Senate President Godswill Akpabio has distanced himself from a planned rally purportedly organised in his name by a group known as the Progressive Peoples’ Resolution (PPR).

The group is led by Ubong Idemudo.

In a statement issued by Jackson Udom, his special assistant on media, the senate president said he was unaware of any such demonstration scheduled to take place in Akwa Ibom on April 4.

He urged his supporters and residents of the state to disregard the event and go about their normal activities.

According to the statement, intelligence suggests that the rally is being orchestrated by “fifth columnists” seeking to exploit Akpabio’s name for ulterior motives.

“The planned rally, from information pieced together, is the handiwork of fifth columnists trying to use the name of the Senate President to achieve their devilish goal,” the statement reads.

The senate president also called on the police and other security agencies to step in, describing the event as “satanic”.

“The police and other security agencies in the state are by this statement directed to ensure that such satanic rally is not allowed to hold, as such has no approval of the Senate President,” the statement added.

[TheCable]

The African labour centre, the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity, OATUU, in April 2013, marked its 40th Anniversary. The anniversary lecture was delivered by then African Union Commission Chair, Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.

The trade union centre of the newest country in the world, the South Sudan Workers Trade Union Federation delegation rose up at the conference to invite the continent’s trade unions to meet in Juba.

A few weeks later, as the then OATUU Secretary General, I called the South Sudan labour President, Honourable Sinon Dieng, to arrange the meeting only to find that he had become a refugee in Kenya. There had been political tension in the country and he and some South Sudanese had fled the country. This was the beginning of the country’s civil war which over the next five years, claimed four hundred thousand lives.

The conflicts took the shape of an inter-ethnic fight led by President Salvar Kiir against Vice President Riek Machar. The signal for the current armed conflict was the March 26, 2025 arrest of the former.

Information Minister and Government Spokesman, Michael Makuei Lueth, accused Machar of directing his forces “to rebel against the government with the aim of disrupting peace so that elections are not held and South Sudan goes back to war”.

In response to the arrest, Machar’s SPLM/IO party declared that: “The prospect for peace and stability in South Sudan has now been put into serious jeopardy”. Reath Muoch Tang, Chairman of the party’s foreign relations committee claimed that unclear charges have been brought against Machar in violation of subsisting peace agreements and the constitution.

While the African Union, AU, has sent a peace mission to ensure a de-escalation, the United States, US, has asked President Kiir to free his First Vice President. Its Bureau of African Affairs said: “We urge President Kiir to reverse this action and prevent further escalation of the situation”.

The United Nations Head of Mission in South Sudan, Nicholas Haysom, claimed that barrel bombs believed to contain inflammable liquid had already been used in the latest conflict. He said this had caused significant casualties and horrific burns on peoples in communities across the Upper Nile.

The UN official added that unless the situation is quickly arrested, these events could lead to: “A conflict (which) would erase all the hard-won gains made since the 2018 peace deal was signed… It would devastate not only South Sudan but the entire region, which simply cannot afford another war.”

But Makuei, while confirming the bombings, disputed the UN chief’s claims that non-combatants have been affected: “The bombardment was strictly against White Army positions and did not harm civilians”.

Apparently, the conflict has been internationalised. The Chair of the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, Yasmin Sooka, claims that Ugandan troops and their battle tanks have crossed into South Sudan, potentially violating the UN arms embargo. The UN seems quite worried by the renewed conflicts as it has an estimated 18,000 peacekeepers in South Sudan.

Machar’s group has made similar allegations. In a statement, it said: “The Ugandan forces are currently taking part in air strikes against civilians in counties of Nasir, Longechuk and Ulang in Upper Nile State, and Akobo County in Jonglei State”.

There had been fighting in the northern Upper Nile state with the armed forces taking on the White Army militia which used to be affiliated with Machar’s forces. So, the government accused the latter of being involved in the fighting.

I am not surprised about the renewed conflict in South Sudan. In my March 4, 2016 column titled ‘The Butchers of Juba’, I had analysed that: “The crisis and its seeming intractable nature are due to a combination of personal ambition, the rich oil resource of South Sudan, national interests of neigbours like Uganda and the lack of a pan-national agenda.”

I had concluded that the UN and AU need to be empowered to enforce peace. And that: “There will never be a solution unless the butchers in South Sudan are made aware that they face arrest and prosecution for crimes against humanity, if they refuse or fail to allow peace reign in the country.” Unless these steps are taken, peace is likely to elude South Sudan for a long time.

South Sudan until 2005 was part of Sudan. The breakup of that country has merely led to new fault lines. So a further split of South Sudan on whatever lines would be no solution, and may lead to further splits. The solution is to rein in Kiir and Machar, evolve a self-governing system based on democratic values and the sovereignty of the people of the country. There is also the need to check the meddlesomeness of foreign powers and neigbouring countries.

In the case of Sudan, the spiralling armed conflict that has led to the on-going massacres and the split of the country into two, is mainly due to the incomplete mass uprising which terminated the al-Bashar regime, and the right wing counter-coup.

The Sudanese Armed Forces, SAF, headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces, RSF, led by General Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo alias Hemedti, had conspired to abort the peoples’ democratic movement by overthrowing the transition Sudanese government and dividing the country as spoils of war.

The RSF had evolved from the Janjaweed, a vicious militant group that was used for ethnic cleansing in Darfur in which over 200,000 people were killed.

The European Union then strengthened the RSF by funding it in return for the militia using force to stop immigrants crossing into Europe through the Red Sea.

In the struggle for power between the two groups, Iran has thrown its weight behind the army, while the United Arab Emirates, UAE, has provided funds and arms for the RSF. The rival groups had begun fighting on April 15, 2023. Since then, over 150,000 Sudanese have been killed and some 14 million displaced.

Given the fact that both sides rely on various countries, the AU or the UN, levelling on this, need to convene an international peace conference that can force a ceasefire. Negotiations should include what is left of the civil groups. A transition agreement needs be reached which would lead to a civil democratic process. The alternative would be both groups fighting until one side is broken. That may not be in the immediate, and the remnants of the defeated side may continue the conflict at the various levels, including banditry.

Whatever the case, the alpha males of South Sudan and Sudan: President Salvar Kiir, Riek Machar and Generals al-Burhan and Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, need to be brought to justice for the senseless wars in their countries.

Today, democracy has become the practice or an aspiration in many countries across the world. To speak briefly about its origin, it was in the ancient Greek city state of Athens in 508 BC that the statesman, Cleisthenes, reformed the constitution of the city state by transferring power from the hitherto ruling oligarchic aristocracy to the citizens of the city. Although President George Washington of the United States of America who lived from 1732 to 1799 is commonly described as the father of modern democracy, it was Abraham Lincoln who lived from 1809 to 1865 who gave us the definition of modern democracy in its now universally accepted form as “the government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

As a background to my remarks on the colloquium’s theme, Democracy in Africa, I would like to tell the story of my role in the promotion of democracy in Africa where there are now 21 African countries in the 56-member Commonwealth of nations. On my election as Commonwealth Secretary-General in 1989  in Kuala Lumpur by the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth, I pledged to them that my primary mission would be: to make the organization a potent force for promoting democracy and human rights; to in the words of the great Indian Prime Minister Jawarhalal Nehru bring a healing touch to conflicts between and within Commonwealth countries; and to strengthen technical cooperation for development among member countries.

At the beginning of my tenure as Secretary-General in 1990, there were 10 non-democratic member countries which were under either one-party or military rule. But when I left office in 2000, only 2 members were non-democratic, these were the absolute monarchy in Swaziland now known as Eswatini, and Pakistan where General Musharaff had taken over in a military coup d’etat in November 1999.

 As Secretary-General, I took several initiatives to promote multi-party democracy in Africa.  I succeeded in persuading after long conversations Presidents Kenneth Kaunda in Zambia, Kamuzu Banda in Malawi, Albert Rene in the Seychelles, and Arap Moi in Kenya to move from one-party ruled State to a multi-party democratic State. In the case of Kenya, I at his request sent the late Professor Ben Nwabueze to go and help Kenya to adapt their constitution from a one-party to a multi-party constitution. And I also had a long discussion with the Head of State, Jerry Rawlings, before Ghana held the elections that transited moved it from military rule to multi-party democracy in January 1993.

Perhaps, the most notable was my seminal role in South Africa’s transition from apartheid to democracy. Early in 1991, with the mandate of Commonwealth Heads of Government I went to discuss with the last white President of South Africa, Mr F W de Clerk, how the Commonwealth could help him in the conference he had proposed of his government and the anti-apartheid political parties after releasing Nelson Mandela from prison. Thereafter, I sent six Commonwealth statesmen and women to the conference when it opened at Kempton Park in Johannesburg on December 1, 1991.

And when the deliberations were threatened by violence following the massacre at Boipatong by the apartheid police of four ANC stalwarts, I went to South Africa to negotiate a peace accord which was signed by the President and leaders of all the political parties and thereafter sent six Commonwealth senior representatives whose presence helped to douse the violence. I organized a contingent of Commonwealth police men and women to go to South Africa and assist the South Africa police force which had been accustomed mainly to confronting anti-apartheid protesters and opponents in learning the techniques of community policing.  A team of Commonwealth electoral experts also went to assist the South African Electoral Commission in organizing the elections.

Overall, I visited South Africa many times during the almost two-year duration of the conference at Kempton Park including on 17th November 1993 when it concluded at 3.30 am with agreement on the holding of elections and installation of a non-racial democratic government. I still remember vividly the quite emotional occasion of Nelson Mandela swearing the oath of the first democratically elected President of the Republic of South Africa at which many in the audience including my wife shed some tears.

The South African Government doubly honoured me for my role. First by giving me the rare honour of addressing their joint Parliament in 1995, and secondly by conferring on me South Africa’s highest honour for foreigners, The Supreme Companion of O R Tambo (Gold). In 1997, I convened a meeting of the Heads of the then 19 African member-countries of the Commonwealth minus Nigeria whose membership had been suspended following General Abacha’s execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his colleagues despite personal pleas from President Nelson Mandela and myself, to discuss the state of democracy in their countries and the challenges they faced.

It emerged from the discussions that the first challenge faced by democracy in Africa which applies particularly to Nigeria is the management of diversity. African countries are largely the creation of European powers at their Berlin conference of 1884/85 where they arbitrarily lumped in individual countries ethnic nations that had existed separately for centuries.

The management of diversity is a common challenge to democracies across the world. The diverse countries that have succeeded in remaining united political entities have been those who operate true federal constitutions which are based at the national level on equity, justice and inclusiveness, while at the subnational level on adequately devolved powers for tackling the challenge of development and internal security. Examples of such countries are India and Canada.

On the other hand, the record shows that diverse countries which failed to manage their diversity through true federal constitutions have disintegrated sometimes after internal conflcts. Examples of such countries are Yugoslavia which disintegrated into seven independent countries, Czechoslovakia, and nearer home in Africa, Sudan.

In several African countries there are tensions among different religious and ethnic groups. In some countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Central African Republic there are ongoing conflicts arising from such tensions. The horrific genocide that occurred in Rwanda in 1994 remains the worst example of the consequence of failure to successfully manage a country’s diversity.

The management of diversity remains the biggest challenge to our democracy in Nigeria. As I have said on many occasions, our current 1999 constitution is, in my strongly held view, ill-fitted to address it. The wisdom of Nigeria’s founding fathers in agreeing the essentials of our 1960/63 constitution which addressed the country’s diversity, is the only answer to the country’s current lack of credible sense of national unity, the wide-spread insecurity, and the under-performing socio-economic development.

Another challenge identified by the African leaders at the 1997 meeting on democracy was the operations of some foreign non-governmental organizations and agencies in their countries. Here in Nigeria there have been plausible allegations supported by foreign commentators such as the recent remarks by the US Congressman Scott Perry regarding the use of USAID funds to support the Boko Haram, and the leader of the South African mercenaries allegedly brought into the country by President Jonathan to help in the fight against Boko Haram, as well as pronouncements by African scholars including the widely acknowledged Professor P.L.O. Lumumba, of the destabilizing and nefarious activities of some non-government actors in the country.

With the recent military coup d’etats in Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, Africa remains vulnerable to returning to the 1960/70 period when the anti-apartheid author Ruth First in her book, The Barell of a Gun, told the story of a United States Secretary of State who said that he could not recall the number of times when he was woken up at night to be informed of yet another coup in an African country whose name sounded like a typographical error.

And finally, I would like to mention another challenge to our democracy here in Nigeria. It is the nature of our politics and the conduct of our politicians. Our political parties are not, as they should be, organized on ideological basis; they are organized essentially as instruments for capturing political power. And our politicians in their conduct are largely motivated not by a desire to render service to the people, but rather by self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment.

To conclude, I would like to stress that it is only through thriving democratic governance that Nigeria and the other African countries will rid the continent of internal conflicts and lack of socio-economic development which are the biggest impediment to Africa’s ability to change the Eurocentric narrative of Africa and the black race- a narrative that sustains racism and the looking down on Africans by other races. I believe that Nigeria, given its well-known attributes, has a special responsibility in changing this narrative.

•Excerpts of the speech by Chief Anyaoku, a former Commonwealth Secretary-General, at Emeka Ihedioha’s 60th birthday colloquium in Abuja

In a massive show of support, sixty support groups, comprising 120 members under the umbrella of All Soludo Support Groups (ASSG), have endorsed Governor Chukwuma Soludo's bid for a second term.

The groups presented a whopping thirty million naira to the Governor at the International Convention Centre, Awka, to support his re-election campaign.

Governor Soludo, overwhelmed by the gesture, revealed that there is a consensus among community leaders, APGA stakeholders, youths, and students alike, urging him to run for a second term.

He attributed this consensus to the visible developments and projects executed by his administration, which has positively impacted the lives of Anambra residents.

The Governor reiterated his commitment to sustaining the vision of "One State, One People, One Agenda," prioritizing the needs of ndi Anambra and executing projects that have transformed the state. The Governor, thereafter, expressed his profound gratitude to all the support groups as well as their leadership 

The Cordinator of the All Soludo Support Group, ASSG, Mr. Chinedu Nwoye, flanked by other conveners, pledged to support the governor in fulfilling his manifesto and vision for the state.

Unanimously, they expressed their profound satisfaction with the sterling achievements of the administration saying that they did not make a mistake by supporting the Governor’s first term in office.

This development comes on the heels of a similar endorsement by Anambra State students, who contributed two million naira to support Governor Soludo's re-election bid. The Soludo Vanguard, a grassroots support group, has also mobilized support for the governor's re-election campaign.

UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin said on Thursday it would be “a bad idea” for FIFA to expand the World Cup to 64 nations for the 2030 tournament.

The 2026 edition in the United States, Mexico and Canada will already see the format increase from 32 teams to 48.

But the head of the Uruguayan football federation, Ignacio Alonso, suggested further expanding the tournament at the last FIFA Council meeting in March. 

Football’s global governing body said it “had a duty to analyse” the proposal, which European chief Ceferin denounced at UEFA’s congress in Belgrade.

“It’s maybe even more surprising for me than for you. I think it’s a bad idea,” Ceferin said.

“I think it’s not a good idea for the World Cup itself and it’s not a good idea for our qualifiers as well, as you know.

“So, I’m not supporting that idea. I don’t know where it came from. It’s strange that we didn’t know anything before this proposal at the FIFA Council.”

The 2030 World Cup will be played in three continents, with Portugal, Spain and Morocco the main hosts.

There will also be three matches in South America — in Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay — to celebrate the centenary edition. The inaugural World Cup was held in 1930 in Uruguay.

That decision paved the way for Saudi Arabia to hold the 2034 event.

[Vanguard]

Miss Isioma Sybil Nwosu, a Biochemistry student, has emerged as the overall best-graduating student of Lagos State University (LASU) for the 2023/2024 academic session, with a Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) of 4.93.

The announcement was made by the Vice Chancellor, Prof. Ibiyemi Olatunji-Bello, during a press briefing on Thursday, marking the beginning of activities for the 28th Convocation ceremony.

Prof. Olatunji-Bello expressed pride in LASU's role in producing market-ready graduates equipped to make significant contributions nationally and globally.

The Convocation ceremony will feature a series of events, including a staff sports competition, special Jumat and thanksgiving services, a coconut-breaking ceremony, and a lecture titled "Patriots, Citizenship, and National Ownership: The Imperative of Collective Responsibility for Nigeria's Future."

The lecture, scheduled for April 8, 2025, will be delivered by the Honourable Minister of Education, Dr. Maruf Olatunji Alausa, with Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress, as chairman of the occasion.

A total of 971 diploma students, 8,711 first-degree students, and 2,235 postgraduate students will graduate during the ceremony.

The university will also confer honorary doctorate degrees on Brigadier General Buba Marwa (Rtd.) and Otunba Olufemi Olusegun Pedro, while elevating Prof. Joseph Abayomi Olagunju to the rank of Distinguished Professor.

Prof. Olatunji-Bello highlighted LASU's achievements under her administration, including full accreditation of 43 courses, collaborations with local and international institutions, and rankings as the best state university and leading university in Sub-Saharan Africa.

The 28th Convocation ceremony will conclude on April 10, 2025, with the award of Doctorate Degrees (PhD) and the conferment of distinguished professorships and honorary doctorate degrees.

I moved to Canada three years ago and encountered many surprises. One of the biggest was the high cost of pay television services and their billing models.

During my time as a journalist at TheNEWS Magazine, I consistently advocated for the implementation of a pay-per-view billing model. I frequently expressed my frustration with price increases by MultiChoice, the service to which I subscribe. I believed I had the right to watch only what I wanted, whenever I wanted. Choosing what to watch and when sounds like a good option until that option is actually available to you.

Living in Canada now, I’ve found it frustrating that I don’t have access to the wide variety of channels that MultiChoice provides without paying a hefty price. To watch major sports events like the Premier League, Serie A, La Liga, Bundesliga, Champions League, and significant boxing matches, you need to subscribe to three different providers: Fubo, DAZN, and TSN. However, even your subscriptions do not necessarily cover the biggest fights.

To clarify, after paying your monthly or yearly subscription for DAZN, you would need to pay an additional $79 (Canadian) to watch the Usyk vs. Fury fight. This bout is available exclusively on pay-per-view and is not included in your regular subscription. In Nigeria, I was able to watch many big fights live on DStv at no extra charge, but that option is not available in my current location.

Many people have to rely on alternative methods to watch major fights, and these options often come with costs that may be a little less steep, but steep all the same. When I moved to Canada, I started to realize that in Nigeria, I had access to live sports at a much lower fraction of the price I currently pay. Here’s why: I had two active MultiChoice subscriptions and believed I didn’t need a local subscription in Canada. I was informed when I arrived that the cost of watching soccer matches (as North Americans refer to football) could be financially overwhelming.

As a savvy Nigerian, I told my friends that I would avoid their expensive subscriptions by continuing to watch DStv. However, I soon realized that I couldn’t access DStv due to geolocation restrictions. You might suggest using a VPN, but I tried that, and it’s easier said than done. While chatting online is manageable, streaming satellite TV is a different story. I also experimented with IPTV, but I’m not a fan of the lag. There are times when a goal would have been scored or a red card shown before the live TV feed is restored. Additionally, I would to keep Livescore handy to stay updated on everything happening in the game. That was not the way I wanted to watch football.

I had no choice but to rely on match highlights, but I wasn’t satisfied because watching live football is what I grew up with. Did I mention how much it costs to subscribe to Fubo, DAZN, and TSN? Fubo is about $85 per month, DAZN costs $30, and TSN is $10. It’s not always better on the other side, as you can see. And before you start asking how much the minimum wage is here, the television service providers here do not ask how much.

Pay up or jog on. Simple.

Even with monthly or yearly subscriptions, there’s no guarantee that you’ll get access to major matches or fights. For instance, to watch the English FA Cup matches, you will need a monthly subscription with Rogers that costs $108. If you’re not a dedicated football fan, you might wonder why you should pay such a high price. That’s a valid question, but the same applies to those who enjoy movies or shows.
I realized that it’s more convenient to have everything in one place and at an affordable price. It’s important to note that the prices mentioned are not fixed. If inflation occurs, many businesses, including pay television service providers, tend to raise their prices.

I realized that my perspective was unrealistic while I was at home. Whenever fuel prices rose or the naira depreciated, leading other businesses to increase their prices, I found myself joining in the criticism of MultiChoice if they raised their prices. I don’t understand how I became so misinformed to believe that adverse economic conditions affecting the prices of groceries and food would not similarly impact pay television prices. I have participated in mocking and complaining about MultiChoice’s price increases, but I now see that they are an easy target.Many people living abroad often reach out to friends and family to ask how they plan to watch major fights because their subscriptions do not cover them. The tradition of watching games and fights in pubs and bars is not solely about wanting to socialize; it’s also financially motivated. Spending $50 to enjoy a match with others who share a passion for the sport can be a more economical choice than paying $79 to watch it alone at home with no additional perks.

In a bar or pub, you can buy a beer or two and enjoy some chicken wings for around $50 while watching the game. Although this adds an extra expense, many people are willing to pay for the experience. Comfort comes at a price. I once told a friend that traveling abroad for a visit is completely different from living abroad and having to manage the bills.

MultiChoice offers many channels for free; take CNN as an example. While it comes with most bouquets in Nigeria, it is not included here. Unless you’re okay with watching outdated news, old shows, and old movies, you won’t be able to watch CNN or Fox News on your regular bouquet.

Consider Amazon Prime. There are movies and shows available on Prime that require a separate subscription, even if you already have a Prime membership. The same applies to Disney+. To access Paramount, AMC, Apple TV+, Crave, Starz, and others, you need additional subscriptions.

When I was at home, I found pay television much easier to navigate compared to my current situation. Many Nigerians abroad would agree that MultiChoice provided us with the most convenient and relatively affordable options to access hundreds of channels in one place.

Looking back at what I paid then versus what I pay now, I appreciate the value of the services MultiChoice offers at their price point. I’ve gained a better understanding of this. Sometimes, when we have easy access to these things, we tend to take them for granted until we try something different. The idea that “it’s greener on the other side” is often misleading.

As for the content posted on social media, I choose not to comment; people are entitled to portray their lifestyles however they wish.

This is my opinion, but a poll among Nigerians living abroad would likely reveal that many share the same view about MultiChoice and its pricing. Where I am, I following, through traditional and social media, how Nigerians are yearning for pay-per-view, which they do not understand, and telling themselves that pay television services abroad cost the same as three bottles of beer back in Nigeria. It is not so. Ask around, as Mr. Macaroni would say.

Bisuga, a former correspondent of The NEWS Magazine, writes from St John’s, Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada

In a sector packed with assets that arrive on Monday and hit zero by Thursday, Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) stands on its own as a cryptocurrency that's practically guaranteed to survive and possibly even thrive over the long term. That makes it the smartest coin to buy and hold, and the longer your investing timeline is, the better it looks.

Let's examine three reasons that's the case.

1. It's immune to inflation

One of the core pillars of Bitcoin's long-term investment thesis is that it's designed to maintain its purchasing power relative to fiat currencies. You've probably heard something along those lines before, but let's take a moment to really unpack it.

Fiat currencies are issued by governments. Governments tend to cumulatively issue more and more currency over time, which is normal, necessary, and expected. But that means fiat currencies have a tendency to lose their purchasing power in the long run as the amount of money in circulation rises.