The Nation Newspaper

Category: Comments

  • PDP’s roforofo fight

    PDP’s roforofo fight

    By Ray Ekpu

    The People’s Democratic Party (PDP) was in power for 16 years (1999-2015) and even boasted that it would keep the power trophy for 60 years. Its rhetoric turned out to be an empty boast when it was trounced in 2015 by Muhammadu Buhari who had done the race three times unsuccessfully before then. Since it lost power, it also lost its direction and has been running from pillar to post trying to get back its sanity and soul. It hasn’t succeeded so far despite several attempts. That failure has led to the party being in tatters. A couple of weeks ago, a faction of the party met in Ibadan in a move to do some panel-beating and get its soul back. It expelled some of its important members including Nyesom Wike, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Samuel Anyanwu, national secretary of the party and several other persons that they probably thought were roadblocks to the smooth functioning of the party.

    The amazing thing here was that two prominent persons, Governor Seyi Makinde and Wike who were together in a rebel club called G-5 were now in separate camps. That was an early sign that whatever would be done in Ibadan, Oyo State, would, most likely, be countered by the other group that did not attend the Ibadan conference. That has now happened. Wike and his gang have also expelled some members from the opposing gang. So the crisis has now morphed into a conflagration. The two camps went to take over the headquarters of the party and a fist fight occurred and the police had to use teargas to disperse the unruly crowd of political heavyweights. Now that office has been sealed by the police.

    What happened there has been described by some media in a sexy alliteration as “Wahala at Wadata.” We saw this kind of roforofo fight in a different setting during General Yakubu Gowon’s era. An activist called Godwin Daboh had accused one of Gowon’s ministers, Joseph Tarka of corruption. The public had to force Tarka to resign. Friends of Tarka also went after Daboh and filed some corruption allegations against him. So the prevailing political jargon at the time was “if you Tarka me I will Daboh you.” That is what has just happened in the PDP between the Makinde and Wike camps.

    Both sides were simply obeying Dirkeen’s Third Law of Politics (a) Get elected (b) Get re-elected and (c) Don’t get mad, get even. The G-5 is now in shreds. Makinde who was with Wike is now without him. Each group is on its own and we are left to figure out which BOT is valid and which is not; which NWC is legitimate and which is not and which NEC is legal and which is not. What we now have is a rebellion within a rebellion, some kind of illegal republic within an illegal republic. As things are now it is only the Supreme Court that will sort out the mess.

    In this roforofo fight, the PDP leaders have put the courts in a quandary. Any keen observer must have noticed that the strategy was that each gang selects in a partisan manner the court in a state where he can hope to get favourable judgement. He goes and files a case there and does what he must do to get the judgement he wants. The other party does the same thing and gets the judgement it wants. That is the name of the game. And these are the same people who will turn around and accuse the courts of corruption when the courts of equal jurisdiction give conflicting judgements. For them leadership does not depend upon being right. It depends on acquiring power by hook or crook. That way they can justify what Henry Kissinger said namely that “power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”

    I am sure that many right thinking Nigerians would be shocked that one of the PDP leaders had the temerity to ask America’s President Donald Trump to come and save Nigeria’s democracy. Isn’t that a foolish remark? It is. Is it not he and his irresponsible colleagues who are turning Nigeria’s democracy upside down? Is it not his responsibility to work with his colleagues to clean the mess that they have created in our democracy and governance? It is.

    By the way is Trump a global magician? He is not. Is he a global Mr Fix it? He is not. In his own country he has problems, enormous problems that he is struggling to solve. He is being challenged by his citizens from time to time in various courts. There are various groups of demonstrators parading the streets of various American cities, people who are vigorously opposed to his policies. He is grappling with those problems without calling on foreign leaders to come and solve them. The leaders of the PDP are those who have done considerable damage to our democracy. The party had the strength to be a viable opposition party but it failed to rally its members into one big tent for that purpose because of the greed for power. They lacked the morality that was needed for that assignment and the test of morality is what you do when you have power.

    Read Also: Nigeria, U.S. moving in right direction, says Riley Moore

    Now they are busy crying that Nigeria is becoming a one party entity. If it becomes a one party entity they must hold themselves responsible for it. If they had stood firm to build their party into a formidable organ their members would not be leaving in droves. Their members are leaving because the greed for power and vaulting ambition had prevented the managers of the party from bringing themselves into the path of reason. Instead of working for two solid parties to emerge they started creating micro parties that had no chance of being big enough to be convincingly competitive. And now some of them have decamped to ADC, a party that has been there but not there. That party is like a false pregnancy. All the signs are there but no baby. The ADC is just a gathering of the disgruntled, of people who have been moving from one party to another since 1999 looking for pepper soup, also known as stomach infrastructure. Those in ADC are just hanging in the air like birthday balloons; they are in the middle of nowhere, going nowhere except political perdition. Their feet are not on the ground. They have no tap roots. All that they have are fanciful flags. That’s all. ADC is not a new party. It has been there for ages and has achieved nothing or to put it kindly next to nothing. Which state does it control? None.

    One of the ADC leaders said recently that the people will vote President Bola Tinubu out in 2027; that their party doesn’t need to control any state before winning. This is evidence that he doesn’t know how people vote in elections in Nigeria. They do not vote based on issues. They vote because their leaders, governors, legislators, commissioners and local government chairmen tell them which party and which candidate to vote for. Any analyst who has watched the voting pattern in Nigeria’s elections can testify to this. So parties that do not control these institutions have very little chance of success in the 2027 elections. Mark my words.

    The other peg on which one of the ADC chiefs is hanging the possibility of driving Tinubu out of office is the issue of hardship in Nigeria. Yes, there is hardship in Nigeria just as there is hardship in many other countries in varying degrees. No country in the world has yet completely eliminated hardship. But the fact is that the federal and state governments are combating the problem with various strategies including giving cash or food items. This has been made possible by the fact that the removal of fuel subsidy by Tinubu has put more money in the pockets of all the governments who now take home almost twice the sum of money they got before fuel subsidy was removed. Now, three or four state governments have trillion naira budgets. Life has become a lot easier. We can get petrol without having to sleep and snore at petrol stations as we used to do for almost a decade when all our refineries were dead; they are still dead. And our politicians did nothing. They just allowed us to suffer interminably for years, while workers in those dormant refineries were being paid for idleness. And with the birth of the Dangote Refinery, our petroleum products palaver has been largely resolved. The Dangote Refinery is the greatest thing that has happened to Nigeria in decades, yes in several decades. And Nigerians, honest Nigerians, must stand up to defend the organisation against the corrupt antics of some corrupt marketers and some corrupt labour leaders.

  • Lagos’ 2026 ‘Budget of shared responsibility’

    Lagos’ 2026 ‘Budget of shared responsibility’

    By Tayo Ogunbiyi

    With the growing pressures for enhanced service delivery in Nigeria and the challenges of budgetary crises and fiscal shocks, the need for improved budget processes and innovative financial management techniques is especially critical more than ever before. The increasing significance of budgets in the economy has obliged the use of new techniques in managing them. It also calls for transparency and clarity of vision on the part of political leadership.

    In Lagos State, especially in the past six years, prioritization of developmental needs and earmarking resources commensurate with the importance of each sector has been the compelling factors in budgetary estimates. In the last six and a half years, the Lagos State government has changed the paradigm not only in budgeting but in its implementation. The state has not only effectively monitored budget implementation; it has consistently delivered a budget performance of over 75%.

    It has been the policy of the government to embark on periodic budget reviews. Repeated monitoring, critical examination, and diligent application of the process have positively impacted budget performance in the state.

    The idea of periodic budget assessment speaks volumes of the pro-activeness of the government as it affords it a scientific basis for measuring its performance consistently while putting pressure on government departments and agencies to meet budgetary targets.

    This amply reflects the commendable form of progress that is being made in terms of budget monitoring and implementation at the ‘Centre of Excellence’. More importantly, it is inspiring that the result of a recent impact assessment done by the government shows that critical sectors as health, education, the environment and security are experiencing marked improvements. Also, in terms of literacy level, the level in the state is above the National Average.

    The implication of this is enhanced security, improved healthcare, and, invariably better quality of life. The number of patients to doctors is also improving, as reflected in life expectancy. Equally, the number of stillbirths and deaths is also gradually reducing.

    Since the inception of the current administration, the government’s programmes, policies, and activities have been firmly anchored on the T.H.E.M.E.S+ Agenda — a framework that continues to guide the transformation of Lagos into a safer, smarter, greener, and more inclusive megacity.

    Year after year, the administration’s budgets have been structured to move the state from stability to reform, from reform to expansion, and now, from expansion to shared and enduring prosperity.

    In the past six years, the administration’s fiscal journey has followed a clear and deliberate progression. In 2020, its ‘Budget of Awakening’ laid the foundation for a Greater Lagos, while the 2021 ‘ Budget of Rekindled Hope’ stabilized the economy after unprecedented disruptions.

    In 2022, the ‘Budget of Consolidation reinforced systems and institutional reforms, and the 2023 ‘Budget of Continuity’ connected the administration’s first-term gains to its long-term vision.

    The 2024 ‘Budget of Renewal’ aligns with the national Renewed Hope Agenda, while the 2025 ‘Budget of Sustainability safeguarded progress and strengthened resilience.

    Each of these budgets has served as a building block —supported by discipline, rigorous planning, and the steadfast partnership of all stakeholders. Collectively, they have delivered measurable improvements in mobility, healthcare, education, housing, agriculture, technology, environmental management, and public safety.

    It is, thus, quite cheering that the State’s N4.237 trillion Appropriation Bill for the 2026 is coming at a time when the focus of the government is on sustaining and surpassing the gains of the past six and half years through the completion of several ongoing projects such as the Massey Street Children’s Hospital, General Hospital, Ojo and Opebi-Ojota Link Bridge among others.

    The budget is a bold and forward-looking financial plan designed to consolidate the current administration’s legacy in its final full year.

    The Y2026 Appropriation Bill, ‘Budget of Shared Prosperity,’ is a reaffirmation of the government’s collective belief that Lagos can continue to rise, continue to lead, and continue to create opportunities for every resident of Africa’s preferred megacity.

    The budget has a total revenue estimate of N3,993,774,552,141, supported by Internally Generated Revenue of N3,119,774,552,141 and Federal Transfers of N874 billion. This revenue projection leaves a deficit financing requirement of N243,332,457,167.

    Capital expenditure for the year is proposed at N2,185,085,419,495, while recurrent expenditure is estimated at N2,052,021,589,812 the recurrent component includes overheads, personnel costs, and debt obligations.

    From all indications, with the availability of the required financial resources, the government will accomplish its objective of sustaining a rising Lagos. Over the years, it has demonstrated enough capacity to implement projects.

    Ironically, however, the successes of the state have created some socio-economic challenges as reflected in the number of people coming into the state to benefit from what it has to offer. It is quite similar to the case of Nigerians travelling abroad in search of the proverbial greener pasture.

    Read Also: Akpabio’s visionary leadership resonates across Nigeria, says Reps Deputy Speaker

    In order to ensure the total success of the state’s 2026 budget, the people need to be fully involved in its implementation. For instance, they need to speak up whenever they notice any anomaly in the implementation of projects in their localities. The projects in their localities are theirs and are principally meant for them, so they should monitor them to ensure that the money being spent is well spent.

    Similarly, existing structures for programme monitoring should be supported with proper evaluation systems, especially where existing ones are weak. It is important, equally, that evaluation provides evidence-based information that is credible, reliable, and useful, enabling the timely incorporation of findings, recommendations, and lessons learnt into decision-making.

    Perhaps, more notably, all MDAs in the state need to be more creative in their revenue generation drive by focusing on untapped areas of revenue.

    On a final note, it is important to stress that every resident of the state has an important role to play in the full implementation of the budget. After all, the human challenges that confront implementation of budgets are both behavioural and attitudinal, particularly with people still refusing to comply with the laws of the state. The effect of this is to increase the cost of running the government in many ways because of compulsory compliance, which the people will not accede to, often leaves the government spending more money on law enforcement than it probably would have.

    For instance, people driving against traffic, people not managing their refuse properly, refusing to use the PSP, and patronizing cart pushers who are not registered to operate, and people selling along the road, and so many other unwholesome behaviours are all parts of the human factors working against the budget.

    So, as the state government embarks on the implementation of the 2026 Budget, there is a need for all residents of the state to embrace attitudinal change that would enhance accelerated growth and development.

    •Ogunbiyi is Director, Public Enlightenment & Community Relations, Ministry of Information and Strategy, Alausa, Ikeja.

  • Malami: When the past comes haunting

    Malami: When the past comes haunting

    By Abubakar Sani

    Last week, former Minister of Justice and Attorney-General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, confirmed through his verified Facebook account that he had been invited by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC). In that short, somewhat predictable post, he restated his commitment to honouring the invitation, and as expected, reaffirmed his loyalty to the rule of law. Moments later, he followed up with an update that he had been released on bail after what operatives at the EFCC described as “a grilling session”.

    For many Nigerians, Malami getting invitations from the EFCC is neither shocking nor new as this is not his first encounter with the EFCC. And, from the look of things, it certainly won’t be his last. The details of the fresh accusations against him have not yet been made public, but the very idea of Malami answering questions at the EFCC hardly qualifies as breaking news. If anything, it feels like a chapter long overdue.

    Anyone who lived through the Buhari years, especially those who paid attention to the inner workings of government would find it difficult to feign surprise. Malami, during his prime, was arguably the most powerful Attorney-General Nigeria had ever seen, and perhaps the most politically entrenched.

    For years, he was alleged to have operated like a law unto himself: the master of selective justice and the undisputed godfather of some of the most curious administrative decisions ever issued in the name of the Nigerian state. That he is now being asked to account for some of those actions is, frankly, nothing more than the past paying a long-delayed visit.

    Across Nigeria’s political grapevine, Malami’s name has hovered over a long list of allegations. There are whispers of shadowy deals, controversial directives, and curious legal manoeuvres that conveniently aligned with the interests of a small circle around him. Whether every allegation is true is for investigators to determine, but the volume and consistency of these claims paint a picture that cannot be dismissed with the usual political PR.

    Read Also: Dayo Amusa emerges national vice president of Actors Guild of Nigeria

    Any country serious about building a culture of leadership based on integrity, would never entertain a person carrying this kind of political and ethical baggage. For their own sake, such people should not even be entertaining the thought of contesting for public office. Yet, here we are, Malami, with a trail of unresolved questions behind him, boldly pushing for the governorship of Kebbi State as though morality, decency, and public perception were mere inconveniences to be brushed aside.

    What is even more baffling is the audacity with which he carries on. This is a man dragging a bag so heavy that it weighs down not only him but also everyone willing to tag along. Yet he persists in this political macabre dance, insisting on testing the waters of public sentiment in a state he barely cared for when he held power.

    Eight years at the peak of influence, and Kebbi State, his own home could hardly boast of his footprint. No major intervention, no remarkable project, no whisper of developmental impact. Even his presence in the state was scarce, almost symbolic. But now, suddenly, Kebbi matters because the governorship seat has become a potential safe haven.

    This is where we must be brutal with the truth. Kebbi cannot, and must not, become a retirement home for people seeking immunity from prosecution. Leadership in our state must never be reduced to a shield for political fugitives. The governorship is not a hiding place for anyone trying to outrun the consequences of past actions. And the people of Kebbi, who are known for their sense of dignity and straightforwardness, will not embrace a candidate whose past smells louder than his promises.

    Those close to Malami owe him honesty. They should tell him plainly that the baggage he carries is not just heavy, it is leaking maggots. The stench of unresolved scandals follows him everywhere, and no amount of political perfume can mask it. People in Kebbi are not blind, neither are they desperate. They can see what is playing out: a man battling legal shadows desperately trying to drape himself in political garb to appear untouchable.

    And the truth is simple: the more he insists on running, the more he draws attention to the very things he hopes Nigerians will forget. The more he talks about leadership, the louder the echoes of his past missteps bounce back. This is not the kind of storyline any serious candidate should be working with. It is certainly not what a state like Kebbi should be forced to entertain.

    Kebbi deserves leadership built on clean hands and a clear conscience. This fact can never be overemphasised! The state is already battling economic challenges, rural insecurity, and infrastructural deficits. Therefore, it cannot afford a governor who will spend his days worrying allegations hovering over his head, or worse, manipulating institutions to evade accountability. The people deserve a leader who comes to serve, not one who arrives with the desperation of someone running from ghosts.

    Malami may genuinely believe he can talk his way through this storm or ride it using the usual political playbook, but he is grossly misreading the mood of the people. These are not the Buhari years when power was concentrated in the hands of a few who operated behind closed doors. The people have been browbeaten by adversity and have become more vocal, more observant, and far less forgiving. What passed as normal a few years ago now provokes serious questions. And Kebbi State like the rest of the country is watching.

    For his own sake, and for the integrity of the political environment, Malami should pause and rethink. Power is not therapy; neither is public office a laundromat for reputational stains. This governorship ambition of his carries an air of entitlement that does not align with what leadership should be. Governance is a privilege, not a refuge.

    If Malami truly believes in the rule of law as he claims, then this is the moment to prove it, not by insisting on a political adventure, but by submitting fully to the process of clearing his name. That is a more honourable path, one that may even earn him some measure of respect down the line. But forcing himself onto the political stage in Kebbi State while his past still knocks at the door is nothing short of arrogance.

    In the end, it will do him and everyone else a world of good if he simply shelves this inordinate gubernatorial ambition and channels his energy towards addressing the multitude of questions hanging around his neck. Because, while leadership can wait, accountability cannot.

    •Sani writes from Birnin Kebbi.

  • Coup by orchestration?

    Coup by orchestration?

    Military coups, in countries where stuff happens, ordinarily are vicious power grabs by armed usurpers to displace sitting governments. These, of course, don’t belong with civilised people. They are a function of political underdevelopment and peculiar to backwater regions of the world. Even in Africa, categorised in the Third World, there is a region notorious for volatility and designated the coup belt. Office holders against whom coups are staged get typically shortchanged and could be in mortal danger, depending on the ruthlessness of those staging the coup against them.

    There, however, seems to be some novelty to coup making in Guinea-Bissau – a notoriously unstable country in West Africa that has experienced four coups since independence from Portugal in 1974, besides multiple attempted coups. Sandwiched between Guinea and Senegal, it is one of the world’s poorest and most fragile countries with a population of approximately 1.9million. Its poll results are often contested, and the general election of Sunday, 23rd November, 2025 that resulted in a military takeover was not an exception.

    This latest power grab is speculated to be orchestrated by President Umaro Sissoco Embaló – the very man from whom power was seized. A group of military officers announced the takeover of power in the country on Wednesday, 26th November, following an acrimonious presidential vote. Bissau-Guineans had gone to the poll the previous Sunday in an election that pitted Embaló against Fernando Dias da Costa as his main challenger. Collation of votes by the electoral commission of Guinea-Bissau had gone very far and provisional results due to be formally announced on Thursday, 27th November, but was headed off by the coupists.

    Although Embaló, who is seeking re-election, and Dias, his main opponent, both claimed victory before the official declaration of results, observer missions reported that they gave their word to ultimately accept the will of the people. But as Bissau-Guineans and observers awaited the official outcome, soldiers butted in to announce having taken “total control” of the country in pre-emption of awaited results. Calling themselves the “High Military Command for the Restoration of Order,” the officers decreed immediate suspension of the electoral process “until further notice.” They also ordered the closure of Bissau’s land, air and sea borders and imposed a curfew, leaving hundreds of foreign poll observers stranded as they could not exit following the coup. Among those affected was former President Goodluck Jonathan of Nigeria, who had led the West African Elders Forum (WEF) observer mission.

    Read Also: Nigeria sends fighter jets, ground forces as troops foil coup in Benin Rep

    Watchers of events in Guinea-Bissau queried the coincidence whereby faces of the coup were close associates of ousted Embaló. The erstwhile chief of army staff, who was named the country’s interim leader, is known to have been close in recent years to the man he now replaces. He told the press the military acted to “block operations that aimed to threaten our democracy.” Officers with him included former head of the presidential military office, who told journalists the army was assuming control “until further notice” after uncovering a plan involving drug lords by which they allegedly were introducing weapons into the country to alter the constitutional order. The coupists also named a former personal chief of staff to ousted Embaló as chief of staff of the armed forces.

    Shortly after the military announced the takeover, Embaló himself was on phone with international media outlets, saying he had been arrested in his office at the presidential palace. But there were subsequent reports he had arrived “safe and sound” in Senegal on a military plane chartered by that country’s government. For his part, opposition candidate Dias said he escaped from his campaign headquarters on the day soldiers struck when armed men came to arrest him. Speaking from hiding, he accused Embaló of having orchestrated the coup, saying he believed he won the presidential poll and that the ousted president “organised” the power grab to prevent him from taking office. “I am the president (elect) of Guinea-Bissau,” Dias told foreign media by telephone, claiming he would have garnered around 52 percent of the vote had the results been announced. “There wasn’t a coup. It was organised by Mr. Embaló,” he affirmed.

    Sections of Bissau-Guineans and other analysts as well questioned the real motive behind the military takeover. They argued it could ultimately benefit Embaló. Some analysts, for instance, said there were unverified preliminary results circulating before the coup that showed opposition candidate Dias as winner of the election. “This is a coup aimed at preventing the opposition candidate, Fernando Dias, from taking power,” one researcher told a frontline news agency, adding: “This is an ideal scenario for Mr. Embaló who could, following negotiations, be released and potentially reposition himself for the next elections.”

    Nigeria’s Jonathan was blunt that the purported coup was mere make-belief. He had managed to exit Guinea-Bissau shortly after the soldiers struck with some other prominent personalities on a rescue flight arranged by Cote d’Ivoirian authorities ahead of a similar arrangement that was being made by the Nigerian government. He also visited Aso Rock Villa in Abuja to brief President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on his first-hand experience of the upheavals in Bissau. Addressing journalists on the heels of his return, Jonathan expressed doubt that a coup truly happened, saying rather there were indications Embaló did not want to leave power.

    “What happened in Guinea-Bissau was not a coup; maybe, for want of a better word, I would say it was a ceremonial coup. It is the president – President Umaro Embaló – who announced the coup. Before the military came up to address the world that they were in charge of everywhere, Embaló had already announced the coup, which is strange,” Jonathan said. He added: “Not only announcing the coup, but Embaló, while the coup took place, was using his phone and addressing media organisations across the world that he had been arrested. Who is fooling who? Basically, what happened in Guinea-Bissau is quite disturbing to me who believes in democracy. In fact, I feel more pained than the day I called (the late Muhammadu) Buhari to congratulate him when I lost the election.”

    Jonathan-led WEF observer mission was in Guinea-Bissau along with delegations of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU). He acknowledged that his team was a much smaller group and did not have sufficient personnel deployed for extensive poll observation, unlike the others that posted agents across the entire country. According to him, Bissau’s electoral body was almost through with the process “and we were all waiting for the results to be announced (when) Embaló announced that there was a coup, that soldiers had taken over and they had arrested him.” He argued, though: “But from all indications, nobody arrested him. My conviction is that, and my charge to ECOWAS and AU is that they must announce the results. They have the results because AU and ECOWAS officials were in all the regions when the results were collated. They cannot change those results. They should tally the results and announce the winner. They cannot force the military out. But they should announce, let the world know who won that election. They owe the world that responsibility.”

    The familiar tendency in Africa has been leaders destabilising or caging opposition, and manipulating the poll in their respective country so to emerge landslide winners. Such elections typically lack transparency and a level playing field for multiplicity of contenders. That was the case in Tanzania’s general election in October, this year, won by Samia Suluhu Hassan. More pervasively, there are leaders who have reworked the laws of their respective country to stretch their stay in power beyond inherited constitutional term limits. Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Obiang, Cameroun’s Paul Biya and Cote d’Ivoire’s Alassane Ouattara feature prominently, among others, in this category. Worst case has been the tendency whereby election is clearly lost but the sitting ruler refuses to cede power, sometimes resulting in civil war like the case of Laurent Gbagbo and Ouattara in the 2010 Ivoirian election.

    Orchestrating a coup against oneself just so to avoid facing up to poll defeat, which the ousted Bissau president is accused of, adds a new trend to ways of self-perpetuation in power. But someone needs to tell Embaló: you never win with military coups. Going by experiences of all countries in the sub-region where soldiers have seized power, these usurpers are never in haste to restore democratic rule. Embaló will come to realise this sooner than later.

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

  • The urgency of state police

    The urgency of state police

    Finally, the chicken has come home to roost. That which we were forewarned about has come upon us. As the late Ghanaian poet and literary icon, Koofi Awoonor, says in “Songs of Sorrow,” “Death has made war upon our house.” Kidnappers, terrorists, extremists, and all manner of criminal cartels, who dared not lift their heads to look in our faces in time past, have come out as men. Criminals, who rape our women, murder our citizens in cold blood, abduct our children (including nursery and primary school pupils), task us on ransoms as though they loaned money to us.

    We are paying the price of the obstinate refusal of successive administrations since the fall of the First Republic to allow Nigeria to run like a federation. The introduction of the highly misplaced Decree 34 of 1966 by the General Aguiyi Ironsi administration, which put Nigeria on the path of unitary form of government as opposed to the federalism adopted after various painstaking conferences in Nigeria and London by our founding fathers set the state for our sorry state. The Ironsi regime set up a body to look at the desirability of unifying the Nigeria Police and local government police. The irony is that the General Yakubu Gowon regime, populated by those who overthrew Ironsi and made him pay the supreme price for his unitary tendencies supposedly aimed to pocket the rest of the country, and quickly nullified the contentious Decree 34 of 1966, still went ahead to foist a unitary police system on the country. This is as opposed to a decentralised police system with various layers of police services that subsisted until the coming of the military.

    That was not all. From 1966 till the last military regime quit in May 1999, a lot of harm was done to the federal structure that birthed Nigeria’s golden era. The result is the Nigeria we have today – a nation beset by security and economic woes. While the introduction of unitary police gradually made the nation vulnerable to insecurity, the destruction of fiscal federalism and subsequent introduction of what former Deputy President of the Senate, Senator Ike Ekweremadu, christened “feeding bottle federalism,” destroyed the creativity, self-reliance, and competitive growth that gave rise to the economic successes recorded before the 1966 coups.

    However, as far as I am concerned, the military is no longer to blame, as 26 unbroken years of democracy are more than enough to right the wrongs we felt the military had done to Nigeria.

    Perhaps, the greatest enemy of state police, in my opinion, is the selfish belief by successive presidents that it is in their best interest to have a total control of all legitimate instruments of coercion in their firm grips – an assumption that have severally boomeranged in their faces. They only see the need for state police after leaving. This is where President Bola Tinubu is different.

    It is therefore heart-warming seeing the consensus that now flows in favour of state police – even from the unlikeliest quarters. Only a few days ago, the top echelon of the northern political leadership and intelligentsia – governors, top traditional rulers led by the revered Sultan Sa’ad Abubakar III, top security chiefs, among others – all gathered at the Kashim Iman House to unanimously endorse state police. As former chairman of the Senate Committee on Rules and Business and one of the critics of Ekweremadu’s State Police Bill, Senator Ita Enang, once confessed on Channels TV’s “Politics Today,” “state police is an idea, which time has come.” It is an emergency and he was no longer interested in what the governors could do with it, so long as they protect the people.

    Read Also: Nigeria sends fighter jets, ground forces as troops foil coup in Benin Rep

    Quite significantly – and also ironically – support for this paradigm shift has equally come from former President Goodluck Jonathan and former Head of State, Abdulsalami Abubakar. Of course, the recent meeting of the Southern Governors Forum and the Southern Nigerian Traditional Rulers Council in Ogun also came up with the same verdict.

    However, beside the harsh realities in the form of a worrisome wave of insecurity, the credit to the momentum and consensus state police now enjoys should go to President Tinubu for body language, statements, and federalist dispositions, including the devolving of more powers to the states. The president also gave a new kick to the push for state police during his recent declaration of emergency on insecurity. The president declared that “Our administration will support state governments, which have set up security outfits to safeguard their people from the terrorists bent on disrupting our national peace.” He also asked the National Assembly to “begin reviewing our laws to allow states that require state police to establish them.”

    Indeed, in the face of rising insecurity in recent times, the president has shown uncommon courage and the political will to navigate Nigeria away from doom. From changing the service chiefs across the military services to the appointment of former Chief of the General Staff, General Christopher Musa as new Minister of Defence, to the directive for the mass recruitment across the military services and the police as well as the recent approval by the National Economic Council, the sum of N100 billion proposed by the Governor Peter Mbah-led Committee for the Revamp of Police and other Security Training Institutions, President Tinubu has displayed a strong will to fix the nation’s security lapses.

    However, of particular commendation is his recognition of the fact that security is local. Thus, he went ahead to not only show the political will to see state policing through, but to also support local security initiatives by governors. Talking about local initiatives, what Governor Mbah is doing with security in Enugu State clearly demonstrates how far a purposeful state government can go to secure a state. In less than three years as governor, he has changed the Enugu security story. He has invested heavily in the construction of a state-of-the-art Command and Control Centre matched with AI-enabled cameras mounted across Enugu State for full surveillance. He set up the Distress Response Squad, a special police unit powered by over 150 security vehicles fixed with AI-embedded cameras for effective patrol of the state to mitigate crimes and also ensure a quick response to crime situations. Just recently, he launched hitech equipment like high-impact drones and patrol vehicles to strengthen the war against insecurity in his state. We have also seen how he dusted up Enugu’s dormant law to demolish several properties used for kidnapping in the state to send a warning to the criminals that crime does not pay.

    Now that the president has accorded the National Assembly the desired political support to amend our constitution to birth state police, the onus is now on the apex legislative body to get cracking. The point here is that the 10th National Assembly does not need to wait for the rest of the proposed amendments to be ready before proceeding with the amendment to create state police.

    Again, given the extensive work that went into Ekweremadu’s Bill for the Creation of State Police, the National Assembly has a brilliant document to dust up and work with. The special thing about the Ekweremadu bill is that it consciously and meticulously addresses the critical issues of structure, standardisation, control, armament, disciplining, co-existence with federal police, and, importantly, the fears of abuse by state governors. The bill benefits from best practices around the world, especially federal climes like the US, Canada, and Brazil.

    Now, with national momentum and presidential willpower in favour of state police, plus a ready document to work with, the ball is now in the court of the National Assembly. Let the amendment begin.

    •Anichukwu writes from Enugu.

  • Insecurity and hereafter

    Insecurity and hereafter

    • By Abdu Rafiu

    The trumpet of insecurity is blowing louder by the day, literally speaking. It is blowing loud enough for the deaf to hear and the accompanying air thick enough for the blind to touch. The waves are sweeping unrelentingly through the land, mostly through the Northern states. It was such that the Speaker, House of Representatives, Tajudeen Abbas came back from end-of year/New Year Recess in January last year seething with rage, determined to give the setting up of state police unhindered and priority legislative attention. That was as far back as January, 2024. Bubbling with excitement I wrote:

    “It has been reported that top on the legislative thinking of the House of Representatives when it reconvenes on January 30 is the issue of security and the concomitant imperative of the establishment of state police. We should all applaud and support them. In the face of seeming intractable insecurity bedevilling the country, that certainly is the right step and it raises a great deal of hope. It would have been a height of insensitivity to watch on, believing that the present security architecture is all there to protect Nigerians from terrorists, bandits, kidnappers and what have you. It is said that you cannot continue to do the same thing, using the same method and expect a different result.

    “It has been the same shibboleth, the same beaten track, the same old hat since Yusuf Gobir Committee report which recommended one central policing system for the whole country in 1967. We have heard it repeatedly said and as much as possible, done—that all that is needed is increased funding, training and raising the numerical strength of the police under the current dispensation. But all that has not given Nigerians the desired protection.”

    As I have said on these pages a few times by way of a reminder, “The Gobir Committee was set up by General Aqui-Ironsi but he did not live to see the report and implement it. The recommendations were passed to General Gowon, his successor who gave them effect in August 1967. Regional police formations were consequently abolished, swallowed by the Federally-run Nigeria Police. Understandably, generals are raised under one command system. But why should the system subsist and tie the hands of states under a democratic order waving the federalism emblem going to 25 years come May?”

    I was rounding off this column on Wednesday when my attention was drawn to President Bola Tinubu’s statement undoubtedly made in response to the nation’s recent experiences. The statement is commendably action-packed. It is no longer an indication of intent and all heat, but no motion. He had said in June this year that the setting up of “state police is no longer an option but an imperative”. Now, he is walking his talk. He has called on the National Assembly to begin reviewing our laws to allow states that require state police to establish them. That is how it should be.

    Two months earlier, March 14, 2024, there was a clear hope-filled development on the subject as it had become clear that the Federal and State governments had reached an agreement of minds that the establishment of state police was the way to go in order to tackle the hydra-headed insecurity challenges in the land. Picking the vibes, most people must have found it enheartening that both tiers of government had come to the same page, hearkening to the outcry across the landfor the establishment of state police. But then time was of the essence. It is must be given bite immediately. It is quite a pity that it has taken such a long time to see that the solution to the insecurity bedevilling our land is the establishment of state police.

    Something so simple to see and so commonsensical to contemplate and perceive! Because of the lackadaisical attitude of certain leaders criminals were let loose on the country. Citizens have been exposed to mindless attacks and destruction of properties. It is already 11 years since 276 Chibok school girls in Borno were kidnapped from their dormitories; no fewer than 96 of them remain in captivity till date! On February 19, 2018, terrorists broke into another girls’ school, Government Girls’ Science and Technical College, Dapchi, Yobe State, running away with 110 girls. Five of them died that same day. Boko Haram released 104, except Leah Sharibu who refused to deny Christ and change her faith.

    Related News

    CPC status: U.S. mounts pressure on Nigeria, vows visa restrictions

    Tinubu pushes new security directives, seeks tougher action against insecurity

    Yusuf, officials visit Kano communities ravaged by bandits

    Not long after, a new wave of kidnapping returned to Borno State when about 400 persons were kidnapped. It was followed by the abduction of 287 school children again in one go in Kaduna State. And to muddle the situation, on Tuesday, 60 more persons were kidnapped in the already menaced axis of Kajuru, bringing to more than 300 kidnapped in the state within a week. Sokoto lost 15 persons in the earlier wave in which two persons were killed.

    Read Also: Tuggar blames structural weakness for unconstitutional changes of govt, others

    The heightened state of insecurity got to a choking frustration at a stage that the then Governor of Zamfara State, who doubled as the national chairman of Governors’ Forum, Mr. Abdullaziz Yari, threw up his hands in resignation. He washed off his hands being decorated as the chief security officer of his state. He saw his position, not having operational control over the police in his state, as a joke.

    After the Northern Establishment raised the nation’s hope a notch higher, throwing their full weight behind the establishment of state police, President Tinubu cemented the hope: It is a done-deed. He said creation of “state police is no longer optional but a national imperative.” The Northern Establishment, comprising state governors and traditional rulers, met in May and unanimously endorsed the urgent need for the creation of state police in the country.

    Given the renewed waves of kidnapping of school children, first in Kebbi State where 25 students were victims, and vice-principal killed; Niger State where 303 students of St, Mary’s Private Catholic School were abducted and an attack in Kwara during thanksgiving worship and 38 worshippers were seized and taken away, Bola Tinubu’s response on Wednesday could not have been timely. The country was headed toward state failure, chaos and collapse.

    Before President Tinubu’s Wednesday statement, I was mulling the idea of an urgent and drastic step that could be taken to halt the embarrassing and frightening mess. Given the burning heat and indignation with which the Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas,came back from his holiday with his colleagues one would have thought the Legislature would act promptly, put everything else on hold, then go the extra mile and evoke the Doctrine of Necessity because of its emergency nature; and the President, would issue Executive Orders to put presidential stamp on the decision of the Legislature, and if still necessary, take steps to regularise it later, dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s! As elders in the South-west would say: Eni t’o kan l’omo! That is, what does not touch you is hardly yours! Until Tinubu’s response declaring a state of emergency on security, the legislative fuss bogged by foot dragging was going to amount towhat William Shakespeare Macbeth might want to describe as “a tale… full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”! Otherwise, where are we today? Within a week, the bandits sent cold shivers down our spine with a renewed wave of kidnapping from schools and a raid in Eruku town, Kwara State.They were attacked during a thanksgiving worship in their church.

    Other steps President Tinubu announced in his statement included urgent increase in the numerical strength of the Army and the police. The police are directed to recruit an additional 20, 000 officers. The Department of State Services are directed to send trained forest guards to flush out terrorists and bandits living in the forests and using them as attack launching bases. Officers being withdrawn from VIP guard duties are to undergo crash training to debrief them so they can operate efficiently in police duties when they are deployed to their core duties as policemen and deployed to security challenged areas of the country. Tinubu said he had approved upgrade of police training facilities nationwide and authorised the use of various National Youth Service Corps camps as training depots.

    He went on: “States should rethink establishing boarding schools in remote areas without adequate security. Mosques and churches should constantly seek police and other security protection when they gather for prayers, especially in vulnerable areas.”

    The issue of the security challenges has been of grave concern to state governments for quite a while and they have been pressing for the laws to be amended to permit them police operational control in their states through the establishment of state police. They always speak with one voice to drive home their points from the time Babatunde Fashola was chairman of the Governors’ Forum; also when Abdulaziz Yayi was leader of the Forum. Only a few days ago South-West Governors Forum pressed for the establishment of state police. On Wednesday, the Southern Governors Forum which met in Ogun State did the same.

    Former leaders have added their voices, making convincing cases for the establishment of the state police. Former President Ibrahim Babangida, for example, was unequivocal on the imperative of state police in the land. He went as far as allaying fears on the possible misuse of the institution by governors. He said the fear is “unfounded” and “exaggerated.” It is one subject from which he did not shy away. In his words: “Added to this desire,” referring to the issue of restructuring, “is the need to commence the process of having state police across the states of the Federation… The initial fears of state governors misusing the officers and men of the state police have become increasingly eliminated with renewed vigour in citizens’ participation in and confidence to interrogate power. We cannot be detained by those fears and allow civilisation to leave us behind. We must as a people with one destiny and common agenda take decisions for the sake of posterity in our shared commitment to launch our country on the path of development and growth. Policing has become sophisticated that we cannot continue to operate our old methods and expect different results.”

    Former Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo even while in office had spoken in the same vein as Babangida: “Securing Nigeria’s over 923, 768 square kilometres and its 180 million people requires a continual re-engineering of our security architecture and strategies. We cannot realistically police a country of the size of Nigeria centrally from Abuja. State and other community policing methods are the way to go.”

    Former Governor, now Senator Henry Dickson and ex-Governor Jonah Jang who shared their experiences while in office came to the same conclusion as Professor Osinbajo. They argued that the prevailing security situation and the need for an effective challenge had made the establishment of state police mandatory. Dickson’s conviction was anchored on the fact that the personnel would be drawn from the locality that makes up the state. Such personnel would be able to access valuable information required to track criminals. It is a position also shared by Major-General David Jemibewon, although he did not expressly press for state police. His thoughts are contained in his book, The Nigeria Police in Transition: Issues, Problems and Prospects.

    TheAssociation of State Assembly Speakers also called for the establishment of state police.

    As of February 2018, Nigeria was host to the sixth largest IDP population in the world. That year, Borno, Adamawa and Yobe states had the largest number of IDPs. Together with its outskirts, Maiduguri saw its population almost doubled from one million to nearly two million. From incessant mayhem, Benue as of 2018, had 160, 000 displaced persons.

    The idea of different communities and zones establishing their own police preceded the coming of Nigeria Police established in 1930. The Egba United Government had muted the idea of setting up its own police in 1900 and members of the hunters’ society constituted itself into a force. By 1903, the thought crystallised and was put forward by the Alake and the Order-in-Council of Egba United Government to Governor MacGregor in Lagos but the nod to go ahead came in 1905. Ibadan followed suit in 1906 and Oyo in 1907. The North also decided to have its own policing system between 1900 and 1906. It resented what it called the centralising tendences in Lagos.

    This is why the agitation for state police is loudest in the South West. It was already used to a three-tier policing system—native Authority, Regional and Nigeria Police fondly called OlopaEko, smart and well attired. The East did not have local or regional police in the First Republic. Tinubu deserves praise and support for holding the bull by the horns and courageously setting the ball rolling to change the narrative of the nation’s security challenges. The primary purpose of a government is security of the citizens, the protection of lives and property. Tinubu has given the green light; the ball is now in the National Assembly’s court!

    • This article was culled from www.radiatingthetruth.com
    • Abdu Rafiu is a renowned editor, newspaper manager and respected elder of journalism.
  • Ndigbo: Fix the inter-generational disconnect

    Ndigbo: Fix the inter-generational disconnect

    • Nnaji Jekwu Onovo

    The trial, conviction and sentencing of Mazi Nnamdi Kanu stirred reactions at various quarters especially among NDIGBO. Many analysts and commentators see the entire episode as the trial of Igbo nation/people.

    One striking observation is the cautious approach by many commentators especially the Igbo elites, so as not to offend the powers that be or the radical ‘neo-Biafran’ group who hardly agree with the elites. Just a handful of the elites spoke boldly, stating the facts, devoid of emotions. A critical assessment of submissions by many of the elites indicates comments laced with emotions, fear and hypocrisy. The neo-Biafrans, radical groups in their commentaries display ignorance and arrogance. They speak, as though, flexing muscles will resolve the issues.

    Notwithstanding the obvious flaws in the approach of both sub-groups of Ndigbo, it’s interesting that Ndigbo are talking. I hope this creates the needed opportunity for Ndigbo to reason together, rethink the approach to national issues and discourse including politics. This is a period for sober reflection, deep thoughts and fixing the inter-generational disconnect.

    Today, Ndigbo could be classified into two subgroups, the elites and the radicals (less privileged including neo-Biafran—the young people born after the civil war). These two blocks, the neo-Biafrans and elite, never agree and never trust each other.

    The elite comprise individuals who are considered—or those who put themselves up as—leaders because of the power, talents or privileges they enjoy. Often, the exalted position, which they occupy, whether through selection or election, or by achievement or ascription, has placed them in a vantage position to make decisions on behalf of, or give direction to, their people. Included, in the elite class have been the traditional rulers, who belong to the traditional wing of the elite class, and the educated ones—the economic gurus as well as the politicians—who constitute the modern elite.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    The inter-generational disconnection between the Igbo elite and their grassroots accounted for the reinvention of radical Igbo nationalism since the return to civil rule in 1999. These radical groups, otherwise called “neo-Biafran” movements, include the Movement for the Actualisation of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB), Biafra Zionist Movement (BZM), Biafra Independence Movement (BIM), Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), etc

    Members of the elite don’t reject the Nigerian federation and opt for secession. Radical attitudes are expressed by the less privileged, especially by younger people who were born after the war. Many of them are well-educated, with academic degrees, but they are often unemployed and tend to accuse other Nigerians of discriminating against them. It’s obvious that Ndigbo doesn’t agree on an approach, with the neo-Biafrans including IPOB advocating for more radical solutions while the elites group like Ohanaeze Ndigbo focus on negotiation and restructuring.

    The dilemma facing Ndigbo (Igbo people) is a complex mix of political marginalization, a need for strategic realignment, and internal challenges. Key aspects include a struggle for national political power, balancing agitation with pragmatic political engagement, addressing internal issues like marginalization within Igbo communities. 

    There is a need for strategic alliances, and Igbo must extricate itself from a “victim mentality” that hinders progress; and focus on economic development and unity.  There is a need for more strategic political planning, including building alliances with other Nigerian power blocs, rather than relying on emotional rhetoric or isolated agitation.

    On September 26, 2006, the Distinguished Senator Francis Arthur Nzeribe wrote a controversial article he captioned: 2007: STATE OF THE IGBO NATION, a month after the Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) carried out their successful stay-at-home order, in the midst of a heated clamour by the Igbo for a Nigerian President of Igbo extraction.

  • Tribute to General Hassan Usman Katsina

    Tribute to General Hassan Usman Katsina

    • By Alani Akinrinade

    I feel particularly humbled to pay this tribute to my former boss and predecessor as Chief of Army Staff at a very trying period in the post-independence history of this country, Major General Hassan Usman Katsina, OFR. Let us learn once again to pay homage to our departed heroes and accolades to those who gave their best so that this country may survive as one single entity. By the time he was recalled by his maker at the age of sixty two  thirty years ago in 1995, the phrase military patriot had almost become an oxymoron; a self-damning joke which could only be pronounced out of fear or fright, given the prevailing climate of the era.

    Yet in fact, General Katsina was both an illustrious patriot of the highest order and a distinguished military officer, well-liked and respected by both his seniors and subordinates. He was the nearest thing to what one can call a prince among soldiers and a soldier among princes. Born into the royal Katsina family and its famed Sullubawa caste, his father, Sir Usman Nagogo, ruled Katsina Emirate as the 48th emir from 1944 till 1981 while his grandfather, Muhammadu Dikko, reigned from 1906 till 1944.

    MD Yussuf, the former Inspector General of Police, was his uncle and Yesufu Bala Usman, the notable radical historian, was a cousin. Before joining the army, he had attended the prestigious Barewa College in Zaria and his military training culminated in admission to the elite Sandhurst military institution. There, he was preceded by military thoroughbreds such as Brigadier Zak Maimalari, General Yakubu Gowon and General David Akporode Ejoor.

      The qualities of aristocratic forbearance, charity and steely calmness under rapid fire, would stand him in good stead in the events of January 15th 1966 following the mutiny of some mid-ranking officers. Kaduna was the epicentre and engine-room of the insurrection.  As the Commanding Officer of the military formation in Kaduna, General Hassan was to find himself directly drawn into action as the pendulum and momentum swung that perilous morning.

      Following the report of some early morning gunfire around the residence of the premier, Ahmadu Bello, Katsina had sent two sentries, Corporal John Nanzip Shagaya and Sergeant Mohammed Danshoso, to find out what was going on. Their finding was as chilling as it was bloodcurdling. The Sardauna and his wife lay dead while somewhere nearby, Brigadier General Julius Ademulegun and his spouse had also been murdered.

    In what seemed like an eternity later, the man of the moment, Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, stormed the place and confronted his superior officer demanding to know where he stood in the unfolding nightmare. Trained to recognize imminent danger and also to remain calm and unruffled in the face of certain elimination, the then Major Katsina declared his support for the major. Nzeogwu was nervous and edgy and already had some shrapnel lodged in his neck as a result of earlier action at the Sardauna residence.

    Read Also: Wanted: legislative action on state/council joint account provision

    A few days after this encounter, Katsina, now appointed as the military governor of the entire northern region by the new head of state, Major General Thomas Aguiyi-Ironsi, watched in wary bemusement as Nzeogwu who had pledged his loyalty to the new military administration, was taken to Lagos accompanied by his friend and former instructor, Colonel Conrad Nwawo, who had negotiated the terms of his surrender with Ironsi. In the following months, Katsina used all of his clout and princely prestige to stem the rising tide of pogrom by an indignant and traumatized north as widespread rioting and looting spread through the region. The late general was also instrumental in fishing out officers of Southern origins and ferreting them to safety as the military appeared to have fractured along ethnic, regional and religious fault lines.

    There have been some murmuring allegations that General Katsina played both sides of the field and was far from being a honest broker. Suffice it to say that in the very difficult circumstances that the nation had found itself at that period, the late general did all he had to do to secure and retain the allegiance of his people without which he himself would have been a sitting duck. It was a tragedy without heroes, as a senior military officer of Igbo origins would later title his still unpublished memoir.

    As fate would have it, General Hassan Usman Katsina was the last governor of Northern Nigeria. As the Nigerian ship of state lurched perilously, it became obvious that something would have to give. Secession and civil war hung heavily in the air. After the Aburi Accord unraveled, it became obvious that nothing could keep the old Eastern Region within the framework of the old nation. In what many believed was a political masterstroke to hobble and hamstring the secessionist agenda of the east, General Yakubu Gowon restructured the nation into a twelve-state format on the eve of the civil war. The falcon could no longer hear the falconer. Following the tragic death of Colonel Joseph Akahan, the then Colonel Katsina was appointed as the new Chief of Army Staff.

    General Hassan Usman Katsina served the wartime army with distinction and calm authority. He was firm, just and unswerving in his commitment to upholding the territorial integrity of the nation. As army boss, General Katsina oversaw an ambitious rapid expansion programme of the armed forces, giving the military the strength and sinews it needed to overwhelm the Biafran enclave. He saw to it that serving officers and their men on the war-fronts were paid their entitlements promptly. After the civil war and in close collaboration with his superiors at the Supreme Headquarters, General Katsina pioneered a massive resettlement and retraining programme for armed forces personnel particularly those of them in need of rehabilitation and reorientation to civil life.

      After that, he left to attend Staff College and upon his return, he was appointed the Deputy Chief of Staff Supreme Headquarters . It was from here that his distinguished career concluded in July, 1975 following the ouster of the Gowon administration. In retirement, General Katsina was a model of rectitude, reticence and exemplary decorum. He refused to become a meddlesome interloper or a cantankerous contrarian, devoting his time and attention to cultural matters and the family sports of polo. His father was the life patron of the association and he himself was a long-serving chairman of the association. He left the army without any blemish on his character and with his sterling reputation for integrity intact. The Nigerian army has produced many illustrious generals but not many with the mettle and personal integrity of the prince from Katsina. May Allah continue to grant him eternal mercy.

    • Remarks made by General Alani Akinrinade as Special Guest at the Second Edition of the late General Hassan Usman Katsina Memorial Conference held in  Kaduna yesterday, 6th December, 2025.
    • Lieutenant General Alani Ipoola Akinrinade was Chief of Army Staff, 1979- 1981 and Chief of Defence Staff, 1981-1982.
  • The twenty-first century public administrator in democratic context

    The twenty-first century public administrator in democratic context

    • By Tunji Olaopa

    The fundamental significance of the public administrator in the overall architecture of government is measured by her capacity to enhance the three functions of government—the policy management, regulatory and service delivery. The policy management function refers to the means by which the government manages the available resources through a process of policy choices that allow the government to achieve its set goals. Once a specific policy choice has been made, the government—in the recognition that the governance space must be expanded to allow for the participation of nonstate actors—needs to regulate the space through regulatory parameters to facilitate effective and efficient intervention by those who will assist in turning the policies into effective outcomes. With the service delivery function, the government concretize the policy management and the regulatory functions by delivering on its promises to the citizens. In other words, it is the service delivery function that culminates the dynamics of delivering public value, and how that leads to the transformation of infrastructural development.

    The public administrator or manager plays a very crucial role in the execution of the three functions of government. Indeed, the civil and public services stand in between the government and the citizens as the facilitator of infrastructural development and the dividends of democracy that is emblematic of the social contract the government has with the governed. And so, the status and the capacities wielded by the public administrator becomes very critical in the determination of the capacity readiness of the civil service as the key arm of government that makes policies work.

    From time immemorial, the public servant has been key in the determination of the qualitative success of the government of the day. And this is what has accounted for the changing roles of the public administrator over time. From ancient Pharaonic Egypt to modern Prussia, the task of the public administrator has become increasingly complicated given the increasing complex nature of the world, the policy environment and the world of work.  By the time Max Weber would be theorizing the nature of public administration, Prussia was already laying the political context for Weber’s theoretical formulation of the grounding of modern public administration and the understanding of the vocation of the public servants. The course of Germany’s political future in the nineteenth century was to be determined by the clash of personalities between Wilhelm II (the young and ambitious German Kaiser) and Otto von Bismarck, his more experienced chancellor. Their personalities intervened in their understanding of social policy and foreign policy, with both favoring incompatible approaches to the objectives of governments. In March 1890, the Kaiser asked for the resignation of Bismarck after series of political clashes.

    This significant confrontation between a king and his seasoned senior public servant was a key ingredient in the foundation of the dichotomies that have functioned in the moderation of the relationship between politicians and public administrators since the dawn of the nineteenth century. From Max Weber to Woodrow Wilson, the politics-administration dichotomy construes politics and administration as two different and separate endeavors that should not be allowed to interfere with each other. Indeed, both are diametrically opposed to each other. For Weber, “In terms of what he is really called upon to do (Beruf), the true official…should not engage in politics but should ‘administer’, and above all he should do so impartially.” On his own, Wilson insists: “The field of administration is a field of business. It is removed from the hurry and strife of politics… Administration lies outside the proper sphere of politics. Administrative questions are not political questions. Although politics sets the tasks for administration, it should not be suffered to manipulate its offices.”

    However, by the time we arrived France under Napoleon I, the administrative dynamics has become so hierarchical and complex that we inherited the concept of the bureaucracy from the French “bureau.” And the bureaucracy created a very strong and political administrative elite that exerted a significant influence on the political system. Administrative history across the globe therefore provides the trajectory by which we have made the transition from the apolitical, impartial and neutral public administrator to the politically aware, citizens-centered and democratically accountable one. The fundamental question I hope this piece will attend to is simple: what kind of public administrator is needed to man the civil and public service required to make democratic governance functional for the citizens in the twenty-first century? To clarify that question: how is the cherished values of public-spiritedness and professionalism to be guided against political conflicts? 

    There is the tendency to assume that a democratic context requires a more politically visible, active and accountable public administrator who is citizen-centered and dissolves the politics-administration dichotomy. However, the reality of governance and administration, especially in a complex context like postcolonial Nigeria, insists we reject such a quick and superficial answer. This tells us, first, that the politics-administration dichotomy cannot be taken as a universal axiom. This means that we need to give attention to the significance of administrative contexts in the mediation of the understanding of what the dichotomy should mean for the governance of any political regime. Second, the interpretation of the dichotomy also enables us to understand the dynamics of state-ness and its relationship to the civil service. State-ness here is not just a reference to state power, but also a set of institutions, structures, and institutional procedures and norms that represent a specific policy architecture the civil and public service are embedded in.

    Read Also: Ogijo lead poisoning: Senate raises alarm over silent public health crisis

    The key issue I need to engage in this piece is the extent to which public administrators and manager can afford to be politicized. To what extent can public servants sidestep their constitutional role to dabble into politics? As Woodrow Wilson noted emphatically, political questions are not administrative questions. When both are properly articulated and separated, the processes and act of governance is given a boost that leads to good governance. Indeed, Weber’s understanding of the dichotomy is founded not just on the distinction between the politicians and the administrators. The distinction itself is the function of how we understand politics. Weber insists: “Thus, [the public servant] should not do the very thing which politicians, both the leaders and their following, always and necessarily must do, which is to fight. Partisanship, fighting, passion…all this is the very element in which the politician, and above all the political leader, thrives.” The very nature of politics demands that the administrators stay out of the fray that will likely compromise her public-spiritedness and professionalism.

    It is this very attempt at preserving the professional capacity of the public servant that necessitates the need to prevent the politicization of the public servant. The apolitical bureaucrat is expected to be neutral, dutiful, impartial and professional even though the political space is impassioned and contested. And this is what enables an administrative continuity that undergirds political succession. Government come and go, but it is that solid space of administrative diligence, capacities and continuity that sustains the very business of government and governance. Once that space is compromised by the very status of the politicized public administrators and managers, then it is not just the dichotomy that is breached.

     It sends a signal to the politicians to tamper with the sacred vocation of public administration. In a most significant sense, breaching the politics-administration dichotomy activates an identity crisis. It calls to question the identity of a public servant, and her status within the governance space. The real point here is that the status of the politicized public servant is ambiguous, compared to the traditional roles and expertise she has been trained for, and which requires regular reskilling to meet current administrative and governance challenges. Within the political space, the public servant is asked to maneuver and exercise her discretionary acumen blindly.  

    The professional credentials of a public servant are founded on her capacity to maintain a strict neutrality that enhances her capacity to mediate policy formulation and design for any government. However, when politics intervenes, the public servant is confronted by a conflict between ideological and professional interests. And sometimes, the ideological would plausibly override the professional because it is inherently political. Here, professionalism coincides with the essence of being a public servant—the publicness of public service. In other words, publicness demands a level of accountability that derives from engagement with the citizens. And this is enabled by a professional dedication to an impartial deliberation on public values, social equity and policy intelligence. However, all these would be compromised once the public servants have to weigh their loyalty to the government as well as to the citizens. In all likelihood, politics almost always wins!

    Politicians are known for their pursuit of quick wins. This facilitates their constant attempt to store political capital. And this often stand in stark contrast to the policy objectives of the civil servants, among which is the deployment of technical expertise and policy intelligence towards concretizing long term governance and development matters. Political partisanship, without doubt, would involve not only the padding of the bureaucrat’s technical expertise, but also the compulsion to step down the expertise in favor of less informed opinions. And this ultimately compromises the responsibility the public servant owes the state and its citizens. Beyond the compromise of the technical expertise, there is also the deeper issue of the breach of public ethics. To ask a public servant to be brazenly political and partisan is to drag her into the murky realm of political matters that seems to abhor ethical ad moral consideration which underlies administrative dealings.

    And yet, a public servant must not just be traditionally defined by the imperatives of the politics-administration dynamics; she must also be found adequately qualified to handle the demands of democratic governance. In my view, a public servant must be able to balance the significance of her traditional vocational expertise with the necessities of administering and managing institutions in a VUCA—volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous—world. A public servant does not need the disruptive tendencies of politics to operate and deploy her expertise in a twenty-first century world already disrupted by many challenges from pandemics to political conflicts. Thus, a public administrator or manager needs to evolve in line with the demands of the time. Three such evolutionary phases have been identified. The first is the traditional rule-based Weberian bureaucrat. The second phase is that of the performance-oriented civil servant who embodies managerial tools, values and techniques in the pursuit of measurable productivity in business-like fashion. And lastly, there is the public manager as collaborator who manages a network of governance actors working together to facilitate infrastructural development and ultimately good governance. All three are not different and distinct, but usually morph into one another. All three would be undermined if the public servant ever strays into politics.

    All these do not require a civil or public servant to compromise on her professionalism, expertise and sense of neutral and impartial commitment. On the contrary, she is called upon, in the service of the political and policy mandates of the politicians, to keep sharpening her professional competences and credentials in order to be able to better deliver on her own constitutionally approved mandate of instilling the policy formulation and implementation responsibility with technical expertise and ethical soundness. Politics intrudes in this fundamental evolution of the public servant and compromises her capacity to genuinely deploy her evolving competences to serve democratic governance. Nigeria needs more of the impartial than the politicized public servant if her democratic governance project would ever be concretized.

    • Prof. Tunji Olaopa, Chairman, Federal Civil Service Commission & Professor of Public Administration, Abuja
  • General Christopher Musa: The man for the season

    General Christopher Musa: The man for the season

    By Sunday E. Shoremi

    It is a known fact that history does not remember offices; it remembers the men and women who dignified them. Titles fade; tenure ends; the corridors of power exchange footsteps. Yet, as old wisdom reminds us, what echoes after the footsteps is the measure of the soul that walked the path. It is this timeless understanding—rooted in civic morality and spiritual conscientiousness—that frames the present reflection on the imperative of retaining exemplary service beyond formal office.

    My country, Nigeria, at this historical crossroads, stands in need not merely of institutions but of individuals whose presence strengthens institutions, whose integrity sanitizes processes, and whose vision steadies the fragile architecture of a nation still grappling with the ghosts of insecurity, political fatigue, and trust deficits.

    In this regard, the stewardship of General Christopher Musa (Rtd.), the immediate past Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), emerges as a compelling example of leadership that did not begin with appointment and certainly should not end with retirement. For as our forefathers said, “a good tree does not cease to give shade simply because the season changes.” Such is the character of service that transcends office—an unbroken flame that illuminates the path long after the holder removes the uniform.

    The nation, like a long-suffering traveller, continues to seek the wisdom that guided General Christopher Musa (Rtd.)’s command—a calm, disciplined, patriotic force that stood between chaos and order when insecurity threatened to overrun reason. To dismiss such a figure into silence after office would not only be a moral loss but a strategic error in a time when Nigeria requires every credible voice, every tested mind, every tempered patriot in its arsenal for peace.

    At a moment when national security remains fragile, the country requires a defence minister who understands the intricate psychology of asymmetric warfare, the sociology of communal conflict, the geopolitics of weapons trafficking, and the diplomacy necessary for international intelligence cooperation. General Musa (Rtd.) embodies this synthesis naturally. His leadership was not imposed by hierarchy; it was earned on the field, in operations, in negotiations, and in decisions taken under extreme pressure where the wrong move could cost lives or destabilize regions.

    His suitability for ministerial responsibility is further amplified by his temperament. He is measured, deliberate, apolitical, and emotionally intelligent. Nigeria has suffered enough from leaders who react before reasoning. General Musa (Rtd.) brings the opposite: clarity before action; diplomacy before confrontation; logic before impulse. He has demonstrated repeatedly that leadership is not noise but depth, not posturing but substance.

    The office of Minister of Defence demands more than administrative competence—it demands a stabilizing presence, a unifying figure capable of coordinating service chiefs, communicating with the presidency, engaging communities, reassuring allies, and maintaining troop morale. General Musa (Rtd.) carries this balance effortlessly. His appointment will fortify the national security architecture at a time Nigeria needs steadiness, continuity, and credibility.

    Most importantly, he represents the moral clarity essential for public trust. His record remains untouched by scandal, factional bias, or regional favouritism. He is seen as a Nigerian officer—not a sectional figure. To ignore the strategic asset of his intellect, experience, and temperament is to undervalue the sacrifices of the men he led and the progress made under his command.

    Our nation stands at a crossroad. The challenges of security, societal cohesion, and institutional continuity demand voices of seasoned judgment. The insecurity of our dear country is not a moment but a generational challenge, multi-layered and complex. It is political—shaped by governance gaps; economic—driven by unemployment and inequality; ideological—fuelled by extremist narratives; technological—enabled by cyber tools; transnational—supported by cross-border networks; communal—rooted in identity conflict; and environmental—worsened by resource scarcity.

    No single tenure, however brilliant, can resolve a generational problem. Continuity of wisdom, not merely continuity of officeholders, is essential. The tenure of one Chief of Defence Staff may end, but the wisdom of a good and patriotic CDS must endure.

    For insecurity is dynamic, requiring generational consistency, adaptive learning, and long-term strategy. Only individuals who have spent decades studying its evolution can advise on its future. Intellectual waste in national security jeopardizes sovereignty. A nation does not fall only to external enemies; it falls when it discards its greatest internal assets. Insecurity thrives where institutional memory is undervalued and experience cast aside. Nigeria must learn from history: nations that survived turbulence preserved their finest thinkers and disciplined strategists.

    Countries like Israel, South Korea, the United States, and the United Kingdom operate on a principle Nigeria urgently needs: compulsory preservation of elite strategic minds. They do not “retire” the best; they retain them as strategic assets. In Israel, retired generals enter security councils. In the UK, former Chiefs of Defence Staff serve as advisers. In South Korea, former military leaders remain embedded in crisis management and strategic planning. In the USA, former service chiefs become national security advisers and institutional reform guides. Experience is a national resource, not a ceremonial relic.

    Thus, bringing back General Christopher Musa (Rtd.) is not an act of sentiment—it is a strategic necessity. Losing a strategic mind incurs immense cost: years of inter-agency networks, insight into insurgent evolution, psychological mapping of extremist groups, trusted relationships with foreign partners, battlefield-forged experience, and nuanced intelligence knowledge vanish with him. Such knowledge is not in files; it is lived, and it saves nations.

    Nigeria’s current security recovery is delicate. The transitional period is most vulnerable: new leadership acclimatizes, insurgents test weaknesses, international partners observe, intelligence flows risk fragmentation. The stabilizing presence of an experienced figure becomes indispensable.

    The contemporary security environment remains complex. Stability is delicate. Absence at the wrong time can reopen cracks. Like every organism seeking health, Nigeria must preserve its strongest immune cells. General Christopher Musa (Rtd.) is one such cell.

    Read Also: FG to expand social protection to cover 60m Nigerians in informal economy

    The purity of intention transforms technical knowledge into actionable wisdom. Character underpins competence, and moral clarity fosters public trust and operational effectiveness. Service involves navigating tension between visibility and discretion, influence and autonomy. Here, the wisdom of the retired statesman proves invaluable: navigating institutional corridors without ceremonial recognition, advising without overstepping authority, and marshalling knowledge for collective benefit. These qualities are tactical and ethical imperatives, exemplifying service beyond office.

    Classical leadership principles reinforce this: Roman consuls retained advisory influence after stepping down; civic elders provided guidance without formal power. Contemporary leaders like General Christopher Musa (Rtd.) continue to shape national destiny. The echo of experience reverberates through policy formulation, institutional discipline, and strategic foresight. The nation benefits from continuity of prudential wisdom, ensuring fleeting office does not equal fleeting value.

    Nations falter when experience and action disconnect. By harnessing counsel from leaders who traversed high office, Nigeria anticipates challenges, calibrates responses, and sustains stability. This is moral and strategic foresight safeguarding the common good.

    Leadership and service are inseparable from history. Offices are temporary, but integrity, prudence, and insight persist.

    Clichés resonate here: “Experience is the best teacher,” “Wisdom comes with age,” “Service knows no expiration.” These maxims validate the principle repeatedly in history, embodied in leaders who retain intellectual vigour and ethical clarity. Every consultation and recommendation reminds the nation that service transcends temporal office.

    May our collective faith in Nigeria continue to find expressions of purpose. Offices fade, honours wane, but the spirit of service abides—echoing in institutions, in lives uplifted, and in a nation that dares to believe tomorrow can be brighter than today.

    •Shoremi is a retired Deputy Director of the Federal Public Service.