The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) is set to sack top management staff who have less than 15 months to retire from the national oil company.

The development is coming days after the oil company announced the removal and replacement of three of the its Executive Vice Presidents (EVPs).

Those impacted by the previous shakeup included Abdulkabir Ahmed, who was hitherto in charge of gas, power and new energies; Adokiye Tombomieye, who headed the upstream segment as well as Adeyemi Adetunji, who was in charge of the downstream.

They were replaced by Olalekan Ogunleye as EVP gas, power and new energies; Oritsemeyiwa Eyesan for the company’s upstream operations, while Adedapo Segun took charge of the downstream.

In a brief statement Tuesday morning, the NNPC stated that the new reshuffling was in line with its aspiration to rejuvenate its workforce.

“In our bid to pursue effective organisational renewal to support the delivery of our strategic business objectives, it has become imperative to rejuvenate our workforce.

“Consequently, in addition to the recent exit of three executive vice presidents, other management staff with less than 15 months to statutory retirement will be exiting the company effective 19th September 2023,” the statement said.

The NNPC noted that the move was in line with its commitment to scale up its capabilities through targeted talent management and equal opportunity for all Nigerians.

A review of global oil prices on Tuesday, September 19 via Oil Price showed that Brent crude was $95.06 per barrel as of 5:36 AM, GMT+1.

The rise in oil prices is due to several factors: supply constraints following the decision by Saudi Arabia and Russia to tighten their crude oil production till the end of 2023, subject to monthly reviews. 

Also, China’s economy is showing signs of a comeback from its downturn as economic stimulus is being rolled out by the government and market experts believe that this will increase oil demand in the country, contributing to a rise in crude prices.  

In a whirlwind of market dynamics, the Nigerian crude Qua Iboe benchmark saw a surge to $100 per barrel on Monday, only to show a slight dip to $98.33 per barrel early on Tuesday.

Concurrently, the West Texas Intermediate held its ground at $92.41 per barrel, portraying a fluctuating yet substantial oil market. 

Amidst this turbulence, the International Energy Agency (IEA) recently asserted that the pinnacle of oil demand is on the horizon. However, the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) responded to this prognosis. 

Adding a global perspective to the discourse, Amin Nasser, the President and Chief Executive Officer of Saudi Aramco, delivered a compelling address during the World Petroleum Congress in Alberta, Canada.

He emphasized the peril of swiftly phasing out conventional energy sources, urging for a cautious approach.  

Nasser stressed that the ongoing transition is causing profound confusion across energy-dependent industries and leaving long-term planners and investors at a crossroads.

He advocated for a strategic scale-up of technology to capture carbon emissions, emphasizing the need for a synchronized effort by governments and companies.  

What does this mean for Nigeria? 

The Nigerian oil industry grapples with the thorny issue of crude oil theft, rendering the prospect of reaping profits from the recent surge in global crude prices a distant dream.

The production figures from August 2023, standing at 1.1 million barrels per day (excluding condensate production), underscore the severity of this challenge. 

On the home front, Nigerians must brace themselves for a potential surge in petrol pump prices if the current rally in global crude prices persists.

Regrettably, viable alternatives, such as compressed natural gas (CNG) recently greenlit by the Tinubu administration, won’t be accessible until 2024.  

Furthermore, the eagerly anticipated rehabilitation of local refineries—Port Harcourt, Kaduna, and Warri—remains a promise slated for 2024.

To exacerbate the situation, the commencement of operations at the Dangote refinery, initially projected for the July-August timeframe, remains pending.  

Consequently, should the rally persist and marketers opt to adjust petrol pump prices in response to market dynamics, Nigerian consumers will find themselves in an unfavourable position with limited options for respite. The road ahead demands strategic foresight and proactive measures to mitigate the potential impact of this volatile market landscape. 

[Nairametrics]

The partial demolition of Datkem Plaza, a 5-storey shopping complex owned by the family of the former governor of Ogun state, Gbenga Daniel, has raised much dust in the state. Although the government of Prince Dapo Abiodun has gone to great length to state the facts behind the demolition and how it is about law, order and public safety, the former governor and his associates have been relentless in presenting the matter as an act of political vendetta.

The demolition which occurred last Sunday, brings to the fore the soured relationship between the two leaders; more importantly, it goes to show the imprudence of the former governor who now represents Ogun Central in the Nigerian Senate. For a man who had a running battle with his successor in office, Ibikunle Amosun, over a similar issue of unapproved construction, Daniel may well be thinking of himself as one VIP that is above the law.

Senator Gbenga Daniel

His Project Manager, Engr Olusegun Lawal, made light weather of the matter when he said the complex has no single structural defect and that the Ogun State government’s complaints about the building only bothered on mundane issues like lack of enough parking space, inadequate muster point and inadequate airspace. The general impression he created is that the government acted arbitrarily, with only three days notice before the demolition.

Going by facts that have since come to the fore, however, Lawal’s disclosure is obviously far from the truth: when the state government moved to forcefully stop further development of Datkem Plaza in Ijebu-Ode last Sunday, it was after 12 months of notices and orders that were ignored.

The Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Physical Planning and Urban Development, Engr. Olayiwola Abiodun, put the matter in clearer perspective. A building of that magnitude without a full government approval and without an approved stage certification – typically provided at each stage of development – is obviously an illegal structure. And demolition took place after more than a whole year during which the developer was served abatement, contravention, stop work and demolition notices between May and October 2022, all of which were ignored.

It is the height of impunity if indeed DATKEM had submitted an application for an office building in 2009 with registration number CB/05/299/2009 and had gone ahead to deviate from the stated parameters by constructing instead, a building that did not conform with the plan granted. At a time the public is concerned about the frequent incidents of building collapse which have claimed hundreds of lives and caused incalculable damages over the years, the building was allegedly modified and enlarged with an additional storey building at the back, without authorization.

The question is: why does Distinguished Senator Gbenga Daniel believe he is above the law? At a time many buildings whose construction and approval processes circumvent due process have collapsed, there is no excuse for government at any level to turn a blind eye to such flagrant abuses. Earlier in the year, the Building Collapse Prevention Guild indicated that over 271 buildings collapsed in the last 10 years alone, claiming as many as 531 lives as the menace of crumbling structures continues to plague Nigeria’s building industry. Senator Daniel who is an engineer himself, should know the consequences of such impunity. Why then would his company ignore legitimate orders meant to safeguard the public who invariably suffer the devastating effects of building collapses and other acts that accompany non-compliance with building and urban development regulations?

Datkem Plaza

Every right thinking person who has witnessed the effects of building collapse and the cost it imposes on the government and the people must commend the Ogun State government for the proactive action which is in line with the laws of the state. No responsible government that accounts to its citizens will fold its arms and watch a developer treat its legitimate orders pertaining to building codes with such brazen contempt.

The allegation that Governor Abiodun – rather than acting to prevent an unsavoury development and save lives – is on a political witch-hunt, raises other issues of their own. Daniel must have become so self-conceited that he has forgotten so soon that it was the same Dapo Abiodun who extricated him from a similar web during the tenure of Governor Ibikunle Amosun. Another property in Abeokuta, the state capital, belonging to him had got entangled in an alleged non-approval and was sealed by the state government. It had remained sealed and marked for demolition but was only spared following the direct intervention of Abiodun.

Immediately he assumed duty in 2019 as Ogun State governor, Abiodun not only allowed Daniel to move back to site, he facilitated the completion of that project despite different court actions against it and despite charges by the EFCC hanging around the project. Today, the property is the popular Conference Hotel in Abeokuta which Abiodun himself graciously commissioned alongside the former vice president, Prof. Yemi Osinbajo.

It is anybody’s guess why a former governor and a serving Senator would always be found on the other side of the law, especially when his personal or family projects, like Datkem Plaza, are concerned. To now accuse the governor who previously saved his property from demolition of victimization and political vendetta is uncharitable, to say the least.

As the 78th United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) begins on Tuesday, 19th September, leaders from around the world will gather in New York City for a crucial General Debate. This moment is historic as it signifies the halfway point in the world's collective pursuit of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which were established in 2015 to guide the global development agenda after the expiration of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs).

During this assembly, leaders will share their perspectives and lay out their respective priorities for the next year. While much of the discussion will revolve around the progress that has been made towards the attainment of the 2030 SDGs deadline, a sobering concern will loom on the sidelines of the 78th Session – namely, the state of democracy in Africa.

To put this in context, from the coup in Niger Republic in July to another in Gabon in August, to the disputed coup report in the Republic of the Congo just yesterday — two days before the commencement of the General Assembly — since 2020, Central and Western Africa have witnessed a series of military interventions that have led to the subversion of democracy. This is why, undoubtedly, on the sidelines of the General Assembly, African leaders will receive a barrage of questions about the state of democracy on the continent.

As President Bola Ahmed Tinubu prepares to deliver his inaugural address at this global gathering, which is expected to have nearly 150 world leaders from the 193 UN member states in attendance this year, given the turmoil on the continent, Nigeria has a unique opportunity to re-establish our leadership in Africa.

Taking a cue from 'From Soft Life to Soft Power,' Chukwudi Ukonne's article in The Republic on Nigeria's regional and global influence, if we examine what Nigeria brings to the table in the context of our relationship with the rest of the world, we have a remarkable set of assets that include: the continent's largest economy, one of Africa's top four militaries, abundant natural resources, and a history of national political stability since returning to democracy in 1999. These strengths put us in a unique position to present a fresh vision of African leadership.

Furthermore, from the cultural impact of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s books; to Davido having a FIFA World Cup single; to Wizkid and Burna Boy winning Grammys; to one of the newer kids on the block, Rema, reaching 1 billion streams on Spotify; all the way to Nollywood becoming the fastest-growing film industry in the world, our creative industry has ignited a cultural renaissance that continues to export our positive national values beyond our borders.

In addition to this, our diaspora population, with their remarkable achievements globally, and our substantial population that has the potential to influence continental trade—especially with the adoption of the African Continental Free Trade Agreement (AfCFTA)—as a nation, we are uniquely positioned to play a pivotal role on the world stage if we can successfully harness and convert our unintentional 'soft power' into deliberate 'smart power'.

To leverage the advantages that we have, both in President Tinubu’s address and on the sidelines of the General Assembly, the Nigerian delegation must push to project our stance as the leading nation on the continent—and thereafter take the necessary steps to forge stronger partnerships across Africa. This approach would go beyond our traditional diplomatic methods and will require a concerted effort—even after the General Assembly—that will constantly reiterate our national interests in the context of the African situation in order to bolster our global influence.

Furthermore, in all our interactions, in addition to the 4D foreign policy vision of this administration, Nigeria should refocus on its long term advocacy for the sovereignty, independence, and territorial integrity of all African nations and be seen to lead all efforts to create the necessary conditions that are conducive for self-reliance and the rapid economic development of all African countries.

We must also look beyond ECOWAS and begin to reassert our influence in the African Union by pushing for more collaborations with other regional economic communities across Africa with a view to establishing a new formalised framework that will benefit Africa as a whole — with Nigeria as the centerpiece of this strategy. This framework should be developed in response to the situation on the continent; it should include the economic development of the African people, the cultivation of stronger institutions, and the preservation of the ‘spirit of democracy’ as fundamental principles that must be re-adopted by all African nations.

By leading the efforts to re-institutionalise democratic values on the continent, while projecting Nigeria’s leadership to the world and to a continent that is seeking effective governance, prosperity, and democratic resilience, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has the opportunity to chart a new course for Nigeria and Africa. 

However, as we project leadership in Africa, we must also work to address any internal political contradictions. This means that while we pursue democracy across the continent, we must take the lead in strengthening our own national institutions to showcase leadership by example.

With the turmoil on the continent, the chaos may just be Nigeria’s ladder to reassert its geopolitical leadership. However, as it is often said, “you never get a second chance to make a first impression.” Therefore, carpe diem! Nigeria must take this inaugural address as our chance to seize the day!

With that being said, I rest my case.

How the Chilean Plebiscite Methodology, May have Provided President Tinubu with a Constitutional Reform Blueprint 

Overview 

Now that President  Bola Ahmed Tinubu has marked 100 days in office as the 5th  President of the 4th Republic and the PEPT has also confirmed the authenticity of his election (albeit still subject to an appeal to the Supreme Court), critics and analysts have begun assessing how credibly he has performed so far in office. It is fair to say that the President has acquitted himself rather well, since he took up the Presidency on the 29th May, 2023.  To his credit, he has largely embarked so far on an economic transformative agenda, aimed at improving our ailing economy. 

Some of his very first acts were to confirm the removal of subsidy on petroleum motor spirit, and to do away with the two tier foreign exchange system. The President has also reached out to several of our international trading partners, and reassured them that under his watch and leadership, Nigeria will become a safer and a far more attractive place to invest, trade and do business. Although Nigerians are groaning under the impact of these economic initiatives, they have largely been accepted, and even the most sceptical of us have come to terms with the fact that these decisions were a necessity for the overall good. 

One other key area of concern yet to be addressed by the President, is the tricky question of how to restructure our polity. This is not altogether surprising, considering how sensitive and emotive the debate on this issue has become over the years; but, it must nevertheless, be addressed sooner rather than later. In particular, we need to ask ourselves as a nation what implications will constitutional reforms in Nigeria have on sustaining the long term future of our democracy not just from a Nigerian perspective, but also from a West African viewpoint, especially in light of several military coups that have recently taken place amongst our neighbouring Francophone States. Secondly, will President Tinubu’s economic agenda and free market oriented approach be at risk, without a more stable political structure? Is a new Constitution the best path forward in reducing the enormous cost of running government, which is now becoming unsustainable without borrowing? What are the other risks and issues at stake? Some very useful clues on how we can best restructure our polity, rewrite our Constitution and assess the overall and general impact all this could portend, can be garnered from the experience of Chile, a South American country whose checkered political history is identical and mirrors that of Nigeria in so many respects. 

The Chilean Plebiscite 

Although Chile is not as diverse a country as Nigeria, it does at least boast of being the longest and narrowest country in the world. For over 40 years, Chile had been operating under a Constitution that was bequeathed to it by it’s former military dictator, General Augustus Pinochet; but, in recent years they started becoming disgruntled, agitated and intolerant of the imperfections of their Constitution culminating in October 2019 of mass protests, that rocked the Chilean capital of Santiago and many other cities in the country. These strikes were reminiscent in many respects of the #EndSARS movement that engulfed us here in Nigeria just a few years ago. The critical and significant difference being that, the Chilean uprising unlike that of ours here in Nigeria, transformed into a mini-revolution that forced the government to act and organise a national plebiscite, asking whether or not Chileans wanted to rewrite their existing Constitution. The following year on 25th October, 2020 to be precise, the government held the  plebiscite seeking to reform the Constitution dating back from the years of military dictatorship under General Pinochet. The Pinochet military regime (just like that of General Abdulsalam here in Nigeria in 1999), had foisted upon the Chilean people a Constitution of which they had little say or input. The Constitution stood in place, for over 40 years. A simple question was put to them, asking whether or not Chileans wanted to rewrite their Constitution. Proponents of ‘Apruebo’ (I approve) viewed the idea of a new constitution as a means to expand democratic freedoms and participation, as well as overcome deep rooted social inequalities. Those in the opposite camp, ‘Rechazo’ (I reject) were opposed to the drafting of a fundamentally new charter, suggesting that the process could result in the erosion of fundamental democratic principles and open a Pandora’s box of unknown economic and social consequences, just like some of the concerns here. 

A second question on the October ballot, had to do with the mechanism for drafting a new Constitution. At stake were two different procedural models, namely the election of an entirely new Constituent Assembly, or a hybrid model of current legislators in addition to elected citizens. 

It was further agreed that if Chilean citizens did vote to approve a new Constitution, a subsequent vote would be held to choose the representatives who would draft the Constitution. A final vote approving the draft of the new Constitution, was then scheduled to take place later in 2022.

It is worth noting that the 25th of October, 2020 Plebiscite date was itself rescheduled from an earlier date, due to the Covid-19 pandemic. The date of the exit plebiscite, was also modified. It was projected to take place in September of the third quarter of 2022, at the latest. In April 2022, it was announced that the referendum would be held on the 4th of September, 2022. It is important to note that Chileans ultimately voted for the hybrid system in redrafting their Constitution, made up of some existing legislators and others specifically elected into a convention tasked with the responsibility of drafting the new Constitution. The new Constitution as drafted was once again put to the Chilean people for their approval in another plebiscite, but the people rejected it as being too radical. As a consequence, the old Constitution continues to operate until a new draft Constitution is approved. 

In the interim, lawmakers then announced a new process, the “Agreement for Chile” in December 2022, in a second attempt to fashion out a new Constitution with different rules. The agreement states that a group of 50 directly-elected constitutional advisors will draft the Constitution, based on a preliminary draft prepared by a commission of 24 experts appointed by Congress. Additionally, a 14-member body appointed by Congress was to ensure that the proposed text, aligns with the 12 institutional and fundamental principles outlined in the Agreement for Chile. Although the entire process has not been perfect, there can be no doubting the transparency of the Chilean approach, and the determination of the people to ultimately come up with a workable Constitution acceptable to the vast majority of Chileans.

Is there a Legal Framework or Constitutional Basis to be able to Hold a Referendum here in Nigeria?

The main restructuring challenge for us in Nigeria today, is simply on how best we can rewrite our existing Constitution or restructure our polity, whilst still having in place the 1999 Constitution (as amended), just like in Chile. When you have an existing Constitution and a system of governance in place, it would be unconstitutional for anyone to attempt to usurp the Constitution, without first receiving a clear mandate from the people. This is because the people are the source and donor of all political power. The government and its organs are created by the 1999 Constitution, and logic suggests that they can only be in possession of the power that is granted to them, by that same instrument from which their power and existence is derived.

There is no direct provision for a referendum in our Constitution, but it is more than implied. We often criticise the 1999 Constitution for being imperfect, but there are several aspects to it that have not been fully explored or understood. What then, is the legal framework that exists within the 1999 Constitution, that can provide ample basis for a future referendum that may ultimately lead to a new and radically changed Constitution, brought about by a people’s plebiscite like is the case in Chile?

The chapter of the 1999 Constitution, which contains the provisions on the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy provides some useful answers.

Section 13 of the 1999 Constitution provides as follows :

“It shall be duty and responsibility of all organs of government, and of all authorities and persons, exercising legislative, executive or judicial powers, to conform to, observe and apply the provisions of this Chapter of this Constitution”. 

Furthermore Section 14 provides: 

14.(1)  The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social justice. 14( 2) It is hereby, accordingly, declared that- (a) Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its power and authority. 

Now, if the Constitution states that sovereignty belongs to the people, it also stands to reason that the same power can be given back to them whenever they ask or demand it. The conundrum however, is that no one seems to know or understand how to go about doing this. A clue can be found in the Second Schedule of the Constitution, which outlines the various items on the Exclusive Legislative list.

Item 60 provides for the establishment and regulation of authorities for the Federation or any part thereof- (a) to promote and enforce the observance of the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles contained in this Constitution.

Establishing a Referendum Authority under the Control of INEC 

The combined effect of Sections 13 and 14 of the 1999 Constitution, as well as Item 60 on the Exclusive Legislative list under the Second Schedule of the 1999 Constitution, is that both the executive and legislative arms of government are empowered to establish a Referendum Authority, to give effect to the implementation of key parts and aspects of the 1999 Constitution. The Proposed Referendum Authority, does not necessarily have to be set up to be an Independent Statutory Authority. Part I of the Third Schedule to the 1999 Constitution, outlines the Federal Executive Bodies mentioned under Section 153 of the 1999 Constitution. Section 14 of the Third Schedule provides for INEC. Section 15 of the same Schedule outlines the powers of INEC.

Subsection 15(i) provides as follows: (i) Carry out such other functions as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly. In other words, INEC could be given additional responsibility by the National Assembly to manage a Referendum Authority within the purview of its responsibilities, without the need to set up a separate entity. INEC will, among other things, determine the criteria and threshold for a National Referendum. It is not unusual, to have electoral bodies and referendum bodies fused together. This is the practice, for example, in Australia. 

In addition to what has been highlighted above, Item 67 of the Exclusive Legislative list also provides that, laws can also be made with regard to any other matter with respect to which the National Assembly has power to make laws in accordance with the provisions of this Constitution. Item 68 further states that, the National Assembly can also make laws with regard to any matter incidental or supplementary to any matter mentioned elsewhere in the Exclusive Legislative list. It is interesting to note that, Section 8(3)(b)(c) and (d) of the 1999 Constitution provides for the use of a Referendum, when there is a proposal to create a new local government area. A Referendum Authority could therefore, also be used at State level whenever there is a request to create a new local government area. We don’t need to wait for such a request, before putting the legal framework in place. In short, a Referendum Authority would provide the mechanism and legal framework for a referendum at both Federal, State and local government level’s of government.

Finally, some might argue that our courts have long decided that Section 6(6)(c) of the 1999 Constitution provides that, except as otherwise provided by the Constitution, any issue or question as to whether any act or omission by any authority or person as to whether any law or any judicial decision is in conformity with the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy set out in Chapter II of the Constitution, is not justiciable. It is however, my argument that since Item 60 is on the Exclusive Legislative list, it is clearly spelt out elsewhere in the Constitution and as such Section 6(6)(c) does not apply, and issues relating to Item 60 will serve as an exception to those provisions, and will thus, be justiciable. See Archbishop Okogie v AG Lagos State 1981 2 NCLR 337; AG Ondo State v AG Federation & 35 Ors 2002 9 N.W.L.R. Part 772.

Conclusion 

The Chilean example highlights the fact that, the People must first be consulted in any attempt to rewrite a Constitution. This, to a large extent, was the reason why the 2014 National Conference was not deemed sovereign. It also explains why the deliberations of that National Conference, were unenforceable and archived. The hybrid system voted upon and approved by Chileans, may ultimately prove to be the way forward here. It placates both the People and our elected representatives, who believe they have already earned the trust of their representatives to initiate constitutional reform, but as earlier argued, the People can recall that power whenever they consider it expedient to do so. 

The Chilean experience shows that, constitutional reform does not necessarily impede the day- to-day functioning of government. It operates on the sidelines until perfected, and given a time frame for future implementation. The People can always reject a draft Constitution they deem unacceptable for whatever reason. as was  the case with Chile. 

Now that an Attorney-General is firmly in place and President Tinubu has decided to recall non-career Ambassadors, perhaps, our next Ambassador to Chile should be given the assignment of understudying the Chilean Plebiscite methodology and report back to the President through the Attorney-General, on how the Chilean experience could aid our constitutional reform process here at home. “Mission to Chile” should ideally be undertaken by a Lawyer, and a copy of updates and the final report passed on to the National Assembly through the office of the Attorney-General or the Presidency. Let’s begin the process.

The social and cultural setting in Yorubaland literally exploded last Friday. It almost took the shine off the Oyo state government’s highly commendable inauguration of a 34.85 km Oyo-Iseyin Road and the completed Ladoke Akintola University of Technology, Iseyin campus. The highly disputatious ex-Nigerian president, Olusegun Obasanjo, was in his usual sabre-rattling element.

At that event, he tongue-lashed Yoruba Obas in the most irreverent display of gross disdain for the traditional stool and institution. As I write this, the inclement anger of the people, like a vulture, is feasting on Obasanjo on social media. He is minute-by-minute lacerated with all manner of irreverent words. A group from Iseyin, where the tongue-lash took place, even declared him persona non grata in the Oke-Ogun area of Oyo state.

The unkindest epithet given to Obasanjo as a comment on his Iseyin discourtesy to the Obas is the ar’obafin – disrespecter of the monarchy. It reminds me of Alukoro, a Yoruba movie starring Fuji singer, Saheed Osupa — a man who, to me, sings as if he is an incarnate of my musical idol, Ayinla Omowura. Osupa laces his songs with an effusion of language, culture, depth and native wisdom which all answer to the profound musical calling of Omowura. In the movie, Osupa played the role of Pela, a village bard. Strapping his agidigbo around his neck, with the musical instrument protruding on his belly, the flick began with him instigating townsfolk against an Ajisafe who he alleged had an incestuous liaison with his daughter. In rousing them up, Pela lectured the people on the boomeranging effect of silence to evil – “T’a ba ni ko kan wa, yi o kan eni ti o kan, ti o pada wa kan wa,” he counselled.

Then, a scene movie shifted to the palace. The whole village was in attendance, as well as a man called Olowoporoku and his wife. Still in his luxuriating voice and talent, Pela musically narrated Olowoporoku’s boldness in standing up to the monarchy headed by Oba Adewolu Adegoroye. He sang in denunciation of those who rise against the palace which Yoruba approximate as rising against the whole town. Pela announced that the enemy of the palace had been put to shame with the quashing of the conspiracy against the king and that haters of the monarchy were persons of mean repute. He sang this thus: “Ar’obafin, oju ti yin o//b’o je’yin le wa l’oni o//ab’Oba Adewolu… e l’aju le, gbogbo wa ni o s’oju…//ete kuku m’oni ete nwa, iyi m’eni iyi nba r’ode, eni ete mo’ra re l’awujo”.

Pela robed the king in the finest raiment. Oba Adewolu had a purity of character comparable only to the whiteness of a cattle egret (lekeleke) and Olowoporoku, not only was a mean character, but one whose moral standing was in the league of the filth of a pig. “Agberaga won a tun gbe’ra sanle, iru e ki s’eni iyi l’awujo…” Apparently, the script to disgrace Olowoporoku had been pre-arranged, a goat that was dressed in the exact apparel worn by Olowoporoku was brought to the palace. Pela then sang, asking the people to shout “monkey” – obo – “E ma pe obo ni! (Obo ni!)… eni wo’so bi obo (obo ni!) o de fila bi obo (obo ni!) o nb’oba da’sa (obo ni!)… aso ki le ro, t’e nkile t’e nru gaga?// Aso t’e ro t’e npon gege, s’ohun l’ewure ti nwo yi o!” He ended the musical narration by telling the palace hater that very soon, all those in his class would forcibly realise the majesty of the king – “isenyi le o m’oba//eyin t’e nb’oba l’eyin…”

At Iseyin, as the crowd savoured the occasion, amid effusive showering of praises on Obasanjo’s host governor, Seyi Makinde, the man known for always provoking verbal balls of fire suddenly sauntered into his familiar route. At the first occasion, the road inauguration, I was told that invited traditional rulers sat even when Obasanjo and his host arrived. When Obasanjo got up to address the crowd during the second event at the University of Technology’s opening, and the larger crowd of traditional rulers still sat, something snapped in him and Obasanjo went into his usual tempestuous tirade. If he had talked to the Obas in a very civil language, it would have gone down well with Yoruba people. Rather, the ex-president spat out poison like a venomous rattlesnake, talking down on the natural rulers like a teacher does to offending kindergarten pupils. Flapping his left hand like a salamander does its tail in a moment of extreme anger, Obasanjo then hectored the rulers to stand, “e dide!”, in the mode of a garrison commander at an army parade. His lips twitched awkwardly, and his countenance was like Sango, the god of thunder’s. He had earlier lectured the traditional rulers on giving honour to whom it is due.

The issue for determination in Iseyin on Friday is, who was the Ar’obafin? The Obas who dishonoured Ijoba (government) by refusing to join the upstanding people to welcome the governor or Obasanjo who upbraided them using a language meant for slaves on royalty?

Like many African societies, the Yoruba venerated their kings, almost to the point of idolatry. Their king was the incarnation of the concept of earthly sovereignty. He regulated peace and order, guaranteed harmonic social relations with their fellow beings and was the intercessor who interacted between them and cosmic forces. The palace where the king lives, though owned by the whole town, was the outward representation of the people’s reverence for their king. It is always located in the sacred centre of the town and surrounded by huge walls. The palace’s importance was partly due to the fact that it was the place where decisions of the most important texture concerning town life were deliberated upon and taken. It was where esoteric rituals were performed among a coterie of a narrow circle of initiates.

A number of weird lore and mores were curated to give the king his primus inter pares aura and dread. First, the title of an Alaafin of Oyo, for instance, symbolised his unlimited powers. He was “lord of the universe and life”, “the master of the land”, and “companion of the gods”, as well as the Kabiyesi whom no one dares contradict his authority. He was a sacred ruler and ideological and political centre of power of his people who held a dimension of power that was awesome. A number of secrecies, mysteries and dread of things unknown and incomprehensible kept alive the oeuvres of the sacredness of traditional institutions in him. He was the mythical intermediary between his people and the gods and the link that connected the people with all the deities of the land and in whom there was a fulfilment of the desires of the gods in the land of the living.

The legitimacy of the king’s royal power emanated from the dread and mysteries that were hoed around him. For instance, he must not see a corpse. The belief that begot this was that, as one who symbolised and embodied life and is a life-giving force himself, sighting a corpse detracts from that power. He was also reputed with magical powers that were beyond his subjects. That is why, upon the enthronement of an Oba, all magic men were required to scramble over one another to donate their amulets and powers to him. This is because the king was believed to be linked with the spirits of his deceased predecessors. As king, his major obligation was the sustenance of the prosperity and fertility of the land which he does by making sacrifices when required, engaging in innumerable annual rites, as well as magic rituals.

The life and death of Obas in Yorubaland are a testament to their assumed powers. According to Samuel Johnson, not less than 21, out of 36 kings that this respected Yoruba history biographer included in his dynastic list, died by excruciating violence. In Oyo Alaafin, not a single one out of the kings of the 17th century died of natural death at a period regarded as the highest flourish of that kingdom. Indeed, 15 of them, beginning with the 17th king Odarawu were compelled to commit suicide as a result of sentences passed by the oracle. As a means of implanting the authority and veneration of their kings in their minds, palace griots, who were mainly custodians of the historical oral tradition of the people, narrated in poetic renditions the official version of the history of their kingdoms, heroic feats of their kings and stories of warfare, conquest.

However, the conversation between Obierika and Okonkwo in Chinua Achebe’s ‘Things Fall Apart’ seems to sum up the calamity that befell traditional institutions subsequently. Dissecting colonial incursion into Igboland and the various queer events that had since transpired, upset by the white man’s total and complete disregard for the Igbo cosmology and the people’s conception of justice, Obierika was stunned that the colonialists didn’t understand the people of Umuofia. Obierika had said: “The white man is very clever. He came quietly and peaceably with his religion. We were amused at his foolishness and allowed him to stay. Now he has won over our brothers, and our clan can no longer act like one. He has put a knife on the things that held us together and we have fallen apart”. This, to me, equates to the calamity that befell traditional institution in Yorubaland, the precursor of the Friday lacerating discourtesy heaped on Yoruba traditional institution by a man whose inscrutable disdain for the other person knows no bounds.

The white man indeed put a knife on the traditional institution that held Yoruba people together. This began with the gale of exiles it unleashed on the highly venerated and dreaded monarchical stool. Oba Akitoye of Lagos was about the first. He had ascended the throne of his forefathers in 1841 and attempted to end the inhuman trade in persons. In this bid, he sowed enmity in the minds of local slave traders who contributed to his deposition and eventual exile. After the white men annexed Lagos in 1861 as a British territorial colony, it was time for recalcitrant kings who insisted on the supremacy of their thrones to be dealt with too. Thus, Ovonramwen Nogbaisi, the Oba of Benin, was equally chased off the throne and exiled to Calabar, alongside his two queens, leading to his eventual death in 1914.

Other kings who tasted the sour broths of the white colonialists were the Alake of Egba land, Oba Sir Ladapo Samuel Ademola, who ascended the throne on May 28, 1920. He was the father of Justice Adetokunbo Ademola, the first indigenous chief justice of Nigeria at the granting of independence in 1960. After 27 years of being on the throne, his power was eroded after a violent protest of about 2,000 women against the colonial government’s native authority in 1947. Under the leadership of Funmilayo Ransom-Kuti, with the assistance of her sister-in-law, Eniola Soyinka, the women virulently protested against taxes for women. Prodded on by colonial disdain for traditional rulers, it was bye to the highly venerated Yoruba monarchy as the women successfully chased Oba Ademola out of the palace.

Obasanjo’s shout on the Iseyin kings to stand up reminds me of the same call by the mercurial deputy leader of the Action Group, Chief Bode Thomas. Born in 1918, Thomas was one of the most brilliant solicitors of Yoruba extraction in pre-colonial Nigeria. In company with Chief Rotimi Williams and Chief Remilekun Fani-Kayode, he established a law firm named Thomas, Willams, Kayode and co. He was however far removed from the indigenous texture of his native Oyo town where he was born. He was also very haughty. So when in 1953, Thomas was appointed the Oyo divisional council chairman, it was obvious that he would find his measure in the father of the recently deceased Alaafin of Oyo, Oba Adeniran Adeyemi II, who reigned on the stool from 1945 to 1954. On November 22, 1953, the day the 35-year-old Thomas made his first appearance in council, just like the Iseyin Obas gathered at the Friday function, Thomas could not countenance why Alaafin Adeniran would sit while others stood for him.

Like Obasanjo, he immediately expressed his disavowal at this. He then asked the Oba, who was then in his 60s: “Why are you sitting when I walked in, don’t you know how to show respect?” During one of my discussions with Alaafin Lamidi Adeyemi who just passed, he confirmed to me that his father merely rhetorically asked if it was him that Thomas was barking at – “Se’mi lo ngbo mo baun?” And then commanded Thomas, to continue in his bark – “Ma gbo lo baun!” Oba Adeniran was to pay dearly for this as he was deposed and died in exile at Egerton, a mosquito-infested guest house in Lagos. Thomas continued barking like a dog and passed on in the morning of the second day.

As they say, since then, a lot of water has passed under the bridge. By the constitutions of Nigeria since the advent of colonialism, the palace has always been put under the subordination of political authorities. This has colossally eroded the respect, veneration and contributions to the society of kings. As it is now, monarchs are under the subordination of local government chairmen who can instigate their deposition. Respected veteran journalist, Lekan Alabi, sent out a video of an interview conducted by the NTA Ibadan with him as the producer and presenter, with the late Kano state governor, Alhaji Abubakar Rimi. Rimi was having a spat with the Emir of Kano, Alhaji Ado Bayero, during this period. In the interview, Rimi exploded: “The way you press and our political opponents (regard) the Emir of Kano is not the way we regard him. As far as we are concerned (thumping his chest) – we the elected government of Kano state – as far as I, the governor of Kano state, is concerned – the Emir of Kano is nothing, nothing, nothing but a public person… he is holding a public office… being paid from public funds and whose appointment is at the pleasure of the governor of the state and who can be dismissed, removed interdicted, suspended if he commits an offence. And there is nothing unique about Ado Bayero, the Emir of Kano… believe me, if he commits any offence which will make it necessary for us to remove him, we will remove him and we will sleep soundly”.

In the explanation of their cosmogony, it is Yoruba’s belief that as hot and red-eyed as Sango is, not only does it give respect to the blacksmiths and the forge, Ile Aro, it is not in his keel to strike it with its thunder. Why will Obasanjo, a man who has taught culture and tradition over time, be the hot anvil that will consume the anvil? Don’t Yoruba say that the reverse is unimaginable, “ina ewu kii jo ewu, ina ewiri kii jo ewiri?” Indeed, that Friday event was a mortal blow to the traditional institution.

Why Obasanjo’s Friday indecorous talk-down on the Iseyin Obas was unusual was that he had always shown the way to go to all political officeholders by publicly courtesying monarchs. He recently, even at over 80 years old, prostrated to the Ooni of Ife who is younger in age than his firstborn. This is why, as I said earlier, if Obasanjo had not made a public ridicule of the Obas, he would have had sympathies of the people. First, he was far older than virtually all the kings at the event and thus deserved their respect. Second, as Nigeria’s former leader, who was Nigeria’s Head of State at a time when many of them were in secondary school, they should have shown him some measure of honour. Sitting down when an elderly person stands is a disrespect of the first order in Yorubaland. I have also confirmed that protocol, especially since the constitutional de-robing of kings of their essences, has since demanded that kings should pay obeisance to political leaders, including even the chairman of their local governments, at public events. However, as they say, if you are sent a message as a slave, you should be knowledgeable enough to deliver it as a freeborn.

To be fair to Obasanjo, though the gradual loss of verve of traditional institution didn’t begin with him, he willingly offered himself as its pallbearer. Many of the traditional rulers on parade in Nigeria today wear such disreputable robes that no one in their true senses should pay them any regard. Nyesom Wike, as governor of Rivers state, publicly dressed down one of them. Today, Yoruba do not venerate their kings any longer and do not see them as embodying their sovereignty. Rather than regulating peace and order in their domains, they are disruptors of the peace therein. The palace has become a den of thieves and fraudsters with many of them kings only to maximise pecuniary interests. No esoteric rituals are performed in palaces any longer but cryptic deals of fraudulence among a circle of fraudulent initiates, with the sacredness of traditional institutions grossly destroyed. So, if Obasanjo talked down on them, he must have known that they were reverses of the natural rulers who deserved anyone’s respect.

I am actually interested in an aspect of the speech of Governor Makinde at the said event. On the vacant stool of the Alaafin, which is the subject of intense acrimony and tackles at the moment, Makinde had said: “Those of you fighting over the Alaafin stool should stop. Those who have collected money from people should know that Alaafin stool is not for sale. It is too important to Yorubaland that we will not sell it. For those who have collected money, I will take them to the EFCC”.

The governor’s homily is a representation of what ails traditional institutions in Nigeria today. It has gone to the dogs. If it is possible for Makinde and the Oyo Mesi to recreate the profundity in tradition, language and culture of Yoruba people, panache and Yoruba leadership which the late Alaafin, Oba Lamidi Adeyemi manifested while alive, we probably would have none of those Iseyin Obas lacking the courage to damn Obasanjo’s bark at them to stand up. Kabiyesi, Omo Alowolodu, Iku Baba Yeye Lamidi Adeyemi, would rather die than be led by the nose to surrender as Obasanjo led those kings on Friday.

President Bola Tinubu has appointed 18 aides comprising special advisers and senior special assistants in the office of Vice-President Kashim Shettima.

In a statement on Monday, Olusola Abiola, a director of information in the office of the vice-president, said Shettima’s new team has six special advisers and 12 senior special assistants.

“The team comprising 6 Special Advisers and 12 Senior Special Assistants will work in the office of the Vice President, supporting the ‘Renewed Hope’ agenda of the Tinubu administration,” the statement reads.

Some of the notable names on the list are Hakeem Baba-Ahmed, spokesperson of the Northern Elders Forum (NEF) and elder brother of Datti Baba-Ahmed, Labour Party (LP) vice-presidential candidate; Tope Kolade Fasua, a columnist at TheCable; and Gimba Kakanda, a public policy analyst.

Here is the full list of the appointees;

• Rukaiya El-Rufai, special adviser, NEC and Climate Change
• Tope Kolade Fasua, special adviser, economic matters
• Aliyu Modibbo Umar, special adviser, general duties
• Hakeem Baba Ahmed, special adviser, political matters
• Jumoke Oduwole, special adviser, PEBEC and Investment
• Sadiq Wanka, special adviser, power infrastructure
• Usman Mohammed, senior special assistant, administration and office coordination
• Kingsley Stanley Nkwocha, senior special assistant, media and communications
• Ishaq Ahmed Ningi, senior special assistant, digital media and emergency management
• Peju Adebajo, senior special assistant, investment and privatisation
• Mohammed Bulama, senior special assistant, political/special duties
• Kingsley Uzoma, senior special assistant, agribusiness and productivity enhancement
• Gimba Kakanda, senior special assistant, research and analytics
• Temitola Adekunle-Johnson, senior special assistant, job creation and MSMEs.
• Nasir Yammama, senior special assistant, innovation
• Zainab Yunusa, senior special assistant, NEC
• Mariam Temitope, senior special assistant, regional development programmes
• Bashir Maidugu, deputy state house counsel

[TheCable]

Let me begin by making a distinction here. Nigeria’s military acknowledges two Obasanjos in its records. One has been retired for nearly 45 years now, while the other was at best a toddler when the older disengaged from military service. Both of them made it to the uppermost crust of the military, the former rising to the exclusive club of “four-star generals,” while the latter is a “one-star general”. He will be decorated major general, a “two-star general” on his next elevation. One is the father, Olusegun Obasanjo, the first Nigerian to serve both as military head of state, and democratically elected president.

Muhammadu Buhari is the only other Nigerian thus far to savour this distinction. Even at that, Obasanjo bests Buhari in terms of length of stay in office. Succeeding Murtala Ramat Mohammed who was cut down by the bullets of coupists in February 1976, Obasanjo was military leader for three and half years.

He handed over to a democratically elected president, Shehu Usman Shagari, on October 1, 1979. Buhari, on the other hand, was a little over two and half years in office when he was torpedoed on August 27, 1985, by Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida. Both of them served out two terms of four years each as civilian presidents. Their records of performance will be discussed another day. But the more vocal Obasanjo echoes the views of many Nigerians to the effect that Buhari, multi-sectorally, was a grand failure. The other Obasanjo, in the Nigerian Army is Adeboye, son of the former whose name when interpreted and approximate age suggests that he was sired while his father was in office. Father and son as combatants have variously featured in the thick of firefighting. Olusegun Obasanjo still wears in the peri-scrotal section of his physiognomy, a scar of a bullet wound from the thick of battle during the Nigerian civil war. Adeboye as a lieutenant colonel was shot in the leg in September 2014, while leading his troops for an onslaught on Baza, Adamawa state, an extension of the hydra-headed Boko Haram crisis in the country’s northeast.

I had the privilege of working with the older Obasanjo for over eight years. I was drafted into his immediate campaign team ahead of his formal declaration to run for Nigeria’s presidency; in the lead-up to the current fourth republic in November 1998. Pervading cynicism about military involvement in the nation’s politics was a potent albatross on Obasanjo’s path. Popular experience with the regimes of Buhari, Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha impugned national trust and believability in the military establishment. Between these three rulers, Nigeria’s second republic was aborted on December 31, 1983, while the goalpost of the wholesale democratisation of national politics was interminably shifted.

Obasanjo was also a hard sell among his Yoruba kith in southwest Nigeria many of whom still harbour misgivings about Obasanjo’s management of the 1979 presidential election which produced Shagari. There is a school of thought which still believes that the revered attorney, nationalist and entrepreneur Obafemi Awolowo should have been declared president after the 1979 polls. Southwesterners equally opine that the region never enjoyed any special developmental privileges under Obasanjo’s military rulership and couldn’t understand why they should support him. Our job as Obasanjo’s makeover professionals under the leadership of the Emeritus editor and economist, Onyema Ugochukwu, was therefore cut out.

Among other strategies, therefore, we deliberately subsumed his towering military rank in all references to him. We played up his traditional honours and titles. Arising from his exploits during the 30-month Nigerian civil war which ended in January 1970 and his subsequent emergence as military leader, Obasanjo had garnered a long list of indigenous honorifics. As campaign policy, therefore, Obasanjo would be addressed as “Chief”. I recall this particular day when we, Obasanjo’s aides, walked him from his Aso Villa office to the residence through the connecting walkway. As we strolled with him, Obasanjo observed that his name had been inscribed on the lawn behind his office.

The title “General” resurfaced on the manicured grass and Obasanjo started a debate about the reinvention of his name in this format. Solomon Giwa-Amu of blessed memory who was aide de camp, (ADC) to Obasanjo jocularly explained how it came about. He said there was a debate between him and the chief security officer to the president, Kayode Odunneye at the time, about the appropriate Obasanjo title that should be communicated to the horticulturist. Odunneye, according to Giwa-Amu, suggested it should be “Chief”. He, Giwa-Amu, however, argued that Obasanjo was first a general before he was recognised by his constituents and festooned with scores of chieftaincy titles. Foregrounding Obasanjo’s military rank in that particular instance, therefore, became more compelling. As a virtual constant on Obasanjo’s entourage on his foreign trips, I noticed in several banners, brochures and mementoes prepared to commemorate his visits that the name of Nigeria’s enigmatic former president was couched in several ways. He was either “His Excellency, Olusegun Obasanjo” or “His Excellency, Mr Olusegun Obasanjo” or even “President of Nigeria”. Neither his military nor chieftaincy appellations were prefixed to his name.

On Friday, September 15, 2023, General Obasanjo resurfaced in Oyo state. It was the commissioning of the 38-kilometre road linking Oyo with Iseyin, two major towns in Oyo state, and the governor of the state, Seyi Makinde, had invited Nigeria’s former leader as guest of honour at the event. Makinde’s effort, by the way, is commendably audacious and visionary. He has opened up vast sections of Oyo state for development. Obasanjo arrived at the venue in the company of his host, who is very fittingly the age of his biological children. Obasanjo, schooled and skilled in official protocol, observed an aberration in the proceedings. The audience didn’t rise, out of courtesy, to acknowledge the arrival of his host Makinde, and his good self at the event. Not one to brook such “misconduct,” he spoke his mind once he took possession of the microphone at the ceremony.

Obasanjo reminded his host audience about two major canons in Yoruba tradition. Deference is customarily accorded to age and authority, he lectured. Didn’t we recently see viral images of 55-year-old Abiodun Abayomi Oyebanji, the governor of Ekiti state, prostrating full length to pay respect to the nonagenarian attorney and statesman, the 93-year-old Afe Babalola? That is deference to age and seniority. There is also the flip side, the imperative of according honour and respect to authority irrespective of the age of the occupant of the office. Obasanjo himself was pictured kneeling before the Olu of Warri, Ogiame Atuwatse Utieyinoritsetsola Emiko, who can pass for his grandson, at his installation two years ago in conformity with tradition. Obasanjo noted that deserved respect for authority was not demonstrated at the Oyo event. The military streak in Obasanjo spontaneously overwhelmed him. He ordered the royals like a commander, to rise up to their feet. This, he noted, should be the standard practice if a governor or president were being welcomed. Instantaneously, he ordered the royal fathers to sit down.

Ever in the eye of the storm, Obasanjo’s act at that event has elicited and continues to elicit reactions and controversies. He has been upbraided and castigated for “blasphemy” against the Yoruba traditional institution by the Council of Yoruba Elders, (CYE). A statement issued by the body and e-signed by Victor Taiwo and Lanre Ogundipe lambasted Obasanjo for an act considered “infra dignitatem to Yoruba culture and tradition and a taboo”. The release accused Obasanjo of denigrating and desecrating Yoruba royalty who are considered igba keji orisa (second-in-command to the deity).

Elsewhere, a certain Adejare Ibrahim purportedly resident in Oyo Alaafin has written a rejoinder titled ‘Now, the truth is coming out gradually’, which continues the Obasanjo-bashing. He submits in the piece that the former president came to the event specifically to exert his pound of flesh out of the Olugbon of Orile-Igbon, Francis Olusola Alao, vice chairman of the Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs. The Olugbon reportedly featured on a radio programme ahead of the February presidential poll where “he berated Obasanjo for his support for the candidacy of Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP)”. Such has been the diversity and magnitude of the fire stoked by Obasanjo’s recent outing.

A statement authored by a certain Dr John Adebayo Abolarin dated September 16, 2023, appears to be what my approximate reading of the Obasanjo vs. Oyo traditional rulers saga would be. Abolarin suggests that Obasanjo in reality was “fighting” for Makinde whose omoluabi simplicity appeared to have been taken for granted by the royals. The unassuming, unobtrusive Makinde it would seem is not fastidious about protocol and officialdom. Obasanjo believes Makinde who will be 56 on his next birthday in December deserves respect from all and sundry on account of the position he occupies. Abolarin proposes that “it was not the Obas that were humiliated by Obasanjo. It was rather the governor who was dragged on the floor on that occasion”.

As one who has officiated at functions which had presidents in attendance, the blame for the Oyo slur should be shared between the Government House protocol team and the master of ceremony. It is the responsibility of the protocol department to furnish the MC, especially if he is not from the governmental system, with the programme brochure and list of expected dignitaries. The MC should be prompted to respectfully invite the audience including the traditional rulers to rise to their feet to receive the August guests once they arrive at the venue. That tutoring should come from the protocol unit. It needn’t have awaited Obasanjo’s assumption of that responsibility.

I conclude by observing that the typically witty Obasanjo could have chosen like a rat, to nibble at the toes of the deep sleeper, while fanning at those toes simultaneously. How about this as suggested remarks by Obasanjo: “I respectfully greet you royalties and salute the people of Oyo state on this auspicious occasion. You all know me well so I need no reintroduction. I’m here as a guest of your son, my son, your governor, Engr Seyi Makinde who is doing so well for your state in my view. For his status as chief executive of this state, protocol demands that you rise to receive him at a function like this. Governor Makinde may be a gentleman who doesn’t bother about ceremonials and fanfare, though. Today, however, I am here and I want to correct this. We should give honour to whom honour is due at all times. This is particularly important on an occasion like this when the governor is hosting a former president. The minimum this audience should do is to rise to receive him and his guest, just as Makinde the “omoluabi” that he is, pays obeisance whenever he comes to your palaces, just as I do whenever I visit you. I imagine that not too many Obas and Baales at this event are older than I am. Shall we then be upstanding, please?… Thank you, Your Highnesses. We may all be seated now.”

We should be mindful, however, that Obasanjo is just a few years from becoming a nonagenarian. This proverbial fire-dried fish, will certainly and surely be difficult to bend!

The meeting between the Federal Government and the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) to avert an imminent nationwide strike action ended in a deadlock.

The Minister of Labour and Employment, Simon Lalong, and the Minister of State for Labour and Employment, Nkeiruka Onyejeocha, met with the NLC President, Joe Ajaero, and other labour leaders in Abuja on Monday.

Naija News reports that the meeting was called by Lalong to stop the union’s planned nationwide strike owing to the removal of fuel subsidies and the hardship in the country.

During the meeting, Lalong promised to partner with organised labour to address the demands of the labour unions in a just and balanced way.

He appealed to the labour leaders to be realistic and frank in the discussions and also expressed optimism that the meeting would lead to a resolution that is of national interest.

In his response, Ajaero said his team was in the meeting with mixed feelings, to see whether “something will happen or not,” as many similar meetings in the past had failed to yield a positive response.

He also noted that the past strikes that the minister referred to were a result of the frustration Nigerian workers faced due to the effects of the hardship occasioned by the removal of fuel subsidies.

Ajaero also noted that not one of the agreements with the FG had been addressed despite a series of meetings that had been held.

He vehemently condemned the invasion of the office of the Nigeria Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW), with some of its leaders arrested and detained.

According to him, that action alone is enough for the NLC to proceed with their planned strike.

However, after two hours, the meeting ended without a concrete resolution to the union’s demands, and the meeting is expected to continue at a later date.

The Labour minister is also expected to hold a meeting with the leadership of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) today.