Do people follow titles, or do they follow courage? What role does integrity play in the essence of true leadership? And can the pursuit and defence of justice serve as a harbinger of outstanding leadership? These are timeless questions, their answers woven into the fabric of history.

While titles may bestow authority, they do not define true leadership. History reminds us that it is not rank but resilience, not position but principle, that carves a leader’s place in people’s hearts. Integrity forms the bedrock of genuine leadership, ensuring power is wielded not for personal gain but for a higher cause. And justice—unyielding, unrelenting—is often the mark of those who lead not by words alone but by deeds that shape nations and inspire generations.

Chief Edwin Clark stands as a testament to these ideals. A fearless advocate, a visionary strategist, and a patriot unwavering in his pursuit of justice, he led with courage and an unshakable moral compass. His passing marks the close of an era, but his legacy endures—a guiding light for those who seek to lead with honour, integrity, and an unbreakable commitment to justice.

At the tender age of 24, while at Teachers Training College in Abraka, Edwin Clark’s leadership potential was already evident. He was not one to turn a blind eye to injustice. Even as a student, he was known for leading his peers in addressing issues that affected them and organising press conferences to discuss national matters. This early period laid the groundwork for his lifelong commitment to justice and fighting for the oppressed. His readiness to challenge the status quo and engage in meaningful dialogue set him apart from his peers and highlighted his natural leadership qualities.

Not content with fighting from the sidelines, Clark ventured into active politics. In 1955, he ran as an independent candidate and won as a Councillor, a bold move considering the dominance of political parties. Interestingly, his father also contested and won under the NCNC platform from another ward. Clark’s presence as an independent candidate made him a thorn in the side of party-backed councillors, as he remained steadfast in holding them accountable. This early political experience demonstrated his commitment to challenging the status quo and fighting for what he believed was right. His ability to operate independently of party structures, a rare trait in Nigerian politics, showcased his political courage and deep-seated belief in true representation.

Leadership and courage are often debated—are they inherent traits shaped by one’s environment? In Edwin Clark’s case, his leadership qualities were shaped by strong values, an unwavering belief in justice, and an environment riddled with societal failures. His ability to stand firm in the face of adversity and his relentless pursuit of justice established him as a formidable leader. His resilience and conviction became his defining traits, as he remained undeterred by political, social, or personal obstacles.

Clark’s leadership extended beyond the borders of Nigeria. In 1961, upon his arrival in London to study law, he was elected President of Hans Crescent, a student body of over 200 students from different countries. His re-election for a second term was a testament to his exceptional leadership abilities. He fiercely defended students’ welfare, often taking significant personal risks to ensure their voices were heard. His leadership at Hans Crescent demonstrated his capacity to unite diverse groups, a skill that would prove invaluable throughout his political career.

Clark’s activism was not confined to Nigerian affairs. Despite his admiration for him, he organised a protest against Ghana’s leader, Kwame Nkrumah. Clark believed in calling out injustice wherever it occurred. He had no personal stake in Ghana’s governance but was driven by a sense of shared humanity and justice. This act underscored his commitment to fearless advocacy beyond his national interests. His ability to separate admiration from accountability was rare, reflecting his unwavering commitment to principles over personal affiliations.

As the Secretary of the Nigerian Bar Association (Warri branch), Clark took on the challenge of professional misconduct in the legal field. He called for the establishment of an ombudsman to oversee ethical practices. His intolerance for corruption led him to confront friends and colleagues in the legal profession, highlighting his unwavering principles. This period solidified his reputation as an anti-corruption activist. His pursuit of ethical standards in the legal profession reflected his broader mission to instil integrity in governance and society. 

Recognising the power of collective action, Clark initiated several organisations to address national issues. These platforms were crucial in mobilising people, amplifying voices, and influencing public discourse. Some of his notable initiatives include the South-South People’s Conference, the South-South People’s Assembly, the Southern Nigeria People’s Assembly, the Congress for Equality and Change, the Southern and Middle Belt Leaders Forum, and Pan Niger Delta Forum (PANDEF). These organisations were strategically created to address specific challenges and ensure that justice and equity remained part of Nigeria’s political discourse. His ability to galvanise people around common causes demonstrated his visionary leadership and commitment to building coalitions for meaningful change.

Though not the originator of the resource control movement, Clark became one of its most vocal champions. He saw it as a means of achieving economic justice, particularly for the Niger Delta region. Between 1998 and 2021, he held 25 press conferences on the issue, undeterred by opposition from political allies and adversaries. His steadfast advocacy ensured that resource control remained a prominent national conversation. He viewed the equitable distribution of resources as a fundamental issue of justice that could not be compromised.

Clark never shied away from disagreeing with influential figures. Despite his close relationship with President Olusegun Obasanjo, he openly challenged his policies when they contradicted his values. Similarly, he became the leading critic of President Buhari’s administration over lopsided federal appointments. His willingness to speak truth to power, even when it meant losing friendships, underscored his dedication to justice. His ability to maintain friendships while holding firm to his principles was a testament to his diplomatic skills and deep loyalty to the truth.

Beyond individuals, Clark confronted institutions that he believed threatened Nigeria’s stability. He was a vocal critic of the Nigeria Governors Forum, labelling it a danger to national peace. He also fought against corruption in the judiciary, demanding greater accountability in governance. These fearless confrontations positioned him as a moral compass in Nigerian politics. He was never intimidated by the entrenched interests that sought to maintain the status quo, constantly advocating for policies and reforms that would benefit the larger population.

Like Abraham Lincoln, Clark was a leader of integrity, known for his courage in standing up for what was right. He also fought institutions and vices, including the Nigerian judiciary and corruption. Even those who opposed him respected his convictions. He was the kind of leader adversaries preferred as an ally rather than an opponent. His legacy is one of steadfastness, resilience, and an unyielding commitment to justice, values that continue to resonate beyond his lifetime.

Clark’s legacy is one of dedication to Nigeria’s betterment. He remained a steadfast advocate for justice and equity until his final days. His life is a roadmap for aspiring leaders seeking courage and integrity to lead. His journey teaches us that leadership is not about titlenor comfort but the willingness to sacrifice for the greater good.

E K Clark’s life answers the question of whether courage is a function of genetic makeup or the environmental context. It is self-evident that Chief Clark’s courageous leadership has been shaped by his genetic makeup, strong values, and an environment of self-perpetuating injustice and societal failures.

His life challenges the next generation to continue the fight for justice. The lessons he left behind must inspire every Nigerian to work towards a better and more just nation. His contributions to national discourse and governance set a precedent that should be emulated by all who aspire to lead.

Edwin Clark was more than a politician; he was a movement. His courage, integrity, and unwavering commitment to justice made him a beacon of hope in Nigeria’s political landscape. His legacy will inspire future generations to pursue justice, speak truth to power, and lead with unwavering integrity. His story reminds us that one individual’s determination can shape history, and his impact will be felt for generations.

Pa E K Clark was a living example of courage, strategic thinking, patriotism, tenacity, and selflessness. His lifelong example of standing up for what is right and just, as well as the challenge he gave us never to stop working for a better and more just Nigeria, should inspire us every day. His story reminds us that one individual’s determination can shape the course of history, and his impact will be felt for generations to come. In remembering him, we are reminded of the responsibility to build a just and equitable society, standing firm in the face of adversity, just as he did.

 Dakuku Peterside, a public sector turnaround expert, public policy analyst and leadership coach, is the author of the forthcoming book, “Leading in a Storm”, a book on crisis leadership.

In five parts, thirteen chapters, six appendices, including an interview; a prologue and an epilogue, he sought to give a definite definition of himself. But, for me, the deepest insight into the person of General Ibrahim Babangida is not in his expensive book (it fetched him billions; I bought a copy for N40,000). The greatest revelation was at the launch of the book in Abuja. His comrade-in-arms and childhood friend, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, revealed that a cleric told them about 80 years ago that Babangida would one day be president of his country.

Now, when you, a seer, tell a child that he would be king one day, the palace cannot be safe until the child becomes man and he becomes king – or he dies. We read exactly that in Shakespeare’s story of the Scottish General, Macbeth. Three witches tell Macbeth that he will be King of Scotland. Macbeth becomes impatient; he kills the reigning king and takes the throne. Because of the security of his throne, paranoia pushes King Macbeth to take other desperate measures. People die; civil war erupts, and more people die. Darkness falls. Please, go back and read again your Macbeth.

My people have several proverbs and sayings on royalty and fate. They say one’s destiny makes one a king but one’s character dethrones one (Orí ẹni ni í fini j’ọba, ìwà èyàn ni í yọ èyàn l’óyè). Like Macbeth, IBB joined the army and rose to become a General. Again, like Macbeth, the Thane of Cawdor prophecy came true for Babangida and he became Chief of Army Staff. Finally, like Macbeth, he became king and pronounced himself president and proceeded to do as Macbeth did until he left almost the Macbeth way. If you had been wondering why the amiable General from Minna chose ‘president’ as his official title, now you know it was in fulfillment of a prophecy.

Babangida once named his heroes: Zulu’s Emperor Chaka and General Hannibal of Carthage. Read again about those Generals, their careers and their exploits, their end. Read page 121 of IBB’s book and decide if you are convinced by his reasons for not answering what all his predecessors answered: Head of State. He says in the book that he chose to be different not because he wanted to copy Turkey’s General Kemal Ataturk or Emperor Chaka the Great. He says he chose to be ‘president’ as a demonstration of his commitment to “our suspended constitution.”

Babangida’s feet walked corridors of power; he befriended, and ‘charmed’ power even before he installed Buhari as Head of State in December 1983. His feet took him, or he took his feet everywhere his inner head (his Ori Inu) could be found. He was intrepid, smooth and daring. I read Shehu Shagari’s autobiography, ‘Beckoned to Serve’ published in 2001: “In late October or early November 1983, Major General Babangida and Colonel Aliyu Mohammed came to the State House to see me and we had a long discussion. They did pay me such visits usually at night long before I became President.” Shagari had that recorded on page 497 of his own autobiography. You are likely to ask what IBB was looking for in Shagari’s home at night. The way Babangida walked hallways of power was the way persons kept awake by destiny walked, restlessly.

In the Foreword to Babangida’s book written by his boss, General Yakubu Gowon, we gain better discernment on the labyrinth called IBB. The older General describes Babangida as “a natural leader but also a devoted follower.” Sun Tzu, in ‘The Art of War’ tells Generals: “Appear weak when you are strong, and strong when you are weak.” Is that why President Babangida is read in the book bossing and, at the same time, bowing to his army chief, General Sani Abacha, in double-quick manner? Many commentators have said that his June 12 account is a mesh of courage and cowardice. ‘Abacha did this, Abacha did that but I regrettably take full responsibility for everything that happened’! Here, before you abuse IBB as a General without biceps, know that he did not walk alone. Apart from Murtala Muhammed who came fast and left fast, every military regime we had had its internal tormentor. For Gowon, it was Murtala Muhammed who was both boy and boss to the boss. All accounts say Gowon ruled under Murtala’s shadows until the kingmaker said enough and took the crown from Gowon alias Jack. Read the Gowon/Murtala story in Theophilus Akindele’s ‘Memoir of Mixed Blessings’ – especially the contract controversies. In his own book, Babangida says Murtala Muhammed, in Gowon’s government, “was quite a handful in matters pertaining to control” (page 85). IBB himself played the Murtala role to Muhammadu Buhari, 1984-85. He made the lanky General from Daura sit on the throne then shoved him off the seat because of his “excesses.” It should, therefore, not shock the reader that Abacha was the captain of the ship who allowed IBB to be there until the groom was ready for the bride. Babangida’s ‘A Journey in Service’ tears the mask.

Somewhere in that book, like a river nearing its sea, for whatever reasons, IBB reproduced (introduced) a 1995 interview he granted TELL magazine, and it reads like a summary of the entire IBB story. At a point in the interview, TELL magazine editors remind him of how he dealt ruthlessly with them and their magazine, IBB asks “What happened to TELL? TELL? Seriously, what happened?” He is told that over half a million copies of TELL were seized, and some of the editors speaking with him there were arrested. His response: “You see, when I sat up there, I didn’t know most of these things that happened…At times, the information only reached me later.” If what he said here is true, for a man who boasted that he was trained to dominate his environment, the fact that big things happened in his government without his knowledge could only tell how hopelessly imprisoned people of power could be.

Some people’s luck or escape route is in dying young. One loud example is General Murtala Muhammed. Would he be the hero he is if he had ruled for three, four years? Nigeria would definitively have happened to him. Unlike Murtala, some other people are very lucky to live hard and live long. Babangida is one of such. He is 83 years old. Imagine if he had died when his enemy, Muhammadu Buhari, was president. He would not have made the loud statement he made in Abuja last week! Or worse, if he had died during the June 12 crisis. He lived those bloody moments and validated Musician Odolaye Aremu’s theory that “if we don’t die young, enemies of fifteen years will become our friends.” At his book launch last week, his enemies and friends dropped offerings at his altar. NADECO man, Bola Tinubu, described him as “visionary Babangida.” Gowon in the Foreword declares that “in the post-Civil War period, his (IBB’s) tenure in office is easily the most remarkable.” That is an interesting verdict. Almost five of those post-Civil War years belong to Gowon himself. Some people are very good at scoring own goals.

In language and structure, I find this book by IBB to be very solid and uncomplicated. But, certainly, the most contentious of the content of the book is the June 12 story. And, the author’s treatment of the matter is the most extensive – almost 40 pages. Very unlike IBB, he named his friend, Sani Abacha, as the head of the forces that cancelled the election. But the annulment was just a culmination of a long, dark, bad process triggered by IBB himself long before the election was held. He said he was away in Katsina when Abacha and his boys annulled the election. But IBB came back from Katsina; why didn’t he undo what Abacha did? If he did anything at all, it is not in the book. Instead, what we see are hand-wringing cliches on the annulment and its consequences. The Abacha family is angry, furious; Abiola’s people are not impressed; they wondered why he waited for ‘all’ his witnesses to die before coming out. But what he wrote is no news. What is news is that those facts are directly from IBB himself. Snippets of what he said were in the media of that period. And we heard all sorts of weird things in newsrooms, the scrambling for and partitioning of power. For instance, we heard (or read) that Abacha, one heated meeting day, followed General Joshua Dogonyaro to the toilet and told him: “Let IBB go and we remain.” And Dogonyaro’s reply was “Who are the we?” Soldiers are great followers of Sun Tzu: “in the midst of chaos, there is opportunity.”

Professor Omo Omoruyi was one of the key architects of IBB’s transition programme and, perhaps, the closest to IBB in the dark days of the annulment. In 1999, Omoruyi published ‘The Tale of June 12: The Betrayal of the Democratic Rights of Nigerians’. It is his account of the June 12 tragedy. More than twenty-five years after it was published, I have not read anyone that is mentioned in the book coming out to say the professor lied. So, I take Omoruyi’s account of the pre and post-annulment events as reliable. He claims in his book (page 37) that the June 12 election “was aborted by forces external to its design.” He is more direct on page 257: “General Abacha felt humiliated when General Babangida yielded to the US pressure to order on June 11, 1993 that the June 12 election must go on. From that June 11, General Abacha showed no interest in the matter and waited for when it would crash…It was Lt.-General Alani Akinrinade, a former Chief of Defence Staff and an experienced professional officer, who read the situation right in the interview he granted to reporters in October 1993 when he said that ‘Shonekan is a mask…the masquerade itself is the armed forces and Abacha is the personification of that masquerade.’ See TELL, November 1, 1993. p.25.”

Omoruyi accuses IBB of betraying his country and its people with his disruptive handling of the last leg of the transition programme. He says IBB lost control of the military and the government soon after the election held. He said Babangida was in a fix as of 9.30 p.m. on 21 June, 1993 when he met him. His book (page 162 – 164) quotes the General copiously: “I see disaster for myself and my family. Where do I go from here?” Omoruyi quotes IBB as confirming that Abiola won the election but that “they” would kill him if he allowed the results to stay. Omoruyi wrote further that at the end of that outburst, Babangida made a telling remark. He quotes him as saying “I told you that I am a prisoner. What do I do? I think I need a psychiatrist” (page 171). Two days after all these, the annulment announcement was made via an unsigned, undated paper circulated to the media through the Vice President’s office.

Can we, at this point, ask journalist Nduka Irabor to come out and tell the world who gave him the unsigned annulment statement that he released to the world on 23 June 1993? He can no longer be quiet.

Now, if Abacha emitted such negative vibrations in his government, why did Babangida leave him behind after retiring himself and all service chiefs? IBB offers no cogent reason for this in his ‘A Journey in Service’. Instead, what we read is his admission of “a grave mistake” in retaining Abacha as chairman of the joint Chief of Staff and “as enforcer-in-chief for the new government” of Ernest Shonekan. Omoruyi addresses the same issue better in his own book (page 257): “In response to my question as to who would guard the guards after August 26, 1993, he (Babangida) said he would remove the operational control from him (Abacha) and assign it to Lt.-General Joshua Dogonyaro.” It is interesting that IBB thought that running into Dogonyaro’s fire was a better option to staying in Abacha’s fire. In any case, Abacha sacked Dogonyaro and all other “guards” soon after Babangida stepped aside. The other arms of the IBB boys, he used them to get rid of Shonekan and his Interim National Government (ING). He then cavalierly gave them the tissue paper treatment – he used, dumped and flushed them down the drain.

We saw a convergence of all the forces in Abuja last week. NADECO and the military factions swam in open adultery. They wined and partied and gave the General of Generals a generous pat on the back. One of my university classmates described the Abuja event as “not funny.” Her post to me dripped with so much pain. She told tales of death and dying and suffering. She gave accounts of personal experiences and sacrifices. She felt betrayed.

I begged her to let me include her tears here without mentioning her name: “I watched the launch of the book written by IBB and took a cursory look at the parade of eminent personalities in attendance. I listened to the speeches one after the other and saw them laughing. I was stunned that people therein, one after the other, eulogized IBB. I thought for a moment that I was in another planet or that I had mental issues by asking myself if these people were describing the same events that I witnessed as a 26-year-old spinster living in Lagos and trying to chart a course for the future. Significantly, I remember how I walked from Aguda in company of a friend to queue up and vote at Adebola Street, off Bode Thomas in Surulere, Lagos and walked back home. I remember sitting at the reception of the school of nursing on Awolowo Road waiting to collect my sister’s transcript when an elderly woman fainted on hearing the news of the annulment. I recall her colleagues trying to revive her and crying at the same time that their hope for a better Nigeria had just been dashed. I remember having woken up early one morning to go to work and arriving in Norman Williams in Ikoyi only to realize that Lagos was on lockdown and going back home became an arduous task. I remember getting a ride through the Third Mainland Bridge to Obanikoro and walking back home in Aguda, dodging bullets and escaping area boys who took advantage of the situation. I survived but some did not. What I saw in that hall last week was a mockery of those who died and of those of us who did not die but are yet to recover from the trauma of that period. It is not funny!”

My friend spoke for millions seething helplessly in the dimly lit parlours of their lives. But, there must be a closure, and I think that was what that Abuja gathering thought it was doing. For those who are angry and crying betrayal, I give what I gave my friend – a quote: “Whatever happens, stay alive. Don’t die before you’re dead.” Some say the quote is from English writer, Virginia Woolf; some others credit Polish writer and Nobel Laureate, Olga Tokarczuk. Whoever the writer is between those two ladies gave a valuable advice. “Whatever happens, stay alive.”

Daedalus was a mythical sculptor who lived in Athens. In one desperate moment, the man threw a stone at a bird and killed it; the stone ricocheted and killed a second bird. With the feathers, he and his son created wings with which they escaped from detention in a high tower which they had helped their tormentor to design. That appears to be the objective of General Ibrahim Babangida’s autobiography. To kill many birds with one lone stone. Still all storms; settle all scores; explain all controversies; and they are many: OIC membership, Dele Giwa’s death, Mamman Vatsa’s coup, the C-130 Plane Crash, the Gideon Orkar Coup, June 12; the SAP riots, Gulf Oil Windfall. The author thoroughly explains and analyses these as “challenges of leadership” all across the 420 pages, some from page 203 to 220. But, has he succeeded in getting these cases closed? Dirty water may quench fire but if you want to fight fire, you don’t wear clothes made of dry grass. Has Babangida’s book helped him to calm or further enrage the sea? Well, in Chinua Achebe’s words, it is “morning yet on creation day.”

TODAY, I delight to ask questions, which I expect those closer than me to the affected scene of activity to answer. The rumblings in Ondo state, though multi-faceted, are in two broad categories – security of life and property and cloak-and-dagger struggle for power and fleeting relevance by politicians and power blocs. On the security front, Ondo state is not smiling; especially the Owo axis where I come from. Reports from home are to the effect that the activities of Fulani herdsmen and bandits are on the increase again. Dastardly acts committed repeatedly send fear and trepidation down the spine of the people. Farmers are denied access to the farm and neither can women go to the brooks to fetch water. Many fear to travel home these days. The areas of Owo/Ose local governments bordering the neighbouring Edo state are particularly unsafe. Recall that it was here that a first-class traditional ruler was murdered by herdsmen/bandits sometime ago. Another area that is fast becoming too dangerous for comfort is the road leading from Owo to the northernmost part of the state. Kidnappings and killings are said to have become a regular occurrence in the aforementioned parts. What is the government doing about it? And what do you, as a person in the thick of this dark cloud, think can be done both by the government (Federal, State, and Local) and the people themselves?

The rival cult wars that ravaged Owo some months’ back are said to have abated in recent times. The curfew imposed by the state government, though not yet officially lifted, is said to have been relaxed and people have tepidly begun to pick the bits and pieces of their economic life. I heard that cult-related killings have meanwhile stopped, thanks to the efforts of the government and the traditional authorities. I watched a video of the Olowo of Owo leading his chiefs and the town’s people to perform traditional rites and lay curses on cultists, their sponsors and backers. That must have helped. But while the crisis raged, Owo people saw hell in the hands of law enforcers who reportedly took advantage to feather their nests. I understand that so many innocent people were arrested and whisked off to Akure, the state capital, and bail, which officially is free, ranged from between N200,000 and N300,000. People were said to have been arrested right on the pavements, verandas, and balconies of their homes. The suffering was said to have been so much for my people. What do you think? That it serves them right? Or that the government should investigate and bring the culprits to book?

The cloak-and-dagger struggle for power among the politicians and power blocs in the state is a continuation of the confrontation between the pro-Akeredolu and pro-Aiyedatiwa factions. The Gov. Oluwarotimi Odunayo Akeredolu faction reigned supreme while their principal was alive and in power but lost out immediately he died. The faction supporting the then deputy governor, Lucky Orimisan Aiyedatiwa, fought tooth-and-nail to prevent his impeachment and once he became governor, the pendulum of power tilted in their favour. Power equation is never stationary or stagnant. It is dynamic and shifting; today in someone’s favour, tomorrow in another’s. Like corruption, those who lose power fight back. So, there are many angles to the ongoing fight in Ondo state: Those who are angered that it is no longer business as usual are kicking and splattering mud all over the place. That is understandable, it is in the nature of politics, especially the brand played here.

Spencer Johnson’s “Who moved my cheese” tells it all! Few people have the right orientation on how to respond to change. The person whose cheese is moved is not likely to take kindly to it. As our people will say, no one looks kindly at the person who collects food from one’s mouth! Vengeance on the one hand, and the desire to do the right thing, are thus two ends of the stick. So it is “Boo ba o pa; boo ba o buu l’ese”. Eliminate him/her physically if you are lucky to catch up with him/her; otherwise, ruin his or her integrity irreparably.

 The other side of the coin, however, is that there can be no smoke where there has been no fire. That is one of my profession’s firm beliefs. This is the principle that makes reporters follow all leads and take all rumours and allegations seriously, believing that, in the end, something will be unearthed. The more I perused the allegations making the rounds in Ondo state; the more I kept returning to the conclusion of one informed citizen of the state that altruism is neither totally present nor absent in any of them. You might need more than a microscope to glean the ENTIRE truth! Even Jesus Christ did not make light of how arduous the task of separating the wheat from the chaff can be (Matthew 3:12)!

Did you read Chinua Achebe’s “Girls at war?” A 1972 short story, it focused on the essence of survival instinct in the midst of the uncertainties of the Nigerian civil war (1967 – 1970). In Ondo State, high profile “girls” are at war and the focus is survivalist instincts in the slippery terrains of politics. In saner climes, once you serve your term and leave office, you stay away! You hugged the limelight while you were there; now is the turn of other people to do similarly. That is the norm of civilised conduct. The new sheriffs in town must also understand that their stay, too, is for a while. Respect yourself, so that you can be respected. Raking up mud does no one any honour.

Jamaican reggae superstar, Peter Tosh, admonishes those who live in glass houses not to throw stones. Were you in public office? Or are you still there? That is a glass house. You should not throw stones! Hardly can you find anyone who passed through public office without leaving skeletons behind. If you left none of yours, what of those left by family, friends, and aides? So, stop washing your dirty linens in the open. It is not all clothes that are spread out in the sun to dry.

Osun State was on fire last week. It is most unfortunate that this came a few days after the six governors of the South-west had demonstrated exemplary camaraderie, giving great hope that they were in one accord to tackle the twin problems of security of life and property and food security, among others, ravaging the region. If the governors did not have it on their agenda before now, henceforth, it must rank high on their priority list to always discuss ways and means of promoting peaceful resolution of issues within the region; especially since they do not all belong to the same political party.

I have said it repeatedly that a uniform local government system as a so-called third tier of government rammed down everyone’s throat from Abuja is anachronistic and tramples federalism properly so called. Federating units should be at liberty to fashion out the local administration most suited to their needs and peculiarities. Unfortunately, even the states that we have today are not federating units like we had them in the First Republic but are mere creations of the military. But our leaders must obey the law – except they are minded to make a revolution; which I do not object to!

That Mr. A did not follow the law does not mean that Mr. B must retaliate in kind. Two wrongs, as they say, do not make a right. Both sides in the Osun imbroglio should look themselves in the mirror. The law frowns at hand-picked local government chairmen and councillors. They, too, are to be elected like the other two tiers of government (federal and state). Take-over and hand-over must, however, be done under the law. Anything likely to cause a breach of peace and breakdown of law and order must be avoided. Wilful destruction of life and property is an uncivilised conduct that should not be witnessed among us anymore. Court decisions should be obeyed without fail. There are avenues for appeal. Once that is exhausted, the decision of the court should be executed according to law. Where there are disagreements over interpretation – which is the crux of the matter in the Osun case –  seek independent counsel and advice. Resorting to self-help is barbaric.

Last week’s crisis of leadership in the Lagos State House of Assembly speaks volumes about cracks in the once formidable APC political machine often touted as impregnable. But now it would appear as if William Butler’s “The Second Coming” has happened to that political fortress that withstood even the assault on it by President Olusegun Obasanjo. Bemoans Butler: “Turning and turning in the widening gyre/The falcon cannot hear the falconer/Things fall apart/The centre cannot hold/Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world” Such was the anarchy loosed upon the Lagos State House of Assembly last week when security operatives were said to have invaded it! But can anyone in his right senses call what happened an invasion when the same House had purportedly written to the security operatives requesting that security around the House be beefed up?

The House might have made a tactical mistake calling on the cat to help watch over its beef. They should have known better than to entrust their destiny in the hands of forces they do not control. Getting them in may be easy but getting them to do exactly what you invited them for may be something else. Throwing them out after you found, to your chagrin, that they were now turning the tables on you, may become even more herculean. The Honourables must have learnt some lesson the hard way last week. 

Some analysts say the honourables are fighting a losing battle; another, that they have already lost the battle. How can they ever hope to get away with their “coup”? Can we not liken what is happening to the case of a child who cursed the “Iroko” tree and immediately began to cast curious glances over his shoulder to see what the “Iroko” would do? The elders say the “iroko” is as patient as the vulture. It not only takes its time but also chooses the place and time to strike once it is offended. How many of the “rebels” will be put forward by their party in 2027? A party to the dispute has gone to court; so we are obligated to let the law run its full gamut.

I struggled when I tried to cast a headline for the rumblings in the Lagos State House of Assembly: “Storm in a teacup” or “Bearding the Lion in his lair” Which of the two do you consider more appropriate?

Qatar's government has signed a five-year deal with AI data company Scale AI to deploy AI-powered tools and training in a push to improve government services in the Gulf Arab state, a senior Scale AI executive told Reuters on Sunday.

"(This deal) can be a blueprint for other governments around the world, and it allows us to really commit in a way that I think could drive impact even faster," said Trevor Thompson, global head of growth at the San Francisco, California-based company.

The deal will allow Qatar's government to adopt tools such as predictive analytics, automation and advanced data analysis in an effort to streamline operations, said a statement by Qatar's communications and information technology ministry.

Scale AI will develop more than 50 possible uses of artificial intelligence (AI) for Qatar's government over the next five years, the statement added.

[english.aawsat]

Banning digital assets makes about as much sense as regulating against gravity. How many times did the market dip, back in 2017, on the news that China was banning Bitcoin BTC-0.92%Bitcoin, only to promptly recover at the realization of the notion’s absurdity?

But while Bitcoin is, to all intents and purposes, unbannable, the same can’t be said of central bank digital currencies—digital forms of national currencies issued and regulated by their central banks. In fact, that’s one of their core properties. Otherwise, governments couldn’t put their citizens in the naughty chair when they fall out of line by prohibiting their right to buy groceries. 

To be fair, most governments aren’t as heavy-handed as China, with its notorious social credit scoring and rampant surveillance. Instead, they are seeking to develop digital currencies for boring bureaucratic purposes, such as greater administrative efficiency and economic data gathering.

Still, it’s no coincidence that China has been one of the biggest proponents of CBDCs and is racing ahead with its own implementation. And it should, therefore, come as no surprise that the United States, which instinctively inverts every Chinese position, should have canceled its own digital dollar after President Trump laid the banhammer. 

There’s a beautiful yin and yang-ness to China banning Bitcoin and the US banning CBDCs. The self-perpetuating cycle is complete. Trump’s decision, like many that emulate from his “shoot first and ask questions later” government, is somewhat reactionary. However, sometimes, shooting first is the smartest thing you can do, and in this case, Trump has hit the target.

America’s digital dollar deserves to be shot down—as do those of every other Western nation. Not because the concept is wrong but because the implementation certainly is. If billions of citizens are going to have their data and financial assets placed on a global database, it’s going to need much better privacy protections than the current proposals offer.

The first domino falls

There are all kinds of ironies wrapped up in Trump’s decision to ban digital dollar. Like his willingness to countenance a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve or endorse a $TRUMP memecoin while simultaneously shunning a digital currency with a potential real-world use case. But even his most vocal critics have had little to say about this mandate.

While the US was by no means the staunchest advocate for a digital currency, with numerous nations much closer to launching their own efforts, the idea was very much on the table until Trump yanked the cloth. In becoming the first President to outright ban a CBDC, he’s tipped a domino that could cause other nations to follow suit, and the reason cited resonates with the people—privacy.

While other Western nations, especially in Europe, like to maintain the impression that they’re nobody’s master, the uncomfortable truth is that US decisions exert a strong pull on EU policy. Thus, America’s curtailing of its own CBDC will inevitably weaken the case for the EU’s digital euro and prompt renewed scrutiny of the purported privacy protections. If the EU wishes to get its own CBDC over the line, it will first need to return to the drawing board.

No privacy, no point

Despite the digital euro being described as being “as private as cash,” this isn’t strictly true. The potential for governments, NGOs, and other shadowy organizations to gain unwarranted insight into citizens’ spending habits—and to censor transactions or “cancel” customers altogether—is very real.

That’s not to suggest that backers of the digital euro are acting out of bad faith necessarily, more out of bad tech. Blockchain evolves fast while the wheels of policymaking turn slow, meaning that by the time digital currency pilots have been greenlit, the underlying tech is already looking tired. As anyone directly involved in web3 will tell you, there are now far better ways to enforce onchain privacy while maintaining compliance—ways that don’t involve placing the privacy of every citizen on a massive database and then broadcasting it for all the world to see.

From ZK proofs to fully homomorphic encryption, privacy standards have become more robust and feature-rich in recent years, allowing for nuanced disclosure of sensitive data without leaving it at risk of exposure to centralized entities and potential malicious actors. Crucially, onchain encryption standards have also become much lighter, allowing for more efficient computation. 

Indeed, ZKs and FHE are the sorts of technologies that would be ideally suited to facilitating the outcomes the EU wishes to achieve with its digital euro, such as tiered privacy in which low-value purchases are lightly scrutinized and high-value ones are subject to more intensive checks.

The good news is it’s not too late to remedy this: the digital euro is still at an early stage, with its final implementation still being worked out. There’s time to get this right. If there’s one thing we’ve learned from the whirlwind that is the Trump administration, it’s that a lot can be achieved in a month. There’s no need to move fast and break stuff.

But make no mistake, the EU does need to move and signal that its own digital currency will be everything the proposed digital yuans and dollars of the world are not: Secure. Private. Robust. Otherwise, it risks being canceled, just like CBDCs in the US. 

Ethereum price held steady as the market came to terms with the $1.4 billion hack by the Lazarus Group. 

Ethereum ETH2.07%Ethereum traded at $2,795 on Sunday, a few points above last Friday’s low of $2,665. It remains about 32% below the highest level in December last year. 

Coinglass data shows that Ethereum balances on Bybit have started rising after crashing on Friday following the hack. Balances rose to over 200,000 or $558 million, up from last Friday’s low of 61,000.

There are two potential reasons for the ongoing Ethereum balances on Bybit. First, there is a likelihood that Bybit is actively buying ETH from the market as it seeks to boost confidence with its users. 

Second, the ongoing rise is a sign that customers are transferring ETH to the exchange as confidence rises. That’s because Bybit has maintained that it will cover 100% of the stolen Ethereum coins. Bybit has also launched a $140 million to track down the funds, a move that may see part of them returned. 

These events are happening after North Korea’s Lazarus Group allegedly accessed Bybit’s cold wallets and stole ETH tokens worth $1.4 billion. In addition to its scale, this hack raised concerns about the safety of crypto assets stored in cold wallets, by exchanges.

Ethereum price may be at risk of a bigger dive

The daily chart shows that Ethereum may be at risk of a bigger dive in the near term. It has already formed a death cross pattern as the 200-day and 50-day weighted moving averages crossed each other. It is one of the most bearish chart patterns in technical analysis.

Ethereum price has also formed a bearish flag chart pattern, a popular continuation sign. This pattern is made up of a vertical line and a consolidation. This consolidation also resembles a rising wedge pattern.

Therefore, the ETH token will likely have a bearish breakdown, with the next reference level being at $2,155, the lowest point this year, which is about 23% below the current level.

The bullish outlook will become invalid if the coin jumps above the 200-day WMA point at $3,085. 

[crypto.news]