MINUTES after we rendered the last stanza of the national anthem with impressive passion, the lyrics put us to immediate judgement as the tales of woes that were painted had deep strokes that held their hues. Silence descended on the hall, making the voices on the devastations of oil and gas exploration – maybe, exploitation is better – in the Niger Delta, more eerie.

We had just sung:

O God of all creation,

Grant this our one request,

Help us to build a nation

Where no man is oppressed,

And so with peace and plenty

Nigeria may be blessed.

Each of those lines put us on trial as speaker after speaker discussed the report that John Tucker Mugabi Sentamu, 75, a retired Anglican bishop, and life peer, who was Archbishop of York and Primate of England from 2005 to 2020, delivered its summary in a quivering voice that appeared propelled by anger at what human beings can reduce other human beings to profit from oil and gas.

The words tumbled off his tongue in a rapidity that set his Swahili accent in a perpetual battle for superiority with the English language much like the same perpetual disdain the oil companies and Nigerian governments have for any ameliorations of the living conditions of the peoples of the oil-producing areas.

At the international conference on environment, the report of the Bayelsa Oil and Environmental Commission presented in Abuja on Wednesday, showed the dark sides of oil and gas production glittering from a documentary in which darkness was so pitched that no lighting could brighten it a bit.

Waters, farm lands, residences, animals, people are mere soots dressed in layers of the darkness of mis-managed oil spillages. More oil wells, more explorations, more millions of barrels per day mean more meaningless life for inhabitants of the areas, the least of whose woes is that they could be kicked out of their lands once substantial crude is found under their feet.

Oil pollution in Bayelsa, Nigeria Delta

The report, _An Environmental Genocide, The human and environmental cost of Big Oil in Bayelsa, Nigeria_, is scientific, used verifiable data, and drew from hundreds of interviews, visits to sites of pollutions, and engagements with affected communities, many of which had lost every hope of their cries being heard. All stakeholders were represented.

Communities had for over six decades been devastated, cultures lost, and future generations are guaranteed diseased existence from their polluted environments. The curse of oil has cost them the present. Those who make it to the future would arrive their destination loaded with toxins that could lower the quality of their lives to the point that they could be a different specie of the human race.

While other children would inherit healthy genes from their forebears, children born in Bayelsa would be of indeterminate genes because of illnesses that their parents have, foods and water that are polluted beyond considerable safe levels and the worsening settings of where they would be born.

Some diseases found in the Niger Delta are new, local to the areas, unknown or where they are known, the improvised peoples of the areas cannot afford the medications and treatments they need.

Central to these pollutions is oil spillage that the oil companies blame on sabotage, their way of blaming youths of the region for the spills. The report’s findings do not support this position.

“Analyses suggest that Nigeria’s pipelines are 565 times more likely to spring a leak per 1,000 kilometres than those in the EU,” says the report. About 21,000 kilometres of these pipelines ring the Niger Delta, taking products from over 5,000 oil wells to export terminals and refineries.

Oil pollution in Bayelsa, Nigeria 

Efforts to harness the travials of Bayelsa and the surrounding States into a scientific report that could be used in solving the problems that oil exploration has imposed on the peoples and environment of the Niger Delta, especially Bayelsa, were activated in 2019 by Governor Seriake Dickson who instituted the Sentamu Commisdion and received its interim report in 2020 before he left office. “I know that by 2021/2022 they submitted their final report which was presented in London in the House of Lords. I was delighted that they came to make a presentation of the final copy to the State, which has formally adopted it at the State Executive Council,” Dickson, now a Senator, and Chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Ecology, said at the event which he also chaired.

The completion of the report is a milestone, a lot of work still has to be done, Dickson said. “I call on all the Governors of oil-producing States, and the people of the Niger Delta generally, to rally round and use this report as a basis for our quest for a safer environment. All of us must rise up for Bayelsa and the Niger Delta and fight against environmental terrorism, which the Commission has clearly found to be a genocide,” Dickson said.

The report is unrelenting in its case against the oil companies and the slackness of the regulatory agencies. “A study conducted on pipelines in six States in the Niger Delta found that more than 70% of the pipelines were over 20 years old and over 40% were more than 30 years old with much of the infrastructure suffering from mechanical failures due to poor construction and maintenance,” according to the report.

More frightening pictures emerge as we peep through the darkness of oil production, the Nigerian version.

King Bubaraye Dakolo, Chairman, Bayelsa Traditional Rulers Council, was illustrative with his sketching of the destructions that oil exploration cause. “You can call me the living dead,” he said, using data from the report on the levels of toxins found in tests conducted on the inhabitants of the areas. They were horrifying data.

“Overwhelming tide of oil contamination and associated activities such as dredging, mangrove and swamp forest clearance, and artisanal refining has turned the Niger Delta – home to some of the planet’s largest mangrove and freshwater swamps, forests, and Africa’s largest wetlands – into one of the most polluted places on Earth. Bayelsa is one of the States most affected within the Niger Delta,”the report lamented.

“Since 2006, oil produced in Bayelsa generated over US $150 billion for the Federal Government and billions for the international oil companies that operate its wells,” said the report.

There is no evidence yet that a cent is kept anywhere for the $12 billion that the report said would be required to clear the pollution.

Governments are occupied with squeezing more oil and gas out of the areas than fix the damage to people and places. Nobody is being held responsible for the future of the people.

“Oil producers are already beginning to divest themselves of their onshore assets to evade potential liability for historic pollution. There is an urgent need for action now,” the report warns.

Dreary as the devastations of oil are, the most commanding news item was Honourable Alex Ikwechegh, of the House of Representatives, slapping his way to prominence by brutalising a taxi driver whose major or general offence was failure to realise that he was before Ikwechegh, who was so majestic that he wondered if people knew who he was, and that he was magical with his abilities to cause people to disappear.

Ikwechegh too is a subscriber to a “nation where no man is oppressed”.

Then Nyesom Wike talks down on residents of the Federal Capital Territory, calls them names, and nobody calls Wike to order. He takes his imperious bearings to Rivers State, sustaining different manners of lawlessness there. He too swore to the Constitution and attends events where the national anthem reminds him of our aspirations to “a nation where no man is oppressed”.

Fuel increases, continued brutality by security agencies, and the dedicated manhunt for Bobrisky all slap us, oppress us, and enlist us among the living dead.

As our governments, National Assembly, and all those who can do something about the Niger Delta, which they live off, turn blind eyes to the plight of the region, we should understand more, why they do nothing about the rest of us.

Can’t we just agree that we are building a nation where oppression is a national value?

 

Finally…

THOSE street beggars, some of them minors, accused of terrorism, and planning to change President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s government illegally, should be released and compensated. There must be limits to ridiculousness.

 

ISIGUZO is a major commentator on minor issues

 

 

With a few days to the November 5, 2024  U.S. presidential election, the tempo of the campaign  has reached fever pitch, with the two candidates, Vice-President Kamala Harris ( Democrat )  and former president, Donald Trump  (Republican) in a dead run to the finish line. The final national New York Times/Siena  poll, published on 25 October 2024, had the two candidates deadlocked at 48% to 48%  for the popular vote.  Aggregate of national polls also project the election as neck-to-neck , with the two candidates tied at 48%, making it a cliff-hanger. 

Both candidates have carried the electoral battle to the battleground states which oscillate in their voting pattern  between the two parties, states whose votes can swing the election either way.  About 10 states are considered swing states ,  with seven of them – Michigan  15, Wisconsin 10, Pennsylvania 19, Georgia 16, North Carolina 16, Nevada 6, and Arizona 11, with a total of 91 electoral college votes – being of focal attention  in this race.  In 2008, former President Barrack  Obama won in eight of the states, Trump  took Michigan, Wisconsin  and Pennsylvania  in 2016 to clinch the presidency while in the 2020  election, Biden not only took back the three states  but also wrestled Arizona and Georgia  from Trump,  on his way to The White House.  

Two major issues have dominated the 2024 presidential election campaign , the economy and immigration with issues of abortion, Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT)  and foreign policy taking second place.  The economy , under the Biden/Harris administration had experienced high inflation rate  and consequent higher cost of living felt by all. Trump highlights the improved economy under his administration before the advent of COVID-19, the global pandemic  that ravaged the world economy. Trump plans to use tariff on imports to raise revenue and as well protect local industries. Harris is for taxing the rich to generate revenue but laissez  faire on  unbridled imports, in spite of its  consequent drag on the U.S. economy, a manifestation of Democrats  Father Christmas disposition to making America a liberal market for imports.

On immigration,  while Trump  is not opposed to legal migration, he pledges  to stop the tidal wave of illegal immigrants from south America on its southern border and  to deport illegal immigrants. According to him,  illegal immigrants are polluting American way of life and taking the jobs of Americans.  Some dub this a racist agenda but it resonates well with Trump constituency.  Democrats are liberal on immigration and not committed  to forceful  removal of illegal immigrants, a stand that earns Democrats 65 % of Latino votes in southern U.S. States .

The issues of abortion  and LGBT  are not just election  issues but are matters which have deeply polarized America  to the extent that die hard conservatives have fire-bombed abortion clinics and launched murderous attacks on gay and lesbian  gatherings. Trump is opposed to LGBT and  an indiscriminate,  free for all abortion. Democrats, and particularly Kamala Harris, celebrate  LGBTs with Harris  insisting they  should be allowed to flaunt their sexual preferences !! She is a disciple of  Barrack Obama,  the evangelist for Gays and Lesbians,  who had threatened African countries which  enacted anti-Gay laws with sanctions !!! The audacity of it all.  The Democratic candidate’s vocal stand on LGBT has its cost in votes. 

Foreign  policy may be a muted election issue but it had in recent times crept into  American public consciousness  with Israel’s genocidal war against Hamas in Gaza for the Palestinian group’s October 7, 2023 incursion into Israel which left about 1200 Israelis dead and over 200 abducted and being held hostage. However, Israeli military killing over 40,000 Palestinians in its one year battle with Hamas,  has prompted unprecedented outrage  and demonstrations across  America, especially on university campuses,  against Israel and the Biden/Harris administration for its refusal to pressure Israel to agree to a ceasefire.  Vice President Harris risks loss of votes in this regard , particularly  in  the  crucial  swing state of Michigan with an estimated 200,000  Arab-American population.  On Europe, while Trump regards the Russia-Ukraine war as avoidable and pledged to bring it to resolution if elected, the Biden/Harris government  is inclined to perpetuating the war, recently pledging additional $20 billion military package to embattled President Volodymyr  Zelensky of Ukraine.  This runs counter to emergent American mood against avoidable war and its cost to American tax payers. The anti-war voters will be a loss to  Harris. These seemingly little losses of votes for Kamala can become significant  in tight election contests where razor-thin victory vote margins can win bountiful electoral votes. For instance, in the 2008 presidential election between senator John McCain ( Republican ) and senator Barrack Obama ( Democrat ) McCain  narrowly won Arizona state  with just 3, 903 votes out 2,887,725 votes cast  in that election !

TRUMP AND UPSURGE IN VOTER TURNOUT.  Trump’s  foray into  presidential election contest in 2016 as an unconventional outsider, as against the deodorized correctness of professional politicians,  literally took the political Establishment by storm,  and electrifying  the electorate. In the 2016 presidential election between Trump and former U.S. Secretary of State , Hillary Clinton, voter turnout was 136,787,187 ( 59.2%)  as against  129,139,997 ( 58.0%)  in 2012 , an increase  of  7.6 million voters.  By the 2020  election that pitted President Trump against  former Vice President Joe Biden,  the stakes got higher and so was the surge in  voter turnout, with 158,429,631 voters ( 66.8%) casting their ballot , an increase of a record   21.6 million voters over the 2016 turnout !  The turnout promises to be higher again in 2024. 

THE BIG BUCKS FACTOR .  Top billionaires, Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Elon Musk have waded into the presidential contest. Gates and Buffett were one time  the richest men in the world  while Musk is the current richest man in the world.  Bill Gates donated $50 million to a  pro- Harris non profit organisation while Buffett who had endorsed Presidents Barrack Obama and Joe Biden has decided this time  around not to endorse any candidate, which, by inference, meant non support for Kamala Harris. On his part, Musk has not  only donated $75  million in support of a  Political Action Committee (PAC)  engaged in getting out the vote for Trump, particularly in the swing states, he has been actively engaged in political election campaigns with the Republican candidate. 

HARRIS LOSES MAJOR MEDIA ENDORSEMENTS.   Contrary to what has become a contentious media practice of endorsing presidential candidates, owners of major newspapers have stopped planned endorsements of Harris in this election cycle.  These newspapers include The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, USA Today, America’s largest newspaper chain, The Chicago Tribune  and Minnesota  Star Tribune.  Gannett, owners of USA Today, in announcing the stepping down of Harris  endorsement stated  : “ our public service is to provide readers  with facts that matter and the trusted information they need to make informed decisions”. For decades, American media had brazenly violated  media code of ethics  which demands fairness,  accuracy and non partisanship in media content. 

PROGNOSIS .  Kamala Harris brought sunshine charm, infectious laughter and irrepressible energy into the 2024 American presidential election campaigns, that almost rattled Trump., and  which gave her an  initial momentum. However, this momentum  has since waned.  That  former President Obama had to complain that Black American men are not enthusiastic enough about Harris’s presidential bid  is indicative that she may not get the  huge Black American block vote of 87%  given to  Democratic presidential candidate Biden in the 2020 election. Her ardent advocacy for gays and lesbians will be another significant vote loss. During the campaign, Harris could not defend the administration’s performance record on the economy, but would rather launch into what she would do, if elected.  So, her biggest albatross is a national economy that is in the doldrums and which remains a big concern for the electorate who will be inclined to vote for a change in government for a new economic direction.  The omens are, therefore, dicey for Kamala Harris. 

As for Trump, he faces a formidable battle in the gang up of  America’s Political Establishment  - Democrats and Republicans – against his re-election. Former Republican Vice President, Dick Cheney, and his daughter, former Congress woman, Liz Cheney, lead the anti-Trump posse. Trump’s abrasive, and perceived crude manner will alienate votes. Ultimately, though, the parlous state of an inflation-wracked economy under the Biden/Harris administration and a sustained, aggressive grassroots get-out-the-vote mobilization have the prospect of tilting the presidential election outcome in Trump’s favour. This makes Trump the man to beat. 

 

Dr. Bisi Olawunmi, a Senior Lecturer, Department of Mass Communication, Adeleke University, Ede, is former Washington Correspondent of the News Agency of Nigeria ( NAN) and Fellow, Nigerian Guild of Editors ( FNGE ) Email : This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. Phone : 0803364 7571.             

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Professor Godini Gabriel Darah (GG Darah or simply “Comrade”, as we fondly called him) was one of our fire-spitting Marxist lecturers and staff advisers at the then University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University), Ile-Ife aka “Great Ife”. Respect, sir! But how “great” is “Great Ife” today when it does not even rank among the top 10 universities in the country? It seemeth the university authorities have been sleeping and snoring, living in past glory! OAU has repeatedly failed, year-in, year-out, to measure up among the country’s first-tier universities. What’s the matter is, however, a topic for another day!

Comrade Darah’s “Tinubu’s regionalism gamble” is my concern here today. In it, the professor of Oral Literature and Folklore who hails from Delta State displayed the crab mentality that is as intriguing as it is unfortunate. If you put a hundred snails in a container, you will need a strong lid over the container with another heavy metal or stone on top to still find the snails in place the next day. But put a hundred crabs in the same container and leave the top open (with no cover whatsoever), you will find all the crabs intact the next day without any fuss! As one tries to make an escape, the others pull it back! Crabs are a typical demonstration of the “Pull Him Down” syndrome!   

Maybe I should first let you read Professor Darah; when we return, we shall make a few comments. Darah wrote: "Pandef, Pandef, beware of false prophets masquerading in electronic garments. There is sour mutilation of historical facts in the narrative on 'How Tinubu Is Reversing The Damage Ironsi Did To Nigeria' attributed to Reno Omokri.

"During British colonial rule, Regions were created in 1939 and their elected governments were in office from 1951. The Regions were three in number: Eastern, Northern, and Western. There was gross inequality and injustice in the regional system. For example, the territory of the Northern Region was larger than the combined territory of the Eastern and Western Regions.

"This lopsidedness triggered agitations for more political restructuring. Furthermore, hundreds of minority groups were lumped with more populous and hegemonic ethnic groups. The situation in the Northern Region was more bizarre as about 300 ethnic groups were put under the political yoke of the Fulani-controlled Islamic Sokoto Caliphate.

"From the 1940s agitations for more regions or states rattled the colonial regime. The agitation of the oppressed minority groups for autonomy dovetailed into armed uprisings in the Benue-Plateau areas, leading to federal armed campaigns to quell them. At the 1957-58 constitutional conferences in Lagos and London, the demand for the creation of states caused stalemates.

"The British responded by setting up Henry Willink’s commission on the fears of minorities and how to allay them. The commission toured all of Nigeria and received bundles of memoranda from freedom-seeking minorities. The commission’s report did not support creation of new administrative units with the excuse that doing so could derail the march to Nigeria’s independence scheduled for 1960.

"But the agitations continued unabated after independence, culminating in the creation, by plebiscite, of the Midwest in 1963. The emergence of the fourth Region fired more insurgent demands. The military governments from 1966 inherited this unresolved problem. Gen Aguiyi Ironsi’s quibbling approach fuelled more intense agitation. Gen Yakubu Gowon, from the ‘ulltra-minority’ Ngas ethnicity in Plateau province, could not ignore the matter. Thus, on May 27, 1967, he created 12 states, six each in the northern and southern halves of the country...

"Therefore, from 1967, the idiom of federalism shifted from regions to states. There are now 36 states. The 2014 National Confab recommended 18 more in furtherance of a more balanced federal system for the 389 ethnic nationalities in Nigeria. Perhaps, with the exception of the Igbo and Yoruba separatist extremists, the option of returning to regionalism is not on the agenda of the other 387 ethnic nationalities.

"Therefore, President Tinubu is swimming against a raging historical flood with his “panel-beater” method of “smuggling” the issue of regional governance into the national political discourse. His efforts are likely to end up in fiasco because the existing States will not meekly accept the option of “impeachment” and unconstitutional replacement which President Tinubu’s regional gamble portents”. That's GG Sarah's clarion call or battle cry addressed to PANDEF (Pan Niger Delta Forum), which is like the AFENIFERE, OHANEZE, NORTHERN ELDERS FORUM, etc.

It is true there is no standard objectivity since “objectivity” is moderated by the individual’s subjectivity. This was writ large in Professor Darah’s “Tinubu’s regionalism gamble”. The summary is that he does not want a return to regionalism. He is okay with the present 36-State structure that gives the advantage to the North - 19 in the North and 17 in the South. If more States are created “in furtherance of a more balanced federal system for the 389 ethnic nationalities in Nigeria”, Prof. may not object, the clamour that we scale down the cost of governance notwithstanding! 

Funke Egbemode once aptly referred to the States as “begging bowls” that throng Abuja monthly for allocations from the Federation Account. Many of the States as presently constituted are not financially viable. The weight of the cost of governance is killing. Part of the argument - “insurgent demands” to Darah! - for regionalism is not fuelled by those Prof. called “separatist extremists” but by people who feel the country as a whole - all the four Regions - made better progress under the regional system of government in the First Republic and that a return to regionalism would reduce the cost of governance, cut wastages and accelerate the pace of development all over the country.     

There is, therefore, no “sour mutilation of historical facts” in the statement that the four Regions made landmark progress under the regional arrangement of the First Republic. That arrangement was also more “federal” than the present military-imposed 36-State structure that makes a mockery of federalism. Whereas Prof. used regions and states interchangeably, there were no states in Nigeria before the military take-over of 1966; all we knew were regions. And regions and states are not the same thing in the Nigerian context at least.

Now, Prof. was right when he said, “During British colonial rule, Regions were created in 1939 and their elected governments were in office from 1951. The Regions were three in number: Eastern, Northern, and Western. There was gross inequality and injustice in the regional system. For example, the territory of the Northern Region was larger than the combined territory of the Eastern and Western Regions. This lopsidedness triggered agitations for more political restructuring. Furthermore, hundreds of minority groups were lumped with more populous and hegemonic ethnic groups. The situation in the Northern Region was more bizarre as about 300 ethnic groups were put under the political yoke of the Fulani-controlled Islamic Sokoto Caliphate. From the 1940s agitations for more regions or states rattled the colonial regime. The agitation of the oppressed minority groups for autonomy dovetailed into armed uprisings in the Benue-Plateau areas, leading to federal armed campaigns to quell them”.

The “gross inequality and injustice” Darah spoke about were not in regionalism as a system but in the way it was skewed to favour some at the detriment of others. And when the “agitations” this engendered were to be addressed by the coalition government of Nnamdi Azikiwe and Tafawa Balewa in 1963, a new region was neither created out of the Northern Region where there had been armed uprisings nor from the Eastern Region where the Ijaws were becoming restive (witness Isaac Adaka Boro's short-lived revolution that followed); but it was from the relatively more peaceful Western Region that the Mid-west, where Darah hails from, was excised simply to weaken the West and prepare it for take-over by opposition forces, which eventually led to political upheavals in that region and the collapse of the First Republic.

Prof. simply said the Midwest Region was created “by plebiscite” in 1963; why was there no such plebiscite in the two other regions - the North and East - “in furtherance of a more balanced federal system for the 389 ethnic nationalities in Nigeria”? Darah conveniently side-stepped the fact that the creation of the Mid-west Region was, more than anything else, a North/East conspiracy to weaken the Southwest and marginalize the Yoruba in the politics of the First Republic.  

The creation of 12 states on May 27, 1967 by the then military Head of State, Yakubu Gowon, was portrayed by Prof. as a further attempt to address the agitations for a more balanced federal system; also conveniently ignoring the fact that it was a deft military strategy to cut the ground from under the feet of “rebel leader” Emeka Odumegwu Ojukwu and his secessionist agenda, which declaration came three days later on May 30, 1967.

So enamoured is Prof. with state creation that he gloated that “therefore, from 1967, the idiom of federalism shifted from regions to states…” It is not the “idioms of federalism” that shifted, it is federalism itself that gave way to military control and command structure where orders are rammed down the throat of everyone from an omnibus, omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent Centre. What we operate at the moment is not federalism. Examples of federal states are there all over the world for us to compare and contrast with the caricature and contraption that we have here.

Darah said only the Igbo and Yoruba “separatist extremists” still savour the option of returning the country to regionalism while the other 387 nationalities are content with their “begging bowl” status as States. He needs to tell us where and when he conducted his survey or opinion poll! No matter how much we may camouflage or pretend, the words that we wield have a way of creating an expressway into our inner recesses. So the Igbo and Yoruba agitators are not “nationalists” or “freedom fighters”! They are not even ordinary “separatists” but “separatist extremists”! Call them “separatist terrorists” if that suits you better!

I am sure Darah himself qualified as an “extremist” in his days at Ife, if I remember correctly! Times and tides have changed, though! Comrade’s language today is that of the Establishment. However, there is nothing wrong in being an extremist or separatist. History is replete with extremists who have changed the course of history. Darah taught his students some of those extremists at Ife. Chairman Mao, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Karl Marx, Engels, Lenin, Cabral and a host of others. For decades, Nelson Mandela and his comrades were branded as extremists and terrorists. So also were Samora Machel, Robert Mugabe and a host of others. To be decorated with the badge of extremism like these our illustrious forebears is, therefore, an honour and not a reproach.

The crab mentality demonstrated by Darah is prevalent among the country’s ethnic minorities. Nigeria appears as their only sure bet. Can they stand or weather it alone? Do they have all it takes? What replaces for them the nebulous prestige of coming from the “Giant of Africa”? So, any ethnic group that exudes the confidence to run solo must be shot down. Whereas that is understandable, it is not a solution. Self-determination is a right recognised by the UN charter. Some have gone ahead. Others will surely follow. No crab will hold the Igbo and Yoruba down forever! 

 

Given the failure of governance so far in the Nigerian State, public analysts are wont to be seen as anti - government. In the circumstance, it's important that once - in - a - while little steps of sanity in the system are acknowledged and encouraged. We therefore applaud the  House of Representatives for it's rejection, last week, of an attempt to dismantle the religious neutrality of Nigeria's Constitution.

On Thursday, October 24, the media reported that a member of the House of Representatives, Hon Aliyu Misau from Bauchi State introduced a constitutional amendment bill in the House seeking to elevate Islamic law in the Constitution. The bill sought to alter Sections 24, 262, 277 and 288 of the 1999 Constitution by deleting the qualification "personal" to all references to Islamic law. Explaining the need for broader recognition of Islamic legal system, Misau argued that the "Constitution did not envisage the dynamism and development that may come into the country" citing the advent of Jaiz Bank as Islamic financial institution, in 2003. He therefore called for accommodation of Islamic commercial law and Islamic international law. He was supported by Abdul Hakeem Ado (Kano State), Saidu Abdullahi (Niger State), and Ahmed Satomi (Borno State).

Leading the front against the bill were Hon Solomon Bob (Rivers State) Bamidele Salam (Osun State), Jonathan Gaza (Nasarawa State), Ademorin Kuye (Lagos State) and Awaji - Inombek Abiante (Rivers State). Hon Bamidele Salam's caution on the secular status of the Nigerian State captured the thrust of opposition to the bill. Mercifully, the vexatious bill was thrown out after the first reading in a voice vote verdict.

The lawmakers who defended the multi religious character of the Nigerian State deserve commendation. They are to be applauded for standing up for the equality of religious faiths before the law. Section 10 of the 1999 Constitution states that the "government of the Federation or of a State shall not adopt any religion as State religion. By the letters and spirit of Section 10 of the Constitution, internal religious policies should not intrude in the common sphere of government and administration. No religion should be accorded such recognition as to dominate the public estate. And no religion should be favoured or elevated by singling it out for special treatment. 

In 2008, the Anglican Diocese of Awka filed application with the National Universities Commission for registration of Saint Paul University, Awka. The NUC approved the name of the institution as Paul University, pointing out that it's guidelines prohibits the use of religious markers in Nigeria's university system. To date, many Church - sponsored universities suffer the identity loss brought about by this policy of anonymity. And yet, Christianity is a way of life for about half of Nigeria's population. If Christian identity cannot be established in the name of universities and religious profession is also  deliberately omitted in Nigeria's census forms, on what superior grounds can extension of the Islamic legal system in the Constitution be founded?

I am impressed by the alertness of Hon Bob Solomon and his group. They must have seen through the veil with which the proposed amendment bill was draped. It's difficult to believe that in the emergency situation Nigeria's economic woes have forced on majority of the population, any serious - minded legislator will consider advocacy for personal religious interests on floor of the National Assembly, time well spent. How could anyone, of all the suffocating hardships Nigerians are contending with, be concerned with merely removing the word "personal" from constitutional references to Islamic law? Ordinarily, no one would, except where there's a deeper mix. And in the instant matter, there is.

Hon Aliyu Misau knows that some of us know where his eyes are set. The lawmakers who objected to his bill know the end game of Misau's harmless - looking bill, even if for political correctness, they chose not to specifically pronounce on it. Perhaps, more importantly, the proponents of the bill consider that they cannot accomplish their mission in one fell swoop. It's a long - term project. Because of the difficulties involved, the route of achieving one item at a time is also being explored. The agenda of Sharia has been on for a long time. And efforts at it will obviously continue. It takes no prescience to predict that this rejected bill will be represented in the National Assembly in the foreseeable future with slight modifications.

I doubt if there are any other issues that have generated as much divisiveness in the Nigerian polity as the quest for introduction of Sharia. This singular subject produced stalemates at the 1978, 1989 and 1994 constitutional conferences. At each juncture, it took the dictatorial power of military rule to force it's constitutional tolerance. But for the imposition of the military, Sharia would not have a mention at all in our Constitution.  Sadly, since the collapse of the First Republic, we have not had a people's Constitution, with wide input by civil society; subsequently ratified in a referendum.

In 1986, Nigerians were jolted with news of the country's sudden membership of Organisation of Islamic Countries, as the body was then called. Notwithstanding that Nigeria was under military rule at the time, the development  provoked outrage among non - Muslim population. The sense of betrayal generated by the secret admission heightened religious consciousness to the extent that top government positions were subsequently subjected to data analysis of their occupants' religion. Asked about the decision to join OIC at a public event at the time, then Chief of General Staff, Ebitu Ukiwe, had turned to the Chief of Air Staff, Ibrahim Alfa, seated next to him as he shrugged off the responsibility: "Was there any time we discussed the OIC at the SMC?" he asked. Many believed this was one of the reasons for Ukiwe's unceremonious removal as CGS.

Recently, we witnessed pitched battles in some States where Muslim students were insisting on wearing hijab in Christian - based secondary schools. The 2023 presidential election further showed how deep religious sensibilities run in Nigeria. APC's muslim - muslim ticket was viewed as disregard for Nigeria's Christian community. The perceived humiliation had the effect of mobilising support for Labour Party's Peter Obi as a counter force to religious marginalisation. It's also instructive that the candidates won majorly in areas associated with their religions.

 These should be sobering reality for those contemplating religious supremacy under whatever guise. It will not work. Aside the demand for equity, social stability and fair play, Sharia is not compatible with our common laws. The philosophies that underpin them are markedly different.

 

 

Afuba is Director, Public Administration Circle, Awka.

 

 

 

In an article titled "Is Nigeria fuelling Israel’s genocide against Palestinians?" which was published in Businessday on October 30th 2024, one Suraya Dadoo, who wrote in from South Africa, opened his contribution by quoting our Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs, my friend and brother, Ambassador Yusuf Tuggar who he attributed the following words to. 

“There is no justification for the carnage that is going on in Gaza… the complete disregard for the proportionality of force that is being meted out on innocent civilians. This carnage is completely out of hand and totally unacceptable. There is no way to explain the double standards; it has to stop”.

He went further by quoting our nation's number two citizen, Vice President Kashim Shettima's words at the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in September where he said the following.

“Justice is antithetical to revenge… Freedom is an inalienable right and a natural entitlement that cannot be denied to any person. The Palestinian people deserve their independence.”

Both the Minister and the Vice President have done us proud with their courageous words and bold stand and it is a reflection of the fact that the Tinubu administration represents the thinking and has expressed the sentiments of the overwhelming majority of Nigerians and have opted to tread the right path when it comes to the tragic events in Gaza and the pitiful plight of the Palestinian people. 

Dadoo went further by writing the following, 

"The Nigerian government has consistently condemned Israel’s military occupation of Palestine and has been particularly outspoken against Israel since October 7. Historically, Nigeria has been a strong supporter of the Palestinian struggle for liberation, and Nigeria was central in efforts to ensure that Israel was not granted observer status at the African Union (AU). According to sources who were at the October 2021 meeting of the AU executive council attended by Africa’s foreign ministers in the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, Nigeria’s then Foreign Minister Geoffrey Onyeama took the lead in objecting to Israel’s accreditation and urged other member states to do the same".

Again this is comforting but he follows it by getting to the crux of his essay and the heart of the matter by dropping the following clanger. He wrote, "While the Nigerian government has strongly condemned Israel’s military onslaught on Gaza it also stands accused of fuelling the Israeli war machine that had already killed, at the time of writing, more than 40,000 Palestinians through direct violence and bombing".

To substantiate his point he wrote, "According to a recently released report titled “Behind the Barrel: New Insights into the Countries and Companies Behind Israel’s Fuel Supply,” Nigeria accounts for 9 percent of the total crude oil supplied to Israel between October 21, 2023, and July 12, 2024. Researchers analysed satellite imagery, ship positions, shipping logs, commodity trade flows, information from port authorities, and financial and media reports to track 65 oil and fuel shipments to Israel in that period".

He concludes by alleging that, "Over 133 kilotons of Nigerian crude were delivered to Israel from Chevron, Eni, Exxon, Shell, and TotalEnergies. Gabonese crude accounted for 22 percent, and the Republic of the Congo supplied 6 percent, but it is Nigeria’s contribution that has raised eyebrows given the country’s vocal criticism of Israel".

Dodoo's allegation, if proven to be true, is deeply troubling and needs to be taken very seriously indeed lest we leave ourselves open to his grave charge of complicity in the genocide that is being unleashed on Gaza by the Zionists.

The matter can be resolved by simply banning all crude oil shipments from Nigeria to Israel.

I hereby call on our President, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, to do precisely that and take an even stronger stance against the Zionists by banning all arms purchases from them and terminating any military and/or intelligence advice or services that the Israelis are offering or providing us with. 

If he could find the courage to implement a number of bold and much needed fiscal, economic and constitutional reforms and policies such as the removal of the oil subsidy, the floating of the naira, the establishment of autonomy for the local government areas, the implementation of the students loan fund, the numerous tax reforms and most important of all the refusal to go to war against Niger Republic despite the enormous pressure that the western powers, led by France and the United States of America, put on him to do so earlier this year, he can certainly muster same to kick the Zionists out of Nigeria, nullify their pervasive influence in our country and sub-region and sever all trade, economic and diplomatic ties and relations with them.

General Yakubu Gowon, our reverred former Head of State, did this in 1973 when he was in power and as Chairman of the then OAU (AU) in order to punish the Jewish State for its attack on the Palestinians during the Yom Kippur War. 

For a number of years before then and specifically during our three year civil war Gowon had viewed Israel with much distrust and suspicion given the covert support she gave to the Biafran secessionists and her complicity in the attempt to dismember and break up our beloved country.

However the straw did not break the camels back until 1973 after which the final break took place and diplomatic relations between our two countries were not restored until September 1992 by the then Head of State General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida.

I am constrained to say that now is the time to break diplomatic ties with Israel again. 

This is the right and proper thing to do in the light of their insatiable compulsion and appetite for mass murder, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide and given their insane and psychotic disposition for murdering helpless and defenceless women and children and for killing babies. 

Again this is the right and proper thing to do given the fact that they have not only illegally occupied the land of the Palestinian people for over 76 years and slaughtered and incarcerated millions of them but they have also unleashed what can best be described as the second holocaust against them over the last one year killing over 60,000 in Gaza alone and thousands more in the West Bank, Lebanon and Syria! 

If the world could go to war with Nazi Germany in 1936 as a consequence of the first holocaust every civilised nation ought to, at the very least, be able to break diplomatic ties with Zionist Israel as a consequence of the second.

Morality, decency and justice demands no less and those nations that insist on applauding the atrocities of the Jewish state and selling weapons of mass destruction to her are not only complicit in her war crimes but are also from the pit of hell and in the service of shaitan.

The Holy Bible says there can be no fellowship between light and darkness. It says we must either choose God or Belial.

It also compels us to resist evil and to fight for the weak, the poor, the vulnerable and the oppressed.

The Holy Koran does the same and is emphatic on the importance of justice for all and support for the less privileged and the vulnerable. 

Nigeria can and must NEVER be seen to be complicit in the bestial barbarity that is going on in Gaza or to have relations with the beasts that have relentlessly unleashed it.

Though we have many challenges, ours is a nation of decent, God-fearing, just and right-thinking people who have a long history of standing for the oppressed all over Africa and contributing to the efforts of numerous liberation struggles.

Let us prove to the world once again that that is who and what we are by openly and loudly challenging the barbarity, lunacy and thuggery of the State of Israel at the International Court of Justice, the International Criminal Court, the United Nations, the African Union and all other relevant fora and calling her out for her continuous violations of international law, her disdain for an international rules-based system and her racist, fascist and ethnocentric disposition.

Let us expose her contempt for humanity and human life, her total and complete adoption, espousal and implemention of apartheid as a fundamental principle and cardinal policy in her system of Government and her religious fanatacism and proselytising bigotry.

Let us vigorously and aggressively resist her hatred for Arabs and Africans, her appauling treatment of Christians and Muslims, her rejection of the two-state solution, her desire to ethnically cleanse, wipe out and totally eradicate and eliminate the Palestinian race, her intention to establish a 'Greater Israel' whose borders would stretch from Egypt to Iran and her heinous crimes and unspeakable atrocities in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon.

These are concrete and cogent steps that we as a people and nation can take to contribute our quota to the collective fight against the tyranny and oppression of the Zionists and I believe that we are still big and strong enough to take them.

May God guide and protect us in this noble endeavour and may history and posterity be kind to us. 

 

(Chief Femi Fani-Kayode, is the Sadaukin Shinkafi, a former Minister of Aviation and a former Minister of Culture and Tourism of Nigeria)

 

 

 

In the world of Nigerian politics, party loyalty has often been considered an unspoken rule. When a prominent politician like Barrister Nyesom Wike, a stalwart of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP), appears to be playing on both sides, straddling both PDP’s legacy and a prominent role within the All Progressives Congress (APC)-led government, the situation calls for scrutiny. For years, Wike championed the importance of party loyalty, decrying cross-party affiliations. Yet today, he occupies a ministerial position under the APC-led administration while maintaining roots within the PDP, casting serious doubts on his previously firm stance. This double standard not only reflects on Wike's political journey but also holds a mirror to broader issues within Nigeria’s political landscape. 

Wike has never been shy about his views on political loyalty. In his years as governor and a leading figure within the PDP, he criticized politicians who switched allegiances for personal gain, asserting that politicians should stand by their parties regardless of the challenges. His speeches from past forums are a testament to his passion for maintaining party loyalty, wherein he argued that leaders should make decisions that align with their party’s vision and should not serve personal interests at the expense of integrity. This standpoint resonated with many Nigerians who saw him as a rare politician committed to a cause larger than himself.

However, Wike’s recent move to accept a ministerial position within an APC-led administration has left many Nigerians questioning his principles. By accepting this role while maintaining ties with the PDP, he seems to be abandoning his long-held position that politicians should be unwaveringly loyal to one party. Wike’s actions raise the question: Can politicians uphold the integrity of the parties they represent while actively serving the interests of another?

Wike’s dual allegiance has implications that extend far beyond his own career. In a political system where party lines should represent ideological and policy differences, such mixed signals from a high-profile figure only blur these distinctions, leaving Nigerian voters disillusioned. If a prominent political figure can alternate between affiliations so freely, it sends the message that the platforms, values, and promises of Nigeria’s political parties are secondary to individual advancement.

This practice further complicates the task of building a solid democratic framework in Nigeria, where parties should ideally be driven by consistent philosophies and principles. The fact that Wike has positioned himself as a member of both parties dilutes the essence of party loyalty and integrity. How can voters believe in a political system when even senior leaders, who once advocated for party loyalty, freely shift alliances without explanation?

To extend the football analogy: In a real-world sports team, loyalty is highly valued because it binds players to a collective purpose, instilling in them a sense of shared identity. Imagine if Lionel Messi donned the jersey of both Barcelona and PSG on the same match day. Such a spectacle would not only disorient fans but erode the competitive spirit of the game. Wike’s recent moves similarly disorient the political “fans”, the Nigerian electorate, who deserve leaders who represent clear, consistent values.

Wike’s stance exposes a concerning double standard. Over the years, he has castigated others for crossing party lines, creating a public image of steadfast loyalty. This reputation, however, is now at odds with his current political choices. While some may argue that his decision to accept the ministerial role in the APC government is a strategic move to secure influence for his home state, this explanation still conflicts with his earlier advocacy. If anything, his decision highlights an element of political expediency that belies his past image.

In a democracy, politicians should be held to account for their words and actions, and consistency is a core aspect of public trust. A shift in allegiance, especially at the ministerial level, should come with a clear rationale to the public that previously supported Wike on the basis of his strong words on loyalty. Leaders cannot build credibility if they abandon their principles when it is convenient. For Nigerian democracy to flourish, the actions of political leaders should align with their stated beliefs, lest the public begin to view all political commitments as hollow.

Wike’s move contributes to the erosion of distinct party identities, which has plagued Nigerian politics for years. In countries with mature democracies, political parties are defined by core values and policies. Members of these parties are expected to embody and promote these ideals consistently. The Nigerian experience, however, is one where ideology often takes a backseat to personal gain. Party switches are commonplace, and alliances shift based on who is in power rather than on shared beliefs or goals.

By playing both sides, Wike risks furthering the perception that Nigeria’s political parties are little more than vehicles for power. This is detrimental to the entire democratic structure. Without clear party distinctions, voters are left with blurred choices and a weakened ability to hold leaders accountable. Wike’s position exemplifies this problem, as he appears to wear the “jerseys” of both parties, diluting the meaning of each and making it harder for the public to place their trust in either.

For Nigerian democracy to progress, its leaders must embrace ideological clarity and respect the principles they claim to uphold. Leaders like Wike, who once advocated for steadfast loyalty, should serve as role models. When politicians demonstrate consistency, voters can make informed choices based on clear differences in policy and philosophy. If Wike is no longer aligned with the PDP’s vision, he should state as much openly and embrace his new political path fully.

The credibility of Nigeria’s political system rests on the transparency and integrity of its leaders. By openly affiliating with both parties, Wike sets a dangerous precedent, one that suggests party allegiance is only necessary until a more beneficial offer comes along. Such a trend threatens to undermine voter confidence, especially among young Nigerians, who may see this as further evidence of a broken system.

Wike’s recent political choices bring to light the urgent need for Nigerian politicians to choose a side and stick with it. His dual loyalty raises questions about the nature of political commitment in Nigeria, and if leaders like him can shift allegiances without consequence, it sets a damaging example for others to follow.

As Nigerian politics continues to evolve, the electorate deserves leaders who stand by their convictions, even when it is inconvenient. If political parties are to serve their purpose as vehicles of representation and vision, their members must abide by the commitments they make. Otherwise, the Nigerian people are left with parties that are only as loyal as their members’ personal interests allow. 

Just as in a football game, where a player’s jersey symbolizes their team loyalty, Wike must remember the significance of his political “jersey.” For the sake of Nigerian democracy, he should embrace one party and give it his full allegiance, anything less is a betrayal of the values he once championed.

 

 

Minister of works Dave Umahi has raised an alarm over defective bridges in the country.

He said they may collapse if the federal government fails to address their deteriorating state, having been built over 53 years ago.

Umahi spoke yesterday while inspecting projects in Lagos where he was joined by the National Assembly Joint Committee Members on Works.

He highlighted the need for urgent intervention to rehabilitate defective bridges while advocating for the declaration of state of emergency on the Third Mainland and Carter bridge axis to fast-track essential underwater repairs to prevent further deterioration of road and marine infrastructure.

He warned on the huge financial and safety risks posed by continued delay of rehabilitation and repairs, adding that delay to take quick actions would cost the federal government over N30 trillion to rebuild Carter and Third Mainland Bridges.

Umahi also recommended swift repair of national bridges along geopolitical zones which he said would cost N341 billion to avoid looming disasters.

He said to avert catastrophe, N341 billion would be needed for repair of bridges nationwide.

Umahi further pointed out that the reinforcement of chlorination, carbonisation and marine attacks on the piles of the bridge had further weakened the structural elements of the bridges even as he stressed that illegal mining activities and excavation of sands along the shorelines had also paved way for the deterioration of the piles and pier caps.

He pointed out that the deterioration of the bridges’ pillars was due to illegal sand mining, natural underwater currents, and the rusting of the steel casings.

“When you construct shorelines with steel, over the years there will be attacks from water leading to carbonization and chlorination of critical infrastructure,” he added.

In his remarks, the chairman of the Joint National Assembly Committee on Works, Sen. Barinada Mpigi, applauded Umahi’s efforts to engage with the Senate House Committee on Works to tackle infrastructure deficit in the country.

He highlighted the significant financial burden that would fall on the federal government for the reconstruction of the Third Mainland and Carter bridges if they do not take swift action to rehabilitate the bridge.

Mpigi acknowledged the National Assembly’s readiness to back the Works Minister in declaring a state of emergency for the two bridges in Lagos.

Mpigi called for a state of emergency on the Carter and Third Mainland Bridge, adding that it was of urgent public importance.

[Leadership]

Guinea’s coup leader, Mamadi Doumbouya, has promoted himself to the rank of Army General as the West African country marked the creation of its armed forces.

Doumbouya, 43, seized power in September 2021 by overthrowing former president Alpha Conde who had placed the then-colonel in charge of an elite force tasked with protecting him.

AFP reports that in a decree on Friday evening, Doumbouya — whose supporters have urged him to run for president when the junta does cede the reins — was also awarded the Grand Cross of the National Order of the Colatier, the country’s highest honour.

This was for “his constant efforts to promote social cohesion and cooperation between peoples”.

Doumbouya is one of several officers who have seized power in West Africa since 2020, along with fellow military leaders in Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger.

He has presided over an ongoing crackdown on dissent, with many opposition leaders detained, brought before the courts or forced into exile.

AFP

The rich also cry. I have seen wealthy and successful people break down in tears and despondency. You would think that some people have everything made in their favour; the sun smiles at everything that they do. The gods are queuing to crack the rich man’s kernels lest he bites his tongue while attempting the simple task.

Until very recently, Aliko was a synonym for good luck while Dangote could be used interchangeably with the word, wealth. Every Nigerian government, military or civilian, pampered the cement mogul. The Kano lad who rose from anonymity to become Africa’s richest businessman has never failed to fascinate, not just with his famed humility but also with his ability to empathise with the lower cadres of society and fund causes designed to uplift the economically marginalised.

I do not delude myself for a minute that Aliko Dangote is a saint. That is not a quality required of businessmen. I won’t yoke any billionaire with that additional burden. But I can’t describe him as a sinner either, because I don’t have any evidence to that effect. I do, however, have evidence that the man is a patriot, all things considered. It takes somebody who loves his country to invest the bulk of his vast wealth in the country of his birth when those funds could have been working for him in more predictable capitalist climes.

Given what the billionaire has gone through since it became apparent that his petroleum refinery was coming on stream, I often wonder what we would be telling budding investors who are watching the disgraceful drama about patriotism and investing at home. If Dangote could be treated as shabbily as he has been treated (that’s the consensus among Nigerians on social media) what hope does a less connected mortal have?

Doubtful ‘Experts’

The first shock was delivered by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL). Then followed other players in the industry. Suddenly, the same “experts” who had told us that most of our problems would be solved with the coming on stream of the Dangote Refinery, are now saying that Dangote is operating a monopoly. The same people who could not operate the government’s refineries successfully in spite of trillions of Naira thrown at the problem are now trying to teach Dangote how to operate his refinery and how to price his products.

I became suspicious of the sudden pretensions of patriotism by petrol retailers and their accomplices at the NNPCL who were presiding over the inflated figures of local consumption in the days of “subsidy-gate”. Now that we are likely to know the exact quantity of petroleum products locally consumed, the retailers have suddenly put on the garb of our defenders against high prices. When the going was bad, they fleeced us. Now, with a private refinery, they still want to determine the price. Dangote has 500 million litres of products sitting in the belly of his storage tanks while the retailers are mounting a strident media campaign.

With defenders like these retailers, we don’t need leeches. We may not be “experts” but we are not as dumb as some of them think we are.

My worry about the ongoing petroleum roulette is its implications for the future. If Dangote’s refinery falters on account of a perceived gang-up, you can kiss tomorrow’s potential mega investments goodbye. Already, Dangote has announced that he is no longer proceeding with an investment into steel production in Nigeria due to allegations that he is seeking to be a monopoly.

When the stories of these times are told, would it then be said that progress was stultified by the choice of the wrong scapegoat?

History was made yesterday as the United Kingdom’s Conservative Party announced the election of Kemi Badenoch as its leader ahead of her closest rival, Robert Jenrick.
Badenoch, who received 53,806 votes to defeat Robert Jenrick who got 41,388, succeeds Rishi Sunak as leader of the opposition party.

The former British Business Secretary is the first black woman to lead a major political party in the UK and takes charge of a Conservative Party reeling from its worst-ever election defeat.
Born in Wimbledon, London, on January 2, 1980, to Nigerian parents, she spent her childhood in Lagos and the United States until she returned to the UK at the age of 16.

Badenoch is also the first Black woman to head a party that has had three other female leaders – Margaret Thatcher, Theresa May, and Liz Truss.  
During her campaign, Badenoch pledged to return the Conservatives to “first principles” and launch a series of reviews in the coming months to shape a new policy platform.
The North West Essex MP is also the sixth Tory leader in less than eight and a half years and faces the challenge of uniting a fractured party.

“It is the most enormous honour to be elected to this role, to lead the party that I love, the party that has given me so much,” a smiling Badenoch said to a group of Conservative Party members after being announced the winner.
“I hope that I will be able to repay that debt,” she added.
The Labour Party’s landslide victory gave it a huge majority in Parliament and the Tories face at least four years in opposition before the next election is due.

However, James Cleverly revealed the day before the results that he would be returning to the backbenches.
Badenoch has vowed to rebuild the Tory Party on more authentically conservative foundations, saying her training as a computer engineer had taught her how to fix problems.
She spoke often of “first principles” like freedom and individual responsibility.
And she has not hesitated to wade into thorny issues like transgender rights or Britain’s colonial legacy, deploring “woke” ideology and “nasty identity politics.”

Despite the challenges, Badenoch’s no-nonsense approach has earned her a loyal base among the Conservatives.
Known for her outspoken positions on identity politics and her desire to reduce state influence, she appeals to a faction within the party that believes a decisive rightward turn is necessary to reconnect with disillusioned voters.
She has a history of tense interactions with media figures, celebrities, and even some government officials during her time as a trade minister, but this has only bolstered her support among members who are wary of institutional and media influences.

“The first black leader of a Westminster party is a proud moment for our country.
“I look forward to working with you and your party in the interests of the British people.”
Ellie Reeves, who is chair of the Labour Party, delivered a more political attack: “It’s been a summer of yet more Conservative chaos and division.

“They could have spent the past four months listening to the public, taking responsibility for the mess they made, and changing their party.
“Instead, Kemi Badenoch’s election as leader shows they’re incapable of change.
“Meanwhile, the Labour Government is getting on with fixing the foundations of our economy and cleaning up the mess the Tories left behind.”

The combative former equalities minister now faces the daunting task of reuniting a divided and weakened party that was emphatically ousted from power in July after 14 years in charge.
Badenoch will become the official leader of the opposition and face off against Labour’s Starmer in the House of Commons every Wednesday for the traditional Prime Minister’s Questions.
However, she will be leading a much-reduced cohort of Tory MPs in the chamber following the party’s dismal election showing.

She describes herself as a straight-talker, a trait that has caused controversy on the campaign trail.
When addressing immigration, Badenoch said that “not all cultures are equally valid” when deciding who should be allowed to live in the UK.
She was widely criticised after suggesting that statutory maternity pay on small businesses was “excessive” and sparked a further furore when she joked that up to 10 per cent of Britain’s half a million civil servants were so bad that they “should be in prison.”