In the dynamic world of politics, the pursuit of power often becomes the driving force behind every politician’s ambition. The allure of influence, prestige, and control can be irresistible. However, as history has shown time and time again, power is fleeting. What remains long after the dust of political battles has settled is the legacy a leader leaves behind. Mr. Politician, it is important to remember that while the corridors of power may feel permanent and untouchable, they are not. What is eternal is how your name will be remembered in the annals of history.

Power, by its very nature, is temporary. It has a beginning and an end, no matter how long or how absolute it may seem. History is full of examples of rulers, kings, and politicians who believed they would wield authority forever. But time, the great equalizer, has proven that no throne is unshakable and no office permanent.

Consider the reigns of some of Africa’s most notorious dictators like Idi Amin and Mobutu SeseSeko. Their rule seemed unassailable at their peak, yet today their names are synonymous with tyranny and corruption. They used their immense power to oppress their people, amass personal wealth, and fortify their grip on control, but in the end, they fell. Power, which once seemed eternal, slipped through their fingers, leaving only the harsh judgment of history.

In contrast, look at the legacies of individuals like Nelson Mandela or Julius Nyerere. They, too, held power, absolute in Mandela’s case, but they are remembered for their integrity, compassion, and devotion to justice. They knew that their time in power was temporary, and they worked tirelessly to ensure that the impact they made would endure long after their political influence faded.

Mr. Politician, no matter how secure your position may feel today, remember that power is fleeting. It can be stripped away by the whims of public opinion, economic downturns, or a single electoral defeat. What will remain is the reputation you build today.

Every politician who enters the political arena must remember that they are first and foremost public servants. It is the people’s trust that places them in office, and that trust comes with a sacred responsibility. Leadership is a call to service, not an opportunity for self-enrichment. When you enter office, you are entrusted with the hopes, dreams, and well-being of the people. How you choose to use that power will determine whether you are celebrated or condemned.

Too many politicians fall into the trap of believing that their position entitles them to privileges beyond their mandate. They accumulate wealth, live lavish lifestyles, and disconnect from the realities of the masses. But leadership is not about self-aggrandizement; it is about self-sacrifice. Power is not a license to exploit but an opportunity to serve and improve the lives of those who placed you in authority.

As you sit in high office, surrounded by sycophants and enablers who will tell you what you want to hear, pause and reflect: Are you truly serving the people? Are your decisions improving lives, or are they creating more suffering? Will your policies lift people out of poverty, create jobs, and reduce inequality? Or will they widen the gap between the rich and poor?

The true test of leadership is not in the titles you accumulate or the wealth you amass. It is in the legacy of change, the upliftment of the common people, and the institutions you leave behind that will endure long after you are gone.

Power is not inherently bad. In fact, it is a tool that can be used for transformative change. But power without a higher purpose is meaningless, it is an empty shell. Too often, politicians become obsessed with the trappings of power, the sirens blaring as they drive through the city, the titles before their name, the control they exert over resources. They forget that power should be wielded with humility, empathy, and the desire to make a difference.

When you enter office, the question you must constantly ask yourself is: Why am I here? Is it to enrich myself and secure my political future, or is it to serve the people who trusted me to lead? Leaders who lose sight of this higher purpose often find themselves isolated, surrounded by the illusion of success but disconnected from the very people they claim to represent.

History is filled with leaders who used their power for personal gain. Their names may have adorned buildings and statues during their reigns, but when they fell, so too did their monuments. The people they oppressed, the wealth they siphoned, and the lives they destroyed will forever be part of their legacy. Mr. Politician, do not let this be your fate. Remember that the power you hold today can be taken away tomorrow. But the actions you take while in office will remain forever etched in the memory of the people you served.

In this digital age, every action you take is recorded, every policy scrutinized, and every misstep amplified. The accountability that history imposes is much heavier now than it has ever been. The internet never forgets. Mr. Politician there is no escaping the judgment of posterity. Social media, investigative journalism, and the vigilant eyes of civil society have made it increasingly difficult to sweep misdeeds under the rug. Even if you avoid public censure in your time, future generations will unearth the truth.

Ask yourself: When the history books are written, and when your grandchildren read about your time in office, what will they find? Will they discover a leader who stood for justice and equality? Will they see a figure who fought for the underprivileged, advanced education, and upheld democratic values? Or will they encounter stories of corruption, scandal, and oppression? History is a harsh but fair judge, and it will remember you for what you truly did, not for the image you tried to project.

As you navigate the complex world of politics, ask yourself: What will people say about you when you are no longer in power? Will they remember you as a leader who sacrificed personal gain for the good of the nation, or will they speak of the scandals and corruption that defined your tenure? Will your name be written on the good page of history, or will it be relegated to the footnotes of failure?

Ultimately, the choice is yours. You have the power to shape your legacy by serving with integrity, humility, and a genuine desire to make a difference. As the late Nelson Mandela said, “What counts in life is not the mere fact that we have lived. It is what difference we have made to the lives of others that will determine the significance of the life we lead.”

Power is not forever, but your legacy can be. As you move forward in your political career, remember that every decision, every policy, and every action will contribute to how you are remembered. The clock is ticking, and the pages of history are waiting to be written. Will your name be on the good page?

The wise know that true power lies not in the ability to dominate but in the ability to inspire. Mr. Politician, power may be ephemeral, but your legacy can be eternal. Use your power wisely, serve the people faithfully, and ensure that when the story of your life is told, it is one of honor, respect, and service to humanity.

Football fans often debate over who the greatest is—Lionel Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo. But there’s a rare group of players who don’t have to choose. These stars have had the unique privilege of playing alongside both footballing legends, witnessing their greatness firsthand.

From brilliant Argentine attackers to stalwart defenders, these players bridge the gap between two eras of football royalty. Let’s dive into this exclusive list of 15 players who’ve shared a pitch with both Messi and Ronaldo.

1. Angel Di Maria

Ángel Di María has been a trusted lieutenant to both Messi and Ronaldo at different stages of his career. At Real Madrid, Di María was a key provider for Ronaldo, contributing to their La Liga and Champions League triumphs. Later, with Argentina, Di María formed a potent partnership with Messi, most notably scoring in the 2022 FIFA World Cup final. After a brief stint at Juventus, Di María is back at Benfica.

2. Gabriel Heinze

Gabriel Heinze enjoyed a solid career as a defender, playing alongside both Messi for Argentina and Ronaldo during his time at Manchester United and Real Madrid. Heinze was a fierce competitor on the pitch and won the Premier League and La Liga during his career. After retiring, Heinze transitioned into management, including a stint with Atlanta United in MLS, though he is currently without a club.

3. Paulo Dybala

Paulo Dybala is one of the rare players who has expressed his difficulty in choosing between Messi and Ronaldo. Having played with Messi for Argentina and Ronaldo at Juventus, Dybala witnessed firsthand the brilliance of both players. Ronaldo’s remarkable 101 goals at Juventus were instrumental in Dybala’s admiration, though Messi’s leadership in leading Argentina to World Cup glory in 2022 must have deepened his respect.

4. Deco

Deco had the privilege of playing with Ronaldo at the start of his career with Portugal and alongside Messi during his time at Barcelona. A midfield maestro, Deco witnessed Messi’s rise to greatness while being an established figure in a Barca team that won multiple La Liga titles. Playing with Ronaldo in the Portuguese national team, Deco saw glimpses of the superstar Ronaldo would become. Deco retired in 2013 and now works in football management.

5. Fernando Gago

A defensive midfielder who had the pleasure of playing with Messi for Argentina and Ronaldo at Real Madrid, Fernando Gago was a steady presence in both teams. Gago’s time at Madrid was marked by Ronaldo’s early days at the club, while his international career saw him share many pivotal moments with Messi. After retiring, Gago ventured into management and is currently coaching in Mexico.

6. Ezequiel Garay

Garay had the distinction of playing alongside Messi at international level with Argentina and Ronaldo at Real Madrid. Known for his solid defending and composure on the ball, Garay was an essential part of the Argentine squad for several years. He spent time at Real Madrid when Ronaldo first joined the club in 2009. Garay retired in 2020 after a successful career in Spain.

7. Andre Gomes

André Gomes had the rare opportunity of playing with Ronaldo for Portugal and Messi during his stint at Barcelona. Despite facing criticism during his time at Barca, Gomes remained a solid midfielder who learned from both legends. His time with Portugal allowed him to see Ronaldo’s leadership in action, while at Barca, he witnessed Messi’s magic unfold. Gomes now plays for Lille in Ligue.

8. Henrik Larsson

Henrik Larsson was at the tail end of his career when he played alongside Messi at Barcelona and Ronaldo at Manchester United. Despite his brief stints at both clubs, Larsson’s quality was undeniable. He scored crucial goals for Barca and United, making a lasting impact on the dressing room with his professionalism and experience. Larsson is now coaching in Sweden, having transitioned smoothly from player to manager​.

9. Gerard Piqué

Gerard Piqué spent the majority of his career at Barcelona, where he played with Messi for over a decade. However, earlier in his career, Piqué played with Ronaldo at Manchester United before moving to Barca. As one of the best center-backs of his generation, Piqué was a key figure in both Messi and Ronaldo’s success stories, having seen both thrive in their respective environments.

10. Nelson Semedo

Semedo played with Messi during his time at Barcelona and shares the pitch with Ronaldo for Portugal. His time at Barca saw him witness Messi’s brilliance up close, while his international career provides him with a front-row seat to Ronaldo’s legendary exploits with Portugal.

11. Carlos Tevez

Carlos Tevez played with Ronaldo at Manchester United, where they won multiple trophies, including the Champions League. Tevez also featured alongside Messi for Argentina, forming part of a talented attacking lineup. His work ethic and intensity on the pitch made him a perfect complement to both superstars.

12. Sergio Ramos

Sergio Ramos is one of the rare players who has shared the field with both Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi at the club level. He spent over a decade with Ronaldo at Real Madrid, where the duo helped the club win multiple Champions League and La Liga titles. In 2021, Ramos joined PSG, where he linked up with Messi following the Argentine’s high-profile move to the French club.

13. Lisandro Martinez

Lisandro Martínez has the distinction of playing alongside Messi for the Argentine national team and Ronaldo at Manchester United. A versatile defender, Martínez has seen both legends up close—he was part of the Argentina squad that won the 2022 World Cup, with Messi leading the charge. Meanwhile, his first season at United saw him line up alongside Ronaldo during a challenging campaign for the Portuguese forward.

14. Achraf Hakimi

Achraf Hakimi played with Ronaldo during his early days at Real Madrid. After developing into one of the best full-backs in the world, Hakimi moved to PSG, where he now shares the pitch with Messi.

15. Alejandro Garnacho

Alejandro Garnacho is one of the newest players to play alongside both Messi and Ronaldo. The young winger, a rising star at Manchester United, made his breakthrough just as Ronaldo was entering his final season with the club. Garnacho has since had the opportunity to train and play with Messi for the Argentine national team, representing the future of Argentine football.

These players have witnessed greatness from two of football’s biggest legends up close. Whether sharing a locker room or lining up on opposite sides, their unique careers have been enriched by the privilege of playing with both Messi and Ronaldo.

For football fans and bettors, watching these stars on the pitch is always thrilling. Want to make your football experience even more exciting? Bet on your favorite players and teams at iLOTBET—where every match is an opportunity to win big!

[OpinionNigeria]

Joe Ajaero, president of the Nigerian Labour Congress, trended in the media for controversial reasons last week. He had always been in the news, sometimes for altruistic reasons and others for stepping out of bounds. This time, it was for his mistaken belief that he was above the law.

When law enforcement agencies invited the labour leader to answer criminal allegations related to harbouring a felon, Ajaero chose to ignore the lawful invitation and attempted to leave the country. However, he was apprehended at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja and taken in for questioning.

Unsurprisingly, Ajaero’s fellow labour leaders and allies in the civil society were swift to denounce his arrest as violating his fundamental human rights. To them, it was yet another example of the Bola Tinubu administration’s inclination to stifle dissent despite mounting opposition to its economic reforms.

However, as Bayo Onanuga, the presidential aide on Information and Strategy, pointed out, the crux of the matter was equality before the law. Ajaero had disregarded a lawful summons before. On 19 August 2024, the police invited him to appear for an investigation the following day. He responded that he was busy and would only appear on 29 August. The Police indulged him. He reported on the appointed date with fanfare and was subsequently interrogated and released on bail.

A day after the interrogation, he was asked to report on 5 September for further questioning. Regarding the continuous invitation as harassment, Ajaero ignored the summons and elected to attend an international conference held in Brighton, the United Kingdom. Only an irresponsible internal security organisation would have allowed him to leave the country during the pendency of the criminal investigation.

Coming on the heels of recent protests of the rising cost of living, it was easy for the labour leader to sell the harassment and insensitivity to dissent narratives. If he expected the security agencies to fall for this blackmail, he was mistaken, as they resisted his attempt to generalise his failure to stay within the law.

Ajaero’s condemnable behaviour is typical of Nigeria’s big men, who take advantage of their position to break the law and expect nothing to happen. The feeling of being above the law is worse among perennial civil society agitators, who equate civil disobedience with criminal contravention. They use the government’s trust deficit to cross the line to fight for the public good.

Ajaero’s brush with the law arose from a Police investigation of Andrew Wynne, a Briton accused of a treasonable felony. He was a tenant in the Labour House, a facility owned by the NLC. The Police accused the Briton of financing the August protests and also charged him with levying war against the state. These were weighty allegations that the labour leader ought to cooperate with the Police to investigate, no matter how frivolous he thought they were.

Under some circumstances, a landlord could be liable for a crime committed by his tenant, except if he shows he did not have intent or knowledge that his premises were being used for criminal or fraudulent purposes. For instance, this is the intent of Section 3 of the Advanced Fee Fraud Act 2011. In Peter Obi’s Anambra State, the law allows the government to demolish and acquire any facility used by kidnappers to harbour their victims. No court proceedings are required.

So, as the president of the NLC that owned the facility linked to the accused felon, Ajaero was required to prove to the Police that the organisation did not know about its tenant’s alleged criminal activities. Simple. Rather than do that, he resorted to red herring and rabble-rousing, which was bound to elicit a strong-arm response from the security agencies.

Besides, it appears customary for the labour leader to blur lines. Social agitators tend to go beyond the call of duty and dabble in politics. Ajaero has been particularly accused of mixing politics with labour activism. While labour cannot be expected to insulate itself from political participation because politicians make decisions that affect its members, its leaders should be cautious.

The NLC president needs to exercise circumspection. He is not only a vocal member of the Labour Party but also controversial within the organisation. His partisanship makes it challenging to see the merit of his case against the government’s policies. Indeed, he needs to be less combative and comport himself better.

On 2 November last year, he was embroiled in a political dispute in his home state of Imo. Ostensibly fighting for the interests of the state’s workers, the All Progressives Congress-led government, amid an election, read political meaning into his action and ruffled him. It took the intervention of Nuhu Ribadu, the national security adviser, to extricate Ajaero from that crisis.

His prevailing brushes with the law suggest that he learned nothing from that experience. Bubbling in controversy within his LP, his public utterances on public policy are bound to attract partisan responses, particularly from a government battling rising resentment of its economic reforms. Those who argue he is a victim of the government’s hatred for dissent misconceived the situation. Is Ajaero the only vocal labour leader in the polity?

At least there is Festus Osifo, president of the Trade Union Congress. He co-led the agitations for the new minimum wage and has been equally critical of the government’s reform policies. He supported the August protesters’ demands to alleviate their suffering. Why have the security agencies not gone for him? One Deji Adeyanju, a lawyer, also actively led the protests and has remained vocal against the reforms. It is not on record that he has been hounded.

The fact is that agitation for anything, including good governance, must be conducted within the law. Those who mouth the rule of law must clearly understand that it means rule under the law. No matter his cause’s justness, no one can operate outside the law. This is the lesson Comrade Joe Ajaero must learn.             

Adebiyi is the special assistant on Media to the Minister of Budget and Economic Planning, Senator Abubakar Bagudu

In the event of a random sampling of n the event of a random sampling of Nigerian public opinion leaders, the probability is that former President Olusegun Obasanjo will be judged the best of all those who have had the privilege of holding the office of President (or as Obasanjo naysayers would say) the one eyed man in the land of the blind. It is also fair to say that, more than his colleagues, he has benefited from a better education and training in the school of Nigerian leadership. some of them, inadvertently. It is a platitude to call him a man of destiny. None has had a more fulsome harvest of providential interventions. He typifies the saying that opportunity plus preparedness is equal to luck (Opportunity+Preparedness =Luck)

An early pointer to his charmed life trajectory was the prophetic foresight of the then Military Governor of the Northern Region, Colonel Hassan Usman Katsina. In the thick of the July 1966 crisis, Obasanjo had to leave Kaduna in a hurry – there was the fear that the safety of military officers of Southern origin was no longer guaranteed. Katsina then assigned two armoured vehicles to secure his journey to the airport and warned that Obasanjo must come to no harm because Nigeria was going to need him in the future. Four years later he was on hand to receive the surrender of the secessionist Biafra army at the end of the civil war in January 1970 (as General Officer Commander of the victorious Third Marine Commando).

He and the late General Murtala Mohammed were the nationalist godfathers of the July 1975 coup that ousted General Yakubu Gowon. Obasanjo thereafter became the deputy to Mohammed in his capacity as military head of state. After the accident of the abortive February 13th 1976 coup in which Mohammed was killed, he was a shoeing into the vacuum created by the assassination of his principal. He was ordained to barely escape getting killed in the coup by fortuitous circumstances. It so happened that on the same day, he had altered his daily routine to accommodate the christening of General Olu Bajowa’s baby to whom he was godfather. Furthermore, General Dumuje was mistaken for him and was accordingly rained with bullets but he survived.

All along in his career, he deliberately cultivated the trust and confidence of the dominant conservative wing of the Northern political establishment.There were rumours to the effect that he was the godfather of the best known Northern elite pressure group, Kaduna mafia. In the subsequent coup of December 1983, the leading conspirators had requested him to pick up the baton he left behind in October 1979 but he declined. You will recall the Mohammed Buhari junta routinely self identified as an offshoot of the Murtala-Obasanjo regime.

As head of state, Obasanjo burnished his lustre and appeal with the successful implementation of a military disengagement from power and transition of political power to civil democratic rule programme. He thereafter commenced another life stream as a burgeoning World statesman.Today, he is the chairman of the committee of former Presidents. Not to talk of the martyrdom effect of the adversity he endured at the murderous caprice of the rogue military dictator, General Sani Abacha. For that matter what used to be the dark spot of his political career, the third term gambit, appears to have transmuted into a missed opportunity in the popular imagination.

It is a reflection of his productive and disciplined life that he went on to acquire a doctorate degree in theology, immediately after his eight years presidency. Exasperated at the repeated failures of his successors, he had pointedly asked me to propose a way out of the mess Nigeria has found itself. He enjoyed utilising me as proxy for the Obafemi Awolowo political school of thought with which he was often at cross purposes. He enjoined me to speak freely without regard to his well known stump speeches.

Obasanjo belongs to a category of Nigerian leaders especially those of military background who are generally disdainful of ‘restructuring’ as reflected in his dismissive refrain that what Nigeria needs is a “restructuring of the mind”. This attitude is typical of the status quo stalwarts who are instinctively suspicious of any suggestion of decentralisation as the only realistic response to the lapse of Nigeria into interminable political and governance abyss. As probable panacea for what ails Nigeria my default position essentially boils down to an advocacy for the restoration of federalism as against reducing the political problem of Nigeria to the absence of ‘good leadership’.

So how do we conjure this good leadership? If we had been searching for this elusive good leadership for the better part of post-independence Nigeria, shouldn’t we get realistic and retrace our footsteps from where we sprayed into the wrong turn. If we were lucky enough to get good leadership occasionally, how do we ensure that the magic does not depart our shores again?.

The emergence of good leaders or bad leaders is random and not predictable unlike the permanence and certainty of the mediation of impersonal constitutional structure. Properly understood, the constitution is the product of our collective wisdom, whose applicability is the irreducible minimum of our coexistence. Moreso for a country that is prone to dysfunction. The futility of predicating the viability of Nigeria on the hope for good leadership has been the sad story of the fourth republic.

Democracy is particularly notorious in its blindness to virtue and optimal outcome of elections. Otherwise Donald Trump would not have been elected American president seven years ago. And no truth has been better said than the quip of Obasanjo that “the best candidate may not win the election” in the 1979 presidential election. Winston Churchill once said that: “democracy is the worst form of government – except for all the others that have been tried.”

What is within our capacity to determine is the constitutional structure that is responsive to our foundational challenges. A viable constitutional order anticipates the worst case scenario of a destructive leadership, hence its inherent imposition of limitations and constraints on the capacity of bad leadership to damage society. It is analogous to taking out an insurance cover for your properties. Science proceeds from the assumption of worst case scenario not the wishful thinking of anticipating good leadership. It is in the assumption of this scientific logic that federalism was formulated as response to Nigeria’s peculiarities and vision. The most debilitating source of Nigeria’s political instability and crisis since 1966 was the military rule enabled over centralisation of powers hence the self prescription of decentralisation.

Nowhere is it truer than Nigeria that federalism is tragedy ‘as it is intended as a response mechanism to political conflict not an optimal strategy. It is a suboptimal compromise in the effort to defuse real and potential situations of conflict and ensure that such situations do not degenerate into less attractive possibilities’¹ The optimal strategy would have been for Nigeria not to be amalgamated in the first place.These were my ruminations and I suspect I might have moved a needle in his disposition towards devolution and decentralisation of powers.

Within the cosmopolitan ambience of the Obasanjo Presidential court would be found the constellation of Nuhu Ribadu and peers from across the nooks and crannies of Nigeria. We worked and lived like a political family of happy warriors. Ribadu was particularly close to Obasanjo. And in the post-Obasanjo era, we endure different degrees of withdrawal syndrome but who would have thought Nigeria would equally suffer a withdrawal syndrome to the extent of wishing that the third term bid had succeeded. His all encompassing role as the National Security Adviser has weighed heavily on him in an important respect-serving to bridge the gap between his principal, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Obasanjo. Understandably, he was not happy that Obasanjo did not attend the last council of state meeting in Abuja. We more or less spent the last Christmas break in Lagos to set in motion the process of thawing the frosty relationship between both of them.

So far as I know, the only encounter between the former President and the incumbent was the occasion of the inauguration ceremony of the ‘reelected’ Governor of Imo state, Hope Uzordinma. In a buoyant mood Tinubu had warmed up to Obasanjo and said aloud he was coming to see the former President. Obasanjo said that what he most appreciated was the waiver of the protocol that no flight takes off when the president is waiting to board his flight. Surprisingly, the camaraderie was blacked out in newspaper reports the following day. If you add two plus two, it is easy to conclude that some people (in Tinubu’s caucus) have a vested interest in the perpetuation of the cold war between the two.

Inevitably, the absence of Obasanjo at the council of state meeting was the kernel of our discussion the last time I saw Nuhu. He found it unacceptable that the former President would generously give of his time and energy to help distressed countries and ignore Nigeria. My position is that a newly elected President should have honoured his predecessors with at least a courtesy telephone call once he resumes office. This is good etiquette, moreso in the Yoruba culture especially if the incumbent is the younger party. I was surprised to see that an acclaimed master of political pragmatism could not transcend personal reservation in such a situation of realpolitik.

I issued a press statement on the itinerary of Obasanjo on Sunday which consisted of his ceremonial visits to Benin to felicitate with Chief Gabriel Igbinedion on his 90th birthday and from there went to Minna on a compensatory retroactive birthday felicitations. He was not in Nigeria on the actual birthday of President Ibrahim Babangida on August 17th. The statement was intended to put the itinerary in its true perspective as against the insinuation of ulterior motive

couched in reports such as this “it was further learnt that, at the residence of General Babangida (rtd), another former Head of State, General Abdulsalami Abubakar (rtd), and former National Security Adviser (NSA), General Aliyu Gusau (rtd), were also waiting for Former President Obasanjo”.

By now, it is common knowledge that Abdulsalami and Babangida are close neighbours and close friends in the retirement residence in Minna. And both of them are personally close to Obasanjo including General Aliyu Gusau. All of whom were his mentees.The news would have been that these friends stayed away when Obasanjo came calling.

As the news unfolded about the Dangote Refinery and the counter-currents, I was stupefied. Specifically, I never knew that Nigeria’s oil policy would ever come to this sorry pass. Mind you, I am not innocent as far as oil and Nigeria are concerned. But I never thought for one moment that my country’s oil would be in a hock to external interests ably egged on by their internal collaborators. As I pondered over this issue, and the other related variable like, massive oil theft, I waited in vain for a rebuttal from official quarters. Thus far, none has come. So what is being bandied about our oil being used upfront as collateral for our debts by the previous regime may well be true.

As I began to ponder over this and other sad issues, memories came to mind about Nigeria and the black gold.

These memories are mainly owed to a career of over forty years in which I acquired various academic qualifications in the twin areas of oil politics and energy diplomacy.

In the course of this career, the shocks came very early during a field work, which eventually led to the highest academic degree in the area of oil and international relations.

In my attempts to gather first hand-information on oil politics, I had to interview a gentleman, a Nigerian and former secretary General of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). We got talking and in due course, the name of a Canadian scholar, Terisa Turner came up. The gentleman categorically told me that he knew Terisa Turner. But since he was running late for another appointment, we agreed to meet on the same day, in the same place-his Western House Office on Lagos Island. We duly met as agreed. But when Terisa Turner’s name came up again, the former OPEC scribe told me that he had never met Terisa Turner in his life. I was aghast and I immediately sensed that I was entering an area of study that was populated by invisibles and invincibles!!

My next port of call, a few days later was on another gentleman. One of those super-perm secs of the Gowon Era. Very suave and self-assured in manners and diction. This is not surprising. Afterall, he had studied the three Greats: Politics, Philosophy and Economics in Oxford with a background in King’s College, Lagos. As an old boy myself, matters moved swiftly between us.

Then the name Terisa Turner came up again. On hearing T.T, this KCOB and Oxford alumnus lost his cool. He proceeded to mouth epithets against the woman, and such are better left out of this piece.

This much was clear however, I had to go back to the Library to search out the works of Terisa Turner. This was when I discovered that the woman wrote her PhD thesis on: The Formulation and Implementation of Nigerian Petroleum Policy. In the thesis, the thrust of her argument was that Nigeria is mainly an arena where the oil companies act out their various external interests in collusion with various internal interests to the detriment of the Nigerian State

This according to her was a recipe for instability. In this respect she went on to predict long before the 1983 coup that a coup was only a question of time in view of the various forces jousting for influence in the arena of oil policy in Nigeria.

Fast forward to 1985, after finishing the doctoral programme.

I was bristling with enthusiasm and I had to attend a conference in McGill University in Canada, where I presented a Paper on: Oil, Nigeria and Mexico.

After the presentation, one woman came up to me and said that there were gaps in my analysis. That I needed to do more work by way of more familiarity with the literature. I took this suggestion in my stride, after all knowledge by its very nature is infinite. I subsequently asked for the lady’s name and she revealed that she was Terisa Turner. I pressed on by asking her whether she knows the former OPEC scribe, she answered in the affirmative. I duly informed her that the man told me that he does not know her. She simply threw back her head and laughed.

Yet another episode, which comes to mind, is the LNG Project. Dear readers please note that efforts to harness Nigeria’s gas resources date back to 1964 some sixty years. And as some technocrats are wont tell in fits of escapism, they always contend that Nigeria is not even an oil producing country; that it is in fact a gas producing social formation. My usual response to this is that the power realities, which govern oil, are also ever present in the gas industry. Long story short, on one fine day, a former oil minister, Tam David-West announced that the money earmarked for the LNG Project, some eight hundred million dollars was missing. The Nigerian media did not pick up the scent. I did and made enquiries from the lawyer in charge of the project under the first administration of Obasanjo. The lawyer was startled because I simply called on him to educate the audience on the issue at an open seminar in Obafemi Awolowo University. He in turn, educated the audience that the then departing regime of Obasanjo handed over the issue to the then incoming government of Shehu Shagari. For four years during the second republic nothing happened. Then the Special Adviser on energy to Shagari died. The 1983 coup came and the whiz kid of the Era bought into a major commercial bank. The new board of directors was made of top and retired personnel of the then NNPC. At this juncture even the non-imaginative reader can fill in the details.

Another episode, which comes to mind, involves this writer and the late Ken Saro Wiwa. Largely at my instigation, I caused the defunct African Guardian Magazine to organize a seminar on: Oil Companies and Oil Community Relations. This was way back in 1993.I served as an anchor resource person at this seminar. In this capacity, I had to comment on every paper through analysis and interpretation. I was enjoying myself at this intellectual feast.

The crunch time was when it was Ken Saro Wiwa’s turn to present a paper. He did alright. But in a different way. He came forth with pictorial footages on the plight of the Ogoni people. The atmosphere changed. Most of the junior workers of the Presidential Hotel poured into the hall. It was no longer a seminar for sedate academics. Heavy advocacy was on courtesy of Ken, the irreverent Ogoni man. But one oil man from Shell would not let him be. He offered counters to Ken’s depositions. It was feisty exchange between the two men. A sort of civil war: for the other man was also from an oil-bearing area. As a serious student of oil politics, the implications and irony of this abrasive encounter was not lost on me. For here were two men from the South-South crossing swords with one batting on the side of the oil companies and with Ken on the other side. Evidently it was not a civil exchange and the two men nearly came to blows. For me, the episode brought to my mind the fate of one Italian man, Enrico Mattei who in an earlier era, also took on the oil companies. He died mysteriously in an air crash. And as the records go, it was reported that when Enrico Matteo died in what has been regarded as an arranged air crash, there were no long faces in the corridors of the oil companies. I went on to narrate this story to the audience and proceeded to pointedly warn Ken that if he was not careful, he would go down the Mattei way. This was precisely Ken’s fate two years later. On November 10,1995,he was hanged courtesy of a kangaroo trial, which precluded an appeal. Such indeed are the ways of oil.

As I reflect on this greasy fluid and Nigeria, what vividly comes to mind is that, no Nigerian leader has ever said anything concrete about oil. Rather the focus has always been on oil revenues. But there is an exception. That exception comes in the spirited interventions of Obafemi Awolowo. As the Finance Minister under Gowon, he caused the government to send a delegation to other oil producing countries. He wanted to know why Nigeria was getting low returns from her oil. The delegation produced a comprehensive report as regards the way forward for Nigeria. This was a 1969 document and it should have been used as a Bible for our oil policy. But shortly after, Awolowo left the government and that was the end of the matter. But not quite.

In the run-up to the 1979 and 1983 elections the same Awolowo outlined comprehensive plans as regards how the oil industry would be run. But the man was too far ahead of his time. This was moreso when the sage was pitted against the vampires of the then ruling party.

So where are we at the moment. For much too long we have gone to sleep. Such that the abnormal has assumed the profile of the normal. For how can one explain a situation in which an oil producing country cannot refine its product and as such has to depend on refined imported oil.

However it looks as if the jinx is about to be broken since the hegemonic forces appear to be in retreat partly because of Tinubu’s latest thrust. It is instructive to note here that PBAT has succeeded in doing the unprecedented by inserting the Naira as a transactional item in our oil business. No more the almighty dollar.

But in an overall sense: will he succeed? Can he succeed? If these questions can be answered positively, then Nigeria would have embarked on a path, which should have been taken several years ago.

But then, as the sage would say: better late than never.

But even then, there are matters arising from this latest phase of our adventure in the oil industry.

There is still much confusion about the pricing and how the product will get to the consumer. At a point in time, Dangote himself said he was waiting on the Federal Executive Council (FEC) as regards pricing. Again we were initially told that NNPC would be the sole off-taker of the products from the Dangote refinery. Meanwhile, as if NNPC is something of a scourge to the populace, it keeps breathing down our necks that the refined oil will not come cheap. And as we write, the street is not smiling as regards the availability and rising price of petrol.

PBAT himself has not helped matters, by his depositions all the way from China.

Among other things, he was of the view that things will have to get worse, before they get better. True, and this is common place enough.

But what remains unaddressed is that under the current conditions, Nigeria only gets 5 percent of what is due to her from the industry. The rest is appropriated by wiser folks outside Nigeria.

In more plaintive terms, what is being said is this; over time since the inception of what passes for the Nigerian oil industry, we have failed to put in place backward linkages, which would have catalyzed our quest for industrialization. For any country with a viable petrochemical industry  (as well as a steel industry) would have successfully weaned itself from itself from unbridled importation which is the sad and tragic lot of our Nigeria, despite its oil.

So beyond all the noise about the Dangote refinery and the perennially coming Port Harcourt refinery, the challenge is really how we can run a viable oil industry that will serve as the foundation of an industrialized Nigeria. Luckily for us, this is not rocket science.

Other social formations through their respective oil companies have been able to serve their countries in this critical area.

On this note, my specific references are to entities like: PETROBRAS; (Brazil), SONATRACH; (Algeria), PEMEX; (Mexico), PETRONAS; (MALAYSIA).

Against this background, my final poser to PBAT is this: Is it possible for us to learn from one or more these countries as regards how we can attain a breakthrough in this critical area.

As it is, the debates and discourses in this critical area of our oil industry have not even started.

This, I believe is the ultimate challenge before this administration in the area of the oil industry-namely the task of putting in place backward linkages which will give a novel fillip to the Nigerian economy.

Permit to end here by saying that a number of individuals are well placed to drive this novel policy thrust. Such individuals include: Engineer Oladele Afolabi, Engineer Kayode Ojo, Austin Avuru, Cyril Obi and Professor Julius Ihonvbere.

•Professor Kayode Soremekun is the immediate past Vice Chancellor of Federal University, Oye-Ekiti.

The Founder and Chief Innovation Officer of UrbanID Global, a digital identity and technology solutions company, Mr. Olatunji Durodola, has said Nigeria may find it difficult to issue physical ID to its citizens because the country currently lacks adequate infrastructure to support it.

Durodola stated this in an interview with Nairametrics, adding that issuing physical cards is a capital-intensive project.

Recall that the National Identity Management Commission (NIMC) recently announced that Nigerians who have registered for the National Identification Number (NIN) would soon be able to request an e-ID card with payment functionality for all types of social and financial services.

Durodola, whose company designed the NIMC Mobile ID app noted that e-ID Cards and Payment Cards popularly known as ATM Cards may look alike, but their implementation, issuance, and lifecycle are very different.

Challenges of card issuance 

The UrbanID CEO noted that in November 2013, the government had issued one of the most sophisticated e-ID Cards in the world but the lack of infrastructure led to its failure as NIMC was unable to maintain the issuance bureau or purchase much-needed high-performance card printing machines.

“The issuance of cards for free was also a challenge for companies who had installed capacity to personalize those cards. The sticky point was how they would be paid. So it eventually died. 

 “Between 2020 and 2024, Nigeria led Africa with the issuance of MobileIDs, taking advantage of the very enviable spread of Smartphones in the Country, and creating an enabling environment for their use. Alas, public awareness was lacking.  

“That 23m MobileIDs were even issued is a testament to the power of word of mouth. 

 “All these developments were by 100% local talent – and it worked! Accolades around the world again. Yet, it would seem the trend is now to go back to physical cards,” he explained.

• Durodola added that the World Bank had also advised against the issuance of physical cards, which were to a large extent, also very reliant on foreign expertise.

• According to him, Nigeria does not produce components nor the operating systems they rely on.

“Those foreign vendors with specialist skills will provide invoices to the Government in their native currency (USD or Euro). They want our money, but not our currency,” he added.

Preventing data breach 

Speaking on the recent alleged breach of the NIN database, Durodola emphasized the importance of maintaining strict identity verification protocols to prevent unauthorized access and misuse of personal data.

• He noted that while businesses are set up to make a profit, loosening restrictions to achieve this can be disastrous.

• According to him, every verification and transaction involving a person’s identity should be closely monitored, and the ID holder should be aware of how their identity is being used.

• He criticized the practice of “store and forward” data handling, where companies keep unauthorized copies of identity information, making it vulnerable to breaches.

• When asked about the broader implications of data breaches on a nation’s security and global standing in data privacy, Durodola pointed out that many systems still grant access rights to personal information without the ID holder’s consent.

• He urged the implementation of stringent data privacy measures to ensure that each instance of personal data access requires explicit consent from the ID holder.

• Durodola noted that UrbanID Global is focused on helping Nigeria become a benchmark for data privacy in developing economies.

What you should know 

Earlier in April this year, NIMC announced that it was launching a National ID card with payment functionality for all types of social and financial services.

• The ID card, which is billed to be launched in partnership with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Inter-bank Settlement System (NIBSS), is to be powered by NIBSS’ AfriGO, a National domestic card scheme.
• According to a statement signed by NIMC’s Head of Corporate Communications, Kayode Adegoke, the National ID card, layered with verifiable National Identity features, is backed by the NIMC Act No. 23 of 2007, which mandates NIMC to enroll and issue a General Multipurpose card (GMPC) to Nigerians and legal residents.
• However, the date of launch and availability of the card still remains unclear almost five months after the announcement.

[Nairametrics]

The Inspector-General of Police, IGP Kayode Egbetokun has ordered the redeployments of the Commissioners of Police in charge of Rivers, Delta and the Federal Capital Territory Police Commands.

According to the directive, the CP Rivers State Command, CP Olatunji Disu has been redeployed as the new CP FCT; CP Delta State Command, CP Abaniwonda Olufemi has been moved to Rivers State Command as CP while CP FCT, CP Peter Opara has been redeployed as new Delta Command’s CP.

Force Public Relations Officer, ACP Olumuyiwa Adejobi, in a statement said in addition, following the approval of the Police Service Commission, the Inspector-General of Police has also deployed four CPs as Commissioners of Police for Abia, Lagos, Ebonyi, and Akwa-Ibom State Commands.

The deployments include the posting of CP Danladi Nda to Abia State Command; CP Olanrewaju Ishola Olawale to Lagos State Command; CP Anthonia Adaku Uche-Anya to Ebonyi State Command and CP Festus Eribo to Akwa-Ibom State Command.

He said, “The posting of these strategic managers reflects the mission of the Inspector-General of Police to strategically reposition the Police Force and ensure maximum utilization of human resources available to the Force.”

The IGP has, however, urged the new CPs of State Commands to ensure diligence in the discharge of their lawful duties and adopt innovations that could mitigate security challenges in their respective areas of responsibility.

He further charged them to key into the police reform plans, which will help the progress of the Nigeria Police Force and the growth of the country in general.

[Leadership]

A Federal High Court in Abuja has set September 23 for judgment in the suit seeking the removal of Abdullahi Ganduje as the National Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

Following the initial judgement date on September 18, the presiding judge in the matter, Justice Inyang Ekwo, was said to have rescheduled the date to September 23.

Thus, the court’s registrar informed journalists about the new date because the judgement was not ready for the earlier date.

The suit was filed by the North Central APC Forum asking the court to declare Ganduje’s chairmanship of the party as a breach of the provisions of Article 7(vii) and (ix) of the party Constitution and the consensus reached at the 2022 National Convention held in Abuja, Nigeria, that the National Chairman of the APC from 2022 to 2026 must be someone from the North Central Geopolitical Zone of the country.

In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/599/24, the North Central APC Forum, led by its Chairman, Alhaji Saleh Zazzaga from Plateau State, had sued Ganduje, saying he is occupying the position of the National Chairman illegally as the position is for the North Central Zone against consensus arrangements at the 2022 national convention of the party.

However, counsel to Ganduje, Ishaka Mohammed Diko (SAN), asked the court to dismiss the suit, maintaining that the election that produced the incumbent chairman of the APC was dully conducted according to the constitution of the party.

The suit joins Ganduje, the APC and the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) as defendants.

[DailyTrust]

The Peter Obi Media Reach, POMR, has reacted to a circulating article in the media space accusing the 2023 Labour Party presidential candidate of hypocrisy for supporting the gubernatorial candidate of the party in Edo State, Barr Olumide Akpata.

DAILY POST reported that Peter Obi was in Edo recently where he campaigned for the LP candidate.

The governorship election in Edo State comes up on Saturday.

The media team, in a statement signed by its spokesman, Ibrahim Umar, claimed that the Obi’s campaign “for the Labour Party flag bearer in the upcoming Saturday’s governorship election in Edo State has effectively changed the narrative in the state and is leading opponents to the mischief of trying to divert attention from the issues”.

It noted that Obi’s adversaries, instead of focusing on the issues that drive the election, “are trying to change the conversation by attacking Obi for supporting his party candidate that he found suitable for the job”.

“They anchored their criticism on Obi supporting Bar Akpata because his zone is not supposed to produce the next governor, and that Obi is going against his long-standing principles on power rotation.

“But what they failed to understand is that Obi’s stand on zoning remains, but the Labour Party in Edo even under the leadership of an Edo State indigene then did not zone their gubernatorial seat to any area in particular, and delegates that elected Akpata were strictly only Edo people from all the local government areas, including Edo central because they found him suited for their desires for the state.

“Obi does not trade competence and reputation for zoning, and as a Democrat, he will always respect the position of the majority, especially if it’s anchored on the track record of the candidate.

“Akpata, by his age and antecedents, appeals to the youths as having the energy and mentality for the job.

“In all his campaigns in Edo, in his characteristic manner, Obi did not indulge in name-calling but concentrated his messages on issues that are needed to take Edo State and Nigeria forward and found the LP candidate a square peg in a square hole.

“The Labour Party delegates in Edo state found Bar Akpata their best option for the contest, and Obi, as a true democrat in his usual way of non-interference, decided to support their choice respecting the peculiarities of every state.

“POMR knew that the needless attack on Obi was just to distract attention from the issue that is driving the Edo state gubernatorial election, which places the Labour Party flag bearer in a good stand.

“Our advice for those bitter that Obi is campaigning for his party flag bearer is to leave the people of the state to decide who their next governor will be not to focus attention on mundane things.

“Our principal’s wish, as always, is to urge all critical stakeholders involved in the conduct of Saturday’s election, especially the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC and security operatives, to ensure a level playing ground in such a way that the world will see that Edo voters and not any other variables prevail in the end,” the statement added.

[DailyPost]