Less than a year after it was appointed, President Bola Tinubu has disbanded the board and management of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) led by Lauretta Onochie.

In its place, he has appointed a new board headed by Chiedu Ebie from Delta State as the chairman.

Former president Muhammadu Buhari nominated the Onochie-led board in November 2022 amid controversy over the role played by the former special assistant on social media to the president.

The changes also affected the managing director of the commission, Samuel Ibukun, who has now been replaced by Dr Samuel Ogbuku from Bayelsa State.

According to a statement issued on Tuesday by Chief Ajuri Ngelale,

Special Adviser to the President (Media & Publicity), other members of the new board approved by the president are Mr. Boma Iyaye (Executive Director, Finance and Admin -Rivers), Mr Victor Antai – Executive Director (Projects, Akwa-Ibom), Ifedayo Abegunde (Executive Director, Corporate Services, Ondo), and Sen Dimaro Denyanbofa (State Representative, Bayelsa).

Also in the new board are Mr Abasi Ndikan Nkono (State Representative, Akwa Ibom), Rt Hon Monday Igbuya, State Representative, Delta), Chief Tony Okocha (State Representative, Rivers),

Hon Patrick Aisowieren (State Representative, Edo), Mr Kyrian Uchegbu (State Representative, Imo),

Victor Kolade Akinjo (State Representative, Ondo) and Chief Dimgba Eruba (State Representative, Abia).

Others are Mr Asu Oku Okang (State Representative, Cross River), Hon Nick Wende (Zonal Representative, North Central), Hon Namdas Abdulrazak, Zonal Representative (North East), and

Sen Dr Ibrahim Abdullahi Gobir (Zonal Representative, North West).

The statement added that President Tinubu expects that the new Board and Management team will ensure a new era of successful administration in the NDDC, in line with his Renewed Hope agenda.

It added: “All of the above listed appointments take immediate effect.”

Apart from Onochie and Ibukun, the former board was made up of 13 others including Charles Ehigie Airhiavbere, director of finance; Charles Ogunmola, director of project; Dimgba Erugba (Abia), Ene Wilcox (Akwa Ibom), Pius Odudu (Edo), Gbenga Odegba (Ondo), Anthony Ekene (Imo) and Onyekachi Dimgba (Rivers).

Others are Mohammed Kabiru Abubakar (Nasarawa), Tallen Mamma (Adamawa) and Sodique Sani

For more than a decade, Professor Udenta O. Udenta and I have walked closely together. This September, he will turn 60 and enter the sixth floor of life. So, I thought it was appropriate to look back on his extraordinary life and great intellectual outputs and contributions as a creative mind and political thinker. Udenta is a well-known, bright, and erudite public intellectual whose written works and other social and cultural contributions are appreciated not just by academic audiences and readers but also by society at large. He is indeed a consummate and profound intellectual of uncommon hue.

Udenta has further cemented and reinforced his place among the sages in the creation of knowledge as a thinker, theorist, and—more importantly—as part of those who have put theory into praxis with his epochal presentation of 21 volumes this September. The 21 works span a wide range of subjects, including politics of course, but also prose, poetry, culture, and literary criticism.

Three of the 21 books with Udenta’s name now on the spine, namely ‘Art, Society, and Identity’, ‘Arts and Social Commitment in African Poetry’, and finally ‘Revolutionary Aesthetics and the African Literary Process’, especially qualify as his magnum opus. These writings present Professor Udenta Udenta as a Marxist scholar, philosopher, and theorist who supports welfarism rather than the strict state control of all resources and means of production as the traditional Marxists advocate.

Udenta, in contrast to most other intellectuals, is largely motivated by praxis and practicality, i.e. knowledge applied to assist society rather than knowledge for its own sake. He has always been preoccupied with the HOW question because of this. Philosophers have “interpreted the world, what remains is changing it” as iconic philosopher Karl Marx would put it. Udenta thinks that the questions of “what” and “why” have been fairly resolved. What is still unclear is HOW society will address the plethora of issues that have previously been discovered and considered.

If one takes a closer look, it is obvious that Nigeria’s issues are all well-known. The nation’s seemingly unsolvable issues have been thoroughly discussed and put in context since colonial times, through the military interregnum, which began with the first military intervention in January 1966, to the variegated civilian governments, and up to the present. However, successive governments have fallen short in their efforts to address the issues that have since been noted. Shockingly, governance failings in Nigeria and all of Africa have been getting worse over time.

Each succeeding government performs worse than the one before it and seems to be led by toxic leaders. Toxic leadership simply refers to a leader who leaves a place worse than when he found it. According to Udenta, the reason for the failure in leadership and nation-building is a lack of understanding of HOW as a result of the incorrect diagnoses and application of the incorrect solutions. Udenta’s views and deeds serve as a link between theory and practice for the reason that he is preoccupied with the HOW question.

His experience mentoring many inspired him to co-found The Abuja School of Social and Political Thoughts (TAS), a bimonthly gathering place for intellectuals of all stripes to discuss the state of the nation and global affairs and suggest answers. The monthly Mbari Forum of the Association of Nigerian Authors (ANA), which takes place at the Maman Vatsa Writers Village in Mpape Abuja monthly, was likewise revitalised and given fresh impetus by Udenta.

His library holds up well against a school library in comparison. It’s hard to determine whether Udenta’s first love is his beautiful wife, his adorable kids, or the mountain of books that fuels his encyclopedic mind and knowledge fountains.

Before we eventually met, I had read about, heard from, and observed Professor Udenta in the mainstream media and on social media, like most curious intellectuals. I had met him in person at the Institute for Peace and Conflict Resolution in Abuja. Then, the controversy surrounding the Umaru Yar’Adua Presidency was at its height. The amiable President’s deteriorating health and eventual demise prompted the National Assembly to use the avant-garde theory of necessity at that point. It was this second meeting that was more purposeful and lasting and launched our intellectual exchange on a sustained basis.

He then practically screamed alone, challenging the circling vultures to leave Yar’Adua alone. Nobody was certain of the then-president’s true condition at that moment because it was cloaked in secrecy and held in the cabal’s frigid hands. Udenta, who is usually courageous and audacious, confronted the alleged cabal and assisted in preventing what had the potential to snowball into a major national tragedy and cataclysmic catastrophe.

Since then, we have remained steadfast in both good and strange times. He is an easy target in any audience thanks to his seductive language, bombastic eloquence, ability to infuse his writings and speech with ideological clarity, and depth of knowledge.

No matter one’s political views or ideological preferences, it is simple to discover Udenta to be a reliable friend, socially savvy, and intellectual collaborator. Though equally battling to hide the cerebral haughtiness and aloofness that go along with his degree of learning, he is socially astute and humble as well. He enjoys jazz and classical music very much and can give anything to see a live opera.

Udenta arguably has very few equals, making it difficult to classify him with other philosophers and thinkers of the present or the past. He is a distinctive public intellectual since he is more of a hybrid and eclectic thinker who extracts and appropriates the best of ideas.

Contrarily, Prof Udenta rather shuns the austere life of Marxists; he shares Awolowo’s conviction that one cannot practice socialism in rags; he lives comfortably a life reflective of both tradition and post-modernity.

Like another classic African (Kenyan) writer who also inspired him, Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, Udenta is an advocate for the total decolonisation of African literature as well as the African person. To live the lives of truly free Africans who can hold their own wherever in the globe, he changed his first name Lawrence to Udenta.

The case study and mirror image of my upcoming book, ‘The Psychology of the African Writer and Public Intellectual’, is Professor Udenta Okwuchukwu Udenta, better known as Udenta O. Udenta. This work was inspired by my distaste for the lives of most African writers, who devote more of their time to neocolonialism’s progress rather than dismantling it. The book makes an effort to define what an African writer and public intellectual should be, providing younger writers and thinkers with some clue on how to avoid becoming the kind of Africans Franz Fanon wrote about in his book: ‘White man, Black skin’. Udenta is directly opposed to that.

Udenta is a fundamentally black thinker who both thinks and lives as a black man. His pursuits of a better Nigeria and his praxis have made him a patriot, statesman, nationalist, pro-democracy activist, and civil society key figure.

I join countless others in wishing the professor a happy 60th birthday. I am honoured to be counted among your acolytes.

Army officers have appeared on national television in Gabon to say they have taken power.

They said they were annulling the results of Saturday’s election, in which President Ali Bongo was declared the winner.

The electoral commission said Mr Bongo had won just under two-thirds of the votes in an election the opposition argued was fraudulent.

His overthrow would end his family’s 53-year hold on power in Gabon.

Twelve soldiers appeared on television on Wednesday, announcing they were cancelling the results of the election and dissolving “all the institutions of the republic”.

They also said the country’s borders had been closed “until further notice”.

One of the soldiers said on TV channel Gabon 24: “We have decided to defend peace by putting an end to the current regime.”

This, he added, was down to “irresponsible, unpredictable governance resulting in a continuing deterioration in social cohesion that risks leading the country into chaos”.

Journalists from the Reuters and AFP news agencies said sounds of loud gunfire could be heard in the country’s capital, Libreville, following the broadcast.

There was no immediate response by the government to the soldiers’ announcement.

As in previous general elections in Gabon, there were serious concerns about the process in Saturday’s vote.

Main opposition candidate Albert Ondo Ossa complained that many polling stations lacked ballot papers bearing his name, while the coalition he represents said the names of some of those who had withdrawn from the presidential race had still been on the ballot sheet.

Campaign group Reporters Without Borders said foreign media had been banned from setting foot in the country to cover the vote.

As polls closed, the government announced a curfew and suspension of internet access for security reasons.

Both of Mr Bongo’s previous wins were disputed as fraudulent by opponents. This time, controversial changes were made to voting papers just weeks before election day.

Mr Bongo came to power when his father Omar died in 2009.

In 2018, he suffered a stroke which sidelined him for almost a year and led to calls for him to step aside.

The following year, a failed coup attempt saw mutinying soldiers sent to prison.

It was an opportune moment in Benin two days ago to reflect again on the lingering issues of the Nigerian federalism. The occasion was a colloquium organised by the Edo state government commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the old Midwest Region, from which the present Edo and Delta states have emerged.

Fitting tributes were richly paid to the memory of the leaders who led the struggle for the creation of the region. These historical figures included the first premier of the region, Sir Denis Osadebay, Oba Eweka II, Oba Akenzua II and the great nationalist, Chief Anthony Enahoro. Consisted with the theme, “60 Years After the Referendum, Which Way Midwest?,”  speakers at the forum looked back into history as they expressed hope for the future.     

The arrival of the Midwest into Nigeria’s federal landscape was remarkable in many respects.

On July 13, 1963 the federal government conducted a referendum to determine the wish of the people of the Midwest on the question of carving the area out of the old Western Region. Western region stretched from Badagry in the present Lagos State to Patani in today’s Delta state. Almost 90% of the people voted in favour of the creation of the new region as the fourth in the Nigerian federation at the time. In the last 60 years, more states have been created by successive military regimes. The four-region structure of 1963 is today a 36-state federation. Yet, the agitation for more states has hardly abated. 

However, as a former governor of Edo state, Professor Oserheimen Osunbor, put it in his goodwill message at the forum, because of its democratic content the story of the creation of the Midwest Region should be read in a fundamentally different way from that of the creation of any other state. The Midwest has been the only geo-political unit created based on the will of the people expressed in a popular referendum. According to Osunbor, just like the colonialists never reckoned with the people in the shaping of Nigeria, the military regimes also created states by decrees. In contrast to the use of force, the Midwest region arose out of political negotiations and mobilisation. Yes, there were manoeuvres in the process!. For instance, the prime minister himself, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, moved the motion for the referendum in the federal parliament. Doubtless, a lot of politics was played in the process as will be shown later in this column. But it was all legitimate. After all, like another scholar puts it, what is federalism if not a perpetual negotiation? The mere fact that two regions have emerged from the one region created 60 years ago is a proof that the political manoeuvres in a federation are unending. Perhaps, more than any other point, it is the democratic origin of the Midwest region that has distinguished it from the states subsequently created.

The standard case for state creation has been that this exercise in political engineering would bring development closer to the people. The chief host of the forum and Edo state governor, Mr. Godwin Obaseki, provided a yardstick to measure how far the dream has been realised. Obaseki aptly put it as follows: “Sixty years after the referendum, we are still bedevilled with numerous socio-economic challenges, which require a reset of the institutions and structures that propped the region up in the past.

“This is why we have undertaken holistic reforms of our institutions in Edo State in the last seven years. We have advanced reforms and innovations in various spheres of the economy that have opened Edo up for investment.

“We must continue to work together to overcome challenges, build on our successes, and sustain collaborations toward building a strong and virile region.”

The theoretical underpinning for the discussions was set by the director-general of the Institute of International Affairs, Professor Eghosa Osaghae focussing on the idea of  “federal solutions’” to the problems of federalism. State creation is a form solution. Other forms of federal solutions include devolution and decentralisation. For some, it could be outright separation. The political scientist paraphrased a famous authority on federalism, Sir Kenneth Clinton Wheare, to say that textbook prescriptions on federalism should only be used as guides because federalism would evolve practically according to the realities of a particular polity. Enthusiasts of the federalist option often call for ‘true federalism.” But as Osaghae reminded the forum, every nation would practise federalism according to its political, historical and cultural peculiarities. The American federalism is not identical to the Indian federalism. Neither is the Australian federalism identical to the Canadian federalism. So, instead of the pursuit of the phantom of a “true federalism,” genuine federalists should be more creative in making the Nigerian federalism workable. In Osaghae’s view, the Nigerian federalism has evolved as a result of the aggregation of federalist principles.  Referring to the 1963 referendum as a “bargaining solution” by a people poised for self-determination, he made a distinction between the “region-centred” and the “nation-centred’ approaches.

Other speakers built on Osaghae’s eloquent formulation. Another keynote speaker, Professor Edward Erhagbe harped on the imperative of “fiscal federalism” and the revision of the legislative list to give more powers to the state. A radical scholar, Professor Godini Darah, unequivocally called for “resource control” as the solution to the fundamental problems of Nigerian federalism. Darah advocated that Nigeria should rather go back to the 1963 Constitution in the same tone as elder stateman, Chief Edwin Clark. Former Nigerian Ambassador to Ethiopia, Mrs Nkoyo Toyo, and former Member of the House of Representatives identified the oppression of the “micro minorities” within a minority group. The contradiction between a minority group and a micro-minority within it is often eclipsed by the bigger contradiction between the minority group and a majority group. This trend is worth pondering because the issues of the Nigerian federalism are not only geographical; the ethnic bases are very pronounced.

Ambassador Godknows Igali, who moderated the colloquium, drew attention of the audience to the “elite consensus’” that was manifest in the politics of the creation of the Midwest region. For him, a pan-Nigerian approach would be indispensable in solving the problems of the Nigerian federalism. He challenged former Edo State governor and now a senator, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, to give an account of how members of the National Assembly from the south-south were forging elite consensus on solving the problems of the region.. Oshiomhole paid compliments to his successor, Obaseki, for appropriately organising the forum to reflect on the journey of the Midwest in 60 years and Edo state in the last 32 years of its birth.  He said senators from different parties representing the three districts of Edo state in the senate are pushing for the rehabilitation of the federal roads in the state. In his first few days in the senate, Oshiomhole moved a motion on the derelict state of the Benin-Auchi road which also links Edo state with Kogi state. Oshiomhole also called for the revitalisation of the concept of regional development bloc for the south-south states of Bayelsa (B), Rivers (R), Akwa Ibom (A), Cross River (C), Edo (E) and Delta (D) – BRACED. According to him, properly organised the BRACED Commission could propel joint development efforts that could make the south-south states a stronger bloc. Well, politicians usually focus more on states as federative units of sorts and less on economic regional blocs. Oshiomhole also made an observation that is worthy pondering by those still demanding creation of more states out of the existing 36: the more the federating units are atomised, the weaker they become relative to the centre. 

The element of the “elite consensus’ suggested by Igali would be crucial in achieving federalism as famously defined by K.C. Wheare: “the method of dividing power so that general and regional governments are each within a sphere coordinate and independent”.

One aspect of the Midwest story which was not emphasised enough at the symposium was that the elite consensus was not easy to forge in the creation of the fourth region. Balewa was enthusiastic to move the motion for the 1963 referendum. But the same prime minister was not eager to support the creation of the Middle Belt region which Joseph Tarka and other leaders of the region fought for gallantly. Leaders of the Middle Belt also wanted to be out of the Northern Region. Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe ‘s party, the National Council of Nigerian Citizen (NCNC) was at the centre of the demand for the creation of the Midwest Region and Osadebay, who emerged the region’s premier, was an NCNC leader.  The NCNC was not backing the creation of the Calabar- River-Ogoja  (COR) state out of the Eastern Region. Chief Obafemi Awolowo, the first premier of the old western region, was in custody and on trial for treason by the time the Midwest was created. In principle, Awolowo was not opposed to state creation of Midwest or any other region for that matter. As far back as 1947, Awolowo wrote in his book entitled: “Path to Nigerian Freedom” that the “ultimate goal” of the federalist pursuit should be the following: “Each group, however small, is entitled to the same treatment as any other group, however large… Each group must be autonomous in regard to its internal affairs. Each must have its own Regional House of Assembly.”  That was the position of his party, the Action Group (AG). And under Awolowo’s premiership, the Western House of Assembly in 1955 passed a resolution to back the demand for the creation of the  “Benin-Delta,” state. Benin-Delta state was the original name given to what later became the Midwest Region. Before the resolution, Enahoro, who was also a leader of the AG, had called for a conference in Sapele to demand for a Benin-Delta state.

As Oshiomhole said in his unusually brief goodwill message to the colloquium, telling the story of the factor of the Midwest in the evolution of the Nigerian federalism is a deep service to history. It was remarkable that a good number of young people were in the audience listening to the various perspectives brought into the important reflection.

Eminent historian, Professor Jacob Ade-Ajayi, once remarked that proceeding on the path of development without a good knowledge of history is like driving car without a rear-view mirror.  Doubtless, such a journey could be accident -prone. That’s why those policymakers who once removed history from the school curriculum committed an unforgivable error of judgment with their warped concept of education. A historical retrospection is important in discussing issues such as state creation so that all sides of the debate would be sufficiently illuminated.

All told, 60 years after the creation of the Midwest, the agitation for state creation has not ceased in parts of the country including Edo and Delta states. Looking back into history could, therefore, help in finding the federal solutions to geo-political problems of Nigeria.

The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) on Tuesday said it has identified its retail station and the individuals involved in the under-dispensing of fuel to customers in Port-Harcourt, Rivers State.

The oil firm said this in a statement posted via its official X platform on Tuesday.

The NNPCL made this known in reaction to a recent video circulating on social media showing NNPC Retail Ltd service agents under-dispensing fuel to customers in Port-Harcourt.

In its reaction on Tuesday, the NNPCL said it had identified the station and the individuals involved and has taken appropriate disciplinary action against the staff.

“Dear valued customers, our attention has been drawn to a recent video circulating on social media depicting NNPC Retail Ltd. service agents apparently under-dispensing fuel to customers.

“While taking these actions very seriously, we would like to inform the general public that we have identified both the station and the individuals involved and have taken appropriate disciplinary action against the staff,” the NNPCL said.

It said measures have already been put in place to prevent future recurrence of such incidents across our retail network.

The company explained that in the spirit of open and transparent communication with its customers towards effective service improvement, it encourages customers always to report any areas needing improvement at its over 900 stations through its social media channels and customer care lines.

“We regret this unfortunate incident and will continue to uphold the high standards and quality of service that are hallmarks of the NNPC Ltd brand,” it said.

[Premium Times]

The Spanish Football Federation is exploring its options over whether it can sack Women’s World Cup-winning Head Coach, Jorge Vilda.

Vilda remains in post despite most of his coaching staff resigning in protest against Federation President Luis Rubiales’ refusal to quit for kissing squad member Jenni Hermoso after their World Cup win on August 20.

Eighty-one Spain players, including all 23 World Cup winners, have also said they would not play for the team again while Rubiales remained in position.

Vilda was spotted applauding Rubiales at the Spanish Federation’s (RFEF) extraordinary general assembly last Friday, when Rubiales repeatedly insisted he would not resign, though Vilda has since criticised his behaviour. 

The RFEF believes all those incidents combined may give them enough of a case to sack Vilda.

Federation regional leaders held an extraordinary general meeting with interim president Pedro Rocha on Monday where they called for a restructuring of the federation to start a new era.

However, a third of the local football association bosses do not want to push Rubiales out of a job so they only went as far as releasing a statement calling on him to resign, which he has so far refused to do.

Rubiales stood by Vilda in September 2022 when 15 national-team players pulled out of the squad, saying that Vilda’s management was affecting their emotional state and health.

Of those 15, only three opted to return to the Spain squad which went on to beat England in the final in Sydney.

Rubiales, 46, has been widely criticised after the incident that followed that match. Hermoso, 33, said the kiss on her lips was not consensual.

Spanish prosecutors have opened a preliminary investigation into whether the incident amounts to a crime of sexual assault, while Rubiales was suspended on Saturday by world football’s governing body FIFA

[EagleOnline]

The Police Service Commission (PSC) has ordered the compulsory retirement of four Deputy Inspectors-General of Police.

The retirement is coming on the heels of the failure of the affected officers to retire voluntarily following the appointment of their colleague, Olukayode Egbetokun, as the Acting Inspector-General of Police.

The PSC, however, approved the appointment of four Assistant Inspectors-General of Police, Ibrahim Ka’oje, Daniel Sokari-Pedro, Ayuba Ekpeji and Usman Nagogo to the rank of DIGs pending ratification by the board of the commission to replace the retired DIGs.

The spokesperson for the commission, Ikechukwu Ani, disclosed this to journalists in Abuja on Monday, noting that the PSC gave the order in the exercise of its statutory powers pursuant to the Third Schedule, Part 1 M, para A&B of the 1999 Constitution, reinforced with Section 6 of the PSC (Establisment) Act 2001, para a, c, d, e, & f.

He explained that the order became imperative because the PSC had expected those DIGs who were seniors in rank prior to Egbetokun’s appointment as IG, to voluntarily retire, adding that such expected application was in consonance with the revered tradition of discipline and regimented culture of the Nigeria Police Force.

Ani said, “In the wake of the appointment of the acting Inspector-General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun on June 19, 2023 by Mr President, the Commission had expected in consonance with the revered tradition of discipline and regimented culture of the Nigeria Police Force that those DIGS who were seniors in rank prior to his elevation will voluntarily apply for retirement or elect to leave the Force.

“The Commission, having waited for ample time with no such application from any of them, took the decision to compulsorily retire them in order to uphold discipline which is the bedrock of the Force, and to discourage status reversal which is inherently inimical to the exercise of authority by the Inspector General.”

The newly appointed DIGs, who are without pending disciplinary matters and/or without any serious medical conditions and health impairments, according to Ani, were drawn from the same respective geo-political regions of the retired ones.

The four Deputy Inspectors-General of Police affected include Dan-Mallam Mohammed, Moses Jitiboh, Hafiz Inuwa and Adeleke Bode.

[NewsDirect]

Prof. Usman Yusuf is the former executive secretary, National Health Insurance Scheme. In this interview, he talks about developments in Niger republic and how they are impacting neighboring Nigeria.

A window for opportunity for dialogue has been opened with Islamic clerics moving over. Where government efforts are not yielding fruits, do private efforts appear to be indeed paving the way for peaceful resolution?

This window has always been there, it’s just that this government did not explore this window before going the military way; this window has always been there. There is a reason, you never start any negotiation with threats.

The threats have been passed before?

Absolutely, So ECOWAS dropped their last plan on the table, putting threats and saying, “if you don’t do this, we will do this, if you don’t do this, we will do this, then you say let’s talk? No, that’s exactly what is giving them legitimacy in Niger, when they come in to attack us and people are rallying round, even those that did not like him, they are rallying round. So, this clearly shows the inexperience of our president as the chairman of ECOWAS; you do not bring violence upfront, there are lots of avenues and we have seen that.

The ECOWAS, what do you think they should have done, you said that negotiation should have been first, to invite the hunter or send a delegation.

Exactly what the elders in the North are saying because we know the people in Niger, they are our people, they are Zaburumas, they are Hausas, they are Kanuris, they are Fulanis; 53 percent of Nigerieans are Hausas, we have shared not only borders, 7 states in the North share borders with them; 5 out of the 7 northwestern states share borders with them, and Borno and Yobe too. We share heritages of language; we inter marry, we have religions same and all of a sudden both will go to fight them? Of all African nations, Niger has been the most steadfast ally of Nigeria, from the time in memory. Division of that border is just artificial.

In what ways have they aligned with Nigeria?

During the civil war, Gabon and Cote d’ Voire, the same Cote d’ Voire that is pushing to go into Niger, were against Nigeria. France, this same France we were fighting for in Niger were against Nigeria, and there was a treaty 60 years old, between Nigeria and Niger, that Niger should not damp River Niger upstream and in exchange, Nigeria will supply Niger with electricity and it has been cut off, as part of the sanctions, it’s wrong. The president of the federal republic of Nigeria cut the treaty unilaterally without consulting the national assembly. He didn’t have the right and the power to do that; he did that on behalf of ECOWAS. I have said before that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, you are now the president of ECOWAS.

He is the chairman of the summit of heads of states, he’s expected to provide leadership.

Leadership to Nigeria first, his primary responsibility; his primary constituency is Nigeria and Nigerians. Whatever is good for Nigeria should be what is put to the table.

So sometimes I think that perhaps what President Tinubu and ECOWAS are doing is some form of game of brinkmanship, push them to the limit, let the war exercise start, let the troop deployment start, he may not intentionally mean it, so as to force a response.

It’s absolutely wrong, this is what we call blaster, you don’t start a negotiation as a responsible leader and a responsible nation like Nigeria that way. “If you don’t do this, I’ll do this”.

They have joined issues with Nigeria, they have provided support intelligence and they have provided the sale of the Tucano jets.

Don’t talk to me about Tucano, Tucano is another big issue that we shouldn’t be talking about; they provided intelligence; in Agadas, United States has over 1,100 soldiers there, one of the largest drone bases, they are looking over you, maybe they are seeing what we are doing now, they are looking all over the Sahel, or have they ever provided intelligence to Nigeria, our Boko haram, where those Chibok girls are? Those bandits and their movement? They knew. Because one time they came with their helicopter and devastated a band of terrorists and picked one of their hostages and left, and now all of a sudden, they are telling us intelligence. Where have they been all this time?

I am saying it again and again and again, President Bola Ahmed should be very careful and not take us into this Niger, or it is going to be a proxy war between Russia and NATO and it’s going to be bad news for us; we Nigeria, we cannot go to Niger and forcefully, well the people that conducted that coup against Bazoum and his brigade of guards, so we are going to kill all the brigade of guards and pull Bazoum and be there forever.

Now that we have the window as the Islamic clerics for the first time, forcing that commitment from the military coupists to begin negotiations, how do we take advantage of it- ECOWAS, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the chairman

First thing, I said is take that threat of violence off the table, that window has always been there, all he needed was to call people within the North, please go through this channel; he should have done all these consultations before even convening ECOWAS meeting and at the ECOWAS meeting, he will present Nigeria’s position. Nigeria is the biggest power in ECOWAS and it will dictate the narrative, when you go and say when Americans are edging you, go and fight, and you place that on the table, everybody else will accept; well now Ghanaians are saying ”no way”, you’re not coming with us. It’s only Cote d’ Voire that is committing troops and we don’t have the troops for goodness sake, where are you going to get the troops in Nigeria?

Each of the 6 geo-political zones in Nigeria is on fire, you cannot pull troops out of the North west, neither can you pull troops out of the North east, the North central or the South east or the South-South. Where are you going to pull the troops from? South west, the number would be minuscule, where are the troops. And Nigeria is essentially broke, Nigeria is borrowing money to pay salaries, how are you going to fund this. My worry is that the United States or NATO would come and say “we will give you logistics, we will give you air cover, we will give you drone cover, we will give you funding to go and do their Business.” That’s why we are raising our voices, we are not going to allow that, I’ve said it again and again, any war against Niger is essentially waging war against northern Nigeria because we will bear the brunt of this.

Should ECOWAS come in directly or should they encourage the Islamic clerics and use them to further strengthen this opportunity?

It’s not even ECOWAS, its President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and his advisers. He’s been poorly advised.

So, should we discard the use of ECOWAS?

Oh yeah ECOWAS, we can do this, thank you very much, drink tea, go home, lets handle this. We are taking care of this.

What should be our minimum demand from the couples? Is it to restore Bazoum?

You cannot enforce that, you had better be able to make good on any threat you make, if you make a threat and you can’t make good on that, you look weak. The Americans say we’ll do this here, they have the capacity to do it. Let’s not be edged to doing America’s bidding. There are a lot of ways to do that, just like we did. What we expect them to do is -take that threat of violence off the table, ease the sanctions. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, you turned off that light, the switch, on a treaty that has been there. Unilaterally, put it back, what this is showing is goodwill, the best we can get is to pressure the junta to come up with a transition timetable as soon as possible, to ease out and allow democratic process to run.

A transition timetable even before previous military governments in Nigeria kept shifting till they perpetrated themselves in office

With the pressure of everybody else, it has been done before. President Obasanjo did it. Before you go even to ECOWAS, here you are, a president who’s barely 9 weeks old, he just recently moved into the villa, he has not even unpacked his bags, he wants to go to war, he doesn’t even have his team; the only people he has are his advisers and the Service chiefs, the Service chiefs have not even got their feet wet. They haven’t even found out what’s wrong in their places and how to make assessment and you’re taking the nation to war.

He has said it is ECOWAS that is taking the action and not himself.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu is sitting on that table because he’s the president of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, without that, he wouldn’t be there. He is responsible as the leader to say “I am going there, wherever you are” ECOWAS, United Nations, AU, you are there to protect the interest of Nigeria.

Should we as good neighbours spanning several decades, try to resolve this matter and engage them bilaterally, rather than multilaterally using ECOWAS; Should the president have said ”let me speak to the coupists directly, Niger republic, bilateral relations framework, ” should that have been an option?

What this is showing exactly is the inexperience of the government in the international scene. What this Niger crisis shows is that he shoots before asking questions. There has been a precedent, a history of Niger going into the coup and even killing a president and Nigeria coming in. Even in 2000, during President Obasanjo’s reign, in 1999, President Manaisara  was shot at the airport, there was a coup. President Obasanjo was just one year old.

ECOWAS did all the meetings and what happened. They said President Obasanjo, because he’s experienced and he had his cabinet, the minister of Foreign affairs was Sule Lamido. They went through the back door and continued negotiations, what happened was that eventually when he was moved from power, there was a transition and Mohammed Tanja became the president.

[Sun]

Governance is serious business. It demands gravitas, rigour, diligence, and urgency. Those saddled with the responsibility of managing public trust must do so with circumspection, sobriety, and solemnity. The mood of the country, today, dictates temperance and moderation in dopamine-raising fiestas by those so entrusted with public utility.

At a time of national disquiet, wild celebrations over public responsibility are simply not the way to show attunement to prevailing concerns. Public service, ordinarily, should command less festivity and more solemnity.

But there seems to be a shifting from the status quo.

On Channels Television’s Sunrise Daily on Monday, Ajuri Ngelale, presidential spokesman, said the President would not hesitate to sack any underperforming appointee. He said: ‘’The President has set the benchmarks. The question now is about enforcement, and the President has shown, as he did during his time in Lagos State as governor, that he is not someone who is afraid to fire anybody. He is not somebody that is afraid to levy quick sanctions to ensure that they get the results that he wants, because, ultimately, if this administration fails, they will not say a minister failed or a set of ministers failed. They will say President Bola Tinubu failed, and he will not accept failure.”

Ngelale’s statement stirred reactions – I believe for its unorthodoxy. In the past, non-performing public officials, some of them self-confessed, enjoyed uninterrupted tenures, and even re-engagement. An anomaly that hangs over the national consciousness like a wraith. But there are knowing signs that there is a shifting from that status quo.

At the inaugural federal executive council meeting, President Bola Tinubu gave members of his cabinet their marching orders. A statement issued by the presidency quoted the president to have said: ‘’Emphasizing that anyone thinking that appointments are fixed term appointments are mistaken, the President expressed confidence that the carefully selected cabinet members know that his government is a new one with a new approach and a new mandate to deliver for Nigeria without any lamentation or excuses.’’

The President was also reported to have told his ministers: “You and I know that expectations are high, and these are tough times. We must work hard and move ourselves to create a buoyant economy that will serve Nigeria.’’

And clearly discerning the mood of country, the President directed the Federal Ministry of Foreign Affairs to freeze the processing of visas for all government officials seeking to travel to New York for the United Nations General Assembly without proof of direct participation in UNGA’s official schedule of activities. This was said to be a part of measures to reduce the cost of governance. Under a tonnage of hardship effectuated by some very necessary and compelling reforms, Nigerians have asked the government to show concern by cutting the cost of governance. I believe the government’s gesture will be a continuum.

Things should be done differently and are beginning to be done differently. A new order from what it used to be. The otiose status quo should not be re-invented or perpetuated. Nigerians deserve a breath of crisp oxygen.

This shift from the status quo should advance further, bringing vibrancy, fecundity, and vigour to our system.

A shift from the status quo implies public officials should consider themselves as servants of the people, and not their sovereign; submitting to transparency and accountability.

A shift from the status quo means the business of governance must be done with private-sector discipline; goal-oriented, performance-driven, and with clear targets. The administration is already bringing this inclination to governance.

A shift from the status quo dictates fiscal discipline, prudence, patriotism, and competence in the management of our finances.

A shift from the status quo implies the pursuit of the national interest, unity, and peace of the country at all times.

A shift from the status quo dictates sustaining the stimulus of Renewed Hope. And it is a good start.

Good governance is the kernel of Nigeria’s development. Effective leadership will address a good number of today’s nettlesome challenges. The vexing problems with education, healthcare, security, unemployment, and electricity can be managed or palliated with responsible leadership.

But there is also the need for citizens to shift from the status quo. There is the place of leadership and there is the place of followership in building a country. Citizens have as much responsibility as the leadership. But it is fundamental for the leadership to be the rallying crucible; to be the trigger and nucleus for nation-building.

Nigerians across stations, persuasions and ideological and political leanings will need to play their role to keep the wheel steady and in forward motion. The civil society, the media, and we, occupiers of the office of the citizen, have our part to play. Nigeria is our collective patrimony. It is our responsibility to make it work. It is our responsibility to help the country blossom.