The Nation Newspaper

Tag: BUHARI

  • Malami & Mohammed: Haunted by their past

    Malami & Mohammed: Haunted by their past

    The late president, Muhammadu Buhari rode to power in 2015 with goodwill of Nigerians, defeating a sitting president for the first time in our nation’s history. Nigerians saw in him the answer to the overarching problems of the country viz indiscipline, corruption and the threat of Boko Haram insurgency in the Northeast and banditry and immigrant Fulani terrorism in the north-central and northeast.

    Despite his anti-democratic credentials as former military head of state and perceived religious fanaticism, Nigerians saw in Buhari, a leader who loved and had faith in a country whose unity and indivisibility he fought for as a foot soldier marching from Makurdi to Port Harcourt; and on whose behalf he suffered the indignity of being removed from power and dumped in detention for standing with Nigerians that roundly rejected IMF and its ‘conditionalities’ including turning Nigeria into a dumping ground for foreign goods. 

    Unfortunately, by 2023, with the near-collapse of the economy due to massive corruption and incompetence, social dislocations and division as a result of terrorist onslaught that set ethnic nationalities against each other, Buhari had frittered away the goodwill of Nigerians that heralded him to power in 2015.

    The failure of Buhari Presidency stemmed from his incompetence. Those he romantically described as his ‘loyal gatekeepers’ who did not share his pan-Nigeria world view but decided to hide within his government to serve self or other tendencies soon hijacked his government despite repeated warning by his wife.

    In this regard, we can start by identifying Buhari’s ‘friends’ that turned out to be his nemesis beginning with Abubakar Malami, his Attorney General and Minister of Justice who, to many, defined Buhari’s presidency; Bala Mohammed, a non-Fulani who decided to fight the Fulani war like a slave, Hadi Abubakar Sirika, former aviation minister dragged before Justice S.C Orji’s FCT High Court in October 2025 over alleged N2.7billion theft; Godwin  Emefiele who on December 2, 2025 forfeited total assets of about N12.18 billion, including 753 Abuja duplexes, plus another $4, 7 million and N830 million.

    Now let us take a journey through memory to examine some of the excesses of Malami who in power forgot that power is transient and became indifferent to the verdict of history.

    The first evidence of Malami’s acquisitive tendencies came to light with petitions over MTN fine of N780 billion by NCC. When Malami and Adebayo, the Minister of Communication were interrogated by the Senate Committee on Communication, it was discovered that the NCC which was duly authorized to collect all revenues was circumvented as the N50 billion part payment was “curiously paid into CBN Recovery Account specifically designated for the recovered looted funds”.

    This was followed by Malami’s 2017 secret trip to Dubai for a meeting with a fugitive offender, Abdulrasheed Maina, chairman of Presidential Pension Review Committee, indicted by Senate probe panel for N2billion fraud. And upon his return, but for the protest of the then Head of Civil Service, Malami would have succeeded in integrating Maina back into the bureaucracy through the back door.

    It is also on record that the central issue between Malami and Ibrahim Magu, the EFCC chairman he falsely accused of corruption, and replaced with an unqualified candidate from his (Malami) state, was over how seized assets were distributed. He had accused Magu of selling the assets to his cronies while Magu accused him of ignorance as the statute setting up the EFCC did not give the body such powers. Magu was later found innocent and rehabilitated following Buhari’s Justice Salami Investigative panel that exposed Malami’s vindictiveness.

    In 2021, it was said that UAE passed to Nigeria, a list of 38 individuals and 15 entities including six Nigerians viz Abdurrahaman Ado Musa, Salihu Yusuf Adamu, Bashir Ali Yusuf, Muhammed Ibrahim Isa, Ibrahim Ali Alhassan and Surajo Abubakar Muhammad, allegedly involved in terrorist financing. As a follow up, it was also said that Nigeria Sanctions Committee met on March 18, 2024, and recommended the sanctioning of some individuals including Gumi’s ally, Tukur Manu, accused of participating “in the financing of terrorism by receiving and delivering ransom payments over the sum of $200,000 in support of ISWAP terrorists for the release of hostages of the Abuja-Kaduna train attack.”

    But Malami, the Minister of Justice appeared to have been swayed by Gumi’s argument that “No Nigerian will put his money into terrorism”; insisting terrorists “are financing themselves by taking our children for ransom”. Malami chose to do nothing despite the ravaging of the north by terrorists forcing northern leaders to call for Buhari’s resignation over his failure to protect lives and properties of the people of the north.

    With his December 2025 detention by EFCC over alleged theft of about N8.7bn, and last week DSS grilling allegedly over his handling of the list of Nigerian terror financiers released by the United Arab Emirates, many believe it is the past coming to haunt Malami.

    Many also believe Bauchi’s Bala Mohammed, whose commissioners are currently facing EFCC charges of terrorism financing share the same fate with Malami. He who sows the wind must necessarily reap the whirlwind.

    Bala Mohammed started nursing a presidential ambition as soon as he was elected governor in 2019. And since one only gets integrated into the northern ruling class through marriage, business or political endorsement, he first declared he was Fulani maternally, before choosing to fight the Fulani battle like a slave. For instance, long after full blooded Fulani like’s Nasir El Rufai, Kastina’s Aminu Masari and Kano’s Abdullahi Umar Ganduje had disowned and called for the total elimination criminal Fulani herdsmen engaged in killing of innocent Nigerians with banned AK 47 riffles, Mohammed embarked on his ill-advised campaign to justify continued bearing of AK 47 rifles that have become weapon of terror against Nigerians by immigrant Fulani herdsmen.

    He did not just stop at that  but went on to insist immigrant herdsmen should be conferred with Nigerian citizenship and integrated into the then government planned National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP) being championed by the federal government.

    Read Also: 15 million Nigerians use drugs, says NDLEA

    Then he picked up battle with Governor Samuel Ortom of Benue State who but for the fact he was fleet-footed would have been eliminated by armed criminal Fulani herdsmen who chased him out of his farm. His only offence was his decision to faithfully implement anti-grazing law passed by his state of assembly. Malami then took the battle to Ondo State where he confronted the late Governor Rotimi Akeredolu over his resolve to rid his reserve forest of illegal criminal herdsmen.

    With all the victories Malami secured in his self-appointed crusade against opponents of criminal Ak-47 wielding immigrant Fulani herdsmen, Malami should feel fulfilled with the title of ‘a sympathiser’ of this anti-Nigeria group; that he is belatedly getting his flowers from no less a body as the DSS should be cause for double celebration.

    Mohammed who alleged his refusal to defect to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) had attracted intimidation and harassment, fingered Nyesom Wike as the man behind his current travail. “Somebody said he is going to put fire in my state. That person is the FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike”, he stated after threatening “to escalate the matter to the international community”.

    But if Mohammed is not trying to be economical with the truth, he should admit that he and Wike were once intimate friends. Former House of Representatives Speaker Yakubu Dogara, not too long ago publicly scolded Bala for his act ingratitude to Wike who generously deployed Rivers State resources to wage his 2019 gubernatorial battle in Bauchi.  Bala more than anyone else knows that Wike, his estranged friend fights with his eyes closed when seeking vengeance. He can therefore not feign ignorance by attempting to divert attention from EFCC that is currently holding some of his Ministry of Finance officials.

    The good news is that Abubakar Malami is deemed innocent until the court returns a guilty verdict while Bala Mohammed is protected by the constitution. The shortest route to freedom for the former who, one Bala Usman,  claimed was until 2015 ‘a charge and bail’ lawyer is to defend the sources of his stupendous wealth including 53 mansions currently under temporary forfeiture to government. As for the latter who is not EFCC’s target, his obligation is to secure freedom for his finance commissioner, Adamu, arraigned by the EFCC, alongside Balarabe Abdullahi Ilelah, Aminu Mohammed Bose and Kabiru Yahaya Mohammed on December 31, 2025 on a 10-count charge bordering on alleged terrorism financing to the tune of $9.7million

    And this can be easily achieved by providing evidence to invalidate DSS claim that the total sum of $17 million and N75.2 mil¬lion shared on February 7, 2024, was for terrorism financing.

  • Who poisoned Buhari?

    Who poisoned Buhari?

    The enigma that was Muhammadu Buhari sprung up again for reckoning. In his new book:  From Soldier to Statesman, Dr. Charles Omole intrudes on our understanding of the man. He thereby has nudged the tall, angular figure with an ascetic carriage and rare, beguiling smiles from the solemnity of his grave.

    From the grave? Great men do not rest in peace when they leave. They are summoned now and again for eulogies and more elegies. They return for a moment, a seminar, or a political event, a comparison, an inspiration, to rebury them, or to historicize them into heroes or villains. We distort their words, reappraise their deeds, send them to Golgotha and back. We cast them in our image by reimagining the past itself as though it is now.

    Men like Caesar, Solon, Napoleon, Mandela, Churchill, De Gaulle, Lincoln, Awo, Sankara, Lumumba rise out of their epitaphs to be redressed or perfumed. Also, Hitler, Pol Pot, Franco, Mobutu, Idi Amin, and the sawdust Caesar also known as Mussolini help illuminate us even when they pollute. So, Shakespeare may have overplayed the ritual of death when he wrote in Hamlet, “Goodnight, sweet prince; and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest.”

    No rest for Buhari this season. We have Buhari today back to the forge or forgery of a censorious nation. Omole’s book reminds us as Ralph Waldo Emerson does in his line that “there is properly no history but the biographies of great men.”

    Maybe Buhari was great. Maybe not. But two principal things strike one in that book, even as excerpts steal out to the public eye. First is the lament of his wife and former First Lady Aisha Buhari. And it relates to the man’s illness on the throne.

    Aisha said it all began when the former president abandoned his medical regimen because some of his folks insinuated that she wanted to poison him. A great charge that none of them have denied or even have tried to undermine. She said the regimen kept him in good health. But once he leaned to the so-called cabal, he abandoned the regimen, and his health began to fail him.

    Because of that he was out of the country for over 150 days. We recall that time as precarious for governance. Osinbajo took over and made a ‘royal’ misstep and fell into the doghouse of the power game. There were those who stoked underground intrigues and eyed a new berth as president for themselves. A certain small man from a power state up north and a certain mouthy man from the south-south were dreaming a tie-up as possible president and vice president. They are together again in a coalition in the same furtive game of futility.

    Meanwhile, stories of death or near so were exaggerating Buhari’s health. Not many of the intriguers were happy he returned to the éclat and applause of his adoring followers. But what bothers one is how a few advisers could destroy a throne because of their greed for influence and filthy lucre.

    They turned husband against wife because they wanted to turn a profit. They did. They twisted democracy in their own favour. They were political families and blood families against the greatest bond between two people: man and wife. They stabbed the first unit of the first unit of society in the country. Sociologists say the family is the first unit, and the president’s family is the first of the first units. One of cohorts, a fuddy-duddy, took over and felt entitled to hold court in Aso Rock as though elected. Another one, Abba Kyari even made himself NNPC board member and said with familiar impunity that it was Buhari who put him there to represent him. The chief of staff told the lie to Buhari, even when the president did not say so. He was the man trying to play double. He was a metaphorical Jibrin. The fuddy-duddy a family man; Kyari a political associate. Both led him to near death because they broke a family.

    Aisha was no goddess in Aso Rock. Neither did anyone expect her to be. But she was his wife. Before her, Yar-Adua had Turai as first lady who served as the garrison of the president’s heart. No cabal could push her down. She was the cabal, if there was one. In fact, a prominent woman today once asked in those days what Yar-Adua did to his wife that Turai would not forgive him but allow him to undergo public ridicule and trial? In other words, the man was dying, so why not let him go in peace rather than egg on the tempest of stories about his good health and return to power?

    Aisha irked the Cabal for trying to be the husband’s garrison. They took her down. She complained about Buhari’s lack of gratitude to those who helped him to the office after three tries. She was referring to now  President Bola Tinubu and many a foot soldier. But the man who mocked the other room would not listen. She also said her husband was listening to the wrong voices. She was challenging wickedness in high places and principalities in the vault of power.

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

    She lacked Turai’s or Maryam Babangida’s influence with the man. She also did not have the wiles of the wives of ancient Greece and Rome, who turned themselves into matadors. It was because the man did not love his wife enough. He almost died because he abandoned his great asset. He had to return to her in a way because she resumed, in her confession, by slipping new medicines into his porridges. The man revived but time had been killed. “You can’t kill time without injuring eternity,” noted Thoreau.

    Losing over six months, of course, injured his legacy. How did that time affect his ability to operate with physical and mental confidence? How did that affect how he handled power, or ethics, or education or the other high imperatives of office?  We shall never know.

    So, if someone tried to poison Buhari, it was not the woman who revived her. In fact, we might say, the cabal poisoned him. They took him off work, derailed his focus and undermined his legacy. In the end, you will not blame the cabal but the man who made them his trust.

    The other point in the book was Dr. Yemi Osinbajo’s ambition. It is clear that he might have betrayed his naiveté. His team said he met Buhari about his ambition. To say he supported him showed the novice the former vice president was. If the man encouraged him to run, it did not mean he supported him. If he approved, it was not the same thing as endorse. Godfathers don’t ask anyone not to run. In fact, the father often is the initiator of the project. He clasps to his chest his favorite, and it was not President Tinubu. Tinubu was not naïve to rely on Buhari. Hence his Abeokuta rhetorical uppercut. If Osinbajo was wise, he was not street smart, nor politically savvy. He went to battle with a hole in his armour. The don was undone.

    He should have known that Buhari was propping up Lawal. If he did not know, he was not a politician. His associates, especially a professor, was gung-ho about Buhari’s support. The Katsina patriarch was cracking the nuts for the former senate president and Osinbajo thought himself the darling of the gods.

     He was entitled to his own failure as other hopefuls in the APC top perch who were hoodwinked and suborned into delusions of grandeur. The cabal filled its pouch. In that regard, though, Omole reveals nothing new.

    Omole’s book also shows that Buhari, for all the hero worship, was made of flesh and blood. And as Sophocles notes in his play Ajax, “He was just a man before this, wasn’t he?”

  • The Omole Exposé: Nigeria’s reckoning with institutional failure

    The Omole Exposé: Nigeria’s reckoning with institutional failure

    Charles Omole’s newly launched book on the Muhammadu Buhari presidency titled  “Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari,”has detonated like a carefully placed charge beneath Nigeria’s political establishment. Though my ordered copy remains in transit, the reverberations from its revelations—and more tellingly, the reactions it has provoked—tell us everything we need to know about the fragility of our governance structures and the dangerous personalization of power that continues to plague this nation.

    The allegations and disclosures reportedly contained in Omole’s work have sent shockwaves through political circles, not merely because they are sensational, but because they apparently lay bare the fundamental dysfunction at the heart of recent Nigerian governance. The book’s reception, characterized by defensive outrage from some quarters and knowing nods from others, reveals a nation that has become dangerously accustomed to leadership opacity. What the reviews and public discourse since it’s launch demonstrate is that Nigeria remains trapped in a vicious cycle: we elevate individuals, even those not elected to positions of immense power, grant them near-imperial latitude, then express theatrical shock when we discover that unchecked authority has been exercised in ways contrary to the national interest.

    This pattern must end. The Omole book, whatever its ultimate historical verdict, serves as yet another clarion call for the structural transformation of Nigerian governance. We must transition from a system that allows individuals to set themselves up against the nation’s interest—whether through incompetence, malice, or the simple reality that power without institutional constraints inevitably corrupts—to one where robust institutions provide the guardrails in preventing such a concentration of power on individuals.

    The case for institutional deepening in Nigeria is not abstract theory; it is existential necessity. Consider what apparently transpired during the Buhari years: decisions made or deferred, appointments that privileged loyalty over competence, policy paralysis masked as integrity, and the concentration of power in informal networks rather than constitutional structures. These are not failings unique to one man or one administration—they are the predictable consequences of a system designed around personalities rather than processes.

    Strong institutions would have prevented many of the alleged missteps documented by Omole. An empowered civil service, insulated from political interference, does not wait for presidential whim to implement policy. An independent judiciary, properly resourced and respected, does not allow executive overreach to go unchallenged. A legislature conscious of its co-equal status does not rubber-stamp executive proposals or remain silent in the face of governance failures. A free press, protected by law and practice, does not wait for post-tenure exposés to reveal what should have been reported in real-time.

    Yet Nigeria’s institutions remain weak by design. We have created a hyper-presidency where success or failure hinges almost entirely on the character, capacity, and circle of whoever occupies Aso Rock. This is not governance; it is a lottery, in local parlance it is kalokalo and governance has become similar to a set of odds. And the Nigerian people, regardless of ethnicity, region, or religion, deserve better than to have their futures determined by chance.

    Which brings me to Nasir El-Rufai’s response to the Omole book—a response that, despite coming from a man I admire greatly for his intellect and administrative competence, fundamentally misunderstands the nature of democratic accountability.

    El-Rufai’s criticism of the book appears to rest on several premises, all of which deserve interrogation. The first seems to be that there is something inherently unseemly or disloyal about former insiders publishing accounts of their time in government. This is untenable. When Muhammadu Buhari—or any Nigerian—chooses to seek and accept the presidency, they voluntarily enter the public sphere in its most intense form. The office belongs to the people, not its temporary occupant. Everything done in that capacity, every decision made, every word spoken in official capacity, becomes part of the public record and subject to public scrutiny. This is not cruelty; it is democracy.

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

    To suggest otherwise is to argue for a cult of silence that protects power from accountability. It is to claim that those who serve in government owe greater loyalty to their principal than to the Nigerian people who are the ultimate employers of every public servant. This is precisely the mentality that has enabled decades of unaccountable governance.

    El-Rufai’s second apparent premise—that such accounts are not balanced and that the book was meant to serve the interests of one faction against the other faction—is equally flawed. Nigeria cannot afford to wait for a village/ umunna / kindred  meeting of sorts between these factions before one can give his verdict, particularly when the consequences of governance failures are being lived in real-time by millions struggling with insecurity, economic hardship, and diminished opportunities. The urgent work of learning from our mistakes, of understanding what went wrong and why, cannot be postponed for the sake of seeking balance which may not occur on its own, it takes the efforts of persons like Professor Omole to do such and perhaps provoke the other side to air its own story.

    El-Rufai ought to have suggested that those with alternative accounts should write their own books.  The marketplace of ideas works best when multiple perspectives compete, when different participants in the same events offer their interpretations, and when the public can weigh competing narratives against available evidence. Omole has contributed to this marketplace; others, including El-Rufai, should do likewise rather than attempting to delegitimize the very act of bearing witness.

    But come to think of it, can Nigerians ask El Rufai if he sought this balanced point of view when he published his book the “ Accidental Public Servant” that is with barbs and the exposures the book exhibited? Haba Sir!!!

    Moreover, the Omole book, from all accounts, is not a simplistic character assassination of Buhari as a person or leader. It is, rather, an attempt to document what occurred during a consequential period in Nigerian history. That the buck stopped at Buhari’s desk is not Omole’s invention—it is the constitutional reality of presidential systems. If uncomfortable truths emerge from that documentation, the appropriate response is not to shoot the messenger but to grapple with the message.

    The fundamental issue revealed by this entire episode transcends Buhari, Omole, or El-Rufai. It is this: Nigeria will not progress significantly until we stop organizing our political life around the mythology of the strong man who will save us, and instead build institutions strong enough to constrain bad leaders and enable good ones. We need systems where competence is rewarded over connection, where merit trumps loyalty, where processes matter more than personalities.

    This means constitutional reforms that genuinely distribute power. It means judicial independence backed by budgetary autonomy. It means a professional civil service with security of tenure. It means a legislature that understands itself as a check on executive power, not an adjunct to it. It means transparent processes for appointments, procurement, and policy-making. It means protecting whistleblowers rather than persecuting them.

    Until we undertake this institutional reconstruction, we will remain trapped in an endless cycle: messianic expectations, inevitable disappointment, recriminatory revelations, then the search for the next savior. The Omole book is merely the latest chapter in this tragedy. Let it be a catalyst for the fundamental change we desperately need—the building of a republic that works regardless of who temporarily leads it.

    Merry Christmas my dear readers, may the joys and hopes cradled in the Christmas Story be ours as a nation and a people.

  • Buhari didn’t name successor to save life, keep APC intact

    Buhari didn’t name successor to save life, keep APC intact

    • Ex-president’s biography reveals why he didn’t overrule Osinbajo

    Former President Muhammadu Buhari’s maturity, restraint, tact and wisdom shaped the succession politics within the All Progressives Congress (APC).

    Facts around these were made public yesterday through a book on the life and times of the late President, presented in Abuja.

    The 600-page book: “From Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari,” was written by Dr Charles Omole.

    Omole is the Director General of the Institute for Police and Security Policy Research (IPSPR).

    In the book, former Director General of the DSS Yusuf Bichi sheds light on why the late former President refused to openly anoint a successor ahead of the 2022 Presidential primary of the ruling APC.

    He states that Buhari did not reverse decisions taken by then Vice President Yemi Osinbajo during his time as acting president.

    Bichi says Buhari refrained from endorsing a successor to avoid exposing the candidate to danger and to maintain unity and cohesion in the party.

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his counterpart from The Gambia, Adama Barrow, governors, ministers, political leaders, diplomats and traditional rulers joined the family and associates of the departed leader for the book presentation at Aso Villa.

    Bichi, who reflected on the former leader’s much-debated refusal to openly name a preferred successor during the intense intra-party contest, says that he made a wise decision.

    READ ALSO: Insecurity: Why are we defeated?

    Bichi says Buhari’s silence was not a sign of detachment, but a deliberate security decision informed by intelligence assessments at the time.

    He says the former president privately expressed concern that publicly endorsing a successor could expose the individual to grave danger, including the risk of assassination, given the volatility and high-stakes rivalries within the political environment.

    Bichi says by choosing not to anoint anyone, Buhari sought to protect lives and prevent further destabilisation within his party – the APC –  and the broader polity, not minding the cost of enduring criticism for being aloof.

    He stresses: “In those months, knives were out; politically and, as security professionals know too well, sometimes literally.

    “To name an anointed heir would be to paint a target on a human being and to foreclose a process that, for all its imperfections, was designed to distribute risk.

    “Buhari chose silence, and in doing so, absorbed the criticism that he was aloof. He was not.

    “He was shielding a life and preserving a fragile equilibrium inside a party whose factions (tendencies) could as easily burn down the house as surrender the nomination they coveted.”

    President Bola Ahmed eventually won the primary with a wide margin and won the election to become Buhari’s successor.

    Giving an insight into the leadership style of the late president, the DSS  boss also explains why  Buhari did not overturn the decision of his deputy, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo, to remove Lawal Daura as DSS DG during the period Buhari was abroad on health grounds, and Osinbajo was acting President.

    Bichi says Buhari’s refusal to reverse Osinbajo’s decision to sack Daura was rooted in his deep respect for institutional order and constitutional authority.

    He recalls that when Osinbajo exercised executive powers as Acting President and removed Daura, there were expectations in some quarters that Buhari would overturn the decision upon his return.

    Buhari, however, declined to interfere.

    Bichi explains that Buhari believed reversing the action would undermine the legitimacy of the acting presidency and constitute an affront on the chain of command.

    He adds: “Having lawfully delegated authority to his Vice President, Buhari considered any attempt to countermand that decision as injurious to institutional stability, a stance that reinforced discipline within the security architecture and affirmed the principle that executive authority, once properly transferred, must be respected.”

    Bichi also discloses that the presidential response to Daura’s removal reflected Buhari’s restraint in power and refusal to personalise governance, even when political pressure mounted.

    He stresses: “One of the earliest tests of Buhari’s restraint came during the removal of Lawal Daura as DG DSS, an episode that could easily have devolved into a battle of egos. When the then Vice President Yemi Osinbajo was acting president, he decided to remove Daura.

    “Pressure followed for a presidential reversal. Buhari refused to interfere.

    “He had handed executive authority to his vice president while away; to countermand Osinbajo would be an ‘insult to his vice,’ and an injury to institutional order.

    “We can also reveal that the First Lady, Aisha Buhari, was a major instigator for the removal of the DSS boss.

    “In a political culture where loyalty is often confused with pliancy, this mattered. Buhari’s stance validated the chain of command and the legitimacy of the acting presidency.

    “It signalled to the security services that leadership transitions could be orderly; that the presidency would not bend the law to rescue allies or punish opponents for sport.

    “The lesson for the DSS was clear: act within your lawful remit, and the Commander-in-Chief will stand back; step outside it, and he will not rescue you from consequences.”

    Bichi sheds light on Buhari’s security philosophy, describing him as a leader who prioritised evidence, institutional restraint and professional autonomy over political theatrics.

    He says the former president deliberately avoided micro-managing the nation’s security services, adding that he granted commanders “the freedom of the battlefield,” while demanding accountability and results.

    Bichi recalls that  Buhari, who consistently resisted acting on rumours or political pressure, insisted on verifiable intelligence before approving arrests, sanctions or disruptive operations.

    He says Buhari usually asked: “Where is your proof?” noting that the former president believed actions not anchored in evidence would ultimately collapse under legal and public scrutiny.

    Bichi says that approach shaped intelligence operations during Buhari’s tenure and allowed security professionals to make operational decisions without fear of sudden political reversals, while also holding them responsible for outcomes.

    He also recounts how Buhari backed decisive security interventions once operational logic was clearly established, including moments when intelligence chiefs acted swiftly to avert potential threats to the President himself.

    In such instances, Bichi says Buhari validated the initiative taken in good faith and urged security agencies to “sustain the pressure” where public safety was at stake.

    Beyond operations, Bichi alludes to Buhari’s personal discipline and frugality, noting that he was wary of converting state privileges into private comforts and often questioned the source of gifts and expenditures around him.

    He says Buhari’s restraint extended to politics, where he consistently resisted suggestions to deploy state power against opponents, preferring instead to target enabling networks of violence rather than suppress dissent.

  • Buhari taught Nigerians that public office is a trust, not a windfall – Tinubu

    Buhari taught Nigerians that public office is a trust, not a windfall – Tinubu

    • …President eulogises late predecessor at biography launch, recalls integrity, humility and service
    • …vows to honour and build upon Buhari’s legacy through discipline, compassion, and results

    President Bola Tinubu on Monday said former President Muhammadu Buhari taught Nigerians, particularly the political class, that public office is a sacred trust and not a personal windfall, as he paid glowing tribute to the life and legacy of his late predecessor.

    Tinubu spoke at the official presentation of the biography, “From Soldier to Statesman: The Legacy of Muhammadu Buhari,” held at the State House Conference Centre, Abuja, where he described Buhari as a leader whose reputation for integrity, discipline, and modest living endured long after the trappings of power had faded.

    According to the President, the true measure of Buhari’s leadership was not the offices he occupied or the privileges that came with power, but “what persists when the sirens fall silent,” noting that the late former President left behind a legacy defined by honesty, restraint, and a firm belief that leadership is anchored in service.

    Tinubu, who described himself as a brother, friend, and political partner to Buhari, recalled their shared political journey and the coalition-building efforts that culminated in the historic 2015 election victory, which unseated an incumbent government and reshaped Nigeria’s political landscape.

    He said the alliance forged during that period had since evolved into the fastest-growing political party in Africa.

    The President said the biography serves as an honest account of Buhari’s life and leadership, outlining both achievements and shortcomings, and urged future leaders to draw lessons from history rather than rely on empty slogans.

    He identified humility, security, vision, and social justice as the enduring pillars of Buhari’s legacy, noting that the late leader preferred simplicity over extravagance, believed in self-discipline as the foundation of governance, and prioritised national security as the bedrock of prosperity.

    Tinubu also highlighted Buhari’s long-term vision for infrastructure development, including roads, railways, bridges, and airports, as well as his commitment to targeted social investments aimed at protecting the poor and vulnerable.

    He said Buhari’s consistent love for Nigeria and faithfulness to his oath of office earned him respect, even among critics, adding that their political experience together reinforced the importance of cooperation across differences in the task of nation-building.

    Tinubu vowed that his administration would honour and build upon Buhari’s legacy, stressing that remembrance must go beyond rhetoric to the delivery of tangible results with discipline, compassion, and resolve.

    “To my dear brother, President Muhammadu Buhari: though you are no longer with us, your impact endures. We will honour and build upon your legacy, not just by invoking your name, but by delivering results with discipline, compassion, and resolve,” Tinubu said.

    The President commended the author of the book for enriching Nigeria’s collective memory and expressed hope that the biography would inspire young Nigerians as they reflect on leadership and public service.

    In his welcome address, the Governor of Katsina State, Dikko Radda, portrayed the late former President as an incorruptible strategist whose leadership was defined by integrity and a deep understanding of national security.

    Radda said Buhari’s foresight in security matters and his personal discipline set him apart as a leader committed to the protection of the state and the welfare of its citizens.

    He also lauded the collaboration and camaraderie that existed between the late President and his successor, President Tinubu, which culminated in the victory that installed the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) in 2015, adding that there could not have been a better successor than Tinubu.

    Earlier, the author of the biography, Dr. Charles Omole, described the book as the most comprehensive account of the life and legacy of Muhammadu Buhari, explaining that the 600-page work addresses complex questions surrounding his journey, character, and leadership.

    According to Omole, the book focuses not just on Buhari the public figure, but on the man himself—his guiding principles, values, and personal convictions.

    He noted that one of Buhari’s enduring legacies is his family, particularly his children, whom he said were raised with forthrightness, balance, and strong emotional intelligence.

    Speaking on behalf of the family, Buhari’s daughter, Hadiza Nana Buhari, said the biography transcends a mere historical record, capturing the rhythm of a life lived with restraint, steadiness, and an abiding belief that public office is a sacred trust.

    She noted that while the story is not presented as flawless, “as no human story ever is, it challenges the next generation to build institutions strong enough to translate good intentions into lasting outcomes.

    Nana Buhari urged young Nigerians to draw lessons from her father’s life by embracing integrity, moderation, and patience in their pursuit of success and service to the nation.

    The event was graced by dignitaries from all walks of life, among whom were the President of The Gambia, Adama Barrow; members of the Buhari family, led by former First Lady, Hajiya Aisha Buhari; traditional rulers, including the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar III; the Olu of Warri, Ogiame Atuwatse III, and others.

    Also at the event were the Chairman of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA), Brig. Gen Buba Marwa (rtd), former Chief of Air Force, Air Marshal Isiaka Amoo (rtd); former Director-General of the Department of State Service (DSS), Alhaji Yusuf Bichi, former Chief of Naval Staff, Vice Admiral Awwal Gambo (rtd), and former Inspector-General of Police, Mohammed Asamu, all spoke on their experience with the late former President.

  • I never said Buhari, Boko Haram were connected —Jonathan

    I never said Buhari, Boko Haram were connected —Jonathan

    Former President Goodluck Jonathan has refuted reports quoting him as saying that the late former President Muhammadu Buhari was once nominated by the Boko Haram terrorist group to represent them in a dialogue with the federal government.

    Jonathan, in a statement signed by his Special Adviser (Media and Public Affairs), Ikechukwu Eze, said his comments at the public presentation of Scars, a book authored by former Chief of Defence Staff, Gen. Lucky Irabor, in Abuja on Friday, were “grossly misrepresented”.

    The statement said: “The attention of the Office of Former President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan has been drawn to misleading reports circulating in sections of the media suggesting that Dr. Jonathan alleged that Boko Haram nominated the late President Muhammadu Buhari, GCFR, to represent them in dialogue with the Federal Government, and therefore this made him somehow complicit in the Boko Haram crisis.

    “We wish to make it abundantly clear that the former President’s comments were grossly misrepresented. At no time did Dr. Jonathan suggest, imply, or insinuate that President Buhari had any connection with Boko Haram or that he supported the group in any form.

    “Dr. Jonathan’s remarks, made in the course of a broader discussion on Nigeria’s security challenges, were meant to illustrate the deviousness and manipulative strategies employed by Boko Haram in their early years.

    “His reference was to a well-documented episode when various individuals and factions falsely claimed to represent the terrorist group and purported to name prominent Nigerians as possible mediators: without those individuals’ knowledge or consent.

    Read Also: We’ve not been served court order on tinted glass permit – Police

    “The point Dr. Jonathan sought to make was that Boko Haram, in its characteristic deceit, often invoked the names of respected public figures to sow confusion, exploit political divisions, and undermine public confidence in government.

    “His comments were therefore an illustration of the group’s duplicity, not an accusation against the late former president or any individual for that matter.

    “The former president’s position was that if indeed Buhari was their choice negotiator, why didn’t Boko Haram expeditiously bring their evil terrorist agenda to an end when the retired General became president?

    “For the avoidance of doubt, Dr. Jonathan recognises that President Muhammadu Buhari, like every patriotic Nigerian, stood firmly against terrorism and was himself a target of Boko Haram violence.

    “Both men, during their respective tenures, shared a common commitment to restoring peace and stability to Nigeria.

    “The Office of the Former President therefore urges the public to disregard any misinterpretation of his remarks.

    “Dr. Jonathan remains committed to peace, unity, and the strengthening of democratic values in Nigeria.

    “He believes that the nation’s progress depends on a truthful understanding of its challenges, not on the distortion of facts for political or sensational purposes.”

    Jonathan had said at the book launch: “One of the committees we set up then, the Boko Haram nominated Buhari to lead their team to negotiate with the government.

    “So, I was feeling that oh, if they nominated Buhari to represent them and have a discussion with the government committee, then when Buhari took over, it could have been an easy way to negotiate with them and they would have handed over their guns.

    “But it (the problem) is still there till today.”

  • We’ll continue to uphold Buhari’s legacy, Tinubu assures family

    We’ll continue to uphold Buhari’s legacy, Tinubu assures family

    President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on Friday paid a condolence visit to the family of the late former President Muhammadu Buhari in Kaduna, assuring his administration would sustain and uphold the values and legacies left behind by the departed leader.

    The President, who was received at the Buhari family residence by the late President’s widow, Aisha, his eldest son, Yusuf and other relatives, said the nation shared in their grief and would forever remember Buhari’s virtues.

    According to a statement by his Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, the President said: “We are just here to assure you that we share in your grief, we share in your pain. A loss in flesh is not a loss in the spirit, and the spirit that he left with us is a spirit of hard work, dedication, patriotism, and honesty, and we are doing that.

    “We assure you and the entire family that we will continue with our leader’s legacy, the mark he made for Nigeria. We will continue on the path of honesty, integrity, and great character that he imbued in us. May God help Nigeria, keep us united and together in the promised land.”

    Responding in an emotional tone, Aisha Buhari thanked President Tinubu, the First Lady and members of the government for their unwavering support since the passing of her husband.

    Read Also: Tinubu celebrates 2Baba at 50, hails music icon’s global impact

    She said the visit was a source of comfort to the family and praised her late husband’s virtues, urging Nigerians to emulate them.

    “My husband stood for honesty, integrity, and justice. I would like to pray for Nigeria, for peace to reign, for unity of the country, and for you, President Tinubu, to carry on with my late husband’s legacy of honesty, integrity, tolerance, accountability, and justice,” she said.

    Tinubu was accompanied on the visit by Senate President, Godswill Akpabio; House of Representatives Speaker, Tajudeen Abbas and Governors Abdulrahman AbdulRazaq (Kwara); Mai Mala Buni (Yobe); Babagana Zulum (Borno) and Ahmed Aliyu (Sokoto).

    Also on the entourage were Minister of Finance, Wale Edun; Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Atiku Bagudu; Minister of State for Defence, Bello Matawalle; and National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu.

    Earlier in Kaduna, Tinubu graced the wedding of Nasirudeen Abdulaziz Yari, son of Senator Abdulaziz Yari, who represents Zamfara West.

    Nasirudeen tied the knot with Safiyya Shehu Idris at the historic Sultan Bello Mosque in the Kaduna metropolis.

    The President, joined by senior government officials, formally received the groom’s hand-in-marriage on behalf of the Yari family after the bride’s representative, Ibrahim Ashiru, confirmed the payment of the N1 million dowry.

    In his remarks, Tinubu commended both families for upholding noble traditions and advised the young couple to build their marriage on faith, love, and mutual respect.

    The colourful occasion was attended by dignitaries from across the country, including traditional rulers, political leaders, and captains of industry.

    Prayers for the President and the nation were offered by renowned cleric Sheikh Abdullahi Bala Lau and the Chief Imam of the mosque, Dr Muhammad Suleiman.

  • Six for the PM

    Six for the PM

    The Yoruba have a quip: a child with no home training is fated to a harsh tutorial outside. 

    That’s the fitting fate of Simon Ekpa, the self-appointed “Prime Minister” of Biafra, set to cool his heels in a Finnish jail house for the next six years, for levying terrorism on his native South East, to hurt Nigeria.  Ekpa hails from Ebonyi State.

    But as we knock callow youths for rash choices, let’s not forget to cudgel elders too for wizened folly — masquerading as ancestral wisdom — pressed from ancestral feuding.

    That explains the South East anarchy that birthed both Nnamdi Kanu and new jail bird, Ekpa. 

    It was also behind the South West anomie — read Fulani disdain — that peaked under President Muhammadu Buhari (PMB), as Yoruba “Nesan” agitation. 

    A Fulani was president; and Yoruba Fulani haters pushed the insecurity challenges to run PMB political associates out of town: explicitly current President Bola Tinubu.  His crime? The clear spirit behind the APC grand merger, that powered PMB’s presidential triumph!

    Well, thank God, the anti-Fulani hysteria is gradually ebbing; and pipers of that toxic tune, gradually fading out — by death or by political irrelevance; or even, in the case of Ekpa, bottled in a foreign slammer!

    Still, for Nigeria’s collective good and political sanity, folks should always keep in mind how it all started — particularly, the present northern ensemble, spewing ethnic bile; and thundering northern arrogance, just because PBAT is sitting president.

    A southern lobby once tried that nonsense — witness: the halcyon days of “Fulani herdsmen”, as the southern media boomed, committing all the heinous crimes Nigeria-wide, while local felons snoozed in blissful retirement! But see how it’s all petering out?

    Ripples opposed the South’s ethnic-baiting of Arewa under PMB.  It will, with equal rigour, resist the North’s ethnic-taunting of the South under PBAT. 

    Read Also: 23 terrorists killed, 26 kidnap victims rescued in Katsina

    That mutual hate is the last Nigeria needs.  On the contrary, it must harness its very best, across the board, to face down its humongous challenges.

    But back to the South East IPOB crisis, and its philosopher kings, long gone; yet, leave their offspring biting the dust.

    Chinua Achebe was a Nigerian — nay global — literary hero.  His everlasting literary accomplishments would always be with us, for us to ever cherish.

    But sorry: same can’t be said of his political distemper, so glaring with — to Ripples at least — his rather forgettable swan song: There Was A Country (2012), with his rather one-sided account of the tragic Nigerian Civil War (1967-1970).

    Yes, Achebe was entitled to his personal and intimate account of the war.  But the anarchy after shows the one-sided colouring could have been better handled.

    That account provided the philosophical spur for the current neo-Biafra agitations. It threw up Kanu, and later, Ekpa and allied fixers — the post-Civil War generation that neither saw war nor felt gore, except with the fake thrills of a combat film.

    These tragic romantics dreamed gung-ho agitations, until IPOB — under Kanu and Ekpa — unleashed naked terror, pain and misery, on own people; in a tragic living orgy of cutting your nose to spite your face, just to prove the Igbo can hurt Nigeria! 

    The nadir, even after Kanu’s caging, came with the so-called Monday sit-at-home protests, which not only harvested skulls and limbs of the ordinary Igbo seeking peaceful daily bread, but also inflicted a deep gash on the South East economy.

    Emma Powerful, the bombastic IPOB spokesperson, first spun sit-at-home, as some civil force to spring Kanu from “unjust” detention. But as Ekpa progressively unleashed own Frankenstein monster, even Emma, in all his garrulous majesty, became famously powerless to rein in Ekpa, who gloried from gory mischief to mischief!

    Of course, between Kanu and Ekpa, there is little to choose in extreme bad breeding.  Kanu cursed and mocked every non-Igbo to push his neo-Biafra cause.  During the EndSARS crisis of 2020, he levied war and arson on Lagos.  Ekpa, in his Finland cocoon, openly danced at his people’s misery.

    But at Ekpa’s judicial crunch, he claimed he was a content creator that meant no harm!  In a parallel plea in a Nigerian court, Kanu too proclaimed his democratic right to untrammelled agitation!

    The Finnish court pooh-poohed Ekpa’s claim, and threw him into the slammer.  Will Kanu fare better before a Nigerian court?  We’ll have to wait to find out.

    But however Kanu’s case is resolved, Ekpa’s jailing has reiterated a clear — but hardly novel — precedent: every action (good or bad) has consequences.  It’s a natural order codified by law, and enforced by the courts, after due process.

    With Ekpa’s jailing, South East politicians, who love to brag that Kanu be released “unconditionally”, just to impress folks back home, have to invent another bluster.  Both act in IPOB plots.

    But the Kanu-Ekpa ensemble did not act solo.  The South West too joined in the anti-Fulani rumble.  It was a rich, frothy season of Fulani bogey! 

    Why, even former President Olusegun Obasanjo, a non-Fulani grand beneficiary of Fulani hegemony, if ever there was one, also chimed in with “Fulanization”, just to put PMB’s nose out of joint.  Typical!

    But for philosophical underpinnings, Prof. Banji Akintoye and his Yoruba Nation project took the cake.  No less, was the late Chief Ayo Adebanjo (God bless his soul!) with his “Afenifere” progressivism, and a swagger of Yoruba supremacism! Besides, the chief’s famous turf war, with PBAT and younger Yoruba progressives, was an open secret.

    Then, the battling rams: the likes of Sunday Igboho, the South West equivalents of Kanu and Ekpa, were at the ready, spewing Fulani hate, in defence of Yoruba “Nesan”!  But it was a missed Golgotha.  The South West dodged that bullet — but just!

    No doubt, from the anti-Lagos/PBAT sight and sound, issuing from the post-PMB “North”, there is a clear proof of northern hegemonists, blind to civil power balance, for Nigeria to nurture sustained nationhood, in peace and harmony.

    Still, why would PMB, whose bloc partnered PBAT to win federal power, goad the so-called “Fulani herdsmen” to raze the South West, the political space of his partner?  Does that even make any sense?  It’s out-and-out hysteria, stupid!

    What’s more?  All the ugly tags — nepotism, Fulanization, Katsina cabal, clueless, incompetent, etc — curated by the booming southern media to blight PMB, are being rebranded and hauled back at PBAT, by northern irredentists! 

    What goes around comes around, doesn’t it?

    As we speak, there is even a Yoruba vs Igbo lunatic army on X, arrayed against each other, dubbing either ethnic as ugly descendants of gorillas and chimpanzees!  How grown, reasonable adults would sign up on such brazen toxicity beats one hollow!

    Then, from the North comes anti-Lagos brickbats, clearly to demonize Nigeria’s No. 1 centre of opportunities, as no more than Tinubu’s glittering trophy of Yoruba nepotism! 

    That’s gas, of course!  But it’s what it is — too much toxicity in the political space!

    Ekpa has received his harsh tutorial in Finland.  But his jailing is a good juncture to apply the brakes!  No nation develops by mutual hating and ethnic-baiting.

  • Buhari was patriotic, ‘angelin human flesh’, says Akande

    Buhari was patriotic, ‘angelin human flesh’, says Akande

    Pioneer National Chairman of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) and former Osun State governor, Chief Bisi Akande, has said the late President Muhammadu Buhari was “a patriotic leader” whose spirit will live forever because of his good deeds for Nigeria.

    Akande spoke yesterday in Kaduna when he led a delegation of political associates to condole with the Buhari family.

    The condolence delegation included Senator Abu Ibrahim; former Youth and Sports Minister Sunday Dare; an APC chieftain, Alhaji Mahmud Abdullahi; the Director-General of the National Directorate of Employment (NDE), Mr. Silas Agara; and the Convener of the Arewa Think Tank, Mohammed Alhaji Yakubu.

    They were received by the former First Lady, Hajiya Aisha Buhari, and the eldest son of the family, Yusuf Buhari.

    Akande said the former President’s passing was a painful personal loss.

    He recalled their last meeting in Daura, Katsina State, before the late President relocated to Kaduna.

    “I first heard that he died when I was abroad. Before then, I met him in Daura. After our feast, we had a nice time together. He was looking robust; he was healthy, very strong,” Akande recounted.

    The elder statesman said his conversation with Buhari on that occasion gave no premonition of his death.

    “In a joke, I said I was going back to my village. He, too, said he was enjoying his village in Daura. By the time he moved to Kaduna, I was planning to come and see him here, and they told me he had traveled,” Akande said.

    According to him, the news of ex-President Buhari’s passing came as a shock.

    Read Also: Analyst hail police for averting two terror attacks in Benue

    “I didn’t ask questions, and I traveled through. But when I was abroad, I learnt that he had passed on. It was very painful; very, very painful.

    “When I came back, I thought the first thing I should do was to come and meet the family, commiserate with them and pray with them. And that’s what I have come here to do today,” he said.

    The former APC chairman applauded Buhari’s legacy, describing him as a rare leader.

    “He was a great Nigerian. He was patriotic. Maybe he was an angel coming in human flesh, and he had done his bit. He had passed,” he said.

    Akande stressed that Buhari’s influence would endure long after his death, adding: “His spirit will continue to live forever because of the good work he did in Nigeria.”

  • Buhari was misguided about Baro Port – House of Reps Ad-hoc Committee

    Buhari was misguided about Baro Port – House of Reps Ad-hoc Committee

    The House of Representatives Ad-hoc Committee on the Rehabilitation and Opertionality of the Baro Inland Port has said that late President Muhammadu Buhari was misguided by bureaucrats about the functionality and take off of the port.

    The Chairman of the Ad-hoc Committee, Saidu Abdullahi stated this during a visit to the Baro Inland Port in Agaie Local Government Area of Niger State.

    “President Buhari was here himself. President Buhari was misguided by the bureaucrats.

    We are here with the technocrats, and I am sure together we will be able to provide solutions. What we have not had, as far as Baro report is concerned, in the past, is to bring all these stakeholders under one umbrella and that is what we have succeeded in doing now.”

    The Committee while expressing satisfaction over the equipment of the Port frowned at the access road where the contract has been given for over seven years and has not been completed.

    Read Also: First Lady leads delegation on condolence visit to Aisha Buhari in Kaduna

     “I don’t think this is something that we should be happy and comfortable with as a country. If contracts are given, there is something called project management. You expect that from conception to the end of it, there should be a timeline attached to them.

    “But this project, like I said, has been given for more than six to seven years now, and we are still where we are. In fact, I have had calls to interface with the Federal Ministry of Works to actually know where the status of this work is, and what they are doing about the laxity from the contractors’ side on getting the roads established”, he stated.

    Abduklahi dispelled the notion from the people that the visit had political meaning, saying that the committee was set up to see how the Baro Port would be functional and look into what was stopping it from being operational.

     He stated that the committee would meet with major stakeholders in its bid to provide solutions that would make the Baro Port work.

    “With what we have seen now, we’re better informed, better guided, and we’ll go back to the Assembly to engage other stakeholders again. At the end of it, I’m confident that we’ll be able to come up with solutions that will make the port functional.”

    The Nigeria Inland Waterways Authority (NIWA)’s Business Manager, Business Development, Adetola James who represented the NUWA Managing Director said that the place was commissioned in 2019 adding that since then, the place has been underutilized.

    He expressed optimism that the visit by the committee would make the place functional and operational as it is meant to.

     Adetola explained that NIWA had been trying its best to make the port work explaining that the major challenge is fund which is needed for anything that needs to be done for the port to become functional.

     “Everything that a port needs to work  is on ground and from what the Committee said, the access road is very key and needs to be worked on while other agencies will need to collaborate together so that everything will be connected.”, he said.