Reno Omokri, a social commentator known for his incisive takes on politics and society, recently found himself at odds with Afrobeat superstar David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, over comments the latter made about Nigeria’s economy. In an explosive post on LinkedIn, Reno took a firm stance against Davido’s assertion that “Nigeria’s economy is in shambles,” made during a podcast appearance. While Davido’s statement resonated with many Nigerians facing daily economic challenges, Reno’s counterargument sheds light on a broader discussion about patriotism, celebrity responsibility, and the true state of Nigeria’s economy.

During his appearance on “The Big Homies House” podcast, Davido lamented Nigeria’s leadership and economic state, labeling the economy as being in “shambles” and criticizing the country’s governance. He also openly acknowledged Nigeria’s lack of strong leadership. This candid criticism did not sit well with Reno, who, in his response, accused Davido of ignorance, unpatriotism, and poor judgment, especially when speaking to a global audience.

Reno Omokri took issue with Davido’s grim characterization of Nigeria’s economy, presenting data to argue otherwise. He pointed to Wizkid’s recent record-breaking album launch, where the album “Morayo” amassed an unprecedented 12.12 million streams on Spotify Nigeria within 24 hours. For Reno, this accomplishment underscores a critical economic principle: people can only spend on entertainment if they have disposable income.

“Streaming music is purchased with disposable income,” Reno argued. “People do not have disposable income in an economy in shambles, not to mention breaking streaming records, especially on Spotify, where the average streaming cost is $10.99 monthly.”

Reno contrasted this with countries like Venezuela and Argentina, where economic collapse has eroded citizens’ spending power, resulting in diminished cultural exports. In his view, the ability of Nigerians to contribute to a vibrant entertainment economy undermines the claim that the country is in economic disarray.

Reno went further to present hard data to bolster his stance. He highlighted that Nigeria had achieved a ₦14.07 trillion trade surplus in the first half of 2024, a historic high, and noted the Nigerian Stock Exchange’s remarkable performance, with a 39.84% year-to-date increase. According to Reno, these milestones are proof that recent economic reforms, while painful, are bearing fruit.

These reforms, he argued, were essential to halt wastage, including the $1.5 billion spent monthly defending the naira and $15 billion annually on fuel subsidies. He acknowledged the short-term challenges brought about by these reforms but maintained that measures such as the increase in the minimum wage from ₦30,000 to ₦70,000 were designed to cushion the impact and enhance purchasing power.

A major thrust of Reno’s critique was aimed at Davido’s perceived lack of patriotism. Drawing a parallel with Barbadian pop icon Rihanna, who has consistently used her celebrity status to elevate her home country’s image, Reno chastised Davido for “talking down” Nigeria on a global platform.

“Rihanna never talks down on her country and instead uses her celebrity to promote Barbados,” Reno noted. “Which is why Rihanna was named a national hero and cultural ambassador for Barbados in 2018.”

Reno implied that Davido, with his dual citizenship and familial ties to Nigerian politics, ought to emulate Rihanna by speaking positively about Nigeria and contributing to its global image.

While Reno’s arguments may resonate with those who see potential in Nigeria’s economic reforms, many Nigerians might relate more to Davido’s bleak assessment. Rising inflation, unemployment, and the high cost of living paint a stark picture for the average citizen. The recent removal of fuel subsidies, though economically justified, has resulted in skyrocketing transportation and energy costs, pushing many Nigerians further into poverty.

Davido’s comments, therefore, can be seen as a reflection of this lived reality, a reality where millions struggle to afford basic necessities, let alone Spotify subscriptions.

Reno’s post raises an important question: what role should celebrities play in shaping the narrative about their countries? Should they, as Reno suggests, prioritize patriotism and highlight progress, or should they, like Davido, amplify the challenges to demand accountability?

In the age of social media, celebrities wield significant influence. For many, Davido’s criticisms may serve as a wake-up call for leaders to address the plight of ordinary Nigerians. However, Reno’s counterpoint is also valid: public figures have a responsibility to project their country in a positive light, particularly on international platforms.

The debate between Reno Omokri and Davido underscores the tension between expressing genuine concern for a nation’s challenges and maintaining a sense of national pride. While Reno’s data-driven optimism provides a counter-narrative to the prevailing pessimism, it’s crucial to acknowledge that statistics alone cannot capture the full scope of an economy’s impact on its citizens.

For Nigeria to truly move forward, both perspectives must coexist. Leaders and policymakers must take constructive criticism, like Davido’s, seriously, while influencers like Reno encourage citizens to appreciate progress and remain hopeful.

Nigeria stands at a critical juncture, where economic reforms and challenges coexist. While Reno Omokri’s optimism highlights the strides being made, Davido’s critique serves as a reminder of the work still to be done. Both voices, in their unique ways, contribute to a larger conversation about Nigeria’s future, one that requires collaboration, resilience, and a shared commitment to progress.

In the end, whether through data or song, it is clear that the dialogue about Nigeria’s economy is far from over. As citizens, we must engage with both the triumphs and the trials, finding ways to build a nation that works for everyone.

The possibility of Seyi Tinubu, the son of the President of Nigeria, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu contesting for the Lagos State governorship in 2027 has become a significant topic of public discourse, raising important questions about the dynamics of political dynasties and democratic values in Nigeria. While his constitutional eligibility to vie for the position under Section 177 of the Nigerian Constitution is undisputed, the discussion brings to light broader issues of political inclusivity, leadership by merit, and the role of family legacy in modern democracy.

The Nigerian Constitution outlines clear qualifications for anyone aspiring to the office of governor. A candidate must be a citizen of Nigeria by birth, at least 35 years old, a member of a political party, and educated to at least the secondary school level or its equivalent. Based on these criteria, Seyi Tinubu, as a citizen by birth and meeting the age and educational requirements, is constitutionally qualified to run for the office, provided he secures the sponsorship of a political party.

Political dynasties are not exclusive to Nigeria; they are a global phenomenon that has influenced governance in many parts of the world. In the United States, for example, the Bush family has held significant political positions, including George H.W. Bush as the 41st President, George W. Bush as the 43rd President and former Governor of Texas, and Jeb Bush as the Governor of Florida. Similarly, the Kennedy family produced John F. Kennedy, the 35th President, and prominent figures like Robert Kennedy, a U.S. Senator and Attorney General, and Ted Kennedy, a long-serving U.S. Senator. The Clinton family also left its mark, with Bill Clinton serving as the 42nd President and Hillary Clinton as a Secretary of State and presidential candidate. These families earned their positions through electoral victories, reinforcing the importance of public trust and the democratic process.

If Seyi Tinubu decides to run, his candidacy will face considerable  scrutiny. Questions about whether his aspirations are rooted in personal merit or familial advantage will dominate public discourse. In Nigeria, where perceptions of nepotism and concerns about equitable access to leadership persist, the candidacy of a high-profile figure like Seyi Tinubu will polarize opinions. To succeed in such an environment, he would need to present a compelling policy agenda and demonstrate his capability to govern effectively. His father’s legacy as a former Lagos governor and current president could either bolster his credibility or attract criticism, depending on public sentiment.

Ultimately, the decision rests with the electorate. Lagosians possess the constitutional authority to evaluate candidates based on their merits and to choose leaders who align with their aspirations for the state. Democracy thrives on the principle that leadership is determined by the people, not inherited by default. Seyi Tinubu’s constitutional right to contest for the governorship reflects the democratic ideals enshrined in Nigeria’s laws. However, his candidacy, like that of any other aspirant, must be judged on its merit, the policies he proposes, and the competence he demonstrates. In the end, the will of the people should guide leadership selection, ensuring that governance remains a reflection of collective choice rather than familial legacy.

Kenechukwu Aguolu

The announcement of a N20 reduction in the ex-depot price of petrol by Dangote Refinery, from N990 to N970 per litre, has sparked widespread reactions across Nigeria. While some applaud the gesture as a step towards addressing the nation’s high fuel costs, others see it as negligible, given the current economic realities. This divide was evident in a conversation overheard between two drivers washing their company vehicles in Ogba, Ikeja. One driver dismissed the price cut with disdain, remarking, “Wetin be N20 wey nor fit buy chewing gum?” This sentiment encapsulates the skepticism many Nigerians feel about the purported relief.

The Dangote Refinery’s statement, signed by its Group Chief Branding and Communication Officer, Anthony Chiejina, framed the price reduction as an end-of-year gesture of appreciation to Nigerians and a nod to the government’s support. The company emphasized its commitment to ensuring the availability of quality, environmentally friendly fuel while ramping up production to meet domestic demand.

Despite the goodwill attached to this reduction, the economic landscape makes it difficult for the average Nigerian to celebrate. Current pump prices range between N1,025 and N1,090 per litre across different marketers. For a country grappling with economic hardship, inflation, and a rising cost of living, the N20 reduction appears more symbolic than substantial.

To understand the frustration of Nigerians, one must delve into the economic context of inflation and diminished purchasing Power. This is as Nigeria’s inflation rate has skyrocketed, eroding the purchasing power of its citizens. Items that were affordable a year ago now cost multiples of their previous prices. Chewing gum, used metaphorically by the driver, indeed costs more than N20 in most urban areas today.

In a similar vein, looking at the issue from the perspective of high cost of transportation, there is no denying the fact that the fuel prices directly impact transportation costs, which in turn affect the prices of goods and services. With fuel already selling at over N1, 000 per litre, a N20 reduction is unlikely to significantly lower transport fares or bring relief to consumers.

Again, from the prism of household budget constraints, it is pragmatic that for an average household that consumes 50 litres of petrol per month, the N20 reduction translates to a savings of just N1,000 monthly. This amount barely covers the cost of basic groceries or utilities in today’s Nigeria.

Against the foregoing backdrop, it is expedient to opine that Dangote Refinery, though, operates as a private enterprise, must strike a balance between profitability and public goodwill. Critics argue that the refinery’s prices remain uncompetitive compared to other suppliers, as evidenced by previous complaints from the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN). Dangote’s reported stockpile of 500 million litres of petrol suggests capacity, but pricing remains a contentious issue.

The refinery’s effort to work directly with stakeholders like PETROAN and IPMAN signals a willingness to address these concerns. However, the logistics of fuel distribution and the associated costs could continue to hinder a significant reduction in pump prices.

In fact, the public’s lukewarm reception to the price cut underscores a broader disillusionment with Nigeria’s economic management. Citizens feel that the government and major players in the oil sector, like Dangote Refinery, must do more to alleviate their plight.

While symbolic gestures like price reductions may garner media attention, they fail to address the structural issues plaguing Nigeria’s energy sector. Nigerians need substantial reforms that translate to real savings and improved living standards.

In a similar vein, the public remains skeptical of promises to lower pump prices. Past assurances by government officials and private entities have often fallen short, leaving Nigerians to bear the brunt of rising costs.

At this juncture, it is expedient to ask, “Which way forward?” To answer the foregoing salient question, it is germane to opine that the skepticism surrounding the N20 reduction calls for a more robust approach to tackling fuel affordability in Nigeria. Some key recommendations cut across comprehensive subsidy reform, enhancing refining capacity, strengthening competition, and addressing distribution inefficiencies.

In fact, the removal of subsidies earlier this year has left Nigerians struggling with higher fuel costs. While subsidy removal is a necessary reform, its implementation should be accompanied by targeted palliatives to cushion the impact on vulnerable populations.

Given the foregoing, there is an urgent need to enhance refining capacity in Nigeria. In fact, beyond Dangote Refinery, Nigeria must invest in reviving its moribund refineries to reduce reliance on imports and bring down production costs.

Again, there is also the expediency and exigency of strengthening competition. This is as encouraging more players in the oil refining sector could lead to competitive pricing and better deals for consumers.

Not only that, there is equally an urgent need to address distribution inefficiencies. The reason for the foregoing cannot be farfetched as streamlining the logistics of fuel distribution can lower costs and ensure that price reductions at the ex-depot level reflect at the pumps.

In fact, the N20 reduction in petrol prices by Dangote Refinery, while commendable in principle, has been met with skepticism due to its minimal impact on the daily lives of Nigerians. As aptly captured by the disillusioned driver in Ikeja, “Wetin be N20 wey nor fit buy chewing gum?”,  the statement highlights the growing frustration of a populace yearning for meaningful economic relief.

For the reduction to resonate positively with Nigerians, it must be part of a larger, sustained effort to address the root causes of high fuel prices and their ripple effects on the economy. Only then can gestures like these move from symbolic to impactful, bringing genuine relief to millions of Nigerians struggling to make ends meet.

In a pivotal moment for Rivers State’s political landscape, Governor Siminalayi Fubara’s defiance against the Nigerian Police and their alleged interference in the state’s local government elections shines a spotlight on the deepening conflict between state sovereignty and judicial overreach. Fubara’s refusal to abide by the Federal High Court’s “fraudulent “judgment from justice peter Lifu, coupled with his dramatic confrontation with Inspector General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, exposes the growing divide between state leadership and federal judicial decisions that seem to overstep constitutional boundaries. At the core of this battle stands the Otisi panel’s recent ruling, which nullified the Federal High Court’s decision, which sought to bar the Rivers State Electoral Commission (RSIEC) from holding elections. This ruling holds significant weight, not just for Rivers State but for Nigeria’s broader democratic processes.

Governor Fubara’s Critique of the IGP: “Fraudulent” and “Wicked”

Governor Fubara did not hold back in his critique of IGP Egbetokun, accusing him of fraudulent and wicked actions in relation to the October 5, 2024 local government elections. Fubara’s strong condemnation of the IGP underscores the frustration and betrayal felt by local leaders when judicial rulings appear to undermine their constitutional rights and democratic processes. “We don’t need your security,” Fubara boldly declared, refusing to accept police intervention in what he viewed as the state’s rightful election process. This was not just about election security—it was about asserting Rivers State’s autonomy.

The standoff between Fubara and police officers on October 4, 2024 in Port Harcourt was a turning point. Fubara’s personal intervention, when police attempted to disrupt the operations of the RSIEC, was an act of defiance that sent a strong message about Rivers State’s commitment to self-governance, especially in the face of judicial decisions that seemed more concerned with obstructing elections than protecting the right to vote.

The Otisi Panel’s Ruling: A Victory for State Sovereignty

At the heart of this judicial struggle is the Court of Appeal’s ruling, which nullified the decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja. Justice Onyekachi Otisi’s panel found that the Federal High Court had no jurisdiction over Rivers State’s local elections, especially in light of Section 28 of the Electoral Act, which only governs federal elections, governorship elections, and area council elections in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). This ruling is a monumental affirmation of state sovereignty and the separation of powers.

The panel’s decision is a landmark victory for Rivers State, confirming that the state has the right to manage its electoral process without interference from federal courts or law enforcement. By overturning Lifu’s “fraudulent judgement”, the Otisi-led panel reaffirmed that the RSIEC could proceed with the October 5 elections despite the federal court’s attempt to block them. This ruling marks a critical step in asserting the autonomy of state governments and local electoral commissions across Nigeria.

The Complex Web of Political Manipulation and Judicial Overreach

The dispute over Rivers State elections underscores a dangerous pattern of political manipulation and judicial overreach. Governor Fubara’s accusations against IGP Egbetokun reveal a growing concern about the compromise of federal institutions, particularly in Rivers State. The governor suggested that the IGP’s actions were part of a coordinated effort with former Governor Nyesom Wike to obstruct the October 5 elections.

This suspicion of political collusion between law enforcement and political figures has raised serious questions about the integrity of Nigeria’s judicial and law enforcement systems. Fubara’s allegations suggest that the Nigerian Police, under the leadership of IGP Egbetokun, may be playing a dangerous role in political interference, rather than fulfilling their constitutional duty to ensure the safety of the electoral process.

In light of this, the Otisi panel’s ruling serves as a refreshing reminder of the integrity of state authority. It emphasizes that state governments must not be held hostage by federal judicial overreach or political manipulation, particularly when such actions are designed to derail the democratic process.

Fubara’s Defiance: The Fight for Judicial Independence

Governor Fubara’s defiance of federal court rulings represents more than a political act; it is a stand for judicial independence. By insisting that the elections proceed, even in the face of legal opposition and police intervention, Fubara has placed himself at the forefront of the battle for Rivers State’s democracy. His declaration that “we don’t need your security” reveals the deep mistrust he has for federal institutions that he believes have been compromised by political interests.

Fubara’s actions—and the Otisi panel’s subsequent ruling—reflect a broader movement in Nigeria where states are challenging the growing overreach of federal judicial power. The question remains: will the Nigerian judiciary continue to be manipulated by political forces, or will it rise above these pressures and uphold the principles of fairness, independence, and autonomy?

A Call for Judicial Accountability and Apology

The ongoing saga between Governor Fubara, IGP Egbetokun, and the Federal High Court in Abuja under Justice Lifu is a glaring example of judicial abuse and political manipulation at its worst. The Otisi panel’s ruling cuts through the political smoke and mirrors, exposing the blatant flaws and overreach in Justice Lifu’s decision. This ruling wasn’t just legally flawed; it was a deliberate abuse of jurisdiction, one that undermined the constitutional rights of Rivers State and disrupted the democratic process with reckless disregard. The manipulation at play here has not only caused unnecessary turmoil in the state but has shown the depths to which some are willing to go to subvert justice for political gain. This is a scathing indictment of a judiciary that must be held accountable for its failures.

In light of this ruling, it is time for the Nigerian Police and Judiciary to own up to their errors and offer a public apology to Rivers State. Their actions in undermining the state’s electoral rights and interfering with the democratic process must be acknowledged, and the damage caused must be rectified.

As Governor Fubara asked, “What kind of a country is this?”—a country where state rights are trampled upon by a compromised judiciary and political manipulation. The Otisi panel’s ruling is a victory for justice, but it is also a call for greater accountability within Nigeria’s judicial system. It is time for the police and federal courts to acknowledge their role in undermining Rivers State’s sovereignty and to offer an open apology for their interference in the state’s electoral process.

A Path Forward: Restoring Integrity and Upholding Justice

The future of Rivers State’s democracy depends on the ability of the judiciary to rise above political pressures and act impartially. The Otisi panel’s ruling is just one step in the ongoing fight for state sovereignty and judicial independence. The people of Rivers State have shown their resolve in the face of injustice, and now the judiciary and law enforcement must step up to restore integrity to the system and apologize for the damage caused by their misguided actions.

The battle for justice in Rivers State is far from over, but it represents a critical moment in the fight for fairness, transparency, and democratic integrity across Nigeria. This recent ruling serves as a reminder that justice must be blind to political influence and that state governments have the right to govern their own elections without external interference. The people of Rivers State have spoken—now, it’s time for the judiciary and law enforcement to take responsibility and make things right.

As Nigeria awaits the outcome of Hamma Barka’s panel on the remaining Rivers State cases, the significance of Rivers State in the nation’s political and economic landscape cannot be overstated. Rivers, as a major oil-producing state, plays a central role in Nigeria’s economic stability, being one of the key contributors to the nation’s oil revenue. The stakes are extremely high, not just for Rivers State, but for the entire country. Any further interference with its governance, especially through fraudulent judicial rulings and political manipulation, risks destabilizing a critical pillar of Nigeria’s economy. Rivers State cannot be treated as a political battleground for power-hungry elites without facing dire consequences.

For this reason, those in positions of power must be extremely careful. No more fraudulent judgments must be allowed to take root, especially when they threaten the very foundations of democratic governance in Rivers State. President Tinubu, who is deeply involved in the political currents surrounding these events, must take heed and avoid being complicit in these dark and dangerous maneuvers. Aligning with figures like Nyesom Wike and engaging in schemes that undermine the state’s autonomy could lead to irreversible consequences. The people of Rivers are resilient, and if the forces of political manipulation continue to push them to the brink, there will be a reckoning—a fire that will be impossible to contain once ignited.

Rivers State’s fight for sovereignty is not just a local issue; it has national implications. The nation’s future depends on whether the rule of law and democracy can be preserved in Rivers, or if political figures, judicial overreach, and law enforcement corruption will continue to dictate its fate. Those in power must choose carefully—any attempt to undermine Rivers State and its people will not be without consequence. The fire will burn, and history will remember those who tried to extinguish it.

Furthermore, the leadership of the Nigerian Police, particularly IGP Egbetokun, must take a hard look at the nonsensical and counterproductive nature of their involvement in this situation. The actions of IGP Egbetokun have shown a disregard for professionalism and the law in the service of political expediency. The police leadership must learn from this stupidity and reassess their role in ensuring the security of the electoral process, rather than being pawns in the political games of the powerful. This is a moment for self-reflection and a clear recognition of the importance of acting in the best interests of the law and democracy, not serving political agendas. The consequences of failing to act with integrity will echo far beyond this moment—into the very future of Nigeria’s democracy.

President Bola Tinubu extends his heartfelt congratulations to the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) on the successful revitalization of the Port Harcourt refinery, marked by the official commencement of petroleum product loading on November 26, 2024.

The President acknowledges the pivotal role of former President Muhammadu Buhari in initiating the comprehensive rehabilitation of all our refineries and expresses gratitude to the African Export-Import Bank for its confidence in financing this critical project.

Furthermore, President Tinubu commends the leadership of NNPC Limited's Group Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Mele Kyari, whose unwavering dedication and commitment were instrumental in overcoming challenges to achieve this milestone. 

With the successful revival of the Port Harcourt refinery, President Tinubu urges NNPC Limited to expedite the scheduled reactivation of both the second Port Harcourt refinery and the Warri and Kaduna refineries. 

These efforts will significantly enhance domestic production capacity alongside the contributions of privately-owned refineries and make our country a major energy hub, with the gas sector also enjoying unprecedented attention by the administration. 

The President underscores his administration's determination to repair the nation’s refineries, aiming to eradicate the disheartening perception of Nigeria as a major crude oil producer that lacks the ability to refine its own resources for domestic consumption.

Highlighting the values of patience, integrity, and accountability in the rebuilding of the nation’s infrastructure, President Tinubu calls upon individuals, institutions, and citizens entrusted with responsibilities to maintain focus and uphold trust in their service to the nation.

In alignment with the Renewed Hope Agenda focused on shared economic prosperity for all, the President reaffirms his administration's commitment to achieving energy sufficiency, enhancing energy security, and boosting export capacity for Nigeria.

Bayo Onanuga  

Special Adviser to the President  

(Information & Strategy)  

November 26, 2024

...Says federal government focused on women empowerment policies

Vice President Kashim Shettima has reaffirmed the Federal Government's dedication to advancing gender equity through transformative policies.

The Vice President emphasised the indispensable role of women in building a balanced and equitable society.

VP Shettima stated this on Monday during the H.I.D. Awolowo Foundation Webinar in commemoration of the 109th posthumous birthday of Chief Hannah Idowu Dideolu Awolowo, wife of the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo.

VP Shettima called for renewed national efforts to create an inclusive society where women are empowered to lead and thrive, saying, "Every nation’s treatment of women serves as the ultimate marker of its civilization.

"We cannot claim to have evolved as a nation unless we recommit ourselves to creating a society that offers women unconditional dignity and opportunity," the Vice President added.

VP Shettima paid glowing tribute to the late Chief Hannah Idowu Dideolu Awolowo, describing her as a "matriarch like no other and a jewel of inestimable value."

He lauded her contributions to modern Nigeria, noting her unwavering support for her husband, Chief Obafemi Awolowo, and her advocacy for women’s rights.

"Mrs. Awolowo’s courage and influence were instrumental in shaping policies like free education in the Western Region. This is what an empowered woman can achieve," he said.

On the historical struggles for women’s rights, the VP referenced the activism of global pioneers like Susan B. Anthony and Nigerian icons such as Mrs. Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti and Hajiya Gambo Sawaba.

"These trailblazers compelled us to confront the structural inequalities holding women back. Thanks to their efforts, the conversation has expanded beyond suffrage to include workplace equality, reproductive rights, and the fight against domestic violence," he remarked.

VP Shettima also pointed to the transformative impact of technology, noting how digital platforms have amplified women’s voices and driven legislative victories like the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act of 2015.

"This landmark legislation is a testament to the power of women-led advocacy and their determination to create a safer, fairer society," he said.

Shettima further reiterated the importance of representation and leadership opportunities for women, even as he praised President Tinubu for his inclusive governance, shaped by the legacy of his mother, Alhaja Abibatu Mogaji, a formidable women’s rights advocate.

"Her legal battle for personal liberty set a precedent in our constitutional history, reminding us that women’s rights are human rights and must never be negotiable," he noted.

The Vice President called for urgent action to address societal inequalities, particularly in education and leadership. "The nation we must build is one where no girl is denied the chance to learn, no woman is denied the opportunity to lead, and no mother is denied the dignity of safety and respect," Shettima said.

He urged Nigerians to honour the legacy of women like H.I.D. Awolowo and embrace a collective responsibility to empower women.

"We are working to create an environment where women are not just supported but celebrated; where their aspirations redefine societal expectations and help build a viable, equitable, and thriving nation," the Vice President said.

In her keynote address, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, Amina Mohammed, said November 25th marks the International Day for the Elimination of Violence Against Women and the start of 16 Days of Activism Against Gender-Based Violence.

She explained that HID Awolowo was a fighter for social justice and human rights and took every opportunity to show the power of women in economic development.

"Every chapter of her story tells us that no bird can fly on one wing. We need the leadership and representation of women. We need partnerships for change—everyone must work for systemic change that will be sustainable.

"We need to end the scourge of gender-based violence as an absolute priority, essential for growth. Societies cannot achieve the equal and just society envisioned by HID Awolowo if we leave 50 percent of the world's population behind," she said.

Earlier, the Chairperson of the HID Awolowo Foundation Advisory Council, Senator Daisy Danjuma, noted that in building a more viable Nigeria, the role of women should not be overlooked.

"Together, let us chart a society where the role of women is recognized, celebrated, and utilized," she said.

Welcoming guests to the webinar earlier, the Executive Director and Co-Founder of the Obafemi Awolowo Foundation, Dr. Olatokunbo Awolowo Dosumu, described HID Awolowo and her late husband as giants of intellect, integrity, service, and sacrifice, saying their lives were a testament to the power of purposeful living.

"They left us a blueprint for leadership and a legacy of hope. It is, therefore, with immense pride (and I hasten to add humility) that I speak before you today, reflecting on the legacy of these two extraordinary individuals. To be their offspring is not just a privilege; it is a profound responsibility.

"Their legacy is not meant to be confined to history books or family stories. It is a legacy that demands to be shared, understood, and applied in Nigeria and beyond. Our role, therefore, is to identify actionable plans and strategies and amplify the voices and capacities of women," Dr. Dosumu stated.

Stanley Nkwocha

Senior Special to The President on Media & Communications

(Office of The Vice President)

As Great Britain, once a colonial power ruling over 56 nations now part of the Commonwealth, transitions into a more inclusive society, a symbolic form of “reverse colonization” seems to be unfolding. This phenomenon, exemplified by individuals from formerly colonized nations rising to leadership roles in the UK, highlights the open-mindedness of Britons. Their inclusive approach has afforded immigrants, including those born in the UK, equal opportunities alongside the native population.

The adventurous spirit of the British has also contributed to London’s evolution into a cosmopolitan hub. Home to people from various former colonies, London has become a melting pot of cultures and a global financial center rivaling cities like New York, Shanghai, and Hong Kong.

Historically, Britain’s dominance as a seafaring nation beginning after the founding of the country in 1707 enabled it to build an empire that spanned nearly a quarter of the globe. Through its control of vast territories in Africa, India, Australia, Canada, the United States, and the Caribbean, the British Empire left an indelible mark on the world. While the UK is no longer the imperial force it once was, it remains a vital player on the global stage.

Should Kemi Badenoch—of Nigerian heritage now the leader of the Tory party currently in opposition—one day become the UK’s Prime Minister, it would be a monumental achievement not just for Nigerians but for Africans and the global Black community. Her rise would echo that of Barack Obama, whose election as the first Black President of the United States inspired millions worldwide.

However, it’s unlikely that Nigerians had a direct hand in Badenoch’s political success. Her ascent in the UK’s political sphere did not hinge on support from Nigerian-majority constituencies. Therefore, Nigerians must allow her to continue climbing the political ladder without the negativity that sometimes characterizes reactions to such achievements as evidenced by the vilification from Nigerians she is currently contending with.

In my view, if Badenoch reaches the pinnacle of UK politics, she may remember her Nigerian roots. But even if she doesn’t, her success is still significant. It would serve as an inspiration for Nigerian-born Britons and the broader Black community in the UK and other countries in Europe and North America to pursue political leadership, marking a meaningful step forward for the Black race.

In the United States, Barack Obama deliberately distanced himself from Black identity politics during his presidential campaign, recognizing that such an approach might limit his appeal in a nation where Black Americans constitute just 13% of the population. In contrast, Hispanics account for approximately 14%, while Caucasians make up around 67%. The significant role of rural Caucasian voters in Donald Trump’s 2016 and 2024 victory—and their contribution to Keir Starmer’s Labour Party overtaking the Conservatives earlier this year, which Kemi Badenoch currently represents—underscores the importance of appealing to the broader majority in diverse democracies.

For candidates from minority backgrounds aspiring to lead multi-ethnic nations, emphasizing racial or ethnic identity can create barriers. Hence Badenoch, like others before her, has to navigate this challenge.

Historically, Rev. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson both campaigned for the U.S. presidency by centering on Black identity, but neither achieved electoral success. Barack Obama learned from these missteps, avoiding identity politics and instead galvanizing young voters through social media, ultimately winning the presidency in 2008. Similarly, Kamala Harris, the current U.S. Vice President, distanced herself from minority-focused identity politics. That is why she did not openly emphasize her Black heritage during her campaign, but celebrated her marriage to Doug Emhoff, a Caucasian, to further broaden her appeal.

Kemi Badenoch appears to be following a comparable path in the UK. Her husband, Mr. Hamish Badenoch, is a successful Caucasian banker, a detail that could work in her favor when elections are called. As leader of the Conservative Party, this positioning may enhance her chances of becoming the UK’s next Prime Minister.

Meanwhile, the debate over reparations for the historical atrocities of slavery perpetrated against Africans continues to stir emotions. At the recent Commonwealth meeting in Apia, Samoa, African representatives renewed their call for reparations, but King Charles dismissed the demands, and Prime Minister Keir Starmer brushed them aside. This response frustrated African advocates and reignited debates about the relevance of the Commonwealth, especially if it primarily serves to promote the economic interests of the UK as the former colonial power, particularly the African continent as a market for her goods and services.

The UK’s resistance to reparations—unlike Germany, which compensated Israel for the Holocaust—is likely rooted in the immense financial strain such a commitment would impose, particularly given the UK’s current economic difficulties.

Nevertheless, Britons like Americans have demonstrated a commendable level of inclusivity and liberalism by granting citizens of foreign ancestry the same rights and opportunities to rise to the highest echelons of political power. This inclusive approach could, for now, be seen as a symbolic form of reparation for the UK’s inability to meet Africa’s demands for financial reparations.

In this context, Kemi Badenoch’s rise to prominence—an African woman occupying one of the most significant positions in British politics—offers a powerful symbolic acknowledgment of historical injustices and readiness of the former colonizer to atone for past atrocities such as slavery and the pillaging of the economic resources of the continent. Her potential candidacy for Prime Minister would reaffirm this gesture of non-financial reparation, serving as a tribute to the historical exploitation of Africa, particularly the West African region.

That said, I do not support those in Nigeria who have criticized Badenoch for her disparaging remarks about the country during her bid for Conservative Party leadership. As Otto von Bismarck once said: “Politics is the art of the possible.” This pragmatic view mirrors the boldness that led Bismarck to organize the infamous Berlin Conference of 1884/85, where Africa was partitioned among European powers whose vestiges have been sustained and a reason the continent remains underdeveloped.

Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd President of the United States, is famously associated with the statement: “In politics, nothing happens by accident.” This highlights that political events and decisions are rarely spontaneous but are typically the result of meticulous planning, strategy, and deliberate manipulation.

Kemi Badenoch’s ambition to become the next Prime Minister of the UK is legitimate, and her approach reflects this aspiration. By aligning herself with the expectations of the British electorate, she has positioned herself as a candidate who embodies British political ideals. However, her portrayal of Nigeria, which has drawn criticism from Nigerians, likely serves to reassure skeptical voters in the UK of her commitment to those ideals, which differ markedly from the political climate in her ancestral home.

Critics who find her comments about Nigeria disparaging may view them as unnecessary, but Napoleon Bonaparte’s assertion that “In politics, absurdity is not a handicap” offers a counterpoint. This underscores the reality that political maneuvering often includes statements or actions perceived as controversial or unconventional.

The ruthless ambition often associated with political pursuits is exemplified by Nicolae Ceaușescu, the former communist leader of Romania, who reportedly declared: “I will sell my mother to buy power. After getting power, I will buy my mother back.” While the literal feasibility of such a claim is questionable, it reflects the unrelenting drive and willingness to sacrifice personal relationships for political gain. Similarly, Ghanaian politician Freddie Blay echoed this sentiment, stating: “I love politics, and I would spend money to win power. If you are not careful, I will even be ready to sell my mother for money to retain my position.”

This stark perspective highlights an inconvenient truth: such a mindset underpins the actions of many politicians globally, particularly in authoritarian systems. Politics, after all, is a game of power and influence, often involving the orchestration of events to achieve specific objectives. While this doesn’t always imply malicious intent, it does illustrate the calculated nature of political strategy. As Groucho Marx wittily observed: “Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies.”

From a historical standpoint, Badenoch’s current political strategy in the UK parallels that of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR), whose rise to the U.S. presidency (1933–1945) was shaped by significant challenges, including the Great Depression and World War II. FDR’s leadership was marked by calculated and strategic decisions, much like Badenoch’s tactical rise to the top of the Tory party as she positioned herself for a shot at the premiership.

As the saying goes: “There is no smoke without fire.”

Badenoch’s seemingly critical stance on Nigeria may be driven by the significant obstacles she faces in her political journey. These include her non-Caucasian identity, which may lead some to question whether her African heritage aligns with British identity. This skepticism is compounded by concerns that her Nigerian background might influence her leadership style if she were to become Prime Minister. Overcoming these challenges requires Badenoch to carefully navigate perceptions and prove her commitment to the ideals and values expected by the British electorate.

Given the unconscious bias that her non-Caucasian background might invite, Kemi Badenoch appears to have strategically distanced herself from Nigeria. This move is likely aimed at improving her chances of securing the top political position in the UK—Prime Minister and resident of 10 Downing Street. To achieve this, she has deliberately redefined herself as a quintessential Briton, fully embodying British political ideals and values.

Therefore, Badenoch’s public criticism of Nigeria’s poor political standards plays into this strategy, enhancing her appeal to the UK electorate who need to be assured that her values as a politician are higher than the typical Nigerian standard. These voters, to whom she must demonstrate her allegiance, are the ones whose support she needs to succeed in her political ambitions, not the Nigerians who have no voting rights in the UK that are unbraiding her because she is not pandering to them.

Given the above reality, it is essential to view Badenoch’s actions through the lens of political survival. She faces significant challenges as she navigates her role as the first Black woman to lead a major political party in the UK, and her situation can be compared to popular cultural phenomena. For instance, her political journey resembles contestants on the Big Brother House reality television show, where individuals use charm, wit, and strategy to outlast competitors and win over audiences to clinch the coveted prize. Similarly, it mirrors the power struggles and scheming seen in Game of Thrones another reality television show, where characters fight for survival and dominance in a high-stakes, ruthless environment.

Understanding the immense pressures Badenoch faces should prompt Nigerians to support her rather than criticize her, hence this intervention aimed at sharing another Point of View, PoV on the matter. Unfortunately, many Nigerians, despite sharing a common ancestry with her, have been quick to attack her leadership style and political stance. Hopefully, this article will help to explain the rationale behind her political posture, which has drawn ire from Nigerians who perceive it as disloyal or unflattering. By recognizing the challenges Badenoch confronts, critics may better understand her choices and judge her more fairly.

In stark contrast to the criticism Badenoch has received for not openly embracing her Nigerian heritage, Rishi Sunak, the former UK Prime Minister of Indian descent, enjoyed overwhelming support from both the Indian diaspora in the UK and Indians back home.

Based on my research, the following factors may help explain why Nigerians have reacted more critically to Badenoch’s candidacy compared to the widespread celebration of Sunak’s rise to power:

1. Distinct diaspora dynamics:
The Indian diaspora in the UK is larger, more established, and maintains stronger cultural and economic ties to India. On the other hand, while the Nigerian community in the UK is growing, it lacks the same level of organization and connection to Nigeria.
2. Nigerian political challenges and skepticism:
Nigeria’s history of political instability and corruption has created a sense of skepticism among its citizens. Consequently, many Nigerians may hesitate to celebrate a politician, especially one who has achieved success within a foreign political system.
3. Limited connection or representation:
Unlike Rishi Sunak, who openly embraces and celebrates his Indian heritage, Kemi Badenoch has not prominently highlighted her Nigerian roots but discountenanced them. Her apparent reluctance, possibly influenced by the challenges facing Nigeria, may contribute to the lack of enthusiasm among Nigerians.
4. Divergent expectations from diaspora figures:
Nigerians tend to focus on the tangible contributions their diaspora representatives make toward Nigeria’s development, rather than celebrating individual achievements abroad. This difference in priorities may explain the muted reception to Badenoch’s political ambitions.
5. Media portrayal and controversy:
The role of social and traditional media cannot be ignored. Badenoch’s controversial remarks about Nigeria have sparked significant backlash, with media platforms amplifying these sentiments and shaping public opinion.

In conclusion,
Rishi Sunak and Kemi Badenoch (if she becomes Prime Minister) will not be the first politicians from minority backgrounds to lead the UK. Several British Prime Ministers have had diverse ancestries:
William Pitt the Younger: Born in England, he became Prime Minister at the age of 24 and had Irish ancestry through his father, a British politician.
Benjamin Disraeli: An English-born Prime Minister whose father was an Italian immigrant.
Harold Wilson: Also born in England, Wilson’s father, a chemist, had Scottish roots.

Kemi Badenoch, an African of Nigerian heritage, could similarly rise to lead the UK, following the precedent set by these figures.

Some critics might attempt to frame her success as “reverse colonialism.” However, she will not be the first minority from a former colony to rule the UK because India, like Nigeria, was colonized by Britain, and Rishi Sunak served as UK Prime Minister for two years (2022–2024) without significantly favoring Indians or enriching India as a country. This demonstrates that such fears are baseless.

As Badenoch appears to have a strong chance of becoming the next UK Prime Minister, Nigerians should refrain from actions or criticisms that could undermine her ambitions.

To Kemi Badenoch, my advice is simple: remain composed (translated in Yoruba as -farabale). Although you are British, your umbilical cord is still tied to Nigeria, and you will need the blessings of Nigerians as you ascend to the highest office in your current country of citizenship.
I join others in wishing her as well as other politicians of Nigerian heritage climbing up the ladder of the political ecosystems in their respective countries of citizenship, the best of luck as they chase the dream of becoming prime minister/president.

Magnus Onyibe
Entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, alumnus of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy, Tufts University, Massachusetts, USA, and a former commissioner in the Delta State government, sent this piece from Lagos, Nigeria.

The Attorney General of Ondo State, Dr Kayode Ajulo SAN OON, has urged all illegal and unlicensed lottery and gaming operators and agents in the State to regularise their operations immediately or face legal consequences. He said "This directive is a confirmation of the government’s unwavering commitment to upholding the law and protecting the interests of its citizens"

The Attorney General made this comment on Monday in Akure, while reacting to the Supreme Court ruling that annulled the National Lottery Act. He lauded the Supreme Court for reaffirming the constitutional authority of state governments to regulate lottery and gaming activities within their respective states.

“The landmark judgement, delivered in Suit No. SC/1/2008 between the Attorney General of Lagos State & Ors and the Attorney General of the Federation represents a watershed victory for constitutionalism, federalism and the rule of law." Ajulo stated.

He further said "This Supreme Court decision is a monumental affirmation that the regulation of lotteries and gaming is a residual matter, firmly within the jurisdiction of State governments. It reinforces the principles of true federalism, empowering States to effectively manage their affairs.”

The AG emphasized the significance of this ruling in strengthening Ondo State's regulatory framework for the gaming sector. “This judgement validates our enduring belief in our ability to govern our resources and safeguard our citizens."

He commended the leadership of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa for his dedication to upholding the rule of law and championing the rights of the people of Ondo State, saying "his unwavering support has been instrumental in achieving numerous positive outcomes for the State."

Ajulo further stated that the Ondo State Government remains committed to creating a safe and regulated environment for all gaming activities, ensuring transparency and accountability for the benefit of all citizens. He said the activities of the Ondo State Lotteries Regulatory Commission would be reviewed and geared up in line with the Supreme Court judgment.

Olusegun Obasanjo, described as “a world statesman and a gift to humanity” who has demonstrated his “selflessness toward causes in Africa as well as global issues” is a prophet without honour in his own Yoruba country where he is regarded by his detractors as an Igbo man. Insisting he is not a Yoruba leader but a Nigerian leader only provided additional ammunition for his political enemies. He has no apologies favouring Shehu Shagari and Alex Ekwueme, in the 1979 at the expense of Obafemi Awolowo regarded a sage by the Yoruba but disparaged by Obasanjo as a failed politician.

Not even MKO Abiola, his fellow Egba who won a pan-Nigeria mandate fared better. For him, Abiola was “not the messiah Nigerians were waiting for”. He therefore did not see anything wrong in joining Babangida in trading Abiola’s mandate for an Interim National Government. Finally, when in 1999 Obasanjo was made president by the owners of Nigeria to assuage the raw feeling of Yoruba that had fought and made the country ungovernable for five years, Obasanjo danced on Abiola’s grave for eight years without acknowledging his supreme sacrifice.

The goodwill he did not enjoy among the Yoruba who refused voting for him in 1999 or his candidates since he left office, he savours among the Igbo who massively supported him against Olu Falae, the Yoruba candidate for the 1999 election. In appreciation, Obasanjo went round the world to recruit into his cabinet the best of Igbo including Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Obiageli Ezekwesili and Chukwuma Soludo. Even the worst of Igbo, including those who smuggled dollars to the US in his presidential jet, or kidnapped and locked up an elected governor like common criminal were not left out.

It is therefore easy to understand why Igbo presidency has become an obsession for Obasanjo since leaving office. During the 2023 election, he carried Peter Obi on his back around the country. And since the election was lost and won, Obasanjo has continued to live in denial claiming Obi was rigged out by INEC and the Supreme Court.

Those who know that Obasanjo has no generosity of heart to forgive anyone that crosses his way would understand while his appearance at Yale University to present a paper in honour of Chinua Achebe, the late Nigeria icon was for him  another opportunity to de-market Tinubu’s administration and present Obi as a viable alternative.

His crusade for Igbo presidency also took the centre-stage during last week’s visit by the League of Northern Democrats to his library. He started by trying to mislead Nigerians by drawing a parallel between the collapse of the first republic to regionalism. The problem with Obasanjo however is that when he is not playing the ostrich, he tries to twist historical facts. There is no evidence to support his claim that “people say because the Igbo had carried out secession and so an Igbo man cannot be the President of Nigeria” or link the collapse of the first republic to regionalism.

In fact, Bode Thomas who introduced regionalism as against his party’s preferred federal arrangement, modelled after linguistic groups as done in India said his objective was to prevent one-eyed king from presiding over the affairs of his Yoruba nation. It was therefore ironic that the assault on regionalism by Igbo unitarists became the harbinger of the reign of blind kings over the country beginning with Ironsi, Murtala Mohammed, Obasanjo, Buhari, Babangida, Abacha and Buhari. And precisely because these soldiers were ill-trained in the management of society, they destroyed our political parties, our socialization process, our university and bureaucracy, our budding economy and centralised our institutions, while they unwittingly claimed they were sacrificing their present for our future”.

Obasanjo’s misinterpretation of history during his encounter with League of Northern Democrats has only provided additional incentive to consolidate the position of those who believe Obasanjo is an Igbo man. It is on record that NCNC and Igbo preferred unitary system to regionalism or any other form of federal arrangement. They carried the battle to the London 1957 Independence Constitutional Conference where against Nigerian governors pre-conference agreement on creation of Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers (COR), Midwest, Middle Belt states, “the northern and eastern regions were unyielding and unconditionally opposed to the carving out of new states from their respective jurisdictions”. “The NCNC went a step further to “adopt a more devious approach by demanding that right there in the conference room, the country should be divided into seventeen states” saying the smaller the states, the better for the federal unity of Nigeria”.  This of course was rejected by Awolowo who said it “would make nonsense of federalism and indeed would amount to a backdoor reversion to a unitary system”. (The Autobiography of Obafemi Awolowo. (Pgs. 190-191).

Awolowo who predicted what we today have has been vindicated. The unworkable and unwieldy 36 states structure foisted on the nation by Obasanjo and fellow blind men, never trained in the art managing human society, is not markedly different from the demand by the unitarists who many will agree are the greatest beneficiary of the ongoing anarchy where states have no record of those who live within their states or control over their borders.

Igbo adage says ‘it is only your true friend that tells you your mouth is smelling’, If Obasanjo is sincere, he would have started crusade for Igbo presidency by first asking Igbo political elite to change their  brand of politics that uses Igbo poor and urban dwellers for political leverage.

 Unfortunately, Obasanjo who has never admitted making a mistake, seems to share the same mind-set with Igbo political elite who never take responsibilities for wrong decision but instead feed those that look up to them for direction with falsehood and propaganda. The result is that Igbo youths always end up believing they are victims hated by other tribes especially Hausa Fulani, Yoruba and Edo.

Let us take a journey through memory to see how Igbo elite often blame others instead of taking responsibility for their error of judgment.

The January 1966 coup was masterminded by Igbo NCNC political leaders who lost out following the collapse of NPC/NCNC coalition where Igbo controlled over 70% of political offices. Ironsi was, according to Richard Akinjide who was present at the meeting of surviving ministers, encouraged to take over power by the Igbo acting Senate President who refused to swear in the most senior surviving minister. Nwabueze drafted Decree 34 that turned the country into a unitary state. Unfortunately Ironsi was too handicapped to know the implications of his actions. Students of ABU who knew the implication of centralization of the bureaucracy started the rioting. Sadly, today Igbo youths blame not their leaders but outsiders for that avoidable tragic phase of our history.

Driven more by passion than reason, Igbo leaders railroaded Ojukwu who later admitted Biafra had 16 riffles to declare independence for Biafra. The response to the wise counsel of Awolowo and Prof Aluko was the battle cry of “no power in Africa can defeat us” or that ‘the grass in Igbo land will rise and fight”. Not even Gowon’s creation of COR state for eastern minorities on the eve of the declaration called for reflection. Awolowo who however said starvation is a weapon of war after three years of war, the failure of leadership, alone carried the blame. This was despite the fact that many Igbo writers including Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie admitted soldiers and members of the elite class were hijacking relief materials meant for starving children.

Between 1999 and 2015, Igbo southeast constituted a solid PDP block. In 2013, Peter Obi moved from APGA to PDP where he rose rapidly to become VP candidate in 2015. In 2023, fearing Atiku Abubakar the recurrent PDP presidential candidate was going to deny him the PDP ticket stabbed PDP in the back by joining Labour with Igbo PDP block. Then, Obasanjo and Igbo leaders who were eating with their 10 fingers while Tinubu remained in opposition for close to 20 years building alliance, wanted him to step down “to allow for an Igbo presidency in the interest of justice and equity”.

Tinubu, for dismissing Obi as “container economist” and his promoters as opportunists who needed some lessons on consensus-building became a target of Obi’s  Obidient mobs while elder statesman and ex-Governor Ezeife  publicly swore that  Tinubu, after winning the election round and square would not be sworn in. Today as his government battle crisis of legitimacy arising from lack of recognition by aggrieved Igbo leaders, there is no evidence any of them have apologized for exhibiting herd mentality in and out of PDP. It was perhaps only Obasanjo and Igbo leaders who believed Obi could win the 2023 election.

And finally, since a part of a whole cannot be holier than the whole, Obasanjo in spite of his theatrics cannot be part of the solution to lack of strategic planning by Igbo political elite that often behave like prostitutes with five husbands (apology to TOS Benson).

“Nigeria should not be a graveyard of businessmen and their businesses. Great businesses make great economies. A Nigeria without four-star businesses cannot have a five-star leadership. The world has no seat for the poor. We have an environment that is toxic enough for entrepreneurs, we should not add for them rumours of ill-timed setting of their radiant sun. We have lately seen, not one, not two, very big entrepreneurs having issues just for giving Nigeria what Nigeria desperately needed. Now, it is Adenuga. How does that encourage economic growth? And a country and its leadership are as great as their frontline businesses. We see this in America’s political and financial systems which empower entrepreneurs to create and invest capital, and compete without the fear of knives of envy being driven into their backs.”

There is the legend of a newspaper journalist who had an issue with his uncle, an oba in present-day Osun State, and threatened the king with death. The man needed a favour; the oba closed his eyes to the man’s demand. “Kabiyesi, you will die,” he reportedly informed the oba. “Iku boo?” Everyone who heard him gasped and upbraided this man for the sacrilege of speaking ill to a king in the palace. They thought his beer and booze had again taken hold of him. In response to demands of apology, the man stormed out of the palace, back to his base in Lagos.

We say a tree does not fall in the forest and kill someone at home. I used to believe that proverb would be true at all times until I heard how this man carried out the regicide he promised. He got to Lagos and submitted a report to his editor that his uncle, the oba, had joined his ancestors. Did the editor pass the story for publication? Well, who else could be the best source and authority on the life and times of a king if not his own kin, the king’s man himself? And so, an abnormal tree that fell in Lagos killed the oba at home. The king read his own obituary, courtesy of his own nephew who worked in faraway Lagos.

The event happened in the 1970s, so we were told in the 1990s. And we were warned as newsmen never to build our truth on a foundation laid by only one source. The man got the fake news of the oba published and stood by it. We couldn’t really get hold of the publication but we were told the man’s name. When the second republic came with its opportunities, the man moved to Ibadan. He had to. His ways had made the waters of Lagos too shallow for his shark to swim.

Our man edited an ephemeral newspaper for some politicians in Ibadan in the early 1980s. Then he spiced it with some other extra journalism stuff. I wished he were alive now for me to ask him why he ‘killed’ the oba with his pen. But if we did not see what his Ajantala did in the bush, we saw the man’s face as he joined in shredding icons on the streets of Ibadan on days when the metropolis lived its reputation. What reputation? I have beside me here a copy of Ruth Watsons’ ‘Civil Disorder is the Disease of Ibadan’. Everyone came to this world with a disease which defines their existence. The end came twenty-something years ago for the man who used his pen to kill his uncle, the king. It was not a nice end.

The world was crazy fifty years ago when a newspaper was deployed to ‘kill’ a monarch. It is crazier now with social media and its unhinged tendencies. I remembered the death story of the undead king when some unknown persons with unknown motives used social media to announce the death of Globacom chairman, Dr. Mike Adenuga, Tuesday last week. I also remembered the Zik-is-dead hoax of 1989. Dr Nnamdi Azikiwe was in his study in November 1989 working on book manuscripts when he read his own obituary complete with a list of a committee to bury him. It was crazy. One thing is clear, the one who wishes one dead is not a friend. A death wish whether oral or written is an enemy action.

The social media can be rumour pro-max. Rumour, most times, come false and in unfriendly costumes. While its currency is virality, it easily spins out of the spinner’s control. Robert H. Knapp in his ‘A Psychology of Rumour’ (1944) avers that “if leaflets, newspapers or radio broadcasts are likened to bullets, then rumour must be likened to a torpedo, for, once launched, it travels of its own power.” Social media scholars have at various times raised the alarm that false information is a threat to modern society. Lt Col. Jarred Prier of the United States Airforce in 2017 published a seminal piece that demonstrated how social media had become a tool for all kinds of ‘war’. In his ‘Commanding the Trends: Social Media as Information Warfare’, he mentioned “malicious users” and “malicious actors” creating malicious trends and manipulating internet platforms to spread negative messages, most times fake news. And, fake news he defined as “propaganda composed of false story disguised as news…”

Death rumours rarely have an identifiable source. The one about the Globacom chairman did not appear to have any. What it had were internet rats in desperate grab of trends. Whoever started the fire disappeared soon after lighting the match. I got calls; the first from a colleague in the United Kingdom; another from Benin, yet another from my office in Ibadan. A friend sent the screenshot of a Facebook version of the vile announcement. Everyone who contacted me sounded alarmed and apprehensive. But, why would they be calling me for a confirmation of bad news? Who do we call – or text? My friends suggested names. First a text to a certain number. “Good evening, sir”. No immediate response. Then I placed a call. A laugh; the line went dead. Then a response came in one minute: “Chairman is fine…” That was a text message from the man I called; we call him Bob Dee (Chief Dele Momodu). Two other messages of reassurance soon followed from that channel. Then, the newsroom went calm, and the same social media that created the topic of death scrambled to quench the fire. “Are rumours just rumours?” Rumour theorists, Heng Chen, Yang K. Lu and Wing Suen, once asked themselves. And they answered, yes. They also noted that rumours (that are not rooted in truth) “often disappear quickly without a trace.” I read all that in their ‘The Power of Whispers: A Theory of Rumour’.

I asked one of my callers why he sounded so troubled by last Tuesday’s death rumour. He told me what I already knew: You remember that old song by Juju music commander, Ebenezer Obey? Anyone who knows the evil ways of darkness will not wish the moon bad (Èdá tó mò’se òkùnkùn, kó má mà d’Ósùpá l’óró) And, I think I heard a new one from Obey on Friday. He weighed in with a new song, using his music to list the benefits of the moon and why its soft, golden glow must continue to drape the night in ethereal light. It fits this hour. There is so much darkness here, in the public space and in the space we call private. That was why as children, we got sad whenever the full moon was seen reducing in size and getting far gone in distance.

Why were my friends almost hysterical at the virality of Adenuga’s death rumour? I can tell why. You know how many people work in that man’s businesses – telecoms, oil (downstream, upstream, midstream), banking, construction etc etc? Some trees singularly make a forest. This is one of them – one of the reasons Nigeria is not completely an economic arid zone. Read Martin Williams’s ‘When the Sahara Was Green’ (2021). The Sahara desert was once lush with greenery. It became what it is today because of unconscionable humans, agents of eco destruction. Malicious bush burning joined hands with other vices to tip the land’s moisture balance. Collectively, they degraded the green that made that stretch to breathe. The result is what the Arabs saw and gave the label ‘sahra’ – the meaning of that word is ‘wilderness’. Now, apply that to our economic situation and be alarmed. Foliage is the canopy of the forest. When you remove trees that make forest forest, the forest dies. That is why we say this China shop should not be heady goats’ playground. Mortar, we can roll; pot, we mustn’t. If you roll a pot like you do pounded yam’s mortar, the master potter will roar in angers of lightning and thunder.

When someone of value is pronounced dead and they refuse to die, the Yoruba have a name for such a hard-to-crack nut. They are called Kokumo (This-is-no-longer-dead). Such are moulded into Ìkòkò ribiti (well-rounded pot); they are, in carefulness, protected from wanton eyes of malice. Adenuga’s ConOil struck gold in 1991, the first indigenous oil company to achieve that feat. His Globacom is also the first and has remained the only wholly indigenous telecoms company in Nigeria. The fact of these businesses coming first serves not just the owner; it serves more the country. It has served as a bulwark against the exploitation of foreign waves. That is why we say the man behind it must live and why we say “no time to check time” to his death wishers. They are a dead horse. Who are they, anyway? And why are they angry?

The invidious, false news of a top entrepreneur’s death should interest the state and its operatives. Howard Wolk, co-author of ‘Launchpad Republic: America’s Entrepreneurial Edge and Why It Matters’ said in a December 2022 interview with Forbes magazine that America is great because it consciously nurtures its businesses and protects their owners even from the state itself. “We limit the ability of incumbents to stifle entrepreneurs,” he declared with an air of pride. Here, the challenge is not a threat of state stifling, it is the menace of bad belle, threats from fake news and the odious bile of idle envy.

His Wikipedia page speaks to where he is coming from: “Adenuga made his first million in 1979, at age 26, selling lace and distributing soft drinks. In 1990, he received an oil drilling licence, and in 1991, his Consolidated Oil struck oil in the shallow waters of Southwestern Ondo State, making it the first indigenous oil company to do so in commercial quantity.” Then, he branched off into telecommunications. He got a conditional GSM licence in 1999. It was revoked. But where he comes from, a man is not allowed to lie supine because a stupid horse flings them off. He must get up and mount the horse again. Which is what the man did. He joined the fray again. He won and received a licence when the government held another GSM auction in 2003. Then the story of telephony changed in Nigeria – for the better, forever.

Nigeria should not be a graveyard of businessmen and their businesses. Great businesses make great economies. A Nigeria without four-star businesses cannot have a five-star leadership. The world has no seat for the poor. We have an environment that is toxic enough for entrepreneurs, we should not add for them rumours of ill-timed setting of their radiant sun. We have lately seen, not one, not two, very big entrepreneurs having issues just for giving Nigeria what Nigeria desperately needed. Now, it is Adenuga. How does that encourage economic growth? And a country and its leadership are as great as their frontline businesses. We see this in America’s political and financial systems which empower entrepreneurs to create and invest capital, and compete without the fear of knives of envy being driven into their backs.

We enjoy the ‘rebellion’ of Adenuga’s Glo; it serves our individual and national interests. There is something about that model in the Forbes interview I cited earlier: Howard Wolk said “entrepreneurship is a rebellious act” and that the United States is great because its political and judicial systems encourage that rebellion while spurring the rebellious to rise and seize new opportunities. His claim is correct. The more unconventional a business is, the more it fires up a country’s creative energy. Globacom did this when it came in 2003 and ruptured the tendons of predatory competition it met on the turf. Nigerians enjoyed that patriotic recalcitrance from Glo. They still enjoy it. That is why millions of them are wedded to that network as a duty to Nigeria. And they will remain so even if the house is on fire and robbers may be on the prowl (Bí ilé ńjó, b’olè ńjà).