The Forum of Southeast Academic Doctors (FOSAD) has expressed its dismay at the content of the 50th Inaugural Lecture, titled "The Igbo Factor in the History of Intergroup Relations and Commerce in Kano: Opportunities and Challenges Revisited," recently delivered by Professor Ahmed Bako at the Usmanu Danfodio University, Sokoto (UDUS). According to the group, Professor Bako misrepresented historical facts at various points in his lecture, and also engaged in typical Igbo profiling, teasing a xenophobic position that negates the integrative spirit of the Nigerian constitution.

As an academic advocacy group in part dedicated to understanding the diverse peoples of Nigeria and the broader tapestry of Nigerian history, FOSAD says it had looked forward with great interest when Professor Bako's impending lecture was announced. The group says it had expected that, as a professional historian, the professor would present the history of Igbos in Kano - and their broader history in northern Nigeria - with depth and dispassion.

To be fair to Professor Bako, FOSAD says, he met the expectation to a degree at various points in his presentation. Citing credible scholarly sources, according to the group, Professor Bako correctly historicized the impetus behind Igbo emigration to other parts of colonial and post-colonial Nigeria.

FOSAD also says the professor correctly portrayed the enterprising nature of the Igbos who left their homeland over a hundred years ago to take advantage of opportunities presented in the colonial administration of Kano and other parts of the North.

Despite this incontestable historiography, FOSAD says Professor Bako - for reasons it cannot fathom - advanced some arguments that are not supported by historical evidence or contemporary fact.

One of the controversial and historically dubious claims made by Professor Bako, according to FOSAD, is his statement that Igbos set out in the colonial era to dominate Nigeria. As the professor put it in his lecture: "The Igbo in actual fact from the 1950s started sending their sons and daughters to Europe and America for higher education; all with the hope of eventual domination of the country; not necessarily for developing it for the benefit of the nation." FOSAD says this is a provocative and historically inaccurate statement which calumniates the Igbos and misconstrues their legitimate attempt to compete in colonial and post-colonial Nigeria.

The academic group disputes the claim that Igbos ever sought to dominate Nigeria, pointing out that Professor Bako never provided historical evidence to back up his controversial assertion. The group also says that Igbos are known to invest in and improve any locality where they are domiciled, sometimes even at the expense of their homeland.

FOSAD disputes Professor Bako's statement that Igbo traders, with their supposedly aggressive trade practices and insular trade groups, displaced indigenous traders in Kano or anywhere else in the colonial and post-colonial North. The group recalls many collaborative ventures between Igbos and indigenous people of Kano and elsewhere in the North, and argues that the more than century-old sojourn of Igbos in northern Nigeria would not be possible with the alleged Igbo aggressiveness.

The group also points to the successful settlement of northerners in parts of Igboland which continues to this day, despite the terrorisation of Igboland by Islamic bandits and militant cattle herders from the North.

Similarly, FOSAD decries Professor Bako's silence on events that led to the Nigerian civil war, his selective account of the devastations and after-effects of the war, and his rather rosy depiction of the post-war policy of indigenisation which short-changed the Igbos but, in his recounting, was depicted as entirely beneficial to them. Professor Bako broached the issue of Igbo dispossession through the "abandoned property" saga; but nowhere in his historiography, according to FOSAD, was there a mention of the grim prospects faced by Igbos who had to scratch up a new existence in post-war Nigeria with the £20 given to them whatever their pre-war bank account balance.

According to FOSAD, the most vexatious part of Professor Bako's lecture is his suggestion that Igbos self-marginalized themselves in the Nigerian political arena by focusing almost exclusively on commercial and mercantile pursuits in the post-war period. This couldn't be further from the truth, FOSAD says, as Igbos have fully participated in the politics of the country, despite the fact that there has yet to emerge - fifty-four years after the civil war - a Nigerian president of Igbo extraction.

In this regard, FOSAD says it strongly condemns Professor Bako's labeling of Ohanaeze Ndigbo, a socio-cultural organization seeking to promote Igbo unity and interests in Nigeria, as a secessionist outfit. Although the professor disclaimed an interest in contemporary politics, he nonetheless made a pointed reference to "current contestations on the question of power shift as well as agitations for separation by Igbo political platforms such as the IPOB, the Ohanaeze Ndigbo worldwide and other Igbo separatist groups." FOSAD says this is a gross mischaracterisaton of Ohanaeze's - and, by extension, broader Igbo - political outlook.

The academic group says this is more worrying given that Professor Bako concluded by saying he hoped his lecture "generates greater interest in the history of Igbo Diaspora in different parts of the country," and that the lecture was delivered for "the northern elites to know what actually happened so that necessary arrangements are made."

FOSAD says it wonders why an academic of Professor Bako's standing should be wondering whether Igbos would ever depart northern Nigeria, despite the integrative aspiration of the Nigerian constitution (1999) which at Section 41(1) provides that "Every citizen of Nigeria is entitled to move freely throughout Nigeria and to reside in any part thereof, and no citizen of Nigeria shall be expelled from Nigeria or refused entry thereby or exit therefrom."

FOSAD calls on all Nigerians to celebrate their shared citizenship, and to embrace their common interest in building a great country which could become the pride of Africa and beacon of Black civilization.

FOSAD Research & Documentation Team:
Dr Chudi Okoye
Dr Marcel Mbamalu
Dr Chris Belonwu

Signed
Dr Stephen Nwala, FOSAD President

Dr Uzor Ngoladi, FOSAD, Secretary General www.fosads.org

It took me less than one hour into President Bola Tinubu’s administration to spot a giant red flag. His famous words at the inauguration, “subsidy is gone”, instantly set off an alarm in my head. In my article on it, ‘Why (Most) Nigerians Oppose Subsidy Removal’ (June 4, 2023), I wrote: “With all of Tinubu’s experience in government, I thought a presidential pronouncement on such a very sensitive and emotive topic could have been better managed.” My worry, on hearing his declaration, was that it lacked strategic thinking and it was going to create chaos everywhere as there would be panic buying. Little did I know that chaos was going to be the core administrative model of his government.

To start with, President Muhammadu Buhari budgeted for petrol subsidy for only the first half of the year. It went without saying that from July 2023, subsidy would be gone — unless his successor decided to retain it. Why, then, was Tinubu in a hurry to announce the death of subsidy one full month ahead of schedule? The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Ltd, aka NNPCL, quickly issued a statement to “clarify” that the announcement would take effect from July, but it was a waste of time. That would only lead to hoarding and hardship. A couple of days later, NNPCL announced a new price of N488/litre in Lagos, up from N185. In other parts of Nigeria, it was as high as N557.

When Tinubu made the ill-advised Eagle Square declaration, the price of crude oil was $75/barrel and the FX rate was N463/$. In June 2023, when the pump price of petrol was adjusted, I understand that the base assumption was an exchange rate of N600/$ — thereby creating some wriggle room in case of depreciation of the naira. Two weeks later, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) decided to float the naira in its “willing buyer willing seller” policy which — as overly optimistic projections go — was supposed to stimulate the inflow of billions of dollars into the economy, undercut the black market and stabilise the naira around N650/$ at most. The poorly managed float ended up killing the naira.

In July 2023, the theory and practical of floating parted ways as the naira started spinning out of control, hitting N800/$. The Tinubu administration reacted by increasing petrol price to about N600. Thereafter, the naira went fully naked in the FX market, crossing the N1,000/$ mark in September 2023 and racing towards N2,000/$. To make matters worse, oil went up to $93/barrel. However, petrol price remained unchanged. Shockingly, the government and NNPCL insisted there was no subsidy. By the end of August 2024, the FX rate was about N1,600/$ and oil was close to $80/barrel, but petrol remained N617. Amazingly, NNPCL kept saying there was no subsidy, just “a shortfall”.

Alhaji Umar Ajiya, the chief financial officer (CFO) of the NNPCL, added some comedy to the tragedy, saying: “What has been happening is that we have been importing PMS, which has been landing at a specific cost price, and the government tells us to sell it at half price. So, the difference between the landing price and that half price is a shortfall.” Ajiya was only doing what NNPCL historically does: pulling the wool over our eyes. Now that NNPCL has adjusted petrol price to around N855/litre, we are still being told government does not fix the prices, that the market has been “fully” deregulated and it is the market forces that are at work, or at play — a barefaced lie that will go unpunished.

Before the latest price hike, NNPC was buying petrol at N1,200 and selling at N600. To cover the “PMS shortfall” from January to July 2024 alone, NNPC forked out N4.2 trillion. By December 2024, we will have spent about N8 trillion on “PMS shortfall” for this year alone — money that should have otherwise been shared by the federating units. Even if we (expectedly) steal or waste 50 percent of it, there will still be some N4 trillion left to spend on education, roads, health, water, etc. As our forefathers would say, “at all at all na him bad pass”. That is, half a loaf is better than none. The reality is that we have been subsidising petrol consumption since most probably August last year.

Nigerians have been very patient with Tinubu but it appears he does not appreciate this. He would do well to come clean on this subsidy issue. The starting point is the need for conceptual clarity. What exactly is he trying to do? Is he increasing petrol price to reduce the subsidy bill? Or is he trying to generate more revenue from the sale of petrol? When he says “subsidy is gone”, is he deregulating the pricing so that any marketer can buy petrol and sell at a price that covers the cost and provides a profit margin — as the case has been with diesel for decades? Or is he just making a political statement for the cameras? Until we know what he is doing, we cannot have a meaningful debate.

Secondly, it is very clear that there was no preparation for this policy. There was a lack of proper thinking — and this should be surprising for someone who said what he wanted in his life was to be president. You would think he had developed a solid blueprint over the years, but the impression I keep getting from the day he was sworn in till now is that he has been doing things on an ad-hoc basis. For a major issue like the pricing of petrol, you would have expected scenario painting. If the cost of petrol per litre is x, are we going to sell at x plus profit? Or are we going to modulate the price? Where will funding come from? Floating the naira after removing the subsidy was so reckless.

Thirdly, the lack of transparency in the whole game is so irritating. Why is Tinubu playing games? While NNPCL and Senator Heineken Lokpobiri, minister of state for petroleum, were busy playing with words on the latest petrol price hike and saying it was all about market forces, Tinubu was saying in faraway China that the increase was because he had to take “hard decisions” for the sake of Nigeria’s development. Don’t they have a WhatsApp group where they can co-ordinate what they tell Nigerians? In any case, “subsidy scam” was one of the catch phrases the APC used to oust the PDP in 2015. Buhari famously asked: “Who is subsidising whom?” It is now an albatross around APC’s neck.

On assuming power and seeing the reality of subsidy in 2015, the first APC administration resorted to semantic sophistication, preferring to call it “cost under recovery” — as if that would solve any problem. They belatedly ended the denial by finally calling a spade a spade. The second APC administration, headed by Tinubu, has rebranded subsidy as “shortfall”. Subsidy denial amounts to lying to your doctor about your illness. Obviously, the denial is also an ego thing. Tinubu, who reputably tamed the Atlantic Ocean, is also celebrated as having slain the subsidy dragon, thereby doing what Napoleon — and all previous Nigerian leaders — could not do. So why burst his bubble?

I know that petrol has been regarded as the most important product in Nigeria and issues around its pricing are tricky. Diesel pricing is free of government control and we have moved on with our lives. Same for kerosene and Jet-A fuel. The labour unions have never called a strike over diesel price, even though a large chunk of inter-state transport is by luxury buses which run on diesel. Most goods — foodstuffs, equipment, etc — are moved across the country by trucks and trailers running on diesel. Medium to large-scale businesses run on diesel. All these impact on the cost of living. Diesel was N700 when Tinubu came in and is now N1,300 or thereabout, but there are no calls for strike.

Why always petrol? I asked a senior friend last week and he reasoned that it was because it is one product that affects the life of every Nigerian. Really? More than the prices of garri, rice, yam, maize, tomato and beans? I have never heard that anybody went on strike because of rising prices of yam or rice. Does that mean Nigerians consider petrol to be more important than food? I don’t think so. My conclusion, which may be tenuous, is that we think, rightly or wrongly, that petrol is “government property”. Therefore, government should take sole responsibility for the pricing in the interest of Nigerians, whether or not it can afford the bill. We classify petrol as a socio-political commodity.

Early 2023, when petrol was N185 in Lagos, I told a filling station attendant that I had just returned from Ghana where a litre was about N700. He replied: “But their government is doing something for them. Fuel subsidy is the only thing we enjoy in Nigeria.” His sense was that Ghana was spending the revenue from petrol on its citizens. I wanted to explain to him that the Ghanaian government does not sell petrol, that it is purely the business of private companies, but courage failed me. Petrol price in Ghana is determined like the price of yam: how much did I buy it? How much did I transport it? How much will I sell to make a margin? We have been unable to achieve this in Nigeria since 1986.

I don’t know who brought up this idea that with Dangote Refinery, petrol would be cheap because it is locally refined. How? The major cost input is crude oil. If crude oil goes for $80/barrel, products cannot be cheap — except we subsidise the crude. A benefit of local refining is the elimination of shipping cost, which does not amount to much. Shipping is the cheapest form of cargo transport across the globe. The biggest benefit of local refining is that we would conserve the FX we spend on fuel imports. The downside, though, is that if we sell crude in naira, we will lose the opportunity to earn FX from oil exports and that could further hurt the naira. Every policy comes with a trade-off.

In the final analysis, whatever we do with petrol subsidy, there will be repercussions. We remove it, Nigerians will suffer but the treasury will suffer less. We retain it, Nigerians will suffer less but the treasury will suffer more. Know that, know peace. It is for the government to weigh its options. But this administration has been disingenuous. They should come out and tell us the truth with their chest. They should lay bare their thinking. Do you want to treat petrol as a socio-political commodity? Do they want to truly deregulate? Why play games? In 2024 — over 180 years after education came to Nigeria — we are still being treated as a colony of ignoramuses. It is what it is.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

GUTTER POLITICS

If you have been following the campaigns in Edo state ahead of the 2024 governorship election, you would be forgiven for thinking the most important issues are marital status and child-bearing. The PDP went on a campaign of taunting two of the leading candidates for being single or unmarried, while Senator Adams Oshiomhole (APC) went completely into the gutter by saying the incumbent governor and his wife are childless. How low can Nigerian politicians go in the struggle for power which, more often than not, is for the ultimate goal of personal aggrandisement and not the progress of the society? Unfortunately, their supporters will defend (or try to justify) the nonsense. Tasteless.

HATE SPACE

Canadian police authorities have arrested a 46-year-old Nigerian woman who allegedly made a hate speech — to the extent of vowing to poison the meals of people from some ethnic groups. The cyber space is full of hate speech but while Western countries are arresting and prosecuting the perpetrators, Nigerian authorities appear to be more interested in fighting personal battles for politicians and other VIPs over “cyber stalking” and “defamation”. They must also crack down on those cowards stoking ethnic and religious hate on social media. These characters think they can post whatever they like and go scot-free. They are a clear and present danger to this society. Action.

CYBER CRIMINALS

Other forms of cybercrime that are not taken seriously in Nigeria are sextortion and revenge porn. Two Nigerian brothers have just been sentenced to 17 and a half years in prison by a US court for sextortion. Samuel and Samson Ogoshi, 24 and 21 years old respectively, lured Jordan DeMay, a young American boy, to send them nude pictures, pretending to be a girl. They then threatened to spread the images except he sent them money. The boy sent all he could and threatened to kill himself, to which the criminals said he should go ahead. DeMay committed suicide immediately. It’s good Nigerian authorities helped with investigation but they need to be doing more at home. Tragic.

NO COMMENT

Prof. Tahir Mamman, minister of education, recently tried to get JAMB to bar students less than 18 years old from writing the UTME. After the uproar, Dr. Tanko Sununu, his minister of state, has come out to “clarify” the matter. “People just pick up some remarks the minister made, misinterpreted the statements to imply that age restriction has been placed for WAEC and NECO examinations,” he said. “What we have been mentioning was the entry age for university — candidates sitting for the UTME.” That is, you can write the senior school exam if you like but you can’t write the UTME until you are 18. The glaring difference between six and half a dozen. What a clarification! Wonderful.

The Presidency on Saturday said it has received the memo from the Spokesman for the President, Ajuri Ngelale, to proceeded on an indefinite leave of absence due to personal and health-related reasons.

This was disclosed in a statement shared on the X handle of the Presidency, @NGRPresident, and that of the Nigerian Television Authority, @NTANewsNow, on Saturday night.

Unlike previous statements by the Presidency, it was not signed by any official as it simply indicated “The Presidency” as the signatory.

It read in part,“The President has received the memo from Chief Ajuri Ngelale, Special Adviser to the President on Media & Publicity and Official Spokesperson of the President as well as Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action, informing of his decision to proceed on an indefinite leave of absence for personal and health reasons.”

Ajuri had earlier announced his decision to step down from his roles within the Presidency citing family related reasons.

In the statement, the President Bola Tinubu extended his heartfelt prayers to Ngelale and his family, wishing him a swift recovery and a complete return to good health.

The President also took the opportunity to acknowledge Ngelale’s tireless service to the nation, especially his remarkable contributions in advancing national discourse and spearheading critical initiatives such as climate action.

“The President recognizes Chief Ngelale’s dedication and thanks him for his efforts in various capacities,” the statement read

The Presidency further requested that the privacy of Ngelale and his family be respected during this challenging period.

Ngelale was appointed as Tinubu’s spokesman on July 31, 2023.

On 19 May 2024, was the first Special Presidential Envoy on Climate Action for the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

[Punch]

Todsy, the Super Eagles of Nigeria play against the Cheetahs of Benin Republic in one of the group qualification matches for the African Cup of Nations 2015.

The match will be played on home ground in Uyo, the only venue approved by FIFA as suitable for Nigeria’s Grade A international football matches. That speaks volumes.

Uyo is a venue with excellent facilities but that holds mixed fortunes for the national team. The beautiful modern city in the heart of Nigeria’s remaining rainforest area has hosted as many matches that have been lost as have also been won. It is a home ground that does not play out as one. Gone are the days when the home ground of the national team was described as ‘an abbatoir’ where visiting teams are ‘slaughtered’ on the hallowed turf of the ‘main-bowl’.

The Uyo Township Stadium is seen these days, particularly by visiting teams, as a neutral ground where they can come and stretch the patience of fanatical Nigerian fans. They do not fear coming there to play anymore. The myth of Nigeria’s invincibility at home has been broken, so, winning for the Super Eagles has become psychologically more difficult.

So, as they line out today, for the first time ever, Nigerians lack the usual confidence that their beloved Super Eagles will trounce the Cheetahs, a team that was Nigeria’s whipping boy for all the decades since football between both nations began. It used to be unthinkable that Nigeria could ever lose a football match to Benin Republic. If things were done correctly by Nigerian football administrators, both teams should never belong to the same planet of football. Haba.

Even today, the Cheetahs parade Nigerian players that fail to make the cut of the third-eleven of the Nigerian national team, yet they only have to stroll across the border at Seme, simply and easily change their nationality, and start to play for Benin Republic. These are some of the players that now constitute a real threat to the Super Eagles. This Saturday, they are coming, led by an aggrieved foreign coach, to attempt to terminate Nigeria’s shaky march to Morocco 2025.

The Cheetahs have become a real threat to Nigeria’s ambitions.

The Cheetahs are led by a man with an axe to grind with Nigeria. Gernot Rohr, a German, handled the Super Eagles longer than any coach since Clemens Westerhof in Nigeria’s football history.

At the end of his last contract, for not winning anything and for his team not being convincingly impressive. His contract was not renewed. He left angrily. A segment of the Nigerian media, particularly one suspiciously benefitting from his generosity or presence, somehow, supported and promoted his re-engagement by the Nigerian Football Federation and failed. Meanwhile, the NFF were under pressure from the people to win anything, even pako (wood), but they failed to do so. Reason prevailed, however, and Gernot Rohr was asked to leave. Since then, Rohr has been on a revenge mission.

The elements must have been enjoying the drama and stretched it further with the present plot where a once-rejected coach lies in the other path of Nigeria’s qualification.

He has won Round One on neutral ground in Abidjan, Cote D’Ivoire in a humiliating and convincing defeat of the former ‘giant’ of African football, a team that has diminished in stature and reputation and become vulnerable on home ground, threatened by all teams now, small or big, in African football.

Some analysts credit former minnows in Africa football with developing their football and earning their new place as worthy challengers on the continent. My truth, however, is that it is Nigeria’s decline at all levels of development (excluding female football), and a reflection of the state of the country itself.

The Super Eagles have lost the stronger feathers in their wings!

AFCON 2023, for a period of one month, showed glimpses of interesting possibilities and potential for greatness, but since then, the team has returned to their flightless nature of the past decade.

So, as the match today approaches, sadly, Nigerians are not brimming with their usual confidence. And that includes me. That’s why, also, the build-up to the match has been ‘humble’ and uninspiring. Expectations have been limited. This is reflected even in the team’s build up.

Without a coach until one week ago, the composition of the Super Eagles, as team of players, has not changed significantly from the team that inspired Nigerians at AFCON 2023, and dampened their spirit since then.

More or less, the same set of players are back in it. Captain William Troost-Ekong has fully recovered from a major injury and surgery, but has not played for the national team since February.

Africa’s current Player of the Year, Victor Osimhen, did not play the last set of matches with the Super Eaglesincluding the one against Benin Republic. His state of mind will be a big factor in his performance. It may either weigh him down, or be a source of challenge to prove that his absence was a factor in Nigeria’s loss. He has also been embroiled in several controversies, all of them psychologically dampening. These include his spat with the last coach of the Super Eagles, Finidi George, issues with his coach at Napoli, and issues around his end-of-season transfer saga, a very poor advertisement for his management, and a huge distraction for any meaningful preparation for this match in Uyo.

Victor is the last player to arrive at the Uyo camp with only 24 hours to train with the team for the first time since February. To start him in the line-up will even be a big gamble for coach Eguavoen who is handling the team without earning the right to do so.

Until a few days ago, the team did not have a preferred coach. In fact the team has not had a permanent coach since the team’s relative success at AFCON in February. In the period after then till now, there have been 3 different unsuccessful coaches that handled the team, including the man now saddled once again to do so on a temporary basis for the next two matches over a period of one week.

I feel sorry for Augustine Eguavoen. He is making his 4th appearance at the helm. Yet, he fails till now to secure the people’s confidence. He could neither negotiate nor reject an assignment that is laden with ‘poison’.

Should he ‘fail’ again, he would surely carry the can of responsibility. Should he succeed, his employers are already searching for a foreign successor. So, he has little motivation beyond self to deliver victory.

Finally, he is saddled with assistants that are untested ‘rookies’ in international football. How will the megastars in Super Eagles relate with these local handlers without their level of exposure and experience in playing or even coaching?

That’s the setting for the match this weekend in Uyo.

For once, I shall join in the night vigil for the Super Eagles.

I hope that, somehow, they find the motivation, inspiration and good fortune to inject some rhythm into their game, play with patience, be clinical in front of goal when the rare chances come their way, and win this match for all Nigerians.

Victory will provide a launch pad for hope and better performances ahead for the rest of their campaigns for qualification for AFCON 2025, and the FIFA 2026 World Cup.

I wish the Super Eagles the best of luck today.

 Mr Bonu Solomon, the lawmaker representing Badagry Constituency 1, Lagos State House of Assembly, has appealed to residents of Badagry communities to pay their electricity bills regularly.

Solomon appealed shortly after the restoration of the electricity supply to some communities in Badagry after almost two years of disconnection from the national grid.

He urged the residents of the affected communities to always pay their bills to avoid being disconnected again.

“We give thanks to God as EKEDC has successfully energised and illuminated our communities.

“I encourage all residents to acquire prepaid meters to prevent future complications.

“Prompt payment of electricity bills will guarantee a steady and reliable power supply directly to your homes,” he said.

Solomon commended the residents for allowing peace to reign in the communities during the outage.

“I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the community for choosing peace and allowing us to resolve this issue harmoniously.

“I am grateful for the trust and support you have shown me.

“Please ensure timely payment of your bills to enjoy uninterrupted electricity services,” he said.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that on May 9, some Badagry communities had lamented the prolonged power outage of over 18 months in the area by the Eko Electricity Distribution Company (EKEDC).

The communities affected by the outage include Jegba Quarters, Posikoh, Huntoh, Farakoh, Igbaho and Awahjigoh.

Mr Arowolo Lukuman, the Chairman of the Electricity Committee of the area, said the outage, which occurred on Oct. 22, 2022, was due to a fault on a transformer.

He said the outage had paralysed the economic and social activities of their communities.

[Vanguard]

Less than 24 hours after he made headlines for a controversial statement, Monday Okpebholo is back in the news again — for a not-so-good reason.

During his campaign rally at Ovia-north LGA on Thursday, the All Progressive Congress (APC) candidate for the Edo governorship election goofed while addressing the crowd.

“We’re going to provide you with insecurity,” Okpebholo said in video clips now making the rounds on social media.

Adams Oshiomhole, senator representing Edo-north and former governor of the state, who was standing beside Okpebholo on the podium, was seen signaling to him, after which the candidate corrected himself.

“We are going to provide you with security; we are going to fight insecurity,” he then said.

“We’re going to make sure that the evil ones are out of our land. This land does not belong to kidnappers.”

On Friday, video clips of Okpebholo saying he would repair interstate roads and claim double the amount from the federal government if elected surfaced online.

The governorship election is scheduled for September 21, and Okpebholo is up against Asue Ighodalo of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and Olumide Akpata of the Labour Party (LP) and 14 other candidates.

[TheCable]

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, is no stranger to the struggles between governance and the expectations of the masses. As democratic practices have evolved over the years, so too has the discourse around governance, transparency, and accountability. A recurring theme in the political landscape is the growing chorus of criticism directed at those in power, often dismissed as “wailers” by government sympathizers. However, a deeper look at the situation reveals that this so-called wailing is rooted in concerns over misgovernance, rather than an outright opposition to democracy itself.

Since Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999, the country has witnessed fluctuating fortunes in governance. Promises of development, economic prosperity, and improved welfare for citizens have often been sidelined by pervasive corruption, poor policy implementation, and a lack of accountability from political leaders. Over time, these issues have resulted in widening inequality, high unemployment rates, an economic downturn, and a growing sense of disenfranchisement among ordinary Nigerians.

Democracy in its true form is meant to serve the people, ensuring that their voices are heard and their needs met. Unfortunately, many Nigerian politicians seem to have misinterpreted democracy as a system that allows them to pursue personal interests at the expense of the people they swore to serve. This disconnect between the government and the governed is the crux of the widespread dissatisfaction, and it is here that the term “wailers” comes into play.

In Nigeria’s political lexicon, the term “wailers” has been used to mock and diminish critics of the government. Those who speak out against poor governance, failed promises, or questionable policies are often lumped together and ridiculed as wailers by the ruling party’s loyalists. But who are these so-called wailers?

Wailers, in reality, represent a cross-section of concerned Nigerians who refuse to stay silent in the face of misgovernance. They are the voices demanding accountability, transparency, and good governance. Far from being a nuisance, their outcry is essential to keeping democracy alive. In a functioning democracy, dissent and critique are vital in holding leaders accountable. Wailing, as it is condescendingly termed, is simply an expression of frustration that the democratic promises of good governance are not being fulfilled.

The irony of the situation is that the government, which should be responsive to the needs of the people, often deflects legitimate criticism by labeling it as mere noise-making. Misgovernance, under the guise of democratic leadership, has unfortunately become a recurring theme in Nigeria’s governance cycle. When policies fail, the economy tanks, or social services crumble, the government points fingers at external factors or past administrations, conveniently ignoring the systemic issues within their own ranks.

By dismissing legitimate concerns as wailing, the government and its supporters misunderstand the true essence of democracy. In a democracy, the people are sovereign, and their cries should be taken seriously, not mocked. The wailers are not enemies of the state; they are citizens fighting for the democratic values that the government itself should champion.

One of the greatest threats to democracy is silence in the face of injustice. If Nigerians stop wailing, if they cease to express their dissatisfaction with the state of affairs, it would signify the death of democratic engagement. The very fabric of democracy is woven with threads of dialogue, debate, and, yes, even dissent. When citizens are too afraid or too disillusioned to speak out, misgovernance flourishes unchecked.

The current state of Nigeria demands active citizen participation. The wailers, far from being misguided or obstructionist, are crucial to Nigeria’s democratic project. They are the individuals who dare to ask the hard questions, who refuse to accept mediocrity, and who push for a better Nigeria. Silencing these voices only perpetuates the cycle of misgovernance that has plagued the country for far too long.

For Nigeria’s democracy to truly work there must be a shift in how criticism is viewed. Instead of dismissing critics as wailers, the government must engage in constructive dialogue. There needs to be a space for civil discourse where the concerns of the people are addressed, rather than dismissed.

Without a doubt, democracy thrives when there is an ongoing conversation between the rulers and the ruled. This conversation should be respectful, transparent, and aimed at improving governance. The current trend of labeling dissenters as wailers only deepens the divide between the government and the people. Nigeria cannot afford such division, especially at a time when the country faces numerous socio-economic challenges.

The misunderstanding of the wailers in Nigeria is symptomatic of a larger issue: the disconnect between the government’s perception of democracy and the realities of misgovernance. As long as legitimate concerns are mocked and ignored, misgovernance will continue to thrive. It is time to reframe the narrative around dissent and to understand that those who speak out are not wailers but advocates for a better, more just and more democratic Nigeria.

In the end, misgovernance and democracy are at odds with each other. The wailers, far from being a nuisance, are a crucial part of the democratic process, fighting for the very values that Nigeria’s democracy is supposed to uphold. Their voices must not only be heard but respected as part of the nation’s quest for genuine progress.

The age-old adage, “The pen is mightier than the sword,” encapsulates a profound truth about the influence of ideas and communication in shaping societies. While the sword represents brute force and violence, the pen symbolizes intellect, creativity, and the power of words. It is against the foregoing backdrop that this writer is in this context exploring how the written word has historically triumphed over physical might, influencing change, inspiring movements, and fostering understanding.

Throughout history, humanity has witnessed numerous instances where the written word has led to significant societal transformations. Consider the impact of influential texts such as Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”, which galvanized the American colonies towards independence. Paine’s persuasive arguments and eloquent prose inspired a revolution, demonstrating that ideas can mobilize people far more effectively than weapons.

Similarly, the abolitionist writings of Frederick Douglass and Harriet Beecher Stowe played crucial roles in the fight against slavery. Their words not only raised awareness but also humanized the plight of enslaved individuals, swaying public opinion and ultimately contributing to the abolition movement. These examples illustrate that while swords can conquer territories, it is the pen that can conquer hearts and minds.

Literature and journalism have long served as powerful tools for social change. Novels like George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” and Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” have sparked critical conversations about governance, justice, and morality. These works challenge readers to reflect on their values and the world around them, often leading to a greater awareness of social injustices.

In the realm of journalism, investigative reporting has exposed corruption and abuse of power, holding leaders accountable. The Watergate scandal, uncovered by journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, is a prime example of how the pen can dismantle political tyranny. Their relentless pursuit of truth through writing ultimately led to the resignation of President Nixon, showcasing the pen’s ability to effect change where force fails.

In today’s world, where freedom of speech is increasingly threatened and governance often fails to serve the people, opinion articles have emerged as a powerful tool for holding those in power accountable. These pieces are more than just personal expressions; they act as intellectual protests against bad governance, exposing leadership failures, challenging unjust policies, and giving a voice to the silenced.

One of the key roles of opinion articles is fostering accountability in governance. In countries where institutions are weak and corruption is rampant, governments often operate with impunity. Opinion writers step in to fill this void by shedding light on failures that would otherwise go unnoticed. Whether it’s economic mismanagement, poor infrastructure, or widespread corruption, these articles serve as the public’s eyes and ears, calling out inefficiencies and demanding corrective action.

Politicians often try to shape narratives through public relations and spin, but opinion articles counter this with reasoned analysis and evidence. When governance fails, whether in economic policy, handling insecurity, or providing basic services, opinion writers expose these gaps, offering an alternative discourse that challenges official propaganda. By cutting through political spin, these pieces become a form of protest, providing a clearer picture of reality.

The phrase “speaking truth to power” finds its purest expression in opinion writing. Unlike objective news reporting, which must remain neutral, opinion articles allow writers to take a stance, critique leadership, and challenge the status quo. This freedom is essential in environments where bad governance thrives on public silence or institutional complicity. Through carefully crafted arguments, opinion writers hold leaders accountable for their actions and decisions, putting them under public scrutiny.

Tough questions, such as why public funds are mismanaged or why citizens lack basic services like healthcare and education, are posed by opinion writers. By asking these questions, they place pressure on those in power. Without these inquiries, governance would go unchecked, allowing corruption and inefficiency to flourish. Opinion articles become a thorn in the side of complacent leaders, forcing them to confront uncomfortable truths.

In places where political protest is banned or restricted, opinion writing becomes a form of silent civil disobedience. The pen becomes a powerful weapon against bad governance, allowing writers to express dissatisfaction without the risks associated with public demonstrations. Many journalists and opinion writers have faced persecution for their work because their words can influence public opinion and destabilize oppressive regimes. The silent protest embedded in these articles can be as effective as large-scale demonstrations, often sparking larger conversations about human rights abuses or financial scandals.

One of the most potent aspects of opinion articles is their ability to amplify the voices of the marginalized and disenfranchised, those most affected by bad governance. Opinion writers give these individuals a platform, highlighting their struggles and exposing the inequalities that stem from poor leadership. When government policies fail to address citizens’ basic needs, such as access to clean water, affordable housing, or functional healthcare, opinion articles act as advocacy pieces. They bring the plight of ordinary citizens into public view and pressurize governments to act.

In some cases, these articles have the power to shape public opinion and even influence policy. By providing well-researched, thoughtful analysis, opinion writers spark debates that go beyond the newspaper pages. Public opinion is a powerful force in any democracy, and well-informed citizens can demand better leadership. Historically, opinion pieces have driven policy changes by exposing governmental neglect or advocating for reforms. When written by respected voices, they carry authority, compelling policymakers to respond and often triggering reforms.

As new forms of communication, like social media, the role of opinion writing remains critical in protesting bad governance. While social media may ignite conversations, opinion articles provide the depth, structure, and insight needed for lasting change. In an increasingly complex world grappling with issues like economic inequality, climate change, and pandemics, incisive criticism through opinion writing is more urgent than ever. These articles remind those in power that their actions are being closely watched and judged by a critical public.

In today’s digital age, the power of the pen has evolved but remains just as potent. Social media platforms allow individuals to share their thoughts and mobilize support for various causes. Movements like #BlackLivesMatter,#MeToo, #EndBadGovernance and #EndSARS gained momentum through the written word, demonstrating how online discourse can challenge systemic injustices and promote social change.

However, this new landscape also presents challenges. Misinformation can spread rapidly, and the written word can be weaponized to incite division and hatred. Therefore, it is crucial for individuals to wield their pens responsibly, ensuring that their words contribute to constructive dialogue rather than conflict.

In fact, the phrase “The pen is mightier than the sword” serves as a reminder of the enduring power of words. While swords may achieve temporary victories, it is the ideas and narratives shaped by the pen that leave a lasting impact on humanity. As we navigate an increasingly complex world, let us remember to harness the power of our words to inspire, educate, and unite rather than divide. In doing so, we can continue to illustrate the profound truth that the pen, indeed, holds greater power than the sword.

Tinubu’s coldblooded statement on his reforms is not dissimilar from the image provoked by the award-winning photographer, Kevin Carter. Aged 33, Carter’s highly-rated photo appeared in the New York Times of March 26, 1993. It was the photo of a famine-stricken Sudanese boy. Initially thought to be a girl, his name was later found out to be Kong Nyong. The boy had collapsed of intense hunger and lay on his face in the hot desert sun of Sudan. He had an empty food bowl hidden beside his face like an Almajiri. A beaded necklace of his Sudanese nationality jutted out of his feeble neck. He was said to be on his way to Ayod, the United Nations ration centre in Sudan, which was about a half-kilometre away. As he walked languidly down the coarse road of the desert, all of a sudden, Kong’s hungry strength failed him.

Less than a meter from the collapsed boy was the unnerving figure of a vulture eyeing the gaunt boy and awaiting his eventual death, so that it could commence his devouring. Carter, on a United Nations photography assignment, according to him, took diverse photographs of the “interesting scene” of the collapsed boy and hurriedly left the scene. The photo went mega viral. Although, entitled ‘The Struggling Girl’, it won the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography in 1994, Carter committed suicide four months after, on July 27, 1994. He poisoned himself with carbon monoxide. Carter had been reportedly taunted by the world and haunted by what people perceived as his inhuman treatment of the dying boy. A caller on a radio programme, who asked what Carter did to help Kong after taking the “interesting” picture of the young boy, was shocked at his curt reply of, “I had a plane to catch.” Carter had earlier confessed to his friend that, “I see all this, and all I can think of is Megan,” his young daughter. The radio caller’s stinging retort was the clincher. It led to an emotional turmoil that eventually led to Carter’s breakdown and suicide. The radio caller had told him pointedly: “On that field were two vultures – you and the cadaver-eating bird!”

Nigeria is at the juncture where three footpaths meet. It is a critical intersection that troubles the stranger newly come to town. Speaking directly to the dilemma of a stranger at a loss on which of the three intersections to follow, Yoruba aptly named the juncture Ìkóríta méta tíí dààmú àlejò. There seems to be no need for pretext any longer. Efunsetan is Prof Akinwumi Ishola’s dramatization of the exploits of Efunsetan Aniwura, the powerful matriarch and pre-eminent slave merchant of Ibadan in the 19^th century. At that intersection when she finds out that her slave had been impregnated by a fellow slave, Efunsetan burst out into a scornful laughter. I paraphrase her hysterics: “The wild wind has blown and the naked rump of the hen is free to be beheld by all!”

It is same for Nigerians. The duo of those who aided and abetted the current runners of Nigeria into office, and those who didn’t, have come to same intersection. Bishop Mathew Hassan-Kukah drew the grim picture succinctly, in a recent beautifully arresting imagery. “A girl was asked, ‘which party are you, APC, LP or PDP?,’ she said: ‘I am hungry’”.

In literature, at the final part of a play, film, or narrative, when a natural resolution and the final strands of a plot are tied together, with knotty matters straightened, a denouement is said to have been achieved. Here, Yoruba conjure the allegory of the dead (Ení kú) and the lost (pèlú eni t’ó sonù) who have finally met each other. Today in Nigeria, hunger and pain have united us all. Our brains seem to have reset. If you watch viral videos of regrets and recounts about the Tinubu misadventure that litter the social media today, you will agree that the dead and the lost have indeed found their mutual level. At this critical stage, ownership of the clothing regalia found on the Egungun masquerade can no longer be denied. It belongs to the Egungun. No one can deny that the last fifteen fatal months of the Nigerian life have been an experience in weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Moving forward is as challenging as back-pedalling. Nigeria is in dire straits. The Nigerian birds have refused to chirp as is their wont. Our rats now mutter foreign tongues. The government in power will seem to have exhausted all the talismanic magic wands in its pouch. Lies (iró) have failed liars and falsehood (èké) has broken the spines of its spinners.

In 1925 Abeokuta, the Alake, paramount ruler of Egbaland, Oba Sir Ladapo Ademola, was trapped inside a puddle of falsehood… until a denouement came. The Oba arrived his own Ìkóríta Méta without bargaining for it, trapped in a puddle of lies and mischief. Writer, radio broadcaster and educationist, Isaac Oluwole Delano, collated the king’s dilemma in a 1955-published book he entitled Aiye D’aiye Oyinbo (This world has morphed into the Whiteman’s). The story gained such huge traction in the Abeokuta area that it was nicknamed the Faripo Incident.

Faripo was a notorious convicted criminal. One morning, as warders conducted their rounds, findings revealed that Faripo had escaped from the Egba Native Administration Prison. There was pandemonium. Blame game began. The story whooshed from one home to the other with baffling speed of lightning, until it encircled the land. In no long a time, grapevine fingered Oba Ademola as one behind Faripo’s disappearance. Permutations were based on alleged past financial malfeasances of Oba Ademola as a prince in Lagos. In 1890, very hardworking Prince Ademola was head printer of Horatius Jackson’s Weekly Record newspaper and played a leading role between Lagos and his hometown Abeokuta in negotiating the passage of railway through Egbaland. The year 1920 was specifically fingered as the year Prince Ademola engaged in the less-than-straight financial transactions. Thus, the disappearance of Faripo was put to the pre-monarchy association between the convicted criminal and the king. According to the rumour, while in prison, Faripo had threatened to spill the beans. The above was a perfect foundation for the allegation that Oba Ademola secured the services of fellow prisoners to murder Faripo in prison and carefully put away his corpse.

Faripo’s disappearance caused immense tension in Abeokuta and environ. Even the Resident and District Officer were not immune from the spinning lie. The two officers then ordered police investigation. In the process, a corpse, assumed to be Faripo’s, was exhumed. Even Faripo’s mother identified the remains as her son’s. At this time, the lie had taken a full weight of truth. Oba Ademola, the major suspect, was about to be investigated. Then, all of a sudden, Faripo was reported found in Oyo town. A few days later, Faripo himself appeared in Abeokuta. Then the police cornered all who made false statements regarding the alleged murder. Oba Adedapo survived his traducers, made up of liars and merchants of falsehood.

A lot of talks have been generated over the sincerity or otherwise of this government in the last fifteen months. Without making a mountain out of a molehill of the issue, the truth is, governments, all over the world, tell lies. If you listen to the narratives from former President Donald Trump, he accuses the Joe Biden administration of lying to the people. It is also vice versa from Biden. Governments have so many reasons to engage in falsehoods. These falsehoods can sometimes be helpful. They range from ones in defence of national security to national integrity. However, when falsehood becomes a defining governmental character, then something is awesomely wrong.

Since its establishment, the NNPC has been an opaque corporation. A 1995 Working paper with the title ‘NNPC and Nigeria’s Oil Patronage Ecosystem’ had this unflattering word about the corporation: “Any attempt to analyze NNPC… must first confront the question of what it really is. Despite its formal organization as a vertically-integrated oil company, NNPC is neither a real commercial entity nor a meaningful oil operator.  It lacks control over the revenue it generates and thus is unable to set its own strategy.  It relies on other firms to perform essentially all of the most complex functions that are hallmarks of operating oil companies.  Yet unlike some NOCs it also fails to fit the profile of a government agency: Its portfolio of activities is too diverse, incoherent, and beyond the reach of government control for it to function as a government policymaking instrument.”

Irregularities in financial operations and non-conformity with statutory laws have been the NNPC’s abiding operational philosophy. Governments upon governments have capitalized on the opacity of its operations to fleece the people. It begins with the fact that Nigerians don’t know the amount of crude oil their country processes in a day, nor the amount of fuel they consume. You could hide an elephant inside the purse of the NNPC and remove foreign currencies of similar size.  Perhaps, the most phenomenally distressing has been this regime of fuel subsidy. It has since made emergency billionaires of laggards and is continuous till today. Nigeria has been fleeced of trillions of Naira all in the name of regulating the prices of this precious commodity.

Those who invested hope in this government believed, upon being sworn in, that it would dissemble the ancient incubus of corruption that has festered untamed in the NNPC. Only God knows where they got that illogic. Can Beelzeebub fight Beelzeebub since a house divided against itself falleth? They didn’t have to wait too long for the quashing of their hope. Some have even said that the foundation upon which this government is built is falsehood. Take for instance the subsidy regime pronounced by the president on May 29, 2023. Mountainous lies were told to give that lie a life. Government had begun making huge savings from subsidy, we were told. Economists however told us that it was incongruous that government wouldn’t be paying subsidy when the Naira to a dollar’s incestuous relationship is this abiding. At a time, the exchange rate went as high as N1,900, with government purchasing processed petrol in dollar. Recently, that adulterous relationship went burst and, as Efunsetan cried, “The wild wind (then blew) and the naked rump of the hen is free to be beheld by all!”

As it is often said, tonnes of lies are needed to defend a single strand of falsehood. It is same here. NNPC has gone into a binge of falsehoods ever since. When Reuters alleged that the corporation owed its oil suppliers to the tune of $6.8b, NNPC promptly and vehemently denied the claim. To shore up that lie, in August, NNPC announced via what it claimed was its audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023, that its revenue from crude oil sales in 2023 had jumped up to N14.07 trillion, an increase of 298.7 percent. This was against the N3.52 trillion earned in 2022. Shortly after, in admitting that it was indeed owing oil suppliers the sum of $6b, NNPC painted a scenario of national insolvency.

In its relationship with the Dangote Refinery, NNPC has extended its serial falsehoods. This it does in its communication with Nigerians on what actually is the subsisting deal between the two. The most laughable scenario we are left to grapple with is that of a private refinery and national oil giant, the NNPC, exchanging liability of responsibility to fix fuel price as cavalierly as beer mugs are exchanged in shebeens. Trillions of Naira have been spent to make the four Nigerian refinery corpses walk, to no avail. It is either the Tinubu presidency infected NNPC with its lie virus or NNPC cleverly learnt the lying body language of Aso Rock. Or, both. The buck of this falsehood regime however stops at the table of the president. He is perceived as either abetting the lies or doesn’t see anything wrong with it.

The trust deficit between Nigerians and their president is as a thick fog. The people believe he has exported the “Eko for show opacity” to the federal. A government that wanted to disconnect from the rank corruption in NNPC won’t have the president as minister of petroleum. Its first hammer, according to projections, would land heavily on Mele Kyari and his oil-sucking bug directors. There was no hammer and no head for it to land on. The president compounded the equation by appointing his old warhorse ally as chair of board, a man whose recency of knowledge of the oil industry is as fossilized as prehistoric remains. Rumour also circulates that every liter of petrol bought in Nigeria is a goat tethered for sacrifice by the grove of Bourdilllon. The corruption broth is finally cooked.

Now, Nigeria is on her knees, totally castrated by a binge of falsehoods and Nigerian rulers’ illicit thirst to make money at the expense of Nigeria and Nigerians. Roiling angers are the mask worn by Nigerians as they walk long hours on the street to their destinations. Nigerians are dying in droves and fat cats are still talking about policies. You could feel the thickness of hopelessness hanging in the Nigerian sky. Yet, the president talks unfeelingly like a compassionless surgeon who just had a job to do – yank some goddamn flesh off the navel. I have analyzed President Tinubu’s China speech severally in less than 24 hours. He talked about a reform that is painful but which would yield results. Results to who, and for whom? To skeletons or cadavers in the mortuary? The president seems to have snatched the trophy of heartlessness from Ibrahim Babangida and his MAMSER, SAP excruciating policies. We should have known that Tinubu learnt the art from the Prince of Niger.

Deploying the image of Kevin Carter and his award-winning photography, dying Nigerians are Kong Nyong, battered by hunger and long hours at fuel stations. Hungry vultures are biding their time to feast on our carcasses. Our president has a reform to carry out. And, like Kevin, has “a flight to catch”.