The Federal Government, through the Office of the Accountant General of the Federation, said the payment of accrued rights of pensioners under the Contributory Pension Scheme is subject to the availability of funds from the government.

The OAGF made this known in a memo signed by Musa Raheem, Director of Administration addressed to the National Union of Pensioners.

“I am directed to inform you that the January – March and April to June 2024 allocations have been released to the National Pension Commission. Subject to the availability of funds, efforts are also ongoing to make further releases before the end of the year in order to reduce the outstanding pension liabilities under the Contributory Pension Scheme.

“Please, accept the assurances of the warm regards of the Accountant-General of the Federation.”

The PUNCH reported on Wednesday that the pensioners threatened to occupy the Ministry of Finance on December 16 should their 21-month backlog pension not be paid.

The pensioners had earlier staged a peaceful rally at the Ministry of Finance on November 12, 2024 and had written the Coordinating Minister of Finance and National Economy, Wale Edun, expressing appreciation for the minister’s “mature and civilized“ handling of their grievances.

However, they lamented that despite promises, the accrued rights account remained uncredited.

The pensioners are demanding the immediate release of the outstanding 21 months of accrued rights to retired public workers from March 2023 to November 2024.

They are also seeking payment of unpaid pension increments, including a 15% increase in 2007, a 33% increase in 2010, and a 20% to 28% increase in 2024.

They called on the Federal Government to declare a state of emergency in the CPS sector and take immediate steps to clear all government liabilities before December 16, 2024.

The pensioners’ union leadership stated that they had the mandate of their members nationwide to take this action, and they would not back down until their demands were met.

[Punch]

Former Head of state and elder statesman, General Yakubu Gowon (retd), has given insight into why he championed the creation of states in Nigeria, among others, while he was in the office as head of state, even as he urged Northern elites to build a consensus around issues that would better serve the greater interest of Nigeria as a whole.

He spoke when a delegation of the Senator Ibrahim Shekarau-led League of Northern Democrats, LND, visited him yesterday at the Yakubu Gowon Centre, in Abuja.

Gowon who governed between 1966 and 1975, told his visitors that it was aimed at dousing tension and removing the fear of northern domination by other component parts of the federation.

According to him, “May I thank you sincerely, as a former governor and now the chairman-am I correct?-of the League of Northern Democrats. I hope you’re not suggesting that Baba Tafawa Balewa was not both a northern and a national democrat.

“I firmly believe, as I have always said, that the responsibility of maintaining Nigeria’s true democracy rests on the north, and Baba Tafawa Balewa embodied this ideal.

“Let me also say that I hope your visit is not just about returning to the old thinking where the north prioritises the north, the west prioritises the west, and the east prioritises the east-until, of course, the Mid-West emerged to think for itself.

“My position has always been that whatever the north does must serve the greater interest of Nigeria.
“From your speech, I understand that this is your intention-to ensure the north, in its current state, focuses on national unity.

“It was for this reason that I supported the creation of multiple states, to prevent any one region from becoming too powerful and threatening the country’s unity.

“This perspective was born out of extensive discussions with political leaders, chiefs, and various groups.

“The north had to make sacrifices to address fears of domination by one region, especially given the size and population of the north.

” At that time, there was considerable anxiety from the south about the north’s dominance, which nearly led to calls for secession from all regions-the west, the east, and even the north.

“This deeply worried me. I was born in Nigeria, raised in Nigeria, and served a profession that represented the country’s collective interest.

“My decision to advocate for states creation stemmed from a desire to prevent the fragmentation of our nation.

“Even now, I recall that at one point, people believed the north wanted to secede, just as similar claims were made about the east and the west. This fear of disintegration weighed heavily on me. If we had allowed it, what would we call ourselves today? We might have ended up with separate nations-whether Yoruba, Igbo, Hausa, or otherwise. I hesitate to say more, as I might risk offending someone here.”

Why I opted out of partisan politics

“You know I’m not affiliated with any political party. My only allegiance is to Nigeria. My profession shaped my belief in serving the country above all else, and I’ve avoided partisan politics.

“I encourage others to think beyond regional interests and focus on Nigeria as a whole. Differences in opinion are natural, but they should never prevent us from working together to resolve issues for the good of the country.

“Nigeria’s population and diversity are strengths. If we can unite despite our differences, we can build the Nigeria we all envision. You have shared your paper with me, and I’ll review it carefully. As you mentioned, you can return at any time for further discussions or my thoughts on your proposals.

“I joked earlier that your League of Northern Democrats isn’t yet a party. It appears to be a northern group, but it’s made up of individuals from all parts of the country.

“The north is incredibly diverse, encompassing various tribes, such as the Igbo-speaking communities in Benue and the Yoruba presence there as well. These differences enrich our region and should encourage unity rather than division.

“The northern identity, however, is often associated with the Hausa-Fulani. Even within that label, there is significant diversity. For instance, among the Angas people, we have distinct names like “Ngas,” and they call us “Ngali.” The cultural nuances are fascinating and a testament to our rich heritage.”

On current security challenges

“Unfortunately, I feel saddened by the challenges currently facing the north, such as the emergence of groups like the Lukurawa from Mali. Their activities have only created more problems for us.

“Nonetheless, I’m honoured and delighted by your visit. Your introductions touched me deeply. Many of you are descendants of respected leaders such as Tafawa Balewa and Shagari. I see this gathering as a continuation of their legacy.

“I must commend your group’s efforts to bring over 700 members together. It’s a remarkable achievement. However, I urge you to remember that the north’s division into states was meant to preserve national unity.

“Whatever you do, always prioritise the nation’s interest. While cooperation among states is vital, it should never compromise Nigeria’s collective good.

“I’m impressed by your initiative and wish you success. Perhaps your movement will evolve into a national party that unites all Nigerians. While various groups work on a new constitution, I encourage you to engage with them to ensure their proposals serve the country’s best interests.

“I’ve always believed in taking the best from all ideologies-be it socialism, capitalism, or others-and applying them for the greater good.

“During my time in government, we valued diverse perspectives, but decisions were always made in the interest of the people and the nation.

“You’ve started something significant, and I hope you’re prepared to collaborate with others for the future of Nigeria. Your dedication gives me hope for the nation’s future.

Earlier, the Chairman of the LND, Senator Ibrahim Shekarau, described Gowon as a symbol of Nigeria’s unity, strength and resilience.

While congratulating the retired general on his 90th birthday, he prayed for his continued health and strength to contribute to national development.

Explaining the desire behind the formation of the LND, Shekarau said, “Your Excellency, the League of Northern Democrats was born out of a shared sense of urgency and responsibility among Northern elites to address the critical challenges facing our region.

“Together, we seek to reposition the North as a bastion of political, economic and cultural influence – a North that reclaims its historical role as a beacon of leadership in Nigeria!

[Vanguard]

Shell is starting arbitration hearings over the supply of liquefied natural gas from Venture Global’s Calcasieu Pass facility, Shell CEO Wael Sawan has said, according to a Reuters report.

Shell and other companies including BP, Galp and Repsol have also launched contract arbitration cases in the United States over inability to obtain contract cargoes for more than two years.

“Frustratingly, we have got no volumes against our term agreement which underpinned the financing for the project. We’re going through arbitration hearings this quarter,” Sawan said on a call with Reuters analysts.

Shell and others say they have lost billions of dollars in profit from gas promised under long-term contracts but it was not delivered. Venture Global LNG contends it has not fully commissioned the Louisiana plant.

Previously, Venture Global LNG had criticised Shell for its poor performance record at its own LNG facilities.

Industry observers see this accusation by Venture Global as reminiscent of the legal issues faced by NLNG, a Shell subsidiary, where it was found that the company had breached a contract by failing to deliver at least 19 cargoes of LNG under a contract signed in January 2020.

This led to a London arbitration panel and an England and Wales High Court of Justice ruling against NLNG in July 2024.

The arbitration panel included John Beechey CBE, J. William Rowley KC, and Nevil Phillips.

Shell accuses Venture Global LNG of wrongfully earning $3.5 billion, according to an earlier report by the Financial Times.

[TheCable]

Upon the inauguration of the Bola Tinubu administration last year, new SUVs were purchased and distributed to the members of the Federal Executive Council and the National Assembly. Such public officers were never assembled in a public place to receive the vehicles. At about the same time, judges whose cars were replaced after about 10 years were assembled by governors who handed the car keys  to them.

The humiliation of judges by the executive was recently taken to an embarrassing level when the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike assembled senior judges to witness the flag off ceremony of 40 housing units to be constructed for judges. The Minister has since announced that he would give 20 houses to Judges of the Federal Capital Territory High Court, 10 to the Judges of the Federal High Court and the remaining 10 to the Justices of the Court of Appeal.

A few colleagues who have forgotten the struggle that culminated in the constitutional recognition of financial autonomy for judges as part of the independence of the judiciary have attempted to justify the distribution of cars and houses to Judges by the executive organ of governments. In fact, those who are not familiar with the current constitutional dispensation have said that the executive should continue to build houses for Judges since it was done before in a particular state.

With respect, it is pertinent to remind such lawyers that sections 81 (3) and 121 (3) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 which granted financial autonomy to the Federal and State  Judiciaries in the country has been confirmed by the Federal High Court and the National Judicial Council in the following cases:

1. Suit No FHC/ABJ/CS/667/13, Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria  v National Judiciary Council & Ors;

2. Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/63/2013: Olisa Agbakoba, SAN v  National Judicial Council & Anor;

3. Suit No. NAD/56/2013 :Olisa Agbakoba v Attorney-General of Ekiti State & 2 others;

4. Suit No. NICABJ/142/2022: Chief Sebastian Hon v National Assembly & 2 Ors.

Section 81(3) of the Constitution  provides that:”(3) Any amount standing to the credit of the judiciary in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the Federation shall be paid directly to the National Judicial Council for disbursement to the heads of the courts established for the Federation and the State under section 6 of this Constitution.” Although the federal judiciary is better funded than state judiciary but the question of financial autonomy has not been properly addressed.

But due to the refusal of state governments to allow the judiciary to operate its budgets, former President Muhammadu Buhari issued Executive Order No 10 of 2020. State Governors successfully challenged the validity of the Executive Order as it was struck down by the Supreme Court.

Thereafter, section 121(3) of the Constitution was amended  to the effect that any amount standing to the credit of the House of Assembly in the Consolidated Revenue Fund of the State “shall be paid directly into wethe account of the Assembly”, and that of the Judiciary “shall be paid directly to the heads of the courts.” A new subsection 4  provides that the state accountant-general of a state must pay the judiciary and the house of assembly their due amounts in monthly installments.

It is public knowledge that the salaries and allowances of Nigerian Judges were increased a few months ago by an Act of the National Assembly. However, the National Judicial Council and the Nigerian Bar Association should prevail on the National Assembly and the various Houses of Assembly to actualise financial autonomy for judges in the 2025 budgets of the Federal Government and the various state governments in strict compliance with  Sections 81(3) and 121(3)  of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.

In other words, with effect  from  2025, the budgets of the judiciary at the federal and state levels should make adequate financial provision to enable the judiciary to build houses and buy cars for judges. This is only way to insulate judges from the overbearing control of the Executives. Therefore, the Nigerian Bar Association should be prepared to challenge any breach of the relevant provisions of the Constitution which have guaranteed financial autonomy for the nation’s judiciary.

The rule of law is underwritten by fundamental assumptions. One, that the law is fair to all and that citizens can approach the court expecting to obtain justice irrespective of their station in life. Two, that judges who interpret the law and dispense justice will be above reproach and remain impartial. Three, that an independent, orderly judiciary will be self-regulating. Unfortunately, recent developments in Nigeria only point to a betrayal of nearly all these foregoing assumptions.

Last week, the Senate passed a resolution asking President Bola Tinubu to sack Danladi Umar as chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT) over sundry allegations of corruption and misconduct. But the provisions of Section 157 (1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) on which the resolution was anchored do not support what the Senate did. There is a difference between the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB) and the CCT and you expect Senators to know that. It would take the votes of two thirds of members of both chambers (Senate and the House of Representatives) for the president to remove the CCT chairman. Apparently mindful of this lacuna, the House on Tuesday invoked the proper law, Section 17 (3), Part 1, Fifth Schedule of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) to complete the process with their concurrence that Umar be removed.  

The second issue is the presidential action that preceded the two resolutions. On 13th July this year, then presidential spokesman, Ajuri Ngelale, announced “the appointment of Dr. Mainasara Umar Kogo as the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT),” as directed by the president. “Kogo is a seasoned lawyer and analyst in the fields of law, security, economy, politics, and international diplomacy,” Ngelale further said. I assumed at the time that Umar’s tenure had lapsed, or he had quietly resigned. Evidently, that is not the case. With both Umar and Kogo claiming to be CCT chairman, the National Assembly has merely covered up for a presidential lapse of judgement on the matter.

The third and perhaps most substantive issue relates to the charges against Umar. First sworn-in as acting CCT chairman in 2007 at age 36 despite his thin résumé, Umar became the substantive chairman in 2011. And in the past 13 years, there have been several allegations of impropriety against him. In January 2018, for instance, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) accused Umar of demanding and receiving bribes from one Rasheed Owolabi Taiwo, a defendant standing trial before the CCT for “favours to be afterwards shown” to him. Besides, Umar also has a notorious reputation in Abuja.

Asked to repark his vehicle that was obstructing other customers at Banex Plaza on 8th April 2021, Umar (who drove himself that day and would later make a big deal of it in a reckless statement) adopted the usual Nigerian Big Man disposition of ‘Do you know who I am?’ by assaulting a security man. When the video went viral, he claimed to be the victim of assault by ‘Biafran boys’, thus profiling shop owners at the commercial complex. In calling for a full investigation into the incident at the time, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) expressed its displeasure at the “display of naked power by a public officer especially one who, by virtue of his high office, is expected to exhibit a high standard of conduct.”

Given the foregoing, Umar’s removal is long overdue. But what I find rather surprising is that his defenders are citing the crisis orchestrated by the removal of a former Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Walter Onnoghen to canvass for due process on the matter. This same Umar was a willing tool in the hands of President Muhammadu Buhari and his Attorney General and Justice Minister, Abubakar Malami, SAN, for that judicial act of infamy. Now that his misdeeds have caught up with him, Umar is seeking equity with unclean hands.

However, the bigger lesson in this saga is for the judiciary. In my presentation at the 2024/2025 Legal Year ceremony of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN) in Abuja on 9th October, I made a general point about justice administration in Nigeria with a clear distinction between ‘rule of law’ and ‘rule of judges’. The latter, as I said, is a situation in which a judge places himself/herself above the law. “Regrettably, the loud and overpowering noise of the latter is becoming definitive of Nigeria’s judiciary in the perception of most people,” I concluded. “Nothing gives better expression to that than the statement, ‘Go to Court’ by conscious wrong-doers, often followed by ‘Go on appeal’ by their hand-in-glove judges.”

In his highly entertaining book, ‘Judges’ which I once referenced on this page, Lord David Philip Pannick used the lesson of history in both the United Kingdom and United States to highlight what could happen when the people lose faith in the judicial process. “Some judges have received more than their just deserts for injudicious behaviour. In the 13th century, Andrew Horn alleged that in one year, King Alfred caused 44 judges to be hanged as homicides for their false judgments. In 1381, a mob pursued the Lord Chancellor, Simon de Sudbury, and cut off his hand. One year later, Lord Chief Justice Cavendish was killed after being apprehended by a mob and subjected to a mock trial in which he was sentenced to death,” Pannick, a member of the House of Lords and the Blackstone Chambers, wrote. “In 1688, the infamous judge Jeffreys, by then the Lord Chancellor, went into hiding when James II fled the country. Jeffreys was captured in Wapping when he was recognized in a tavern by a man who had been a dissatisfied litigant in his court. (The man had won his case, but Jeffreys had been rude to him and kept him waiting). Jeffreys was put in the Tower of London, where he died in 1689.”

We are living in an age when the past bears an uncanny resemblance to the present. It is therefore important for the National Judicial Council (NJC) to begin dealing with deviant behaviours among its members. Authorities in the judicial sector must not allow a situation in which the people would openly turn against our men and women on the bench. This requires an urgent need for internal cleansing. May the day never come in Nigeria when an enraged public would begin to disrobe otherwise eminent judges in the marketplace!

What the Yoruba People Have Lost

“Chief Lóògò Bámútùlá explains, ‘I grew up amid deities…In the house, the gods talked audibly and clearly. They spoke precise human language…’ This is a Chief who actively remembers his ancestors, who offers his own stories of a life lived through the Nigerian Civil War and beyond, and whose clients include those of many different affiliations. His practices include prayer, festival, charms, psychiatric care, pharmaceutical and medical interventions, and resolving curses, reminding us of the complex rituals and acts that make up what we call religion…”

The foreword by Laura Nasarallah, Scholar of Ancient Christianity and Buckingham Professor of New Testament Criticism and Interpretation at Yale University, United States, leads us to the story of an extraordinary man who had no formal education yet imbued with the power/knowledge to cure many ailments. Described as a “ritual specialist, native botanist and family patriarch” by Arthur Kleinman, Professor of Psychiatry at Harvard Medical School in the blurb, Chief David Akinsawe Bámútùlá of Ile-Oluji in Ondo State is not only a cultural avatar but also a symbol of the body of knowledge in Yorubaland that is gradually going into extinction. But how did I get to read the manuscript of the coming book by Harvard Professor, Jacob Olupona, co-authored with Oluwole Akinyosoye who worked briefly at The Guardian newspaper before venturing into the oil and gas industry?

To get away from the drama of ‘birthday’ which holds no significance for me (village people don’t celebrate birthday), I try to take my annual holiday from the first week in November though the get-away gambit almost failed this year due to a delayed visa renewal process. But in the past two weeks, I have visited New York, Washington DC and Toronto (Canada) before finally arriving at my main destination in Boston, Massachusetts. For the past 15 years, Professor Olupona and his wife, Josephine Modupe, have been guardian angels for my family. But for me the real attraction in always holidaying with them is not so much the warm hospitality but rather the knowledge and insights I gain from Professor Olupona who always enjoys having me around. It’s much like being in school. In the process of discussing the current situation with the traditional institution in Yorubaland, Olupona told me of a coming book, ‘In the Twilight of Time: A Biography of an African Medicine Man’ he co-authored with Akinyosoye. And the moment he handed me the manuscript, I could not put it down.

Chief Lóògò and the late Professor Thomas Adeoye Lambo were contemporaries and friends who pursued the same vocation in psychiatric healing though the latter was trained by the best Universities around the world. Lambo, a globally renowned psychiatrist and former Vice Chancellor, University of Ibadan (1967 to 1971) later became the World Health Organisation (WHO) Deputy Director General. Being senior to Lambo who was born on 29 March 1923, that means Chief Lóògò is well beyond 100 years in age. Lambo, Chief Lóògò recalls, usually sent a vehicle to pick him up for meetings of the association of Nigerian traditional healers where they always sat beside each other. “He was not much of a herbalist; he was a professor, an audacious fellow, ever ready to experiment,” Chief Lóògò told the authors in one of the numerous interviews conducted for the book. “Lambo chose to test me, when we needed to display the efficacy of charms at a conference in Iganmu, Lagos. Everybody was thrilled at the results.”  

The second foreword to the manuscript, by HRM Oba Olufaderin Oluwole Adetimehin, Jimoko II of Ile-Oluji Kingdom, Ondo State, is significant in several respects. “I found his (Baba Lóògò’s) elucidation on Yoruba culture fascinating, especially his explanations of conceptual nuances of Olóògún (Ògún devotees) and Olóògùn (traditional pharmacist) and the differences between Babaláwo (Ifá diviner) and Onísègùn (traditional healer)” wrote the royal father, a former president of the Chartered Insurance Institute of Nigeria (CIIN). “The elucidations reveal Baba Lóògò’s rich repository of Yoruba lore and culture.”

I am sure the Ile Oluji Monarch must also have learnt a great deal about our past, especially considering how Yoruba Obas are now being abducted right in their palaces. In the days of yore, criminals who dared such a sacrilegious enterprise would have had to contend with ‘Sìgìdì’. Explaining how Sìgìdì provided security for powerful people in the past, Chief Lóògò illustrated his point with the experience of his own father from whom he inherited trado-medicine. “If an evil person is approaching, the Sìgìdì would ambush them before we know and announce their arrival after the task, ‘Baba, we are back.’ Father would respond, ‘You are welcome…You will eat tomorrow. Your mealtime is tomorrow’. I knew then that a goat would be slaughtered the following day. The Sìgìdì often alerted my father whenever danger lurked. Sometimes, Father would command the Sìgìdì to confront the attackers, and they (the attackers) would shoot, unaware that they were not aiming at physical objects.”

In Yoruba cosmology, according to the authors, “sacred beings are presented in hidden forms. When one greets a king, either he will move his Ìrùkẹ̀rẹ̀ (flywhisk, a symbol of office) or have his courtiers speak on his behalf,” while expanding on how traditional authority was revered in the past. “The king himself is an Òrìṣà, and silence reflects his elevation and divinity; it is part of the reason that the king garners respect and honour.” Not these days when traditional rulers compete with ‘slay queens’ to throw tantrums on social media!

Allow me to make an upfront admission here. I am a Christian who believes in the Bible, and I take my faith very seriously. But I have often wondered about some of the things I witnessed growing up in the village. I can still picture in my mind several traditional healing methods we now consider ‘occultic’. What makes knowledge and wisdom valid? Should knowledge be only those which cement or affirm the existing power structure and epistemology? These, according to Olupona, were some of the questions that prompted their research into the life and career of Chief Lóògò, and it is something I could relate with regarding the way we dismiss (or even criminalise) what we do not understand in Nigeria, because of a lack of curiosity that now defines public engagement and the intellectual space.

I recall the controversy that trailed the release about two decades ago of Tunde Kelani’s ‘Agogo Èèwò’ (the gong of taboo). Written by the late acclaimed authority on Yoruba tradition and culture and National Merit Award Winner, Professor Akinwumi Isola, the National Films and Censors Board wanted to ban it at the time. Some of the parts they queried were when the character played by Abiola Atanda (aka Madam Kofo) was carrying rituals and where the herbalist (Akinwunmi Isola) was consulting the Ifa oracle with chants. The verses they considered objectionable are: “Af’ipá l’ówó won kìí kádún” (Seekers of wealth by forceful means do not last); “Afi wàràwàrà l’ówó bí ológun kìí dòla…” (Seekers of instant wealth who employ military brute force do not live long). Not much has changed since then.

Chief Lóògò explained the different types of preventive traditional medicines to the authors. “Apparently, ‘Ayeta’ (bullet repellent medicine) as described by Chief Lóògò is not designed for a continuous assail of bullets but to protect against ambush or assassination and allow one to readjust himself for a fight or flight in a war situation,” they wrote. But the authors also lament how “Important trees, leaves and herbs are disappearing in their large numbers, even in Chief Lóògò’s backyard, due to human-induced climate change,” while revealing the contradictions in our society based on the revelations by Chief Lóògò fully captured in the manuscript. “Despite their outrage on his methods and their keeping public distance from him, we find from his dispositions that Christians and Muslims, including notable politicians, secretly patronise him.”

It is interesting that Chief Lóògò believes that only God can heal, while also admitting that the same God can use anything and any vessel. “Look at Moses with only a rod. He did great wonders. There was nothing in that rod; It was just a symbol of God’s power,” said Chief Lóògò who then argues, “God is not averse to using medicine to heal the sick. They call the ‘trado-medical’ practitioner ‘Agbomolà’, one who saves the lives of men and women, young and old. Can God be upset with someone for saving another man’s life?”

Meanwhile, Chief Lóògò has abandoned his practices and the family deities after embracing Christianity. “I converted to retrace, redirect my path, and change my family’s fortunes…I beg God daily to forgive my sins and those of my lineage.” When the authors inquired whether jettisoning Ògún, the deity he once served as its high priest, was due to pressure from his children, Chief Lóògò replied, “Ògún came to earth on his own volution just like Sàngó and other Yoruba deities. God did not send him here. I discovered that Ògún is opposed to God, so I decided to part ways with him and embrace God.” And the depth of his new-found faith can be glimpsed from this line: “I know my time (on earth) is far spent; my prayer is for Jesus to help me make it to heaven.”

The main concern for me is that we have lost the traditional healing methods embraced by other societies. Having visited China several times, I have had the opportunity of seeing expansive herbal/traditional medical centres. During the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020, China’s National Health Commission revealed that about 90 percent of their nationals infected with the virus took some form of traditional medicine to treat their symptoms. These traditional remedies, according to the Chinese, helped to alleviate symptoms, reduced the severity of the virus, improved recovery and reduced mortality rate. Growing up in the village, most of us also took these herbs that are now being derided, so we are aware of their efficacy.

In the past, I have used Richard Niebuhr’s book, ‘Christ and Culture’, to demonstrate how Christians have attempted to deal with the challenge of their faith against the background of traditional beliefs and customs. Niebuhr identifies five approaches which he listed as: Christ against Culture; The Christ of Culture; Christ above Culture; Christ and Culture in Paradox and Christ the Transformer of Culture. Unfortunately, as I have also argued, the Pentecostalism embraced in Nigeria today fits into the paradigm of ‘Christ against Culture’, a notion which rejects all ancient mores and body of knowledge, including for traditional healing, as archaic, backward, and evil.

• You can follow me on my X (formerly Twitter) handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com  

In an economy touted to have been “saved” by $20 billion due to policy reforms under President Bola Tinubu’s administration, the recent approval by the Senate for a $2.2 billion loan raises significant questions about fiscal discipline, economic priorities, and public accountability. The juxtaposition of these two stories, a declaration of financial salvation and the eagerness to incur more debt, reveals an apparent inconsistency in Nigeria’s economic management.

Finance Minister Wale Edun recently celebrated the gains of Tinubu’s reforms, notably the removal of fuel subsidies and the floating of the naira. According to Edun, these measures have saved Nigeria $20 billion, approximately 5% of the nation’s GDP. This figure has been presented as a monumental achievement, promising the redirection of funds toward critical sectors such as infrastructure, healthcare, education, and social services.

If this is accurate, then Tinubu’s reforms represent a watershed moment, signaling the administration’s ability to tackle rent-seeking practices and foster a more productive economy. The $20 billion, as Edun highlighted, is a resource that could catalyze transformative projects to uplift the nation’s socio-economic fabric.

In stark contrast to the triumphant announcement of these savings, the Senate recently approved Tinubu’s request to borrow $2.2 billion to fund the 2024 budget and bolster foreign reserves. The loan, according to Senate reports, will be sourced through Eurobonds and other international financial instruments. Proponents argue that borrowing at this scale will strengthen Nigeria’s external reserves and facilitate ongoing capital projects.

However, this decision raises a fundamental question: why borrow a relatively modest $2.2 billion when $20 billion has allegedly been saved? The optics are troubling. It suggests either a lack of fiscal coherence or a misrepresentation of the government’s financial position.

The essence of saving, whether in personal finance or national budgeting, is to build a buffer against future expenses. If Nigeria truly has $20 billion in savings, it is logical to draw a portion of these funds to cover the $2.2 billion requirement rather than incurring additional debt.

Borrowing comes at a cost, including interest payments, currency risks, and the burden of repayment for future administrations. By contrast, utilizing saved funds would reduce these financial liabilities while signaling to Nigerians that the government is committed to fiscal responsibility.

Nigeria’s debt profile is already worrisome, with debt servicing consuming a significant portion of national revenue. Borrowing more, even at favorable terms, perpetuates a cycle of dependency and limits the government’s ability to invest in long-term growth. Furthermore, the issuance of Eurobonds ties Nigeria to global financial markets, exposing the economy to external shocks.

By opting to borrow instead of utilizing savings, the government risks eroding public trust. Many Nigerians, already grappling with the economic fallout of subsidy removal and naira devaluation, may perceive this as a sign that the promised benefits of these reforms are either exaggerated or inaccessible.

If the government cannot allocate $2.2 billion from the purported $20 billion savings, it raises critical questions:  “Are the Savings Real?” “Is the $20 billion a tangible, accessible sum, or is it merely a theoretical figure derived from avoided expenditures? If it exists, where is it held, and under what conditions can it be deployed?”

Also to be asked in this context is, “If the savings are indeed available, why is the government prioritizing external borrowing over deploying these funds to critical sectors?”

There is no denying the fact that for the Tinubu-led administration to engender transparency and accountability that Nigerians deserve to know how these savings are being managed. Without clarity, the narrative of $20 billion savings risks becoming another political sound bite.

In fact, the government’s decision-making should reflect the principles of fiscal discipline and strategic allocation of resources.

Against the foregoing backdrop it is expedient to suggest in this context that the government should draw from the saved $20 billion to meet immediate funding needs, such as the $2.2 billion loan request. This would reduce debt exposure and demonstrate a commitment to prudent financial management.

Thirdly, the government should provide a detailed breakdown of how the $20 billion is being utilized. Nigerians need assurances that these funds are not languishing in accounts or being redirected for less critical purposes.

In a similar vein, borrowing should be a last resort, not a default option. The government must explore alternative funding mechanisms, including public-private partnerships, to finance capital projects.

Again, the government should utilize savings to fund transformative projects that directly impact the lives of Nigerians, such as infrastructure, healthcare, and education. This will help mitigate the economic pain caused by subsidy removal and naira devaluation.

In fact, the contrasting narratives of saving $20 billion and borrowing $2.2 billion highlight the need for greater coherence in Nigeria’s fiscal policies. The government’s actions must align with its rhetoric, demonstrating that it is capable of managing the nation’s resources judiciously.

If Tinubu’s administration truly seeks to transform Nigeria’s economy, it must embrace transparency, accountability, and fiscal discipline. The $20 billion savings should not be an abstract concept but a tangible resource deployed to uplift the nation. Anything less undermines the sacrifices Nigerians have made and erodes confidence in the government’s reform agenda.

The choice is clear: draw from the savings or risk perpetuating a cycle of debt that future generations will bear. It is time for the government to practice what it preaches and ensure that its economic decisions reflect the interests of the Nigerian people.

The political climate in Nigeria has often been shaped by power struggles, aspirations, and the belief in political entitlements. A recurring feature in the country’s politics is the emergence of individuals who consider public office as their birthright, believing that their time has come due to their family’s legacy, personal ambition, or political networks. The rise of the phrase “Emilokan,” famously coined by Bola Ahmed Tinubu, which translates to “It’s my turn” in Yoruba, marked a crucial point in Nigerian political history. However, this phrase, while marking a milestone in Tinubu’s quest for the presidency, has evolved into a broader conversation about political entitlement, especially with the increasing discussions about his son, Sheyi Tinubu, and his ambitions to become the governor of Lagos State in the 2027 gubernatorial election.

While “Emilokan” symbolized Tinubu’s claim to the presidency, “Sheyi-Lokan” is now gaining traction as the battle for Lagos governorship inches closer. Sheyi Tinubu, son of the current president, is being touted by some as the anointed successor to govern Lagos State. This development raises serious concerns about political entitlement, the consolidation of power within one family, and the disregard for democratic principles in the selection of leaders.

In the lead-up to the 2023 presidential election, Bola Tinubu’s slogan, “Emilokan,” was more than just a campaign catchphrase. It encapsulated the belief that after decades of political maneuvering, loyalty to party structures, and his strategic positioning, it was his turn to lead the country. The slogan gained traction among his supporters, and while it helped secure his election, it also struck a chord with critics who viewed it as a reflection of political entitlement, a belief that power should pass to an individual not based on merit or popular demand, but based on a perceived right or seniority.

This sense of entitlement embedded in the slogan reflected a broader issue in Nigerian politics: the culture of dynastic rule and the perception that political office is a reward for loyalty, time served, or lineage, rather than a mandate earned through service to the people. While “Emilokan” may have appealed to a certain section of the electorate, it raised questions about whether Nigeria’s political system was evolving into one where leadership was determined not by public consensus but by political calculations and familial connections.

Fast forward to 2027, and the political scene in Lagos is once again being overshadowed by the notion of entitlement, albeit this time, it may likely come under the banner of “Sheyi-Lokan.” This slogan, which translates to “It’s Sheyi’s turn,” is gaining momentum as the son of Bola Tinubu, Sheyi Tinubu, is increasingly being positioned as the next governor of Lagos State. Much like his father, Sheyi is expected to be thrust into the spotlight and emerge as the chosen candidate, with his path to the governorship seemingly preordained.

This development has sparked a new wave of debate about political entitlement in Nigeria. The concept of “Sheyi-Lokan” is troubling not only because it mirrors the “Emilokan” phenomenon, but also because it brings with it the dangerous implication that leadership in Lagos State, one of Nigeria’s most influential regions, could potentially become another family legacy. The narrative is that Sheyi Tinubu, as the son of the president and a prominent figure within the political machine that controls Lagos, is automatically entitled to lead the state, irrespective of his qualifications, vision for the future, or the needs of the people.

The potential rise of Sheyi Tinubu as Lagos State’s next governor highlights a more systemic issue in Nigerian politics: the dominance of political dynasties. For decades, Nigerian politics has been characterized by the dominance of a few families and individuals, whose political fortunes are often passed down from one generation to the next. This trend has led to a situation where positions of power are seen as family inheritances, rather than opportunities for new leadership and innovation.

The emergence of Sheyi Tinubu as the likely candidate for Lagos State governor would be another step in consolidating political power within the Tinubu family. This is not an isolated case, there are several other examples in Nigerian politics where familial ties have been central to the rise of political figures. What makes the Tinubu case more concerning is the fact that the family is already entrenched at the highest levels of government, with Bola Tinubu serving as president, and the looming prospect of his son continuing the family’s political legacy in Lagos.

The focus on family loyalty and seniority rather than merit or popular choice undermines the principles of democracy. Political office should not be a birthright or an entitlement, but a position earned through public service, accountability, and a clear vision for the future. The idea that Sheyi Tinubu, as the son of the president, should be automatically considered for the governorship is a troubling sign of the growing undemocratic tendencies within Nigeria’s political system.

The increasing discussion surrounding Sheyi Tinubu’s candidacy for Lagos State governor represents a deeper issue: a governance crisis in the making. If political offices are passed on based on familial ties, rather than the popular will of the people, it signals a retreat from democratic ideals. The people of Lagos, and indeed all Nigerians, should be given the power to elect their leaders based on merit, competence, and the ability to address the pressing challenges facing the state or nation.

Political entitlement, whether under the guise of “Emilokan” or “Sheyi-Lokan”, shifts the focus of governance from the needs of the people to the interests of the political elite. When political power is consolidated in the hands of a few, the quality of leadership diminishes. This concentration of power stifles innovation, accountability, and the possibility of true democratic change. Instead of vibrant political competition, Nigerians are left with a political environment where choices are made based on loyalty and family lineage, rather than the best candidate for the job.

Lagos, one of Nigeria’s most populous and economically influential states, deserves a leadership that reflects the needs of its diverse population. It should be a state where anyone, regardless of their family background, can aspire to lead based on their abilities and vision for the future. The political landscape should not be one where power is inherited or automatically granted to the offspring of current political leaders. Instead, it should be a system that encourages free and fair elections, where candidates are chosen based on their merit, competence, and the ability to address the issues that matter most to the people.

In fact, there should be need for a shift in political culture. The rise of Sheyi Tinubu as the next potential governor of Lagos is a clear reflection of the political entitlement that has plagued Nigerian politics for years. For Nigeria to move forward, there must be a shift in political culture, a move away from dynastic politics and entitlement-based leadership to a system that is truly democratic, where leaders are chosen based on their qualifications and their commitment to serving the people.

A democracy thrives when its leaders are accountable to the electorate, and when positions of power are earned through transparent, competitive processes. Nigeria must move away from the dangerous notion that political office is a family heirloom and instead focus on nurturing a system where leadership is earned, not inherited. This shift is essential if Nigeria is to fully realize the promises of democracy, equity, and good governance.

Without a doubt, the political trajectory that seems to be shaping up for Sheyi Tinubu is a stark reminder of the dangers of political entitlement. Whether it is “Emilokan” or “Sheyi-Lokan,” both slogans reflect a political culture that prioritizes familial legacy over the democratic values that should guide leadership selection. It is time for Nigerians to demand a political system where leadership is truly earned and where the best candidates rise to the top, not because of who they are related to, but because of what they can offer to the people. Only then can Nigeria’s democracy flourish and reach its full potential.

For decades, the notion of consumer protection in Nigeria has largely been confined to government agencies and statutory bodies like the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC). Many Nigerians assumed that holding businesses accountable and protecting consumer rights were solely the purview of government regulators. However, the landscape of consumer advocacy is undergoing a transformation, and at the center of this change is a determined individual: VeryDarkMan. Through relentless efforts and a robust presence on social media, VeryDarkMan is challenging this erroneous belief and empowering ordinary Nigerians to take ownership of their consumer rights.

VeryDarkMan, whose real name is Martins Vincent Otse, is no ordinary advocate. Armed with an unwavering passion for justice and a keen understanding of the challenges consumers face in Nigeria, he has risen to prominence as a bold and relentless voice for the downtrodden. Before his emergence, consumer advocacy in Nigeria was often seen as bureaucratic and ineffective. Many Nigerians had resigned themselves to poor services, substandard products, and unresponsive companies, believing there was no recourse for their grievances.

Through his activism, VeryDarkMan has proven that consumer protection does not have to rely solely on government intervention. By using social media as his primary tool, he has redefined what it means to fight for consumers. His viral videos, in which he exposes exploitative business practices and seeks justice for affected customers, have captured the attention of millions. He is not just an advocate; he is a movement, inspiring others to stand up for their rights.

VeryDarkMan’s impact can be measured by the numerous cases he has taken up on behalf of ordinary Nigerians. One of his most notable efforts was his campaign against a prominent real estate company accused of defaulting on agreements with several clients. Many of the victims, who had invested their life savings into the company, thought they had no chance of reclaiming their money. However, VeryDarkMan amplified their voices, exposing the company’s alleged malpractice and pushing for resolutions.

Another instance of his advocacy involved a telecom provider whose services were causing significant distress to customers due to overbilling and poor network quality. Through a series of investigations and public engagements, VeryDarkMan rallied affected users to file collective complaints. His efforts eventually forced the company to address the issues, proving that even powerful corporations are not beyond accountability.

His work extends beyond exposing corporate malpractice. VeryDarkMan also educates consumers on their rights, teaching them how to document grievances, file complaints, and seek redress through legal and regulatory channels. His emphasis on knowledge and empowerment ensures that his advocacy has a lasting impact, creating a generation of informed and proactive consumers.

Before VeryDarkMan, the average Nigerian consumer had little faith in the possibility of justice. Today, there is a growing awareness that consumer protection is not just the government’s responsibility. His work has highlighted the importance of collective action and personal responsibility. By demonstrating that one person’s determination can lead to systemic change, VeryDarkMan has inspired a new wave of citizen-led advocacy.

Moreover, his work underscores the power of social media in the fight for justice. Platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter have become his battlegrounds, and he wields them masterfully. By sharing stories, mobilizing public opinion, and calling out errant businesses, he has turned social media into a tool for accountability.

While VeryDarkMan has proven that individuals can effect change, it is crucial to recognize that his work would be more impactful with robust institutional support. The Nigerian government has a responsibility to protect advocates like him, ensuring that they can continue their work without fear of harassment or intimidation. Activists often face significant risks, from threats to their safety to attempts at legal suppression. It is imperative that the government strengthens its legal frameworks to protect advocates and whistleblowers who are fighting for the public good.

On the flip side, the masses also have a role to play. Advocacy thrives on collective action, and VeryDarkMan’s success stories are a testament to the power of unity. By supporting his efforts, sharing his campaigns, and joining in the fight for accountability, citizens can amplify his impact. Encouraging such individuals is not just about cheering them on; it is about actively participating in the change they are driving.

VeryDarkMan’s approach offers valuable lessons for consumer advocacy in Nigeria. First, his focus on storytelling has been particularly effective. By personalizing the struggles of affected consumers, he creates narratives that resonate with a broad audience. His ability to combine emotion with facts ensures that his campaigns are both compelling and credible.

Second, his use of digital platforms shows how technology can bridge the gap between consumers and advocates. In a country where many people lack access to traditional legal or regulatory channels, social media serves as an accessible and democratic space for justice.

Finally, his relentless drive reminds us that change often begins with one person’s courage. By stepping up to fill a gap in the system, VeryDarkMan has shown that anyone can make a difference, no matter how daunting the odds.

As VeryDarkMan continues to redefine the consumer protection landscape, the importance of supporting his work cannot be overstated. Advocacy is a demanding and often thankless endeavor, requiring immense personal and financial sacrifice. While his work has garnered significant attention, it is essential that he receives sustained encouragement from the public.

The government, too, must recognize the value of his contributions and work to create an environment where consumer advocates can thrive. By fostering collaboration between independent advocates like VeryDarkMan and regulatory bodies like the FCCPC, Nigeria can build a more robust and inclusive consumer protection framework.

VeryDarkMan’s work is a beacon of hope in a system where consumer rights have long been neglected. He has not only exposed the flaws in Nigeria’s consumer protection mechanisms but also demonstrated the power of individual and collective action. By challenging the erroneous belief that consumer protection is solely the responsibility of the government, he has empowered Nigerians to take ownership of their rights.

As he continues his advocacy, it is incumbent upon all of us, government officials, businesses, and citizens alike, to support his efforts. Advocacy is not a one-man show; it is a collective journey toward a fairer and more just society. In VeryDarkMan, Nigeria has found a champion for consumer rights. Now, it is up to us to ensure that his voice remains loud and his impact enduring.

In moments of uncertainty, indecision can feel like the safest option. Yet, history and faith teach us that the refusal to act is often the most dangerous choice. The story of the four lepers in 2 Kings 7 provides a profound lesson on the necessity of taking bold steps, even in dire circumstances. Their courageous decision not only altered their destiny but also saved an entire city. Their story is a timeless call to action for anyone feeling stuck or overwhelmed by life’s challenges.

The narrative unfolds in Samaria, a city besieged by the Arameans. Starvation gripped the inhabitants, reducing them to desperate measures. It was a period of unimaginable hardship where hope seemed a distant memory. Outside the city walls sat four lepers, ostracized because of their disease. Their plight was even more precarious, they could neither seek refuge within the city nor rely on any assistance from others.

The lepers found themselves at a crossroads, grappling with a stark reality. They could remain where they were and die of starvation, enter the city and perish with the people, or venture into the Aramean camp, risking death but potentially finding sustenance. Their reasoning was simple yet profound: “Why sit we here until we die?”

This pivotal question sparked an extraordinary decision that reshaped their fate and that of Samaria.

Without a doubt, there are poignant lessons to learn from the lepers’ decisive action. First is to recognize the need for change.  The first step toward decisive action is acknowledging that staying in the same situation is no longer viable. The lepers’ clarity about their predicament is striking. They did not sugarcoat their reality. They faced the brutal truth: inaction guaranteed their demise.

In our lives, the failure to confront uncomfortable truths often leads to stagnation. Whether it is an unfulfilling job, a toxic relationship, or a personal habit hindering growth, the inability to recognize the urgency of change can trap us in cycles of despair.

Take a moment to reflect: Are you “sitting” in a situation where action is long overdue? The courage to admit that change is necessary is the foundation of transformation.

Lesson 2 is the need to embrace the uncertainty of action. Thus, the lepers chose the only option that held even a glimmer of hope, venturing into the enemy’s camp. They knew the risks: the Arameans could kill them. But they also understood that staying put guaranteed their demise. Their decision exemplifies a crucial principle: sometimes, the possibility of success lies on the other side of uncertainty.

Life often presents us with choices that feel like a leap into the unknown. Starting a new business, pursuing a passion, or leaving a familiar but unproductive environment can be daunting. Yet, as the lepers demonstrated, the willingness to take risks can lead to breakthroughs we never imagined.

When faced with uncertainty, ask yourself: What is the cost of doing nothing?

Lesson 3 is that small steps can lead to big miracles. As the lepers made their way to the Aramean camp, they had no guarantees of survival. Yet, their simple act of moving forward set the stage for a divine intervention. God amplified the sound of their footsteps, causing the Aramean army to flee in terror, leaving behind abundant supplies.

This miraculous outcome underscores an important truth: our small steps of faith often activate forces beyond our control. Taking action, no matter how small, creates momentum. The lepers’ journey was not dramatic; it was a slow, deliberate walk toward what they believed was their only chance. But that humble effort was enough.

In your journey, don’t underestimate the power of small, consistent actions. A single step in the right direction can open doors you never knew existed.

In a similar vein, lesson 4 is that your courage can impact others. The lepers could have hoarded the food and treasures they discovered. Instead, they returned to the city to share the good news, saving countless lives. Their story reminds us that our decisions can have a ripple effect, influencing not only our own lives but also the lives of others.

This is a powerful motivator for taking action. Whether it is pursuing a dream, standing up for what is right, or addressing a societal issue, your courage can inspire and uplift those around you. The lepers did not set out to be heroes; they simply acted on their instincts for survival. Yet, their choice brought salvation to an entire city.

Consider how your actions today might positively affect others. What gifts, talents, or opportunities do you have that could benefit those around you?

Still in a similar vein, lesson 5 is that faith and action go hand in hand. The lepers’ story is a testament to the interplay between faith and action. While they took a practical step toward survival, it was God who orchestrated the miraculous outcome. This balance is crucial. Faith without action is wishful thinking, while action without faith can lead to burnout and frustration.

As the Bible teaches in James 2:26, “Faith without works is dead.” The lepers’ faith was demonstrated through their decision to move forward despite uncertainty. Similarly, we are called to act in faith, trusting that God will meet us where our efforts end.

What areas of your life require both faith and action? How can you combine trust in God with practical steps toward your goals?

The question, “Why sit we here until we die?” resonates across centuries as a challenge to overcome complacency and fear. It speaks to anyone feeling stuck, overwhelmed, or unsure of what to do next. Whether in your personal life, career, or spiritual journey, the story of the four lepers offers timeless wisdom:

Acknowledge your reality. Don’t shy away from the truth of your situation, Take a risk, and embrace the uncertainty of action, knowing it is often the path to growth. Start small, even the smallest steps can lead to extraordinary outcomes. Think beyond yourself, your courage could inspire and benefit others and always trust God as combining faith with action allow divine intervention to work through your efforts.

The story of the four lepers is not just a tale of survival; it is a call to action. Their courage and faith transformed their lives and saved their city. It challenges us to examine our own situations and ask: “Are we waiting passively for circumstances to change, or are we willing to take decisive action?”

As you navigate the challenges in your life, remember their question: “Why sit we here until we die?” Let it inspire you to rise, move forward, and trust that the steps you take today can lead to a brighter, more fulfilling tomorrow.

The presidency has shared details of what President Bola Tinubu and his wife, Oluremi Tinubu, would be doing on a three-day official visit to Paris, France.

Naija News reports Tinubu, accompanied by First Lady Senator Oluremi Tinubu, arrived in Paris on Wednesday evening for a three-day State Visit to fortify Nigeria-France relations.

Following the arrival, the Special Adviser to President Tinubu on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, in a statement on Wednesday, narrated that during the visit, the Nigerian leader will attend a distinguished reception at the Palais de l’Élysée.

Also, President Tinubu, during the visit, will address initiatives to boost youth exchange programs and enhance skills, engage in strategic political and diplomatic discussions, while both leaders will attend a session hosted by the France-Nigeria Business Council, coordinating private sector involvement in economic development.

The presidential aide also highlighted that the French First Lady, and Nigeria’s First Lady will discuss empowering women, children, and vulnerable populations.

Before departure, President Tinubu and his wife will attend a state dinner put together by their hosts.

The full statement reads: “President Bola Tinubu, accompanied by First Lady Senator Oluremi Tinubu, arrived in Paris on Wednesday evening for a three-day State Visit to fortify Nigeria-France relations.

“Touching down at Orly Airport around 5:10 p.m., President Tinubu was welcomed with full military honours by the French Republican Guard, marking a ceremonial start to his visit.

“The official engagements will begin on Thursday at the historic Les Invalides, where French President Emmanuel Macron and First Lady Brigitte Macron will warmly receive President Tinubu. The visit will continue with a distinguished reception at the Palais de l’Élysée, honouring the Nigerian leader.

“The visit aims to enhance bilateral ties, focusing on key areas such as agriculture, security, education, health, youth engagement, innovation, and energy transition. It promises substantial benefits for Nigeria.

“In collaboration with President Macron, President Tinubu will address initiatives to boost youth exchange programs and enhance skills in automation, entrepreneurship, and leadership.

“The visit includes strategic political and diplomatic discussions on shared values concerning finance, solid minerals, trade and investment, and communication.

“Additionally, both leaders will attend a session hosted by the France-Nigeria Business Council, coordinating private sector involvement in economic development.

“Brigitte Macron and Nigeria’s First Lady will discuss empowering women, children, and vulnerable populations through Nigeria’s First Lady’s Renewed Hope Initiative.

“President Tinubu and his wife will attend a state dinner hosted by the French President before their departure.”

[NaijaNews]