In Washington DC on Monday, 30 April 2018, then President Muhammadu Buhari and his host, then United States President Donald Trump, addressed a joint press conference to mark the end of the two-day visit of the Nigerian leader.  Buhari made some requests, among which was the US assistance in getting weapons and equipment to support Nigeria’s fight against the deadly Boko Haram terrorists that were rampaging the Northeast zone of the country. Interestingly, it was not President Trump’s promise to assist Nigeria that caught my attention, but his response to an unrelated question posed by one of the White House correspondents, Cecilia Vega of ABC News. She veered off to the turbulent issue of the Mexico border closure which was top on Trump’s political agenda.

True to his style, Trump took his time to explain to the audience the imperative of strong border security.  He described the proposed wall as a critical measure to enhance national security, arguing that it was essential to stop illegal immigration as well as drug and human trafficking. The closing statement by Trump was instructive. He emphasised that ‘any country that cannot secure its borders cannot control its own territory or ensure the safety of its citizens’. For the visiting Nigerian president, that message was either lost or not properly assimilated.  

Many factors have been attributed to the spate of insecurity in Nigeria over the past decades. Some of these are the rise of extremist groups, ethnic and religious tensions, economic disparities and poverty, weak governance and corruption, armed banditry and criminal gangs, as well as the effects of climate change that is fuelling farmer-herder clashes. In recent times, people have also referred to the activities of illegal miners in collaboration with some foreign groups. These factors have given rise to the activities of several non-state actors with unrestricted access to sophisticated weapons and ammunition used to regularly perpetrate violence against innocent people and members of the security forces and agencies.  In dealing with the threats, the country must be able to analyse the strategic centre of gravity of the violent non-state actors to enable it to provide appropriate response in both kinetic and non-kinetic forms.  

In tackling the spate of insecurity especially across Northern Nigeria, it appears that there has been no specific consensus, careful analysis and identification at the political level of what the strategic centre of gravity of the threat is, or it is simply overwhelmed with the intricacies of dealing with centres of gravity that could trigger political complexities and dimensions. The reason is obvious; anyone schooled in the business of crisis and violence management would understand without equivocation that in Nigeria today, what gives the various armed groups their strength is the unrestricted access to weapons and ammunition.  This is the centre of gravity of the armed groups and bandits, which the government must focus and direct its attention.  This can fundamentally be achieved by addressing the issue of our porous borders and the several swathes of unoccupied spaces across the country.  
On record, Nigeria has a total of 84 crossing points along the borders, many of which are unmanned. The terrain along the borders facilitates unofficial crossings in several areas apart from the official crossing points. Since the emergence of Boko Haram Terrorist activities with their firepower, many of the crossing points along the Northeast borders have been abandoned with the insurgent group enjoying freedom of action. Only recently, the Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael Institute’, a leading think tank and academy on international affairs raised an alert on the increasing presence of violent extremists in the Kainji Lake National Park, many of whom infiltrated through Benin Republic. It further observed the re-emergence of the extremist groups with Nigerian connections in some parts of Benin Republic.  

Over time, the battle against insurgents and bandits has assumed a relentless cat-and-mouse game, heavily complicated by the porous borders and extensive unoccupied spaces.  This provides numerous hideouts and escape routes from which bandits can easily slip through and flee to other unoccupied areas and sometimes across the porous borders when faced with intense pressure from the military.  The ease with which bandits cross into neighbouring countries not only exacerbates the challenge, but also provides them opportunity to regroup and rearm to launch new attacks once the military’s focus and attention shifts elsewhere.  This vicious cycle of violence and evasion makes it difficult for security forces to establish long term stability in most of the affected areas.  

In his book ‘When States Fail: Causes and Consequences’ published in 2004, Robert Rotberg examined the multifaceted phenomenon of state failure, identifying its root causes among which is the inability of the state to control its borders.  Porous and unprotected borders exacerbate internal security threats which lead to unregulated flow of weapons, insurgents and contraband. Rotberg’s analysis underscores the diverse perspective that the failure to secure borders is both a symptom and a cause of state collapse. Nigeria is obviously not a failed state; the latter is, however, the fear and reason why conscientious and timely efforts are necessary to rejig our border security arrangement so that the effects of the porous borders do not allow the country to degenerate into a failed state.
 Nigeria’s current border security arrangement leaves much to be desired.  It is grossly inadequate to secure the country from threats and intruders especially around the Northern borders. The Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo acquiesced to this while inaugurating a 13-man Integrated Border Governance Committee in September 2023, to develop a plan to adequately secure Nigeria’s borders. The violence often unleashed on the citizens by well-armed extremist groups and bandits who infiltrate the borders has shown that the nation can no longer rely on the Nigerian immigration and Customs Service alone for the security of the borders.  Those criminal groups who violate the borders and fizzle into the adjoining unoccupied spaces within Nigeria to take abode have shown overwhelming capability that the two agencies cannot match.  

To address the gap, Nigeria must develop an integrated border security system that would combine physical security measures with modern technology, like strategies used in the US, Turkey and India.  It must consider the use of ditches, walls, wire barriers, surveillance devices and armed drones where necessary.  Nigeria could also emulate India and the US, where border security force is established to deal with infiltration of terrorists, arms smuggling and illegal trafficking of people along the borders.  Now is the time to build a credible, robust and bellicose border security guard force that will be well equipped to serve as the primary focus in the overall integrated border security arrangement. In addition to its primary task of securing the borders, the border guard force would also provide security and protection to the existing border control agencies and enable them to perform their duties without hindrance.  The border security guard force which must be well resourced could be placed directly under the Nigerian Army or the Defence Headquarters to prevent issue of rivalry and enhance coordination.

•Olawumi, a retired Major General of the Nigerian Army and former NYSC Director General is a member of THISDAY editorial board

Last week, the Honourable Commissioner for Justice and Attorney General of Ondo State, Dr Kayode Ajulo SAN, joined the Chief Judge of Ondo State, Hon Justice Ayedun Odusola as well as other stakeholders in the administration of Justice to visit the Correctional Centers across the State where a total number of 57 inmates were released. 

During the visits, 15 inmates were released in Akure; 18 in the Ondo male facility; six at the Ondo female facility, and 18 at Okitipupa, unconditionally.

According to the Chief Judge of Ondo State, it was the first visit ever by any AG of Ondo State for such a purpose. 

Those who were pardoned in Olokuta Custodial Centre include an 81-year-old man, Isiaka Momodu, who had been standing trial for two years and three months over unlawful carnal knowledge; the duo of Odeh Friday, 35 and Peter Ufomadu, 30, awaiting trial for alleged robbery and conspiracy for more than five years; Ismaila Abdulrasaq, 36, standing trial for three years was released for lack of witnesses; Emmanuel Ianna, 32 standing trial for two years over conspiracy.

Other inmates released include 65-year-old Prophet, Taiwo Komolafe, Dele James, 38”; Danladil Kuku, Peter Sunday, Emmanuel Isaac, Ayomide Oladeji, Wale Olaolu, Ola Ojo, Joseph Amos,45; and a teenager, Essan Doland, all charged for stealing.

In Ondo, 57-year-old, Ayo Odunsi and Sola Ayemibo who were standing trial for alleged murder were pardoned based on legal advice from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP), while Training Ebegbe and Okutu Elokumo, 32 charged with kidnapping were released unconditionally on critical health ground.

At the female custodian centre in Ondo, those released were; a 29-year-old nursing mother, Grace Akinsanmi charged with stealing and was released on humanitarian grounds, Yusuf Sherif 39, who was standing trial for concealing the death of a newborn baby for two years while Opeyemi Oguntimoju, 32; Olasunkanmi Kolawole, Joy Anthony and Bukola Oyatunde who were charged for stealing were pardoned.

Others released were: Adams Isiaka, 33; standing trial for unlawful possession of firearms, Edet Ezekiel, 25; charged for beach of peace, Samuel Kastin, Gbenga Dadeni, 44; Mukaila Yisa, 28; Tunde Ibrahim, 41, Philip Samuel, 28; Samson Paul, 25; Joseph Okon, 25; Emmanuel Okuti, 34; Emmanuel Peter,22; John Fanen, 34; Biliaminu Muhammed, 42 all charged for stealing.

In Okitipupa, a 63-year-old Muhammad Basiru charged with kidnapping was pardoned on health grounds, while Sunday Miracle, 20; Segun Adeniran, 30; James Anthony, 23; Goodness Sunday, Ibrahim Isaiaka, Adeluwoye Imoleyin, 21; Eze Emmanuel and other 10 inmates standing trial for stealing were released unconditionally.

This act highlights the State government led Governor Aiyedatiwa’s commitment to upholding the rule of law and ensuring fair treatment within the correctional system. It is a progressive approach to justice and rehabilitation within Ondo State, marking a new chapter in the State's commitment to humane and equitable legal practices.

The pardon not only offers a second chance but also reflects the government's dedication to upholding the principles of justice and fairness.

Action Group on Free Civic Space (AGFCS) is a loose network of individuals and different organizations working on different issues, but collectively committed to defending the civic space in the country.

The Action Group on Free Civic Space (AGFCS) urges the Lagos State Government to uphold impartiality and non-discrimination in its criminal justice administration, especially with respect to the criminal charges brought against Fredrick Nwajagu, aged 67, known as 'Eze Igbo' of Ajao Estate”. Mr. Nwajagu was arrested in April 2023 for allegedly threatening to invite members of the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) to Lagos to protect Igbo properties. This ‘statement’ was made in response to the persistent threats and attacks on Igbos and their properties in Lagos during the Lagos State governorship election in 2023. In a viral 49-second video, Nwajagu called on IPOB to protect Igbo shops and properties against these incessant violent attacks.

Arrested by the Department of State Services on April 1, 2023, Mr. Nwajagu was charged with misconduct likely to cause a breach of peace. The police prosecution claimed that Mr. Nwajagu’s statements inviting IPOB to Lagos contravened Sections 168 (d) and 411 of the Lagos State Criminal Law, 2015. A Lagos magistrate ordered his remand pending legal advice, and the case was adjourned to May 3, 2023. The Lagos State Government later charged him with terrorism under Sections 12(a) (c), 18, 21, and 29 of the Terrorism (Prevention & Prohibition) Act, 2022.

What remains visible in Nwajagu’s case is the glaring shadow of selective application of security laws, inconsistent with the principles of impartiality and non-discrimination. Nwajagu issued the alleged threats in response to the violent attacks on Igbo people in Lagos State by certain persons that remain free till date. These provocative and violent attacks aimed at disenfranchising the targeted ethnic groups and influencing political choices during the 2023 elections in a particular direction. It is absurd that while Nwajagu languishes in prison, the initial attackers have neither been arrested nor prosecuted. In contrast, the Nigeria Police downplayed the initial threats and attacks, dismissing them as a joke.

The Nigerian constitution expressly prohibits discrimination and envisions a society founded on justice, equality, and non-discrimination. Nwajagu’s case not only demonstrates a brazen disdain for constitutional protections, but exemplifies deeply-entrenched application of selective justice and ethnic discrimination in Nigeria’s criminal justice system. The failure to arrest and prosecute those who attacked Igbos in Lagos in the first place, while swiftly arresting and prosecuting Nwajagu, fuels suspicion of ethnic bias. Selective justice undermines the rule of law, breeds resentment, and fuels social strife. The authorities must ensure that all individuals who break the law, regardless of ethnicity or political affiliation, are held accountable.

Therefore, the AGFCS calls on the Lagos State Government to demonstrate impartiality and non-discrimination in its criminal justice administration by withdrawing all charges against Mr. Nwajagu and releasing him, as he has already spent over 15 months in prison awaiting trial. We urge the Governor of Lagos State to direct the Commissioner of Justice and Attorney General to enter a nolle prosequi in the case, ensuring Mr. Nwajagu's immediate release from prison.

Signed:

1. Rule of Law and Accountability Advocacy Centre, Lagos

2. Centre for Community Empowerment in Conflict and Peacebuilding, Kaduna

3. Foundation for Environmental Rights Advocacy and Development FENRAD Nigeria, Abia State

4. Partnership for Social and Environmental Development Initiative- P4SEDI. Cross River State.

5. Centre for Justice, Empowerment & Development (C4J), Port Harcourt, Nigeria

6. Open Society on Justice Reform Project, Lagos

7. Citizen Centre for Integrated Development and Social Rights - CCIDESOR, Imo State

8. Foundation for Livelihood Advancement, Imo State

9. Vision Spring Initiatives, Lagos

10. Ojena Foundation, Imo State.

11. Spaces for Change, Lagos

12. Human Rights Social Development and Environmental Foundation (HURSDEF), Rivers State

13. Centre for Human Rights Advocacy and Wholesome Society (CEHRAWS), Aba, Abia State

14. Global Organization For Youth Enlightenment and Development GOYED, Anambra state.

15. Institutional and Sustainable Development Foundation, FCT Abuja

16. Initiative for Safety Security and Educational Development in Nigeria. IPSSED Network, Enugu

17. Divine Era Development and Social Rights Initiative (DEDASRI), Enugu

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has affirmed Dr. Asue Ighodalo as the duly nominated and authentic governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Edo State.

In a Judgement delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, on Wednesday, the Court declined jurisdiction in the Edo PDP candidate's case involving a forged voter's card.

The Court held that the allegation of a forged voter’s card is not one of the requirements for disqualifying a governorship candidate under the Nigerian 1999 Constitution.

The suit was filed by the impeached deputy governor of Edo State, Philip Shaibu, Anselm Ojezua, and one other.

Justice Omotosho held that the suit, being a Pre-election case, was filed outside the 14 days allowed under Section 285(9) of the Constitution.

The judge ruled that even though forgery or non-possession of a voter’s card was a disqualifying factor under Section 182 of the Constitution, the plaintiff failed to prove that Ighodalo forged his voter’s card as alleged by the plaintiffs.

The honourable justice therefore dismissed the case for lacking in merit.

Recall that Asue Ighodalo emerged as the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in a keenly contested primary election that held on February 22, 2024, at the Samuel Ogbemudia Stadium in Benin City, Edo state.

He polled a total of 577 votes, beating 10 other aspirants to clinch the party’s ticket.

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has affirmed Dr. Asue Ighodalo as the duly nominated and authentic governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Edo State.

In a Judgement delivered by Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, on Wednesday, the Court declined jurisdiction in the Edo PDP candidate's case involving a forged voter's card.

The Court held that the allegation of a forged voter’s card is not one of the requirements for disqualifying a governorship candidate under the Nigerian 1999 Constitution.

The suit was filed by the impeached deputy governor of Edo State, Philip Shaibu, Anselm Ojezua, and one other.

Justice Omotosho held that the suit, being a Pre-election case, was filed outside the 14 days allowed under Section 285(9) of the Constitution.

The judge ruled that even though forgery or non-possession of a voter’s card was a disqualifying factor under Section 182 of the Constitution, the plaintiff failed to prove that Ighodalo forged his voter’s card as alleged by the plaintiffs.

The honourable justice therefore dismissed the case for lacking in merit.

Recall that Asue Ighodalo emerged as the governorship candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in a keenly contested primary election that held on February 22, 2024, at the Samuel Ogbemudia Stadium in Benin City, Edo state.

He polled a total of 577 votes, beating 10 other aspirants to clinch the party’s ticket.

In “Finding long-lasting solutions to Nigeria’s woes”published on 11 June, 2024, I commented on a post sent to me by a comrade and classmate at “Great Ife”, Wale Olajire Ajao, titled “The role of the public space in a democracy” In it, I disagreed with Wale that critics do not necessarily have to offer suggestions; the role of defending the government, he said, rests squarely on the shoulders of the public relations managers of the government. Today, I am honouring my pledge to publish Wale’s treatise in full (with little editing because of space constraints) and to further explain why I disagree with some of his views. Read on:

“Public space can be defined as any medium or avenue made available for citizens to express views on the public affairs of a society. Such mediums could be above-the-line, below-the-line or on-line channels. Among above-the-line channels are magazines, newspapers and electronic mediums like radio and television. One of their major characteristics is that a vast or mass audience can be reached at a time. For example, Tokyo Daily in Japan or Washington Post in the USA can circulate up to five million copies daily. Below-the-line channels include leaflets, posters and interpersonal communication channels such as letters or intra-organization communication channels like house journals or newsletters and other new media avenues like WhatsApp group where up to two hundred members of the platform can exchange ideas by chatting up one another. On-line channels are usually new media avenues like e-mail, Facebook, X and WhatsApp. On-line channels can disseminate information faster than traditional media like newspapers and magazines . New media can also reach the vast majority of communication consumers more than newspapers and magazines. Electronic channels, however, can reach the audience faster than any new media channel.

The common characteristic of any public space channel is that it is an avenue for the exchange of ideas. In effect, in the public space there is bound to be advertisement and dis- advertisement of ideas. This is so because in the public space, it is ideas and opinions that are in competition; not the owners of the ideas or opinions. Views compete for attention in the public space. It is clear, therefore, that in a democracy, the public space is open to all the stakeholders to express their views. In popular language, the right of a stakeholder to express his or her opinion on any issue of public interest is what is described as the citizen’s fundamental human rights. This means that each citizen has an equal right of access to the public space. No citizen has a right to inhibit another citizen from expressing his opinion. Therefore, the first thing all users of the public space must accept is that each citizen has equal access or equal right to the public space whatever their opinion. In effect, it is clear that all users of the public space cannot have the same opinion on an issue. Therefore, the first condition for a proper use of the public space is that all users must allow others to express their views without harassment or intimidation. One major demand which the public space makes on all users is what is known as the right of reply. Just as every citizen has a right to express his opinion, it is also the right of everyone to reply to whatever has been put in the public space which they agree or disagree with.

One very clear role of the public space is that it gives everyone the right to react to whatever they agree or disagree with. This means, for example, that if Mr. Julius Akpojiovi is fond of writing only negative things about Nigeria, other users of the public space can respond by publishing what is good about Nigeria. That is how to use the public space. Whenever someone expresses an opinion that is not acceptable, those who disagree have the right of reply. Democracy thrives on difference of opinions because it provides for the right of expression and right of reply. In a democracy, no one should abuse another person just because of difference or divergence of opinions. The public space can accommodate everyone because it has provided freedom of speech or freedom of expression as well the right of reply. It is an abuse of the public space to abuse or attack someone just because of his or her opinion. All a good user of public space has to do is to exercise his right of reply whenever and wherever he deems it necessary. When stakeholders refuse to abide by the freedom of speech and the right of reply, they endanger democracy by unwittingly resorting to gagging the press or polluting the public space. When people are threatened or attacked just because of their opinion, the society loses because it is when two opposing camps engage in a debate that stakeholders can have a deeper understanding of the issues at hand.

One common manifestation of abuse of the public space is to resist or be openly intolerant of dissenting opinions. Critics of the government are often regarded as enemies of the government simply because they criticized the government. Supporters of the government often say that those who criticize the government should come up with alternative views or suggestions for the government to consider. But the rules of the public space do not include making suggestions to the government. In other words, a critic who does not have suggestions to make to the government has not violated the rules of the public space just because he did not make suggestions to the government. In fact, his duty is not to make suggestions. His duty is to criticize. If someone has made destructive criticism, the media officers of the government or those supporting it may choose to exercise their right of reply. No more no less!

The beauty of democracy is that the traditional media law has a way of dealing with mischief-makers who deliberately publish falsehoods against the government or fellow citizens. There is the law of libel; there is also the law of defamation targeted at any medium which publishes libelous information. The fact that new media has been making it difficult to punish those who publish falsehood is the reason governments all over the world are calling for new laws to regulate it; just like it obtains for Facebook, X, WhatsApp, etc. With new media, so many things can be thrown into the public space by anonymous authors. In fact, new media has turned everyone into a journalist, which is not so with the traditional media because not everyone acting as journalists in new media today was trained to be one. Newspaper editors will not accept for publication many of the materials we see on new media because they are not ethical and are injurious to society and the public space.

In effect, new media is potentially capable of abusing the public space because it is abusive of people with dissenting opinions; it also contains falsehood or deliberate distortion of facts and figures. In Europe and America, more and more people are calling on the government to look for ways of streamlining the use of new media. In fact, in China and some Asian countries, new media is not licensed to operate. One other common source of abuse of the public space is when non-experts on a subject insist that everyone on a platform must accept his view as an authority on the issue at hand . Such persons often easily resort to abusing people with dissenting opinions.

In conclusion, the most important role of the public space is that, in a democracy, it allows everyone to speak their mind without fear of intimidation. The public space provides for freedom of expression and the right of reply, both of which make abuse or attack unnecessary. This is more so as there are ready laws to tame offenders”.

The only aspect of this beautifully-crafted piece that I disagree with is where Wale posits that critics need not provide suggestions; I think they should for many reasons. One: It will drastically reduce the number of ignoramuses who simply jump on board, especially on social media, to run their mouth. Two: The suggestions they make will let us know the stuff of which they are made. Three: Those in government do not have a monopoly of knowledge; therefore, suggestions from all manner of places will be of benefit to everyone. Four: Scriptures say in the multitude of counsel, there is safety (Proverb 11: 14). So, counsel and advice cannot be too much. Five: It is a known fact that many of those who walk the corridors of power seldom tell our leaders the truth. Leaders are often cut off from reality; they get caged. A high-ranking senator made this same allegation recently. Six: Since we all have a stake in getting our problems solved and making our country better, offering possible solutions is one way of contributing our own quota to making the country great. If, truly, the rules of the public space is as Wale has said, then, it should quickly be amended to put a burden on critics. Otherwise, criticism just for the sake of criticism is mere hot air; a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing! Apologies, William Shakespeare! Aside from political partisans, skit makers and comedians qualify as some of the most vicious violators of the rule of the public space. How to rein them in without violating their freedom of speech is a challenge.

The assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump on July 13 at a campaign rally in Pennsylvania has sucked the oxygen from the debate on President Joe Biden’s fitness for a second term. The discussion will resurface, but Democrats should forget it. The party is stuck with Biden.

The odds are daunting. It must feel like a difficult marriage heading for a shipwreck. However, with only four months to the election, facing the odds is the only way to overcome them. Expectedly, Biden doubled down on his decision to run after the presidential debate with Trump left the president looking like the victim of a car crash.

He has tried to redeem himself several times and has snagged on his speeches every time. Yet, despite his frail health, stumbling speeches, and the mocking caricatures in the media, Biden insists he would stay in the race.

“I know I’m not a young man,” Biden said after the debate with Trump. “I don’t walk as easy as I used to. I don’t speak as smoothly as I used to. I don’t debate as well as I used to, but I know what I do know — I know how to tell the truth!”

Stuck on him

As doubts about his fitness persist, one truth that he weighs is whether it’s in his party’s best interest to run. With a heavy heart, it’s fair to say that the answer is yes. Democrats are stuck with Biden. However worrying the prospects of a defeat – particularly a defeat to Trump – might seem, Biden’s candidacy still gives the party the best chance to win or rebuild.

Some think Biden should let Vice President Kamala Harris run. She has received support from members of Congress, especially from her state of California, women organisations, progressive activists, and sections of the Asian American community.

Her supporters have given reasons, from her relatively younger age to the likelihood that, given her background as a prosecutor and Attorney General, she would pay more attention to issues like criminal justice reform, immigration and healthcare. Others have added that her ethnic nationality would bring diversity to the ticket and energise Latinos, Asians and Blacks, who are increasingly important demographics among voters.

Others, like Illinois, Pennsylvania, and Michigan governors, have also been mentioned as possible Biden replacements, but none would appear as viable as Harris. Yet, for all the promises she offers, there are many reasons Biden, instead of Harris, remains the Democrats’ best card.

Remember Hilary?

Hilary Clinton, former First Lady and Secretary of State, apart from being a senator, a white woman and one of the best-kept secrets of the deep state, could not defeat Trump in 2016 because America was not ready. It was unprepared to discard the bogey of an “evil” Clinton dynasty. It was – and still is – unprepared for a female president.

Sure, more women are serving in the US Congress today, and voters’ attitudes toward having a female president have slightly improved. But not so fast when a woman of colour is on the ballot.

We never know what might have happened if Hilary challenged Trump again in 2020. But she declined not only because the previous contest had left her with deep emotional scars but because the Democratic party had also come to the inevitable conclusion that in what was supposed to be a post-modern society, gender – and the elephant in the room, race – remained a big issue.

It’s unlikely that Harris would succeed where Clinton failed, a hint that may also be responsible for Michelle Obama staying out of the race despite her popularity in the opinion polls.

Harris’ bonafide

Harris’ slim chance against Trump has little to do with her credentials. She was a former Attorney General and senator from California who formed a bipartisan coalition to enact a $1 trillion investment in infrastructure to remove every lead pipe in the US. She has also been on the frontline to reform the healthcare system, especially among the vulnerable, and reduce gun violence, among other things.

On a typical day, Harris is an asset to the Democratic party and might still be for some time. But this November election is an unusual one. America is deeply divided, and trust in politics is so severely broken that a Wall Street Journal poll indicated that even though this is the first presidential rematch in five decades, nearly 10 per cent of voters are still undecided.

That shouldn’t be because voters have records to judge the contestants: Trump, the demagogue, cut taxes for the middle class and massively removed regulations, among other things; Biden, on the other hand, has recorded two crucial years of job growth in a long time and managed to keep the economy steady, despite the supply chain disruptions of COVID-19. Inflation has taken a significant toll on families but could have been worse.

The jury is out on voters’ feelings, especially where it matters most: their pockets. Although the demographics of the undecided population – less educated, less wealthy, less politically aware and engaged, less interested in politics, but definitely more diverse – should favour Harris, the “silent voters” or “hidden Trump voters” who blindsided pollsters and torpedoed Clinton eight years ago are still alive and well.

Teflon Trump thrives in scandals. Today’s Feeble Joe is not the same Biden who faced Trump four years ago and got away by the skin of his teeth. While he is weaker, frailer and poorer even at sharing his accomplishments in the last four years, his opponent, Trump, has been emboldened by his worst excesses. The race for the US presidency is a match-up between horror and uncertainty.

Strength in weakness

Yet, Biden’s weaknesses, especially his common touch – not Harris’ strengths – are the Democrats’ most potent weapon against a candidate who would lie, cheat, inflate, incite and routinely invent stories to get by. It’s a hard thing to say, but Biden, with all his frailties, is the medicine for Trump’s demagoguery.

Biden stepping down at this time will further weaken and divide the Democrats, giving them very little time to rally before the election. And if the worst, a Trump victory happens – which I think is improbable – then the party would have the chance to rebuild from its potentially less fragmented ruins.

What’s in it for Africa? Heads or tails, not a lot. Trump made clear that it was America first and last and the rest of the world, especially Africa, was shithole. Some still romanticise the Biden Senate years, when he spoke against apartheid, railed against injustice in the Middle East and pursued global peace through multilateralism.

A new Biden

That was then. The Biden of the last four years has massively funded Ukraine’s senseless war with Russia, a meat grinder if ever there was one, and paid scant attention to Africa. He has also proved utterly ineffective in getting Benjamin Netanyahu to stop the killings in Gaza.

The election in November is not about Africa. It’s about whether an exceptional country that lost its way in 2016 – with horrific consequences for the rest of the world – is determined to lose it yet again.

Ishiekwene is the Editor-In-Chief of LEADERSHIP and author of the new book Writing for Media and Monetising It.

In stagecraft, ventriloquism stands out as one of the most entertaining and yet peculiar types of comedic performances. A lifeless puppet or dummy is placed on the thigh of a ventriloquist who inserts his hand into the body of the puppet. The ventriloquist mumbles words and creates a false illusion that the lifeless dummy is the one talking while it is, in fact, the ventriloquist that is secretly moving the lips of the dummy.

In his book titled ‘The Art of Ventriloquism: How to Throw Your Voice’ George Callahan teaches how to misdirect. The dummy has no mind of its own. It is an inanimate object incapable of imagination, speech, or motion but is still able to entertain an audience.

Enter Sam Oritsetimeyin Omatseye, the chairman of the editorial board of The Nation Newspaper owned by Bola A. Tinubu. To the undiscerning, Omatseye is a columnist who uses flowery language to express his opinion on topical issues. But a closer look would reveal to the discerning mind that this so-called writer is nothing but a puppet of his ventriloquist, Bola Tinubu.

In Omatseye, Tinubu has emerged the perfect puppet master pulling the strings and diverting attention from himself. This 63-year-old who ought to be a role model to the younger generation of journalists has sadly left his body and soul to the control of Tinubu, his master.

The sad part is that no one is spared from his vitriol. In June 2011, he penned a libellous article titled, ‘Awo Family Without an Awo’, where he launched an attack against the revered family of the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo and his wife, HID.

“This woman whom Awo once described as the jewel of inestimable value has lost value to his cause. If he came back to life, he would have committed the extraordinary act of divorce after death. Even his newspaper, The Tribune, has so stumbled and fallen that it swims in Awo’s vomit,” he infamously wrote.

The baleful article was crafted to diminish the legacy of Chief Awolowo just because many believed that Tinubu – the man who forfeited $460,000 to US authorities for alleged drug trafficking – was not worthy enough to tie Awolowo’s shoe laces yet alone compare to his matchless legacy.

During the last election, this same cantankerous writer described the Labour Party candidate, Peter Obi, as ‘Obituary’ because Obi dared to contest against his master.

His latest tirades are now directed towards former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and ex-Governor Nasir el-Rufai. Omatseye attacks Atiku weekly just because he seeks to run for office, which is his constitutional right.

Omatseye also pours invectives on el-Rufai and his children just because Tinubu suspects that he, the former Kaduna governor, still harbours a grudge since his controversial removal from his (Tinubu’s) ministerial list.

This unscrupulous writer is not bothered about the latest report by the United Nations that 82 million Nigerians will go hungry by 2030. He is unnerved by the fact that in Kaduna, Katsina, and Kano, bakeries are shutting down because food has been priced beyond the reach of the poor.

Omatseye is not bothered by the fact that over 20 million Nigerian children are out of school. He has no qualms about the exit of multinationals and the resulting job losses. He is unperturbed by the insecurity that claims hundreds of lives on a monthly basis, which has forced farmers to flee and contributed to the 40% spike in food inflation.

This agent of distraction sees no evil in the fact that a woman who was denied a fresh term in the Lagos State House of Assembly after hoarding COVID-19 palliatives meant for the poor has been smuggled back as one of the managers of the Nigerian Social Insurance Trust Fund (NSTIF) which holds billions of naira on behalf of workers.

Omatseye’s only assignment, like the puppet he is, is to distract the public. His duty is to attack Tinubu’s opponents merely because they dare to exist. But Tinubu needs to put an end to the charade. Even the feeble minded are aware that Sam Omatseye is only a weapon, an attack dog at best who takes a cue from the whistle of his master.

Unfortunately for Omatseye, once the stage play is over and the curtain is drawn, the ventriloquist will throw the dummy into the attic where it gathers dust. Were Tinubu proud of Omatseye, he would have treated him the way a mentor treats his protégé. He would have appointed him information minister or presidential spokesman or he would have put him in charge of the National Orientation Agency or the News Agency of Nigeria but even Tinubu knows that a puppet can never be fit to become a ventriloquist’s apprentice hence Omatseye has remained stagnant as chairman of The Nation’s editorial board since 2006.

Paul Ibe is the Media Adviser to Atiku Abubakar, Vice President of Nigeria (1999-2007) and Presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (2023).

Each time the issue of cutting costs of governance is raised, most attention goes to the public officials’ salaries and allowances, including their retinue of aides and vehicles. Another popular area of focus is the Steve Orosanye Report which recommended pruning down the number of ministerial departments and agencies by scrapping or merging some of them.

 No doubt, these two instances are valid, especially given the prevailing dire economic situation in Nigeria. But there is yet another critical aspect that is mostly overlooked.

 That is the menace of abandoned projects. It is largely downplayed in national discourse yet it portends a great threat to the infrastructural and economic development of any nation.

 Among other several causes, lack of funding, poor budgeting, litigations and corruption account for project abandonment. Similarly, its numerous effects include creating avenues for economic wastage, providing hide-outs for insecurity or criminality as well as breeding grounds for dangerous animals and then propagating poor environmental aesthetics and hygiene. Abandoned health facility projects are a threat to the lives of the citizenry. Abandoned educational projects deprive the citizens of the opportunities to develop and enhance their living standards. Then, of course, the implications of abandoned roads, housing and electricity as well as industrial developmental projects are numerous.

 Put succinctly, abandoned projects constitute wasted opportunities for national development.

 Hence, a responsive government does not play politics or pay lip service to this issue of great concern. A people-oriented government is dispassionately concerned about employment and wealth creation opportunities including in some cases, lives, lost due to the absence of these basic amenities. It is not certainly about politics or about who initiated the projects. It is about the intentions and inherent benefits for the economy or end-users.

 This is the reason well-meaning Nigerians lauded the recent decision of the 10th Senate to set up an ad-hoc committee to investigate the reported case of 11,866 projects abandoned by the federal government since Nigeria’s independence in 1960. Not just, perhaps, since this republic, but since 1960!

 The question on every lip was: why would successive governments allow such a humongous waste of public resources to grow to this alarming level?

 One can only imagine the amount of money that will be saved and invested productively if only the government can deploy sufficient will to make a policy against initiating fresh projects in sectors where there are existing abandoned ones.

 For instance, a forward-thinking governor should identify and seek to complete abandoned projects in their domain that are of strategic socio-economic importance. It does not matter whether they were initiated by the federal government or previous state governments. This they can do either through partnership or requesting a refund upon completion. In an extreme case, they can approach the federal government with a request to convert such abandoned projects to state use, depending on their natures.

 Hence, the governor of Enugu State, Peter Mbah, recently earned widespread approvals for demonstrating a high level of strategic thinking and prudence in governance. He offered to collaborate with the Nigerian Communications Commission to see to the completion of the Digital Bridge Institute which was abandoned for over a decade along the Ibagwa-Ugwuogo-Opi-Nsukka Road in the state.

 This project was proposed to become the South-East training centre for manpower and expertise in the communications industry.

 It was facilitated by Senator Gilbert Nnaji. Motivated by emerging superior opportunities, he sought to make it the Southeast campus of the first African University of Information and Communication Technology. A bill on his name to that effect was ongoing before the termination of the 8th Senate.

 Meanwhile, this visionary initiative received an impetus from the Muhammadu Buhari administration. The then Minister of Communication, Adebayo Shittu, had announced that “we already have the Digital Bridge Institute, which is for short-term training programmes in six locations across the country and we will transform this institute into the ICT University of Nigeria. This unique university will, by God’s grace, take off effectively in September 2017 and will be run as a Public Private Partnership with the best business and entrepreneurship models.”

 He added, “I have engaged with several stakeholders at the international level – Facebook, Motorola and Ericson – and I am still talking to more stakeholders. We are encouraging them to come and adopt the respective university campuses as their own. I am happy to report that this project is receiving a global boost and endorsement. The committee set up has been working round the clock on the realisation of this objective, and has indeed submitted its final report. A vice chancellor and other senior officials will soon be appointed”. He was later to visit Enugu to ascertain the viability of the project.

 Nine years down the line, nothing has happened. Again, after eight years of Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi and one year of Peter Mbah respectively as governors of Enugu State, the project remained abandoned, despite being almost completed. Instructively, the project got to its present stage of completion when Sullivan Chime was concluding his second term in office.

 This informed the accolades that trailed Peter Mbah’s display of uncommon will and acumen. As a progressive-minded leader, he saw the overriding need to recover the wasted opportunities and create more, for the oncoming generations by extending a hand of fellowship for the ultimate realization of the dreams of the project.

 After he met with the executive vice chairman of the Commission, Aminu Maida, the governor announced that “our discussions focused on strategic initiatives to enhance collaboration for the advancement of Enugu State and the nation at large. We deliberated on several key projects, including the completion of the Digital Industrial Park in Enugu State, which is poised to become the South-East’s innovation hub. We also discussed ensuring that the Digital Bridge Institute is finalized and commissioned, subsequently exploring plans on transitioning it to a digital skills university or institute of technology”.

 It is also noteworthy that Mbah has since commenced works at the International Conference Centre which was initiated by the government of Chimaroke Nnamani and abandoned in 2007.

 This is a rare mix of leadership, pragmatism and patriotism at play. It is an open challenge for the other governors to look around their states for possible avenues for collaboration with the federal government, in the overall interests of the masses. Similarly, it is a statement to the effect that legislators should be true agents of meaningful development for their constituencies and states. In their core functions of representation, law-making and oversight, their focus should be on the things that offer life-enhancing opportunities for the people.

 In this regard, Senator Gilbert Nnaji stands out and deserves commendation for thinking home. He has since left public office but the products of his visionary leadership are still visible and impactful.

 Apart from the DBI project and quoting from a credible source, “as Chairman of the Senate Committee on Communications, Nnaji contributed immensely towards Communication Technology development and advancement in the country. Through his legislative interventions and in furtherance of his ideology that it is through qualitative technology  education that Nigeria can attain a knowledge-based economy, he sponsored a motion on the Integration of ICT in the Secondary School Curricula and also a bill for an Act to Establish the Information and Communication Technology University of Nigeria”.

 Records also reveal that “added to his numerous landmark investments in human capital development, Senator Gilbert Nnaji” ensured that all the tertiary institutions in Enugu State, both private and public, including the teaching hospitals, are equipped with various kinds of ICT facilities for qualitative teaching and learning. He used 58 post-primary schools to demonstrate the efficacy of ICT laboratories in technology  education.

 Commenting on this initiative by Peter Mbah to complete the DBI project, Senator Nnaji said “I am not only happy but my heart is full of joy. It is with a sense of fulfilment that I received the good news. Although I am not surprised that my brother and governor, Dr. Peter Ndubuisi Mbah, is making this positive move. When you see a true leader, nobody will tell you. If you have an opportunity to listen to his dream and vision for our Enugu State, you will agree with me that he is indeed on a rescue mission. So, I am overjoyed and grateful to God that the dream behind the project is becoming a reality”.

 On why the previous state governments could not look in that direction, he added that “our people say that God’s time is the best. So, there is no need to go back to history. Peter Mbah has done the needful and the people of Enugu State and Nigeria will never forget him for this singular show of wisdom and foresight. That is how governance should be. Am sure that other legislators will now be encouraged to bring more developments home”.

 Indeed, the joy of post-public service life is to sit and see how your legacies are serving the interests of the people.

 So once again, as we celebrate Governor Peter Mbah for his display of visionary leadership and prudence in governance, Senator Gilbert Nnaji, with this and many other legacy accomplishments, deserves our commendation.

 But this is just to wish him a happy birthday as he turns 58.

Egbo writes from Abuja.

The Major Energies Marketers Association of Nigeria (MEMAN) has disclosed that the landing cost of Premium Motor Spirit, also known as petrol, was ₦1,117/litre as of Tuesday, July 16, 2024.

MEMAN disclosed this during a webinar with journalists on Wednesday.

The association revealed that the landing cost of diesel was ₦1,157/litre, while that of aviation fuel was ₦1,127/litre.

MEMAN’s Executive Secretary, Clement Isong, said the costs were obtained from independent energy price benchmark providers.

The association maintained that it would release similar information regularly to keep the masses informed.

According to Punch, filling stations operated by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) and those of the major marketers sell PMS at between ₦617/litre and ₦660/litre, while independent marketers sell for ₦700/litre or more.

NNPC, the sole importer of petrol into Nigeria, has consistently denied subsidising the cost of PMS but refused to disclose the landing cost of the product.

The revelation from MEMAN is almost the first from marketers in the industry as the landing cost appears to have been shrouded in secrecy by the importer of PMS.

An expert in the energy sector, Wumi Iledare told the aforementioned publication that, “The gap between the cost of diesel and petrol in Nigeria is much. It is never like that all over the world. That means something is wrong.

“I don’t know if NNPC is paying subsidies or not, but somebody is absorbing the difference. You can call it under-recovery or subsidy, but the price of petrol today does not reflect the market cost of producing a litre of petrol,” he disclosed.

Iledare added that with the current exchange rate, the price of petrol should not be less than 80 per cent of the price of diesel.

[NaijaNews]

The exchange rate for duties collection by the Nigeria Customs Service (NCS) has risen by N3 above the official closing rate of the Naira on the NAFEM window.  

Checks on the customs exchange rate portal reveal that the FX rate for duties collection stands at N1584/$ while the naira closed at N1581 to the greenback on the 17th of July, 2023 according to FMDQ data.  

The current customs duties exchange rate of N1584 /$ is one the highest since March 2024 when the naira depreciated near the N1600/$ mark.  

In recent times, the naira has weakened against the USD despite efforts by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to boost supply in the foreign exchange market. 

Increase in FX turnover 

Last week, the Nigerian official foreign exchange (FX) market experienced a notable surge in turnover, rising by 40%. Data gathered by Nairalytics, the research arm of Nairametrics, from the FMDQ indicates an increase of $292.75 million, from $740.92 million last week (July 1 to 5, 2024) to $1.03 billion this week (July 8 to 12, 2024). 

The last time the weekly FX turnover exceeded the $1 billion mark was in the first week of June, with a total of $1.05 billion recorded. The rise in FX turnover comes on the heels of CBN’s tacit intervention in the foreign exchange market by selling FX to authorised dealers.  

CBN sale of FX to authorised dealers 

• The surge in FX turnover this week was driven by a two-day sale of dollars worth $122.67 million to 46 authorized dealers by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). 
• In a statement by Dr. Omolara Duke, the Director of Financial Markets at the CBN, it was disclosed that the apex bank sold $67.5 million to 27 authorized dealers and purchased $2.5 million from one authorized dealer on Wednesday.
• The bid range for these transactions was between N1,480/$1 and N1,500/$1, with payments scheduled for July 12, 2024, following a two-day settlement cycle (T+2). 
• Last week Thursday, the CBN sold $55.17 million to 19 authorized dealers at a rate of N1,540.0/$1. No foreign exchange was purchased on this date, and payments for these spot sales were due on July 15, 2024.
• The CBN also urged all authorized dealers to ensure that foreign exchange purchases from the bank are exclusively used for trade-backed transactions, which must be reported within 72 hours.  
• The renewed gradual depreciation of the naira comes as the apex bank prepares for its fourth Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) meeting next week where it will decide whether to hold or continue interest rate hikes.  

[Nairametrics]