feeds the myth.

     Another pillar of Nigerian leadership myth is the promise of security. Each administration vows to end the violence that has plagued parts of the country, whether it’s the Northeast, plagued by insurgency, or the Northwest, suffering under banditry. Every president is the Commander-in-Chief of the Nigerian Armed Forces, yet they seem more skilled in speeches than in strategies. One might think, given their promises, that each new administration would make Nigeria one of the safest nations on earth. Yet, security remains elusive, like trying to catch rain with a sieve.

    The real irony is in the way leaders themselves are heavily guarded while citizens fend for themselves. It’s not uncommon to see a convoy with enough SUVs to form a motorcade protecting one individual while the ordinary citizen walks home through streets dimly lit and streets less patrolled. And yet, Nigerians are resilient. In the face of so much insecurity, they go about their lives, praying that one day, security will be more than a lofty campaign promise.

    Leadership in Nigeria is much like a soap opera — long, dramatic, and filled with cliff-hangers. And just like the characters in these dramas, Nigerian leaders are often concerned with their legacy. But what does legacy even mean in the context of Nigerian leadership? The legacies that some leaders leave are more about buildings, statues, and airports bearing their names than about sustainable development. And when the next leader comes in, one of the first steps is often to dismantle, rename, or outright ignore the predecessor’s “legacy.”

    What this means for Nigeria is a series of disjointed projects, half-hearted initiatives, and policies abandoned halfway. In place of real progress, Nigeria has a collection of monuments to political egos, a scrapbook of half-completed buildings, and a string of reforms that never quite made it to completion.

    But here’s the twist: for all the comedy and tragedy of Nigerian leadership, Nigerians themselves are the true leaders. They are the ones who hustle, adapt, and thrive despite the odds. While politicians grandstand, ordinary Nigerians build businesses from scratch, create art and culture that captivate the world, and maintain a resilient spirit that no amount of hardship seems to quench.

    The myth of Nigerian leadership persists because, deep down, we all hold out hope that one day, the leaders we elect will reflect the best of us — not the worst. Nigerians deserve leaders who understand that leadership is a service, not a birth-right, a responsibility, not a ticket to personal paradise.

    In the end, perhaps the myth will give way to reality. Maybe the Messiah Complex will be replaced by the Public Servant. But until then, Nigerians will do what they have always done — lead themselves, rise above, and continue to believe that one day, true leadership will emerge, not as myth but as reality.

    •Prince Dickson PhD, Development & Media Practitioner, writes via <pcdbooks@gmail.com

  • State police: Make Nigeria safe again

    State police: Make Nigeria safe again

    • By Bamidele Ademola-Olateju

    By In 1861, the Acting Governor of Lagos Colony; William McCosky established the first police force, to protect British trade. After that, we had a British style system based on Constabularies, Native Authorities, and the post-independence regions controlling the security system within their territories and it was effective. Only the Eastern region under the 1963 constitution did not exercise the right to establish a regional police force. The police in other regions had regional training and are imbued with civilian orientation and inclinations. Ever since, the gradual destruction of the little progress we made just before, and after independence, started with the unfortunate incursion of the military into our politics. The coup of 1966 threw out the baby with the bath water. The first casualty was the 1963 constitution, which they ignored. All local police were abolished through the centralization, and militarization of the police force. Thus began the destruction of the ethos of a developing, devolved policing system leading to a loss of espirit de corp, focus and effectiveness. The 1979 and 1999 drafted by the military foreclosed the formation of any decentralized police architecture.

    In the United Kingdom in contra-distinction, the system created by Sir Robert Peel devolved from London to the regions and there was never a need to create a centralized policing system around London because the topography of the regions is different. For effectiveness the military conception of a centralized Bonarpartist conception of the State must be discarded. Napoleon created a centralized state to suppress a revolution, what revolution is Nigeria, a multi-ethnic state suppressing? Furthermore, France was at the time homogenous, with a shared culture and a state religion. We are heterogenous, with diverse cultures. Today policing has been so devolved in the United Kingdom, much like the USA, where there are democratically contested elections for top posts in the police system. That was inconceivable decades ago. Anyone can contest on a non-party basis. Nigeria cannot continue to swim against the tide.

    The reservations against the devolution of the policing system can also be used against the Federal police force, that is; partisanship, high handedness etc. The antidote to all these is professionalism as well as the entrenchment of democratic control and civil society monitoring, and oversight. This is what obtains elsewhere since no country is populated by Angels.

    Professionalism of an antediluvian policing system is key for effectiveness; frankly every aspect of the State must be retooled and technologically driven if Nigeria is to become competitive again. A government Technology Service must be established to infuse technology into every department including the police, customs, judiciary, ports and so forth. This is long overdue. The British premier achieved a similar modernising objective in his administration when in 1964 he created the under performing agencies and departments of the state.

    The argument for state police is not just about decentralization, it is about building a Nigeria that is secure enough to compete and be globally relevant. As it is today, the Nigerian police have not transited from a force into a Service. Its focus is still about regime protection, and not on service rendered to protect the community.

    Read Also: Nigeria, ECOWAS to improve energy data methods

    What is delaying the creation of state police? According to the Director-General of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum, Asishana Okauru; The official position of the forum is in favour of state police. I don’t know of any state that is not in support of state police.” As of September, Kwara, Sokoto, Kebbi, Adamawa, and the Federal Capital Territory have not submitted their report to the National Economic Council (NEC). Society is ordered and coordinated from the base, that is, the community level. This is why the late Governor Rotimi Akerodolu SAN is now a cherished historic persona. By insisting on the efficacy of Amotekun he changed the territory of the discourse, which as Gramsci stated is the real purpose of politics. His intervention has been positive.

    A vast and varied territory with diverse cultural etymology like Nigeria, cannot be subjected to a centralized internal security mechanism. The United Kingdom, United States of America, Ethiopia and Canada know that this is most absurd. The United Kingdom is a devolved unitary state, but it operates over fifty autonomous police boards and does not have a czar called Inspector General of Police. The creation of this position, in post independence Nigeria in 1962 must now be subject to re-evaluation. Nigeria must rebuild its internal security with sub-nationals controlling the policing system and be responsible for their effectiveness. There will of course be democratic control, as well as parliamentary scrutiny, and oversight. As President Eisenhower showed in Little Rock in 1958, that the local police can be temporarily “Federalized” in the national interest in an emergency. The present defective unitary set up is affecting Nigeria’s credit risk analysis leading to questions about its suitability as an investment destination.

    Nigeria’s food security is also at risk, leading to horrendous food price inflation. An an acclaimed federalist, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has a compelling, historic responsibility to devolve the police framework and make Nigeria safe again.

    •Bamidele Ademola-Olateju, former Commissioner for Information in Ondo State, is the Director of New Media and Corporate Services for the All Progressives Congress.

  • Prudent governance: A tale of two states

    Prudent governance: A tale of two states

    • By Chekwube Nzomiwu

    Events that occurred in two Nigerian states last week, caught my attention. One was the award of contract by the Anambra State government for the construction of an iconic tower at Ekwulobia in Aguata Local Government Area of the state. The tower project awarded to IDC Construction Company will cost the state government N980 million, an amount N20 million shy of one billion Naira.

    The second was the report on Nasarawa State government, commencing the harvest of its 10,000-hectare rice farm in Jangwa community, Awe Local Government Area of the state. The governor of Nasarawa State, Abdulahi Sule, physically flagged-off the commencement of the harvest, targeted at ensuring food security in the state.

    Following the wide media coverage that these two events received, I decided to comment on them, at least, as momentary respite from the media attention on national affairs, which often eclipsed happenings at the sub-national level, especially with the prevailing biting economic difficulties in the country. To put facts here in perspective, I will start this commentary from the rice harvest in Nasarawa State.

    Speaking while flagging-off the rice harvest, Governor Sule reiterated the commitment of his government to lead by example in agriculture through government structured initiatives, and thus, contribute to the national food security agenda. He described the milestone as part of Nasarawa State’s broader strategy to enhance food security, which was launched at the beginning of this year’s planting season.

    In my opinion, the massive rice harvest in Nasarawa State could not have come at a better time, considering the palpable fear of food insecurity in Nigeria. Just a few days ago, a new report indicated that not less than 30 million Nigerians, including Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) in 26 states and the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), are expected to be food insecure or worse between June and August 2025. As reported by Daily Trust newspaper on November 1, the food and nutrition report, Cadre Harmonisé (CH), was put together by the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security with technical support from the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and other partners.

    Read Also: Nigeria, ECOWAS to improve energy data methods

    Earlier in September, Bill Gates, American business magnate and co-chair of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, raised an alarm that Nigeria presently has the second-highest rate of food insecurity in the world, with climate change accelerating the problem. According to the co-founder of Microsoft Company, Nigeria receives the largest share of intervention funds allocated by his foundation to Africa because of food insecurity.

    Prior to Bill Gate’s exposé, the Nigerian Economic Summit Group (NESG) had issued a Policy Brief on the status of food security in the country. The brief was posted on the website of the nation’s foremost private sector think tank by 12:39 pm on March 25. The document revealed that Nigeria’s food inflation surged from 33.9 percent in December 2023 to 35.41 percent in January 2024.

    Quoting from the NESG Brief, “the number of food-insecure Nigerians increased significantly, from 66.2 million in Q1 2023 to 100 million in Q1 2024, with 18.6 million facing acute hunger and 43.7 million Nigerians showing crisis-level or above crisis-level hunger coping strategies as of March 2024. The NESG recommended immediate humanitarian, social protection and food systems responses to address this unprecedented food crisis.”

    Judging by the statistics recounted above, the government of Nasarawa State deserves a bundle of praises for leading by example in agriculture. Food is critical to the survival of humanity. There is a saying that a “hungry man is an angry man.” Extreme hunger can lead to frustration, which can lead to unrest and aggression. We all witnessed the massive destruction of lives and properties in the country during the August hunger protests.

    The Nasarawa rice-farming initiative has not only contributed immensely to the national food agenda, but also created employment for the indigenous people. It is also interesting to note that the initiative is an inclusive one, carrying along both the women and youth, like the Green Revolution in post-Independence India in the 1960s. Prior to this Agriculture Revolution, India which before Nigeria gained Independence from Britain in August 1947, survived on food donated from other countries as a result of frequent famines and drought.

    However, the Green Revolution transformed agriculture in India, using technology, such as irrigation, mechanised implements, high yield seeds, fertilizer and pesticides, among others. Today, very few people in India remember that there was a time their country begged for food. Unfortunately, owing to poor implementation and corruption, the programme failed in countries of Sub-Saharan Africa, including Nigeria in the 70s.

    Fast forward to present day, Governor Sule in his post rice harvest interview with Channels Television, disclosed plans by his administration to establish a rice mill within the location of the 10,000 hectare rice farm. If the rice mill comes to fruition, it will be the icing on the cake.

    On the other hand, the decision of the government of Anambra State to spend almost N1 billion on the proposed iconic tower at Ekwulobia under the prevailing economic condition in the country, calls for serious concern. Frankly, I thought that the governor of Anambra State, Professor Charles C. Soludo, being a social scientist, ought to be very familiar with Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The American psychologist saw physiological (biological) needs as the most important. They include breathing, food, water, clothing and shelter. He argued that without these physiological needs, the human body cannot function optimally. Once the physiological needs are satisfied, the next level-the need for safety and security-becomes important, followed respectively by the needs for love and belonging, self-esteem and self-actualization.

    Based on this theory, I don’t see how the proposed ‘Iconic Light of the Nation Tower’ at Ekwulobia will contribute to the survival of the five million inhabitants of Anambra State whose existence is threatened by hunger, just like millions of other Nigerians living in different states. For me, it would have made more economic sense to deploy the N1 billion approved for building the proposed tower to tackling food insecurity.

    Omor town in Anyamelum Local Government Area of Anambra State was once the largest rice producer in the entire South Eastern Nigeria. Unfortunately, the agrarian potential of Omor and the other seven towns in Anyamelum has been inhibited by lack of government support. The story is not different in other major agrarian communities in the state, scattered across Ogbaru, Anambra East and Anambra West localities. 

    Alternatively, the N1 billion will definitely serve more useful purposes if deployed to the security sector in Anambra State. It is no longer news that Anambra is one of the hotbeds of insecurity in the Southeast. Lately the state has witnessed a spike in the spate of attacks by unknown gunmen, kidnapping and killings linked to cultism. Equipping the Nigerian security agencies and vigilante operatives with the huge amount approved for the tower will go a long way in addressing the widespread insecurity in the state.

    Besides, the idea of building a tower at Ekwulobia clearly contradicts Soludo’s justification for not fulfilling his promise of making Anambra State the “Dubai-Taiwan of Nigeria.” Speaking at an event recently, Soludo mocked those who felt that making Anambra Dubai-Taiwan meant building skyscrapers everywhere in the state. He maintained that such cannot be done with an illiterate population, insisting that access to qualitative education is the road to the destination.

    Here, I wouldn’t want to re-echo the sentiments of the highly educated majority in Anambra State who took Soludo’s comment as a big insult to them. But if he knew that access to qualitative education will take Anambra to Dubai and Taiwan, common sense demands that the N1 billion should be channelled to the improvement of access to education, rather than constructing a tower.

    In conclusion, prudence is very critical in governance because resources are not limitless. Decisions require sound judgment. Before taking a decision, you must identify the priority areas for the good and welfare of the people.

    On a lighter note, I know that Governor Soludo, as a Christian, must have read from the Book of Genesis in the Old Testament of the Bible, the story of what happened to those who wanted to build the “Tower of Babel” so tall that it would reach into heavens, thinking that doing so would earn them glory. When God saw that the people were becoming too powerful because of their ability to communicate, He made them to speak different languages and when they could not understand each other, they were unable to complete the tower.

    •Dr. Nzomiwu is a communication scholar, journalist and public relations practitioner. He writes via chekmma@yahoo.com

  • Future of USA-Nigeria relations post 2024 elections

    Future of USA-Nigeria relations post 2024 elections

    • By Ademola Oshodi

    As a global power, the United States of America significantly influences global affairs. Thus, as US citizens troop to the poll, citizens and governments worldwide are keen on the outcome, as much as Americans. For instance, while the Nigerian government has never endorsed any US election presidential candidate, many Nigerians draw correlations between US political parties and theirs. Nigerians are thus divided between Kamala Harris (Democratic Party) and Donald Trump (Republican Party), as questions arise as to what the outcomes could mean for USA-Nigeria relations.

    US-Nigeria relations have fluctuated over the years, since the ruling party and its ideology mostly dictate governance. Many Nigerians believe that Democrat presidents are accommodating of immigrants and supportive of Africa’s interests, much more than Republican presidents who are more supportive of trade and investment. Although lacking data, these perspectives are widely held. A historical analysis from 1981 helps to situate this argument.

    Republican-led US-Nigerian relations were a mix of targeted engagement and interests. Under President Ronald Reagan (1981-1989), relations were cordial, although the administration focused more on global anti-communism than specific bilateral relations with Nigeria. President George Bush (1989-1993) increased engagement with Africa and supported Nigeria’s democratic transition. President George Bush (Jnr)’s (2001-2009) engagement with Africa, through the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC), benefitted Nigeria’s health and development sectors. The administration increased the US aid to Africa by over 600%, of which a significant portion came to Nigeria. In 2003, he also became the first Republican President to visit Nigeria.

    The Donald Trump (2017-2021) administration’s anti-immigration policies made him unpopular among Nigerians. His reference to Haiti and African countries as ‘shithole countries’ offended many. Nevertheless, Trump recognized Nigeria’s significance in Africa. His first conversation as president with an African leader was a telephone call to President Muhammadu Buhari in 2017. Buhari was also the first African leader invited to the White House by Trump, but this was marred by Trump’s leaked reference to Buhari as ‘lifeless’. Although the USA tried, unsuccessfully, to deter the emergence of Nigeria’s Akinwunmi Adeshina and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala as president of the Africa Development Bank and Director-General of World Trade Organization, respectively, it also removed Nigeria’s blockade to acquiring military hardware against insurgency.

    The Nigerian government maintained a less combative relationship with the USA on human rights issues, as Trump’s administration either deliberately or coincidentally refrained from interfering in Nigeria’s internal affairs despite negative reports. Also, the State Department and the USAID allocated $450 million in bilateral support for Nigeria in 2020.

    Read Also: Anti-graft: Lawyers’ platform seeks more powers for EFCC

    Under Democrats, there were significant US-Nigeria engagements too. The Clinton administration (1993-2001) supported Nigeria’s transition to democracy but failed to defend it when the 1993 presidential election was annulled. Also, while the African Growth and Opportunity Act was established to promote preferential trade between the US and Africa, Nigeria barely felt the economic impact. Obama’s presidency (2009-2017), focussed on economic and security cooperation and promoting democratic governance in Africa. His Power Africa Initiative experienced limited success. Obama’s highlight was his approval to remove the Libyan leader, Muammar Gadhafi, and his visit to Ghana. Nigerians remember Obama for blocking Nigeria’s quest to purchase high-grade military hardware needed to stem insurgency under the pretext that the arms may be used against civilians.

    The Biden administration has supported Nigeria, committing over $1.2 billion in economic development, humanitarian assistance, health, education, and social services in 2022. It also supports Nigeria’s security and climate efforts through military-security training and partnering to reduce carbon emissions.

    What would the presidency of either Donald Trump or Kamal Harris mean for Nigeria?

    Foreign relations during Trump’s first presidency were transactional, and Nigeria may benefit more from this at this point. If Nigeria aligns with the US’ economic interests, it could benefit from increased trade or investment in sectors like oil and gas. Also, Trump has a record of providing military and counter-terrorism support to Nigeria, which, if prioritized, could further West Africa’s regional security.

    Conversely, a Harris presidency, judging from her history, could prioritize democracy and human rights. This might mean putting conditions on military assistance to Nigeria under the guise of promoting human rights. Support toward anti-corruption, economic development, climate change, and global health may benefit Nigeria through increased development aid and trade partnerships. Harris’ balanced approach to immigration could positively impact the Nigerian Diaspora and youths seeking to study or work in the USA. However, the Democrats’ recent shift to the right on immigration may see Harris adopting a less-than-traditional immigration approach. Biden’s support for the bi-partisan immigration deal aimed at tightening border controls indicates that possibility.

    In summary, a Harris presidency might foster long-term development and systemic change in Nigeria, while Trump may prioritize security and economic transactions. Their impacts depend on evolving global dynamics and how each integrates Nigeria into broader foreign policy priorities.

    •Oshodi is a political analyst. He is currently Senior Special Assistant (Protocol) to President Bola Tinubu

  • The push against ARCON’s advertising reforms

    The push against ARCON’s advertising reforms

    •  By Jill Okeke

    In recent times, the advertising sector has faced an unprecedented but organized wave of resistance to its continued growth and progress, particularly from forces seeking to discredit the Advertising Regulatory Council of Nigeria (ARCON) effort in sanitizing the digital space. This campaign of criticism, spearheaded by stakeholders uncomfortable with the tightening of industry standards is an attempt to reverse progress made thus far, erode consumer protections, and maintain the status quo.

    Since the repeal of APCON Act that birthed ARCON and under the leadership of its Director-General, Olalekan Fadolapo, the regulatory body has made great strides in the industry, tackling long-standing issues like crippling industry debt, delayed payment circles, copyright infringements, and the offshoring of production, among many others.

    Before now, the Nigerian advertising industry has long been plagued by unsustainable levels of debt, with agencies struggling to secure timely payments for completed work. Historically, agencies faced payment cycles stretching between 60 to 120 days, impeding business growth, employee compensation, and even operational viability. Through ARCON’s interventions, these cycles have been reduced to less than 40 days, a move that is relieving financial burdens on agencies and promoting stability within the industry.

    This shift mirrors successful policies in countries like India, where the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) implemented similar measures, leading to the development of Mumbai as a global advertising production hub. Also, in the U.S. Prompt Payment Act enforces stringent timelines on federal agencies for contractor payments, imposing interest penalties for delayed payments. Without doubt, ARCON’s work toward similar financial protections has strengthened Nigeria’s advertising ecosystem.

    Historically, multinational companies routinely exported entire production processes abroad, depriving the Nigerian creative ecosystem of valuable opportunities. But ARCON’s policies now mandate that production processes intended for the Nigerian market be conducted locally, creating an avenue for growth within the domestic creative industry and providing opportunities for local professionals. This local-content policy has created jobs, preserved intellectual capital within country, and bolstered Nigeria’s position as an emerging advertising hub in Africa. Countries like India and Brazil enforce similar policies, encouraging global corporations to produce locally as a way of nurturing their creative industries.

    Working collaboratively with sectoral groups under the aegis of the Heads of Advertising Sectoral Groups (HASG), ARCON has also elevated the industry’s status with its daring effort on the valuation of the advertising industry and the multiplier effect of advertising on the economy, among other achievements too numerous to mention.

    Read Also: Nigeria, ECOWAS to improve energy data methods

    But despite ARCON’s many achievements, it faces a coordinated campaign of calumny aimed at discrediting its work and pushing for the repeal of some sections of its act, particularly section 54. Section 54 of the ARCON Act mandates prior approval from the Advertising Standards Panel for all advertisements, across products and services across all media. Interestingly, this section is older than ARCON itself, considering it was part of the repealed APCON Act.

    Section 54 is not unique to Nigeria. Many countries impose similar regulations to safeguard consumers and maintain advertising integrity. In Canada, for example, the Competition Bureau and the Advertising Standards Council enforces the Competition Act, which mandates that advertising claims are accurate and verifiable, thus protecting consumers from false or misleading advertisements. Singapore’s Advertising Standards Authority maintains strict pre-approval requirements for certain advertising categories. The European Union enforces prior review requirements for various forms of financial and health-related advertising. Likewise, the United Kingdom’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) enforces strict guidelines on advertisements, ensuring that all claims are truthful, legal, and not misleading. ARCON’s policies are not exceptional; they are aligned with international best practices, designed to protect consumers and ensure ethical advertising.

    Indeed, the focus of naysayers on the perceived burdens of this section distracts from its broader goal of ensuring ethical advertising in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. Consumers, more than corporations, suffer the consequences of misleading or harmful advertisements, and regulations like Section 54 address this very imbalance. Fraudulent schemes such as MMM, which operated as a Ponzi scheme and left many Nigerians financially devastated, come to mind.

    In fact, unsubstantiated reports have it that certain groups are gathering signatures to remove Section 54, an action that reveals the lengths to which these forces are willing to go to reverse ARCON’s progress. Sponsored articles and opinion pieces have flooded media channels, each echoing the same unfounded criticisms while conveniently ignoring the successes ARCON has achieved in the last few years. Rather than acknowledging the agency’s role in stabilizing the advertising industry, these detractors opt to portray ARCON as an obstacle to growth, an unfounded narrative that ignores the real beneficiaries of ARCON’s work—Nigerian consumers.

    Particularly noteworthy is the fact that the requirement of Section 54 wilt under international comparison.  For instance, The United States Securities and Exchange Commission’s action of slamming the hammer on Kim Kardashian, resulting in a $1.26 million fine for undisclosed cryptocurrency promotion on her personal social media space, demonstrates how developed markets maintain even stricter oversight. Compare this to the case of Nigeria where Toyin Abraham, a veteran Nollywood actress similarly endorsed and advertised for  RevolutionPlus Property, a real estate company, where many of her fans and admirers lost money they invested. What would have happened if ARCON had slammed the hammer on her like Kim?

    Recall the controversies that followed Peak Milk and Sterling Bank’s Easter advertisements in the recent past. Or is it the one from the FIRS claiming that Christ only paid the debt of sins and not taxes? These incidents further reiterate the critical importance of pre-emptive regulation for our multi-ethnic and religious society. Let me not fail to add that ARCON’s intervention in these avoidable cases prevented potential religious conflicts that could have erupted from insensitive advertising content.

    It is very clear that ARCON’s regulatory framework is indispensable for sustaining its growth in a way that prioritizes ethics, consumer welfare, and economic sovereignty. The resistance to ARCON’s work is, at its core, a resistance to accountability. Those who oppose the body are not fighting for a more dynamic industry; they are fighting to retain a system that allows unchecked profit-making at the expense of consumers. The path forward is clear: ARCON must continue to enforce its regulations, particularly Section 54, to safeguard Nigerian consumers and businesses alike.

  • Commonwealth nations stand for reparations

    Commonwealth nations stand for reparations

    By Olabode Lucas

    At the last Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting (CHOGM) held in Apia, the capital of Samoa island, it was resolved that the lingering issue of reparations for the odious transatlantic slave trade which went on for many centuries should now come to the front burner for equitable discussions. The meeting felt that there should be “conversation” on the vexed issue of reparations for the transatlantic slave trade in order to douse the justified searing anger among many nations in the Commonwealth on this horrendous blight on humanity.

    As expected at the meeting, Britain, which is the chief perpetrator of horrendous slave trade in human history, stoutly opposed this resolution through its new Prime Minister, Sir Keith Starmer. King Charles of Britain who is the titular head of the Commonwealth also offered no apology for this rape on humanity which for centuries saw many millions of Africans uprooted from their ancestral homes to work in plantations in the Caribbeans, and the Americas.

    The Commonwealth is a free association of Britain and some sovereign independent states which were former British colonies. The Commonwealth was formed in 1931 with mainly five white countries – Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the then white-dominated South Africa. Later, all former British colonies automatically became members on attainment of independence. India and Pakistan joined in 1948, Sri Lanka known then as Ceylon joined in 1948, Ghana in 1957 and our country, Nigeria joined in 1960. At present, the organisation comprises of 56 independent countries located in Africa, Asia, Americas, Europe and Australasia with a population of 2.7 billion people.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Tinubu swears in seven new Ministers

    In recent times membership of the Commonwealth has been opened to countries that were not former British colonies, and this has allowed African countries like Cameroons, Rwanda, Togo and Gabon to be admitted as members. The organisation is administered by a Secretary General who is given the status of a Head of State. At the Samoa meeting, Shirley Ayorkpor Botchwey, a former Foreign Minister of Ghana was elected as the next Secretary General of Commonwealth, and she will take over the administration of the Commonwealth in April 2025. She will be the second African to hold this post. The first African to hold this post was our revered Chief Emeka Anyaoku who gave the Commonwealth a focused leadership between 1990 and 2000. During his time, immense pressure was exerted that led to the collapse of the much-hated apartheid regime in South Africa.

    The Commonwealth has several agencies that are involved in promoting trade, education, sports and technical assistance among member countries. However, it is the decisions taken at its biannual conferences that always engage the attention of the world. In view of the diversity of its members in economic development, political and social orientations, Commonwealth meetings are always very acrimonious.

    The first notable contentious issue that faced the Commonwealth in the early days was the membership of the apartheid South Africa which was one of the founding members. At its London meeting in 1961, the issue came up and leaders like Diefenbaker of Canada, Tunku Abdul Raham of Malaysia and Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana successfully fought for the expulsion of South Africa because of its evil policy of apartheid. In the seventies, the issue of Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in Southern Rhodesia instigated by the dour Ian Smith dominated the Commonwealth meetings. Through the persistence of the Commonwealth leaders, the rebellion of Ian Smith was brought to an end. At the Lusaka summit of Commonwealth in 1979, Britain was forced to act leading to the independence of Zimbabwe on April 28, 1980.

    The Commonwealth was also in the forefront in the struggle to end the inhuman system of apartheid in South Africa. The issue of South Africa dominated Commonwealth meetings for many years from early seventies to early nineties when the heinous apartheid was finally dismantled. The evil regime was finally brought down through economic sanctions and isolation in many world events, especially sporting activities. The Commonwealth countries were very vocal in getting these measures against South Africa in place. Eventually, South Africa as a democratic country re-joined the Commonwealth in 1994 under the revered Nelson Mandela.

    After the collapse of apartheid in South Africa, the attention of the Commonwealth was shifted to other daunting political problems afflicting the world. Such problems included the enthronement of democracy and rule of law especially in Africa where military rule was the order of the day then. The Harare Declaration of 1991 expressed Commonwealth commitment to democracy. Nigeria was hammered with expulsion in 1995 when the malevolent regime of Sani Abacha executed Ken Saro Wiwa when the Commonwealth meeting was taking place in Auckland, New Zealand. Nigeria was readmitted to the Commonwealth only when democracy was restored in the country in 1999.

    With this Harare Declaration of 1991 in place, it is difficult to fathom the rationale behind the admission of African countries like Cameroons, Togo and Rwanda into the Commonwealth family. Any keen observer of the political scene in Africa will find it difficult by any stretch of imagination to regard these African countries as democratic. Cameroons is under the grip of ageing dictator, Paul Biya, Paul Kigame of Rwanda rules the country with iron fist through brutal suppression of the Hutu majority, while the tiny Togo has become the dynasty of Eyadema clan. Many anti-democratic countries like Fiji, Burma, Pakistan and even Nigeria had been at one time or the other been expelled from the Commonwealth, it is therefore double standard to admit these undemocratic African countries into the Commonwealth.

    From the above incursion into laudable interventions of the Commonwealth in contentious issues in the past, it is obvious that the Commonwealth has impacted positively on irritating political problems especially in Africa. Its meetings can no longer be regarded as talking shops.

    Now that the Commonwealth has decided to bring the issue of reparations for the detestable transatlantic slave trade for discussions, one could only hope that something concrete will be done by Britain and other slave-trading European countries like Holland, Spain, France and Portugal to pay for their past horrendous misdeeds on humanity. Their heinous actions which spanned many centuries of human existence were a corrosive blight on humanity.

    On this issue of reparations discussed at the Commonwealth meeting, Britain is now again in the dock as it was during the series of Commonwealth meetings on ways of ending political impasse in Southern Rhodesia and South Africa. British history praised William Wilberforce for his heroic role in stopping the reprehensive slave trade by Britain but British history cleverly ignores Sir Eric Williams who in his 1938 D.Phil. thesis at Oxford University proved conclusively that Britain abolished slave trade not because of any altruistic reason but because it was no longer profitable as a result of the industrial revolution. Sir Eric William later became Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago.

    I commend the Heads of Commonwealth countries for their latest stand on reparations for the atrocious transatlantic slave trade. They should resist any attempt by the British government and its monarch to water down their legitimate demand. The scar of slavery is still very evident in Africa, in the Americas and the Caribbeans even though the wicked trade in human cargo ended about two centuries ago. I am sure the late Moshood Abiola who championed the case for reparations before he died will be happy in his grave at the turn of events on this issue of reparations.

    •Prof. Lucas writes from Old Bodija, Ibadan

  • Who wants a coup? Stupid

    Who wants a coup? Stupid

    By Ray Ekpu

    Nigeria is a country where many people, educated and not educated, suffer from amnesia. They forget very easily what the country had gone through in its six decades of independence. Now some people are asking for a coup. It doesn’t matter whether they are children or adults. It springs largely from mischief and ignorance. They do not remember that Nigeria has had a bitter taste of coup making several times. And that blood had been spilled ceaselessly on our soil. They forget that this country had been run and run aground by military officers for 28 years. That is what has brought us to where we are now. That foundation in looting our treasury by top military officers dug a huge hole and put Nigeria into it.

    When General Murtala Mohammed overthrew General Yakubu Gowon’s government in 1975 he decided to probe the 12 governors that ran the affairs of Nigeria’s 12 states. Ten of them out of 12 were guilty of corruption. It was only Brigadiers Oluwole Rotimi and Mobolaji Johnson who did not soil their fingers in the corruption pot. No military government has been investigated since then. If anyone did it, he would have found that a lot of camels had passed through the tiny eyes of the needle. Someone who was familiar with the modus operandi of the military decision makers in those days said that for most contract awards, there was a formula: multiply by 1000. That may be true or false but the view is that the formula was used to take care of the boys who executed the coups. Their stomach had to be full for their leaders to sleep with their two eyes closed. If the boys were not happy the men would not be happy.

     If anyone needs any evidence that there was massive corruption under our military governments General Sani Abacha’s regime has offered an excellent example. There is something in our political lexicon called “Abacha’s loot.” Since Abacha died Nigerian governments have been combing various banks in various countries and continents searching for Nigeria’s money that Abacha stashed away in places known and unknown. A part of it, perhaps a small part of it, has been recovered but the search for more continues. We may never be able to get all of it back because we may never know in which undiscovered island some of the money may have been dumped. No civilian leader has had the temerity or audacity to do something of that magnitude in the last 25 years of our democracy. If that happened opposition leaders would have divulged it and the press and civil society groups would have taken up the gauntlet. That is a little part of democracy’s beauty: transparency.

    Why should any adult forget that it is the military that brought our civil war? That 30-month war cost many Nigerians to lose their lives, limbs, property and years of school or service. That war has left an indelible mark on the former Eastern Region, and made many Easterners to believe, rightly or wrongly, that they are not wanted in Nigeria. That is at the heart of the establishment of IPOB, a matter that is still hanging fire today and threatening the stability of Nigeria. So, those who want a military government should go and read the various books that have been written on the Biafran war.

    Those who are young may not know how grave a military situation often is. When a military government is in place there is no human rights, no free press, no independence of the judiciary, no legislative assembly, no seminars or press conferences on the activities of the government of the day.

    Read Also: I’m still in charge, says embattled UNIZIK VC

     Most laws enacted by military governments are back dated. There was no death penalty for drug smuggling, when Muhammadu Buhari took over the country on December 31, 1983. He enacted a law on drug smuggling, backdated it and killed three young Nigerians namely Bartholomew Azubike Owoh, 26, Lawal Akanni Ojuolape, 30 and Bernard Ogedengbe, 29. They were all tied to the stakes and shot even though the offence they committed did not attract a death penalty at the time the offence was committed. That is the unbridled arbitrariness that is the hallmark of military rule.

     When Newswatch was proscribed in 1987 on account of the Cookey Report, there was no law forbidding its publication. The Babangida government just quickly enacted a law overnight and backdated it. When Newswatch executives were tried for mutiny in 1994 because of an interview done in the magazine with David Mark, there was no law, only Abacha’s anger. For military governments arbitrariness is the name of the game.

    Military rule produces only temporary stability. In the long run it brings a long period of instability. That is what it did in Nigeria. It produced a long string of military leaders who had different views of the direction that Nigeria must go, leaders who suspected each other of plotting a coup against them. So their interest was in staying firm in office and chopping nonstop.

    Most military coups are executed violently. And violence brings more violence. It happened in Nigeria: coup in January 1966 and a counter coup in July 1966. That brought Nigeria to the edge of the precipice. It happened too in Ghana. Flight Lieutenant Jerry Rawlings and his coup men killed three former Ghanaian heads of state namely: Acheampong, Akuffo and Akwasi Afrifa. Rawlings was hailed as the messiah at the beginning of that regime. Ghanaians even named him Junior Jesus. As time went on, as more people were executed Rawlings became a hated man. They started calling him Senior Judas. He died unsung.

    In Nigeria several newspapers and magazines were shut down; many journalists detained without trial; attempts were also made to burn down some media houses; some journalists such as Tunde Thompson and Nduka Irabor were jailed unfairly. Some journalists, including Dele Giwa, were assassinated for no just cause. Many more atrocities were committed in those days. Anyone who wants to know can read of these atrocities in books but it is not the same as experiencing them. Experiencing them was pure horror.

    Our elections are not perfect. They can be improved upon but they will never be perfect because they are organised by imperfect persons who yield to temptations offered to them by desperate politicians. Our governments are going through difficult times occasioned by the instability in the global economy. This has been compounded over the years by the incompetence of our governments in the last two decades. These twin problems have affected the state of affairs in Nigeria which the various governments in the states and centre are struggling to deal with. The mistakes made by these governments in their hasty and all considered decisions especially on security and the economy have brought more hardship than happiness to our people. These twin problems have damaged Nigeria considerably.

     The answer is not regime change. It is for us to throw more ideas into the basket of governance. It is for us to put pressure on our governments to do what is right so that our country may be on the path to recovery. Calling for a coup is stupid, very stupid. That is the way to lose whatever we have gained in the last 25 years of our imperfect democracy.