On behalf of the management and staff of the Office of the National Security Adviser, I wish to extend heartfelt greetings to Muslims across Nigeria and around the world on the occasion of Eid-el-Fitr, marking the end of the holy month of Ramadan. This sacred period embodies the virtues of resilience, discipline, and sacrifice. As we celebrate, I urge you to bring to bear these virtues in our collective efforts to strengthen national security.

Your cooperation in the fight against terrorism and other threats remains vital in ensuring peace and stability across our Nation, particularly in our commitment to a ‘whole-of-government and whole-of-society approach.’ Therefore, the continued collaboration between the government, religious leaders, communities, and security agencies in combating terrorism and extremism remains paramount.

The celebration of Eid-el-Fitr serves as a moment for deep reflection, gratitude, and a renewed commitment to peace and national unity. It is thus pertinent for Muslims and all Nigerians to come together in unity, embracing the core principles of love and togetherness that are essential for our national progress. Peace, unity, and compassion are the core values underpinning the true spirit of Eid-el-Fitr; therefore, Nigerians must continue to uphold the virtues of empathy, kindness, and tolerance during the festivities and beyond.

I appeal to all Nigerians to remain vigilant against any forces that threaten our peace, and together, we can build a Nigeria where all citizens, irrespective of their faith, can live in harmony and prosperity.

Our diversity is our strength, and despite the challenges we face as a Nation, we remain united by a shared commitment to peace and stability. The administration of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and this Office uphold these values, and under my leadership, we are dedicated to ensuring the safety and security of all Nigerians regardless of background or faith. We remain steadfast in our mission to enhance Nigeria's resilience against terrorism and violent extremism while promoting peaceful coexistence and national security. I wish you all a happy Eid-el-Fitr celebration.

Mallam Nuhu Ribadu mni

National Security Adviser

The National Judicial Council has raised concerns about a proposal by the House of Representatives to empower the Nigerian Bar Association to sanction and remove corrupt judges.

On March 25, 2025, the House of Representatives passed a bill seeking to amend the 1999 Constitution by introducing provisions for the removal of corrupt judges from the judiciary.

The bill proposes that the NBA should receive petitions against such judicial officers, consider the defense of the petitioned officer, and take further steps on the matter.

Reacting to the bill, the Deputy Director of Information of the NJC, Kemi Ogedengbe, questioned the feasibility and legality of such a move, citing constitutional constraints and procedural requirements.

In an interview with Sunday PUNCH, Ogedengbe said the Constitution placed the responsibility of disciplining judges squarely in the hands of the NJC.

She emphasised that sanctioning a judge is a process governed by specific procedures, including presenting evidence against accused judges.

“The constitutional requirements place the discipline of judges in the hands of the NJC, and it doesn’t just come with the NJC—it has procedures that must be followed. If a judge is deemed to be corrupt, you can’t just put up a statement that a judge is corrupt. It must be backed up with evidence.”

“Either the judge is caught in the act or you have evidence against the judge. Once it happens that way, the dictates of the Constitution will now be followed to deal with such a corrupt judge. That’s what the Constitution says,” she said.

Ogedengbe further questioned the practicality of the NBA taking on such responsibilities, and the potential for abuse.

She said, “The question is, who are those corrupting the judges? A crime does not occur in isolation; there are always accessories. Who are these accessories? Are they members of the public, lawyers, or medical doctors? Or are they lawyers themselves?”

The council also emphasised that public hearings and stakeholder input would play a critical role in determining the viability of the proposed amendment.

“The House of Representatives’ bill will not just end there; it will pass through the Senate and the 36 state Houses of Assembly. They are going to ratify it; there will be public hearings on it. So, this is just the tip of the iceberg.

“Whether it will be able to curb corruption is what I don’t know because one person cannot perpetuate corrupt practices. There must be accessories. So, who are those accessories? Or will a judge just sit down, and they will charge him for corruption?”

“It is those accessories that we have to identify. From there, we will now know if the NBA taking over sanctioning judges will be abused or not.”

“This is just the beginning of the conversation. Whether this bill can effectively curb corruption remains to be seen. For now, we must adhere to the Constitution, which already provides a framework for disciplining judicial officers through due process.

“There is no constitutional amendment that does not involve public hearings. Every stakeholder will come to say if they support it or not. That is when we will know if this type of amendment will succeed or not. A law is not a good law until it is made perfect,” she said.

[Punch]

•Opposition leaders in 11 states hit back at AGF Fagbemi
•President after govs who may oppose him in 2027—Amaechi

Following the threat by the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Minister of Justice, AGF, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, that President Bola Tinubu would declare a state of emergency in any state should the need arise, opposition parties’ leaders across states controlled by them and residents have vowed to resist any such action.

They noted that the remark by the AGF should be taken as a threat to democracy, adding that it portrays Nigeria as a country under dictatorship.

The AGF had warned that the Federal Government would not hesitate to mete out sanctions, including a declaration of a state of emergency, in any state that threatens the economic interest of the country.
Fagbemi spoke in the defence of the declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State which saw Tinubu suspending Governor Sim Fubara, his deputy and the state House of Assembly.

The action of the President drew widespread condemnation across the Nigeria as it is widely believed that whereas Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution provides for emergency rule declaration under certain circumstances, there is no such provision in the document for the suspension of a state governor, the deputy, the House of Assembly or any other democratic structure.

Meanwhile, the Sole Administrator appointed for Rivers State, Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas (rtd), took a cue from Tinubu when, last Wednesday, he dissolved all democratic structures in the state.

Fagbemi had said: “So, it is Rivers State’s turn today. It can be anybody’s turn tomorrow.

“Let the signal be clear for those who want to foment trouble, who want to make the practice of democracy and enjoyment of dividends of democracy a mirage to think twice.

“If it happens again, I will encourage Mr President to do the same, maybe this time with even greater vigour and vitality.

“So, the question of separating or treating or giving preferential treatment to anybody does not arise.
“You give preferential treatment to anybody, you are giving preferential treatment to illegality. Just call a spade a spade.”

But opposition leaders drawn from the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, New Nigerian Peoples Party, NNPP, Labour Party, All Progressives Grand Alliance, APGA, and residents of states where opposition parties rule, said Nigerians won’t succumb to the antics of the ruling party.

Whereas the government at the federal level is controlled by the All Progressives Congress (APC), of Nigeria’s 36 states, 11 are governed by the opposition.

They include Delta, Bayelsa, Akwa Ibom, Anambra, Abia, Enugu, Adamawa, Zamafara, Osun, Kano and Taraba.

Instill fear

Speaking on the matter, Legal Adviser of the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, in Akwa State, Ekemini Uba, said the AGF was instilling fear in opposition parties.

Uba, who admitted that a state of emergency is declared in a state to restore peace and stability, however, advised that it should not be used as a political tool against the opposition.

His words: “The procedure to declare a state of emergency in any state is spelt out in the Constitution clearly.

“It is about restoring peace and stability. Let them not use it as a political tool against the opposition parties.

“So when they are saying they will declare a state of emergency in any state that threatens, they are merely trying to instill fear in the opposition.

“It is a way of stifling the voice of PDP and a few other opposition parties that have been speaking out lately and criticizing their government’s actions.”

Another stakeholder of the PDP in the state, who pleaded anonymity on the issue, angrily said: “Why have they not declared a state of emergency in Borno, Benue?”

Consequences

On his part, Chairman of the NNPP in Kano State, Hashimu Dungurawa, and a political analyst, Prof. Kamilu Sani Fagge, described the development as a dangerous trend.

Dungurawa said: “It is quite unfortunate to have this drastic decision taken by Mr. President because democracy is full of noises, agree and disagree.

“Mr. President could have called the aggrieved parties, Wike and Fubara, discuss and advise them wisely, but because of selfish interest and partisan politics, he decided to take action in favour of his party and abandon the opposition.

“Why didn’t he declare emergency rule in Katsina and Sokoto where insecurity is out of hand? So many people have lost their lives and properties?

“This is unfortunate and not helpful to democracy. And I think, he has no advisers who are putting him through. “Honestly, the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers amounts to trying to create havoc in democracy because nobody is happy.

“You need to see responses from legal practitioners, politicians, and the downtrodden.

Unilaterally

“And he unilaterally took the decision.

“He should have allowed stakeholders to deliberate and take a stand before declaring a state of emergency.
“He just operates like a one-man business. This is what he did when he was sworn-in as the President when he just removed fuel subsidy, now bringing new taxes and declaring a state of emergency in an opposition state. It is quite unfortunate, and he should think wisely”.

Lending his voice, Fagge said: “Such a comment by the AGF is troubling. “Because it shows that our leaders are trying to become dictatorial.

“I think there is a need for caution given that what happened in Rivers has generated a lot of controversies.

“By making such a statement, I think it shows that we are in for trouble, it shows that, at any slightest mistake, the President might declare a state of emergency in any state. This is a dangerous trend.

“In fact, it is highly undemocratic. It seems our leaders have not learned a lesson from what happened in the past. “Such action was what caused the crisis in Western Region and which culminated in the collapse of the First Republic.

“Similarly, such a crisis is what contributed to the failure of the Second Republic.

“It also contributed to the inability of the Third Republic to stand.

“I think this is a dangerous trend and highly dictatorial.”

‘Executive recklessness’

The leadership of PDP in Taraba State, on its part, told Sunday Vanguard that what the AGF said amounted to executive recklessness and an attempt to stifle opposition.

The party’s spokesperson, Andeta’rang Irammae, accused the Federal Government of undermining democracy, warning that the AGF’s remarks suggested that Nigeria no longer runs a democracy but a dictatorship.

He said: “What the AGF said implies that Nigeria no longer runs a democracy and what we have now is dictatorship.

“Our democracy is being targeted, and their intention is to totally capture it.

“The saddest reality is that Mr. President was one of those who fought for this democracy, but now, instead of strengthening it, he is destroying it.

“The AGF is supposed to be a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), not someone who undermines Nigeria’s Constitution.”

Dictatorship

A political analyst, Istifanus Mashi, also spoke, describing the AGF’s statement as dangerous and warning that such threats could lead Nigeria toward what he called a “democratic dictatorship.”

He said: “The President does not have the unilateral power to suspend an elected governor, as Nigeria’s federal system grants constitutional autonomy to states.

“Any such action must follow due legal procedures rather than executive overreach.”

Another critic, Godwin Peter, condemned the AGF’s remarks, calling them “reprehensible, coercive, and a serious threat to constitutional democracy.”

He argued that the statement was made at a time when the state of emergency declared in Rivers State is already facing widespread opposition, raising concerns that such measures may be politically motivated.

His words: “The central government is now using the proclamation of emergency rule in opposition states as an instrument of coercion, possibly to foist a one-party state, which should be condemned by all.”
He called on opposition parties, civil society organizations, the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA), traditional rulers, and religious leaders to take action.

‘Dangerous signal’

In Abia State, a former Senate President, Senator Adolphus Wabara, cautioned the AGF against using the threat of state of emergency to intimidate opposition states.

Wabara, who is also the Chairman, Board of Trustees, BoT, of the PDP, said the comment “is a dangerous signal to Nigeria’s democracy”.

He warned the APC-led Federal Government of taking anti-democratic steps capable of putting Nigeria “in the reverse gear.”

Wabara accused the APC of using intimidation and harassment to suppress the opposition in Nigeria and, therefore, urged Nigerians not to succumb to the antics of the ruling party, insisting that the opposition voice is an essential ingredient of democracy.

International community

He said: “Such a remark coming from a personality like the AGF is very disappointing, and portrays Nigeria as a country under dictatorship.

“This is not only undemocratic but a bad image for Nigeria before the international community.”
On his part, Abia State Secretary of Labour Party, LP, Rev. Andrew Ohiagba, cautioned the AGF against frightening opposition states with emergency rule.

He faulted President Tinubu on emergency rule in Rivers State, insisting that the process violated Nigeria’s Constitution.

The LP scribe, who warned against actions that could derail Nigeria’s fledgling democracy, added that the opposition should not be muzzled or intimidated into silence with emergency rule.

Arbitrariness

In Anambra State, Igboezue Internal Association Nigeria and the Diaspora, IIAND, condemned the statement by the AGF.

Reacting to the statement through its National President Worldwide, Chief Pius Okoye, Igboezue regretted that such a statement could come from a senior and notable lawyer like Fagbemi, who many Nigerians believe knows the law and should be guiding the President not to act contrary to the law.

The pro-Igbo group stated that using what the President has done in Rivers State to threaten other states and governors in the country is wrong and amounts to silencing the opposition. Igboezue also believes that if the President had called former Rivers State Governor Nyesom Wike (now FCT Minister and apparently using majority of the state lawmakers to try to impeach Fubara) to order when the problem started, the situation in the state could not have degenerated to the level of him declaring a state of emergency in the state, for reasons best known by him.

According to Igboezue, “emotions are getting high in Nigeria, and Ndigbo must be very circumspect this time concerning the political quagmire in Rivers State that led to the declaration of state of emergency in that state.”

The group went on: “It is regrettable and unfortunate that Nigeria and its leaders seem to be with neither soul nor spirit, but with a body clothed in evil and injustice, the country seems to be an artificial construction, and, therefore, Ndigbo must tread with caution and remember 1966.

“Ndigbo should remember that the crisis in which many Igbo were slaughtered during the Nigeria-Biafra war (which) started in Yorubaland between Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Ladoke Akintola, then-Premier of Western Region, a crisis that was nicknamed ‘Wild Wild West’ before the ‘Operation Wetie’ started, followed by the constitutional crisis.”

‘Shameful’

Commenting on the issue, Chairman of Labour Party in Rivers State, Hilda Dokubo, described the situation as shameful.

Dokubo said: “State of emergency because for two years we have had peace! State of emergency because you want to capture the economic soul of Rivers State.”

She compared Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State to George Orwell’s novel Animal Farm. The 55-year-old urged every citizen of the state unfamiliar with the book to take the time to read it.

“Animal Farm by George Orwell should be given to every Rivers State citizen as palliative. Meanwhile, someone tells Mr. Jones to rein in his pigs”, she noted.

Imposition

A chieftain of the PDP in Bayelsa State, Mr. Igenewari Dom, said Nigerians would resist imposition of state of emergency in any other state.

Dom said: ‘’They have used Rivers as a pilot scheme. Nigerians are reacting but not resisting. Next time, we will mobilize and resist it.

“The AGF made a reckless statement because Nigerians accept their misrule”, he said.
“What they failed to realize is that they won’t be in power forever. It’s just four years because I know nobody will re-elect Tinubu and his group.

“Nigerians are already united against his dictatorial rule. This is the time for the opposition to unite and send them packing.

“We have had enough, please”.

In the same vein, a political activist in Delta State, Mr. Blessing Adima, said: “I am surprised. Is it because he (Fagbemi) is the Minister of Justice? “He’s not talking as Attorney General. He is talking as a Minister of Justice, as a man under President Tinubu, who will support anything unconstitutional the President does.

“There is nowhere in the Nigerian Constitution that empowers the President to suspend a state governor. “There is no ambiguity in any Section of the Constitution that allows the President to suspend.

“A governor can be removed from office, either through impeachment by the State Assembly, not even the National Assembly, or through incapacitation or through death or through resignation.

“Here, in Section 305, there is no where it states that the President can suspend a governor; this is not democracy at all. “These people have just come to kill our constitutional democracy.

“Did Governor Fubara invite Tinubu and said, ‘oh, the situation in the Rivers state is overwhelming?’ It is only on that note that you will say, ‘okay, Mr. Governor, step aside, let me take this step.’

Judiciary

“Okay, let us look at the manner in which the state of emergency was declared; the President puts the cart before the horse.

“You declared state of emergency before you now transmitted the proclamation to the National Assembly. “That again, is unconstitutional; both the executive and National Assembly acted recklessly.

“So we are waiting for what the judiciary will tell us about this act, this unconstitutional act of Mr. President.

“The President is supposed to consider the Constitution and consider the sovereignty of this country before he exercises his powers.

“I think the President just did his overreach and for a Minister for Justice to support this overreach, then they are now telling us that we have lost the country; but we are still waiting for what the judiciary has to say about this action that the President took.”

Fears in states

Expressing his fears, Chairman of PDP in Rivers State, Nname Ewor, described what happened in the state as state capture.

He said the development has led to tension in states governed by the opposition.

Ewor said: “What they have done in Rivers State has given the impetus to do it in any other state. Having done it in Rivers State and succeeded without following the laid down principle, they are likely to do it in another state.

“The governors, especially governors of the opposition should be wary of the system as we speak.

“The declaration of the state of emergency in Rivers State is not in line with the constitution. Section 305 of the constitution provides the conditions that will give rise to emergency declaration. None of the conditions stated there happened in Rivers.

“All the situations that would warrant emergency rule never happened in Rivers State, but they went ahead to do that, I call it political exigencies.

“They declared a state of emergency and sent a Sole Administrator. What is he doing? He is just destroying the political structures of the governor. He removed the Secretary to the State Government, SSG, removed the Chief of Staff, political appointees and commissioners.

State capture

“They know that the declaration was not constitutional. But having done it in Rivers State and succeeded, the likelihood that they will do it in any other opposition party state is there.

“The AGF is only informing us of what they will do. So we should be wary and rise to the occasion by resisting them.

“What has happened in Rivers State is state capture. There is no emergency. We have states that need emergency in Nigeria. As we speak, in Borno, last week, soldiers were killed. Many LGAs are under siege. The North-West is under the control of bandits, Boko Haram. In Benue, herdsmen have done havoc. But Rivers State has been calm.

“Even the pipeline they claim, since Fubara resumed in 2023, no single pipeline was attacked. What they have done is to take over the structure of governance in the state and hand it over to the Minister of Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike. They have dismantled all the structures Fubara put in place.”

Also, a lawyer, Chief Festus Ogwuche, said the position taken by the AGF brings to question his knowledge of the nation’s constitution as it concerns human rights abuse.

Ogwuche said the statement by the AGF would only create tension in states, adding that emergency rule as declared by President Tinubu runs contrary to democratic principles.

Meanwhile, a former governor of Rivers State, Rotimi Amaechi, has described President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of emergency rule in Rivers State as a ploy to intimidate governors to support his re-election bid.

Amaechi, who spoke in an interview with DW Africa, said the President’s move has sown fear in governors “that if you are not careful, the president will remove you.”.

He added that Fubara has “no security responsibility” over the Rivers crisis, adding that the suspended governor is being punished for an offence he “did not commit.”

Power grab

His words:”It is between the President and the FCT Minister. The President wants power grab. They want to frighten governors who may not support them in 2027. There is a rumour everywhere that if you are not careful, the President will remove you.

“If the President said it is because of insecurity because they blew the pipeline, what about the part of the country where there is insecurity? Is the President saying they should impose an emergency rule on him too? They can’t because he is a democratically elected President. Nobody can impose an emergency rule on him because there is serious insecurity in the North-East, North-West, even in South-East and South-West.

“Rivers governor has no security responsibility. It rests squarely on the President. So why punish a man who did not commit an offence?”

Amaechi called on Rivers residents to “resist the president”. He said the resistance should be done “by democratically protesting against the President.”

[Vanguard]

Dead or alive, Professor Humphrey Nwosu always evoked extreme emotions. I am not by any chance surprised by the outbreak of controversy over whether or not to immortalise him. The former chairman of the National Election Commission (NEC, now INEC), who died at 83 and was buried on Friday, is best known for conducting the June 12, 1993 presidential election. The watershed election was annulled by Gen Sani Abacha, the minister of defence, while Gen Ibrahim Babangida, the president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces, watched helplessly and innocently from his balcony. (If you believe that fantastic story, you can as well believe I am the Queen of Yugoslavia.)

I recall that on Monday, June 14, Nwosu announced results from 15 states, 11 of which were won by Bashorun MKO Abiola, candidate of the Social Democratic Party (SDP). The highlight was Abiola’s victory over Alhaji Bashir Tofa, candidate of the National Republican Convention (NRC), in his own backyard. Abiola did not only win Tofa’s ward, but he also won Kano state. It was total humiliation for Tofa and sweet victory for Abiola, whose backbone in Kano was Alhaji Abubakar Rimi, the former governor. On June 16, NEC suspended announcement of results citing a court injunction, although the electoral laws ousted the jurisdiction of the courts in the conduct of the transition elections.

On Wednesday June 24, Babangida told the nation that the annulment of election, based partly on the need to “protect the judiciary” (don’t laugh). By the way, fake news did not start in the age of social media. The best sites for fake news in those days were newsstands where, depending on the algorithm, you could be served the best rumours and conjectures tailored to your taste. We were told then that as Nwosu insisted on announcing the remaining results, he was arrested by soldiers and given the beating of his life. As a result of the torture, the “bloggers” at the newsstands explained, Nwosu was taken ill and could not continue with the announcement. We believed it.

I pitied Nwosu, whom I saw as the last man standing in a dishonourable and duplicitous military government bent on truncating democracy and holding on to power. He thereafter disappeared from the public eye, perhaps out of trauma, perhaps out of remorse. He refused to grant any media interview. In 2001, when I was editor of TheWeek magazine (a weekly publication founded by Alhaji Atiku Abubakar), I thought Nigerians should hear from Nwosu. A story is best enjoyed from the horse’s mouth. I sent the political editor, Raphael Duru, to Nwosu’s village in Anambra state to search him out. The professor of political science chased him away, shouting: “Leave me alone!”

For long, there was some frustration about Nwosu. Nigerians had many questions lined up that only he could answer, but he refused to come out. Who was really behind the annulment? What role did Babangida, in particular, play? What were the roles of Abacha and other top military officers? Why did Nwosu suddenly stop announcing the results? Why did he not go ahead to announce Abiola as the winner in spite of the court injunctions since the electoral laws expressly ousted judicial jurisdiction? Was it true that he was arrested and manhandled by Brigadier Halilu Akilu, the director of the dreaded Directorate of Military Intelligence (DMI), for insisting on announcing the results?

In 2008, he announced that he had written a book on the election. He picked an interesting date for the presentation: June 12 — exactly on the 15th anniversary of the election. The book, titled ‘Laying the Foundation for Nigeria’s Democracy: My Account of June 12, 1993 Presidential Election and its Annulment’, was published by Macmillan Nigeria. It was presented at the Abuja Sheraton Hotel and had in attendance Akilu, the man reputed to have arrested and slapped him. I looked forward to devouring it, although I felt he was telling the story too late. By the way, both Akilu and Nwosu used the occasion to deny that the professor of political science was arrested and manhandled in 1993.

But I was generally disappointed with the book. We did not wait for 15 years for Nwosu to come and tell us that the president and commander-in-chief of the armed forces was not to blame for the annulment. Babangida himself had taken responsibility in interviews. More so, he stepped aside in August 1993 and conveniently left Abacha behind as minister of defence and, technically, commander-in-chief. This allowed the Goggled One to sweep away the interim national government, led by Chief Ernest Shonekan, in a matter of 83 days. Abacha had saved Babangida by foiling the Orkar Coup in 1990. This 1993 arrangement looked like a case of one good turn deserving another.

My conclusion after leafing through Nwosu’s book was that Babangida had his nudes, so he felt obliged to defend the former president till his dying days. I also believed Babangida was preparing to launch a comeback into politics and had sent Nwosu ahead to help in rehabilitating him in the minds of Nigerians. In one word, I wished Nwosu had not written that book at all. Silence is golden. I began to view him differently and the respect I had stored up for him in 15 years started evaporating. But years down the line when I watched his interview with Sahara TV, my hard line on him began to dissolve. I could see that he put in a decent shift under the difficult circumstances he found himself.

The irony of it all is that it was Babangida’s memoir, ‘A Journey in Service’, published last month, that finally made me cut Nwosu some slack. To me, Nwosu appeared to have been quite brave in going ahead to conduct the June 12 election despite the body language of the powers that be following the late-night injunction issued by Justice Bassey Ikpeme. From similar narrations by both Babangida and Nwosu, it was clear that senior members of the National Defence and Security Council (NDSC) — the highest ruling body in the country then — did not want the election to go ahead despite the illegality of the injunction stopping the election. The NDSC appeared divided but the consensus was clear.

The easiest thing for Nwosu to do — were he to be, indeed, complicit in the annulment plot — was to put things on hold until the injunction was vacated, even though the electoral laws had clearly stated that no court had the power to entertain matters concerning the conduct of the election. But in the end, was it not court injunctions that were relied upon by Babangida to annul the election? We should resist the temptation to discount the fact that Nwosu insisted on conducting the election despite the implicit and explicit opposition from the military authorities. Nwosu specifically recounted that Babangida told him he was on his own if he went ahead to announce the winner.

Abacha was obviously more straightforward than Babangida in his opposition to Nwosu’s position. At a meeting with the NDSC after declaring the first batch of results, Nwosu recounted: “I told them to allow us to complete the exercise. Abacha screamed at me when he heard this. He told me who do I think I was. He said I was not a member of the national security council and that I went ahead and held an election even after the court had declared it illegal.” This was Abacha’s way of telling Nwosu: Are you a baby? Can’t you read our lips? Do you expect us to talk with the whole of our mouths? Unlike Abacha, Babangida was typically playing the Pontius Pilate and going through the corners.

Perhaps half the story has not been told, but with what is in the public domain, Nwosu did his best to serve Nigeria within the context of a brutal military regime that was notorious for curtailing civil liberty, arresting activists at the slightest provocation, closing down media houses at will, and sacking political appointees without any compunction. It may also be of interest at this stage to point out the fact that the NEC actually filed an appeal in Kaduna on June 20 to quash the various injunctions against the June 12 election and submitted the full results to the court. Guess what happened next? Babangida (or is it Abacha?) dissolved the commission and sacked Nwosu as chairman on June 23.

June 12 election aside, Nwosu did many things. He was a political scientist who performed many experiments to improve the electoral system. He first brought back the open ballot system, mandating voters to queue behind the posters of their candidates and be counted. The idea was to avoid inflation of figures but it ended up killing the secrecy of ballot, eroding the principle of free choice (imagine the possible consequences of husband and wife openly voting for different candidates). He also introduced staggered presidential primaries, by which a party did not have to hold its primary on a single day. It was held in states in different rounds, based on the timetable.

There was serious criticism of the open ballot system as voters complained about intimidation while commentators said it was archaic and regressive. Nwosu tinkered with it and came up with the modified open ballot system (MOBS) which is still in use today. Ballot boxes used to be inside polling booths. This created room for multiple voting and stuffing. With MOBS, voting would be in secret but ballot boxes would be in the open. Everyone could see that no stuffing is taking place. Asked at a press conference why he changed his mind after having defended the open ballot system and declared it as the best, Nwosu replied: “My friend, can’t a good thing give way to a better thing?”

Nwosu also came up with the Option A4 system (which many mistakenly refer to as open ballot till this day). Through Option A4, presidential candidates had to go through four stages before they could pick their party’s tickets. First stage was to contest and win at the ward level, after which they would contest and win at the local government level (stage two) and then proceed to contest and become the state’s flag bearer (stage three). The final (fourth) stage was the national convention, where all the flag bearers from the states would contest for the party’s ticket. No matter the controversies postmarking his life and death, Nwosu was a thinker. He served Nigeria creditably.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

IBAS’ RIVERS

Bob Marley sang it: “Give them an inch they take a yard/Give them a yard they take a mile.” Admiral Ibok-Ete Ibas, the emergency administrator of Rivers, is recreating the state in his own image. Standing on President Tinubu’s mandate, he has sacked all Siminalayi Fubara’s political appointees — as if the governor would not return. He fired the SSG, the chief of Staff, commissioners, board members, special advisers, special assistants and senior special assistants. He appointed a military officer, Commodore Aminu Shehu, as chief of staff, and is now more or less probing the councils. This is somebody that was brought in to stabilise the state. What next? Remove the chief judge? Agenda.

OBI AND OBA

I almost passed out when I watched a video in which Mr Peter Obi was speaking glowingly about how democracy flourished under President Olusegun Obasanjo. And to make matters worse, the audience erupted in applause. Only those who don’t bother to check their facts would take Obi’s eulogy seriously. Where do we even start from? Is it the illegal impeachment of dissenting governors, sometimes by six lawmakers? Is it the abduction of a governor and the withdrawal of his security? Is it the declaration of a meaningless public holiday in April 2007 to stop the Supreme Court from delivering a ruling that was going to favour Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, his estranged deputy? Amnesia.

JUSTICE FOR TEEJAY

Mr Adetunji Opayele aka TeeJay, the 32-year-old co-founder and CTO of Bumpa, was reportedly knocked down on his bike on March 4, 2025 along Ozumba Mbadiwe, Victoria Island, Lagos. There is much to be said about the motorist but a sad part for me is that in the year 2025, there are no functional emergency services in the so-called “Centre of Excellence”. Many motorists refused to help the bleeding and unconscious victim to the hospital, apparently to avoid police trouble. Above all, several hospitals turned him back maybe because of who would pay the bills. He eventually died. What a sad, sad, sad story. When are we going to start valuing human life in this country? Sickening.

NO COMMENT

After using voice vote to determine two-thirds of 360 members in endorsing the state of emergency in Rivers state, the house of reps has been pretty much busy trying to justify the billions of naira we pour into their pockets yearly. On Wednesday, they passed two bills for second reading, a vital legislative stage. One strips the vice-president, governors and deputy governors of immunity. The other bill abolishes the death penalty. If you thought they knew what they were doing, you were giving them too much credit. Less than 24 hours later, our honourable lawmakers gathered again and rescinded the bills. That is the level of diligence that goes into lawmaking in Nigeria. Hahahaha.

Audu Ogbeh, a former minister of agriculture, has faulted the practice of replacing civilian governors with military appointees during state of emergency.

Speaking on Channels Television’s Politics Today, the ex- minister said President Bola Tinubu and his predecessor, Olusegun Obasanjo, had taken similar steps, raising concerns about a return to military-style governance.

Ogbeh warned that the practice could send a damaging message to Nigerians about the ability of civilian leaders to govern themselves.

“The only other thing that I’m asking is: Why is it that each time there is this suspension of a governor, a military person is put back in place?” he asked.

“Do we miss military rule or are we suggesting that civilians are incapable of governing themselves?

“Obasanjo did it twice, in fact, thrice, and we have it again. What’s the logic? This is why, in the first place, this whole imposition of a state of emergency should be avoided.

“Since the constitution doesn’t say you can only pick this or that person, the president is free to do so, but it’s also sending a funny signal that civilians can’t do the job themselves.

“That’s not a good one. That’s why civilians themselves should be more responsible. Elected individuals should behave themselves and not carry on as if it’s a holiday and that they can do as they wish because they are sending the wrong signal to society.”

On March 18, Tinubu declared a state of emergency in Rivers, citing the protracted political crisis and vandalisation of oil facilities.

The president also suspended Siminalayi Fubara, the state governor; Ngozi Odu, his deputy; and members of the state assembly.

Tinubu nominated Ibok-Ete Ibas, a retired vice-admiral, as the sole administrator of Rivers.

On March 20, the senate and the house of representatives controversially ratified Tinubu’s request for the emergency rule.

The presidency had said that the decision was to prevent further escalation of the political crisis in the south-south state.

Several stakeholders, including the south-south governors’ forum, have condemned the emergency rule in Rivers.

[TheCable]

Lech Walesa, remember him? He was the Labour union leader who succeeded in forming and leading a broad anti-Communism and anti-Soviet Union mass uprising under the banner of the Solidarity Movement which, in 1989, ended Communist rule in Poland and ushered in a chain of events that led to the disintegration of the behemoth called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republic (USSR) and brought an end to the Cold War as it was then known - even if temporarily and for a season as recent events appear to demonstrate.

For his efforts, Walesa, an electrician by profession and Polish dockworkers’ union leader, was awarded the Nobel Peace prize, going on to win the 1990 Polish presidential election and becoming the first democratically-elected president of his country (1990 - 1995) since 1926 and the first-ever Polish president elected by popular vote. Recently, I read him complaining about the United States’ President Donald Trump’s alleged (mis)treatment of the Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and the superpower United States’ apparent abandonment of its leadership of the so-called “Free World”. And I began to wonder and ponder.

Who constitutes the Free world? “Freed” and or “free” from what, who? According to Google, the term Free World “refers more broadly to all liberal democracies collectively, as opposed to authoritarian regimes and communist states. It has traditionally primarily been used to refer to the countries allied and aligned with the United States, the European Union, and NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation).”

In practice, the Western world, as the US and its economic and military allies are called, are the Free World. These, majorly, are the countries of Western Europe, the United States, and Canada. They are also known as the “West”. They are the "metropoles" or metropolitan powers while other countries allied or aligned to them from the other parts of the world are their satellites. The United States of America, beginning from the end of the Second World War in 1945, leads the hordes. Hence, it is referred to as the leader of the Free World. Derisively and derogatively, it is also jeered at as “the policeman of the world”!

Policing and protecting what, who? Policing and protecting, ostensibly, the sovereignty, territorial integrity, freedom, and liberties of its members and their satellite states against any encroachment from external forces and or factors. It stands to reason that the arch enemies of the Free World are the other side or section of the world that is not “free” and which is assumed to be opposed to the freedom of others. These are the countries whose political, economic, and social systems are opposed to those of the countries of the Free World.

While the countries of the Free World practice capitalism or what they call the free market or deregulated economy and flaunt as democracy the regular election of its leaders by popular vote, their opponents practice a regulated communist or socialist system where the freedom and liberty to run haywire on all fronts and fly on spoils granted by the Free World is reined in to ensure a more equitable distribution of resources towards the establishment of an egalitarian and more just society.

Led by the defunct USSR, Moscow was the metropole while the satellite states were also spread across the world. Until recently, China, then a sleeping giant (to quote the French general, Napoleon Bonaparte), stood aloof from the Cold War that raged between the US and the NATO countries/forces it led on the one hand, and the USSR and the Warsaw Pact countries/forces led by it on the other. Most of the east European countries belonged in the Warsaw Pact/Communist Bloc. They were known as the Communist Bloc or the Eastern Powers. Derisively and derogatively, they have been referred to by the West as the “Evil Empire”.

The disintegration of the USSR in 1991, which resulted in 15 of its constituent republics gaining independence and moving away, one-by-one, from the eastern axis to the western axis, whittled the power and influence of what remained as the rump of the old USSR, which is the Russian Federation, but which, as a superpower, is still strong enough to command immense influence and exert commensurate power in regional and world politics. The meteoric rise of China from the backwoods of superpower politics to the centre stage of power and recognition and its alignment with Russia, so far, has all but ended the sole superpower status enjoyed by the US and its NATO allies in the post-USSR disintegration era.

This is the realisation that must have dawned on Trump but which the likes of Walesa, still marooned in the past and remaining nostalgic of its heroics, want the US to still forge ahead with. The US disastrous policy of policeman of the world is unwelcomed in many parts of the world. Whatever has a beginning must have an end - with the exception of He who is the Alpha and the Omega.

1776 was when America made its declaration of independence. Before then it had been a colony of Great Britain. It also had to fight a civil war, buy and grab territories before it became the behemoth that it is today. Even at that, it was not originally interested in world dominance but in the preservation of the Americas as its own “sphere of influence”, which is the import of the Monroe Doctrine (1823) by the 5th US President James Monroe (1817 - 1825).

If the first World World (1914 -1918) opened the eyes of the US to the fact that it had a role to play in world affairs, the second (1939 - 1945) confirmed to it that it must not only assume the leadership of the (Free) World but also put in place mechanisms to create it in its own image, assiduously preserve it, and beat everyone into line. We have since been in that era - the era of the United Nations Organisation - with the enforcement tools of NATO, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, among others.

“Man is born free and everywhere he is in chains” bemoans the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Little wonder, then, that the battle cry of the French Revolution of 1789 was “Liberty, Equality, Fraternity” in its “Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizen”. The Americans, in their 1776 Declaration of Independence, stated unequivocally that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”

Please, don’t rejoice yet! Whenever the West speak such eloquent words and espouse noble principles that make the hair stand on the body, they mean it only for themselves, the so-called Free World, and not for anyone else! Otherwise, there would have been no centuries of Slave Trade when the human resources of Africa especially were pillaged and carted in the most inhuman, horrid, horrible, and despicable conditions to develop the so-called New World. Walter Rodney’s seminal work, “How Europe underdeveloped Africa” graphically depicts the effects of this inhuman trade on the underdevelopment of Africa and Africans.

Otherwise, too, there would have been no decades of colonization of the African continent following immediately after and the Berlin conference of 1884/1885 where Africa’s head was shaved behind its back (to quote MKO Abiola). There would have been no gruesome murder of African leaders demanding the same “unalinable rights” that the same leaders of the so-called Free World had so eloquently propounded and so forcefully demanded, fighting even to the death to earn them. Patrice Lumumba! Kwame Nkrumah! Walter Rodney! Conscientious African and other satellite-country leaders that raised their heads to demand equal rights for their own people were murdered, were hounded out of office, and were prevented from taking office. Salvador Allende! Sylvanus Olympio! Obafemi Awolowo! The list is endless!

Neo-colonialism or imperialism, which Vladmir Lenin, leader of the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917, described as the highest stage of capitalism, has replaced direct colonial rule. What we have in many satellite countries today is Frantz Fanon’s black mask or faces hiding the face of the white colonial masters still calling the shots. Africa’s mineral and material resources are pillaged for the benefit of the metropoles. Peanuts are what the Free World pays for these resources.

Just one example here: While France paid $0.8 per kilogram of uranium to its former colony, Niger Republic, it paid $200 for the same quantity of the same commodity to Canada, a member of the same “Free World” like itself! We may mouth the same cliches, but they mean different things to different folks. We may be rallied to fight for the same principles (as was the case during the Second World War), but when the chips are down the same principles and ideals will be interpreted and implemented differently for different peoples.

Their freedom is our slavery. Their rights, our chains. They are the Free World. We are the Enslaved World. They have reasoned - and reckoned - that we cannot both be free together. One has to be enslaved for the other to be free. One has to be looted and deprived of its resources, human and material, for the other to enjoy the good life. One hand must be down for the other to be on top. Their prosperity and our poverty are inversely proportional one to the other. For those who may not understand that mathematical expression, what it means is that they are rich because we are poor and we are poor because they are rich. To get rich, they first make us poor. Another way of putting it is that they must make us poor before they can become rich.

There is no moralization involved here. Or, better put, the morals of the situation is that, to break their yoke from off our neck, we must stand up and fight, like the French did, and like the Americans did. This has got nothing to do with religion; in fact, religion was, has been, and remains one of the tools they employed for our subjugation. It is the reason Karl Marx described it as the opium (sedative) of the people. If we cannot turn the tables and employ the same religion against them - now that we cry more than the bereaved and act holier than the Pope on the matter of religion - we should at least see beyond the veil.

Morals play no role in the Free World’s code of conduct. Their ethics revolve around the good life for themselves and themselves alone. To achieve this, their doublespeak and deceit even make the few conscientious folks among them blush. Otherwise, how can second- or third-generation immigrants and sons of immigrants like Trump sit in judgement over - and begin to deport - the descendants of those who have been there centuries earlier?

Bob Marley then was right: Them crazy/Them crazy/We gonna chase those crazy baldheads out of town/I an I build a cabin/I and I plant the corn/Didn’t my people before me/Slave for this country?/Now you look me with that scorn/Then you eat up all my corn/…Hate is your reward for us/Telling us of your God above/We gonna chase those crazy…”

Only by first freeing ourselves shall we help to free the so-called Free World from their pride and prejudice, hatred, bigotry, jaundiced worldview and oppressive manipulation of the other parts and peoples of the world.

Eid Mubarak to my teeming readers and all our moslem brothers and sisters all over the world! But should I put it on record that none has yet considered sending me ram, rice, and condiments for me to also hillariously join them in the celebration?

Gospel singer Frank Edwards has advised against overspending in an attempt to emulate his charitable actions.

Edwards, on Facebook, emphasised that his financial capacity and business ventures enable him to support others.

He cautioned fans not to drain their savings in an effort to help others, as they may not have the same financial stability or guidance.

The singer specifically addressed those trying to start their lives, urging them to prioritise stability before attempting to support others.

He wrote: “For those following me i need to sound you this warning! Don’t say Frank Edwards empowers people, gives a lot … and you go and start doing the same thing with your little savings .. you don’t know how many businesses i own , you don’t know how long I’ve been working, you don’t have the instructions i have ..This is specifically for those of you trying to kick start your life . DONT EMPTY YOUR SAVINGS. .

stand 1st so you are able to carry others. Because i saw a comment that says “sir i am going to empty my savings and help people like you do”, calm down”.

[TheCable]