In the tapestry of life’s challenges and triumphs, the words of Philippians 2:3-4 offer a guiding light:  “Do nothing out of selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility consider others as more important than yourselves. Everyone should look not to his own interests, but rather to the interests of others.”  

This scripture is more than just a spiritual admonition; it is a framework for leadership, a beacon for service, and a call for selfless governance. In the context of Nigeria’s political landscape, these verses resonate deeply, highlighting what is sorely missing in the corridors of power, humility, empathy, and a commitment to the common good.

Nigerian politics has long been plagued by the twin evils of selfish ambition and conceit. Many politicians view public office as an opportunity to enrich themselves and their cronies rather than a platform to serve the people who entrusted them with power. This culture of self-centered governance is evident in the disparity between the lavish lifestyles of those in power and the daily struggles of the average Nigerian.  

While millions grapple with poverty, unemployment, and lack of access to basic amenities, political leaders flaunt ostentatious wealth. It is as though the words of Philippians 2:3-4 are forgotten, replaced by a drive for personal gain at the expense of the nation’s welfare.

The scripture challenges leaders to look beyond themselves and prioritize the interests of others. This is not a call for performative humility but for genuine servant leadership. True leadership, as modeled by Christ, is rooted in selflessness, empathy, and the recognition that every decision made impacts real lives.

For Nigeria’s politicians, this means listening to the people. Therefore, governance must begin with understanding the needs of the citizenry. Leaders must leave their ivory towers and engage directly with the people they serve. Policies crafted in isolation, without input from the masses, often fail to address the real issues.  

Secondly, Nigerian politicians must fight for equity and justice. They should understand that humility in governance means creating systems that work for everyone, not just a privileged few. It means ensuring that resources are distributed fairly, infrastructure reaches all corners of the nation, and every Nigerian has a chance to thrive.  

Thirdly, Nigerian politicians must be accountable to the people. Being accountable to the people is germane for Nigerian politicians as the interest of the nation must supersede personal gain. Politicians should be willing to answer for their actions, being transparent in their dealings and open to criticism.  

Fourthly, Nigerian should always endeavor to be leading sacrificially.  This is as true leaders often make sacrifices for the greater good. This may mean rejecting the allure of corruption, working long hours to solve pressing issues, or prioritizing the welfare of citizens over personal comfort.

In fact, the reason for demanding the foregoing expectations from Nigerian politicians as highlighted in the foregoing viewpoints cannot be pooh-poohed with mere wave of the hands as the Nigerian Reality is unarguably that of a leadership deficit.   

From independence to the present, Nigeria has experienced a litany of unfulfilled promises and missed opportunities, largely due to the lack of selfless leadership. The selfish ambition of a few has robbed the nation of its potential.  

The recent removal of fuel subsidies and the palliative measures proposed have starkly exposed the gap between the ruling class and the people. While politicians speak of economic reform and growth, the man in the street struggles to afford a meal. A true commitment to Philippians 2:3-4 would mean crafting policies that ease the burden on the masses, not exacerbate their struggles.  

Consider the ongoing failure to address key sectors such as education, healthcare, and security. A leader who genuinely places others before themselves would prioritize these areas, knowing they are the bedrock of a thriving society.  

While Nigeria has its share of challenges, there have been shining examples of leaders who embodied humility and service. Leaders like Nelson Mandela remind us of what is possible when a politician prioritizes the interests of the people above personal ambition. Mandela’s willingness to forgive and work towards a united South Africa serves as a template for leaders everywhere.  

In Nigeria, we have seen glimpses of such leadership in individuals who have dedicated themselves to public service with integrity. These examples, though rare, remind us that humility in governance is not a myth but a possibility.

For Nigeria to rise above its challenges, our leaders must embrace the principles of Philippians 2:3-4. It begins with a shift in mindset, thus, from rulers to servants. In fact, given the foregoing backdrop, politicians must see themselves as servants of the people, entrusted with the responsibility of governance.  

In a similar vein, there must be a shift in mindset, from personal gain to public good. Without a doubt, decisions should prioritize what benefits the majority, not the pockets of a few.  Also, there should be a shift in mindset from conceit to collaboration.  In fact, leadership requires collaboration with all stakeholders, citizens, civil society, and even political opponents, to build a stronger nation.  

Contextually analyzing this issue from the perspective of a role for citizens, it is expedient opine that   while this article focuses on politicians, the responsibility also lies with the electorate. Nigerians must demand accountability, transparency, and humility from their leaders. Elections should be a time to reward selfless service and reject selfish ambition.  

Moreover, citizens can embody these principles in their daily lives, fostering a culture of humility and service that transcends political affiliations and strengthens the nation’s moral fabric.  

Philippians 2:3-4 challenges all of us, especially those in positions of power, to act selflessly and prioritize the needs of others. Nigeria’s politicians must internalize these values if the country is to move forward. The current realities demand leaders who will serve with humility, placing the interests of the people above their own.

This is not just a spiritual ideal; it is a practical necessity. Selfless leadership is the cornerstone of good governance and the pathway to a better Nigeria. Let every leader remember that true greatness lies not in how much you accumulate for yourself but in how much you give to those you serve.

In Nigeria, the media landscape is as dynamic as it is fraught with challenges. Among these challenges, the misinterpretation and practical application of defamation laws often leave journalists in a precarious position. While theoretical understanding gained in journalism schools equips media practitioners with foundational knowledge, the realities in the field often reveal stark gaps between what is taught and how defamation law is applied.  

The present case between renowned legal luminary Afe Babalola and activist Dele Farotimi, though not involving a journalist, serves as a powerful inspiration for this discussion. The defamation allegations in this case are being viewed through the prism of criminality rather than civility, a departure from what is taught in journalism classes. In journalism schools, defamation is addressed within a civil framework aimed at restitution and reputation repair, not criminalization. The handling of the Babalola-Farotimi case underscores the urgent need to critically examine how defamation laws are interpreted and applied in Nigeria.

Defamation, under Nigerian law, refers to any published or spoken statement that injures the reputation of another person, exposing them to hatred, ridicule, or contempt. It is divided into two categories: “libel”, which covers written statements, and “slander”, which pertains to spoken words. In legal theory, for a statement to be deemed defamatory, it must be proven to be false, published to a third party, and damaging to the plaintiff’s reputation.  

Journalism schools emphasize the civil nature of defamation cases, teaching that redress is sought through the courts to repair reputations or seek monetary compensation. Criminalizing defamation, as seen in certain Nigerian cases, deviates from these foundational principles, creating an atmosphere of fear and intimidation among journalists and other commentators.

In journalism schools, aspiring reporters are taught the importance of verifying facts, seeking the truth, and exercising caution when reporting stories that could damage an individual’s reputation. Students are also introduced to defenses against defamation, such as the truth of the statement, privilege (absolute or qualified), fair comment on a matter of public interest, and lack of malice.

These principles instill a sense of responsibility and accountability, yet the real world often presents journalists with a different and more hostile reality.

Once in the field, Nigerian journalists face a different reality. They often work in an environment characterized by inadequate legal protections, institutional corruption, and an uneven judicial system. The interpretation and enforcement of defamation laws are frequently skewed to favor the influential and powerful.  

The ongoing legal battle between Afe Babalola and Dele Farotimi underscores the disparity between theoretical understanding and real-world practice. Farotimi, known for his vocal activism, has been accused of making defamatory remarks about Babalola. Instead of handling the matter civilly, as defamation cases are traditionally managed, the case has been treated with undertones of criminality.  

This approach not only intensifies the ordeal for the accused but also sends a chilling message to journalists and public commentators. When defamation is treated as a criminal matter, it raises questions about the erosion of free speech and the weaponization of legal frameworks to stifle dissent.

Cases to be referenced in this context cut across that of Rufai Oseni and the N5 Billion Libel Suit,  “People Gazette and the Malami Report”, and  “Agba Jalingo’s Prolonged Legal Battle”.  

Detailing the foregoing cases, it is germane to explain in this context that Arise TV journalist Rufai Oseni faced a N5 billion lawsuit from Ogun State Governor Dapo Abiodun over comments questioning the governor’s qualifications. This case exemplifies the disproportionate financial claims often leveraged to silence journalists.

In a similar vein, an investigative report implicating Nigeria’s Attorney General, Abubakar Malami, led to threats of legal action, despite being evidence-backed. The threat of lawsuits like this stifles investigative journalism and undermines public interest reporting.

Also, Cross River State journalist Agba Jalingo faced both defamation and cybercrime charges for his critical reports on the state governor. The drawn-out legal proceedings highlight how defamation laws can be weaponized to deter critical reporting.

Against the foregoing backdrop, it is not a misnomer to opine that challenges Journalists face in practice are varied, and manifest in the form of cost of legal defense.  This can be explained from the perspective of the fact that the financial burden of defending against defamation lawsuits often cripples journalists and media houses, leaving them vulnerable to coercion or settlements.

Looking at the issue from the perspective of lack of legal knowledge, it is germane to opine that not a few journalists lack a deep understanding of how to navigate legal disputes, exposing them to exploitation by litigants.

In a similar vein is the weaponization of the law as defamation laws are frequently wielded as tools of intimidation, particularly by the powerful, to suppress unfavorable reports.

Also, is weak institutional support, and this can be seen in Journalists who often face legal battles alone, as media organizations and unions fail to provide adequate backing.

Without a doubt, there is the need for reform. In fact, the cases highlighted above, particularly Afe Babalola versus Dele Farotimi, show the urgent need for reforms in the interpretation and application of defamation laws. 

Given the foregoing, recommendations in this context include enhanced legal training.  Therefore, Journalism schools should include practical workshops on defamation law, featuring legal professionals to prepare journalists for real-world scenarios.  

In a similar vein, media organizations and unions must create frameworks to provide legal assistance to journalists by providing Pro-Bono legal support. 

Also, there is need for judicial reform, and to achieve this, Nigerian courts should prioritize distinguishing valid defamation claims from those designed to harass journalists.  

Close to the foregoing is the entrenchment of law review.  This is as a review of Nigeria’s defamation laws is necessary to ensure alignment with international best practices that balance free speech with protection against reputational harm.  

In fact, there is the need for media accountability. Meaning, Journalists must adhere to ethical standards, including fact-checking and fairness, to avoid genuine defamation claims.

The gap between theoretical understanding and real-world application of defamation laws poses significant risks to free speech and journalism in Nigeria. Cases like Afe Babalola versus Dele Farotimi expose the tendency to weaponize the law, moving away from its intended purpose as a civil remedy. Bridging this gap requires systemic reforms, stronger institutional support, and a renewed commitment to ethical journalism. Only then can Nigerian journalists effectively fulfill their watchdog role without fear of undue legal intimidation.

The Minister of Works, David Umahi, has said that if Nigeria should close its widening infrastructure gap, projects cannot be funded by the government alone, but with a combination of bonds and loans.

A statement in Abuja yesterday by the minister’s spokesman, Uchenna Orji, noted that Umahi was speaking during an investigative hearing of the Senate Committee on Works on contractors’ slow pace of work on some road projects.

Umahi stated that President Bola Tinubu remains one of the few leaders who have taken the decision to give priority to inherited projects.

While lauding the lawmakers for closely watching the contractors to ensure value for money as well as speedy delivery of all the ongoing road projects, the minister highlighted current impediments, but assured that the President was tackling the situation.

He said: “It’s very rare for a president to come on board and he decided to ignore new projects and decided to take on all the inherited projects and do them at the same time. It’s very rare.

“And we have a country where we want to make an omelette, but we don’t want to strike an egg. Road projects cannot and will never be executed to the satisfaction of the public by using budgetary allocations.

“There must be different kinds of funding. These different kinds of funding must have to come from either bond or loan  to do the job. But the public is saying, no, the president is taking a loan.

“But the president is taking a loan to invest in infrastructure development. And that’s what every developed country follows.”

Speaking on the efforts made by  the ministry on the Odukpani-Aba-Odukpani-Ikot Ekpene road, he disclosed that the thickness of the asphalt pavement has been increased to ensure longevity.

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Works, Senator Barinada Mpigi, in his remarks, stated that the Senate was prepared to fully back actions that hold contractors accountable and put an end to practices that delay project delivery timelines.

He warned that it was no longer business as usual for contractors to collect tax payers’ money and delay in completing the projects.

“His (Umahi’s) actions in revoking underperforming agreements and ensuring that public funds are redirected to more capable contractors reflect a deep commitment to the Renewed Hope Agenda of this administration.

“This agenda prioritises infrastructure as the backbone of economic revitalisation, and we in the senate will support every step taken to ensure its success,” he noted.

He also decried the hardship contractors’ behaviour has caused road users, stressing that the deplorable condition had resulted in devastating consequences with  precious lives lost on the highways.

Mpigi added: “Contractors, including RCC, have received substantial funds, including the N15 billion that was injected into this project, yet delivery remains elusive.

“The other stretch of the East-West Road has contractors like RCC, Setraco, and Gitto who have been paid billions, yet the pace of work is far from acceptable,” the senator added.

Meanwhile, the Senate Committee on Works has given Julius Berger Plc an ultimatum to appear before it.

In a motion moved and adopted during the investigative hearing, the Senate resolved that it would have no option than to issue a warrant of arrest on Julius Berger Plc should it fail to appear before it as scheduled.

Moving the motion, a member of the Committee, Senator Asuquo Ekpenyong said: “Messrs. Julius Berger Nigeria Limited is not here. Now, my understanding is that Messrs. Julius Berger Nigeria Plc bid, was selected, and awarded this job.

“Funds from taxpayers across this country were disbursed to them. Our understanding is that they showed up on site for a brief period and have since abandoned the site.

“It is our collective resolve as a committee that under the new minister’s rule, Julius Berger should be produced to this committee in 24 hours,  failure of which will lead to our invoking our constitutional powers and issuing a warrant of arrest on messrs. Julius Berger Nigeria Plc.”

[Thisday]

Dear Readers,

As I have had the course to point out in other epistles, “How did we get here?” is a refrain often heard among a defined group of the society that you probably belong to -as a reader of these notes. It works this way: in the face of news of violence by criminals and terrorists, or about the sloppiness of public officers, preposterous demands and ideas from organised groups in the society, and the desperate and desolate state of citizens and consumers, I am sure that just like me, you have found yourself asking or being asked the question “how did we get here?”. We tend to hear and use such a common refrain when faced with heart-wrenching events and the uncomforting state of the country. The “How did we get here?” refrain comes up, especially when the sad events we are informed about or have to deal with are either totally alien to our usual or imagined way of being a people or contrary to our projected or desired idea of Nigeria.

I have often replied that “we got here” because of our inability to recognise the possible drama, where not tragedy, a comedy can lead to. Evil rarely happens all of a sudden; it tends to come gradually from lone voices and little accidents. It then grows into disaster when we don’t curb or at least recognise it for what it is and when it rears its head. It is easy in this context to see how correct the Spanish essayist and philosopher Baltasar Gracián is when he warns us, “Never open the door to a lesser evil, for other and greater ones invariably slink in after it”.

The Muslim Rights Concerns Group, known as MURIC, is, by all accounts, a numerically small group whose strength lies in its access to media and other communication channels. Many of us started noticing the group on WhatsApp and then in the Press. Let us be clear: there is nothing wrong with being small and no particular virtue in being big. MURIC is led and represented mainly by a seemingly innocuous scholar of Islamic studies called Professor Ishaq Akintola. He is now more known for his MURIC activities than his dedication to Islamic eschatology. It is what an individual or a group does that matters.

And therein lies the rub because for some time now, MURIC, by a deliberate, voluntary and coordinated effort, has consistently and growingly become the leading voice for unnecessary and toxic divisiveness. A simple search online will give you a clear idea of what I mean. I suggest you type in MURIC into any search engine of your choice. The result will amaze you.

This last time we dedicated some time to Professor Ishaq Akintola and his MURIC on this page was when he, in the name of MURIC, called for a rejection of Babajide Sanwo-Olu as governor of Lagos State, not because of any act or omission as governor. Then, the rejection was not justified by any allegation of anti-Muslim or anti-Islamic policies or programmes. It did not even accuse Sanwo-Olu of discriminatory appointments and nominations. Instead, it was based on a call for a rotation that hinged on flawed arithmetic and ahistorical understanding of Lagos. MURIC wanted Babajide Sanwo-Olu out of office simply because he is a Christian.

We pointed out then that Yorubaland, where MURIC operates freely and is recognised and given a chair on discussion tables, rightly prides itself on its cosmopolitanism. We reflected aloud then that in Yorubaland and culture, there is no basis for religious separation, let alone religious discrimination; everybody is related to someone from another religion.

Please note that saying everybody is related to someone from another religion in Yorubaland is a factual, not a symbolic, statement. This harmonious lifestyle has allowed Yoruba people to separate religion from politics easily, and it has never mattered to them how a politician prays or what they eat. The easily predictable effect of such arrangements is that, in most cases, merit and personal relationships trump religious sectarianism.

Clearly, such not-so-subtle reflections have affected Professor Ishaq Akintola and his MURIC. They have continued in their ways, and just on the last day of November 2024, they came out to say that GOTV is forcing Christianity on Nigerian Muslims, and they have called on, rather they have instructed the international television outfit to cease transmission of Christian programmes or be faced consequences that range from Muslims de-subscribing from GOTV to other consequences. MURIC gave the station seven days to comply or face its wrath—a sort of fatwa- for the obnoxious, prejudiced and ill-advised practice of televising Christian programmes. Yes, in 2024, Professor Ishaq Akintola considers televising Christian programmes obnoxious, prejudiced and ill-advised.

It is time to tell Professor Ishaq Akintola that he and his MURIC threaten our harmonious living in Yorubaland and that we will soon start treating them as a threat. He has a choice: he and those who think like him can move to where the Taliban rule; we have a duty to save ourselves from his ilk and similar threats.

It is difficult to precisely diagnose why MURIC will want to destroy our enviable harmony. Because there is no clear benefit to most, it is not logical to conclude that of its own volition, MURIC wants to turn Yorubaland into the Nigeria of today wherein division or at least suspicion of division reigns. Such a conclusion will not make sense without explaining why. There are politicians who, for their ambition, need to divide people into religious and ethnic groups. They tend to do so to take advantage of their people and subjugate those different from them. By its admission, MURIC is not a political group. Are we to suspect that MURIC is acting as an agent at the behest of a principal?

Yes, you are right. If such a principal exists and MURIC is an agent, it is because such a principal cannot show their face, and their intention cannot be good for our democracy and harmony.

The freedom that we and even MURIC enjoy and allows us to live in peace and for prosperity, no matter how relative and improvable the situation, is the fruit of a system that enables us to learn, love and trade in harmony, not division and suspicion. It is the duty of all of us to judiciously and jealously guard that harmony and democracy against all those who threaten it openly and consistently.

Our religious leaders and academics, as well as our politicians and the media, must show they have foresight. Today, the threat is MURIC; tomorrow, it might be someone worse.

Anthony Kila is the Institute Director at CIAPS.

For those who are conscious of the loftiness of the Office of the Chief Justice, the victory of the Hon. Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen at the Court of Appeal is cause to heave a sigh of relief, indeed for rejoicing. It was release from the entrapment and weight of dross that had settled on the nation’s soul for nearly five years. I was convinced the trial of Chief Justice Onnoghen was ill-motivated and the judgment perverse. In most countries of the civilized and free world, the Office of a Chief Justice is by far more hallowed than that of a President. The reason is not far to seek. The hallowed chamber of a Chief Justice is indeed one that is rarely discussed and when it is done, it is in whispers! It is an office that is approached with trepidation and in awe. A President is a politician and is exposed. While a President is heard and seen, a Chief Justice must necessarily be an introvert of a sort, heard but not seen—and when heard, only sparingly. What could be a more apt picture to prove this than that painted by General Yakubu Gowon, then the Head of State? It was at an event in Lagos chaired by the then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Dr. Teslim Elias. You can trust the General to draw effortlessly from his armoury of humour. Explaining why he arrived early for the programme, the Head of State said he did not want to be charged with the contempt of court with Justice Elias already seated!!

As I did promise last week, following is one of two articles I wrote in January, 2019, on the trial of the then Chief Justice Walter Onnoghen:
It is in the nature of Nigerian politics that when elections draw close and the contending parties seem equally matched, we begin to witness strange developments. The most dramatic and alarming has to do with charges bordering on assets declaration by Walter Samuel Onnoghen, the Chief Justice of Nigeria. The six-count charge is in public domain. Lawyers have been engaging themselves as they are wont to do in brickbats even before they get to court in their wig and gown, predictably because of the personality and the office involved, and evidently because it is suspected the charges have political undertones—at this late hour. Look at the speed. An attempt was made on Thursday, 09 January, to serve the CJN court papers. He was expected to have studied them and filed his reply the following day, that is by Friday, 10 January, and by Monday, 14 January he was expected to report at the Code of Conduct Tribunal to stand trial and answer to allegations against him by the Code of Conduct Bureau. That is the Chief Justice being treated this way, like a common felon.

Justice Onnoghen was confronted with the charges 36 days to the country’s most crucial elections, the Presidential and National Assembly polls. As I write, the election is only 28 days away. We do not know how the election will go. If it is disputed the CJN will have a pivotal adjudicatory role. When the trial begins at the Code of Conduct Bureau Tribunal, being on trial, the Chief Justice will be required to recuse himself—recuse, a word strange to our lexicon but today made popular and forced into our consciousness by erstwhile dumped Donald Trump’s Attorney-General, Sessions. How anyone expects political meaning will not be read into the move against the Chief Justice beats me hollow. Professor Itse Sagay is right in saying that no one is above the Law. But while that is true what could lend itself to an embarrassment is when and how the forces of the Law are deployed against a Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of Nigeria. The Chief Justice is the chief priest in our Temple of Justice. He is the embodiment of justice and our judicial system. He is chairman of the National Judicial Council and also of the Federal Judicial Service Commission. In these roles he is the face and head of the third arm of the government. In these onerous and sacred responsibilities he is expected to, like Caesar’s wife, be above board. What a Temple connotes is a certain sacredness and sanctuary that bows the spirit.

What happens if the CJN is found not to be above board and unworthy of his high office will necessarily agitate our minds. I will come to this presently.
To begin with, what does the law say? Lawyers are in their elements in matters of this nature, displaying not just knowledge of the law, but skills in the elucidation of the light the law is supposed to beam to the dark recesses of living. And they are at it in the court of public opinion.
“Subject to the provisions of this Constitution”, the Law reads, “every public officer shall within three months after coming into force of this Code of Conduct or immediately after taking office and thereafter:
a). at the end of every four years, and
b). at the end of his term of office, submit to the Code of Conduct Bureau a written declaration of all his properties, assets and liabilities and those of his unmarried children under the age of 18.

“Any statement in such declaration that is found to be false by any authority or person authorized in that behalf to verify it shall be deemed to be breach of this code.’’

A powerful team of 47 senior lawyers have lined up and, indeed, announced their presence to defend the Chief Justice. They are joined by 43 other lawyers who consider themselves up to the task. Their first task is to establish that the Tribunal has no jurisdiction to try a judicial officer without the complaints against him being first examined by the National Judicial Council which can then recommend him to a court or as in this case of assets declaration, to the tribunal established for the purpose. This is also the position of the distinguished lawyer, Aare Afe Babalola. I believe this is to protect the independence of the judiciary as the third arm of the government. If it were not so, an Administration such as Buhari’s which is irritated by the Israelite’s journey of the rule of law in the courts and has complained loudly about its frustration, would have overrun the Judiciary and dealt with matters with great haste and alacrity.

Babalola had this to say: “No country, no matter how well intentioned its political leaders are, can aspire to greatness if its judicial arm is denigrated and held in contempt. While the Judiciary itself must be awake to its huge responsibilities, its efforts in this regard will not be helped by the erosion of its independence. I am of the view that the constitution requires that any infraction by the said judges be firstly investigated and resolved by the National Judicial council to the exclusion of any other body or authority.”

There is, however, another set of lawyers who believe that the Chief Justice is not among public officers covered by immunity. They do not see it as an assault on the Judiciary the way their national association, NBA, is viewing it. It is tempting to ask: “Did the CJN breach the code of conduct or not especially in view of the seriousness of the charges against him?” That is precisely, without conceding the particulars of the charges, what his lawyers are saying, especial without going through the laid down process of the matter first being examined by the National Judicial Council.

The assets in terms of bank lodgments in local and foreign figures in the public domain are incredible. Whether the lodgments are true or false is another kettle of fish. The Chief Justice cannot be unaccustomed to banking rules and sanctions that make it mandatory for banks to report to authority lodgments in excess of a given amount by individuals and companies, rules for financial houses in all countries of the free world. The CJN would know if lodgments into his account were being monitored. If they were true, he would have played into the hands of Buhari’s boys who would be elated to feed our huge appetite we are wont to display for scandals.

Declaration of assets and properties by the CJN is by virtue of his being a judicial officer. This means that although he may not be covered by immunity as a public officer, being a judicial officer makes all the difference. The due process laid down in the constitution for a judicial officer stipulates that his case should first be heard by the National Judicial Council. This exempts him from going straight to the Code of Conduct Tribunal as the court of first instance.

The second point is, what will the spectacle be like seeing the Chief Justice in the court facing criminal charges? The ugliness of such a scenario would be unprecedented and matchless. Just for minute, consider the picture that would flow before the eyes is a Chief Justice in his full regalia, the dignity and power invested in that office standing in the dock! And this is the officer of the law being dragged to stand in the dock and before a junior judge.

It is not without foundation that justices are addressed as lords. It is because it is only justices that have the power of life and death over their fellow human beings. In that office, when they mount the throne, they are assumed to be half a step higher than their fellow men. They are an embodiment of the Law and Justice. And wisdom! These are precipitations of attributes of the higher Laws that govern the entire universe, indeed the whole of Creation. Certainly, the humiliation of a Chief Justice no matter the degree of moral deficit is not just a humiliation of the Judiciary, but of the whole country. Assuming, without conceding, that the charges are true, the question that would arise is: Was due diligence as well as exhaustive background and security checks not carried out before Justice Onnoghen was appointed the Chief Justice of Nigeria?

In my view, since trial of a criminal offence is not statute barred, moving against Justice Onnoghen should have waited until his retirement which is only two years away. By that time, another Chief Justice would have been in the saddle to hold and brandish the sanctity of the office before our gaze and consciousness.
As I reflected more deeply on this event, however, I asked myself how some other person in the Villa, say Obasanjo, for example, would have handled this situation so that unintended grave damage would not be done to the judiciary and the image of the country. What scenario would have played out? This is assuming again that the charges are unassailably true, and I am not saying they are. Armed with the report, Obj would have gone to meet the Chief Justice in his home in the dead of the night, say 2 a.m. After pleasantries and getting his host relaxed with jokes and humour, and perhaps some comestibles, he would bring out a copy of the document and ask the CJN to confirm the highly explosive and confidential report he had with him. Upon confirmation Obj would suggest to him to consider tendering a letter of resignation in view of the effects the report going out would have before the public and the international community. He would say to him that if he did not mind, he might wish to see a draft resignation letter he already brought with him for the CJN. All Onnoghen would need to do would simply be to sign it. Reason for the resignation: On health grounds.

Both would agree to keep their meeting and agreement exceedingly confidential, completely away from the prying eye of the Press. That would be the first visit. On the second visit, Obasanjo would go with Hon. Justice Uwais, a highly revered former CJN and Afe Babalola whom he admires and trusts a lot, to negotiate certain terms of disengagement. The third step Obj would take is after six months or so, he would appoint Hon. Justice Onnoghen an ambassador to Tunisia!
The trial of Chief Justice Walter Samuel Onnoghen will diminish us all. The able lawyers must deploy their knowledge of laws and their skills to ensure that the CJN does not go into the dock. What is at stake is beyond the denigration of a Chief Justice, but the humiliation of the Nigerian Judiciary and the nation as a whole.

First published on 17 January, 2019

About 215 students of Obafemi Awolowo University out of 7,368 will graduate with first-class honours during the 48th convocation ceremonies of the Ivory Tower.

Speaking at the pre-convocation press conference held at the university campus yesterday, the vice chancellor, Professor Adebayo Simeon Bamire, disclosed that the events would take place from December 5th to Saturday, 14th December, adding that students from the 13 faculties of the institution will graduate with varying degrees.

The vice chancellor gave the breakdown of the graduating students as follows: Second Class Upper Division: 2,198, Second Class Lower Division: 2,691, Third Class: 755, Upper Credit: 61, Lower Credit:

33, Pass 62, making 6,015 for classified degrees.

According to him, the unclassified degrees are as follows: Distinction: 13, Pass with Distinction: 59, Pass with Credit: 154, Pass: 169, totalling 395. Postgraduate Degrees are as follows: Postgraduate Diplomas: 74, Master’s Degrees: 708, Doctor of Philosophy (PhD): 186, totalling 958.

Bamire also disclosed that the university would confer honorary doctorates on five exceptional individuals for their significant contributions to humanity, uplifting the less privileged and advancing societal progress through their talents, financial resources, and material support.

According to Bamire, these individuals include Senator Oluremi Tinubu, First Lady of the Federal Republic of Nigeria; Dr. Akinade Akanmu Ogunbiyi, Group Chairman of Mutual Benefit PIc; and Prof. Anthony Adegbulugbe, a distinguished entrepreneur, academic, and engineer.

Others include Prince Karl Olutokun Toriola, a seasoned business leader and telecommunications expert, and Daere Afonya-Akobo, a prominent figure in the oil and gas sector.

 [Leadership]

State govts borrowed N533bn, generated N1.92tn IGR, serviced debt with N658bn

A total of 29 state governors spent N1.994tn on recurrent expenditures, including refreshments, sitting allowances, travelling, and utilities in the first nine months of 2024, findings by The PUNCH have shown.

It was also gathered that the states obtained a N533.29bn loan, while it spent N658.93bn to service its debts owed to local, foreign, and multilateral creditors.

However, these states fell short in their revenue-generating targets, collecting a total sum of N1.92tn as internally generated revenue but fell short of the revenue target of N2.868tn, recording a deficit of N948.28bn.

The recurrent data utilised in this report did not include personnel costs.

An analysis of the fiscal performance of each state, utilizing data from the Q1 to Q3 budget performance reports obtained from each state’s website, revealed a pressing need for stringent measures to prioritise fiscal discipline, especially amidst growing calls to reduce the costs of governance.

This comes despite a 40 per cent increase in the state’s statutory allocations from the Federation Account.

For the first three quarters of the year, our correspondent examined budget implementation data from twenty-nine states; data for six states was not available.

Borno, Gombe, Kaduna, Kano, Kwara, Sokoto, and Ogun states were the ones without the latest data from January to September 2024.

Since the commencement of the current administration, state governments have enjoyed improved monthly allocation mainly due to the elimination of fuel subsidies and the unification of the foreign exchange market.

The Nigeria Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative recently noted that the Federation Accounts Allocation Committee disbursed N3.473tn to the three tiers of government in the second quarter of 2024.

This reflects an increase of N46.77bn (1.42 per cent) compared to the first quarter of 2024.

The Federal Government received N1.102tn, representing 33.35 per cent of the total allocation, while 36 states received N1.337tn (40.47 per cent), and the 774 local government councils shared N864.98bn (26.18 per cent).

A comparison with the previous quarter shows that the Federal Government’s allocation decreased by N41.44bn (3.76 per cent), while state governments saw an increase of N58.13bn (4.29 per cent), and local government councils experienced a rise of N30.82bn (3.57 per cent).

But this improved funding hasn’t translated to an improved standard of living for its citizens.

A breakdown showed that the 29-state government spent N1.994tn on its recurrent expenditure, which included refreshments for guests, sitting allowances to government officials, local and foreign travel expenses, and utility bills.

The general utilities include electricity, internet, telephone charges, water rates, and sewerage charges, among others.

Lagos, Plateau, and Delta States spent the highest on their operating expenses, incurring a cost of N375.19bn, N144.87bn, and N121.54bn, respectively. This was followed by Ondo and Bauchi spending N107.34bn and N99.31bn.

Niger State, under the leadership of Governor Mohammed Umar Bago, was the highest borrower within the review period, obtaining loans worth N79.09bn. Katsina followed with a loan of N72.89bn. Oyo State also got a loan of N62.48bn.

In terms of revenue, Lagos State collected the highest of  N912.17bn, followed by Rivers State with a collection of N269.18bn. Third on the list was Delta (N97.02bn).

A state-by-state analysis revealed that Abia State, led by Governor Alex Otti, spent N17.91bn on operating expenses and generated N22.15bn in revenue, falling short of the N32.14bn revenue target. Additionally, the state borrowed N3.901bn and allocated N10.91bn for debt servicing.

Adamawa State spent N41.45bn on recurrent expenditure, while it earned N9.16bn income out of its revenue of N22.24bn. This state borrowed N10bn and paid N22.68bn to service its debts.

Akwa-Ibom State recurrent spending reached N85.45bn in nine months, N43.98bn more than its generated revenue of N41.47bn in nine months. The state paid N34.47bn as debt service but didn’t borrow.

Anambra State generated more revenue (N28.296bn) than its recurrent spending of N12.70bn. It spent N4.56bn on debt service and didn’t record any borrowing.

The Bauchi government spent N99.31bn on its operating expenses. This state only got N15.92bn out of its budgeted target of N37.03bn but borrowed N33.64bn and paid N27.54bn as debt service.

Bayelsa state got N57.85bn IGR more than its revenue target of N23.87bn. It spent N75.23bn on its operating costs and spent N30.54bn on its debt service.

Governor Hyacinth Alia of Benue state approved the spending of N29.45bn for operating expenses while it collected N8.71bn as revenue out of an N23.91bn target. This state didn’t borrow but spent N5.48bn to service previous loans collected.

Similarly, Cross Rivers spent N55.73bn on recurring expenses, collected N32.42bn IGR, borrowed N20.67bn from its creditors and spent N19.99bn on debt service.

Delta state recurrent expenditure reached N121.54bn in nine months while it earned N97.02bn as revenue out of the N110.3bn target. The oil-rich state serviced its debt with N55.9bn and didn’t obtain any loan.

Also, Ebonyi State spent N37.73bn on its recurrent expenses but earned N15.67bn as revenue. The state borrowed N15.65bn and spent N8.46bn on debt service.

Edo State spent N75.78bn on recurrent expenditure but generated N52.68bn revenue. The state borrowed N12.84bn and spent N27.5bn on its debt service commitments.

Similarly, Ekiti State recurrent spending was N74.73bn, generated N23.16bn revenue, borrowed N11.75bn and spent N12.93bn to service its debts.

Enugu State spent N10.88bn on its operating expenses but got N39.98bn in revenue. This state borrowed N1.39bn and spent N6.93bn on its debt service.

Imo State under Governor Hope Uzodinma, spent N42.75bn on its operating expenses but got N15.24bn as revenue. This state spent N15.94bn to service its debts but didn’t obtain any loan.

While Jigawa incurred N35.69bn as operating expenses, it collected N18.41bn as revenue out of its target of N50.65bn borrowed N744.75m, and N2.17bn on debt service.

Further analysis showed that Katsina State spent N40.73bn on its recurrent expenditure while it generated revenue of N29.95bn. This state increased its loan by N72.89bn and paid N12.78bn as debt service.

Kebbi state recurrent spending was N22.42bn while it generated N7.86bn revenue. It also obtained an N24.59bn loan and paid debt service of N3.42bn.

Kogi State spent N84.48bn on its operating expenses but earned N19.86bn in revenue. The confluence state also obtained N51.68bn as loans and repaid N18.12bn debt.

Lagos state spending on recurrent expenses was N375.19bn, while it earned N912.15bn revenue. The state paid N84.53bn as debt service but didn’t obtain any loan.

Within the same period, Nasarawa spent N42.63bn on its operating expenses but got N22.78bn as revenue, Niger state recurrent expenses reached N41.28bn while it earned N29.22bn.

Ondo State spent N107.34bn on recurring expenses but only earned N24.43bn, Osun State spent N48.87bn but earned N28.86bn as revenue while Oyo State spent N51.24 on its recurrent expenditure, N45.79bn was collected as revenue.

Plateau spent N144.86bn on its recurring expenses but only earned N18.03bn; Rivers State’s spending on its operating costs was N72.69bn, but it earned N269.17bn.

Taraba state spending on recurrent expenditure reached N58.39bn, surpassing its revenue generation of N7.84bn,  resulting in a deficit of N50.55bn. This state borrowed N52.63bn and paid N21.19bn.

Yobe State spent N51.29bn on its recurrent costs but earned N8.14bn as revenue. Also, Zamfara spent N36.34bn on its recurrent expenditure but earned N18.46bn.

Commenting in an interview, A professor of Economics at Babcock University, Segun Ajibola, stated that the enduring problem of high governance expenses had persisted at the state level, with inadequate oversight and accountability resulting in minimal economic benefits for grassroots citizens.

Ajibola, a former president of the Chartered Institute of Bankers, lamented that state assemblies had also abandoned their oversight duties, leaving the state governors to operate with no iota of transparency and accountability.

The Fiscal Responsibility Commission last week expressed concerns over Nigeria’s current fiscal federalism structure, cautioning that the system may be unsustainable in its present form.

[Punch]

PRESIDENT Bola Ahmed Tinubu flies the world like a mother bird in search of food for the hungry in its nest. He is a tireless traveller traversing the world, signing strings of trade agreements to shore up a troubled economy.

He has embarked on 33 foreign trips in 18 months, visiting 18 countries. His favourite places being the United Kingdom which he has visited four times, and France, of the woolly Emmanuel Macron, which he has visited five times.

Just on Sunday, November 17, 2024 he touched down in Brazil for the two-day 19th Meeting of the G20 Leaders Summit. There, he signed a $1.2 billion cooperative agreement for Brazil to modernise Nigerian agriculture.

President Tinubu was in France for a three-day state visit from November 28, 2024 and then flew to Cape Town, South Africa on December 2, 2024 signing agreements.

Perhaps it is with France Nigeria needs to be most careful because of that country’s predatory politics. It eliminated two million Algerians when their country opted for independence rather than become a province of France. It physically destroyed infrastructure like roads, water pipes and vehicles in Guinea-Conakry when that country in 1958 voted for independence rather than remain a French colony. France on January 13, 1963 carried out the first coup in Africa and in the process, summarily executed President Sylvanus Olympio of Togo. For over 50 years, it forced 14 African countries to keep their foreign reserves in France under its control, ran a French CFA and sabotaged the ECOWAS Eco currency project. When in February 1960 it wanted to test its atomic bomb, it did so in colonised Algeria, not in France so that the French and Europeans would not be affected by its radiation effects.

When a coup took place in Niger Republic in 2023, then French Foreign Minister Catherine Colonna arrogantly gave the coup plotters an ultimatum to hand back power or face invasion by a Nigerian-led ECOWAS military force.

Now, France, with its military kicked out of Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger Republic, asked by pliant Chad to leave and, told by President Bassirou Diomaye Faye that it is inappropriate to maintain its troops in Senegal, is desperately in search of new military bases.

It has its sights on Nigeria; hence its offer to assist our security should be viewed with suspicion. Two countries have accused France of double dealing with Islamic terrorists. Back in 2021, Mali accused France of supplying arms to the Islamic terrorist group, the Ansar al-Din and creating a haven for them in the Kidal area. Burkina Faso President, Ibrahim Traore, claimed in July, 2024 that France “sets up operations with them (terrorists) and helps them to look after themselves.”

On November 25, 2024 at a meeting in Abuja on trade relations between Australia, Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico and South Korea under a coalition called MIKTA, and some Nigerians, the question was asked why our trade with these countries seem inequitable; should it not be a partnership of equals? The same question can be asked about the string of trade agreements President Tinubu has been busy signing. But can our trade with those countries be equitable if primarily all we offer is oil in its crude form, minerals in their raw form and begging for assistance?

Ambassador Joe Keshi, President of the Association of Retired Career Ambassadors of Nigeria, ARCAN, who was at the MIKTA meeting noted that while the five countries reeled out the progress they had made in the past 40 years, Nigeria had no corresponding story to tell. 

He said Nigeria had virtually nothing to trade with, saying we are like the student in a class who does not pass, does not fail and does not leave the class. “We are not retarded, the fact is that we have refused to grow,” he said. His suggestions are that the country invests in the people and human capital development, returns to collective national planning , discipline and punishment for corruption.

I was taught as a kid that it is when a pupil does not know the answer to a question, that he stares at the ceiling; whereas the answer is never hidden there. Similarly, the answer to Nigeria’s myriad of problems is not in the sky. So, frequently taking to the skies will not resolve our problems. I wish President Tinubu would drastically cut his flights and concentrate on providing the answer to our problems.

A question is: why is Nigeria so big on propaganda, but so small in production with a hungry multitude, legion of jobless youths and a combustible army of 18.3 million out-of-school children? I know there are some who will immediately respond that these problems are not Tinubu’s creation, but I am not interested in apportioning blames. My interest is in the solution of our problems which the President out of his freewill offered to lead us to providing. I do not think he has started well as many of his appointments, especially in the ministerial cadre, amount to providing jobs for the ‘boys’ and ‘girls’ rather than appointing the competent, knowledgeable, visionary and, above all, the patriotic. His October 23, 2024 cabinet reshuffle was a mere motion without movement.

Perhaps the most vital direction to take is for his administration to run the country in accordance with the Directive Principles of State Policy as enshrined in Chapter Two of the Constitution and in the interest of the teeming populace. Not in accordance with the sophistry and interests of foreign powers and their enslaving institutions like the World Bank, International Monetary Fund, IMF and the World Trade Organisation, WTO.

These suggestions are taking an urgent tone, not just because our people are hungry and getting desperate, but also for the fact that the international scene is changing rapidly. For instance, Nigeria on October 24, 2024 in Kazan, Russia joined the Brazil, Russia, India and China, BRICS, alliance of countries as a partner country. This was a salutary move.

However, 38 days later, the eclectic United States President-elect Donald Trump threatened BRICS and its partners with 100 per cent tariff slam and exclusion from selling into the US economy if they either create a new currency or back any other currency to replace the US Dollar.

This seems a mere threat as the US itself cannot survive such a fight; but we must be ready for the consequences were Trump to selectively implement it, picking on perceived vulnerable countries like Nigeria.

Another emergency we need to prepare for is Trump’s November 7, 2024 threat to deport 11 million undocumented immigrants and, Canada’s follow up threat to evict about five million immigrants. If these threats are carried out, a number of Nigerians from both countries will return to Nigeria.

Nigeria has procured 12 pre-owned alpha jets from the French Air Force.

Olusegun Dada, special assistant to President Bola Tinubu on social media, said the jets were acquired through SOFEMA, a French military and aeronautics company.

“All the 12 aircraft are ready for shipping,” Dada posted on X on Thursday.

“As of 2023, the Nigerian Air Force has 11 Alpha Jets in service.”

Developed through a collaboration between France and Germany, the alpha jet is a versatile military aircraft designed primarily as a light attack jet and advanced trainer.

The aircraft is capable of carrying a variety of weapons, including bombs, rockets, and missiles. It is also equipped with a gun pod that can be used for close air support missions.

Dada added that the Nigerian Air Force is also expecting the arrival of 24 M-346FA light attack aircraft ordered by the past administration under former President Muhammadu Buhari.

The president’s media aide said the aircraft will arrive early next year.

Hasan Abubakar, the chief of air staff (COAS), said NAF has witnessed a remarkable turnaround, evident in the renewal of its aircraft fleet and enhanced operational readiness with Tinubu’s support.

The announcement of the French aircraft purchases comes days after Tinubu’s three-day state visit to France from November 27 to November 30. The president departed on December 1.

The visit was at the invitation of President Emmanuel Macron.

Meanwhile, in October, Abubakar said Nigeria expected 24 Leonardo M-346FA aircraft from Italy, with six units already in production.

The air chief said the initial batch of three aircraft is expected to be handed over in early 2025, with total delivery scheduled for 2026.

Abubakar emphasised the necessity of establishing a maintenance hub in Nigeria to ensure long-term support for the aircraft.

Tinubu has repeatedly pledged to support the armed forces in their fight against insecurity.

[TheCable]