Nigerian Gospel singer cum founder of Spotlite Nation, Moses Bliss, has broken silence about the early exit of former signee, Ebuka Emmanuel Hillary, known professionally as Ebuka Songs.

Naija News reports that during a press conference at The Experience 2024 music concert, the ‘Daddy Wey Dey Pamper’ crooner claimed that Ebuka violated a three-year contract by leaving after just 11 months.

Bliss said he has no grudge against Ebuka Songs, adding that the goal is for Jesus to be seen and give people the opportunity to minister the gospel.

“Me and Ebuka Songs? There are no issues between us. Of course, he was signed to Spotlite Nation. He just said he wants to do things on his own.

“Our contract didn’t end when it was supposed to end. It was a three-year contract. I think 11 months into it, he said he wants to do his music alone. I prayed about it and I said, ‘You can go’.

“We hold no grudge against him. The goal is for Jesus to be seen. Our goal is to give people the opportunity to minister the gospel.

“We are not fighting. I love him and I am happy to have been part of his journey and wish him the best,” Bliss said.

[NaijaNews]

Much ado about a book! There will always be hawks and doves on both sides. It is at such times that I appreciate the admonition of Gordon B. Hincklrey:

“A small publication that came to me some years ago carried the following: ‘Once a man who had been slandered by a newspaper came to Edward Everett asking what to do about it. Said Everett, ‘Do Nothing! Half the people who bought the paper never saw the article. Half of those who saw it, did not read it. Half of those who understood it, did not believe it. Half of those who believed it are of no account anyway’ (“Sunny Side of the Street,” November 1989). So many of us make a great fuss over matters of small consequence. We are so easily offended. Happy is the man who can brush aside the offending remarks of another and go on his way.”

The heavens have no fury like a lawyer scorned. On account of Aare Afe Babalola’s complaint that Dele Farotimi criminally libelled him in his book, “Nigeria and its Criminal Justice System”, the younger lawyer was bundled from Lagos to Ado-Ekiti to face the music. Social media has since been clogged with positive and negative reactions on both sides. The matter has become so incendiary that even senior lawyers and commentators have been very careful in their analyses. Nobody wants to be at the receiving end of criminal liability, least of all lawyers and columnists!

Civil Or Criminal?

Aare Babalola, 95, is a legal icon and the revered founder of Afe Babalola University, Ado-Ekiti (ABUAD). He was called to the Bar in England after being awarded the University of London’s LLB in 1963. The defendant is the gutsy 56-year-old Dele Farotimi, also a lawyer, a seasoned political activist and author. He was called to the Nigerian Bar in 1999 and was in active legal practice until 2018.

Luckily, eggheads in the legal discipline have been educating “unlearned” members of the public about the bolts and nuts of the matter in contention. The first thing that befuddled people outside the legal field was the confusion over whether libel was a civil or criminal matter.

Dr. Olusegun Abejide generously shares his professional view: “Civil defamation focuses on providing remedies to the victim through compensatory or punitive damages. The defamed individual brings a lawsuit against the defamer, seeking redress for the harm done to their reputation. The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff to demonstrate that the defamatory statements were false, damaging, and made with malice or negligence. When the aggrieved party seeks monetary compensation or a public apology to restore their reputation, they often pursue civil cases.

“Criminal defamation, on the other hand, involves treating defamation as a public wrong. Here, the state prosecutes the defendant, with penalties ranging from fines to imprisonment, depending on the severity of the offence and its impact. Criminal defamation emphasises deterrence, sending a clear message that slander carries severe consequences.”

But why was Farotimi’s case treated as a criminal matter and not a civil suit?

Defamation

Abejide explains: “Defamation remains actionable as both a civil and a criminal matter under Nigerian law,” enshrined in statutes and judicial precedents. Section 373 of Nigeria’s Criminal Code Act provides the framework for prosecuting criminal defamation, underscoring its significance in maintaining societal order and protecting individual reputations…

“Take the hypothetical scenario involving “Mr. Farotimi and Chief Afe Babalola,” a prominent figure based in Ado Ekiti. If defamatory material targeting Chief Afe Babalola originates in Lagos but affects his reputation, businesses, and personal relationships in Ekiti, the legal right to address the matter in Ekiti is unequivocal. The ‘theory of effect’ upholds the principle of establishing jurisdiction when the defamatory act yields tangible consequences.”

This explanation seems to neutralise the accusation by Farotimi’s teeming admirers who have seized the cyber superhighway by the jugular alleging that the lawyer was conspiratorially and illegally abducted from Lagos to Ado-Ekiti in a replay of the same kind of accusation of self-help he had made against Aare Babalola which caused the original problem. Why would his accuser use the state’s law enforcement machinery to “abduct” the accused to Ado-Ekiti if not as a result of collusion?

The arrest of the human rights advocate sparked so much public interest in his book, “Nigeria and its Criminal Justice System” to the extent that it became the bestseller on Amazon and Kindle, and also generated worldwide buzz on the internet.

However, in addition to the 16 counts of criminal defamation senior lawyer Babalola filed against him based on excerpts from the book before a chief magistrate’s court in Ado Ekiti, the police also filed new charges focusing on Farotimi’s comments in online interviews in which he reaffirmed allegations made in his book.

Two Camps

The arguments that Nigerians have marshalled can be categorised into two camps. Farotimi’s sympathisers are convinced that Babalola is using his connections as a top lawyer with high connections in government to intimidate a professional junior. Many senior professionals are, however, on the ABUAD founder’s side. Among them is Dr Olusegun Abejide who argues as follows:

“The case of Chief Afe Babalola serves as a cautionary tale for those who assume they can defame others with impunity. The notion that a defendant should be immune to prosecution outside the location of their act reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of legal principles. Just as defamatory material can damage a reputation globally, so too can its accountability transcend borders…

“Let this serve as a reminder: free speech is a right, but with every right comes responsibility. Defamation is recklessness, and those who walk it must be prepared to face the consequences when the aggrieved seek justice. In a world where words have power, let us wield them with care, respect, and an unwavering commitment to truth.”

But the masters of the trade used to counsel temperance in days gone by. Let’s take a story told of the respected jurist Dr. Akinola Aguda who had served as Chief Justice of Botswana and opened a legal consultancy service after retirement. As narrated by Richard Akinola: “He told me that two briefs he usually advised against were Defamation and Divorce matters, particularly if the person is old. According to him, at the hearing, lots of unpalatable things that people never knew about, may come up, to the embarrassment of the parties and their children. For instance, in defamation matters when your reputation is in question, a defendant is at liberty to bring up a dirty past the plaintiff may have forgotten.…”

Different Folks, Different Strokes

Akinola also recounted another option open to anyone who has been libelled. Call it the Gani Option and you wouldn’t be wrong. It was the option taken by the inimitable lawyer, Chief Gani Fawehinmi (now deceased) when his erstwhile friend, Dr Olu Onagoruwa, wrote a book titled, “A REBEL IN GENERAL ABACHA’S GOVERNMENT” to justify his serving in the Abacha government.

Fawehinmi wrote another book to counter the false assertions against him in Onagoruwa’s book.

While it is within the right of any individual to choose his right of action when defamed, the admonition of Dr Aguda is quite instructive. Let the sleeping dog snore!

Nuptial Bliss

Happy married life to Ololade Anifowose and Kolawole Olawale. Best wishes for nuptial bliss and continued happiness.

The question as to whether the law of defamation is a hindrance to freedom of speech and a curtailment to democratic norms confronted the Burkinabe, a few years ago. Lohe Issa Konaté was Burkina Faso, that landlocked West African country’s own Dele Farotimi. He was a journalist with the newspaper, L’Ouragan (The Hurricane). Like a tempestuous hurricane, on August 1, 2012, Konaté published a series of articles in the weekly newspaper attacking the conduct of a local prosecutor in a money counterfeiting matter. A week later, Konaté doubled down on this same allegation against the judicial system of Burkina Faso by writing a stinging piece on another matter instituted by the same prosecutor.

Like Farotimi, Konaté shot bullets of expletives, which included “rogue officer,” against the prosecutor while alleging corruption in the country’s judiciary. Angered by this against-method manner of publicly shaming the judicial system, the prosecutor promptly filed a complaint against Konaté through a defamation suit. In it, he alleged public insult and contempt of court against the journalist. Alongside these, the state also filed criminal charges against Konaté and sought damages. In October, 2012, Konaté was found guilty by an Ouagadougou High Court. He was then sentenced to one-year imprisonment, fined US $3000, and a US $9000 damages to be paid by him to the prosecutor. The court was not done yet. It suspended the L’Ouragan newspaper which published the articles for a period of six months. At the Ouagadougou Court of Appeal, the court upheld the judgment.

Dr. Kayode Fayemi, former governor of Ekiti State, last Thursday, in Ibadan, the capital of Oyo State, delivered a thought-provoking lecture to mark the 80th birthday of journalism colossus and Nigeria’s former ambassador to the Philippines, Dr. Yemi Farounbi. In the lecture, entitled “The Future and the Challenges of the Nigerian State”, Fayemi invoked the spirit of that ever-engaging locus-classicus book on Nigeria, The Famished Road, authored by Ben Okri. In it, Okri looks at the concept of nation-building as a generation-to-generation effort. Each generation possesses its own predilections, with which it confronts nationhood, he says. The generation that will take over from us is an impatient generation. It is the generation called the Gen Z. It was the generation whose impatience for excuses of previous generations goaded into trooping to the streets in what has now been known as the #EndSARS and #EndBadGovernance protests. It is fearless. It suffered yet-to-be-properly-enumerated casualties in the process. It is a defiant generation, what Yoruba call the esin-ò-ko’kú (the fly fears no death) generation.

In the lecture, Fayemi compares that generation to post-Apartheid generation of South Africa called the “Born free” generation. The generation literally carries no baggage and holds no captive. It is a generation that the Greek philosopher, Heraclitus was probably referring to when he said you cannot step into the same river twice. Everything happens for and to it at supersonic speed – inventions, technology etc. In Nigeria, that generation didn’t witness the orgy of military rule and a roulette of coups. It didn’t live to see the wickedness of rulers and servile, even if complicit following. One feature that hallmarks this generation is impatience with norms, long-held views, traditions, practices and orthodoxies.

Look at the Farotimi and Afe Babalola legal duel which is the main issue of discourse in Nigeria today. Take a look also at the huge swath of public opinion behind Farotimi. Not that Farotimi himself is a youth, properly defined, but he carries its anger, its venom and dis-alignment with the ruinous Nigerian status quo. You will locate impatience with orthodoxy in this horde of youthful supporters egging Farotimi on, in spite of his alleged violation of legal orthodoxy. The youth is not interested in the obsessive fascination of the generations before it with norms, whether legal, social or political.

While legal orthodoxy tells us about the ancient rules of defamation, even criminal defamation, and the boundaries that must not be crossed, the youth cares less. It asks brash, carelessly confounding, even if seismic questions. It asks, for instance, how those rules can help in fighting endemic corruption which, with its twin, bad rule, has conspired to under-develop Nigeria. The Nigerian judiciary, the youth is aware, is complicit in and has been known to be the imperial castle where corruption resides in Nigeria today. The youth doesn’t care if Farotimi’s allegations against Babalola are unfounded in law. It doesn’t care that Afe, a legal colossus, has the right to defend himself against this autumn tsunami which threatens to drown decades of his contributions to law and statesmanship. It doesn’t care that Afe is one of Nigeria’s greatest private investors in education. It just doesn’t care. Generations before this generation are the enemies of the youth, the Gen Z generation says.

If public opinion is the barometer for measuring guilt or innocence of action, check the social media: Afe Babalola is guilty as charged. I am not surprised that Babalola’s counsel, on Friday, chose to address a press conference on the matter, in disregard for the upbraid of Nigerian lawyers, especially senior lawyers’ penchant for discussing cases pending in the court, by Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) Justice Kuburat Kekere-Ekun. The CJN upbraided the lawyers during her screening in the senate in September. There, she decried senior lawyers’ declarative or authoritative pronouncements that border on the subjudice.

One of the beliefs by those against legal orthodoxy is that the law of defamation is anti-democratic and has served as bulwark against the fight against corruption. Taken in its totality, the defamation law has been held to constitute an impediment to the guarantee of rights to freedom of expression and a major shield against promotion of democratic virtues.

Among the major cancerous afflictions that Nigeria suffers today is corruption. Judicial corruption is its handmaiden. Corruption’s audacity and permeating influence are terrifying. It is almost an impossibility to get anything done in Nigeria without corrupting officials. All over the world, the renown of Nigerian institutions as beehive of corruption precedes any interface with them. Globally, Nigeria wears its maggots-laced badge as the place where the umbilical cord of corruption was buried. A pervasive stench culture of corruption and impunity reigns here. This culture is almost unanimously accepted as native to us, though it hinders effective governance and erodes public trust. The culture also kills enterprise, industry, talent and excellence, replacing them with mediocrities and reign of the adder-brained in public service.

Since the advent of colonial rule, so much fuss has been made about how ingrained corruption is in the heart of Africa. Some claim it is genetic since, even pre-colonial rule, African relations were watered by kleptocracy. Judicial corruption is king here. Though many attempts have been made to dress it in borrowed robes of euphemisms, judicial corruption is growing in leaps and bounds in Nigeria. In its bother about corruption in the house of justice, Transparency International affirms that all sectors of society rely on the courts to sanction corrupt officials, politicians, citizens and businesspeople, who steal resources and weaken integrity in public and private life. It maintains that, when the judicial system is corrupt, justice cannot be done and the whole society is done for.

As if bitten by the metaphysical bug the Yoruba call sìse-sìse – inexplicable constant errors – in June last year, Nigerian senator, Adamu Bulkachuwa, whose wife, Zainab, was judge and President of the Court of Appeal, publicly confessed to influencing his wife’s judicial decisions. He had said: “My wife, whose freedom and independence I encroached upon while (she) was in office, and she has been very tolerant and accepted my encroachment and extended her help to my colleagues.”

Miscarriage of justice by judicial officers and judicial corruption is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. Hubert Ogunde’s famous play, Yòrùbá Ronú – Yoruba, think! – performed in 1964, though aimed as an attack on S. L. Akintola, Premier of the Western Region, was a damming review of intra-Yoruba relations where probity was becoming an anathema. Ogunde excoriated a phenomenon where the guilty are set free and the innocent are adjudged guilty “wón á gbé’bi f’áláre, wón á gb’áre f’élébi”. Earlier, in the 1962-published book, The Incorruptible Judge, written by D. Olu Adegoke, the concept of corruption was brought to the fore and how the judiciary can help tame it through its impartiality. The virus of compromise of court decisions has become cancerous today as it is generally believed to be a recurrent happening. That was why when Bulkachuwa confessed to the crime in the Nigerian parliament, without prodding, many Nigerians saw it as Karma fighting for the common man. But, what has happened ever since?

As stated above, many people are bothered that the law of defamation seems to excuse the excesses of the Nigerian elite. As it is constituted, it will be almost an impossibility for a defendant to substantiate corruption allegation against a public officer. There are also many real but unsubstantiated allegations of cahoots between judges and senior lawyers in perpetration of judicial corruption. You must be against method and possessing the wild spirit of the Gen Z generation to say this openly and pin names and faces to it. Corruption in the judiciary is however not an openly advertized bazaar. It is operated under cultic darkness by the parties. While lawyers know among themselves who and who are corrupt elements, lawyers also know pliable judges who can be bought for a price. It is to this set of people that they go when there is the need for mortgaging of conscience for a fee.

Both Farotimi and Afe Babalola, as lawyers, are aware that the vermin of corruption is destroying the judicial institution in Nigeria. However, if Farotimi does not have evidence that irresistibly points at the facts before making all those weighty allegations in his book, it will be the height of recklessness by any worshipper ever in the temple of justice. If he has evidence, it will be good for the sanity of the legal system and the expansion of democratic frontiers in Nigeria, especially in combating the demon of judicial corruption.

But, come to think of it, which institution in Nigeria is corruption-free? Are judges and lawyers not part of the corruption bug sucking the blood of Nigeria like a leech? Is journalism corruption-free? The other day, the EFCC said it seized 753 duplexes, its highest-ever recovery since its inception. The political class swims in sewage, bankers do and Nigeria in totality is one huge stinking sewer.

Legal orthodoxy does not support Farotimi. That is why many lawyers feel scandalized and horrified at the claims in his book, Nigeria and its criminal justice system. However, Farotimi represents the growing impatience with a reality that Nigerians know, are aware of the destruction it daily wreaks but are consigned into silence because of judicial orthodoxy. This orthodoxy spells out silence if the one who alleges does not have irrebutable evidence to buttress their claim. What Farotimi did with that book was to peer torch into the eyes of the leopard in the dark (gbé’ná wo’jú olóólá, ekùn). What he did, even if a mountainous animal like the elephant does it, the animal will get his horns twisted (ìwo è á ló!). Farotimi has figuratively entered a mythic forest called Forest of the Wicked, the “Igbó Òdájú.”

While entering this forest, the elders warn the faint-hearted not to dare come near them. The ones whose mothers have not weaned from suckling are exempted. Mothers are also warned to hold their children with a leash, lest they stray into the forest. It is a forest where flesh-eating animals inhabit – the leopards, lions, jackals and the Queen of fishes – Àrògìdìgbà. Farotimi’s matter is made worse because the judges who he alleged as recipients of the alleged bribe will sit in judgment over the matter. But if Farotimi survives in this task of breaking the coconut pod on his own head – and I pray he does – he may have begun a major revolution against corruption.

(Being Lecture delivered at the 6th General Assembly and Conference of the Association of African Public Service Commissions (AAPSCOMS) which was held in Nairobi, Kenya on 6-8 November, 2024)

We now live in a world that is daily undergoing what has been called a polycrisis—crisis situations that are not only fundamental, but are also interlinked in ways that affects several regions of the world. In administrative terms, the polycrisis define a VUCA—vulnerable, uncertain, complex and ambiguous—policy environment where governments have to anticipate challenges before they even happen. With the COVID-19 pandemic, public administrators and public managers are confronted with the contexts of a new normal in all aspects of public administration. And in maneuvering through the landmines of this new normal in governance, governments and administrative contexts all across the world depend significantly on public policy professionalism and expertise that ensure that what governments intends for their citizens are what get implemented by public servants. Successful governments all over the world, in other words, achieve good governance by paying critical attention to their public policy architecture.

Public policy indeed emerged as a fully developed field of study in the nineteen century, and within the context of a flurry of theoretical and practical development that came after the Second World War. Several contextual issues—the emergence of statistical analysis, management science, social science research methodologies, as well as the emergence of research institutes, policy schools and several think tanks—instigated a series of significant developments that consolidated policy analysis and policy-engaged research as a critical dimension of the policy inputs into government work and into public administration. By the time American universities began cooperating with think tanks, from the Brooking Institution to the Rand Corporation, policymakers, development workers, policy managers, public administrators and even policy researchers were all totally inundated within a robust policy ambience that generated seminars, workshops, public policy courses and discourses which enabled capacities to ground the policy process on solid evidence-based research protocols.

The public policy framework that we just sketched briefly above provides the handle by which the government in developed societies cumulate the benefits of their intellectual capital. This is the sense in which policymakers and researchers/academics collaborate to facilitate policy-research linkage that burrow into the transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary nature of public policy research to ground development planning and good governance. Unfortunately, Africa’s contribution to the global public policy and research experience is almost next to nothing. What the current global framework demonstrates is that most African states fixate on the hardware of development in terms of infrastructural development indices—roads, schools, hospitals, etc.—with no critical attention to the intangibles that serve as the bedrock for development and governance itself, from human capital and the rule of law to institutional stability and the quality of education.

And to arrive at a cogent diagnosis of what had gone wrong with the failure of the continent to contribute to the global policy framework, we need to peer deep into the exogenous nature of the policy dynamics on the continent. Africa’s policy protocol is poor for three major reasons. The first is principally ideological—Africa’s insertion into and fixation with the Western neoliberal economic paradigm, and especially the Washington Consensus, that dictates supposedly universalist recommendations and conditionalities which are always at odds with local and regional economic and developmental realities. The second unfortunate reason that circumscribes Africa’s poor policy-research nexus is essentially political. It derives from the fact of bad politics that sees politicians formulating policies to satisfy clientelist interests and patronages, rather than fulfilling the social contract and servicing the common good. This is also further complicated by the stringent conditionalities that politicians and the political class needed to embed into the policy formulation framework that in the final analysis hurt public interest.

This political perspective undermines the technicist view of policy formulation and implementation as a straight and linear process. On the contrary, it is often smeared by political consideration that are not always salutary. The last reason has to do with the conflicting time frame that conditions the policy-research relationship. On the one hand, politicians and governments need a quick turnaround time on policy implementation that provides political capital, but on the other hand, policy researchers build their policy intelligence and recommendations on long-term incubation of policy ideas and paradigms for action. In other to undermine the gross uncertainties that often characterize policy design and implementation, policy must be preceded by research and intelligent evaluation and assessments.

Africa’s development is therefore caught in a bind. Given the macroeconomic shocks that have kept assailing the world before and after the COVID-19 pandemic, many African governments have failed (a) to ground the framework and protocols of their policymaking practices on economic and statistical rationalities; and (b) rather than exploring and exploiting local capacities to design and formulate policies that align with local interests and needs, many of these governments have ceded or outsourced the policy initiatives to donors to articulate solutions that are far from and sometimes totally disconnected from local realities. One sorry fact about the African policy management crisis is that a significant proportion of usable development statistics about African countries are generated and funded by foreign development agencies, from the World Bank to the United Nations. The chances of achieving success with such hastily drafted and non-indigenous policy recommendation becomes very low because it becomes top-down in ways that undermine the ability of the local population to own the policies.

Nigeria presents a rather symptomatic example of this general analysis. At the height of Nigeria’sfirst development plan after independence (1962 to 1968), the World Bank seconded Prof. Wolfgang Stolper as a technical adviser to assist with the design and implementation of the NDP. In 1966, Stolper penned his experiences in a book, Planning without Facts: Lessons in Resource Allocation from Nigeria’s Development. Stolper’s central experience which grounds his arguments in the book is that the first national development plan was articulated without the benefit of a data and statistical culture around which evidence-based development practices are founded. And so, given this paucity of data, development becomes a process of optimizing as one goes along. In other words, since there is no statistical analysis to optimize a long-run scientific projection, one is forced to depend on series of short-run decisions and planning that limits the extent of the future one can predict. This lack of statistical parameters makes sustainable development a mirage for policymakers. And it is therefore not surprising that from the first NDP (1962 to 1968) to the 1992-1994 rolling plan, Nigeria has barely been able to articulate a sustainable development that impacts good governance for Nigerians. And so, insecurity, terrorism, climate-change-induced disasters and macroeconomic challenges that other countries are managing with success go out of hand for Nigeria.

We can therefore conclude that Nigeria has been beating about the development bush because we lack a cogent understanding of what development demand—a strong collaboration between policymakers, researchers and think tanks. The policy-research linkage demands a significant relationship between the government and research institutes, tertiary institutions and think tanks that bring a certain sophistication to leadership and the change space of distributed leadership. This collaboration enables the leadership of a state navigate the VUCA administrative environment and the demands of a knowledge and technology society. And that linkage comes with its own unique peculiarity in the Nigerian policy space. On the one hand, consecutive governments in Nigeria don the toga of anti-intellectualism that sees the research industry as interlopers in the policy process rather than as staunch allies and stakeholders. While researchers do not often generate solutions to governance problems, they have the capacity to articulate different scenarios that enable government to better understand different problems that can enhance better policy choices. On the other hand, researchers and scholars also face significant challenges in their commitment to government policy demands. For example, such researchers stand the risk of lower scholarly performances in terms of academic parameters and scholarly rating. Indeed, such scholars also generate some level of suspicions as to the genuineness of their research findings.

Resolving the disconnect between policy and research on the continent demands some critical imperatives in terms of how policy and research are framed for governance and development purposes that connect policymakers, policy researchers and research centers and institutes. The core imperative is that policy management must be a cumulation of policy research, strategic intelligence and pragmatic statecraft cum intuition that scientifically and practically guide the path of governance projection. And this demands that government needs cogent collaborative plans that focus the research profile of research organizations and think tanks. This is crucial because these organizations, institutes and centers are usually torn between the imperatives of conducting research and the demand of generating policy intelligence and scenarios simply as publications to earn promotion. There is therefore the need for a blueprint that helps research institutes to maneuver between external partners, civil society organizations and the organized private sector in their mandate to mobilize resources, and the necessity of their autonomy as institutes and centers that generate objective and evidence-based data and statistical analyses that government can use.

The other dimension to the resolution of the policy-research disconnect is that research institutes and the universities need to also revisit their mandates and modus operandi. The town and gown initiative becomes an imperative that balances the need for research with the demand of development. The town-and-gown framework generate a dynamic of co-creation that expands the depth of what research implies. For instance, universities and tertiary institutions, as well as think tanks, can no longer ignore the fundamental implications of expanding the traditional content of who a faculty member is through the integration of the expertise of professors of practice and scholar-practitioners as a mean of jumpstarting a seamless interdisciplinary and interdependent policy-research partnerships. On their parts, the public service in African states must also invest enormously in the professionalization of planning and policy analysis departments. Such departments will be manned by a special core of experts and consultants that will lead the research onslaught into developing future research and scenario planning on what is needed to be done to make the public service to be world-class in spirit and in truth.

Professor Tunji Olaopa is a Professor of Public Administration & Chairman Federal Civil Service Commission, Abuja.

MORE facts have emerged on reasons behind the sealing off of the entrance gate leading to the palace of the Emir of Kano, Muhammad Sanusi II, on Friday

Though the Nigeria Police were yet to speak on the matter, a reliable source disclosed that the action carried out by law enforcement agency was aimed at preventing the breakdown of law and orders in Bichi town where Emir Sanusi was scheduled to visit to install a district head for the town.

A source, who preferred anonymity, said that the residents of Bichi town had allegedly mapped out plans to prevent the installation from taking place.

The feelers were, however, not favourable to security operatives, as they swept into action to prevent the Emir of Kano from attending the programme.

It was also believed that the move was also taken to prevent eminent personalities from visiting Bichi town to attend the same event.

Sunday Tribune learnt that many residents of Bichi town were not happy about the planned installation, querying the rationale behind the idea of a district head.

Some residents who spoke with our correspondent felt that the planned installation was to demote the town.

According to them, when the five Emirate councils established by former Governor Abdullahi Ganduje were sacked by current Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, he [Governor Yusuf] went ahead to appoint second-class emirs for three of the sacked Emirate councils and excluded Bichi town.

Some of the residents said the reason for their planned resistance to the Friday’s installation was because the governor demoted their kingdom to be ruled by an ordinary district head while the others towns that were sacked alongside are now being ruled by second-class emirs.

Some stakeholders, who confided in Sunday Tribune, admitted that the police action could be a blessing in disguise as the situation could have caused a serious crisis in Bichi town which could escalate to many communities and state capital.

It will be recalled that as of 7 a.m. on Friday heavily armed policemen had taken over the entrance leading to Emir Sanusi’s Kofar Kudu palace.

[Tribune]

President Bola Tinubu has said things are taking shape for the better, even though people may not like his government.

He said amid the tough challenges in the country, his administration had made some progress, noting that there are better days ahead.

The President, who was represented by the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu, made the remarks at the graduation ceremony for the Executive Intelligence Management Course 17 at the National Institute for Security Studies in Abuja, on Saturday,

He said, “Things are happening in our country today. People may not like us. They probably will disagree with one or two. But fundamentally, things are changing. And Nigeria will change.

“The economy is changing. Very tough, very difficult, very huge challenges we are facing. But I can assure you, better days are ahead of us,” he stated.

Tinubu also assured Nigerians of his administration’s commitment to ensuring security and stability in the country.

He said people with questionable character,  would face justice irrespective of where they live.

“If you are a bad man, whether you are inside Nigeria or outside, you are in trouble. We will go after you. We will bring you to justice,” he stated.

[DailyTrust]

The Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, has described the expulsion of the House of Representative member from Ideato North/Ideato South Federal Constituency of Imo State, Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere, as null and void.

PDP National Working Committee, NWC, said Ugochinyere’s expulsion by his Ward chapter of the party was of no effect.

The PDP Umuopia/Umukegwu Ward chapter of the PDP had expelled Ugochinyere for gross indiscipline, insubordination and anti-party activities.

Ugochinyere’s expulsion was contained in a letter from the Ideato LGA chapter of PDP, dated December 5, 2024.

The letter was signed by the LG party chairman, ThankGod Okeke, and the secretary, Onyebuchi Umeh.

Ugochinyere’s expulsion followed the report of the party’s disciplinary committee, dated November 27, 2024, which investigated misconduct charges against him in line with Section 57 (1-4) of the PDP Constitution, 2017, as amended.

The lawmaker was initially suspended at his Umuopia/Umukegwu ward on October 14, 2024, after failing to honor an invitation to appear before the ward executive committee on October 5, 2024.

He was summoned to answer allegations of disciplinary offenses, and ignoring reminders and further invitations sent to him on October 7, 2024.

However, in a statement on Saturday, the PDP NWC insisted that Ugochinyere is a bonafide member of the party with all rights and privileges.

Parts of the statement, signed by PDP spokesman, Debo Ologunagba, read: “The attention of the National Working Committee (NWC) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) @OfficialPDPNig has been drawn to the purported expulsion of Hon. Ugochinyere Ikeagwuonu @IkengaImo from the Party by the Umuopia/Umukegwu Ward Chapter of the PDP in Imo State.

“The NWC declares the said purported expulsion as null and void and of no effect, not being consistent with the express provision of Sections 57 (7) and 59 (3) of the Constitution of the PDP (as amended in 2017) and laid down Rules of our great Party.”

The party relied on Section 57 (7) of its Constitution to affirm Ugochinyere’s continued membership.

Meanwhile, the LG chairmen of the PDP in Imo State at the weekend named Ugochinyere the leader of the party in the state.

Ugochinyere is the highest ranking government official elected on the PDP platform in Imo State.

The Imo PDP local government leaders, who passed vote of confidence on Ugochinyere, also insisted that the party’s acting national chairman, Umar Damagun, and national secretary, Samuel Anyanwu, should be immediately removed to pave way for the reinvigoration of the opposition party.

[DailyPost]

The Federal Government on Saturday fixed February 2025 for the national youth conference.

President Bola Tinubu, during his Independence Day broadcast, announced the gathering of a 30-day national youth conference to address critical issues facing the country’s youths, including unemployment, education, and political participation.

This is as various youth groups across the country expressed disappointment over the presidency’s silence on the proposed confab.

The planned conference was part of the administration’s response to the youth-led protests, including #EndBadGovernance in August 2024 and the #FearlessOctober in October 2024.

“The conference aims to provoke meaningful dialogue and empower our young people to participate actively in nation-building. By ensuring that their voices are heard in shaping the policies that impact their lives, we are creating a pathway for a brighter tomorrow,” the President said.

The conference was greeted with mixed reactions as some youths welcomed the idea.

But almost three months after Tinubu’s pronouncement, no further announcement has been made as some youth groups expressed frustration.

The groups, including Arewa Youth Consultative Forum, Yoruba Youths Council, Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide and the Ijaw National Congress, accused the Tinubu-led government of neglecting its commitment to addressing the challenges confronting Nigerian youths.

The National President of AYCF, Zaid Ayuba, said the delay in organising the confab was disappointing and showed Tinubu’s lack of interest in youth development.

“We express our profound disappointment with the government’s inability to organise the much-anticipated national youth conference.

“Our disappointment stems from two key points. First, in an ideal society, a statement or directive from the president should automatically translate into executive action, reflecting the government’s commitment to follow through.

“The President’s announcement of such a conference was an opportunity for all Nigerians to witness a decisive mandate to bring it to fruition. However, this failed to materialise at a critical time, which deeply disheartened us.

“Second, as representatives of Nigeria’s largest demographic—the youth—we viewed this conference as a platform to present innovative ideas and solutions for the nation’s progress. It was supposed to be an avenue where the voices of young Nigerians could be amplified. Unfortunately, the conference did not happen, leaving us disappointed and marginalised.

“While we are disheartened by this missed opportunity, we remain hopeful. We call on the president to prioritise organising this critical National League Conference as the first major event of 2025,” Ayuba said.

On his part, the President of the Yoruba Youths Council, Eric Oluwole, lamented what he called the continued neglect of youths by the Tinubu administration.

“I can say categorically that Nigerian youths are not happy with Tinubu on the delay in organising the national youth conference as proposed by him. It was our belief that the confab would hold as early as possible but when you look at the whole thing now, it is like they have forgotten about it and the conference might no longer hold.

“We are already planning a meeting of Nigerian youths to remind the Federal Government that we are not going to relent until we achieve our goal, because we believe that the youths are the leaders of tomorrow. We also have the power to decide the country’s political future.

“One of our major demands is youth inclusion in governance because we make up 70 per cent of the country’s population and there is no way the government can sideline youths while making important policy decisions,” Oluwole said.

The spokesperson for Ohanaeze Ndigbo Worldwide, Dr Alex Ogbonnia, said Tinubu’s lack of action on the proposed confab undermined his administration’s credibility and integrity.

Ogbonnia said, “The youth confab is to the advantage of the President and shouldn’t be delayed any further because it will enable the President to know the yearnings of the youth. It is very important for the confab to hold.”

Also speaking, the National Publicity Secretary of Ijaw National Congress, Ezonebi Oyekemeagbegha, warned that Tinubu’s inaction on the confab could lead to disengagement and apathy among the country’s youths.

He urged the presidency to provide updates and a concrete timeline for the conference, insisting that the confab was necessary for addressing the escalating unemployment rate, brain drain, and rising social unrest among young people.

Oyekemeagbegha said, “It is good that whenever our leaders, particularly the President, make a promise; he must make conscious efforts to fulfill it. It is unfortunate that the confab is yet to be held. We expect that the President should have met with the youth, particularly this time when there is a lot of hardship and there is a need for the President to meet with the youth and other stakeholders in resolving some of the challenges confronting the country.”

The Secretary of the Democratic Socialist Movement, Peluola Adewale, described the conference as a “diversionary tactic” by Tinubu to placate youths during the #EndBadGovernance protest.

“It (confab) was a charade ab initio. The Tinubu government was never sincere about it. It was meant to bribe a section of young people at the period of an upswing in the #EndBadGovernance movement. At present, there is a seeming lull in the struggle, though the mass anger is still highly intense.

“So, the government apparently doesn’t see an immediate need for the youth conference at the moment. I think it is instructive to say that given the intensification of anti-poor policies, the growing impoverishment of ordinary people and the associated mass anger, another mass struggle may break out again.

“This is in spite of the vicious attack on democratic rights and repression of dissent by the Tinubu government. No youth conference will prevent it. In any case, the youth conference is a sheer waste of public resources and another avenue for looting of public funds,” Adewale said.

FG fixes February 2025

Responding to enquiries by Sunday PUNCH, the Federal Government said it plans to begin the month-long conference in February 2025.

The Minister of Youth Development, Mr Ayodele Olawande, said delegates would only converge on the FCT, Abuja, for one week after spending three weeks engaging youths at the grassroots.

“We will do the confab by the first week of February. It is not going to be the usual confab. That is why about three weeks of this confab will be spent with the grassroots,” said Olawande, who added that President Bola Tinubu would inaugurate selected delegates by mid-January.

While providing updates on preparations for the confab on Saturday, the youth minister said the event would not be a time to “talk and spend money.”

“We have changed the idea. The President has given us the go-ahead to come up with something more action-oriented, and after clarifying it with the Chief of Staff and getting his input, we will announce the modalities before the year (2024) ends.

“We will announce the committees. We’ll hit the ground running by mid-January or the last week of January. We will nominate representatives from each ministry and agency to collaborate with the delegates.

“We will announce those people; the President will approve and inaugurate them, and we will do the confab properly by the first week of February. I can assure you that we are going to the grassroots.”

He noted that the 30-day event would allocate two weeks to engagement in federal constituencies, followed by one week in states and local government areas.

The final week will involve a convergence on Abuja, where all findings and progress will be reviewed and discussed to formulate actionable steps.

Reflecting on previous conferences, such as the 2014 confab, he emphasised the need for a fresh and result-oriented approach to avoid repeating mistakes that yielded minimal results.

“This period, we have been looking at what has been done and how we can do things differently and better. That is why we are taking our time because we want results.

“As of now, we are setting up committees and giving them templates. We need to go back to where the challenges are the grassroots. We will not have the same people in various youth organisations who have always been there for a long time and just recruit them for the confab. We don’t think that is the right step this time around.”

In October, Olawande, then Minister of State for Youth Development, had said the Federal Government would set up a task force to implement the recommendations of the youth confab.

He argued that the task force was necessary to help concretise the recommendations into executive orders or bills to be transmitted to the National Assembly.

“We will still ask the President to give us an implementation task force so that when we need to do an executive order, we can put it up immediately. Those (recommendations) that need to go to the National Assembly, we can take it off, and we will start having this as quickly as possible. So, it’s a done deal,” Olawande noted.

He revealed that although the initial brief submitted to the President proposed four days for the dialogue, Tinubu recommended one month instead after listening to their plan to bring youths together for a dialogue.

“We are preparing to roll out things very soon with all stakeholders involved, which the President has consented to,” Olawande stated.

Reacting, the National President of the National Association of Nigerian Students, Lucky Emonefe, urged the Federal Government to expedite action on the planned conference.

He noted that part of the demands NANS would be presenting at the confab was increased youth participation in government, insisting that at least half of all public leadership and decision-making positions must be held by young people.

“We never expected that the conference would take this long. This youth confab and engagement with the youth is very important. We urge the minister of youth to please expedite action. Mr. President should put action to his words to ensure that the conference takes place because it is an opportunity for Nigerian youths to express their mind, their challenges and demands.

“We want a situation whereby like 50 per cent of government position would be occupied by youths so that we can attend to the needs of the youth,” Emonefe said.

“No man was ever honoured for what he received, but for what he gave”— Calvin Coolidge, 1872-1933, 30th US President.

It was twenty years ago, when the Governor of Akwa Ibom State, Obong Victor Attah, launched his book titled RESOURCE CONTROL. I was deeply honoured to have been asked to write the Foreword to that book which primarily advanced the co-joined principles of derivation and return to the federalism on which Nigeria was based in 1960. Akwa Ibom State was an oil producing state in 2004; Lagos was not. Why was I Lagos Boy standing side by side with the Governor of a state which stood to receive more revenue allocation from Abuja, if the agitation succeeded, while Lagos might receive a smaller slice of the national cake? The reason was simple. “There comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must take it because conscience tells that it is right.” (Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr, 1929-1968).

Attah was not the only Governor from the Niger Delta who advocated for the derivation principle and a larger share of the oil revenue for Niger Delta. He was joined by Alamieyeseigha of Bayelsa State and James Ibori of Delta State in demanding that one and a half per cent derivation was unfair to the states; with onshore-offshore dichotomy also thrown in. The three set out to redress the situation while the cowards and traitors governing Abia, Cross River, Edo, Imo, Ondo and Rivers either stood aloof or actually undermined their efforts.

Attah became the arrow-head of the movement because he wrote the book (copies are still available) and instantly became the number one enemy of President Obasanjo who was determined to continue with the rape of the Niger Delta. Nothing is more painful for me than watching governments and leaders of the Niger Delta giving Obasanjo the red carpet treatment each time he visits the area. With a friend like OBJ who needs enemies? He not only opposed the demand for derivation, he made sure that Ibori, Alamieyeseigha and Attah paid heavily for pushing the agenda to the successful end of getting the oil producing states 13.5 per cent derivation, without the obnoxious onshore-offshore dichotomy. I was very happy for the states.

“I hate ingratitude more in a man than lying, vainness, babbling drunkenness or any other taint of vice whose strong corruption inhabits our frail blood.” William Shakespeare, 1564-1616.

 There can be no doubt concerning the benefits derived by the states from that struggle. Just remove 13.5 per cent derivation from the revenue allocation to the states and it will be clear how much poorer they will all become. In any society wanting to create individuals who would promote the people’s welfare one thing they do is to honour them for their contributions. They build monuments, name institutions and streets after them; declare days to express appreciation. With the exception of Akwa Ibom State, all the other Niger Delta states now collecting huge allocations have proved ungrateful. None has done anything to acknowledge his contribution to their progress. This is scandalous.

Granted, the current Governors and leaders of the States Houses of Assembly might not be aware of the debt of gratitude owed to Attah; and which had not been discharged by ill-mannered predecessors. But, henceforth, none can claim ignorance. Attah, who turned 86 on November 20, deserves at least a major road named for him in every state of the Niger Delta.

ATTAH REMEMBERED BY DR UDEME NNANA

Fortunately, not everybody forgot the great man’s contributions to the development of the Niger Delta. Dr Udeme Nnana remains the only person appointed to office by Governor Attah, who had remained loyal till today.

He has been organising an annual Book Colloquium aiming to promote book reading in the state to mark Attah’s birthday. This year was no exception. Below is a summary of what transpired this year.

The Keynote Speaker – Sunday Udo Akpan, The Chairman was Abom Tony Esu, a former Member of the House of Reps

Barr.Bassey Dan Abia, former Attorney General and Hon.Commissioner for Justice who also served as the Chairman of NDDC.

Professor Ebebe Ukpong, former Commissioner for Economic Development

Professor Trenchard Ibia, Former Commissioner for Agriculture, Dr Eno Attah, Executive Secretary, Akwa Ibom State Primary Healthcare Development Commission,Dr Martin Akpan, Orator of the Book Club and Chairman, Governing Board, Akwa Ibom State Healthcare Development Commission

Barr. Dan Akai, former Chairman, Akwa Ibom Newspapers Corporation, Members of Bush House Academy and Members of the Book Club initiative in Akwa Ibom State.

My advocacy was on the need for Akwa Ibom State Government and indeed all the States in the Niger Delta Region to set aside November 20 every year as ‘OBONG VICTOR ATTAH DAY’ to honour a man who stood firmly to fight for the abrogation of the onshore – offshore dichotomy and full payment of 13 % Derivation fund. My argument is that, it was because Obong Attah won that fight, that is why these States and their Governors now have so much money from the Federation Account every month.??

That was the cake on the occasion.

Thanks and God bless you.

THE CURRENT WAR ABOUT VAT – I AM A LAGOSIAN

“I hold that man in the right who is most in league with the future.” Henrik Ibsen, 1825-1906

 Now that Nigerian politicians and their collaborators among the elite are at daggers drawn regarding the proposal on the Value Added Tax, VAT, in the new Tax Bill, I, as a Lagos state indigene can talk without fear about the matter. Based on the principle of derivation, the bill apparently will benefit three sub-national entities – Lagos, Rivers and the Federal Capital Territory more than the other states. Lagos is expected to be the biggest winner; while all the other states lose. Governor Zulum of Borno State and Alhaji Kwakanso, Presidential candidate of the NNDP in the last election, among other Northern leaders, have made Lagos State the target of their rejection of the very complex Tax Bill.

 Apart from the fact that singling out Lagos State for attack under the circumstances, is not exactly how to build national unity, I find the entire campaign highly ridiculous and hypocritical on the part of people I thought are more reasonable. Permit me to ask Zulum and Kwakanso the following questions. Was it by accident that most of the 35 per cent of VAT revenue going to Local governments are paid to Northern states? That Jigawa, with less than half the population of Lagos collects twice as much for its LGs than Lagos? Was it not a deliberate injustice by ALL the Northern Military Heads of State to allocate 20 LGs to Lagos and Kano State 44; despite the fact that Lagos State has a larger population and generates far more revenue?

 Let nobody be under the impression that Lagosians can be made the scapegoats for their corrupt and inept leaders who turned Northerners to the Wretched of Nigeria – if not the Earth. For every true Lagosian you can find in most states of Nigeria, you will find hundreds of thousands of their own people in Lagos. We welcome their beggars and give them alms. How many Lagos beggars are in Borno? Enough is enough. Let us collectively solve this problem and stop this nonsense about isolating Lagos for attack. We are not helpless here!!!

As a sign in front of a bar in Kansas, USA during the days of the Wild Wild West read: “IF YOU ARE LOOKING FOR TROUBLE, YOU HAVE COME TO THE RIGHT PLACE”. Zulum, Kwakanso, beware!!!