The Oba Ìsèse Of Ogun state and Chairman, "Ìsèse Kingdom Of Truth Association Of Nigeria," Oba Ifarotimi Adifagbola Balogun, has expressed confidence in a brighter future for Nigerians despite the present difficulties and hardships.

Addressing journalists in Abeokuta, he expressed confidence in the present administration of President Bola Tinubu to turn things around for the better and urged citizens to be patient.

He said that traditional deities have revealed that Nigerians would have a cause to smile at the end of the tunnels, noting that Nigerians need to be patient with the present administration-led by President Bola Tinubu.

“One of the qualities of a good citizen is patience. We Nigerians should continue to exercise patience and support our leaders, especially the President, Governors and others, so that they will be able to deliver on their pledges,” he said.

Oba Adifagbola Balogun said Nigeria first, is a citizen-driven civic initiative aimed at motivating young Nigerians not to lose hope in the viability of their country, noting that the planned protest on the independence day should be shelved, especially for the betterment of the masses.

“This is our country, and we don’t have any other country. So, let us play the role of good citizens by showcasing the good about Nigeria. We have vibrant Nigerian youth who are now leading in Fintech, Nollywood, Arts and Musics and other sectors, this means like in every clime, there are good and noble people in Nigeria.

“Also, the government should come up with an economic policy that will stop traders and service providers from increasing prices of goods and services by 100 percent whenever there are fuel issues or the others.

“Let there be a price control policy and a policy that will help the government to monitor the activities of market women and other traders, thereby stopping them from charging outrageous prices for their goods and services," Oba Adifagbola Balogun stated

He described President Tinubu as an administrator with a key interest in people’s welfare, saying the long-term effect of fuel subsidy removal will be to the huge benefit of innocent Nigerians.

During the screening of the current Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) Governor, one lawmaker stood apart from the crowd, raising concerns that few were willing to echo at the time. That lawmaker was Adams Oshiomhole, the former Governor of Edo State and a senator who has never shied away from expressing his candid views. Oshiomhole’s opposition to the appointment of the CBN Governor appeared bold, even confrontational, amidst the widespread support from his colleagues. But now, with Nigeria’s economy in turmoil and public confidence in the CBN dwindling, a critical question looms: was Oshiomhole right all along?

During the screening process in Nigeria’s Senate, Oshiomhole raised strong objections to the CBN Governor’s nomination, taking a position many viewed as politically inconvenient. He questioned the nominee’s track record, citing a lack of strong financial oversight credentials and expressing doubt about his ability to navigate the highly complex monetary and fiscal challenges facing Nigeria.

For Oshiomhole, it was not merely about credentials on paper. He understood that the Central Bank Governor must not only manage monetary policies effectively but must also have the courage to stand up to political pressures and external influences. Oshiomhole feared that the nominee might be too closely aligned with political interests and could compromise the independence of the apex bank, which should remain insulated from political interference.

But, instead of engaging in a substantive debate over the concerns raised, the majority of his colleagues in the Senate brushed off his criticisms, some labeling them as “unnecessary opposition.” They expressed confidence in the nominee’s ability to continue in the long tradition of capable financial leadership that had characterized the CBN’s history.

The outcome was predictable. Despite Oshiomhole’s protests, the Senate overwhelmingly confirmed the CBN Governor, with Oshiomhole standing as one of the few dissenting voices. He was, however, unrelenting, stating at the time that “Nigerians will one day see the consequences of these hasty confirmations.”

Fast forward to today, and the picture of Nigeria’s economy tells a different story. The value of the naira has plummeted, inflation has soared, and the purchasing power of the average Nigerian has diminished. Nigeria, a nation that once had a robust currency and stable financial markets, now struggles with runaway inflation, rising unemployment, and an economy trapped in a cycle of debt and uncertainty.

The CBN’s much-publicized decision to float the naira, a move designed to stabilize the currency, backfired, leading to further depreciation, stoking inflation, and causing significant panic in the financial markets. In the absence of clear and coherent policies, businesses are grappling with an unstable exchange rate, while ordinary Nigerians are left to bear the brunt of higher costs of goods and services.

The financial sector has been rife with confusion, and the CBN’s response to these challenges has been criticized as inconsistent and short-sighted. The Bank’s attempts to balance the foreign exchange market, combined with measures such as cash withdrawal limits, have met with criticism from economists who argue that these policies have been either too radical or poorly executed.

The current economic hardship raises the question: “Would Nigeria be in this position if Oshiomhole’s warnings had been heeded?” His reservations about the CBN Governor’s ability to effectively manage monetary policy and stave off political pressure seem eerily prophetic in light of Nigeria’s deteriorating financial situation.

One of Oshiomhole’s main objections during the CBN Governor’s screening process was the risk of political interference in the operations of the Central Bank. The former Edo State governor made a compelling argument that the apex bank must be led by someone who could make tough decisions for the country’s economic stability, free from political influence.

Looking at the current economic situation, there are growing concerns about the independence of the CBN. Critics have accused the Bank of making decisions that seem more politically expedient than economically sound. Some have even suggested that the CBN is under pressure from certain political actors who are prioritizing short-term political gains over long-term economic stability.

This was precisely what Oshiomhole warned about. He envisioned a scenario where the Central Bank, instead of acting independently to safeguard the economy, would become a tool for political maneuvering. Today, these concerns have materialized, as the CBN struggles to assert its independence in the face of rising economic pressure and political expectations.

Oshiomhole’s vocal opposition during the screening process underscores a broader problem in Nigerian politics: the tendency to silence or ignore dissenting voices, especially when they go against popular sentiment. In many cases, warnings from opposition figures are viewed as mere political antics, rather than serious concerns deserving of debate.

The collapse of Nigeria’s financial stability and the confusion surrounding CBN policies should prompt a reassessment of how critical decisions, such as key appointments, are made. “If Oshiomhole’s voice had been taken seriously, would Nigeria’s economic situation be different today?” “Could a more rigorous vetting process for the CBN Governor have produced a leader better equipped to manage the economy through these turbulent times?”

The CBN’s mishandling of currency devaluation, inflation control, and financial regulations has had a devastating effect on businesses and households. Major industries are struggling to stay afloat, with many companies scaling back operations due to the skyrocketing cost of imports and raw materials. Small businesses, which form the backbone of the economy, have been hit the hardest, with many shutting down or downsizing due to high production costs.

In the agriculture sector, the lack of access to affordable credit and fluctuating exchange rates has crippled farmers’ ability to invest in mechanization and improve productivity. This, in turn, has led to reduced food supply, exacerbating food insecurity across the country.

Households are also bearing the brunt of poor monetary policies. With inflation eroding the value of wages, families are struggling to afford basic necessities, and the poverty rate continues to climb. The promise of economic recovery and stability now feels like a distant dream for millions of Nigerians.

With the economy sinking deeper into crisis, many Nigerians are now beginning to revisit the concerns Oshiomhole raised during the CBN Governor’s screening. While his lone opposition may have been dismissed at the time, the current economic realities suggest that he may have been onto something important.

It is too early to say definitively whether Oshiomhole’s warnings were completely justified, but the early signs of economic distress under the current CBN leadership suggest that his concerns were not unfounded. If the situation continues to worsen, his opposition may be seen as a prescient act of political courage, a move to safeguard Nigeria’s future, even when it was unpopular.

In governance, particularly in a democracy, dissenting voices are crucial to ensuring that decisions are scrutinized and debated before being implemented. Oshiomhole’s lone stand against the CBN Governor’s appointment serves as a reminder that opposition, when based on genuine concerns, should not be dismissed lightly.

As Nigeria grapples with the consequences of its economic policies, Oshiomhole’s opposition now seems less like an outlier and more like a warning that the nation should have heeded. Whether or not his stance will be fully vindicated, one thing is clear: Nigeria’s leadership must learn to take critical voices seriously, especially when the stakes are as high as they are today.

The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) is central to Nigeria’s democratic process. Established with the mandate to oversee elections and ensure free, fair, and credible outcomes, INEC carries immense responsibility. Yet, despite its title as an “independent” body, questions surrounding its true autonomy remain a subject of heated debate.

Without a doubt, INEC’s independence is enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution. It is meant to function as an impartial institution that can withstand political influence, financial manipulation, and societal pressures. The Electoral Act of 2010 provides a legal framework for INEC’s operations, granting it the powers to regulate political parties, conduct elections, and oversee voter registration. This framework is designed to foster a fair democratic process, where no political party or individual has undue influence over the results.

However, while INEC’s independence is legally guaranteed, the effectiveness of this constitutional safeguard often depends on the interpretation and enforcement of the law, which may be influenced by political will. Legal provisions alone cannot protect an institution from external pressures if there is no concerted effort to shield it from political interference.

A key factor in the debate over INEC’s independence has been persistent allegations of political interference. Over the years, opposition parties, civil society organizations, and observers have often questioned the impartiality of the commission. Accusations range from tampering with election results to collusion with ruling parties, and these concerns are not new to Nigeria’s political landscape.

For example, in the 2007 elections, widely regarded as one of the most flawed in the country’s history, there were widespread allegations of vote rigging and ballot box stuffing, with INEC criticized for failing to maintain control of the electoral process. In more recent times, the 2019 and 2023 general elections were also shadowed by claims of irregularities, including issues with result collation and vote transmission delays. These incidents often lead to public distrust in the electoral process and raise questions about the actual level of independence INEC enjoys from the ruling government.

In a similar vein, just recently, Civil Society Organizations (CSOs), which monitored the Edo State governorship election on Saturday, issued a damning review of the exercise, declaring that the results from several polling units were altered at coalition centres.

The civil society coalition, the Situation Room, said the conduct of the election lacked credibility.

Also, Yiaga Africa, said it deployed the Process and Results Verification for Transparency (PRVT) methodology for the Edo election, involving 300 stationary and 25 roving observers, covering a representative sample of polling units (PUs) across all 18 local government areas of the state, and ostensibly against the foregoing backdrop, faulted the conduct of the poll and the declared results as lacking integrity.

However, the electoral body has, at various times, refuted these allegations, citing challenges such as logistical problems, election-day violence, and sabotage. However, these denials often do little to change the public’s perception, as the pattern of electoral controversy continues to haunt Nigeria’s elections.

Another critical aspect of INEC’s independence is its financial autonomy, or the lack thereof. INEC, like most government institutions, depends on the federal budget to finance its activities, including election preparations, voter education, and technological upgrades. While the government allocates a specific budget for INEC’s operations, the process through which funds are disbursed remains a potential lever for political control.

For instance, delayed release of funds for electoral activities has been cited as a reason for INEC’s inability to adequately prepare for elections in the past. When funding is not timely or sufficient, the commission struggles to meet its obligations, leaving it susceptible to external pressures. Critics argue that if INEC had its own independent source of funding, it would be more empowered to carry out its mandate without fear of financial blackmail from political authorities.

Furthermore, the question of financial accountability arises. INEC’s spending is scrutinized by the National Assembly, which also wields significant political influence. This arrangement has led to questions about whether INEC can truly stand on its own, especially when the same politicians it oversees hold the power to approve its budget.

INEC’s ability to operate independently in the field is crucial to ensuring fair elections. The commission’s introduction of various electoral reforms, such as the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the electronic transmission of results, was aimed at reducing human error and the potential for manipulation. However, while these reforms were steps in the right direction, their implementation has not been without challenges.

The 2023 general elections highlighted some of these operational hurdles. Despite the deployment of electronic systems, several polling stations reported delays, equipment malfunctions, and in some cases, a complete failure of the technology. This raised suspicions about whether these lapses were due to INEC’s own inefficiencies or deliberate sabotage from political actors seeking to manipulate the process.

INEC has often found itself at the center of these controversies, facing backlash from both the public and political parties. The commission claims that it is not immune to the broader infrastructural and security challenges that affect Nigeria, especially during elections. For instance, election-day violence, ballot snatching, and intimidation of voters are issues beyond INEC’s direct control but have significant implications for the commission’s ability to operate independently.

Election security is another factor that complicates INEC’s independence. While the commission is responsible for overseeing elections, it relies heavily on security agencies to ensure safety and maintain order at polling units. The Nigerian Police, Army, and other security agencies are tasked with preventing violence, but their deployment is often overseen by the ruling government.

This reliance on state-controlled security forces has led to concerns about how neutral these agencies can be during elections. There have been instances where security forces were accused of aiding or abetting electoral malpractice, particularly in ruling party’s strongholds. When security agencies act in favor of one party, INEC’s ability to conduct free and fair elections is significantly compromised.

In the 2019 and 2023 elections, reports of military interference in the electoral process were widespread. There were accounts of voters being intimidated and opposition politicians being harassed, all of which contributed to the belief that INEC was not in full control of the election environment. Although INEC can set guidelines, it is at the mercy of security forces when it comes to enforcing them.

The success of any electoral body hinges on public confidence in its ability to act fairly and independently. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, public trust in INEC has often been low, primarily due to past electoral malpractices and inconsistencies in election results.

A survey conducted by a Nigerian civil society organization revealed that many Nigerians believe INEC is not free from political influence. This perception of bias diminishes the legitimacy of the electoral process and discourages voter participation. When people lose faith in the neutrality of the electoral umpire, it creates a cycle of apathy, where citizens are less likely to engage in the democratic process.

In response, INEC has consistently called for patience and understanding, emphasizing its commitment to improving election management. Despite this, the commission must work harder to rebuild trust. Public engagement, transparency in election logistics, and prompt communication are essential for changing this narrative.

Finally, the judiciary plays a crucial role in determining the extent of INEC’s independence. When disputes arise over election results, courts are tasked with adjudicating the outcomes. INEC’s decisions are often subject to judicial review, and election tribunals have, on occasion, overturned results declared by the commission.

While the judiciary serves as a check on INEC, the frequent involvement of courts in electoral matters suggests that the commission may not always get it right. Moreover, political actors have often used the judiciary to challenge election results in what some view as an attempt to manipulate the processthrough legal avenues. This dynamic further complicates the perception of INEC’s autonomy, as its decisions are constantly under scrutiny and often reversed by the courts.

In assessing how independent INEC truly is, it becomes clear that while it has made significant progress, it is still constrained by a host of challenges. Political interference, financial dependence, operational difficulties, security concerns, and public mistrust all combine to undermine the commission’s full independence.

In fact, for INEC to truly fulfill its mandate, a multifaceted approach is required, and this includes greater financial autonomy. Given the foregoing view, INEC should be allowed to manage its own budget with minimal interference from the executive and legislative arms of government.

In a similar vein, reforms to the Electoral Act must be continuous, with a focus on closing loopholes that enable political manipulation of the process, and INEC must invest more in public education and transparency, explaining its processes clearly to the electorate and making sure citizens are well-informed.

In a similar vein, there should be clear protocols on the role of security forces during elections, with measures in place to ensure their neutrality, and while the courts play an essential role in adjudicating election disputes, the process should not be politicized. Therefore, strengthening the integrity of the judiciary is necessary to complement INEC’s independence.

In conclusion, while INEC is designed to be an independent body, the reality on the ground suggests that its autonomy is limited by numerous external pressures. To ensure that Nigeria’s democratic process remains credible, urgent reforms and a renewed commitment from all stakeholders are needed to guarantee that INEC can function without undue influence. Only then can Nigeria’s elections be truly free, fair, and independent.

On October 1, 2024, unarguably less than 24 hours from now, Nigeria would be 64 years old, Nigeria stands like a weathered patriarch, a man with vast riches, many wives, and countless children. His wealth, once envied by his neighbors, is now the subject of bitter conversations at family meetings. From the shimmering oil fields of the Niger Delta to the fertile farmlands that stretch across the northern plains, this man should be living a prosperous and peaceful life. Yet, despite his enormous fortune, his children have become his biggest burden, each one more reckless than the last.

This old man, whom we call Nigeria, was once brimming with youthful optimism. In his prime, he was a proud member of a global community, endowed with resources that seemed endless. But as the years have passed, his wealth, rather than multiplying under prudent management, has been plundered by his own blood. His children, entrusted with the family’s fortune, have become entitled and corrupt, using their father’s riches not for the good of the family but for their personal gain.

The story of Nigeria is a tragedy of mismanagement. Blessed with oil, gas, minerals, and fertile land, this patriarch should be the wealthiest man in his region. But his children, greedy and short-sighted, have squandered his assets. Instead of investing in businesses that could make the family fortune last generations, they spend recklessly, siphoning funds into foreign bank accounts, building extravagant mansions, and buying luxury cars that will eventually rust.

Nigeria’s children, those in charge of his estates, bear the most responsibility for his troubles. They are the politicians, the leaders who have been entrusted with managing his fortune. But instead of upholding the legacy of their father, they engage in power struggles, siphoning off money meant for family upkeep, schools, hospitals, and roads. The basic needs of their siblings, ordinary Nigerians, are neglected.

Instead of following in their father’s footsteps and ensuring his wealth grows, they have become parasites, milking the old man for every last drop, leaving the house crumbling. Roads are potholed, hospitals are understaffed and underfunded, and many of the children go to bed hungry, despite the family’s vast stores of resources.

The children who are not in power, ordinary citizens, are the ones who suffer the most. Despite their father’s wealth, they live in poverty. They watch helplessly as their older siblings, entrusted with the keys to the family vault (The “Emilokons”), lavish themselves with riches while leaving everyone else to fend for themselves. They struggle to pay school fees, fight to access basic healthcare, and work multiple jobs just to make ends meet, all the while knowing that they are part of a family that should be wealthy beyond imagination.

These ordinary children grow disillusioned. They once believed that their father’s wealth would provide for them, that they would inherit a prosperous future. But now, they see that without change, they are doomed to live in the shadow of squandered potential.

Nigeria, the 64-year-old man, can still recover. His fortune, though mismanaged, is not entirely lost. But for him to prosper once again, his children must change their ways. The family needs unity, accountability, and a sense of responsibility. The wealth he has accumulated over decades should not be treated as an endless supply but as a precious resource to be nurtured and grown for future generations.

Perhaps, in his old age, this patriarch will take a stand. Perhaps he will remind his children of their duties and set them on a path toward restoration. But until then, Nigeria remains a wealthy old man with children who continue to squander his fortune, leaving the rest of the family wondering what could have been.

As Nigeria is set to mark another year in less than 24 hours from now, it is time for his children to reflect on the future. Will they continue on this path of greed and mismanagement? Or will they finally rise to the occasion, protect their father’s legacy, and build a future where every child in the family can thrive? The answers lie in their hands.

In response to the recent remark by former Rivers State Governor, and currently Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, who questioned, “Who has Fubara made?” during a ceremony where he was honored by the Ijaw community, it is essential to set the record straight on what true leadership entails. This question, though seemingly casual, reflects a much deeper issue in the mindset of Nigerian politicians, a fundamental misunderstanding of the true role of governance.

Governance is not, and should never be, about empowering or “making” individuals based on personal ties, political favors, or loyalty. It is not a tool for creating allies or strengthening one’s network of political benefactors. True governance transcends personal ambitions or friendships; it is about creating an environment where every citizen, regardless of connection to those in power, can thrive. A good leader works to uplift their entire constituency, ensuring that the benefits of governance reach everyone, not just a select few who are privileged to be in their inner circle.

There is a dangerous narrative circulating within Nigeria’s political discourse that must be corrected. We often hear that certain politicians have “made” certain individuals, be it a governor, senator, or influential business figure. This notion is often repeated when discussing about some politicians, with some praising their political prowess by stating that they have “made” numerous leaders and politicians who have risen to prominence. But governance is not supposed to be a king-making affair. It should never be about the elevation of a few at the expense of the many.

The reality is that true leadership is measured not by how many individuals one has “made,” but by how well the leader has uplifted the collective well-being of the masses. Governance, at its very essence, is about creating opportunities for everyone, ensuring equitable access to resources, and fostering an environment where the average citizen can achieve their full potential without needing to rely on political patronage.

This culture of “making people” is rooted in the erroneous belief that governance is about personal favors, not about service to the populace. The idea that a leader’s success should be judged by how many individuals they have “empowered” or “made” is fundamentally flawed. It perpetuates a system where political officeholders are seen as gatekeepers to opportunity, rather than stewards of the public good.

When Nyesom Wike posed the question, “Who has Fubara made?” it was as if to suggest that Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s leadership should be evaluated by how many individuals he has personally elevated. But this is a dangerous and short-sighted way of viewing leadership. The purpose of governance is not to create a select group of privileged individuals who rise because of their proximity to power; it is to create a system in which every citizen has the opportunity to rise based on their own merit and effort.

Governor Fubara’s success should not be measured by how many political godsons he has made or how many of his friends have found themselves in positions of power. His success, and indeed the success of any leader, should be measured by the overall development and well-being of Rivers State, by the number of jobs created, the quality of education improved, the infrastructure built, and the lives of ordinary people transformed.

The idea of “making” individuals only serves to perpetuate the cycle of patronage politics that has hindered Nigeria’s development for decades. This system places personal loyalty and political allegiance above merit, competence, and the collective good. It also fosters an environment where access to opportunity is limited to those with the right connections, leaving the vast majority of Nigerians on the outside looking in.

We often hear that a certain politician has “made” this person or that person, and while this may be seen as a mark of political influence, it is not the essence of true leadership. Political leaders, like every other leaders in Nigeria, should not be measured by how many individuals they have “made” or by how many allies they have elevated to positions of power. Rather, they should be measured by how effectively their administrations uplift the masses, create equal opportunities, and improve the overall living conditions of Nigerians.

True leadership requires vision, sacrifice, and a deep commitment to public service. It is about creating systems that empower everyone, not just those who are part of one’s political or social circle. In an ideal democracy, every citizen should be able to succeed based on their talent, hard work, and dedication, not on their personal connections or political patronage.

Leaders should focus on creating policies that benefit the general population, policies that improve healthcare, education, infrastructure, and employment opportunities. They should work to create an environment where every citizen, regardless of their background or affiliations, has a fair chance to succeed. This is the true measure of leadership.

A great leader honors the people by ensuring that the resources of the state or country are managed equitably and responsibly. When politicians focus solely on empowering their friends, they dishonor the broader population. Governance should not be about honoring personal relationships; it should be about honoring the mandate given to them by the electorate. The resources and opportunities provided by the government must be made available to everyone, not reserved for a privileged few.

Nigerian politicians must break away from the mindset that governance is about patronage and personal favors. The country cannot progress if its leaders continue to operate as if their primary responsibility is to enrich their friends and allies. True governance is about service, and service means uplifting the entire population, particularly the most vulnerable and disadvantaged.

If Nigeria is to realize its full potential, its leaders must embrace a new mindset, one that focuses on the collective upliftment of all citizens, rather than the personal empowerment of a few. Governance must be about building systems that work for everyone, not about “making” individuals. It is time for our politicians to understand that their legacy will not be measured by how many people they have placed in positions of power, but by how well they have served the people.

A great leader builds institutions that will outlast them, creating opportunities for future generations. They work to improve the lives of the masses, not just a select few. They focus on creating a fair and just society where every citizen has the chance to thrive.

Governance is not about making friends; it is about making a difference in the lives of the people. Leaders who understand this will leave a lasting legacy that benefits all Nigerians, not just those within their inner circle. It is time we held our leaders accountable to this higher standard.

Nigeria is in the grip of a severe economic crisis, with high inflation, volatile exchange rates, and a steep rise in the cost of living. The inflation rate, which soared to over 30% in the second quarter of 2024, has put immense strain on household budgets, making it increasingly difficult for many Nigerians to afford basic necessities such as food, healthcare, and housing. The situation has been worsened by the depreciation of the naira, which plummeted to historic lows against the US dollar, trading at over ₦1600 to $1 in recent days. This economic turmoil, coupled with persistently high unemployment rates of over 33%, is fostering a growing sense of economic despair across the nation. 

This environment of uncertainty has shaken the confidence of the average Nigerian, even those renowned for their resilience. A recent survey conducted in Abuja, Lagos, Kano, and Port Harcourt showed that 70% of respondents expressed pessimism about the country’s future, fearing that things will unlikely improve soon. These sentiments have been reflected in public movements such as the #EndBadGovernance protest, which erupted a few months ago and brought the frustrations of millions of Nigerians to the forefront. Although it started as a protest against bad governance, the movement quickly morphed into a more extensive critique of poor governance, economic hardship, and the perceived disconnect between Nigerian leaders and the everyday struggles of citizens.

Amid this widespread disillusionment, the mere mention of a possible cabinet reshuffle or change has sparked a flicker of hope. While a cabinet change might seem like a small gesture, it often brings a sense of cautious optimism that new leadership might steer the country in a better direction. The presidency’s recent indication of a potential reorganisation of the Federal Executive Council (FEC) has garnered significant national attention. The question is whether this reshuffle will end an ineffective and underperforming cabinet or if it could signal the beginning of genuine efforts to address Nigeria’s pressing crises. The scepticism is rooted in past experiences where cabinet changes have failed to bring tangible improvements. For example 2019, after President Muhammadu Buhari’s second-term victory, a similar cabinet overhaul raised hopes of economic reform, but little changed. Key sectors such as power, infrastructure, and healthcare continued to struggle, leading to widespread public disillusionment.

A personal experience offers a fitting analogy. A close friend of mine was diagnosed with an aggressive form of prostate cancer. Faced with this alarming news, we didn’t simply choose any available doctor—we searched for a specialist with proven expertise in treating prostate cancer. We knew that his survival depended on finding the right medical expert. Nigeria’s economy is similarly dire; it is “cancerous” and desperately needs leaders with the necessary skills, knowledge, and commitment to enact meaningful change. Anything less would jeopardise the nation’s collective survival.

For many Nigerians, a cabinet reshuffle holds the potential for two distinct outcomes. On one hand, it could signal the end of an ineffective Executive Council that has failed to tackle the country’s challenges, much like the underperforming cabinets of the past. On the other hand, it could herald the beginning of a new era, where the government finally prioritises reforms, implements policies to alleviate economic hardship, and rebuilds trust between the government and the people. While public expectations are high, there is also a lingering sense of scepticism. However, the potential for positive change is a beacon of hope in these uncertain times. 

The current Federal Executive Council can be broadly divided into three groups. The first group consisted of ministers who were appointed out of political indebtedness. These individuals were chosen not for their competence but because the President owed political favours. As a result, their loyalty lies with the President, and they feel little obligation to serve the nation or its people. The second group consists of those who gained their positions through nepotism or the famed “Nigerian connection”. These individuals bring little value to governance and often lack the expertise needed to address the complexities of Nigeria’s socio-economic challenges. For instance, critics have pointed to appointing ministers without relevant experience in the ministries they oversee, leading to poor policy decisions and a lack of direction. The third group, unfortunately, the smallest, is composed of competent technocrats and politicians who have the capacity to deliver meaningful results. However, their influence is often overshadowed by the ineffectiveness of the other groups.

A cabinet dominated by individuals focused on short-term political gains rather than the public good has far-reaching implications for governance. Ministers prioritising personal or partisan agendas are unlikely to prioritise the nation’s needs. Some argue that even the most capable ministers would struggle to make a difference in the current political, social, and economic environment. The primary function of policymaking has been sidelined, and this dysfunction has only fueled public discontent. The quality of the Federal Executive Council has significantly contributed to the country’s broader dissatisfaction.

Many Nigerian commentators have expressed frustration with the government’s inefficiency, attributing it mainly to the substandard quality of the cabinet. This inefficiency has also contributed to the normalisation of corruption in various sectors. Significant reforms in critical sectors have been noticeably absent, leading to widespread doubt as to whether the average Nigerian feels any positive impact from the actions of the Federal Executive Council. The government’s credibility is increasingly being questioned, and many wonder whether any real progress can be made under the current leadership.

As the country eagerly anticipates the formation of a new Federal Executive Council, there are clear expectations. Nigerians are not just hoping for a change in personnel, but for a fundamental shift in governance priorities. The nation urgently needs ministers who are dedicated to solving its pressing problems, not advancing personal interests. The new cabinet must be transparent and accountable, addressing the concerns of a public that has grown weary of opaque leadership. Furthermore, competence must take precedence over party loyalty when selecting ministers. The country cannot afford appointments based on political allegiance; it needs individuals with the technical expertise to implement effective policies and follow through on their promises.

Effective governance requires competent ministers, a clear vision and roadmap from the President, and accountability mechanisms to guarantee policies are efficiently executed. Our President must clearly define his mission: what kind of government does he want to run? Restorative, transformative or visionary? The President’s vision and mission would provide the guardrail of how his ministers would be chosen and how they operate. The SGF and Chief of Staff will use that to set targets and milestones. The President’s mission is required to define the roles of ministers and their mode of operation.

Economic growth and job creation must become central priorities. In 2024, youth unemployment was estimated at over 42%, leaving millions of young Nigerians without meaningful opportunities. This unemployment crisis, combined with a lack of public services, continues to drive young Nigerians toward dangerous migration routes in search of better lives abroad. There is little meaningful discussion on these crucial issues, as the focus remains on personal or political agendas. The country’s progress depends on a renewed focus on sustainable development, economic expansion, and the creation of employment opportunities for its people.

In these challenging times, Nigeria needs ministers who are competent and deeply committed to the nation’s well-being. Patriotism, focus, and dependability will be essential for steering the country through its current crises. The period of trial and error is over. The President and Vice President must now prioritise selecting the best candidates from across the country to form a cabinet capable of delivering results. Governance must shift away from serving a privileged few to addressing the needs of all Nigerians.

Nigeria stands at a pivotal moment where the choices made in the coming weeks could define its path for years. The potential reshuffle of the Federal Executive Council offers both an opportunity and a test for the current administration. On the one hand, it could catalyse significant reforms prioritising economic recovery, job creation, and transparent governance. On the other hand, it could fall into the familiar pattern of superficial changes that fail to address the root causes of the nation’s challenges. What is clear is that Nigerians are no longer willing to accept governance that serves the interests of a select few at the expense of the broader population. They demand competence, accountability, and a renewed commitment to solving the economic, social, and political crises that have plagued the nation for too long.

The stakes are too high for mere half-measures or political gamesmanship. Now is the time for decisive action guided by vision and responsibility. The incoming cabinet must be composed of individuals who are skilled and deeply invested in the country’s well-being. Their actions will either restore faith in the government or further erode it. Ultimately, the success of this moment hinges on whether Nigeria’s leadership can rise to the occasion, recognise the situation’s urgency, and implement policies that will bring real and lasting change. For the nation’s future, the time for meaningful leadership is now.

Credit to the government surged by over N11 trillion in the month of August 2024, as high interest rates make government securities more attractive to investors.

This is according to the latest money and credit stats data of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

The CBN data also shows that credit to the government accounts for 29.4% of N105.88 trillion net domestic credit in August as the government continues to rely more on local borrowing to fund its expenditures.

This was as the private sector experienced a slight decline in credit as debt repayment intensified, buttressing the impact of rising interest rates, which have made borrowing more expensive for businesses while driving greater interest in government securities.

What the data shows 

• In August 2024, credit to the government reached N31.15 trillion, a sharp increase from the N19.83 trillion recorded in July 2024.

• This marks a significant growth of N11.33 trillion or 57.1% in just one month. The surge in government borrowing reflects the increasing attractiveness of government securities, driven by higher yields resulting from persistent interest rate hikes by the CBN.

• By comparison, in August 2023, government borrowing stood at N22.51 trillion, meaning that in the space of one year, government credit has risen by 38.5%, affirming the growing reliance on debt to finance public expenditure.

Declining private sector debt 

• While the government is increasingly tapping into credit markets, the private sector appears to be retreating. Credit to the private sector in August 2024 stood at N74.73 trillion, a slight decrease from N75.51 trillion in July 2024. This marks a reduction of about N780 billion, or 1.03%. Though the decline is relatively modest, it reflects the broader trend of businesses struggling to cope with rising borrowing costs as the CBN continues its monetary tightening.

• In August 2023, private sector credit was significantly lower at N56.95 trillion, highlighting that while there has been an overall increase in private sector borrowing over the past year, the rising cost of debt is starting to weigh on businesses’ willingness to expand credit further.

The hike in Interest Rates 

The CBN, under Yemi Cardoso, increased the monetary policy rate (MPR) five times to combat inflation and foster economic stability.

The first hike increased the rate from 18.75% to 22.75%, the second to 24.75%, the third to 26.25%, the fourth to 26.75%, and most recently in September 2024, the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) raised the rate by 50 basis points to 27.25%.

These increases, totalling 850 basis points since Cardoso’s appointment, have been driven by efforts to tackle the country’s persistent inflation challenges, which include high core and food inflation.

The CBN’s tightening monetary policy has reshaped the dynamics of credit allocation in Nigeria. Rising interest rates have made government securities more attractive to investors, as higher yields offer better returns with relatively lower risk compared to private sector lending. This has led to a surge in government borrowing, while businesses, facing higher borrowing costs, are more cautious.

However, there are concerns that prolonged tight monetary policy could stifle economic growth, especially if businesses are unable to access affordable credit to finance expansion and investment.

Also, although government securities have become more attractive due to higher yields resulting from persistent interest rate hikes by the CBN, the government is not exempt from the pressures of increased borrowing costs.

As interest rates continue to rise, the government will have to pay more to service its debt, particularly on new issuances of bonds and treasury bills. This could strain public finances further, as the cost of servicing debt could consume a larger portion of government revenue, leaving less room for critical expenditures such as infrastructure projects, social services, and other development initiatives.

What you should know 

The Bola Tinubu administration has relied mostly on the domestic debt market, especially treasury bills, to fund short-term obligations, a huge departure from the Muhammadu Buhari administration, which relied mostly on the CBN’s Ways and Means Advances.

Nairametrics earlier noted that Nigeria has a total Treasury Bills (T-Bills) debt of N10.4 trillion, a 60% rise in just three months, according to data from the Debt Management Office (DMO).

The CBN also incurred an estimated N1.55 trillion in interest payments for the 12 successful T-Bills auctions conduced in the first six months of 2024.

The interest costs in 2024 were approximately 654.7% higher than the N205.63 billion recorded the same period of the previous year.

Data from the apex bank reveals that the apex bank has sold Treasury Bills worth N8.4 trillion in the first half of the year for tenors ranging from 91-days, 182-days and 364-day bills. The stop rate, which is the interest rates accepted from the bids on offer, ranged from as low as 2.44% for some 91-day bills to as high as 21.49% for 364-day bills.

The Lagos Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) recently lamented the effect of high interest rate of CBN’s Treasury bill noting that it is drying up funds from the private sector into government’s treasuries.

The Director-General of the Centre for the Promotion of Public Enterprise (CPPE), Dr Muda Yusuf, called on the CBN to expedite the window of development finance for businesses to mitigate the effect of the high monetary policy rate in the country. He noted that businesses need the single-digit interest rate to drive the Nigerian economy.

Also, the President of the Dangote Group Industries Ltd, Alhaji Aliko Dangote stated that no economic growth will happen unless the bank interest rate at 30% decline. He further called for the protection of local industries, especially in manufacturing, across the country.

However, Yemi Cardoso, the Governor of the CBN earlier emphasized the necessity of maintaining higher interest rates to address the persistent inflation issues plaguing the Nigerian economy. Cardoso stated that tighter monetary policy accompanied by higher interest rates was at their disposal to solve the challenges of high inflation.

[Nairametrics]

A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday once again stopped the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from providing the voters’ register to the Rivers State Independent Electoral Commission (RSIEC) for the upcoming local government elections scheduled for October 5, 2024.

In addition, the court prohibited the Inspector General of Police and the Department of State Services (DSS) from offering security for the poll.

Justice Peter Lifu delivered the ruling following a lawsuit filed by the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The APC’s legal team, led by Senior Advocates of Nigeria Joseph Daudu, Sebastine Hon, and Ogwu James Onoja, argued the case.

Justice Lifu ruled that the RSIEC acted prematurely in setting the October 5 election date, stating that it did so without adhering to the necessary legal requirements.

Specifically, the court found that the Rivers State electoral body had failed to comply with provisions of the local government election law, particularly the requirement to publish a 90-day notice prior to the election.

Additionally, Justice Lifu emphasized that the updating and revision of the voters’ register must be completed before a legally valid election date could be set.

As a result, the court ordered INEC not to provide the certified voters’ register to RSIEC until all legal stipulations were met.

RSIEC was similarly instructed not to accept or use any voters’ register from INEC for the October 5 local government elections.

[NaijaNews]

Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf of Kano State has identified weak institutions, corruption, poor governance and the quality of leadership at the national, state and local government levels as some of the challenges hindering Nigeria’s development.

In a speech at a lecture to mark the country’s 64th independence, Governor Yusuf gave an assessment of the progress made in its democratic journey.

The governor commended the two speakers at the lecture, Prof. Kamilu Fagge and Sheikh Ibrahim Khalil, for their contribution while they “incisively engaged us on topics that are of paramount importance to both Kano State and our country as a whole.”

He described the topics addressed as apt and reflecting the realities of national life, especially in the areas of governance, leadership, and the relentless pursuit of development.

In his assessment, Governor Yusuf raised questions on whether the democratic ideals of freedom, justice, and equality have been fulfilled.

He said: “As it is everywhere globally, the success of Nigeria’s democracy is tied closely to the quality of leadership.

“As a developing nation with a complex political landscape, leadership challenges, such as corruption, weak institutions and lack of accountability, have hindered national progress.

“A lecture focusing on leadership challenges will certainly allow for a deeper analysis of the role leaders at both state and national levels play in the country’s successes and shortcomings.

“Although the topics address national issues, its specific focus on Kano State is highly relevant. States are the building blocks of Nigeria’s federal structure, and the progress of individual states contributes to the overall success of the nation.”

Turning his attention on his own government and state, Governor Yusuf said that by repositioning Kano State to address leadership and governance challenges, it sets an example for other states on how to create a model of good governance that can be replicated nationwide.

He said, “Allow me to also remind you that the future of Nigeria is deeply linked to the development of its states. A brighter future for Kano State can serve as a small-scale version of the broader national aspiration for a prosperous Nigeria.

“By addressing state-level challenges in leadership, education, health, and infrastructure, these topics emphasise the importance of localized governance as a stepping stone to national success.

“We must recognise that democracy is a journey, and the success of that journey is largely dependent on the quality of leadership at every level — national, state, and local government.

“We in Kano State are fully committed to playing our part in strengthening the democratic process and building institutions that foster good governance.”

Governor Abba, who used the opportunity to highlight some of his achievements in education, health, security, agriculture, and public service reforms among others, said as Kano State looks to the future, his administration will continue to build on those achievements.

He called for the active participation of all citizens and unity in the spirit of patriotism, hard work, and dedication to the values that define Nigerians as a people.

“Let me therefore urge all of us to use this anniversary as a time for reflection, and renew our commitment to building a prosperous, secure, and inclusive Kano State and Nigeria at large,” he said.

[DailyTrust]

There is tension at the Edo State Government House in Benin City over alleged plans by Philip Shaibu to resume in his office as Deputy Governor.

DAILY POST reports that security has been beefed up within the premises of Government House located at Dennis Osadabey Avenue, Benin City.

It was gathered that the security beef up is aimed at stopping Shaibu from resuming office.

As part of security measures, the state government has banned vehicles including those of Government House staff from entering Osadebe Avenue.

During a visit to the area on Monday, DAILY POST observed that visitors and civil servants parked their vehicles by the roadside and walked long distances to their offices.

Men of the Nigeria Police and the state-owned Police Constabulary mounted a roadblock at the entrance gate.

DAILY POST recalls that on July 17, a Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice J. K. Omotosho, reinstated Shaibu as the Edo State Deputy Governor.

The court had also last week, rejected a motion filed by the Edo State Government and the House of Assembly for a stay of execution of the reinstatement order.

The State House of Assembly had on March 18, 2024, impeached Shaibu as the deputy governor of the state, and in his stead, Governor Godwin Obaseki appointed and swore-in Engineer Godwins Marvellous Omobayo as the deputy governor.

Speaking to DAILY POST on Monday, some civil servants who spoke on condition of anonymity described the security beef up at the Government House as surprising.

“We were surprised to see heavy security in and around the Government House on resumption at the office.

“Election has ended and we expected to see a very more peaceful state,” they said.

The Edo State Government had on Sunday, in a statement, alleged that Shaibu had perfected plans to invade the Government House on Monday, September 30, to enforce his purported reinstatement despite the fact that a stay of execution appeal has been filed challenging Justice J. K. Omotosho’s ruling.

The statement by Mr Crusoe Osagie, the Special Adviser to the Edo State Government on Media Projects, called on the Inspector General of Police and all well-meaning Nigerians to prevail on Shaibu to refrain from his alleged plot.

Osagie opined that the plot was a clear recipe for chaos, given the fact that a policeman was killed the last time Shaibu attempted such action.

“We want to draw the attention of the Inspector General of Police to the intelligence we have gathered regarding a planned move by Shaibu to forcefully enter the Edo State Government House to purportedly enforce the ruling of Justice J. K. Omotosho.

“The stay of execution is still pending at the court of appeal and we appeal to the Inspector General of Police to ensure that the state does not descend to anarchy because of the ambition of one man.

“The last time Shaibu attempted to do this, it led to the death of a police officer. We believe that is one death too many and it is only wise for us to prevent a repeat of such,” he stated.

Reacting to the statement, Shaibu denied the allegation, saying the reality was yet to dawn on Obaseki that he and his followers have been rejected by Edo people.

Shaibu, who reacted through his media aide, Mr Ebomhiana Musa, noted that unlike Obaseki, he (Shaibu) is a peace-loving man who firmly believes in the rule of law and would not want to shed innocent blood for whatever reason.

“We want to put it clearly here that, unlike Governor Godwin Obaseki, Philip Shaibu is a peace-loving, who firmly believes in the rule of law and would not want to shed innocent blood for whatever reason.

“In the eyes of the law and in the eyes of the good people of Edo State and Nigerians, Philip Shaibu is the de jure and de facto Deputy Governor of Edo State.”

He called on the public to ignore the allegation, describing it as fake news spread by Obaseki’s spokesperson.

[DailyPost]