Nigeria’s President-elect Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) is back in the country. He was declared winner of the February 25 Presidential election with 8, 794, 726 of the total votes cast with over 25% in 30 states, more than the 24 states required by the Constitution. He reportedly returned to the country at 4.30 pm yesterday through the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja after a four-week vacation in Europe and Saudi Arabia. He left the country on March 21, and according to his handlers, the President-elect needed time to rest, relax, re-tune, rejuvenate and prepare for the inauguration of a new government on May 29. We were told he would be in France, the UK and Saudi Arabia where he was expected to observe the lesser hajj, that is Umrah. The trip fueled speculations about the state of his health, with many Nigerians arguing that his trip abroad was a cover up for undisclosed medical treatment. There were even videos of his sightings in Guinea, and speculations about his citizenship. For record purposes, I had argued on another platform, The Morning Show of AriseNews, the television wing of this newspaper where, as lead anchor I ruminate on sundry issues every morning - that Asiwaju Tinubu has the right to the freedom of movement and that I did not see anything wrong if he wanted to take time off to rest after what we would all readily agree was a hectic, hypertensive, campaign season.

Nigerians were however inconsolable. They wanted the President-elect on the ground. They said they were not comfortable with the idea of a President-elect who would be missing in action or become the equivalent of an unidentifiable, untraceable flying object going from France to the UK to Saudi Arabia and wherever. Where is he?, they asked. And that included even persons that did not vote for him.   To be fair, I could understand the concerns of those who raised these questions. When a man is proclaimed President-elect, he becomes automatically, a property of the state. He becomes a person and subject of state interest. He is effectively no longer an ordinary person. He is asked to move into secure state accommodation, in this case, the Aguda House in Abuja. He is given a full complement of state security. He receives daily briefings from all the security agencies. He acts in other words, as if he were already President. The only difference is that he cannot yet exercise executive powers until he is duly sworn in and he takes the oath of office. The underlying logic in this regard is that there cannot be two Presidents at a time. So, in effect, Tinubu is a President-in-waiting, and Nigerians who are concerned about his movement, health and safety have every reason to raise questions. There are also national security implications. The British, Chinese and the Americans would not allow their President-elect yo-yoing across the world weeks before inauguration. In traditional communities, such persons, waiting to ascend the throne, are kept in seclusion, to be prepared for the enormous assignment ahead and their transition from one plane of existence to the other. 

However, Bola Tinubu is back. What a big relief! His return, yesterday, it can be said, has settled the questions about his condition and health.  Those who have raised questions about his health and circumstances can now see him. It bears stating that no one would expect any further overseas travel by the President-elect before his inauguration, 35 days from now.  The timing of his return is also auspicious. The Ramadan season is over, and whoever uses religion as the excuse for being abroad, is of course expected to return. While he was away, the supplementary elections in 24 states of the Federation took place on April 15. The President-elect issued a statement commending the process and asking all elected persons to work with him. While he was away also, there were controversies about his citizenship and whether or not he committed perjury in filling the Form EC9 that he submitted to INEC. Quite a number of persons insist that the President-elect must address these two issues. 

I have argued and I stand to be corrected that the controversy about his Guinean connection and/or dual citizenship is of no moment. No right-thinking, reasonable person would imagine that Tinubu is not a Nigerian. He is in fact more Nigerian than most of us. That is why he is President today and you and I are busy still pursuing the dream. The laws of our land recognize dual citizenship, and in law that matter was settled in the Bukola Saraki case.  The conditions for citizenship are properly spelled out in Sections 25 – 28 of the 1999 Constitution, and there is no point quibbling over Tinubu’s qualifications in that regard. The other issue that has been raised has to do with perjury. But that can only be proven and confirmed by a court of law. Section 117 of the Criminal Code frowns upon giving false evidence or testimony, either orally or in writing, and Section 118 further prescribes punishment accordingly. But perjury has to be proven. It should be recalled that last year, some lawyers went to the Federal High Court accusing Tinubu of perjury. It was an ex parte motion seeking an order of judicial review with regard to Tinubu’s educational qualification. What is the status of that case? 

We have been through this route before, by the way. As Governor of Lagos State, Tinubu was similarly accused of perjury. The lawyer involved in that case was a jurist of timbre and calibre: the inimitable Gani Fawehimi.  “Gani The Law” was a formidable officer in the temple of justice. But nothing came out of that case. The matter was dismissed. The order of mandamus sought by Gani Fawehinmi was ruled out of time.  Tinubu was already Governor. The court held that the was covered by immunity under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution. I imagine that similarly, history would repeat itself on this matter, in the same manner in which it is certain that the inauguration of Asiwaju Tinubu as President of Nigeria would take place on May 29, 2023. It is true that there are petitions at the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal, but anybody who knows Nigeria fairly well can confidently wager a bet that their Lordships will not give a decision to upturn the social and political order. Tinubu has already set up an inauguration committee, a 13-man committee. His associates have been sighted attending the Spring meetings of the Bretton Woods institutions in Washington DC, United States. He has been busy playing Rose Garden politics. Meanwhile, nothing has been heard from the Presidential Election Petition Tribunal.  Petitions and cross petitions have been filed. Hundreds of lawyers have been lined up. We would probably be here in 50 days from now, with inauguration done attended by traditional rulers competing for attention, the international community in attendance too, a Federal cabinet in place, the woman in charge of catering for the Presidential inauguration Ball having been paid for her pepper soup, small chops, and jollof rice, and the aso ebi, skyscraper Yoruba headgear crowd compensated, a new National Assembly inaugurated, and then the election petition tribunals would suddenly start sitting… The same tribunals would be paid and offered logistics by the new government. Indeed, the Nigerian system is one of the most comedic in the world. Never mind. The lawyers will collect their pay, there will be one or two dramas in the courts, the judges will be happy to have made some fine points of law, and we will all move on.

Moving on, however, it is important, now that the President-elect is back in town that we remind him of the urgent tasks ahead: the big load on his shoulders, the thing around his neck: how to lead Nigeria out of the woods. Nigerians can expect that it would not take Tinubu a long time to set up a Cabinet. In 2015, it took President Buhari quite a while to identify Ministers. He was not alone. One state Governor ran a one-man show in his state for a whole year! He had stayed too long in Lagos before going back home to be Governor. He had difficulties identifying his own people. Tinubu would naturally put a team together without any stress. He has the necessary experience. He has done this and that before as Governor of Lagos State and as an active Godfather in Nigerian politics. Nonetheless, he has more than enough persons in his face who since the elections have been posturing as potential Ministers and advisers, re-enacting their own “Emilokan” – “it is my turn” posturing. The sense of entitlement in the Tinubu camp is so much, so loudly paraded, I would not be surprised if one or two persons in that camp end up in the hospital if they do not get what they think they deserve. But should that bother us? Nigerians are not looking for a team, post-May 29, of entitled persons, boys and girls who are in government to collect IOUs, “emilokan adventurists” in the corridors of Aso Villa. 

Nigerians want a team that can work and move Nigeria forward. In eight years, this country has taken one step forward, two steps backwards. We don’t need to argue over that. Check your pocket. Listen to the loud, tsunami-like rumblings of your stomach. Consider the rate at which burial spaces are disappearing at the cemeteries because of increased harvest of corpses. Imagine how laughter has died in the people’s throats and the pronounced jeremiad in Southern Kaduna, Benue and Plateau. Headline inflation is now over 22%. Food inflation is much higher. The country is in heavy debt. Only the other day, the World Bank told us that Nigeria’s debt service to revenue ratio is 96%. President Buhari says he is looking forward to May 29, and that he can’t wait to return to his home town of Daura. He wants Nigeria to forgive him in case he has not met our expectations. Err, he needs not worry. Nigerians are too distracted, too confused, they don’t know what is good for them. The President can be sure that he has already been forgiven except anybody wants to start another round of religious and ethnic controversy. Charly Boy says the apology is not accepted. Charly Boy, Charly Daddy, is on his own. What Nigeria needs right now is a magician. And the question is: how versed is Tinubu in the magical arts of leadership and societal transformation? He says “emilokan”: now soon, that would be fulfilled in a historical manner, the only other Yoruba man in contemporary times to be President of Nigeria. Very soon, Abuja will be overtaken by the Yoruba cap, the language spoken in the big halls of Abuja hotels would be distinctively Yoruba, “emilokan” will become “awalokan” with Tinubu’s children, in-laws and associates treading the surface of mother earth like new conquerors, backed by power aphrodisiac and possibly, Artificial Intelligence! What Nigeria needs is a President who knows what to do!

“Whatever they like, they (can) speculate, I am healthy and strong and I am okay. May 29 is not a calendar…The challenge ahead is beyond that., it is for all of us together.  And we must stay focused. That is very important. Don’t isolate one date. One date on the calendar does not mean anything. It is just an event.”, Tinubu said on his arrival yesterday. Good. We have heard. But the President-elect must be further reminded that he made many promises to Nigerians, including those who voted for him and those who did not, about his mission to restore hope. Nigerians are looking forward to the delivery of those promises. They need the renewed hope that he promised! Once upon a time in this country, and many would remember, a President told us that he was not aware of the promises in his own election manifesto. He changed the script the moment he got into power and blamed the past administration for everything that did not work. Tinubu cannot play that game. He is an APC man succeeding an APC administration. He would not have a predecessor to blame! Scratch that out of the strategy list. He cannot unleash the security agencies either after the departing administration. If anything, he would in fact be expected to give the incumbent President and other influential persons slots in his own government. 

We, the people of Nigeria, cannot control that. But we expect hope, and that the promises made will be delivered. The President-elect promised Nigerian students that he will pay them loans. Those students at home and abroad are waiting. Where will the money come from? He told us he will increase oil production to 4 million barrels per day. Nigeria has never done more than 2.2 million barrels per day.  We can’t even meet our OPEC-assigned quota. Nigeria’s refineries are down, there is a big crisis in the oil and gas sector, upstream, midstream and downstream. Will Tinubu remove fuel subsidy, immediately he assumes office, on May 29, or would he postpone the evil day complaining about consequences or some “bla bla, blu blu” excuses?. He says he will address the challenge of insecurity in the country. How? And how soon? We would all love to see a civilian leader succeed where a President with an acclaimed strong security background failed.  The days ahead are challenging indeed, not a season for proverbs and Babelic language but action, leadership and results. 

As it is, Tinubu will be President. The courts can have their say, but the power brokers will have their way. I sympathize with the people who continue to insist that something else will happen before May 29, based on the predictions of. prophets and pastors. I am unavailable for that kind of talk, to borrow a phrase that has been made popular in Nigeria by Davido, the musician. In Nigeria, you can hire a Pastor to see what you want to see, and use his social media pages (These Pastors are all over social media now) to say what you want to say. Even persons who are not pastors see visions in Nigeria. So, deal with it, what is ahead in Nigeria would prove to be very interesting. The countdown has begun.  

“Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher and cultural critic, was described as “the eloquent and menacing prophet of an impending catastrophe.” That characterization came after he warned of “an apocalyptic tenor spawning a mood of gloom and a good deal of anxiety, anger, and terror.” His warning was for the 20th century but the things he saw manifest more clearly around here this century. After witnessing the crude novelty in Adamawa which has, so far, attracted only the huff and puff of official reluctance suggesting complicity, can we still say that there is hope for sanity here? There can’t be regeneration wherever foul play is fair play. We have seen the audacious move to enthrone a governor before the election was concluded – and even without the votes. We have heard the state telling us the principal culprit is missing, and is beyond the long arm of the law. We have watched a public television station opening the legs of our democracy for the rapist’s address of larceny. We’ve seen how that station did it without the consequences usually suffered by its private-sector competitors. We are seeing how easy it is to commit the greatest of crimes and slip into the eternity of immunity. We should also see how hope for redemption is increasingly the devil’s water on the highway to optimism. But we are too ‘trusting’ to see everything we should see. “Sometimes”, wrote Ayi Kwei Armah, “a whole people need healing.” We are that people.” 

There are books and films on the life and times of Efunsetan Aniwura, the second Iyalode of Ibadan. She was rich, powerful and cold-hearted. Her success as a woman; her manly carriage and ruthlessness made her a perfect mark for envy and destruction. And she lost everything. But Iyalode did not say goodnight gently; she did what real men do. On one occasion, one of her favourite slaves, a female, laced her food with poison. That slave was stupid. She should have known that no one became Iyalode raw and untoughened in those pristine days. Efunsetan was not a fragile rodent to be killed with ordinary poison. Iyalode looked into the meal, saw death and fed it to the bearer. She challenged the culprit; the culprit confessed that she was merely a messenger. You were sent? And you didn’t tell ‘them’ that you were too small to deliver the message? That slave of Efunsetan ate the food, poison and all, and lost her life. She had to die, because, according to Efunsetan: “Àimo isé kò níí p’esin l’ógun (Not knowing how to say no to errant errands kills horses in battle).” She was right; in ancient times, men took equines to war to go and die. And millions perished, especially during the two World Wars. Throughout history, unfortunate horses died in wars they were drafted to fight. Indeed, Britain had a Horse Mobilisation Scheme under which thousands of horses were moved into the First World War (1914-1918), initially for cavalry, later for transport. History says on a single day during the Battle of Verdun in 1916, over 7,000 horses lost their lives. They had to die because their ladle did not know how to say no to hot, searing sauce.

There are many stupid horses in our government agencies; INEC has a large number of such. They are a herd always ready to deliver any message, no matter how bad, for anyone and to anyone, if the fodder is right and the legumes rich enough. If you were sent on a slave errand and you delivered it as a slave, then, you are a slave. If you were sent to deliver a message of evil and you did as asked, you are definitely evil. And there are consequences for delivering messages. When I read the statement by the Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), Boss Mustapha, conveying President Muhammadu Buhari’s suspension of Hudu Yunusa-Ari, the Resident Electoral Commissioner (REC) for Adamawa State, I shook my head for the fallen man. The man won’t stop being in the news until another stupid stallion does worse than he did. The REC fed a big dose of poison to Nigeria’s democracy with his illegal declaration of the president’s candidate as the winner of the governorship election in that state. And he was audacious and bold about it. He didn’t do it at midnight or before dawn as soldiers of fortune do. He did it as a breakfast treat for Nigeria. The APC candidate was set to lose the election but Yunusa-Ari came out to raise the dead. He didn’t wait for the collation of results that would affirm the lady’s loss; he simply used his powers to decree her as the winner. What he did was novel in the history of electoral heists in Nigeria. Since then, he has not had peace; his employers say he is on the run; a news website insists he was flown to Abuja as a hero in a private jet. Whatever it is with him, the fact this moment is that he is a fugitive; the REC has become a wreck. But did he act alone? To his right were three very powerful security chiefs in the state. I would be stupid to assume that those ones too acted alone, unilaterally. No, but they have melted away, anonymous. Yunusa-Ari is the sole soil man carrying the shit can. He is the only enemy Nigerians know by name because he delivered the message with the rash of a slave.

If you serve power and the powerful, serve them with all your sense intact and alert. Your interest, and your name, must never suffer. There were at least four big men, including the REC, on that ingloriously high table in Yola. Governor Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri has vowed that he will punish all of them for endangering democracy. What can the governor do? He may be a raptor in power, but his falcon has neither the head nor the beak of the eagle behind those owls. If I were that governor, I would look beyond the messengers. Who had the power to direct those four chargers to be at that point that hour? We don’t know them; we can only guess and we are not guessing wild. They must be people who are not just in government but are in power. We know also that the flies of those who deployed Yunusa-Ari and others to do what they did are not following their corpses into the grave. If the unthinking tools have to go down, they have to go down alone as mere sacrifice ingredients. Messengers are expendable bullets; they are kept only for battle. When servants like those in INEC become burnt out, they are cast into Hades by the same persons who used them badly. An incredibly effective horse was nicknamed ‘Warrior’ during the first World War; his other name was “the horse the Germans couldn’t kill.” Warrior served and saved his lord and won many battles for him; he dared and overcame machine gun attacks and burning stables. He survived the war and returned to England by Christmas of 1918 only to be killed by his owner 23 years later – because of the cost of feeding him with “extra corn rations.”

Where I come from, our ancestors know it is impossible for people to escape being sent on errands. It happens. But they warned (and still warn) that if you are sent on a slave errand, deliver the message as a freeborn. That wisdom is alien to persons who have had the (mis)fortune to manage our elections since the beginning of Nigeria. We saw that in that man in Adamawa; he thought he could drop any ‘dirty bomb’ and get away with it. Now, they say he is on the run; his employers want the police to declare him wanted. There are possibly many like him – others may have been subtle (and therefore successful) in doing their own damage. Nigeria’s election chiefs work in a cut-throat, complex world of greed and temptation. The opportunity for mischief and misbehaviour is ever present where they work. Appropriating the thoughts of V, the mystery author of ‘The Mafia Manager’, because the INEC chiefs are allowed to stand with wolves, they think they should howl – but they are no wolves with the survival sense of the canid. Read their stories – they always come in as angels; they always exit injured and wrecked.

But they enjoy the work they do while it lasts. Wherever Yunusa-Ari is hiding (or not hiding) now, I can swear he is eating Tuwo with lamb limbs and thighs of rams. The reason Nigerian power-seekers will give anything to get right there in INEC – or at least tuck their agents in there. The job gives them the power to veto popular votes and be the elector of governments. The office kits them to compete with judges and the courts; the real super powers in our game of thrones. Occurrences like Adamawa’s are potent reminders that Nigeria and optimism must not cohere in the same sentence. But, there are people who would insist that the Nigerian leprosy is mere rashes; they say the blight will soon disappear with the right doctor in the ward. Some hold, in their trusting innocence, that no evil will be evil enough to shock Nigerians to positive action.

Machiavelli, teacher of painful truth, said “by the delusions of seeming good the people are often misled to desire their own ruin.” He added that the people “are frequently influenced by great hopes and brave promises.” Building castles of hope on Nigeria is futile but I get posts of hope and optimism every day from patriotic Nigerians who think, strongly, that Nigeria can still be saved. Two weeks ago, before Adamawa happened to us, I got one from one of my old professors in Ife. I got another from a reader, a fan, who strongly believes in Nigeria, its destiny and in the government that will come on May 29, 2023. My teacher wrote to me: “I’ve just read your piece on ‘The Terrorists Are Back.’ It’s as usual engaging in style. But it’s rather hyperbolic in its portrayal of what seems to be the hopelessness of the Nigerian condition. We still have cause to cheer…” The other message: “My name is Kayode Sufianu, a constant reader of your Monday Lines. I have read almost all the weekly articles since one of them was posted on my old school platform about a year ago – St Charles Grammar School, Osogbo, Class of 1974. That was the first time I got to know of your writings, regrettably. You are one of the best writers I have ever come across – the manner of expression, the almost unimaginable but apt references to writings of different authors, some of whom I never heard of nor read; deep knowledge of Yoruba culture and understanding of the Nigerian situation is legendary. You are also fearless. But permit me to say that yes, the Nigerian situation is bad, but is it hopeless? I don’t think so. However, my fear is this, if everyone, every Nigerian believes, intuits and concludes that NIgeria is irretrievable, there is a great risk that the volition will take on form and manifest. Therefore, we must nurse hope and promote it – that Nigeria will pull through and fulfill her potentials to become a great nation. Does that sort of mimic ‘renewed hope’ slogan? It’s just coincidental but perhaps against all odds, the president-elect, Bola Ahmed Tinubu, may be the one to start the renewal process. Best.” Both messages posit seriously that Nigeria is not irredeemable. They may be right; I may be wrong. They are not alone on that rostrum of hope; millions, North and South, are with them, shoulder-to-shoulder.

Friedrich Nietzsche, German philosopher and cultural critic, was described as “the eloquent and menacing prophet of an impending catastrophe.” That characterization came after he warned of “an apocalyptic tenor spawning a mood of gloom and a good deal of anxiety, anger, and terror.” His warning was for the 20th century but the things he saw manifest more clearly around here this century. After witnessing the crude novelty in Adamawa which has, so far, attracted only the huff and puff of official reluctance suggesting complicity, can we still say that there is hope for sanity here? There can’t be regeneration wherever foul play is fair play. We have seen the audacious move to enthrone a governor before the election was concluded – and even without the votes. We have heard the state telling us the principal culprit is missing, and is beyond the long arm of the law. We have watched a public television station opening the legs of our democracy for the rapist’s address of larceny. We’ve seen how that station did it without the consequences usually suffered by its private-sector competitors. We are seeing how easy it is to commit the greatest of crimes and slip into the eternity of immunity. We should also see how hope for redemption is increasingly the devil’s water on the highway to optimism. But we are too ‘trusting’ to see everything we should see. “Sometimes”, wrote Ayi Kwei Armah, “a whole people need healing.” We are that people.

TWICE did I hear Aisha Dahiru, alias Binani, of the All Progressives Party, APC, declared the winner of the Adamawa State gubernatorial elections and the first female to be elected governor in the country. Twice did this turn out to be a hoax – a sick joke played on Nigerians. The first time was the product of propaganda; the diet on which Nigeria is run.

After the March 18, 2023, elections, it was announced on some media outlets the next day that Binani had won the elections. Many, including Great Britain, fell for the hoax. The British High Commissioner in Nigeria, Catriona Laing, took to her verified Twitter handle, screaming: “Great news! Huge congratulations to Aisha Binani! I hope you will be a trailblazer for other elected female governors.”

When the reality dawned on Laing that she had fallen victim to an orchestrated disinformation campaign, the envoy deleted her tweet. The facts were that the elections were inconclusive and Binani’s rival, incumbent Governor Umaru Ahmadu Fintiri of the Peoples’ Democratic Party, PDP,  in the results so far declared, was actually leading with 421,524 to Binani’s 390,275. Despite these facts, the APC, perhaps based on false information from its Adamawa State branch, insisted that Binani had won the elections.

Its National Publicity Secretary, Felix Morka, issued a statement claiming that: “election results show a clear and decisive victory for Senator Aishatu Dahiru (Binani), the All Progressives Congress, APC, governorship candidate. Faced with the imminent and certain prospect of losing the election, thugs and political actors led by the incumbent governor and candidate of the PDP, Ahmadu Umaru Fintiri, have unleashed heavily armed thugs to disrupt further collation of results and subvert the will of the Adamawa people as expressed at the polls.” 

The Harvard-trained lawyer and former human rights advocate claimed, without providing any evidence, that “the governor is reported to have torn result sheets at the collation centre in a show of unprecedented impunity and executive brigandage.” The APC insisted that Binani: “holds a clear, unassailable lead, only awaiting final collation and declaration by INEC.” However, the results with the INEC were contrary to the APC’s claims, and it directed that supplementary elections be conducted.

The supplementary elections were held on Saturday, April 15, and  the results were being collated and announced when, at 1.00 a.m. the next day, with half the results declared, the INEC announced a break and that the collation and announcements would continue at 11.00 a.m. However, at 9.00 a.m., two hours before the exercise was to continue, Yunusa Hudu-Ari, the INEC Resident Electoral Commissioner, REC; Mohammed Barde, the Police Commissioner on election duty in the state wearing camouflage uniform, the State Director of the Directorate of State  Services, DSS, and the head of the state’s Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps, wearing a well ironed uniform, returned to the collation venue.

REC Hudu-Ari, Commissioner of Police Mohammed Barde, and the other security chiefs who had militarised the collation centre were aware that the collation of the results was in progress and knew that only the Returning Officer, Professor Mohammed Mele, was empowered to announce the results and the winner of the elections. Despite these and the protests of representatives of political parties and election observers, the REC, backed by the security chiefs, went ahead to announce Binani as the winner of the elections. They then fled the crime scene with the assistance of well-armed policemen and security operatives. It was nothing short of an attempted electoral coup, and the action almost set the state on fire, with angry residents taking to the streets in search of the conspirators.

In a redeeming move, INEC quickly nullified the announcement and ordered the REC and its officials in the state to report to its headquarters in Abuja. Inspector General of Police, Usman Baba, followed by removing Barde and replacing him with his Gombe State colleague, Etim Equa.

On Tuesday, when the INEC concluded the collation and announcement of the supplementary election results, Fintiri was declared the winner. It was clear to me that the REC was aware that Binani had lost but had deliberately moved to declare her the winner. The move may seem bizarre, but not in Nigeria, where much crazier things happen in elections. For instance, the APC candidate in the 2019 Imo State gubernatorial elections, Hope Odidika Uzodinma, who came fourth in the INEC-supervised elections, was elevated on January 14, 2020, to the first position by no less an institution than the Supreme Court of Nigeria. In the 2023 elections, candidates who did not contest in the statutory primaries ran in the elections, with some of them declared elected.

The Adamawa coup attempt was a simple one. The strategy amongst the political class, is to get declared the winner of an election and let the court do the rest of the job. Even if the court were to rule in favour of the actual winner, the loser would have been in office for some time, even years before the actual winner would take over.

So, perhaps in accordance with the script, the REC illegally declared Binani the elected governor of Adamawa State. She immediately made an ‘acceptance’ speech carried on public network television, thanking President Muhammadu Buhari for her alleged victory as the first female governor. Next, she ran to the Federal High Court in Abuja to stop INEC from doing anything about her announced victory.

In court, she claimed the fake result that declared her the winner, is authentic, that INEC voiding the result announced by the REC is an usurpation of the power of the Returning Officer and that only the petition tribunal has the power to void her declaration as the governor-elect. Binani failed to acknowledge that it was not the Returning Officer that declared her winner, and since she claims it is only the election tribunal that has powers over electoral matters, why did she not head there rather than the High Court?

So why did Hudu-Ari, a lawyer, and his fellow conspirators engage in the attempted electoral coup? An alleged security officer in a viral video claimed they were paid N2 billion. But Binani, in a reaction, said this is false. Perhaps  REC Yunusa Hudu-Ari would help clarify whether he staked his reputation, job, and freedom for free or was paid to do the job. But the problem is that he seems to have disappeared from the radar screen. However, one person who is certainly not on the run is the strong woman, Binani; she is ready for any eventuality.

So long as politics remains the most lucrative business in Nigeria and impunity reigns, it will be run like a criminal enterprise and our elections will be crime scenes to be trampled upon.

There are two countries whose well-being and stability reach into nearly every part of Africa. One is the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), which is nominally in the Central African Region but which shares borders with nine countries extending to all of the continent’s four other regions – Angola, Burundi, the Central African Republic, the Republic of the Congo, Rwanda, South Sudan, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia. Unsurprisingly, the DRC is in the regional organisations of every region of Africa except those of North and West Africa.

The second is Sudan. With a current landmass of 1.886 million km², Sudan is nearly double the size of Nigeria and the third largest country in Africa behind only Algeria and the DRC. Its neighbours include Chad, Central African Republic, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Libya, and South Sudan; and its regional reach extends to the Middle East and North Africa, Central Africa, Eastern Africa, and West Africa. Even more, Sudan’s geo-strategic significance covers nearly all of the continent’s fragilities, including the Congo Basin, the Horn of Africa, the Great Lakes of Africa, the Gulf of Aden, the Maghreb, the Nile Basin, the Sahel, and the Indian Ocean. A popular land route for Muslim pilgrims and a magnet for all manner of irregular hawkers of violence, Sudan holds the key to nearly all of Africa’s significant strategic exposures from governance, through climate change, to international terror.

But Sudan has known little peace since its independence in 1956 as a condominium of Egypt and the United Kingdom. In 67 years of independence, it has seen at least 17 attempted coups, six of which were successful. Two of those successful coups have occurred in the last four years, the first in April 2019 resulting in the overthrow of the 30-year-long rule of General Omar Al-Bashir, and the second in October 2021 resulting in the overthrow of the power-sharing arrangement that was to return the country to civil rule in 2022.

On both occasions, Egypt, itself at once both uneasy neighbour worried about the course of the Nile (which substantially flows through Sudan before emptying in its territory) and former colonial power, was always an enthusiastic business partner with the Armed Forces of Sudan. To many people, General Burhan, who nominally heads the Sovereignty Council, as the ruling military arrangement in Sudan is called, is a client of Egypt.

These two recent coups were a joint enterprise between the two most organised and best-financed entities in the country: Sudan’s armed forces commanded by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, a four-star General; and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) commanded by Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, better known by the nom de guerre, Hemedti. The RSF is the new name for an entity that used to be known as the Janjaweed, an expeditionary unit of largely lawless irregulars, to whom the government of Omar Al-Bashir outsourced the violent pacification of Darfur. In many ways, it was an internal mercenary force which fed off its crimes. This arrangement suited all sides; the army could conserve its assets, the regime could deny direct responsibility, and the leadership of the Janjaweed could make a lot of money and political capital too.

In the decade and a half from the beginning of the Darfur campaign around 2004 to the overthrow of the regime of Omar Al-Bashir in 2019, Hemedti, who comes from one of Sudan’s most troubled regions in Darfur, built up considerable personal wealth and strategic capital, and the bandit force which he originally constituted as the Janjaweed emerged to become what Alex de Waal described as “now the real ruling power in Sudan. They are a new kind of regime: a hybrid of ethnic militia and business enterprise, a transnational mercenary force that has captured a state”.

In Darfur, the Janjaweed were responsible for a long and distinguished record of credibly attested atrocities, including crimes against humanity that have since become the subject of investigation and prosecution by the International Criminal Court, ICC. They also managed to export their skills in the deployment of indiscriminate violence to clients in the Gulf States, including Saudi Arabia, who found them useful for outsourcing atrocities in Yemen. From his early origins as a bandit and violence rustler, Hemedti managed through these kinds of arrangements to insinuate himself into respectable company in the region, becoming an almost indispensable factor in the security of arguably the most fragile region in Africa, with support from an assortment of actors including the Gulf States and renegade General Khalifa Haftar in Libya.

The threat posed by the Janjaweed was always very evident even to the uninitiated. Until 2019, they were a kind of iron fist underneath Sudan’s velvet gloves. After the overthrow of Bashir, Hemedti, as the commander of the Janjaweed-in-government nicknamed the RSF, became effectively the power behind the throne. The marriage between him and Burhan always seemed rather convenient. It was only a matter of time before he made his bid for power.

On or around April 15, 2023, Hemedti launched what would effectively become Sudan’s 18th coup attempt by bringing guns and heavy artillery into Khartoum. The build-up to this unfolded almost in slow motion amid the ruins of the effort to integrate the RSF into Sudan’s armed forces. While struggling to retrieve some respectability from that, Hemedti reportedly picked up rumours that the assets of Egypt’s Air Force stationed at the Merowe Air Base in the north-west of the country, including the relatively sophisticated Egyptian MiG-29M medium-weight ‘4+ generation’ fighters, were planning a strike on him. So, he made the first move and attacked.

Whether this could end up as Sudan’s seventh successful coup is presently unclear. The fact that Burhan and Hemedti, both committed Islamists, were too impatient to defer the outbreak of military hostilities until after the end of the Holy Month of Ramadhan is notable. As Muslims all over the world marked the Feast of the Sacrifice this weekend and amidst rising civilian casualties in this most urban of Africa’s recent wars, both sides proclaimed an unconvincing ceasefire, supposedly to enable the victims to mark Eid.

Anyone with even limited knowledge of Sudan may be disappointed but not in any way surprised by this turn of events. Much of the present tragedy was both foreseeable and predictable. The most surprising thing of all is the absence of any effective plan for addressing it. While the people of Sudan are slaughtered by those supposed to protect them, the world and the region carry on in apparent resignation and confusion. Karim Khan, the prosecutor of the ICC, appears so fixated on Ukraine, he cannot find the bandwidth to acknowledge the conflagration in Sudan, where Darfur, itself currently an active case under the watch of both the ICC and the UN, has also degenerated into warfare.

For its part, the United Nations Security Council appears to have outsourced the situation to the African Union which has, in turn, outsourced it to the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), which is chaired by Sudan, whose duelling rulers each seem to believe that they have the military solution to this war. All they can muster at the moment appear to be Zoom meetings.

While regional countries try to scramble, Nigeria, Africa’s self-appointed big brother, has barely noticed. Yet, the links between both countries are beyond geographic. In 1903, Frederick Lugard sacked Sultan Attahiru of Sokoto, who made a last stand at Burmi (now near Bajoga in Funakaye local government area of Gombe state) where he and over 700 of his family and followers were slaughtered nearly 120 years ago in August 1903 in the “destruction of the town by a British force of 30 whites and 500 native rank and file”. His surviving son, Mohammed Bello, led the remainder of Attahiru’s survivors into exile in Sudan where their descendants have lived since then. Above all, the embassy in Sudan is Nigeria’s most lucrative foreign mission.

For Nigeria, the crisis in Sudan is not just a matter of security and geography, it is also inescapable history and economics.

A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Democracy, by its design, nature, and practice, is not a light toggle switch that is turned on and off. It is not a wall that crumbles in one fell swoop. Democracy is always a process, both in its growth and demise. History is replete with how democracies collapsed in other climes. Disregarding the rule of law is the root of all the cases. The most consequential disregard for the rule of law is the one that affects the entire population, and that is when they lose faith in the electoral process. It often led citizens to conclude that there is no difference between democracy, authoritarian rule, and other forms of government. Using electoral fraud to decimate democracy is far easier than any other means. Every attempt to compromise the electoral process makes it harder for the people to believe in democracy.

In almost all nations where democracy crumbles, they followed the same playbook – whether in Peru under Alberto Fujimori( 1990-1992), Hungary under Viktor Orban, Venezuela under Hugo Chavez or Chile under Salvador Allende/ Augusto Pinochet( 1979). Destroy or compromise the institutions of the state, the police, judiciary, military, security apparatus, parliament, and most importantly -the institution and mechanism of the electoral process and democracy begins to crumble.

The 2023 general election is a watershed in our electoral history, and all see the reverberation of its impact. Never in Nigerian history has the people been highly committed to an election with hope, optimism and great expectations. The final verdict of the outcome of the electoral process is yet out because the process has not concluded, but some came out disappointed in the structures and procedures of the election. Most of the political actors became Machiavellian and threw caution to the winds in their pursuit of electoral victory. Some politicians bought the electoral victories with pain and blood. The strategy was to win at all costs and care less about the consequences on our democracy. Little wonder there is a mixed feeling of progress with our democracy yet high despondency and frustration among many Nigerian post-elections.

Nigerian political class seems unmindful of the consequences of some of its actions and inactions. The politicians who ought to guard democracy are inadvertently investing in destroying the guard rails of democracy. Politicians compromise judges, corrupt electoral officials, buy up security personnel and buy votes. This is after investing in the mass impoverishment of the populace and weaponising poverty.

Our democracy seems to be unravelling in front of us. The gradual dismantling of our democracy is in seemingly random events, sometimes isolated and unrelated, but when pulled together, it shows our descent into anarchy or autocracy. The last general election witnessed three stages of dismantling Nigerian democracy by politicians, political parties, and their sympathisers.

The first stage is known as capturing the referees. If you wanted to rig a football, one of the first things you would do is ‘capture’ the referees and get them to rule in your favour. In the last election, evidence suggests that politicians and their cronies captured INEC officials, and in time we will know whether they captured the judges in the many court cases that are still ongoing.

The second stage is side-lining the opposition players. Their opponents entirely stifled the political opposition in some parts of the country. And not given a level playing field to compete in the elections. They were denied opportunities to campaign in some states and were molested, beaten, and arrested for no just cause. Some politicians told opposition members not to come out and vote unless they wanted to die. Opposition politicians and their supporters were subjected to various inhuman treatment, often in the open and where you have security operatives. They were blackmailed, and their supporters were ethnically profiled and denied their franchises. Unfortunately, society did nothing about it, and the perpetrators have gone without punishment or consequences. They are emboldened by their victory to keep brutally raping our democracy and dismantling it bit by bit.

The third stage of dismantling democracy is disregarding rules—actions and reactions fuel losing faith in democratic institutions. The interpretation and actions of INEC on the position of the Electoral Act on the use of technology, specially Bimodal Voter Accreditation( BVAS) and INEC Results Viewing Portal( IRev) is the core of diminished trust the people have in INEC. It is also the plausible reason we have too many disputes about the declared results. INEC is generally believed not to respect constitutional provisions and its regulations.

The dismantling of our democracy implies that Nigerian voters may have no reason to act rationally but will rely on primordial and survivalist sentiments to deal with future elections. If Nigerians believe their votes do not count, what is the point of elections? If we allow the prevailing feeling of disenfranchisement to continue, our democracy will become a mere nomenclature and not reality. In that case, there is virtually no reason to think our votes will change anything. There is also no reason to behave rationally. We will act emotionally and vote only based on ethnicity, religion, and other base sentiments.

We will disconnect voting and elections from governance since voting does not decide who leads. Therefore, there is no reason to change our beliefs regarding electoral politics. As a result, people will continue to vote for whatever politician or party is closest to their emotionally determined beliefs. In other words, there’s no reason for people to vote rationally; instead, sticking to their biases or emotions is much more comfortable. Understanding this reality is essential since our democratic system assumes that rational voters are in the majority. And this is a danger to our democracy! At the extreme, if we don’t find ways to sanitise the electoral process further and, by extension, democracy, we would incentivise popular revolt to redefine democracy in the image of the people’s wishes.

Suddenly, our democracy is tainted with politicians who reject the rules of democracy. They often are suspicious of elections and their results and sometimes rail against the laws and constitutions of Nigeria for their selfish reasons. They discredited their political opposition and sometimes tagged them as enemies of the state. They tolerate and encourage violence in elections and brag about their link to the mafia, militant groups men of the underworld. They quickly desire to reduce the civil rights of people, institutions, and protesters and actively silence the media.

We have seen too many cases where results were declared under gunpoint, and the opposing parties and INEC appeared helpless. This gave rise to the insertion of Section 65 of the Electoral Act 2022, which stated that: “The commission shall have the power, within seven days, to review the declaration and return where it determines that the said declaration and return was not made voluntarily or made contrary to the provisions of the law, regulations and guidelines, and manual for the election.” Going by what transpired in the March 18 and supplementary elections, this challenge is still very much around.

Two strings of incidents in recent times have raised the red flag on the efficacy of the electoral process. The latest wave of electoral malfeasance is the Adamawa case. Too many inconsistent stories and conjectures are flying around. INEC owes us the obligation of full disclosure of what happened. A situation where the INEC REC, flanked by the commissioner of police in the state, unilaterally declared the APC gubernatorial candidate as the winner, but INEC changed course in a few days to announce the PDP candidate as the winner, leaves a sour taste to most Nigerians. It killed our democracy a little. Interestingly, both INEC and President Buhari have authorised the REC’s suspension from office, his investigation and possible prosecution by the police, but to give confidence to the citizens, it will be imperative to make the findings public.

Another embarrassing interference in the electoral process is what happened in Rivers State during and after the elections. How INEC conducted the governorship and state assembly elections in that state can earn her a spot in the Guinness Book of Records of electoral heist. The orchestrated mob action and drama that followed the attempt by APC to inspect and collect from INEC RVS certified true copies of electoral materials is a big dent in the electoral process. The fact that all the drama happened in the presence of security agencies and INEC officials makes it difficult to dispute the conspiracy theory that followed.

Even the lawyers preparing to fill election appeals were molested, arrested, and manhandled. The supposed guardians of democracy raised no voice to condemn what happened in Rivers State. Although “the protesters” trying to stop opposition parties in Rivers State from inspecting and collecting true certified copies of INEC materials used for the elections were at the INEC office for days, no single arrest was made, nor was anybody invited for questioning. Our democracy is the victim of these shenanigans; we are all casualties. No doubt these anti-democratic forces are emboldened.

These trends are laying the foundation for the complete demise of our democracy. All lovers of democracy must not allow these anomalies to continue unchecked. We must protect our democracy and bequeath it to posterity. We should not take things for granted simply because our democracy has survived the shenanigans so far. Democracy remains the only system of government that will lead our multi-ethnic, multi-religious, multi-language and heavily diverse country into meaningful growth and prosperity. Let us defend it!

Dr. Peterside is a former Director General of the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA)

There is a Peter Obi witch-hunt that is ongoing. Undoubtedly, certain forces are after him. You can call it Obidients-phobia or Obi-phobia. Both are equal in the eyes of the attackers. These sustained attacks on Obi, Datti, his running mate, as well as the Labour Party and the Obidient family, are simply because they have upended the system and are devoted to creating a new Nigeria that would be beneficial to all Nigerians. They hope to overthrow the corrupt system using the ballot and the law because Nigeria, today, solely benefits a small number of kidnappers of state power, and these beneficiaries are resisting the change.

Since Obi filed his petition with the Presidential Election Petitions Tribunal (PEPT), the attacks on him have increased in frequency and complexity. However, two instances stand out as the most puzzling and horrifyingly nasty. A hacked telephone conversation between Peter Obi and respected clergyman David Oyedepo was made public. The LP candidate requested Pastor Oyedepo’s assistance in getting his message out to Christians in the Southwest and some part of the North-central in the doctored audio clip. They added a last twist to the audio to meet their purpose by declaring that the presidential race was a “religious war”.

Discerning minds are aware of what internet tigers and ICT experts have turned the internet tools into, particularly video and audio editing and faking. For this evil use of the internet, the actual conversation between these two eminent Nigerians may never be known and will be forever drowned in perfidy.

However, a few days after the deep fake audio was published, Information Minister Lai Mohammed accused Peter Obi of inciting Nigerians against one another, accusing him of treason. This accusation of treason made by the minister is only one of the numerous desperate, intentional, and dishonest attempts by various people, including officials of the Nigerian government, to denigrate and destroy Peter Obi by falsely portraying him as inciting insurrection.

Unless treason has a different definition, Peter Obi is never known to solicit support for actions that would harm the Nigerian state or to encourage his supporters to take such actions, let alone promote such actions. Therefore, the accusation is one of defaming a dog to hang it. No matter how treason is operationally defined, it will never include a guy who calls for calm and who seeks redress in court for his harm.

Here is the most basic definition of treason, for the avoidance of doubt: “the crime of betraying one’s country, particularly by attempting to assassinate or overthrow the ruler or government”.

Treason in Nigeria can also be held as anyone who declares war on the state to subdue or frighten the president. Treason is viewed as betraying the state also from a biblical standpoint. In Nigeria, treason is a crime. According to the legislation: “Any person who levies war against the state, to intimidate or overawe the president or the governor of a state, is guilty of treason, and is liable to the punishment of death” (L.N. 112 of 1964). That is what Peter Obi’s accusers are fabricating.

According to a proverb, a tsetse fly that lands on the scrotum is dispatched unusually. The scrotum will break if you kill the tsetse fly violently; the tsetse fly will drain the blood if left alone also. When one considers the forces chasing Peter Obi in light of his surprise performance in the presidential election on February 25, one gets the idea that they are in a desperate state. The Peter Obi challenge is a mystery to them. Simply put, the blackmail is not working.

Despite all the abracadabra, INEC nevertheless reported that the presidential candidate of the Labour Party had a lead in 12 states, matching the results of both the incumbent APC’s candidate and the main opposition PDP’s candidate, who both had a lead in 12 states like Obi.

Peter Obi was initially viewed as merely a rabble-rouser running for publicity and to make a point. Former Edo state governor Adams Oshiomhole even dismissed his spectacular social media dominance as “four people tweeting in a room”. However, after the presidential election, this impression has become an apprehension of clear and present danger and a nightmare, in the eyes of the forces who think they control Nigeria.

The general public, especially the young people, responded favourably to Obi’s show of competence, ethics, and straightforward campaign message of switching Nigeria from consumption to production. They were encouraged knowing that at last there is a man who is sincerely dedicated to eradicating poverty and changing the country.
“Don’t vote for me because I’m an Igbo man, a Christian, or because I’m from Southern Nigeria,” Peter Obi urged at the time, further telling Nigerians. “Instead, cast your vote for me since I’m a Nigerian and I’m the candidate with the highest qualifications out of the other 17 candidates”. One of Peter Obi’s messages that threaten and enrages the oligarchs is: “Let’s take back our country”. Within a few months, Obi had amassed a sizable following and became a movement.

His 100-page presidential election petition raised issues that will bewilder any tribunal and rankle any president-elect. INEC has declared Tinubu as president-elect and asked all aggrieved parties and the main contenders – Peter Obi and Atiku Abubakar – to go to court. The two leading candidates, Peter Obi, and Atiku Abubakar have both filed petitions. However, the grounds are what the oligarchs are upset about – not the fact that Obi went to court. That is what this witch-hunting is all about.

Peter Obi has consistently pleaded with his supporters to uphold the law and not give up on the country. By working to regain his mandate, Obi is steadfastly devoted to his mission of creating a Nigeria that benefits all Nigerians. He believes that failing to pursue his mandate would be equivalent to betraying the millions of Nigerians who trusted him enough to cast their votes for him. Obi is a humanist who supports peace, social fairness, and human advancement.

During his presidential campaign, Obi demonstrated that he understands the extreme insecurity, poverty, unemployment, and untold miseries that Nigerians experience and informed them that a new Nigeria is achievable and that they should have faith in him.

The defamation of the man and his dream by those opposed to the new Nigeria and worried they are about to lose significance in the new equation has now evolved into actual threats and covert actions against the man and his dream. A few days ago, news of Peter Obi’s identity being stolen also spread from the UK. Right around this time, it was believed that the dark forces’ use of deep false audio tape was coming to an end. They haven’t also revealed their motive for assuming Obi’s identity.

Theft, impersonation, and fighting words, may have been the climax but may not be their final acts. One thing is certain, though: these covert actions were planned and carried out against Obi to weaken his determination and disperse the movement. According to Robert Greene, “Strike the Shepherd and the sheep will scatter” is one of the 48 Laws of Power.

Yes, with Peter Obi’s level of dedication, courage, and inspirational leadership, a new Nigeria that would be safe and secure for all Nigerians is feasible. However, strong opposition exists to this new Nigeria. All advocates for Nigeria’s peace, unity, and development must not only pray for Peter Obi but also collaborate with him to achieve these goals.

Senate President Lawan’s senatorial nomination bid and the earlier Imo State Governorship election are two recent cases whose controversial outcomes have continued to annoy many people including retired and serving judges. A third case that may have such lasting impact is the controversy concerning what a candidate must score in Abuja, the Federal Capital Territory as a condition for becoming president.  According to Section 134 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999, a candidate can only win a presidential election in Nigeria if he scores majority of votes at the election which must in addition not be “less than one quarter of the votes cast at the election in each of at least two-thirds of all the states of the Federation and the Federal Capital Territory Abuja.”

Public understanding of the provision has remained contentious. Rather than joining those making premature comments on the subject, this article hypothesizes that head or tail, the electoral importance of Abuja’s hegemony is not one that can easily be discountenanced. If the judiciary decides that it is not mandatory for any candidate to win in the territory, the consequences of the decision may not be less than the impact of a contrary decision. It is therefore a battle that must get to the Supreme Court for the most senior judges of the land to conscientiously examine and interrogate. Thus, efforts must be made to prevent the subject from becoming one of those which erode the integrity of our justice system. For this reason, this is not a subject to be left to judges alone. Civil society groups need to undertake public enlightenment schemes that can prepare citizens to appreciate the rationale for whatever decision is eventually made.

Interestingly, some of the arguments so far canvassed concerning the subject are incorrect. The common belief for instance that the Supreme Court had in the past pronounced on the matter is false. In fact, the Judiciary has had no cause to deal directly with the question of the 25 percent of votes in the FCT because in all the presidential elections in Nigeria since 1999, each winner always met the requirement. It has therefore not come before the judiciary as a ground for reviewing any person’s victory. The presidential election of February 25, 2023 where the candidate declared by INEC as president-elect did not win up to 25 percent of votes cast in the FCT is in actual fact the first time the matter is coming up for determination. Those who have already formed an opinion that there is a precedent to be followed might be misled into violence if their expectation is not met. They need to watch it.

Is Abuja one of the states of the federation? This is a major question of interest to many but it is not a new question. The judiciary has answered it before, yet the question has refused to go away. To imagine that those still raising it are unaware that the question had been answered before by the judiciary is simplistic. On two occasions: the cases instituted by Okoyede (2001) and Musa Baba-Panya (2015), saw our courts affirming that Abuja is one of the states of Nigeria. The decisions were hinged on Section 299 of the constitution which provides that Abuja should be treated as if it were one of the states of the federation. There are several reasons why the decision looks suspect. First, what immediately follows the provision suggests that there is a limit to when, where and how the provision is applicable. This is because if Abuja is to be treated as a state at all times, it would not have been necessary for the provision to immediately detail how the legislative, executive and judicial functions of Abuja were to be handled. They would have just been left to run as states handle theirs. 

A second reason why not everyone is persuaded that the drafters of the Nigerian Constitution intended to make Abuja a state of the federation is their failure to change their other provision which says that Nigeria shall have 36 states. Why couldn’t they simply say 37? In addition, the same Constitution formally describes Abuja as the Federal Capital Territory(FCT).  There is also the issue of whether an entity is exactly same as one that is treated like it. One school of thought provides an interesting analogy; that if a man choses to treat his stepson as if he is his son, it does not change the fact that a stepson and a son are not the same in all respects – a stepson can never successfully claim to be the biological son of a stepfather simply because the stepfather treats  him as a son. Although the executive is known for deciding on which judgments to obey, it does not help the case of Abuja as a state that judicial decisions directing it to be so treated have never been obeyed by successive administrations.

To make the attainment of 25 percent of the votes cast in a presidential election mandatory for Abuja treats it differently from other states. Perhaps that is a strong point because states are supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law. But that is not the only case where Abuja is virtually a stand-alone entity. Indeed, there are too many things found in a state that are nowhere in Abuja. It has neither its own governor nor a legislature. The president serves as its governor while the national assembly makes laws on its behalf. Why would such an entity be regarded as a state when it does not have several things that states have? What appears obvious is that although Abuja is not a state, it is a special Nigerian territory that can attract certain provisions such as the 25 percent requirement. To start with, it is the only part of Nigeria where citizens especially civil servants are attracted from all over the country through the principle of federal character to cohabit. Every presidential candidate ought to be able to score just 25percent of votes cast in such a location of diverse citizens that is a miniature Nigeria

It is also important to note that for a candidateto be elected as governor of a state, such a candidate must score 25 percent of the votes cast in at least two-thirds of what makes up a state. Considering that no one disagrees with the fact that the president is the governor of Abuja, is it too much for Abuja to be a mandatory place where such a president should meet that requirement? Many would agree that Abuja where a president stands-in as governor ought to be where the 25 percent requirement is not negotiable. Otherwise, there would be no basis for a president who could not attain that basic requirement to be imposed on the people of Abuja who apparently didn’t vote for the particular president. Ordinarily, this should not give room to debate, but unfortunately the subject has been so politicised that supporters of different parties are not likely to take any decision on it lightly. This is why the judiciary needs to take a comprehensive look at the subject once and for all. 

At the same time, a decision which categorically makes Abuja, the 37th state is likely to agitate those who would see it as an attempt to give more states to the North. In 1967 when General Yakubu Gowon turned Nigeria into 12 states, the North and the South had 6 states each. Some Nigerians didn’t think it was fair toin later years give  the North 19 of the 36 states, leaving the South with only 17. To elevate Abuja to a state thereby increasing the gap between the North and South respectively to 20: 17, is perhaps not the best way to attain the much desired unity in the country.  Our apex court can help stabilize the polity by halting the situation in which our constitution specifically provides for 36 states, yet we seem to have 37. The lessons of two-third of 19 states which we faced in 1979, ought to have persuaded us away from a figure that is odd-numbered. Otherwise, problems of two-thirds of 37 which await us in future can be resolved now.

In a tragic sense, Sudan is somehow lucky. Its leading political figures, who also happen to be combatant generals, have not hidden their differences beneath a façade of mutual deceit.  They have instead allowed their differences to blossom into an open bloody confrontation. The two top generals who also happen to be the top political citizens of a nation with many hidden wounds have spared no effort in coming into the open to display their differences and clashing ambitions. These differences also happen to reflect the many hidden complications in Sudan’s national life: religious differences, economic interests, political ambition, a politicized military, big power transferred aggression and the aggressive strategic goals of big powers.

When an animosity between two rotten warlords blossoms into a shooting war, it opens the path to either a national meltdown or some kind of settlement. It is either the stronger force subdues the weaker and dictates the terms of a peaceful settlement or an equilibrium of forces is achieved in which case peace through negotiation becomes the only path open to all. In the next couple of weeks, Sudan may have to migrate from the present rage of clashing warlords to a full civil war, yet another in a series since after independence in 1956.

In a little over a week, Khartoum, the capital, has been transformed from a scraggy sprawling city in the sun into the battlefield of an undeclared civil war. A contest for power supremacy between two corrupt ambitious generals has reopened the window for familiar military adventurism. The bloody rivalry between the two topmost senior military and political leaders has exploded into a real combat situation between factions of the Sudanese military and security forces. War planes, tanks and other weapons of war are being used freely as troops shoot into civilian population centres in Khartoum and beyond.

The raging confrontation is between the forces of General Abdul Fattah al-Burhan, Commander of the Sudanese Army, against those of General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, commander of the Rapid Support Force(RSF), a paramilitary security force. Both are semi autonomous forces competing for pre-eminence in the post al- Bashir era. Both men happen to be the topmost political figures, Head and Deputy  respectively, in an interim semi military government presiding over the country after  a series of shifting power arrangements after the toppling of Omar al Bashir in a 2019 coup led by both men. Both men also staged a coup that wrested power from the revolutionary civilian coalition of civil society groups whose protests facilitated the ousting of al-Bashir’s three decades of Islamist authoritarianism.  

The raging bloody confrontation has degenerated into a blood bath.  Casualties have mounted and order has collapsed. Close to 300 deaths have been reported with over 3,500 injured. Most of the victims are innocent civilians and international workers according to independent journalists and observers. The diplomatic community has been badly hit with United Nations offices and diplomats’ residences openly ransacked and looted. Disturbing cases of open harassment of female diplomats have been reported. Attempts by the international community to broker a cessation of hostilities has led to two failed ceasefires that collapsed within minutes of being announced.

The African Union(AU) has, as usual, been generous with condemnations of the violence with a basket of resolutions and threats, calling on both sides to come to the negotiating table. The United Nations has in turn joined in ritual condemnations of the fighting and its tragic fallouts. Meanwhile, the hostilities are assuming the character and dimensions of a full blown civil war.

The origins and drivers of the resurgent violence in Sudan go beyond a mere interpersonal power tussle between the two very corrupt and ambitious political and military overlords. It goes down to the strategic issues and factors that have always defined the country’s existence and recurrent crises. The primary conflict is that between a growing popular democratic wave and the long standing conservative Islamist power establishment that was the basis of the three decades long Omar al-Bashir hegemony. The pro- democracy forces led the 2018 street protests and revolution that helped topple Omar Al Bashir’s 30 year autocracy remain alive. They had started with agitations and street protests for greater accountability and a better standard of living. Pitted against this nascent populist democratic wave is the conservative Islamist power core of the Sudanese state. The current power structure led by both Generals  Hamdani and Dagalo are thinly disguised factions of the al-Bashir regime.

It would be recalled that the popular uprising softened the al Bashir autocracy for toppling by the military. In turn, the two dueling generals staged a coup that upstaged the popular revolution,  refusing to cede power to the leadership of the popular movement.

In many ways, a perennial power tussle between factions of the usurping military leaders has become the centerpiece of Sudan’s political life in recent times. It has consistently sidestepped the transition to popular democracy which remains the major issue in the post al-Bashir era. The compromise that legitimized the now crumbling semi military administration remains an attempt to forge a tenuous balance of ambitions between these two dominant forces on the one hand and the popular civil society  coalition on the other.

Predictably, therefore, the appearance of uneasy political stability that would lead to the planned democratic elections later in two years was more an appearance than a reality. It has now burst into the bloody confrontation on display in and around Khartoum. It is unlikely that the two dueling generals and their followers will be willing to sheath their swords for as long as they still have forces and formations under their respective command and control. Already,  deal to subsume the paramilitary Response Force under the larger umbrella of the Sudanese Armed Forces has fallen apart.

Strategically, Sudan’s peculiarities may escalate the present confrontation. The interplay of internal political interests may be overwhelmed by international conspiracies and interests occasioned by a convergence of Sudan’s strategic location and internal composition. The United States has always seen Sudan as something of a precarious and suspicious rogue nation  that needs to be constantly kept under watch because of its deep Islamic leanings and sporadic terrorist affinities. Sudan was for a long time a hiding place for jihadist terrorist and fundamentalist organizations associated with a long tradition of anti-Western activism. These range from Yassir Arafat’s temporary refuge in Sudan in the days of the Black September organization. Similarly, al-Queda found refuge in Sudan in its formative years leading President Bill Clinton to send cruise missiles to bomb suspected  terrorist havens in Sudan in the run up to the emergence of Osama Bin Laden.

As a result, the two opposing tendencies in the global Islamic world have sought and found allies within the Sudanese political leadership. At different times, Iran and Saudi Arabia as well as their client states and allies in the Middle East have courted different regimes in Sudan. Even now, major interests in the Middle East are tending to support either of the two warring generals. Egypt and Libya have assumed opposing alliances in the ongoing confrontation.

At the present time, the Russians have emerged to further complicate an already complex scenario. They have seen an opportunity in the establishment of a naval base in Sudan as an opportunity to counter long standing US and Western influence in Sudan. Similarly, the Saudi’s remain interested in exploiting the political fluidity in the Sudan to advance their interests. Others like Egypt, Libya and the UAE have of late weighed in in a running jostle for regional influence and pre eminence. Sudan’s neighbours like Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, South Sudan  and even smaller African authoritarian regimes all have an interest in the contest for supremacy among Sudan’s ambitious and politicized military leaders.

As it turns out, contrary to the prevalent notion that Sudan is merely a vast arid semi desert country, the country actually contains 10 percent of the arable and fertile land mass of Africa. In addition, it has an abundance of natural resources. Its oil reserves are the main attraction for an increasing Chinese presence in the country. It also has abundant gold and uranium resources in which both its immediate neighbours and major international players  are deeply interested. Therefore, there is a convergence of international interest in the current instability in Sudan which may make the confrontation degenerate into a full blown civil war with deeply interested external players intent on finding lasting foothold.

For the international community especially both the United Nations and the African Union, a quick resolution to the sudden violent eruption in Sudan is now imperative before the parties ossify into combatant footholds with friends abroad. Sudan should be more  than a casual engagement. The international community will have to untangle the web of complex interests that are at play in the Sudanese crisis. The Sudan crisis calls for the highest display of diplomatic dexterity to sufficiently assuage the interests and reassure the combatants.  A ceasefire leading to dialogue is the only way out.  A quick resolution is imperative if the escalating humanitarian tragedy is not to worsen. Most importantly, the challenge in Sudan is first and foremost that of restoring the original sanctity of the civil society coalition that pressured al Bashir out of power. This should be quickly followed by the restoration of civil authority through a democratic election and return to civil rule. Continuing to sweep the prodemocracy current under the carpet of warlords can only prolong the crisis and plunge Sudan into yet another avoidable civil war. Sudan is boiling from an urgent desire for genuine democracy, not the superficial contest of the huge ego of ambitious war mongers and  power oligarchs.

For Nigeria, the evolving tragedy in Sudan has far fetched repercussions. The United States initiative with its special military mission in AFRICOM will be in peril if Sudan crumbles in an all out civil war. Sudan holds a delicate geographical place in the international effort to contain the spread of jihadist terror in the Sahel. 

Happily, the Nigerian political landscape has evolved beyond the point where politicised generals have privatized commands that can be used to hold the nation to ransom. It is perhaps a happier place to be in the hands of rough political entrepreneurs than be caught in a cross fire between armed warlords funded by the state.