The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Obasanjo

  • Obasanjo’s ‘Third Term’ nightmare

    Obasanjo’s ‘Third Term’ nightmare

    • “Inordinate ambition and the belly are the two worst counselors.”— Anonymous
    • Mobolaji Sanusi

    The Olusegun Obasanjo phenomenon will no doubt occupy a conspicuous chapter anytime and anywhere the history of this colonially-designated country called Nigeria is to be chronicled. He served as both military and civilian ruler of this great country.

    His legendary public service actions and inactions, mischiefs, and his holier-than-thou assessment of himself, makes him a sui generis rabble-rouser in the annals of public service of the land.

    While in power, Obasanjo believed he knew it all even though politically discerning millions of his countrymen believed his opinion of himself was exaggerated. Outside power, he still believes those steering the ship of state are incompetent, corrupt, and confused. This, again, if true, especially since the advent of this 1999 democratic dispensation, is traceable to Obasanjo’s incorrigible pettiness, hubris, and avaricious disposition to governance, being the pioneer president of Nigeria’s ongoing democratic experiment.

    Deludingly, except it’s Obasanjo’s verdict, other verdicts are inapposite. No wonder he tries at every given opportunity to deflect questions on his open secret Third Term Agenda. The numerous evidential proofs of hundreds of millions of naira deployed by point-men in the former president’s government to bribe then National Assembly members remain a stain on Obasanjo’s less than real credibility. Actually, some former National Assembly members, out of disdain for Obasanjo’s lies, routinely admitted to having collected the slush funds meant to induce them. As much as Obasanjo tries to make his public denials count, his conscience, being his tormentor-in-chief, creates nightmarish tension in him.

    If not, how else can one describe Obasanjo’s recent admonition to African leaders against pursuits of tenure elongation in their countries. Sadly so, he remains, undeniably, the renowned architect of unsuccessful tenure elongation in the continent.

    Yours sincerely read with disgust what Obasanjo reportedly said at a Democracy Dialogue recently organized by the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation in Accra, Ghana. He was quoted to have brazenly denied the open secret truth that he craved tenure elongation that is otherwise known as Third Term Agenda in the twilight of his second term as president of Nigeria.

    His dubious refutation: “I’m not a fool. If I wanted a third term, I would know how to go about it. And there is no Nigerian, dead or alive that would say I called him and told him I wanted a third term.” He also reportedly said that debt relief that he commendably secured for the country was more important to him than any Third Term Agenda even when his close buddies as president and the political party that brought him to power, PDP, were actively involved in the pursuit of the infamous idea.

    Obasanjo’s challenge to any “living or dead Nigerian,” exposes his nightmarish mindset since he knows that most people in the know of that sordid agenda hardly take him serious whenever he utters his gibberish about that catastrophic idea.

    Obasanjo was at his hypocritical best when he reportedly observed at the occasion that any belief in “one’s indispensability” is a “sin against God.” The truth that those at the dialogue, including our own revered Catholic Bishop, Mathew Hassan Kukah, forgot to remind him is that he actually played God and indeed wanted, and planned his ill-fated Third Term nonsense.

    Read Also: Ondo police arrest ‘notorious gunrunner’ supplying arms to Osun, Kogi, Edo, Kwara

    Isn’t it a mockery and a misnomer for organisers of such an important democratic dialogue to have extended an invitation to an Obasanjo who, as president, never masked his disdain for democratic tenets. Obasanjo superintended over a civilian-terror reign that showed the greatest contempt for democratic doctrines during his two terms of eight years as president of this country.

    Obasanjo had no regard for institutions of state, be it constitutional or traditional. The country witnessed the worst electoral abuses under Professor Maurice Iwu as chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) with Obasanjo’s presidentially discerned body language and consent. Even his successor in office, late President Umaru Yar’Adua publicly admitted that Obasanjo’s organized election that brought him to power was flawed.

    The era of ballots stuffing, falsification and concoction of election figures, unleashing of electioneering/political rascality, political party imposition amongst other anti-democratic tendencies were prevalent and obviously taken to another level during Obasanjo’s years in power.

    Obasanjo behaved as if without him, Nigeria would die but the country is still existing to his chagrin. He masterminded the removal of several senate-presidents, declared state of emergencies in states where their governors refused to toe his despotic paths: At the heights of Obasanjo’s high-handed reign, his political party, the People’s Democratic Party’s then national chairman, Ahmadu Alli, publicly declared that the PDP would rule Nigeria for the next sixty years.

    But God intervened and just as Obasanjo’s Third Term Agenda was truncated in 2006 by the National Assembly, by year 2015, a conglomeration of national opposition parties coalesced to wrest power from the deludingly pompous PDP.

    In my efforts to unravel the bottled anguish that General Obasanjo has been battling over his aborted Third Term Agenda that he tries at every opportune time to deny, l decided to consult Wikipedia. It is from there that a leading insight was given about the nightmare that the former military cum civilian ruler of Nigeria is facing. Wikipedia defines Nightmare as a dream “that is often connected to unresolved anxiety and trauma that our brain has not fully worked through…” Further scrutiny elsewhere revealed that nightmares as currently being suffered by Obasanjo over his failed Third Term bid might be a consequence of his “unmet psychological needs and/or frustration…..”

    Jacky Casumbal, a clinician describes nightmares as “dreams that are often connected to unresolved anxiety and trauma that our brain has not fully worked through.” Justin Alcala’s descriptive phrase of “dissatisfied reality” aptly captures Obasanjo’s failed Third Term agenda and must have indeed been querying and tormenting his statesmanship status every day he wakes up from his sleep.

    This is further simplified by Megan Chance in her ‘The Spiritualist’ when she said that persons like Obasanjo had been traumatized by nightmares because they “run from what they feel” and to avoid the madness that denial inflicts on them, she says the only way out of being imprisoned by their conscience is to “own up to their misgivings.” Obasanjo is, because of pride, not willing to own up to his misgivings on third term.

    The only way out for Obasanjo’s unresolved feelings over his aborted Third Term agenda, is for him to avoid further nightmares over it. This can be achieved if he publicly confronts the difficult truths inherent in his deceitful denial of the agenda he secretly nurtured but aborted in the hallowed chambers of the National Assembly in 2006.

    Rather than do this, Obasanjo has shamelessly continued his puerile dismissive rhetoric each time questions regarding that dark episode of his leadership history are asked. During such periods, he becomes unnecessarily defensive, uttering patent lies that further diminish his supposed leadership worth in Nigeria, Africa, and global politics generally.

    The duplicity in Obasanjo’s denial of his Third Term bid cannot stand the test of time, not even with the praiseworthy reintroduction of history as a subject in school curriculum in the country by the current administration. The Balogun of Owu in Abeokuta, Ogun State capital did everything to obliterate, especially recent and not too recent, political history of the country. It was his government that needlessly removed the teaching of history from the school curriculum. For selfish reasons!

    His motive is to circumvent important historical documentation so that many Nigerians of forty years and below demography will never know his role in the demonization of late Aare MKO Abiola, winner of the June 12,1993 Presidential election. He didn’t want forgetful and historically bereft Nigerians to know that his military constituency used his presidential candidacy to pacify the aggrieved South-west Yoruba people who were greatly pained by the annulment of the June 12 presidential election and the eventual conspiratorial deleting of Abiola, their kinsman, from the face of the earth.

    Furthermore, Obasanjo didn’t want Nigerians to know how he quelled the democratic wishes of Nigerians in various states of the federation where Professor Maurice Iwu’s INEC perpetrated an outlandish electoral process riddled with falsification of election figures, amongst others, under his watch.

    Now that history as a subject of learning is back in schools, students will now be taught of how Obasanjo sidetracked democratic institutions and treated governors of his time as if they were his errand boys. Our students would be taught how Obasanjo destroyed internal democracy in his and other political parties through his high-handed picking of candidates for election: How he masterminded the removal, unilaterally, of any of the governors, during his tenure, that disobeyed his self-serving orders.

    Obasanjo cared less about the opinions of others. He committed electoral heist against notable candidates contesting for governorship and presidential positions in the country. He victimized Rasheed Ladoja, Ayo Fayose, Joshua Dariye, Diepreye Alamieyesiegha, James Ibori, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Akinrogun Segun Osoba who in 1999 were governors in Oyo, Ekiti, Plateau, Bayelsa, Delta, Lagos and Ogun states respectively.

    Just because he did all these and nothing happened, he thought the next stage was for him to absolutely enslave Nigerians by toying with the notorious idea of staying put in power, through tenure elongation. Nigerians, through their determined federal legislators, headed by Senator Ken Nnamani, then senate-president, threw away his detrimental Third Term agenda, which, as it stands today, remains the nighmare that will continue to haunt Balogun Obasanjo.

    • Sanusi, former LASAA MD/CEO is a managerial psychologist and current managing partner of AMS RELIABLE SOLICITORS.
  • The last lie?

    The last lie?

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, for the umpteenth time, has insisted it was a lie that he sought a third term.  He challenged: any Nigerian that he called on the project should speak up or forever shut up.

    “I’m not a fool,” he declared at a Goodluck Jonathan Foundation democracy talk show in Accra, Ghana.  “If I wanted a short term, I knew how to set about it.”

    But no sooner did his voice come off the mike than Usman Bugaje, a House of Representatives member during that period, declared that Obasanjo’s latest denial was a frothy bluff — a euphemism for a grand lie.

    He might not have directly called anyone, Bugaje countered. But his proxies did: trying to bribe and suborn everyone to subvert the grund norm; and its sacred provision of a maximum two-term presidency of four years each.

    But putting the controversy aside, the grand irony is lost on the former I’m-never-wrong president; not the least also on former President Jonathan, whose electoral ouster Obasanjo hailed with his hyena laugh; and with a wild dance in the street.

    Read Also: Dapo Abiodun: 65 hearty cheers to a change agent

    After Obasanjo, President Muhammadu Buhari lived, served and died.  But no one had had to accuse him of third term, with the transparent manner he conducted himself on term limit.  He absolutely shunned its subversion.  Obasanjo was the exact opposite.

    Then, Jonathan who Obasanjo, in his imperial gracelessness, pushed every grubby effort to disgrace, offered a platform for the old man’s denial in Accra, Ghana —  18 long years after Obasanjo had left office!

    What’s this about “third term” that the shriller Obasanjo denies it, the hollower he sounds, even to himself and his parched conscience? 

    On an another denial: Obasanjo once told a foreign interviewer, on foreign TV, that PDP won the grand heist that was the 2007 election fair and square.  But we all knew what happened, with the Supreme Court’s 4-3 bare acceptance of that robbery, and the Court of Appeal dismissal of PDP “elected” governors in Edo, Ondo, Ekiti and Osun!

    Is that all Obasanjo’s bluff is worth?  Even former Senator Shehu Sani added a grim humour.  If Obasanjo insists on his claim, why don’t we all invite former Senate President, Ken Nnamani, to testify?  He presided over that final Senate session; and he revealed, at the launch of his book, “Standing Strong: Legislative Reforms, Third Term and Others Issues of the 5th Senate”, in 2021, the strategies he employed to checkmate the gambit. 

    And assuming without conceding that Obasanjo knew nothing of his proxies’ rascality: why didn’t he shout it down, as PMB did?  One of the so-called human rights lawyers had tagged PMB with “hidden agenda”.  But PMB, straight as rod, disowned it so fiercely the fellow never mentioned such nonsense again.

    Obasanjo’s last lie or his eternal truth?  Whatever it is, it gives impish pleasure that “third term” is Obasanjo’s latter-year purgatory.  He will wrestle with it till his maker calls him!  Sweet!

  • Third term: Obasanjo used threats, money, says Bugaje

    Third term: Obasanjo used threats, money, says Bugaje

    Political activist and former federal lawmaker, Dr. Usman Bugaje, has said ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo “did everything within his power” to extend his tenure beyond constitutionally recognised two terms.

    Obasanjo had debunked working on a third-term agenda while speaking at a democracy dialogue hosted by the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation in Ghana last week.

    He said: “I’m not a fool. If I wanted a third term, I know how to go about it. And there is no Nigerian dead or alive that would say I called him and told him I wanted a third term.”

    But on a national television programme yesterday, Bugaje, who was a member of the National Assembly during Obasanjo’s tenure, maintained that lawmakers at the time had direct knowledge of the third-term plot.

    “I can confirm to you that Obasanjo looked for a third term. He did everything that he could within his power to get a third term, but he failed to do so,” Bugaje said.

    The former lawmaker argued that Obasanjo’s defence was unconvincing, saying the former President’s agents threatened many lawmakers who opposed the third-term move during the time.

    READ ALSO; Moral rot on steroids

    “Now, the fact that he did not take a telephone to make a particular call to anybody is not sufficient evidence that he did not look for a third term. It’s just a matter of style. But all of us in the National Assembly at that time knew beyond any doubt that he worked day and night, and many of us were threatened by his agents,” he said.

    Bugaje recalled incidents of intimidation against lawmakers, citing the experience of Senator Victor Lar, then Leader of the Northern Caucus of the House of Representatives.

    The former lawmaker said Lar was forced into hiding at different times before a decisive meeting to resist the third-term bid.

    “Those people who actually distributed the money and threatened us are alive. Those who received the money are alive. Those who refused to receive the money are alive. There is sufficient evidence… This is an incontrovertible matter. There is no way he can deny it,” Bugaje added.

    The “third term agenda” controversy dominated Nigeria’s political space in 2006 when an amendment to the 1999 Constitution, which would have allowed presidents to seek three consecutive terms, was brought before the National Assembly.

    The third-term proposal was widely believed to have been sponsored by allies of Obasanjo, who was then completing his second term in office.

    The proposed amendment, which included several other constitutional changes, was ultimately rejected after a heated debate in both chambers of the National Assembly.

    Civil society groups, opposition politicians, and even members of the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) mobilised against the plan, arguing that it would derail Nigeria’s democracy.

    The failure of the amendment effectively ended any speculation of Obasanjo seeking another term, paving the way for the 2007 general election that produced the late President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua as his successor.

    Obasanjo had, in his New Year message in 2023, denied lobbying for a third time, saying he could have got it if he wanted.

    He also described himself as “audacious enough” to get whatever he wanted.

    But former Senate President Adolphus Wabara claimed that he turned down a N250 million bribe offered to support the controversial third-term agenda during Obasanjo’s tenure.

    When questioned about the veracity of this claim in an excerpt of a YouTube interview series, “Untold Stories with Adesuwa,” released in January 2024, Wabara firmly stated: “That’s very correct.”

    Also, former Vice President Atiku Abubakar confirmed that his intimate relationship with National Assembly members under Obasanjo enabled him to stop Obasanjo’s third-term bid.

  • Obasanjo gets it wrong at Jonathan Democracy Dialogue

    Obasanjo gets it wrong at Jonathan Democracy Dialogue

    Last week, the Goodluck Jonathan Foundation hosted its fourth edition of Democracy Dialogue in Accra, Ghana. Loftily themed ‘Why Democracies Die’, it attracted high-profile personalities, including Ghana’s president John Mahama, ex-Nigerian president Olusegun Obasanjo, 2023 Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate Peter Obi. This piece is not about what all of them said during the dialogue: it would be boring and repetitive. It is not even about the gentle admonition the keynote speaker, Bishop Mathew Hassan Kukah, gave former president Goodluck Jonathan regarding the 2027 presidential election. He had warned the ex-president: “The voice of the devil is not so far from the voice of God. Listen very carefully to those who want to use you as an instrument for the elongation of their interests, and not your interests or the interests of Nigeria.”

    The piece is also not about Mr Obi’s customarily simplistic ratiocinations on national issues. He had wildly generalised that democracy was dying in Nigeria, saying: “Nigeria is a typical example of where democracy is dying because it no longer serves the needs of the people and is no longer accountable to them. In Nigeria, democracy has become a process of elite state capture, granting access to public resources for personal and family interests. To reverse this situation, Nigerians must take democracy and elections seriously by ensuring that only people with competence, capacity, character, compassion, and commitment to service are elected.” It was unclear whether he was playing to the gallery, or whether his statement reflected how far his mind could take him, or he was simply trying to ape and please Chief Obasanjo, his newfound master and choreographer.

    It was also, as a matter of fact, certainly not about Dr Jonathan himself, despite the foundation being his. All he could think about, his mind ineluctably drawn to the judiciary, is that “…No businessman can bring his money to invest in a country where the judiciary is compromised, where a government functionary can dictate to judges what judgment they will give. No man brings his money to invest in that economy because they are taking a big risk…If we must build a nation for our children and grandchildren, no matter how painful it is, we must strive to do what is right.” Dr Jonathan probably identified with the cacophony on social media suggesting that the courts compromised the lawsuits that followed the last elections. It is significant that he has said nothing about those lawsuits and the presidential poll directly. If only he was capable of giving his audience something deep relating to the theme of the dialogue, something about why democracies die, or whether a country must run Western-type democracy in order to advance the interests of its citizens.

    Read Also: FG may invite EFCC, ICPC over slow progress on Abuja–Lokoja road project

    Chief Obasanjo was the chairman of the dialogue, and he, as usual, made a few highfalutin and patently contradictory statements tangential to the subject matter of dying democracies. He is, therefore, the reason for this piece. This write-up will focus on two or three points he made during the panel discussion. Responding to the question of where Africa got it wrong in terms of democracy, especially in view of incompetent sit-tight leaders as well as leaders who manipulate the constitution to stay on and on, Chief Obasanjo launched into a rigmarole inspired and propelled by his interactions with Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame. He said he once discussed the subject of succession with Mr Kagame who told him of his unsuccessful efforts to mentor two potential successors, both of whom betrayed him and betrayed Rwanda. As a result, the Rwandan leader inspired a constitutional amendment to elongate his tenure than originally envisaged. Chief Obasanjo added that he embarked on a vox pop incognito in Kigali during which he questioned some 10 Rwandese, eight of whom admitted that they would be willing to give Mr Kagame 10 more terms should he ask for it and as long as he continued to rule well as he was doing.

    Here was Chief Obasanjo supposedly providing insight into why democracies fail and what could be done to prevent that failure in Africa but ending up making peace with tenure elongation on the excuse that potential successors failed the Rwandan president. Did he by any chance inquire into why the potential successors ‘betrayed’ Mr Kagame? What is evident from Chief Obasanjo’s rambling anecdotes and thespian imageries, particularly his conclusion that the Rwandan leader amended the constitution ‘perfectly’, is that Mr Kagame’s tenure elongation aligned exquisitely with his abjuration of Western-style democracy. He made another anecdotal reference to an African sit-tight leader, possibly Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, whom he encountered somewhere in Europe in the thick of impeachment attempts against him in Abuja, and who had counseled him to go back home and amend the Nigerian constitution. Not only was he flattered by the suggestion, but juxtaposing that counsel with his half-baked idea of democracy, he felt it unnecessary to delve deeper into the continent’s checquered democratic journey, let alone question Mr Kagame’s untenable justifications. For if the Rwandan leader could not find the right successor, supposing he dropped dead suddenly, would the country not find an answer to their existential riddle one way or the other?

    Even more mystifying is how to explain why Chief Obasanjo keeps evading a more structured and fundamental consideration of the continent’s democratic longings, a task that never crossed his mind as president, nor has he contemplated it or tasked himself after his presidency. Midway into the panel discussion, he had initially spoken about the weaknesses or failings of Western liberal democracy, that Eureka moment coming only after he had ruled for eight years and unsuccessfully tried to amend the constitution to suit his objective. But he made no rigorous or original suggestion to explicate the subject matter other than his usual self-righteous conclusions anchored on a terrible misreading of political history. He claimed, without any substantiation, that Europe’s development could be attributable largely to the reign of monarchies, stable monarchies that supposedly allowed for longevity of ideas, visions and developmental plans and executions. In other words, tenure extension for rulers like him and Mr Kagame would have produced economic development. Absolute piffle.

    Indeed, Chief Obasanjo even argued, sadly unchallenged, that America, which was founded as a protest against Europe, had no term limit until 1951, after President Franklin D. Roosevelt and the passage and ratification of the 22nd Amendment. The devil is, however, in the detail. Three of the foundational presidents of the United States to wit, George Washington (1st), James Madison (4th), and Thomas Jefferson (3rd), kept strictly and deliberately to two terms, with the third president insisting that to aspire to more than two terms was to strive to be a king. That king, concluded President Jefferson, could very well rule until his ‘dotard’ sustained by the ‘attachments and indulgence’ of the people. While Nigeria struggled to amend its constitution to bar a third term for presidents who complete the term of another, and managed to obfuscate it, the US constitution amended for the same purpose was explicit. It provides that “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.”

    Chief Obasanjo has clearly not found time to study political history or understand the US system to which he made glib reference, nor given proper thought to the unstructured political systems often manipulated or exploited by malevolent and messianic leaders. On the one hand, he denounced presidents who schemed for life presidency, but on the other hand spoke wistfully of presidents who satisfied ‘certain fundamentals such as peace, security, unity that are taken as sacrosanct’ to stay longer in office. Drawing from the Rwandan example and contrasting it with the unnamed president who advised him to amend the Nigerian constitution, he gave the impression that once a president governed well or brilliantly, term limit should not rob the country of his expertise. But how could anyone tell when a brilliant and popular president has had enough? The moderator of course saw through Chief Obasanjo’s baffling logic, and unfazed by his anecdotes, decided to probe him further on his alleged third term ambition.

    Responding to the question on third term, Chief Obasanjo sought refuge in theology. He was no fool, he snickered, boasting that he would have had it had he wanted. He based his confidence on the far-fetched comparison between third term and debt relief. According to him, securing debt relief was infinitely tougher and more complex than getting third term. If he could achieve the more complicated task of securing debt relief for Nigeria, every other thing was cakewalk. Only Chief Obasanjo was capable of such comparisons. But for the rest of Nigeria, no such comparison or contrast exists. In any case, he said dismissively, no one alive or dead could accuse him of asking or scheming for a third term in office, a lie many national lawmakers and political leaders had repeatedly debunked. They described his style as plausible deniability. What Chief Obasanjo didn’t know is that contrary to the impression he tried to create of his altruism and leadership acumen, nearly all his responses to the moderator’s question in Accra last Wednesday gave indication that he saw nothing wrong with tenure elongation, regretted that he could not pull it off in 2007, and is still bitter against those who robbed him of the chance to rule until he was tired or in his dotage. And if he could not even master the art of mentoring a successor, why would he think his legacy was extraordinary enough to gift him tenure elongation? Yes, he is still mentally sound, but that soundness, not to say his sanctimoniousness, has never mitigated his lack of depth and altruism.

  • Obasanjo, Pate, Abdulsalami launch health hub to expand access to affordable healthcare

    Obasanjo, Pate, Abdulsalami launch health hub to expand access to affordable healthcare

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo, the coordinating Minister of Health and Social Welfare Prof. Ali Pate, and the former Head of State Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar (rtd) on Tuesday in Abuja jointly launched the Care365 Health Hub, a tech-driven healthcare platform designed to bring affordable and quality medical services closer to underserved communities across Nigeria.

    Speaking at the event, Obasanjo described Care365 as a groundbreaking solution to Nigeria’s healthcare challenges, particularly in remote areas. 

    “What we have here today is a game changer. For too long, our rural communities have been cut off from quality medical care because of distance and poverty. 

    “This innovation will bring health services to people where they live. It is not just technology; it is life-saving intervention.” 

    He urged governments, private investors, and development partners to back the platform’s nationwide rollout, saying, “We must not allow this initiative to die on paper. It deserves all the support it can get.”

    Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar also praised the launch, describing it as a bold step toward equity. “This is a critical intervention. For decades, access to healthcare in rural communities has been a national challenge. 

    “I am pleased to see a platform that combines technology, community engagement, and clinical expertise to address this gap. But we must ensure sustained support and investment for this initiative to thrive.”

    On his part, Prof. Ali Pate said Care365 aligns closely with the Tinubu administration’s ambitious health sector reform agenda, which focuses on governance, primary healthcare expansion, unlocking the healthcare value chain, and health security. 

    “Nigeria’s health system is undergoing a transformation. We are building a future where every Nigerian, regardless of where they live, can access affordable and quality care. 

    “Technology like Care365 will help us close gaps and strengthen our primary healthcare system,” he stressed.

    Pate emphasized the Federal Government’s commitment to scaling innovations that reduce inequality in healthcare delivery, noting, “We want to make sure healthcare is not just for those who can afford it but for every Nigerian,”..

    Ngozi Odumoku, founder and developer of Care365, explained how the hub integrates a mobile application, smart kiosks, and mobile clinics to create an interconnected healthcare ecosystem. “Care365 is a complete system,” he said. “Our kiosks are equipped with AI-powered diagnostic tools, telemedicine connectivity, and essential medicines. Patients can consult licensed doctors remotely, receive accurate diagnostics, and access first-line treatment within their communities.”

    Odumoku added that the system was developed with rural and underserved populations in mind. “We designed Care365 to work in high-density, urban, and rural settings. The goal is to make healthcare accessible, affordable, and reliable for every Nigerian,” he said.

    Health experts at the event said Care365 represents one of Nigeria’s most ambitious efforts to use digital innovation to advance universal health coverage. Obasanjo summed it up in a call to action: “Healthcare is a right, not a privilege. With the right leadership and support, this initiative can bring hope and healing to millions.”

  • APC: Obasanjo in no position to call anyone incompetent

    APC: Obasanjo in no position to call anyone incompetent

    Lagos State chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) has said it finds the recent comment by former President Olusegun Obasanjo, alleging that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is “competing with Buhari in incompetence”, not only laughable, but also disgracefully hypocritical.

    Its spokesman, Seye Oladejo, said in a statement yesterday in Ogba, Lagos:  ‘’It is ironic that a man, whose own time in office is remembered more for political arrogance, squandered opportunities and failed democratic subversion, will have the audacity to label anyone incompetent.

    ‘’Let us remind Nigerians that under Obasanjo: Billions in power sector spending disappeared with zero results.

    READ ALSO: FULL STEPS: How to be a LAGRIDE driver, earn N250,000, above

    ‘’The economy was handed off with more foreign debt than when he took office—after claiming to have paid it off.

    ‘’The infamous third-term agenda nearly plunged the nation into constitutional crisis.

    ‘’Corruption flourished under the disguise of reforms.

    ‘’If Nigeria is still recovering from years of structural rot, Obasanjo bears a huge chunk of the blame. The mess didn’t start with Buhari, and it certainly isn’t being deepened by Tinubu—it started long before, under the watch of men who now pretend to be saints.

    ‘’President Tinubu has taken decisions no previous leader had the spine to take. Removing fuel subsidies, overhauling the foreign exchange regime and confronting entrenched inefficiencies are not marks of incompetence—they are bold actions by a man ready to fix what others, including Obasanjo, either broke or ignored.

    ‘’Obasanjo’s bitterness is well-known. He cannot control this government, and he resents that Nigeria has moved on from his brand of egocentric, do-or-die politics. His habit of attacking sitting presidents when he no longer holds relevance has become predictable and pathetic.

    ‘’We strongly advise the former president to show some decorum, especially at his age. Elders are expected to advise, not agitate. If he has nothing constructive to say, silence will serve him—and the country—far better than these attention-seeking outbursts.

    ‘’President Tinubu is not in a race with Obasanjo or anyone else. He is focused on the future. Nigeria is on a path of reform, recovery and renewal—and no amount of potshots from bitter yesterday’s men will derail that journey.’’

  • Four more internet fraudster-suspects arrested at Obasanjo library complex convicted

    Four more internet fraudster-suspects arrested at Obasanjo library complex convicted

    Four more suspected internet fraudsters arrested during a sting operation by agents of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) at a hotel within the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library (OOPL) complex in Abeokuta, Ogun State, were yesterday convicted by a  Federal High Court sitting in Lagos.

    The anti-graft body arrested 93 suspects at a hotel within the precincts of the library. Seven of them had been convicted for cybercrime-related offences.

    In two separate judgments yesterday, Dehinde Dipeolu, the presiding judge, convicted and sentenced Olugbodi Adefolarin Pamilerin, Adenuga Ezekiel Oluwaseyi, Yusuf Ramon and Ganiyu Ibrahim for internet fraud.

    In the first ruling, Pamilerin and Oluwaseyi pleaded guilty to charges of impersonation, identity fraud and retention of proceeds of crime.

    Pamilerin admitted to fraudulently posing as “Emily Eddins” on Telegram and was found to have retained $160 obtained through deceit.

    Franklin Ofoma, the EFCC prosecutor, presented evidence, including Pamilerin’s iPhone 14 and a N150, 000 bank draft as restitution.

    The judge sentenced him to one month’s imprisonment or an option of a N500, 000 fine and ordered the forfeiture of the iPhone to the Federal Government.

    Read Also: Obasanjo’s son congratulates new APC chairman, Yilwatda

    The charge sheet reads: “That you, Olugbodi Adefolarin Pamilerin (Male) sometime in 2025, within the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, with intent to defraud, retained in your control the total sum of $160 which were proceeds of criminal conduct, deceitfully obtained from unsuspecting members of the public and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 17 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment etc) Act No: 4 of 2004,” the charge against Pamilerin read.

    Oluwaseyi also pleaded guilty to impersonating a woman on Gmail accounts and retaining $1,000 from fraud.

    The evidence tendered against him includes two iPhones (iPhone 15 Pro Max and iPhone 6S), a N1 million bank draft and forensic investigation reports.

    Oluwaseyi was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment or an option of a N2 million fine, with the confiscation of his devices and the bank draft.

    “That you, Adenuga Ezekiel Oluwaseyi (Male), sometime in 2025, within the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, fraudulently held out yourself as a lady in your gmail accounts, synderlaureen909@gmail.com and antonyeagle879@gmail.com to unsuspecting members of the public, with intent to gain advantage for yourself and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under section 22(2)(b) of the Cybercrimes (Prohibition etc.) Act, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2015,” the charge against him reads.

    “That you, Adenuga Ezekiel Oluwaseyi (Male), sometime in 2025, within the Lagos Judicial Division of the Federal High Court of Nigeria, with intent to defraud, retained in your control the total sum of $1000USD which were proceeds of criminal conduct, deceitfully obtained from unsuspecting members of the public, and you thereby committed an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 17 of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (Establishment etc) Act No. 4 of 2004.”

    In the other judgment, Justice Dipeolu convicted and sentenced Ramon and Ibrahim for impersonation, identity and internet fraud.

    They both pleaded “guilty” to the charges preferred against them.

    S.M. Yabo, the prosecution counsel, called two investigative officers, Chukwu Christian and Izuchukwu Collins, to review the facts of the cases.

    Yabo, thereafter, sought to tender, in evidence, the extrajudicial statements of the defendants; Ramon’s iPhone XX and iPhone XX Max; Ibrahim’s iPhone 13; the N200,000 bank draft in restitution made by Ibrahim; as well as the forensic investigation documents printed from their mobile devices.

    They were all admitted as exhibits by the court.

    The judge convicted and sentenced Ramon to one month imprisonment from the day of his arrest, with the option of a fine of N200,000, and ordered that the mobile devices recovered from him be forfeited to the federal government.

    The judge also convicted and sentenced Ibrahim, who confessed to having benefited from the $150 from his criminal activities, to one month’s imprisonment, with the option of a fine of N200,000.

    He ordered that the iPhone 13 recovered from him as well as N200, 000 in bank drafts be forfeited to the Federal Government.

  • Audu Ogbeh a patriot, says Obasanjo

    Audu Ogbeh a patriot, says Obasanjo

    Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has expressed shock and sadness over the demise of former Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development and the National chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Audu Ogbeh on Saturday.

    Obasanjo, who is in Uganda on a visit, described the late Minister as a peace-loving,  unassuming , committed patriot and a firm believer in democracy and participatory governance. 

    In a statement by his Special Assistant on Media,  Kehinde Akinyemi the former President stressed further that the former PDP leader was “a man whose political career stretched from the military era through the present democratic dispensation. 

    It reads: “To this extent, he was the Deputy Speaker in Plateau House of Assembly in the 70s, Minister of Communications 1982-1983, Chairman of Peoples Democratic Republic of Nigeria (PDP) 2001-2005 and Minister of Agriculture and Food Security 2015-2019. All of these serve as evidence of his faith in the prospects of participatory politics.

    Read Also: BREAKING: Ex-PDP chairman Audu Ogbeh dies at 78

    “Ever since, he built for himself, an impressive profile of immense goodwill and affection among his people, as a frontline politician and community leader.

     “Chief Audu Ogbeh will be missed for his unwavering commitment to politics, governance and democracy as he made significant contributions to the re-establishment of democracy in Nigeria.  His place will be very difficult to fill within his community, the State, the party and the nation.

     “May God console his wife and the entire family. May his soul rest in perfect peace.”

  • The 1999 Constitution: Between Obasanjo and Anyaoku

    The 1999 Constitution: Between Obasanjo and Anyaoku

    • By Mohammed Haruna

    Two weeks ago, on July 16 to be precise, the self-described Eminent Patriots, in conjunction with the Nigeria Political Summit Group, convened a three-day National Summit on “The Future of Nigeria’s Constitutional Democracy” at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel, Abuja. At that summit, two pre-eminent Nigerians, former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, and former Secretary-General of the Commonwealth, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, grabbed media headlines for their diametrically opposed views on the country’s Constitution.

    Anyaoku, who spoke first, said the problem with the country was its Constitution basically because it was a military imposition and did not reflect the country’s plural nature. His solution, he said, was to go back to the parliamentary constitution of the First Republic which was bequeathed to us to by our British colonial masters. Obasanjo disagreed and said the country’s problem was not its Constitution, imperfect as it is. The problem, he said in effect, was the bad faith of those who operated it.

    It is hard, if not impossible, to disagree with Obasanjo, even though as president, he did not always respect the checks and balances built into the Constitution.

    Anyaoku is, of course, not alone in blaming our Constitution for the country’s woes. The vast majority of the country’s “progressives” do, and their voices are much, much louder than those of conservatives. Probably, the loudest among them is The PUNCH. Editorial after editorial, it has never left any of its readers in doubt that not only does it think our Constitution is unworkable. It has repeatedly said it is, indeed, a fraud.

    The latest of such editorials took up three quarters of its editorial page in its edition of July 8. Entitled “Attah’s position on the 1999 Constitution resonates”, the 1,209-word editorial unequivocally supported the view of Obong Victor Attah, former two-term governor of Akwa-Ibom State and prominent member of the Eminent Patriots, that what the country now needs is not merely an amendment to the Constitution but a brand new one because it is simply irredeemable.

    “We,” Attah reportedly said, “cannot amend what is so fundamentally bad. We need a completely new constitution.” Attah’s call was against the background of the on-going exercise by the current National Assembly to further amend the Constitution which, he said, has only given us a polity that is “a unitary system masquerading as a federalism.”

    “Attah’s position,” The PUNCH said, “is compelling. The 1999 Constitution is a charade from start to finish—in letter, spirit, and form.”

    Clearly, the newspaper would be in total agreement with Anyaoku in his disagreement with Obasanjo. But both the newspaper and the retired top diplomat – and, of course, Attah as well – are, in my view, wrong to blame our Constitution for the country’s woes.

    Our Constitution is, of course, not perfect simply because nothing man-made can be perfect. To begin with, as a roughly a 61,000-word document, it is rather too bulky for a constitution, especially compared to, say, the United States constitution we modelled it after; theirs, as a roughly 7,500-word document, including all of its 27 amendments, is a study in brevity, clarity and simplicity. Second, because our Constitution is military in origin, it sounds plausible to dismiss it as an imposition.

    Third, our current 36-state federalism came about by a strong centre ceding powers to the states it created out of the original three regions that made up the country at independence in 1960. This is in sharp contrast to the US which came about by first, the original 13, and eventually 50, independent states coming together to cede powers to the centre.

    The differences between the two constitutions in size, origin and evolution notwithstanding, both are presidential democracies whose common feature is a division and balancing of power among the three arms of their governments, namely the legislature, the executive and judiciary. But, contrary to popular public perception in this country, Washington DC, the US capital, exerts far greater power and authority over its 50 states and even over the private sector than Abuja, Nigeria’s capital, exerts over its 36 states. 

    However, the fact that of the US constitution has served it well for nearly 240 years since 1789, is not just because of its slim size, origin or history. It is essentially because its citizens, leaders and followers alike, have, by and large, kept faith with its provisions.  

    In his total rejection of the current Constitution, Attah said President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, himself a victim of the abuse of the Constitution by President Obasanjo when he was Governor of Lagos State, should appreciate the need for a totally new Constitution.

    Read Also: Tinubu governing with people, not above them, says Shettima

    “This particular President”, he said, “is in the best position to do it because he suffered the consequences of the type of thing that this Constitution allows to happen. His local government money was seized unconstitutionally… So, he is really in the best position to do it, … if he doesn’t do it, he would have left a worse Nigeria than he met.”

    From his own very words, it ought to have been clear to Attah that the problem between Obasanjo and then Governor Tinubu was not the Constitution itself. He himself said the money for the Lagos LGAs “was seized UNCONSTITUTIONALLY” (emphasis mine). The Constitution, as our Supreme Court ultimately ruled, clearly forbade Obasanjo from doing what he did. It is therefore wrong for Attah to blame it instead of the person who breached its injunctions. Rules, after all, do not execute themselves. It is people who do.

    And unconstitutionally withholding the money for Lagos LGAs was not the only rule Obasanjo breached while in power. He hired and fired chairmen and other senior officials of his party at will, appointed and sacked Senate Presidents at will, sacked state governors and state legislatures at will, tried, albeit unsuccessfully, to fire his estranged Vice-President, and even tried, again albeit unsuccessfully, to abrogate the Constitution’s two-term limits for the elected executive offices of the president and governors.

    It is such demonstration of bath faith against our Constitution, not just by Obasanjo alone, but by so many of our leaders that is mainly responsible for the seeming failure of our Constitution to serve our country well. And its not just our leaders; even ordinary Nigerians generally tend to preach one thing but practice the opposite. And, as the saying goes, a people get the leaders they deserve.

    Simultaneous with his call on President Tinubu to spearhead the making of a new constitution, Attah also pleaded with the National Assembly to pass a bill for the convocation of a national conference with representation from all relevant groups, ethnic nationalities, and socio-cultural groups across the country, “to sit down and prepare a proper constitution… so that it is a Nigerian Constitution.”

    The 1999 Constitution, as we all know, is essentially the same as that of 1979 which ushered in the Second Republic. Surely, Attah must be aware that that Constitution emerged through a national conference similar to the one he is now calling for. And that Constitution, it can be argued, is the best shot of all the efforts by Nigerians at constitution making since the first attempt in 1922. The argument that it is merely a military imposition certainly does gross injustice to its framers.

    First, the draft of that Constitution was framed and written by a 49-member Constitution Drafting Committee (CDC) composed of some of the most brilliant and accomplished Nigerians, headed by the late Chief FRA Williams, the country’s first Senior Advocate. The committee spent nearly a year going round the country before it wrote and submitted its draft to the authorities under Obasanjo as military Head of State.

    Second, the Constituent Assembly (CA) which worked on the draft was composed of 230 Nigerians, only 27 of whom were government nominees, seven of them being chairmen of the seven subcommittees of the CDC. The rest were all elected through what was one of the most credible elections ever conducted in the country. Anybody going through the list of its members will testify to the fact generally they were among Nigerians of the best character and highest achievements in their various fields.

    This Assembly spent about nine months going through the draft before it produced the Constitution. It speaks volumes of the credibility and integrity of that Constitution that some of the founding fathers of our nation like Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe and Malam Aminu Kano, contested in the two general elections of the Second Republic before it was overthrown in 1983.

    Yes, our Constitution has its flaws. But no, those flaws are not so fundamental that it must be replaced with something completely new. Our problem, as I have often said, is not the tool as such but, as the English would say, it is that of a bad workman always quarrelling with it instead of learning how best to use it.

    Mohammed Haruna is a veteran journalist and political columnist and currently a National Commissioner with the Independent National Electoral Commission.

  • Obasanjo, Anyaoku differ on need for new Constitution

    Obasanjo, Anyaoku differ on need for new Constitution

    • The Patriots constitution summit kicks off

    Former Commonwealth Secretary General Chief Emeka Anyaoku and ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo yesterday disagreed on the need for a  new constitution.

    While Anyaoku believes Nigeria needs a new, pluralistic Constitution, Obasanjo said no such document is perfect and that it is the operators that matter.

    They spoke in Abuja during the opening of a three-day emergency national constitutional summit organised by a group of eminent Nigerians operating under the umbrella of the Patriots.

    They are working in partnership with the Nigerian Political Summit Group (NPSG).

    The theme of the summit is: “Actualising a constitutional democracy that works for all in Nigeria.”

    Anyaoku dismissed the 1999 Constitution, currently in operation, as a military imposition.

    The Chair of the Patriots believes that the country’s pluralistic nature requires a new constitution.

    To Anyaoku, the present 36 federating units have proven incapable of driving development, adding that 65 years after independence, Nigeria has become the world capital of poverty.

    He said: “Nigeria is a pluralistic country, and like all successful pluralistic countries around the world, for its stability and maximal development, its constitution must address its problems.

    “Second, it must address its pluralism by being formulated by elected representatives of its diverse people.

    “Our present 1999 Constitution, as amended, is not such a constitution. It was not democratically formulated.

    “It was instead imposed on the country through a decree by the military administration.

    “And the governance system derived from it is not only non-inclusive, but also induces over-expectation of the nation’s resources on administration rather than on capital development.

    “As a result, what we see is our nation’s need for a new constitution.

    “There is the need for a new constitution, but this is a matter to be made by the people of our country.”

    Decrying insecurity, weak health and education facilities and a “palpable mood of hopelessness,” he said: “The present 36 federation units are incapable of generating and sustaining the pace of national development achieved in the early years of our independence under the 1963 Constitution.”

    He called for “a constitution that would be in sync with the Constitution of the United States, a constitution of successful pluralistic countries around the world”.

    Anyaoku added: “To those who say that the fate of a country depends primarily on its leadership, I say that the Constitution from which the system of governance is derived largely determines the character of the people who get elected or appointed to govern the country from the three arms of the government.”

    Obasanjo: new constitution not the answer

    But, Obasanjo said Nigeria rather needs the right operators of the constitution instead of a perfect document.

    Represented by the Secretary-General of Eminent Patriots, Mr Olawale Okunniyi, the former President agreed that while a constitution must reflect the history, the constituents and the aspirations of a people, “no constitution is perfect.”

    Obasanjo said: “From my experience in operating our constitution, I will be the first to point out some areas that need amendment.

    “However, for me, no constitution can ever be regarded as perfect.

    “But whatever the strength or weakness of a constitution, the most important issue, to my understanding and experience, is the operators of the constitution.

    Read Also: Traditional institutions key to nation building, says Shettima

    “The best constitution can be perverted and distorted by the operators, and we have experienced that all over Africa, Nigeria is not exempt.

    “I am more concerned about the operators of the constitution to lead in good governance and promotion of welfare and wellbeing of the citizenry.

    “No matter what you do to the Nigerian constitution, if the operators of the constitution, for the past one decade and a half, remain unchanged and continue in the same manner, the welfare and wellbeing of Nigerians will continue to be sacrificed on the altar of selfishness.

    “It will continue to be sacrificed on the altar of self-centeredness, corruption, impunity and total disregard of the constitution, decency, morality, integrity and honesty.”

    A former Governor of Akwa-Ibom, Victor Attah, whose remarks were also read by Okunniyi, agreed with Anyaoku, insisting that the 1999 Constitution was not a people’s constitution.

    He described the 1999 constitution as a military decree, imposed without the people’s consent.

    “The military suspended the 1963 Constitution, which remains the last legal expression of our people’s collective will,” he said.

    “We, from the Southsouth region, join other zones who now agree that this union is not working as it is.

    “It can only be sustained if it is restructured on the basis of equity, justice and mutual consent,” he said.

    In attendance at the summit were many leaders of thought and representatives of geo-cultural groups, who hope to produce a draft Constitution and push for its adoption by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the national Assembly.

    The outcome of the summit which will ratify the prepared draft, will be presented to the President and the leadership of the National Assembly with a recommendation for its consideration as a bill to be passed into law.

    However, there is an ongoing Constitution amendment process in the National Assembly.

    Notable names of summit attendees include Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC) President Comrade Joe Ajaero, General Ike Nwachukwu, former Ekiti State Governor Kayode Fayemi, ex-Ogun State governor Gbenga Daniel, Senator Aminu Tambuwal, former Minister of Education Dr. Oby Ezekwesili, Prof. Pat Utomi, Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN), Femi Falana (SAN), and Prof. Mike Ozekhome (SAN).

    Also present were former Minister of Women Affairs Josephine Anenih, former Minister of Women Affairs Dame Pauline Tallen, Senator Akerele Bucknor, ex-Information Minister Labaran Maku, Ambassador Godknows Igali, Elder Solomon Asemota (SAN), Ohanaeze President Senator Azuta Mbata, represented by Okey Nwadinobi; Hajia Maryam Ciroma, among other dignitaries.

    Delegates from ethnic groups attended the summit.