The Nation Newspaper

Category: Comments

  • Dangote Vs the oil cabals

    Dangote Vs the oil cabals

    • By Ray Ekpan

    For something like 12 years or so, we almost got used to having cars as our beds and our petrol stations as our bedrooms. We were always short of petrol, a sad irony for a major oil producing country. In fact, at festive seasons we always stayed in the long queues for days waiting for fuel. Part of the culture was that you had to pack food from home in a food flask because you did not know how long you would stay in the queue. If you got out of your car to go and fetch food somewhere, you would lose your space in the queue. That would mean that you will stay longer at the petrol station with hunger harassing you until you were able to go home.

    Nigerians are long suffering people. They endured this torture for part of President Goodluck Jonathan’s tenure and all of the eight years of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration. There are not many countries in the world where their leaders would subject them to this mayhem and they would continue to meekly accept their leadership. But Nigerians quietly tolerated this for years. If their leaders failed them, why did they fail themselves? That is what I call followership failure.

    For those dozen years or so, our four state-owned refineries based in Port Harcourt, Warri and Kaduna were dead or almost dead, producing nothing or almost nothing. We reportedly spent $25 billion (about N11.35 trillion) on their repairs yet nothing positive came out of that huge expenditure. There were no protests by marketers, or labour leaders or workers, or students or Nigerians of any class whatsoever. None at all; yet the workers in those refineries were being paid salaries regularly, salaries without service, payment without performance. And Nigerians remained deaf and dumb.

    Then on May 22, 2023, Buhari went to Lagos and commissioned the Dangote Refinery built by Aliko Dangote with $20 billion of his hard-earned money. We the consumers were excited that with the opening of that huge refinery, there was now an expiry date for our snoring at petrol stations. We did not know that some cabals existed that thought that the birth of that refinery was the beginning of their bitterness. It wasn’t long before they showed their colours.

    Read Also: Yuletide: Lagos Police deploys 5,000 traffic officers, intensifies surveillance

    The Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Nigerian Mainstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Farouk Ahmed, was the one who fired the first shot. He claimed that Dangote refinery’s fuel was inferior to imported petroleum products because it contained higher sulphur levels.

    I am not an expert in the oil business but as an analyst, I did not believe Ahmed for three reasons: (a) If a man decided to invest $20 billion in such a major industry he was not likely to manufacture inferior products that would make his investment useless; (b) If a man has established a solid reputation as an investor in about six countries and was not thrown out for malpractices, he was not likely to do so now, especially in his own country; (c) I thought if Ahmed was sincere about what he was saying, he needed to engage the Dangote refinery leadership quietly instead of making a damaging statement openly. His statement turned out at the end of the day to be false, which means that he had a hidden agenda. And one of the core functions of the authority is “to promote private sector participation and investment in the midstream and downstream sectors.”

    His action was the exact opposite of this core function.

    It was obvious from Day One that the Dangote Refinery was going to face unanticipated challenges: NNPCL refused to supply crude oil to the refinery. Dangote had to import crude oil from the United States. President Tinubu then directed NNPCL to sell crude oil to Dangote and accept naira. Was NNPCL happy with that decision? I don’t know.

    Then NUPENG and PENGASSAN wanted their own share of the Dangote cake by asking to be allowed to collect tolls per truck while loading. In response to that, Dangote decided to buy thousands of CNG trucks. Were the two labour organisations happy with Dangote’s decision? Of course not. The fight continued as the two labour unions insisted that Dangote staff must be allowed to join their unions. Dangote asked his staff to indicate if they wanted to join PENGASSAN. About 800 of them indicated interest. They had just walked into a trap without knowing. Dangote sacked them accusing them of 22 cases of sabotage including fire incidents. NUPENG and PENGASSAN declared a strike over the sacking of the staff. The National Assembly decided to intervene. It asked Dangote to reverse the sack. He did but sent them to the cement factory.

    The marketers are worried that Dangote Refinery’s entry into the market is taking meat, massive meat, from their mouths. Recently, the refinery brought its price of petrol down to N699 and the marketers are jittery that their pepper soup may soon disappear.

    In the Punch of December 18, a major marketer said that “since Dangote crashed the gantry price of petrol to N699 per litre, we have lost over 90% of marketers who lift products from our depots. There is no way you can sell the product at Dangote’s price to make a profit.”

    That is the issue.

    The marketers don’t care about us, the consumers. All that they want is to make humongous profits at our expense. That is why they are fighting Dangote because the Dangote Refinery is changing the market dynamics. That is why they are accusing him of trying to be a monopolist. How can his refinery be a monopolist when there are 10 other refineries in the country including the four owned by the federal government? For the whole time that the four refineries have been dormant, I am not aware that the regulators and or the trade unions have paid serious attention to their revival. Have they? Their major interest is in importation, in burning away our foreign exchange, in keeping people in full employment abroad, in punishing Nigerians with high prices, in rendering Nigerians jobless while they smile broadly to the bank.

    That is the crux of the matter, the genesis of their grouse against Dangote. The regulator does not care about the protection of the consumer which is one of its core functions. In November, the NMDPRA had advised President Bola Tinubu to shelve plans to ban imports of refined petroleum products because, according to them, local output cannot meet the national demand which the regulators put at 55 million litres per day.

    President Tinubu has got the two CEOs of the regulatory agencies Ahmed of NMDPRA and Gbenga Komolafe of the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC) fired and their replacements have been promptly appointed. Whether they admit it or not, their forced resignation is a vote of no confidence on their performance. Their successors must take note of that because the day of reckoning will come.

    Yes, petroleum product importation is the restaurant with limitless food, limitless feast and non-stop “chopping” by those who step their feet into that restaurant. And anyone who gets in there wants to stay there for ever. Anyone who interrupts or blocks their chopping must be brought to a standstill. That is their unwritten mandate.

    Nigeria must prioritise local production of petroleum products over importation. Local production is what Nigeria First is about because it has immense benefits: enhanced employment, retention of our foreign exchange, availability of products at reasonable prices and energy security for the country.

    Those who are fighting to bring down the Dangote Refinery are unpatriotic. They are not fighting against monopoly. They are fighting for their stomachs. That fight is against Nigeria’s self-reliance, national interest and the welfare of the people. Dangote could have spent the $20 billion he invested in the refinery on items of limitless pleasure for himself. He could have bought rows of expensive palaces in various parts of the world. He could have built the refinery in any other country except Nigeria and he would have had peace. Some countries are asking him to come and invest in their territory and yet we here don’t appreciate his massive investment in his homeland.

    President Tinubu must stand by Dangote and all those who invest in Nigeria because they all have alternative investment choices. We must note that if we treat a Nigerian investor shabbily that is a disincentive to other potential investors, local and foreign. 

  • On reported lead poisoning in Lagos and Ogun states

    On reported lead poisoning in Lagos and Ogun states

    By Oladele Oladipupo

    On December 4, the upper chamber of the National Assembly deliberated extensively on the issue of lead poisoning ravaging Ogijo, a densely populated community located at Ogun-Lagos states border. The issue of lead poisoning was brought to the floor of the Senate by Senator Tokunbo Abiru of Lagos-East Constituency and Senator Gbenga Daniel of Ogun-East Constituency.

    According to the report submitted by the two senators to the upper chamber, the lead poisoning situation linked to multiple used lead-acid batteries recycling factory which has evolved into a full blown health emergency with vulnerable children and women including factory workers facing life altering consequences after years of exposure to toxic substances.

    When I read the story in the Vanguard newspaper, a lot of questions came to my mind. First, was an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study conducted prior to the commencement of the operation? Second, if yes, were necessary mitigation measures put in place to address environmental challenges? Third, were the workers provided with personal protective equipment?

    Read Also: Telemedicine is lifeline for Nigeria’s strained health system, says report

    These are questions that beg for answers.  Because of the sensitivity of the problem, the Senate had to summon the Ministers of Environment, Health, Solid Minerals, Labour and Employment and Director-General of the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) and other key players in the environment sector for an emergency interface. At the end of the meeting, the Senate came up with the following resolutions: First, that the Federal Ministry of Environment should, as a matter of urgency, develop programmes of activities for the restoration of the impacted areas in accordance with the national and international best practices and regulatory requirement. Second, that the National Environmental Standards and Regulations Enforcement Agency (NESREA) should carry out a comprehensive physico-chemical analysis of environmental media of the affected areas i.e. the soil, air, vegetation and water (both surface and ground water) in order to ascertain the level of lead contamination. Third, that Nigeria Centre for Disease Control and Prevention should deploy medical team to Ogijo community for proper medical examination and treatment.

    This is not the first time we have cases of lead poisoning in the country. Recall that a couple of years ago, thousands of children died of lead poisoning in Zamfara State due to illegal lead mining activities. Moreover, early this year, several people in two host communities in Ebonyi State were said to have been afflicted by lead poisoning ailments leading to renal failure, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory disorder and hypertension as a result of unsustainable mining practices.

    Recall also, that in early nineties, both the federal and state governments put in place various instruments of intervention in order to address environmental challenges. Some of these instruments include but not limited to the following: the National Policy on the Environment, National Guidelines and Standards for Environmental Pollution Control in Nigeria, Environmental Impact Assessment Act CAP E12 LFN 2004 and Hazardous Wastes Degree 42 of 1992. Despite the efforts made by both the federal and state governments to ensure environmental sustainability in Nigeria, it is quite unfortunate that most industrial establishments operating in the country are flouting the environmental laws with impunity.

    For instance, the case of battery-acid lead recycling factories at Ogijo community is a good example of an industry that is violating environmental laws. According to the report submitted to the Senate, this particular factory does not have a functional waste water treatment plant. In addition, both the hazardous and non-hazardous wastes that are being generated within the facility are not being treated and disposed of in line with international best practice. Obviously, the management of this factory should have been sanctioned long time ago.

    We have institutions that are saddled with the responsibility of enforcing environmental laws. Moreover, these institutions have the power to sanction erring industries. The question remains: Are these institutions carrying out their mandate effectively? Your guess is as good as mine!

    Frankly, there are so many factors that are responsible for lead poisoning in the country. These include but not limited to the following: dearth of skilled man power, inadequate funding, lack of enforcement of relevant environmental laws, lack of functional environmental laboratories and lack of pollution abatement facilities and nonchalant attitude on the part of the management of these industries.

    At the moment, critical skills in areas such as engineering, geology, analytical chemistry, data analytics, ecology are already in short supply. It is therefore imperative that the crop of officials saddled with the responsibility of enforcing environmental laws and regulations should be well trained in order to enable them carry out their statutory mandates. Secondly, is the issue of inadequate funding. Most of the federal and state ministries of environment are poorly funded. For instance, these institutions need money to procure vehicles in order to enable their officials move around and carry out enforcement activities.

    One recalls that during the administration of former president, Olusegun Obasanjo, all operational  and field vehicles were auctioned as a result of monetization policy. Up till today, most of these institutions have not been able to procure new vehicles due to lack of funds. Third, is the lack of enforcement of environmental laws. Obviously, everything boils down to the issue of funding. If the ministries were well funded, the officials would surely perform their functions effectively.

    Fourth is lack of functional environmental laboratories. Enforcement of environment laws entails, the ability to collect environmental samples, preservation of the samples, conveying the samples to the laboratory and carrying out the analyses of the samples in line with international best practices.  Some of the state ministries of environment do not possess well equipped and functional environmental laboratories.

    Fifth is the issue of nonchalant attitude on the part of the management of these companies. For instance, all industries are supposed to put in place pollution abatement facilities. However, only a few of them do have the facilities. Moreover, the law says they should carry out environmental audit of their facilities every three years. Majority of them do not comply: Furthermore, all wet industries are supposed to conduct the physico-chemical analysis of their effluent discharge and forward the results to both the federal and the state ministries of environment. Unfortunately, majority of them do not do so.

    The way forward is the establishment of a special court that will handle environmental matters in the country.  It is also imperative that all environmental laws and regulations be vigorously enforced by relevant authorities. Third, all new projects should undergo Environmental Impact Assessment study and the reports be submitted to Federal Ministry of Environment for further necessary action;

    Fourth, Nigeria is signatory to some international conventions and treaties relating to environmental matters. However, majority of these conventions and treaties have not been domesticated. The National Assembly should expedite actions on these conventions.

    •Oladipupo writes via oladeleoladipupo@gmail.com

  • Freedom, finally

    Freedom, finally

    Burkinabe authorities, mid-last week, let go 11 Nigerian soldiers they had taken into custody for alleged violation of that country’s airspace. The Nigerian Air Force (NAF) C-130 transport aircraft that was impounded along with the military personnel was also released.

    Freedom came for the soldiers and aircraft following high-level diplomatic engagement by the Nigerian government with Ouagadougou. Foreign Affairs Minister Yusuf Tuggar, on Wednesday, met with Burkina Faso junta leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré, in the country’s capital. Tuggar, who led a Nigerian delegation, said at a parley with pressmen that the visit was at the instance of President Bola Tinubu.

    It was on the heels of the Ouagadougou meeting that the freedom deal was announced. Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Kimiebi Ebienfa, confirmed on Wednesday night that the aircraft and personnel had been released.

    The C-130 NAF aircraft carrying nine passengers and two crew members got impounded on 8th December following an emergency landing in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso’s second largest city. Initial reports said the aircraft was grounded by Burkinabe authorities for unauthorised incursion into the country’s airspace. Officials of the Confederation of Sahel States (AES) disclosed that preliminary investigations indicated that the aircraft lacked authorisation to fly through Burkina Faso’s airspace. AES is the breakaway umbrella body formed by Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger Republic after they pulled out of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) for reason of coming under military rule.

    A joint statement by the junta alliance said investigation by Burkinabe authorities showed the aircraft did not obtain required authorisation to fly over their territory – something the body condemned as a breach of the sovereignty of its member-state. Speaking for the confederation, General Assimi Goïta of Mali described the NAF aircraft landing in Burkina Faso as an “unfriendly act carried out in defiance of international law,” and he warned that member-states had been authorised to neutralise any aircraft violating their airspace henceforth.

    The alarm of the AES states was obviously fuelled by the timing of the emergency landing in Burkina Faso – coming just a day after Nigerian airstrikes in Benin Republic that were instrumental in foiling an attempted coup against President Patrice Talon. On the previous day, the Nigerian government had deployed fighter jets and ground forces in the neighbouring country to help loyal troops thwart an attempted coup by dislodging soldiers led by Colonel Pascal Tigri, who had seized the national broadcaster and announced suspension of the democratic order. Acting on requests from the government of Benin, President Tinubu ordered NAF fighter jets to enter the country and take over the airspace to dislodge the coupists from the national television station and a military camp where they regrouped, according to official statement. Within hours, loyal Benin forces aided by Nigerian troops reclaimed the national broadcaster and put down the coup attempt.

    Read Also: Tinubu assures Nigerians on security, urges peaceful Eyo celebration

    But the C-130 aircraft that was in Burkina Faso was neither on military operation nor espionage mission, according to the Nigerian military. It was on a ferry mission to Portugal, and it made a precautionary landing because the crew detected a technical issue shortly after take-off from Lagos on 8th December. In a statement, NAF spokesperson, Air Commodore Ehimen Ejodame, explained that the crew’s diversion to the nearest airfield was in line with standard safety procedures and international aviation protocols. “Following take-off from Lagos, the crew observed a technical concern that necessitated a precautionary landing in Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso, the nearest airfield, in accordance with standard safety procedures and international aviation protocols,” he said, assuring that the personnel were safe and were being well treated by the host authorities.

    In a later statement, Ejodame fought back speculations that the aircraft was on intelligence mission in Burkina Faso, and that the personnel were intelligence officers trained in espionage who were on a clandestine intelligence operation. “The aircraft in question was on a duly authorised ferry flight to Portugal for scheduled periodic depot maintenance, a routine and mandatory lifecycle requirement for military transport aircraft and, therefore, had no operational tasking or mission of any kind,” he affirmed. “The flight was covered by necessary flight documentation, including provisions for diversion in line with international aviation procedures. The precautionary landing at Bobo-Dioulasso was initiated strictly on safety grounds, in full compliance with standard aviation protocols. At no time was the aircraft intercepted, forced to land, or found operating without authorisation, and claims of airspace violation or hostile intent are fabrications intended to misinform and inflame public sentiment,” he added.

    According to the NAF spokesperson, the personnel on board were “standard aircrew and mission-support officers conducting a legitimate military air movement, not intelligence operatives, and the aircraft was not equipped with surveillance or data-collection systems of any kind.” He  stated, however, that matters relating to the aircraft and its personnel were being handled through established diplomatic channels, and in line with international norms and bilateral relations.

    Well, diplomacy triumphed: the personnel and aircraft were let out after 10 days in custody. There are instructive takeaways, however. One is that junta-led countries of the sub-region may have brewed enough resentment to stand up to Nigeria, the biggest power within the bloc, whenever they perceive a red line crossed. It is almost like Venezuela standing up to the United States in the Americas. Whether they have the real capacity to live up that dare is another matter, though. With better intention, Burkina Faso could have verified that the aircraft was not equipped for any hazardous mission and that the personnel on board were non-combatants, and not hold them in custody until a diplomatic reprieve.

    Then, there was the gang-up factor in AES that made the precautionary landing at Bobo-Dioulasso to be viewed, not as potential violation against just Burkina Faso but the entire junta alliance. Notice that the three member-states of the alliance reacted concertedly and spoke jointly all through, not leaving the matter to Burkinabe authorities. It was Mali’s Goïta who called out the NAF aircraft emergency landing as an unfriendly act and served notice that AES member-states were poised to neutralise any aircraft violating their airspace henceforth. In effect, they served notice of a joint survival bond whereby assault on any singular member of their alliance is deemed an assault on all – the same creed espoused by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) alliance where attack on any member-nation is taken to be an attack on all warranting a collective response.

    Contrast that, for a moment, with the disposition within ECOWAS. Even though the sensitivity of the AES states to the NAF aircraft’s landing in Bobo-Dioulasso was accentuated by Nigeria’s role in thwarting the attempted coup in Benin, which was openly applauded by the regional body, the task of sorting out with Burkina Faso fell on Nigeria solely. And so, you never heard ECOWAS as a body or any member-state speaking up for Nigeria in rejoinder to the AES, or joining in negotiating the release of the seized personnel and aircraft. Maybe ECOWAS needs to learn about forging a united front against external threats to its member-states.

    Besides, the Bobo-Dioulasso incident highlighted the level of estrangement that has taken place within the sub-region. From being fellow members of the same bloc of interests under ECOWAS, the junta alliance now views other countries as potential enemies that stage “unfriendly” acts and deserve being neutralised in the event of future encounters. But that ill-will was only skin deep, apparently, because all three AES states yet maintain embassies in Nigeria, among others, to manage bilateral relations, trade and consular services. Nigeria also maintains diplomatic presence in those countries to promote regional cooperation.

    There were speculations that the Sahel states wanted to use the occasion as a bargaining chip to get some relief from the hurtful blockade of trade and movement of goods and services that ECOWAS imposed on them, which they believed Nigeria was in a position to influence within the bloc. That might well be so, but it did not justify their inflaming public passion with allegations of enemy action levelled against Nigeria. Regimes may come and go, but citizens will always live and inter-relate across country borderlines. No government should seek to upend that.

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

  • State police, national security and the dignity question

    State police, national security and the dignity question

    By Lekan Olayiwola

    The renewed debate on state policing in Nigeria is often framed in terms of federalism, decentralisation, and efficiency. Yet national security is not only about structures; but about how authority is felt at checkpoints, in homes, and in markets, where Nigerians encounter power not as abstraction but as lived experience: protection, neglect, abuse, or survival.

    A reform that prizes proximity over civic respect and accountability risks collapsing into grievance, because in Nigeria, humane authority is inseparable from security. The country carries six overlapping histories of how force has been exercised, endured, resisted, and internalised. To imagine that a single reform can traverse these terrains intact is to misunderstand how insecurity perpetuates itself. The dignity question, therefore, is the true measure of state policing.

    What force fragmentation looks like across regions

    In the Northwest, insecurity is immediate and rural. Banditry empties villages, fractures trust, and normalises fear. Any state police force here would inherit a context already shaped by armed actors and survival logic. Hardening too quickly risks converting policing into counter-insurgency. Civilians become terrain, not partners. Security that saves lives but erodes dignity plants the seeds of future instability.

    In the Northeast, years of insurgency have left communities wary not only of militants but of uniforms. A state police force that re-enters civilian life without recognising trauma risks mistaking compliance for trust. Peace after conflict is not restored by surveillance alone; it requires restraint that signals a return to normalcy.

    In the North-central, conflicts over land, identity, and seasonal movement turn neighbours into adversaries. Policing here is always read through the lens of belonging. Who is protected, and who is suspected? Without visible neutrality, locally controlled forces can deepen perceptions of partiality, entrenching cycles of grievance.

    In the Southwest, administrative capacity is stronger, urban crime more legible, and informal security arrangements exist. Yet efficiency carries risks. Policing that prizes order can slip into over-policing, especially of youth and informal workers. When dignity is traded for convenience, legitimacy erodes quietly but steadily.

    In the Southeast, heavy security presence has not translated into a feeling of safety, and political grievances bleed easily into security encounters. Here, a state police could either de-escalate fear or institutionalise suspicion. The line between criminal enforcement and political repression is thin, and once crossed, difficult to repair.

    In the South-south, policing is inseparable from extraction. Oil, environment, youth unemployment, and protest are entangled. Security forces are often experienced as guardians of assets rather than people. Peace here is not merely absence of violence; it is presence of fairness.

    Why structure alone cannot carry the weight

    The appeal of state policing lies in proximity, local knowledge, faster response, cultural familiarity. These are real advantages. But proximity without restraint magnifies harm. Authority becomes humane not because it is local, but because it is answerable without humiliation. Institutions that cannot admit error resort to denial; those that fear collapse cling to silence. Force becomes defensive, not protective.

    The deeper problem is not lack of information. Nigeria already knows where insecurity lies and how it manifests. What it struggles with is incentive. Who bears the cost when force overreaches? Who pays when restraint fails? Without ethical infrastructure, new policing structures simply redistribute old fears.

    The risk of localising fear

    There is an unspoken hope that bringing force closer will make it more controllable. Yet without safeguards, the opposite occurs. Fear becomes localised, personalised, harder to escape. When authority answers only upward, communities learn quickly that silence is safer than complaint. When correction is costly, abuse becomes routine. Policing reforms that ignore this may reduce certain crimes while increasing alienation—they can produce order without peace.

    Read Also: Nigeria deploys electronic navigational charts to Calabar, Bakassi channels

    Policing reform should be judged by how ordinary people experience authority. Not on paper, but in markets, along highways, during routine checks. Security that humiliates does not disappear; it returns as grievance.

    Young men stopped repeatedly without cause, women spoken to with contempt, communities searched without explanation—these are not marginal details. They are the emotional residue from which insecurity regenerates itself. Legitimacy does not flow automatically from effectiveness; it flows from dignified restraint, the visible capacity of power to limit itself.

    Comparative lessons from beyond Nigeria

    International experience suggests that proximity must be married to restraint. In India, state-level police often respond quickly to urban unrest but have struggled to build community trust in rural insurgency zones. Training in de-escalation and accountability mechanisms has proven essential.

    In Kenya, devolution gave counties local policing powers, yet uneven capacity and weak oversight have led to variable protection, with some communities experiencing force as predatory rather than protective.

    In Liberia, post-conflict policing reforms emphasised community liaison and trauma-informed engagement. Force without accountability risked replicating wartime fear networks; restraint and ethical oversight proved key to building enduring legitimacy. These examples illustrate that decentralisation alone is insufficient. Institutional incentives, oversight, and channels for complaint are equally critical.

    What a different design demands

    A careful approach starts by acknowledging limits. State policing will not automatically reduce insecurity. Decentralisation does not equal justice. Nigeria does not merely need the right structure; it needs a design that makes restraint possible and correction survivable.

    Officers must be protected when choosing de-escalation over domination. Communities must have channels to speak without fear of reprisal. This is not sentimentalism; it is practical governance. In pluralistic, historically wounded societies, peace is sustained not by absence of force but by the discipline of its use.

    A question before reform

    The harder question is not whether Nigeria should have state police, but what kind of peace it is willing to build. A peace that relies on fear travels quickly but collapses under pressure. A peace that protects respect and accountability moves slowly but endures. State policing will not be a single experience; it will be six different realities layered onto one constitutional change. Recognising this is critical to any reform effort.

    Security that listens before it acts may not appear strong at first glance. Yet it is the only kind that does not return later as crisis. Officers’ choices to restrain, to pause, to de-escalate, must be visible in both policy and practice; communities’ responses, their trust, and their ability to speak must be measurable through repeated engagement. Nigeria’s security future will be decided not by where power sits on paper, but by how it behaves in the lives of those it claims to protect. That is the test this moment presents

    •Olayiwola is a peace and conflict researcher and policy analyst. He can be reached at lekanolayiwola@gmail.com.

  • Tinubu’s budget speech of discipline as doctrine, boldness as signal, security as core

    Tinubu’s budget speech of discipline as doctrine, boldness as signal, security as core

    By Sunday Dare

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s 2026 Budget Speech is remarkable, not only for its rhetorical flourish, it is remarkable, for something far more consequential in Nigerian public finance management: authority, realism, and enforcement intent.

    This budget  indicates where Nigeria is coming from, where it is, and—critically—what must now change.

    •A President Owning the Hard Truths,Powering Forward

    The first strength of the speech lies in what it does not evade. The President openly acknowledges that:

    •budget execution must be stronger,firm

    •revenue assumptions were optimistic,

    •and fiscal reality eventually caught up with projections.

    This candour is rare in budget presentations, which often prefer abstraction over admission. By naming the problem plainly, the President establishes credibility and signals a shift from excuse-making to corrective action.

    The clarification that the additional three months for 2025 budget execution is legal housekeeping, not fiscal indiscipline, further reinforces a leader who understands constitutional boundaries and chooses to explain them, not hide behind them.

    Read Also: Tinubu assures Nigerians on security, urges peaceful Eyo celebration

    •The Boldest Line in the Speech: Command, Not Consultation

    The speech reaches its most consequential moment at Paragraph 12:

    “Let me be clear: 2026 will be a year of stronger discipline in budget execution.”

    This is not rhetorical emphasis; it is executive instruction. Naming the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, the Accountant-General, and the Director-General of the Budget Office is deliberate. It does three things at once:

    •fixes responsibility,

    •removes ambiguity,

    •and collapses bureaucratic distance.

    This is presidential authority exercised without apology. It sends a clear signal that 2026 is not a negotiating year for fiscal laxity.

    •From Reform Rhetoric to Enforcement Architecture

    The speech’s boldness deepens in its treatment of Government-Owned Enterprises (GOEs). The language shifts from encouragement to performance compulsion:

    •assigned revenue targets

    •digitised end-to-end collections

    • interoperable payment rails

    •real-time dashboards,

    • performance scorecards tied to evaluations.

    This is not merely reform language; it is institutional redesign. The President is explicit that underperformance will no longer be masked by opacity or manual processes. The subtext is unmistakable: systems will now remember who performed and who did not.

    •Security Doctrine: No Moral Grey Zones

    On national security, the speech abandons euphemism entirely. The declaration that any armed group operating outside state authority will be regarded as terrorists is a doctrinal reset. It removes political, ethnic, or semantic cover from violent non-state actors.

    This is bold because it narrows discretion and widens accountability. It also signals to security agencies that ambiguity will no longer be an operational excuse.

    •Fiscal Numbers as Political Statement

    The budget aggregates are presented not as defensive explanations, but as choices:

    •a conservative oil benchmark

    •realistic production assumptions

    •a deficit framed within sustainability, not denial.

    The repeated insistence that “these numbers are not mere accounting lines” reinforces the President’s framing of the budget as an instrument of national priority, not legislative ritual.

    •A Quiet but Firm Philosophy Shift

    Perhaps the most important feature of the peesentation is its philosophical undertone:

    Nigeria is moving from expansion without discipline to consolidation with enforcement.

    The closing line captures it succinctly:

    “The most significant budget is not the one we announce. It is the one we deliver.”

    That sentence alone separates this speech from many of its predecessors.

    Why This Budget Matters

    This budget speech is bold not because it promises miracles, but because it sets consequences. It does not sell optimism cheaply; it conditions optimism on discipline, systems, and performance.

    In tone, structure, and substance, it signals a presidency that is no longer merely reform-minded, but execution-driven. If followed through, it marks a transition point: from reform as intent to reform as enforcement.

    In that sense, this budget is less a fiscal document and more a governance marker—and its boldness lies precisely there. 

  • Tax Reforms push-back: Opposition’s political gimmickry or genuine love for masses?

    Tax Reforms push-back: Opposition’s political gimmickry or genuine love for masses?

    • By Bode Opeseitan

    As they filed into the press hall at Shehu Musa Yar’Adua Centre, the desperation was not just audible, it was visible.

     From the African Democratic Congress (ADC) to members of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Labour Party (LP) like Solomon Dalung, Kenneth Okonkwo and Chille Igbawua, who spoke for the group tagged Nigeria Opposition Movement, the gathering looked less like a united front and more like a wounded chorus.

     They were joined by others like activist Aisha Yesufu.

     Their demand? That the federal government suspend the new tax laws set to take effect in January 2026. Their claim? That the reforms are exploitative. Their vow? Lawful resistance. Their appeal? That Nigerians join their petition against what they called a harmful policy.

     But harmful to whom?

     In a democracy where opposition voices have thinned to the point of near extinction, any moment of protest deserves scrutiny. Especially when it masquerades as concern for the masses but smells unmistakably of political mischief.

     Unlike the backdoor decrees of the past, this tax reform journey was one of the most consultative in Nigeria’s legislative history. Town hall meetings were held across all six geo-political zones. The policy was debated with the Governors’ Forum, LabourCongress, Manufacturers Association, and civil society. Media interviews were granted. National Assembly hearings were attended. Compromises were reached. The National Assembly passed the bills. The President signed them into law. Implementation was deferred until January 2026 to allow for public awareness and institutional readiness.

     This is not how a government hides a harmful policy. This is how a responsible state builds consensus.

     Now to the substance. The 2026 tax reforms are not a punitive ambush but a structural correction. They exempt individuals earning below ₦800,000 annually from personal income tax. They shield small businesses with turnover below ₦100 million from Company Income Tax, VAT, and the new Development Levy. They consolidate four separate levies such as TETFund, NITDA, NASENI, and the Police Trust Fund into a single 4% Development Levy, making compliance simpler and more transparent. They introduce a 15% minimum tax on multinationals, aligning Nigeria with global standards and ending the era of corporate freeloading. And they modernize tax administration through a new Nigeria Revenue Service, digitizing processes and reducing corruption.

    Read Also: CBN asks banks to configure ATMs, POS terminals for foreign card transactions

     The reforms are not just about revenue, they are about fairness. They are about shifting the burden from the poor to those who can afford to pay. They are about ending the chaos of multiple taxation and replacing it with clarity. They are about funding education, healthcare, and infrastructure not through loans and handouts, but through a fair, long-term agreement where citizens and businesses contribute their share via taxes, and the government delivers public goods transparently and efficiently.

     So why the outrage?

     The opposition says the reforms ignore ASUU and doctors’ strikes. But tax reform is not a labor negotiation, it is the foundation for funding those very sectors. They say the policy is harmful. But the facts show it protects the poor, empowers SMEs, and targets the top end of the economy.

     They claim to speak for the people. But where were they when the Lagos-Calabar Coastal Road was ridiculed, by the same opposition, only to become a national marvel in the making? Where were they when the student loan scheme was dismissed, only to become a lifeline for over 788,947 Nigerian students through NELFUND, with over ₦154.3 billion disbursed in just 19 months?

     This is not principled opposition. This is political rascalism.

     And it is not new. The same voices that now cry foul once fought against every reform that has since become a national asset. They have not evolved. They have not learned. They have not earned the right to be taken seriously.

     Seeing Kenneth Okonkwo there gave pause. He has, at times, shown flashes of rational thinking. Was this a moment of misjudgment, or a perfidy he walked into, doing the bidding of others?

     This is not how opposition should behave. To be credible, they must raise issues that reflect the lived realities of Nigerians, not hide behind the fig leaf of public interest while shielding the privileges of their moneyed patrons. Nigerians are smarter than that. They know when politicians are clowning, which they do often. They know when they are genuinely fighting for the common good, which unfortunately they rarely do.

     This protest failed the test of scrutiny. And history will remember it as such.

  • Reno Omokri’s ambassadorial appointment

    Reno Omokri’s ambassadorial appointment

    Mr. Reno Omokri deserves to be congratulated on the Nigerian Senate’s confirmation of his ambassadorial appointment, in spite of vehement opposition from some quarters to his nomination. He is a lawyer, a former Special Assistant on New Media to former President Goodluck Jonathan of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), and an avid supporter of former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar’s 2023 bid to be president of the country.

    An American missionary, Mike Arnold, who claimed to know Reno Omokri closely, said that the nominee was not fit for appointment as an ambassador, because “He was accused of sexual harassment by Sen. Natasha Akpoti at a State House event.” This allegation was in an open letter by Mike Arnold to the Nigerian Senate, and was widely circulated on social media and reported in various other media outlets on 2 December, 2025.  Meanwhile, in a 22 March, 2025 X post addressed to The Economist (of London) and titled, “In the interest of transparency, please balance your coverage”, Reno Omokri had denied the allegation.

    In the X post, he had written: “Senator Akpoti accused me of sexually harassing her at Aso Rock Presidential Villa, during a reception held for the visiting Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta, when he visited Nigeria between May 4 and May 7 2014.  …  [D]uring those dates, I was sent to the United States of America as President Jonathan’s special envoy. I met and was photographed with multiple U.S. officials, including State Department officials, in Washington, D.C.”

    Moreover, in a 21 September, 2025 YouTube interview with Laolu Akande, on Channels Television’s Inside Sources, Reno Omokri stated that, for the journey, he had “a first class British Airways ticket … which I had to go and ask British Airways to send to me proving that I was not in the country on May 6, 2014 when President Jonathan hosted President Kenyatta to a state banquet and also showed my passport with a stamp from US immigration.”

    Raising the Senator Akpoti-Uduaghan issue in relation to the nomination therefore seemed to be what Ambassador Gbara Awanen called “emotional rhetoric” and “the weaponisation of past, failed accusations” in a 30 November, 2025 article in The Nation, titled “Why Tinubu must reject media trial of his ambassadorial nominees.” In the article, the ambassador was principally defending the nomination of his fellow Ambassador Ayodele Oke, a former Director General of the National Intelligence Agency.

    Moreover, in a 1 December, 2025 Arise News assessment of the ambassadorial list, Dr. Reuben Abati had, using innuendo (or indirect reference), said: “You may well post some people to some countries and they go there and carry placards, depending on where the wind blows. Even they may carry placards against Nigeria.” More directly, Seun Okinbaloye of Channels Television, in an 11 June, 2025 YouTube interview titled “Reno Omokri defends support for Tinubu …,” referred Reno Omokri back to a protest he led against then-presidential-candidate Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and at which the nominee referred to Asiwaju in derogatory terms at Chatham House in London on 5 December, 2022.

    Seun Okinbaloye asked him why he switched to supporting President Tinubu after the election. To the question, Reno Omokri replied: “Well, there’s a saying, ‘Results cancel insults.’ … We had a manifesto which I was part of putting together. That’s the Peoples Democratic Party presidential manifesto. We said we were going to do certain things. The first, we were going to remove fuel subsidy. The second, we were going to float the naira.  The third, we were going to devolve power from the federal government down to the local levels. And then, we were going to have students loans. All of these things we said we were going to do, President Bola Tinubu is doing them, and he began doing them from day one. … So, when I saw the results [of what] the President was doing, I decided that, okay, this is a man to be supported.”

    Read Also: ICPC invites Dangote over $7m school fees claim against ex-NMDPRA boss

    In a 30 November, 2025 post, one of the very prominent Facebook staunch supporters of the president, Sunday Wale Adeniran (#SWA), wrote: “Yes, Reno worked against Tinubu as Atiku’s spokesperson but after the election, I do not know of anyone who has supported this government and promoted the nation Nigeria with more facts and figures than Omokri. This man presents his thoughts clearly backed with historical, political and economic facts that no one has ever succeeded in controverting. He also promotes our culture pro bono like no one else.”

    Indeed, whenever I see Reno Omokri in his beautiful Nigerian attire, which he dons with pride, I remember the late Ambassador Olusegun Olusola of “The Village Headmaster” fame who passed away on 21 June, 2012. Sometime before his demise, in one television interview, Ambassador Olusola advocated for the active promotion of Nigerian culture, especially Nigerian fashion, as a feature of soft power on the African continent. Possibly without knowing it, Reno Omokri has been living Ambassador Olusola’s dream, even beyond Africa.

    It is therefore understandable that #SWA submitted: “Reno does not only deserve an ambassadorial appointment, he [also] deserves to be posted to one of the biggest players on the global stage. He is going to be one of the best representatives of this country since independence.”

    Like #SWA, Iluo-oghene, who self-identifies as a legal practitioner, poet and political analyst, noted on Facebook, on 30 November, 2025, in a post titled, “Political currency of usefulness”: “[T]he rant about Tinubu nominating Reno Omokri and Femi Fani-Kayode [FFK] as ambassadors is funny to me. … Politicians act from a strategic place, and nobody gets a seat for being a saint, but for being useful. Tinubu didn’t pick Reno and FFK because he ‘forgave’ them. He nominated them because they are not just useful, but of extreme value and influence.”

    She further declared: “Since Tinubu’s emergence, Reno has defended him like Kilode [i.e., unimaginably]. During Donald Trump’s recent political circus with Nigeria’s sovereignty, Reno [fought] tooth and nail, countering misinformation internationally. Call him dramatic, cunning, a liar or annoying …, but the man is brilliant and markets Nigeria well. Now, that’s the core job of an ‘Ambassador’. … Reno and FFK earned that spot, fairly.”

    On the point that Reno Omokri had called President Tinubu horrible names in the past, Iluo-oghene responded: “And so? … [N]ot everyone who criticizes the president is against him, and not everyone who publicly praises him is for him. Some critics are only playing a role, while some supporters are just acting a script.” If a person has been betrayed before by close ‘saints’, should it be strange if that person then somehow tolerates distant ‘sinners’?

    In fact, at a point in time when President Tinubu and the government were under immense attack, Reno Omokri, like FFK, stuck his neck out in their defence, even when some of those who were under moral obligation to speak out kept a timid or treacherous silence. According to an anonymous quote on Instagram accessed on 8 December, 2025, “Not everyone creating problems is visible. Sometimes the real enemy hides in silence.” Moreover, the famous late African-American civil rights leader, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., said perceptively: “In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.”

    Another lady argued powerfully in support of Reno Omokri’s nomination, resisting hisses and rendering other attempts to interrupt her ineffectual, at an explosive debate on the topic “Ambassadorial nomination list of Reno Omokri, Femi Fani-Kayode and Prof. Mahmood Yakubu by President Tinubu, glory or shame?” posted on YouTube by Gana@Ganaonlinetv on 4 December, 2025. The lady said: “Majority of people who have problem with Reno are the most unaccountable set of people you can ever meet. … I knew Reno even before Tinubu became president. He was really against the president. … But he was accountable enough to [carry out] his research and also come back to debunk every allegation, every false allegation.”

    She continued: “None of you here markets Nigeria like Reno. …. Not [even] me. … Irrespective of who is in power, Reno has always been patriotic. Reno has always been intellectual. Reno has always [engaged in] proper debate, intellectual debate, backed with data, backed with research. None of you here can match him when it comes to that level. … He’s very qualified to be an ambassador for Nigeria.”

    Reno Omokri is an efficient counterforce to political hot-air-blowers and social media killjoys. And what does he have in his tool box? A capacity for deep and extensive research, courage and rational arguments. With these, he defended the election that brought President Tinubu to office against those, like Peter Obi and his supporters, who naggingly insinuate or claim that the Independent National Electoral Commission, led by Professor Mahmood Yakubu, manipulated the 2023 presidential election to declare Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu winner.

    Reno Omokri knocked down the argument in a 30 November, 2025 post on Facebook. He said: “As for the conduct of the election, all international observers publicly stated that the polls reflected the will of the Nigerian people. For example, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labour of the US Department of State, stated as follows: ‘National elections were widely reported to have reflected the will of voters.’ Moreover, as I said privately to people in the Peoples Democratic Party before the election, if in 2019, when the PDP was united, we could not defeat the All Progressives Congress, how could we hope to vanquish them in 2023, when we had splintered into four. … It was just a matter of common political sense to know that Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu would win the election.”

    Reno Omokri further addressed Peter Obi directly: “You, sir, challenged his victory at the Presidential Election Petition Court, and in your pleadings, you did not state that you won the election. Rather, you pleaded that the then President-elect was not qualified based on a conviction, not winning Abuja, and sundry other flimsy reasons which were thrown out by the courts all the way to the Supreme Court, which spent less than five minutes dismissing your appeal.” In effect, Reno Omokri also defended Professor Mahmood Yakubu against the charge that his current ambassadorial nomination is a reward for ‘making’ Tinubu president.

    With the Senate confirmation of Reno Omokri’s ambassadorial nomination, in spite of stout denunciation, he needs to remember constantly that he has a point to prove, and that to whom much is given, much is expected. The whole controversy also underscores the significance of recognising, irrespective of the issue, the existence of alternative perspectives. In fact, as Amber Veal counselled: “Before you argue with someone, ask yourself, ‘Is that person even mentally mature enough to grasp the concept of different perspectives?’ Because, if not, there’s absolutely no point.”

  • Performance Management System (PMS) as game changer in Nigeria’s development progress

    Performance Management System (PMS) as game changer in Nigeria’s development progress

    • By Tunji Olaopa, Abuja

    One critical question that I had contended with for sometime as a public service institutional reformer is, why it has been so very difficult to institute performance-oriented values and systems (PMS) to alter the inherited ‘I am directed’ traditional public administration tradition in the civil service in Nigeria. Indeed, implementation of PMS has been largely rhetorical, entailing moving in circles since the Jerome Udoji Public Service Reform Commission reforms first attempt in 1974. Why is this so? One, civil servants generally take on their job as career, largely because of job security. They therefore would generally resist any reform that threatens their jobs, even if such reforms are in the public interest. This attitude translates, for all practical purpose, into a general dislike for change and an unreflective defense of the status quo

    Two, civil servants are accustomed to a tradition of ‘wait for your turn’ to gain seniority within hierarchical structures, and therefore value the respect and authority that their positions carry jealously. This orientation contrasts with performance management’s need to reward individual initiatives, creativity, authority of knowledge, and proven expertise, while rewarding officers based on evidence of performance, usually measured as outputs, outcomes and impact within results-based management frameworks. Three, in any governance context and administrative environment where entitlement mentality prevails, where cultural practices of patronage and nepotism that would usually override merit on the altar of ethnic, religious and sectional parochialisms prevails. One where personal connections and loyalty influence appointments with brazen disregard for merit as is common in our clime, it is usually difficult to achieve the flexibility that enables the fairness and objectivity required for a performance-based system to function effectively. Let us now proceed to put this set of theoretical statements in context, to explain how the failure to institute performance-based systems in the Nigeria’s public administration system over the years has, in part, been responsible for Nigeria’s arrested development

    Let me start with an axiom that has guided my reform optimism about the Nigerian state and the unfinished business of institutional reform. That axiom is that there is definitely no shortage of development visions, blueprints, development ideas and paradigms, well-intended policies and programs, or even expert or professional advisory support. As a public service institutional reformer and policy implementation researcher, I recognize all these as the very first step in the trajectory of getting reform done. Thus, while consecutive Nigerian governments could be said to have a surfeit of the visions and ideas that ground institutional reforms with varying levels of impacts, the momentum that translate these visions, ideas and paradigms into efficient institution and transformative development progress has been missing. 

    Unfortunately, the institutional and developmental impacts have been less than salutary because of the lack of the political will that backstops the success of any reform effort. This is the second level of the reform business that unlock the possibility of success. We can all agree, without prejudice, that many Nigerian governments have played bad politics with development programs. By this I mean that Nigeria’s political orientation, from independence till date, has made it extremely difficult to achieve the right composition of elite nationalism that triggers national development. First, there is the problem of policy short-circuiting due to administrative discontinues—each government always desires to reinvent the political and administrative wheels rather than building on the foundations the previous administrations have laid. Most fundamental is the lack of any genuine ideological bases for political parties that connect to an overarching philosophical construct for rethinking national integration and national development. Since 1999, when Nigeria’s resumed her democratic experiment, politicking has been more about trivial issues of religion and ethnicity than that of issue-based discourse on taking Nigeria seriously.

    Read Also: ICPC invites Dangote over $7m school fees claim against ex-NMDPRA boss

    In institutional reform terms, therefore, we have been witnessing political administrations who have been entrapped in the conception-reality gap in the sense that they have demonstrated some real passion for institutional reforms, given the availability of outstanding ideas, insights and blueprints. However, the passion lacked deep knowledge that could have enabled the governments to intimately and critically interrogate the binding constraints that limit and undermine institutional reforms in the public sector change space as well as the institutional architecture that the space represents. This failure makes it very impossible for these governments to recognize the devils in the details of development policy execution. This conception-reality gap is further complicated by the ready default of prebendal culture of primitive accumulation that color elite nationalism. This makes it difficult for any successive administration in Nigeria to take a gamble on development by initiating development bargains around which the Nigerian Project could have taken off efficiently and with the right dose of political will to raise the possibility of success.

    From an institutional reform perspective, many of Nigeria’s past governments have moved from electoral victory to administrative performance to unlock the dividends of democratic governance without a thorough knowledge of the binding constraints that requires dismantling within the governance, administrative and institutional dynamics of the Nigerian state and its public service. Thus, every effort to ignite structural and developmental transformation has remained futile. From the technical angle of policy and development management, therefore, Nigeria has been benchmarking failures through change management initiatives that have been marred by several limitations: poor policy and programme design; poor resource allocation; unstable macroeconomic climate not matched with required policy intelligence and analytics; lack of disciplined and performance managed development policy and programme execution; policy and programme discontinuity; low public service organisational intelligent quotient (IQ) and sub-optimal institutional capability readiness; and the wide-ranging sociological and cultural issues generally summed up as the Nigerian Factor.

    However, when the Tinubu administration was inaugurated, His Excellency, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu wisely opted for performance management as the best means by which to manage the Renewed Hope Agenda. And to achieve this, the president compelled key policy players to sign a performance bond. The administration further appointed Hadiza Bala-Usman to oversee the structural nodal point for implementing and tracking the trajectory of institutional performance. Whatever the process is called—performance bond, agreement or contract—it signals a political willingness on the part of government to achieve a measure of performance and productivity through a judicious attempt to get the best out of the people, infrastructure, financial and material resources deployed by the MDAs. This will be achieved through a systematic set of actions that link the Renewed Hope Agenda’s policy goals and national development objectives with the performance and productivity expectations from the MDAs in terms of sector strategies, performance budgeting, improvement plans, targets, data, workplans, key performance indicators, training and capacity development, etc. And to achieve the utmost productivity, corrective measures in terms of rewards and sanctions are equally put in place when performance improves or falls short.

    By opting for the performance management system, the Tinubu administration has keyed into a global best practice. From Florence Nightingale’s effort, in 1861, to instigate the publication of medical statistics in London hospitals and the impact of this on the British civil service, to F.W. Taylor’s scientific management method that facilitated process improvements on factory floors, performance management has come a long way. By the time colonial rule was over and Nigeria had keyed into the inherited administrative traditions of the British civil service system, Nigeria had adopted the formal personality-based assessment models, the most popular of which is the annual performance evaluation report (APER) form. Unfortunately, this template would soon degenerate into oblivion because of its flaws bordering on its subjective limitations. And high-performing civil service systems across the world would later revise and supplement it by other rating instruments and scales, including psychometrics, 360-degree peer review feedback, Management by Objectives (MBO), critical incident techniques, behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS), assessment centers, project-based appraisals, self-assessments, competency-based reviews, narrative appraisals, and many more.

    For the Nigerian civil service system, the Udoji Commission report recommended and introduced the planning, programming, budgeting system (PPBS), that ensured that MDAs and their performances were framed in terms of programmes and strategies rather than line items. The Commission also introduced the management by objectives (MBO), and later the zero-based budgeting. At the global level, and under the prodding of the new public management, performance management planning and implementation would soon be enriched and upgraded at many critical and technical points to demonstrate the complexity of measuring performance in an increasingly complex administrative world. The Kaplan and Norton Balanced Scorecard (BSC) became significant in the public sector because of its revolutionary shifting of performance scorecard away from the traditional focus on the very narrow financial considerations to a broader and more comprehensive assessment founded on four variables—financial, customer, innovation/growth, and internal processes. This has been followed by other performance management features, from value for money audit and service delivery units to performance-based pay and sanction and citizens charter.        

    Despite the perspicacity of the Tinubu administration in opting for the implementation of performance management system, there is still a fundamental question an institutional reformer is forced to ask. Are the MDAs’ structural, procedural and institutional dynamics capability ready for the performance-oriented change process? Are they prepared to shoulder the burden of performance management? Why, despite our best reform efforts, has it appeared as if the civil service system is just gyrating on an axis without any appreciable progress? The performance management dynamic of the civil service system in Nigeria has been dominated by the fixation with the APER template and some underlying assumptions. These have to be deconstructed to even begin to reinvent the performance management system that will anchor the Renewed Hope Agenda. First, therefore, we need to make it very clear that staff performance evaluation that the APER takes care of, is not the same thing as performance management. The annual performance appraisal is merely a one-off evaluation criterion which barely add any value to a staff’s promotion score. It is therefore just a key but not too significant component of performance management.

    On the contrary, performance transcends staff appraisal. It involves a continuous cycle of monitoring and reporting of performance against certain set targets, goals, and objectives. To foreground performance as the basis for evaluating the MDAs, the Renewed Hope Agenda has to concretize a performance system that instigate performance monitoring, evaluation and reporting based on (a) whether or not the MDA is doing what it is supposed to do in terms of outputs, impacts and outcomes; (b) articulate gap identification in the MDAs that enables them not only to evaluate and learn but also to improve their performance; and (c) institute a reward and sanction system as a basis for rewarding high performance, and sanctioning low performance.

    As a paradigmatic shift away from the traditional Weberian and “I-am-directed” bureaucratic system, performance management transcends technical and technocratic design, roll-out and training, and speaks rather to the necessity of transforming work and workplace culture, behavior and attitude in ways that emphasize outputs through the baselining of quality information and data system with the capacity to produce high-quality data in timely manner. This then enables the MDAs to develop strategic plans, like the medium-term sector strategy (MTSS) which stipulate quantitatively measurable goals, objectives, performance indicators and how they are to me achieved.

    To therefore concretize the firm resolve of the Tinubu administration to frog leap the civil service system into an efficient mode through the adoption of the performance management system, more is required. The performance system must first be squared with the existing dynamics of technology, capacity, governance and technology. It is not just sufficient to introduce the system in a discrete manner that fails to cohere with the existing overall civil service limitations and possibilities in terms of structures and institutions. Here, the Offices of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF) and States Heads of Service will need to play a crucial role as nodal points in coordinating the strengthening of the monitoring and compliance dimensions of the performance management system in the central personnel agencies. This will facilitate not only the institutionalization of performance as an accountability tool, but also the necessity of unifying its dynamics and procedures across the MDAs. The second most significant step in the institutionalizing of the performance management system is the need to integrate it with the existing and reformed component of the human resource management. This will be two-sided. On the one hand, it will involve the HR processes of recruitment, promotion, training and deployment that articulate the significance of leadership pipelining and talent management for the civil service. On the other hand, there is also the imperative of a consequence management system that regulates performances and challenges through, for instance, a performance bonus or the establishment of a challenge fund that motivates performance. This must also be coupled with a service-wide capacity building workshop and training program, especially supervisors, to determine a schedule for periodic impact assessment. The Federal and States Ministries of Budget and Planning, OSGF/OSSGs, Bureau of Statistics, Civil Service Commissions, government training institutions, and, of course, the Office of the Special Adviser to the President on Policy and Coordination, etc. have pivotal roles in PMS implementation. Their roles are multi-layered and integral, making PMS inter-ministerial partnership as one irreducible critical success factor in its implementation to explore in great details. Exploration of the dimensions to the latter, is beyond my mission in this contribution, as it is far more nuanced and technical.

    The Renewed Hope Agenda has taken off to a good start. It is a declared intention to shun bad politics in the articulation of a governance framework that is founded on solid institutional reform blueprint that will deliver the stated goals of the Tinubu administration. What I have done in this piece is to outline the structural and institutional components of the performance management system that will backstop the success of the Agenda. It is the last mile towards good governance.

  • Tinubu: Prophetic in vision, delivering with foresight

    Tinubu: Prophetic in vision, delivering with foresight

    • Bamidele Atoyebi

    Looking with hindsight at the rate of delivery on campaign promises, what rightfully agitated the mind would be, Is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu a prophet? The question may sound rhetorical, even dramatic, but it is one that keeps imposing itself on public discourse as events continue to align with the projections he boldly made while presenting the 2025 budget in 2024 with empirical accuracy.

    At the time, many Nigerians dismissed his projections as mere political optimism but now know better. He called the 2025 budget “An Ambitious But Necessary Budget To Secure Our Future” and projected that inflation which appeared untamable, and stood at about 34.6 per cent, would drop significantly to around 15 per cent. Today, inflation has reportedly declined further to about 14.5 per cent and still racing towards single digit. That was not  coincidence; it was policy meeting purpose, the result of one who prepared for power and just linking the dots with pinpoint accuracy.

    He also spoke with confidence about the exchange rate. When the naira was hovering around ₦1,700 to the dollar, with many predicting it would hit the N2000 mark, President Tinubu projected a drop to about ₦1,500. As at today, the naira is trading around ₦1,452 to the dollar and with the reforms, there is no gain saying that the Naira will further firm up. Again, what many saw as wishful thinking has become measurable progress with adroit policy implementation.

    Read Also: Tinubu felicitates Dr Awosan at 70

    This is why the President’s oft-quoted assurance (Elofokanbale) “go and be rest assured, go and be at peace”  resonates differently today. Tinubu did not just say he would fix the battered economy; he is fixing it, step by step, policy by policy. Leadership is not about noise; it is about results.  The results are beginning to speak loudly in different sectors where hopes had been lost.

    Even the NNPCL has stepped up under this administration. For the first time in over 36 years, the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Limited has broken long-standing barriers, recording historic highs in its upstream crude oil production and posting unprecedented financial returns with a never seen transparency. This turnaround has been driven by stronger accountability, improved operational efficiency, and a clear reform direction championed by the Tinubu government.

    President Tinubu has always spoken with the confidence of a man who understands both power and process. He once said he does not join certain caucuses because he knows them to be sneaky and untrustworthy, but that he would defeat them in every election. History records that he did exactly that, defeating Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, and Rabiu Kwankwaso  despite their combined efforts. “We will vote”, “we will win” was not just a slogan; it became a political reality that has become an immutable benchmark.

    Every major statement Tinubu has made in public either became a trending topic, a political reality, or an economic direction. His words shape conversations; his policies shape outcomes. That is why some Nigerians, half-joking but half-serious, now ask: Does Tinubu like Nostradamus, see the future?

    From the standpoint of the BAT Ideological Group, this is not prophecy; it is preparation. It is the product of experience, courage, clear vision and an ideological belief in reform-driven governance. Tinubu understands that tough decisions today are the price for stability tomorrow. This is why we say Tinubu is not a politician he’s an institution,  he doesn’t just make a statement like others do without having plan and methodology on how he would achieve his aims and objectives.

    As we look ahead to 2026, optimism is no longer blind faith; it is grounded in evidence and reality of what have so far been achieved. The foundations are being laid, the numbers are tallying, and confidence is gradually building. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu deserves his accolades, not because he speaks boldly, but because the country is beginning to move in the direction he promised.

    History will decide the final verdict, but for now, one thing is clear: when leadership is guided by ideology and competence, vision can begin to look like foresight.

    When I was asked at one event I attended in Kwara what to expect from President Tinubu after 2027: I told them to expect anti-terrorists battalions,  improved salaries and welfare for our security men, upgraded weapon systems, more loans for farmers, farmers cooperative, rural infrastructure development, access to finance, more Renewed Hope homes for low income earners among others. When the reporter asked how I  knew these; I told him Bamidele understands by Renewed Hope manifestos and political impartation same way “Daniel understood by books and time”

    •Bamidele Atoyebi is the Convener of BAT Ideological Group,  publisher at Mining and Unfiltered reporting and National Coordinator for Accountability and Policy Monitoring

  • Nigeria’s evolving landscape of security management

    Nigeria’s evolving landscape of security management

    By Olatunde Labode

    Nigeria’s security challenges are often discussed in terms of uniforms, budgets and command structures. Public debate most of the time seems to focus on visible institutions and reactive responses, while far less attention is paid to the less obvious systems that support prevention, coordination and early decision-making of the security architecture. Yet in increasingly complex environments, security is no longer defined only by force; it is shaped just as much by information, analysis and foresight.

    Across major capitals of the world, governments now operate within layered security ecosystems.

    These systems include not only formal state institutions but also civilian professionals who specialise in risk assessment, information coordination and strategic support. Their work is typically quiet, highly regulated, and designed to strengthen institutional response rather than replace it.

    Nigeria, particularly Abuja, is gradually moving in this direction. The convergence of diplomacy, politics, commerce and large-scale public activity in the capital city has created security demands that extend beyond traditional enforcement. Sensitive locations, high-profile gatherings and critical infrastructure increasingly require anticipatory planning and structured information flow long before uniformed personnel are deployed to such locations or gatherings.

    Within this evolving landscape, a small number of privately run intelligence and risk-management firms have emerged as part of the broader support architecture. Operating within legal and ethical boundaries, these organisations focus on early-warning analysis, situational awareness and the responsible handling of security-related information. Their contribution is often measured not in public visibility but in the absence of crisis.

    One such firm is EIBStratoc Limited, a key part of the EIB Group, led by Bright Echefu, whose professional path reflects the multidisciplinary nature of contemporary security work. With a background that spans across formal education and systems-based training, Echefu exemplifies a calm, methodical approach to security thinking, one that prioritises discipline, discretion and institutional cooperation. His leadership reflects an understanding that credibility in this field is built through consistency, ethical restraint and respect for process rather than public prominence.

    Under this approach, firms within the EIB Group contribute to national stability through multi-source intelligence coordination, continuous situational-awareness frameworks and early-warning advisory support for sensitive environments. Their work typically integrates location-based risk analysis, structured information flow and continuous monitoring designed to assist decision-makers responsible for safeguarding critical national assets and high-risk settings. These functions are carried out through collaboration with relevant public institutions as well as trusted local and international partners, reinforcing the principle that modern security is most effective when it is coordinated, layered and accountable.

    Beyond the security sector, the EIB Group’s activities extend into communication, entertainment and hospitality which are industries that play a significant but often understated role in economic development and urban stability. These sectors are central to employment creation, public engagement and the management of shared spaces where information, crowd dynamics and perception intersect. Engagement across these areas reflects a broader appreciation of how security, communication and commercial activity are deeply interconnected in modern cities.

    Read Also: 2027: Makinde, Afolabi to Nigerians: let’s drop winner-takes-all politics

    The group’s footprint also spans other productive segments of the economy, including automobile services, real estate, sports-related ventures, styling and medical-oriented initiatives. While varied in form, these enterprises share a common thread: practical contribution to livelihoods, infrastructure and service delivery. In an environment where economic resilience depends on diversified private-sector participation, such investments strengthen local value chains and reinforce stability beyond any single industry.

    Notably, these commercial pursuits are complemented by philanthropic engagement of corporate social responsibility initiatives through a foundation aligned with the EIB Group’s broader values. This social investment focuses on community-oriented support and human-centred interventions, reflecting a view of enterprise that recognises responsibility alongside growth. In a climate where private success is often detached from public contribution, this approach underscores the importance of giving back as part of sustainable development.

    At the core of this emerging model is a simple idea: that many security failures begin as information failures. Miscommunication, delayed analysis or poorly coordinated responses can transform manageable risks into national incidents. As a result, modern security practice increasingly emphasises structured intelligence support, ethical data management and collaboration with relevant public institutions.

    The role of private actors in this space is not without debate. Questions around oversight, accountability and data protection remain valid and necessary. Clear regulatory frameworks are essential to ensure that civilian participation in security ecosystems enhances public safety without undermining civil liberties or institutional authority. Transparency of purpose, not publicity of capability is what builds trust.

    What is becoming evident is that Nigeria’s security conversation can no longer remain one-dimensional. The nature of contemporary threats, often fluid, information-driven and asymmetric, requires layered responses that combine enforcement with analysis and prevention. This does not diminish the role of state institutions; rather it recognises the value of structured support systems that operate quietly alongside the state institutions.

    In many cases, the most effective security interventions are those that go unnoticed. Crises that do not occur, tensions that do not escalate and vulnerabilities that are addressed early rarely make headlines. Yet they form the invisible foundation of national stability.

    As Nigeria continues to adapt to a changing risk environment, greater attention may need to be paid to the quieter components of its security architecture. Not as replacements for established state institutions but as part of a modern, coordinated approach to safeguarding a complex society.

    •Labode is a public commentator and security enthusiast who writes from Abuja.