•25-year duty-free AGOA partnership in danger, Nigerian-American commerce chamber worries

•Nigeria’s crude revenue may plunge as US begins enforcement Wed, NACCIMA raises concerns

The newly imposed 14 per cent tariff by US President Donald Trump on exports by Nigerian businesses presents a significant risk to the $10bn annual exports to the United States, potentially disrupting key sectors such as oil export and agricultural trade, experts and trade associations concerned about a potential global trade war stated on Thursday.

The economic experts, in separate interviews with The PUNCH, noted that the policy, which would raise the prices of goods and services for consumers, would weaken the standard of living, slow down manufacturing activities, hinder international trade and consequently weaken demand for Nigerian oil in the US, one of its key markets.

The experts also predicted that Nigeria’s oil earnings were poised for a significant decline following the announcement of the new tariff regime.

In an interview with The PUNCH, the National President of the Nigerian-American Chamber of Commerce, Sheriff Balogun, stated that since the inception of the African Growth and Opportunity Act in 2000, Nigeria had exported an estimated $277bn worth of goods to the United States, with crude taking the majority.

Nigeria’s exports to the United States currently average between $10bn and $12bn annually, although it has been fluctuating in recent years, according to US and Nigerian trade data.

Trump had announced in a decision widely condemned by the European Union and exporting nations that countries seeking to sell goods to the United States would now face taxes as high as 50 per cent.

The announcement, made during a ‘Make America Wealthy Again’ event in the Rose Garden, marked a dramatic shift from decades of free-trade orthodoxy that had underpinned the global economy since World War II.

He said the new sweeping tariffs of at least 10 per cent on all countries were part of a broader strategy aimed at rebalancing global trade and addressing perceived unfair trade practices.

According to the Trump administration, Nigeria imposes a 27 per cent tariff on US exports, a disparity they claim has long been detrimental to American businesses and consumers. It said the higher tariffs were charged through currency manipulation and trade barriers.

Our correspondent gathered that the reciprocal tariff was calculated based on the trade deficit for the US in goods with the particular country divided by the total goods imports from that country, and then divided that number by two. A trade deficit occurs when a country buys (imports) more physical products from other countries than it sells (exports) to them.

In his address, Trump framed the tariff as part of a larger initiative to protect American industries and ensure that other nations play by what he described as “fair” trade rules.

Trump declared the start of what he called a new era of “fair trade”, promising to “supercharge America’s industrial base” and force open foreign markets long accused of shutting out US goods.

“This is one of the most important days in American history,” Trump said. “We will supercharge our domestic industrial base. We will pry open foreign markets and break down foreign trade barriers, and ultimately, more production at home will mean stronger competition and lower prices for consumers.

“This will be, indeed, the golden age of Americans coming back. We are going to come back very strongly.”

Responding to the development, NACC president Balogun warned that the policy could impact trade volumes worth $277bn.

“Since the African Growth and Opportunity Act began in 2000, Nigeria has exported an estimated $277bn worth of goods to the United States under the programme,” he stated. “The vast majority of this trade value comes from crude oil shipments, with petroleum products overwhelmingly dominating Nigeria’s AGOA exports each year. In fact, oil alone accounts for nearly all of Nigeria’s exports under the initiative by value.”

Economic experts say this move threatens Nigeria’s exports to the US, particularly petroleum goods, its major export product. With oil accounting for the bulk of Nigeria’s export revenue, the move could exacerbate economic challenges, including a weaker naira and rising inflation. Additionally, reciprocal tariffs on imported goods like wheat and vehicles could further drive up local prices, compounding the financial strain on businesses and consumers alike.

According to Afreximbank research, the 14 per cent reciprocal tariff will reduce oil demand and lower forex earnings, while higher tariffs on wheat and vehicles may increase local prices; key exports include oil, cocoa, and rubber, while key imports include wheat, refined petroleum, and vehicles.

It added that these tariffs could reduce export revenues, increase production costs, and disrupt investment flows, particularly for nations heavily reliant on US trade.

Nigeria’s main exports to the U.S. included crude petroleum, petroleum gas, and nitrogenous fertilisers, flour and meals of soya beans, urea, refined lead, flowers buds and natural gas, while the western country mainly exported cars, refined petroleum, and wheat to Nigeria.

According to the National Bureau of Statistics, Nigeria’s trade with the United States reached a combined N31.1 trillion in ten years between 2015 and 2024. An analysis of the foreign trade report showed that N16.4tn was recorded as exports and N14.71tn in imports, indicating a trade surplus of N1.64tn

A breakdown showed that Nigeria exported goods worth N344.27bn in 2015 and received N581.99bn as imports. In 2016, it increased to N1.03tn in exports and N706.09 in imports. Exports surged to N1.73tn in 2027, N1.094tn in 2018, N1.01tn in 2019 before dropping to N382.19bn in 2020 due to the pandemic. By 2021, exports increased to N800.34bn, N1.82tn in 2022, N2.61tn in 2023 and N5.52tn in 2024.

The tariffs also come just as the US began importing jet fuel from Nigeria’s Dangote Refinery, with six vessels carrying 1.7 million barrels arriving this month.

The CEO, Cowry Asset Management Limited, Johnson Chukwu, explained that crude oil exports from Nigeria may remain unaffected by the tariff.

“Trump has already exempted tariffs on energy products, including crude oil, copper, and gold, so, it won’t directly impact our oil exports to the US. However, agricultural exports could take a hit,” he explained.

Chukwu added that while Nigeria was not a major non-oil exporting nation, the larger concern is that the US tariffs could lead to reduced global production. “Once production declines, demand for crude will fall, bringing down oil prices and likely affecting Nigeria’s projected revenue for the year,” he warned.

Beyond crude oil, the broader implications of the tariff war include rising consumer prices and weaker economic activity worldwide.

The economist noted that as countries adjusted to the new trade landscape, the cost of goods and services would rise, leading to a lower standard of living and a slowdown in manufacturing and international trade.

“However, at the general level, what Trump has done would trigger a higher cost of goods and services globally because countries would add it to their economies and it will be borne by final consumers. So, prices will go up in almost all the jurisdictions, the standard of living will weaken, manufacturing activities will slow down, and international trade will slow down. Ultimately, where it will affect Nigeria is that the demand for crude will decline because production will go down, and once the demand reduces, it means the price will come down and likely affect the projected revenue from crude sales this year. We are not a strong non-oil exporting country, so it may not affect our agricultural products, but reduced demand will affect our crude revenue,” he added.

Already, crude oil prices took a sharp hit on Thursday, with Brent crude dropping below $70 per barrel following an unexpected increase in production by OPEC+.

The CEO, Centre for Promotion of Private Enterprises, Muda Yusuf, highlighted the indirect effects Nigeria might face.

“The Trump administration has practically brought closure to the AGOA trade window. Additionally, the trade war and retaliatory tariffs could trigger inflationary pressures in the U.S., leading to higher costs for imports into Nigeria,” he said.

Yusuf also warned that disruptions in global supply chains could weaken economic growth worldwide, potentially lowering crude oil prices — a development that would reduce Nigeria’s foreign reserves and revenue.

Despite these challenges, Yusuf noted that the shifting trade landscape could present new opportunities for Nigeria.

“Many countries affected by the trade war will seek new bilateral trade relationships, which may create investment opportunities for Nigerian businesses,” he explained.

However, he cautioned that if US inflation worsens, the Federal Reserve may tighten monetary policy, leading to higher interest rates and capital outflows from emerging economies—potentially putting further pressure on the naira’s exchange rate.

On his part, the Director General, Nigerian Association of Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture, Sola Obadimu, urged the Federal Government to focus on domestic economic growth rather than overreacting to U.S. policies.

He emphasised that every country, including the United States, implemented policies in its best interest, and Nigeria must do the same to protect its economy and create jobs.

Obadimu explained that the tariff aligned with former US President Donald Trump’s “America First” agenda, aimed at revitalising domestic industries and creating employment opportunities for American citizens.

“Trump’s goal has always been to make America great again, and one way to achieve that is to get factories running again,” he said. “Many factories in the U.S. have shut down due to outsourcing, and this policy is designed to discourage imports, boost local production, and generate jobs. It’s a valid argument.”

However, he stressed that the real concern for Nigeria should be its own economic strategy. He pointed out that the country exports mostly crude oil and raw agricultural products with little value added, effectively outsourcing jobs instead of creating employment locally. To address this, he called for policies that prioritize industrialization and job creation.

“We cannot industrialise on generators. We should aim for 150,000 megawatts of electricity, add value to our products, and employ more people,” he urged. While noting that Trump’s policies could be overturned by a future administration, Obadimu emphasised that Nigeria must take proactive steps to safeguard its economy from external shocks and long-term poverty.

In addition to the 14 per cent tariff on Nigerian exports, Trump also unveiled a broader trade policy that included a baseline 10 per cent tariff on all US imports.

The new tariffs, which take immediate effect, apply to more than 50 countries.

They include major trade partners like China, the European Union, India, and Japan, as well as developing economies in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

The new policy is a dramatic shift in global trade and economic policy, rattling markets and stirring fears of a global trade war.

Aside from Nigeria, some African countries that will bear the brunt of the new policy include Algeria (30 per cent); Lesotho (50 per cent); Mauritius (40 per cent); Kenya (10 per cent); Namibia (21 per cent) and Ethiopia as well as Ghana 10 per cent apiece. South Africa was handed down a reciprocal tariff of 30 per cent.

Other countries, including China, got 34 per cent, India (26 per cent), South Korea (25 per cent), Japan 24 (per cent), Taiwan (32 per cent), United Kingdom (10 per cent), Vietnam (46 per cent), Switzerland (31 per cent), Cambodia 49 (per cent) South Africa (30 per cent), Indonesia (32 per cent), Brazil (10 per cent) and Singapore (10 per cent).

Trump said the baseline 10 percent tariff would start on April 5, while higher rates on various partners would begin on April 9.

[Punch]

THE price of Nigeria’s Bonny Light yesterday dropped to $69.90 per barrel from more than $75 per barrel in the global market, indicating a decrease of 6.8 percent.  

The development was fuelled by announcement of sweeping new tariffs by US President Donald Trump and the decision of the Organisation of Oil Producing Countries, also known as OPEC+ group, to increase its unwinding of output cuts in May 2025, expected to increase supply to the market.

However, this may likely affect Nigeria’s 2025 budget, which was based on oil production of 2.06 million bpd, $75 per barrel and revenue target of N36.35 trillion with 56 per cent coming from oil sales.

The Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission, NUPRC, said crude oil output, including condensate, dropped month-on-month, MoM, by 3.8 per cent to 1.671 million barrels per day, bpd, in February 2025, from 1.737 million bpd in January 2025.

Meanwhile, OPEC said Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iraq, UAE, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Algeria, and Oman have reaffirmed commitment to market stability on healthier oil market outlook and adjust production upward.

In a report released yesterday, the organisation stated: “The eight OPEC+ countries, which previously announced additional voluntary adjustments in April and November 2023, namely Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iraq, UAE, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Algeria, and Oman met virtually on 3 April 2025, to review global market conditions and outlook.

“In view of the continuing healthy market fundamentals and the positive market outlook, and in accordance with the decision agreed upon on 5 December 2024, subsequently reaffirmed on 3 March 2025, to start a gradual and flexible return of the 2.2 million barrels per day voluntary adjustments starting from 1st of   April 2025, the eight participating countries will implement a production adjustment of 411 thousand barrels per day, equivalent to three monthly increments, in May 2025.

“This comprises the increment originally planned for May in addition to two monthly increments. The gradual increases may be paused or reversed subject to evolving market conditions.”

This flexibility will allow the group to continue to support oil market stability. The eight OPEC+ countries also noted that this measure will provide an opportunity for the participating countries to accelerate their compensation.”

“The eight countries reaffirmed their commitment to the voluntary production adjustments agreed at the 53rd Joint Ministerial Monitoring Committee, JMMC meeting on 3 April 2024.

[Vanguard]

I like the theme of the Niger Delta Sports Festival (NDSF 2025) currently going on in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State – Beyond Oil: Harnessing Talents. The sports festival is the brainchild of the Niger Delta Development Commission (NDDC) and it is the first of its kind.

The Niger Delta Development Commission has played very significant roles with many impactful interventions in the lives of communities in the nine states under its mandate, namely Abia, Akwa Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross River, Delta, Edo, Imo, Ondo and Rivers – covering the entire Southern region of Nigeria with representation across the South East, South South and South West. The main objective was to ensure that the resources derived from these states are directly felt and enjoyed by their people.

Oil has been Nigeria’s main stay for many years and the latest thinking is about the diversification of the economy and less dependence on the ‘black gold’, as crude oil is called. However, the current realities are that oil will remain our premium resource and biggest asset for a long time to come. So from the days of the Petroleum Trust Fund (PTF) to the present day NDDC, the objective has not changed, which is to make every Nigerian, especially those living in oil producing communities, enjoy what is extracted from their land.

The interventions (from both PTF and NDDC) were meant to make up for the environmental degradation, pollution, spillage and other negative consequences of the massive exploration activities holding on their land. So, despite all the challenges associated with the administration of the NDDC down the years, there can be no denying the fact that there have been so many positive interventions across all spheres of life in most of their communities.

Now relating this to sports, the concept of a Niger Delta Sports Festival is relevant and hugely beneficial in many ways. The leading states in Nigeria in terms of sports talent discovery and achievements in domestic and international competitions, at least in recent times, are the Niger Delta states. This is so easy to validate. Just take a look at the top states on the medals table of the National Sports Festival (NSF), National Youth Games (NYG) and more recently, National Para Games. You may extend this further to intercollegiate games like the Nigeria University Games Association (NUGA), the Nigeria Polytechnic Games (NIPOGA) and those of the Nigeria Colleges of Education Games (NICEGA). Given these antecedents, the decision of the NDDC to start a sports festival is a game changer for sports development in Nigeria.

Although not the first regional sports festival in Nigeria (that record is proudly reserved for the DAWN games or the South West region), this Niger Delta Sports Festival scores its own first in a unique way as it is a multi-region sports festival. Given the fact that at least states from three regions are part of it, it is bigger and more significant in scope than a regional sports festival. The planning, organisation and media buzz around it have also underlined the seriousness that its initiators have attached to it.

The Chairman, Main Organising Committee (MOC) of the Niger Delta Sports Festival, Alabo Boma Iyaye, who is also the Executive Director, Finance and Administration in the NDDC, says the aim of the games is to ensure that it remains the leading contributor of sports talents for Nigeria.

According to Iyaye, “60-70 per cent of athletes who represent Nigeria in international competitions are from the Niger Delta and we have observed a decline in the quality of our performances in recent times, so we want to ensure we keep that talent conveyor belt working so we can keep churning out talents that will go on to do Nigeria proud at global meets.

Iyaye also said: “We will not just provide the platform to discover these talents, we hope to groom them and give them exposure.”

With over 3,000 athletes, 500 coaches and technical officials and 200 journalists already in Uyo following and reporting the intense competitions in 17 different events, it is obvious that this is the second largest assemblage of the country’s sporting talents at a single multi sports event, second only to the main National Sports Festival. The appointment of accomplished former national athletes by the organisers as tournament ambassadors and mentors is another ‘sweetener’ worth commending. Seeing living legends like Nwankwo Kanu, Emmanuel Amuneke, Victor Ikpeba, Blessing Oborodudu, Seun Ogunkoya and Enefiok Udo-Obong who doubles as the Tournament Director, is extra motivation and inspiration for the participants.

The challenge for the NDDC will be the sustainability of the project, hoping that the excitement and enthusiasm seen with this first edition can be carried on for a long time. Another issue will be in the area of nurturing the talents discovered at the festival. There is no doubt about the availability of talents in the country, but where there is usually a gap is in the monitoring, development, management and exposure of the talents in a conducive environment so they can fulfill their potential. This is one area where the grassroots and elite athletes departments of the National Sports Commission would play a key role.

And then, this could be an eye opener for the other regions to provide opportunities and platforms of this kind for their athletes. The south-west region that started this initiative many years ago now has to upscale, raise the bar and become really deliberate about its developmental programmes. Other regions, especially the north, also need to awaken from slumber and take up the challenge of investing massively in grassroots sports.

The dangers of neglecting these calls could see a movement of the best sports talents from places where there are no opportunities for growth and exposure to the areas that could afford them the chance to fulfill their dreams.

Let’s end with this truth:
Positively engaging the youth with sports could be the long term solution to the vices and crimes like banditry, terrorism, armed robbery, kidnapping and other forms of violence currently rampaging our nation. So as the youths of the Niger Delta take centre stage in Uyo in the next few days, may their exploits lead to the discovery of the next generation of world class athletes that would turn Nigeria’s sporting fortunes around.

Senate President Godswill Akpabio has distanced himself from a planned rally purportedly organised in his name by a group known as the Progressive Peoples’ Resolution (PPR).

The group is led by Ubong Idemudo.

In a statement issued by Jackson Udom, his special assistant on media, the senate president said he was unaware of any such demonstration scheduled to take place in Akwa Ibom on April 4.

He urged his supporters and residents of the state to disregard the event and go about their normal activities.

According to the statement, intelligence suggests that the rally is being orchestrated by “fifth columnists” seeking to exploit Akpabio’s name for ulterior motives.

“The planned rally, from information pieced together, is the handiwork of fifth columnists trying to use the name of the Senate President to achieve their devilish goal,” the statement reads.

The senate president also called on the police and other security agencies to step in, describing the event as “satanic”.

“The police and other security agencies in the state are by this statement directed to ensure that such satanic rally is not allowed to hold, as such has no approval of the Senate President,” the statement added.

[TheCable]

The African labour centre, the Organisation of African Trade Union Unity, OATUU, in April 2013, marked its 40th Anniversary. The anniversary lecture was delivered by then African Union Commission Chair, Dr. Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma.

The trade union centre of the newest country in the world, the South Sudan Workers Trade Union Federation delegation rose up at the conference to invite the continent’s trade unions to meet in Juba.

A few weeks later, as the then OATUU Secretary General, I called the South Sudan labour President, Honourable Sinon Dieng, to arrange the meeting only to find that he had become a refugee in Kenya. There had been political tension in the country and he and some South Sudanese had fled the country. This was the beginning of the country’s civil war which over the next five years, claimed four hundred thousand lives.

The conflicts took the shape of an inter-ethnic fight led by President Salvar Kiir against Vice President Riek Machar. The signal for the current armed conflict was the March 26, 2025 arrest of the former.

Information Minister and Government Spokesman, Michael Makuei Lueth, accused Machar of directing his forces “to rebel against the government with the aim of disrupting peace so that elections are not held and South Sudan goes back to war”.

In response to the arrest, Machar’s SPLM/IO party declared that: “The prospect for peace and stability in South Sudan has now been put into serious jeopardy”. Reath Muoch Tang, Chairman of the party’s foreign relations committee claimed that unclear charges have been brought against Machar in violation of subsisting peace agreements and the constitution.

While the African Union, AU, has sent a peace mission to ensure a de-escalation, the United States, US, has asked President Kiir to free his First Vice President. Its Bureau of African Affairs said: “We urge President Kiir to reverse this action and prevent further escalation of the situation”.

The United Nations Head of Mission in South Sudan, Nicholas Haysom, claimed that barrel bombs believed to contain inflammable liquid had already been used in the latest conflict. He said this had caused significant casualties and horrific burns on peoples in communities across the Upper Nile.

The UN official added that unless the situation is quickly arrested, these events could lead to: “A conflict (which) would erase all the hard-won gains made since the 2018 peace deal was signed… It would devastate not only South Sudan but the entire region, which simply cannot afford another war.”

But Makuei, while confirming the bombings, disputed the UN chief’s claims that non-combatants have been affected: “The bombardment was strictly against White Army positions and did not harm civilians”.

Apparently, the conflict has been internationalised. The Chair of the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, Yasmin Sooka, claims that Ugandan troops and their battle tanks have crossed into South Sudan, potentially violating the UN arms embargo. The UN seems quite worried by the renewed conflicts as it has an estimated 18,000 peacekeepers in South Sudan.

Machar’s group has made similar allegations. In a statement, it said: “The Ugandan forces are currently taking part in air strikes against civilians in counties of Nasir, Longechuk and Ulang in Upper Nile State, and Akobo County in Jonglei State”.

There had been fighting in the northern Upper Nile state with the armed forces taking on the White Army militia which used to be affiliated with Machar’s forces. So, the government accused the latter of being involved in the fighting.

I am not surprised about the renewed conflict in South Sudan. In my March 4, 2016 column titled ‘The Butchers of Juba’, I had analysed that: “The crisis and its seeming intractable nature are due to a combination of personal ambition, the rich oil resource of South Sudan, national interests of neigbours like Uganda and the lack of a pan-national agenda.”

I had concluded that the UN and AU need to be empowered to enforce peace. And that: “There will never be a solution unless the butchers in South Sudan are made aware that they face arrest and prosecution for crimes against humanity, if they refuse or fail to allow peace reign in the country.” Unless these steps are taken, peace is likely to elude South Sudan for a long time.

South Sudan until 2005 was part of Sudan. The breakup of that country has merely led to new fault lines. So a further split of South Sudan on whatever lines would be no solution, and may lead to further splits. The solution is to rein in Kiir and Machar, evolve a self-governing system based on democratic values and the sovereignty of the people of the country. There is also the need to check the meddlesomeness of foreign powers and neigbouring countries.

In the case of Sudan, the spiralling armed conflict that has led to the on-going massacres and the split of the country into two, is mainly due to the incomplete mass uprising which terminated the al-Bashar regime, and the right wing counter-coup.

The Sudanese Armed Forces, SAF, headed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, and the Rapid Support Forces, RSF, led by General Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo alias Hemedti, had conspired to abort the peoples’ democratic movement by overthrowing the transition Sudanese government and dividing the country as spoils of war.

The RSF had evolved from the Janjaweed, a vicious militant group that was used for ethnic cleansing in Darfur in which over 200,000 people were killed.

The European Union then strengthened the RSF by funding it in return for the militia using force to stop immigrants crossing into Europe through the Red Sea.

In the struggle for power between the two groups, Iran has thrown its weight behind the army, while the United Arab Emirates, UAE, has provided funds and arms for the RSF. The rival groups had begun fighting on April 15, 2023. Since then, over 150,000 Sudanese have been killed and some 14 million displaced.

Given the fact that both sides rely on various countries, the AU or the UN, levelling on this, need to convene an international peace conference that can force a ceasefire. Negotiations should include what is left of the civil groups. A transition agreement needs be reached which would lead to a civil democratic process. The alternative would be both groups fighting until one side is broken. That may not be in the immediate, and the remnants of the defeated side may continue the conflict at the various levels, including banditry.

Whatever the case, the alpha males of South Sudan and Sudan: President Salvar Kiir, Riek Machar and Generals al-Burhan and Mohammed Hamdan Dagalo, need to be brought to justice for the senseless wars in their countries.

Today, democracy has become the practice or an aspiration in many countries across the world. To speak briefly about its origin, it was in the ancient Greek city state of Athens in 508 BC that the statesman, Cleisthenes, reformed the constitution of the city state by transferring power from the hitherto ruling oligarchic aristocracy to the citizens of the city. Although President George Washington of the United States of America who lived from 1732 to 1799 is commonly described as the father of modern democracy, it was Abraham Lincoln who lived from 1809 to 1865 who gave us the definition of modern democracy in its now universally accepted form as “the government of the people, by the people, and for the people”.

As a background to my remarks on the colloquium’s theme, Democracy in Africa, I would like to tell the story of my role in the promotion of democracy in Africa where there are now 21 African countries in the 56-member Commonwealth of nations. On my election as Commonwealth Secretary-General in 1989  in Kuala Lumpur by the Heads of Government of the Commonwealth, I pledged to them that my primary mission would be: to make the organization a potent force for promoting democracy and human rights; to in the words of the great Indian Prime Minister Jawarhalal Nehru bring a healing touch to conflicts between and within Commonwealth countries; and to strengthen technical cooperation for development among member countries.

At the beginning of my tenure as Secretary-General in 1990, there were 10 non-democratic member countries which were under either one-party or military rule. But when I left office in 2000, only 2 members were non-democratic, these were the absolute monarchy in Swaziland now known as Eswatini, and Pakistan where General Musharaff had taken over in a military coup d’etat in November 1999.

 As Secretary-General, I took several initiatives to promote multi-party democracy in Africa.  I succeeded in persuading after long conversations Presidents Kenneth Kaunda in Zambia, Kamuzu Banda in Malawi, Albert Rene in the Seychelles, and Arap Moi in Kenya to move from one-party ruled State to a multi-party democratic State. In the case of Kenya, I at his request sent the late Professor Ben Nwabueze to go and help Kenya to adapt their constitution from a one-party to a multi-party constitution. And I also had a long discussion with the Head of State, Jerry Rawlings, before Ghana held the elections that transited moved it from military rule to multi-party democracy in January 1993.

Perhaps, the most notable was my seminal role in South Africa’s transition from apartheid to democracy. Early in 1991, with the mandate of Commonwealth Heads of Government I went to discuss with the last white President of South Africa, Mr F W de Clerk, how the Commonwealth could help him in the conference he had proposed of his government and the anti-apartheid political parties after releasing Nelson Mandela from prison. Thereafter, I sent six Commonwealth statesmen and women to the conference when it opened at Kempton Park in Johannesburg on December 1, 1991.

And when the deliberations were threatened by violence following the massacre at Boipatong by the apartheid police of four ANC stalwarts, I went to South Africa to negotiate a peace accord which was signed by the President and leaders of all the political parties and thereafter sent six Commonwealth senior representatives whose presence helped to douse the violence. I organized a contingent of Commonwealth police men and women to go to South Africa and assist the South Africa police force which had been accustomed mainly to confronting anti-apartheid protesters and opponents in learning the techniques of community policing.  A team of Commonwealth electoral experts also went to assist the South African Electoral Commission in organizing the elections.

Overall, I visited South Africa many times during the almost two-year duration of the conference at Kempton Park including on 17th November 1993 when it concluded at 3.30 am with agreement on the holding of elections and installation of a non-racial democratic government. I still remember vividly the quite emotional occasion of Nelson Mandela swearing the oath of the first democratically elected President of the Republic of South Africa at which many in the audience including my wife shed some tears.

The South African Government doubly honoured me for my role. First by giving me the rare honour of addressing their joint Parliament in 1995, and secondly by conferring on me South Africa’s highest honour for foreigners, The Supreme Companion of O R Tambo (Gold). In 1997, I convened a meeting of the Heads of the then 19 African member-countries of the Commonwealth minus Nigeria whose membership had been suspended following General Abacha’s execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and his colleagues despite personal pleas from President Nelson Mandela and myself, to discuss the state of democracy in their countries and the challenges they faced.

It emerged from the discussions that the first challenge faced by democracy in Africa which applies particularly to Nigeria is the management of diversity. African countries are largely the creation of European powers at their Berlin conference of 1884/85 where they arbitrarily lumped in individual countries ethnic nations that had existed separately for centuries.

The management of diversity is a common challenge to democracies across the world. The diverse countries that have succeeded in remaining united political entities have been those who operate true federal constitutions which are based at the national level on equity, justice and inclusiveness, while at the subnational level on adequately devolved powers for tackling the challenge of development and internal security. Examples of such countries are India and Canada.

On the other hand, the record shows that diverse countries which failed to manage their diversity through true federal constitutions have disintegrated sometimes after internal conflcts. Examples of such countries are Yugoslavia which disintegrated into seven independent countries, Czechoslovakia, and nearer home in Africa, Sudan.

In several African countries there are tensions among different religious and ethnic groups. In some countries like the Democratic Republic of Congo, South Sudan and Central African Republic there are ongoing conflicts arising from such tensions. The horrific genocide that occurred in Rwanda in 1994 remains the worst example of the consequence of failure to successfully manage a country’s diversity.

The management of diversity remains the biggest challenge to our democracy in Nigeria. As I have said on many occasions, our current 1999 constitution is, in my strongly held view, ill-fitted to address it. The wisdom of Nigeria’s founding fathers in agreeing the essentials of our 1960/63 constitution which addressed the country’s diversity, is the only answer to the country’s current lack of credible sense of national unity, the wide-spread insecurity, and the under-performing socio-economic development.

Another challenge identified by the African leaders at the 1997 meeting on democracy was the operations of some foreign non-governmental organizations and agencies in their countries. Here in Nigeria there have been plausible allegations supported by foreign commentators such as the recent remarks by the US Congressman Scott Perry regarding the use of USAID funds to support the Boko Haram, and the leader of the South African mercenaries allegedly brought into the country by President Jonathan to help in the fight against Boko Haram, as well as pronouncements by African scholars including the widely acknowledged Professor P.L.O. Lumumba, of the destabilizing and nefarious activities of some non-government actors in the country.

With the recent military coup d’etats in Guinea, Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger, Africa remains vulnerable to returning to the 1960/70 period when the anti-apartheid author Ruth First in her book, The Barell of a Gun, told the story of a United States Secretary of State who said that he could not recall the number of times when he was woken up at night to be informed of yet another coup in an African country whose name sounded like a typographical error.

And finally, I would like to mention another challenge to our democracy here in Nigeria. It is the nature of our politics and the conduct of our politicians. Our political parties are not, as they should be, organized on ideological basis; they are organized essentially as instruments for capturing political power. And our politicians in their conduct are largely motivated not by a desire to render service to the people, but rather by self-aggrandizement and self-enrichment.

To conclude, I would like to stress that it is only through thriving democratic governance that Nigeria and the other African countries will rid the continent of internal conflicts and lack of socio-economic development which are the biggest impediment to Africa’s ability to change the Eurocentric narrative of Africa and the black race- a narrative that sustains racism and the looking down on Africans by other races. I believe that Nigeria, given its well-known attributes, has a special responsibility in changing this narrative.

•Excerpts of the speech by Chief Anyaoku, a former Commonwealth Secretary-General, at Emeka Ihedioha’s 60th birthday colloquium in Abuja

In a massive show of support, sixty support groups, comprising 120 members under the umbrella of All Soludo Support Groups (ASSG), have endorsed Governor Chukwuma Soludo's bid for a second term.

The groups presented a whopping thirty million naira to the Governor at the International Convention Centre, Awka, to support his re-election campaign.

Governor Soludo, overwhelmed by the gesture, revealed that there is a consensus among community leaders, APGA stakeholders, youths, and students alike, urging him to run for a second term.

He attributed this consensus to the visible developments and projects executed by his administration, which has positively impacted the lives of Anambra residents.

The Governor reiterated his commitment to sustaining the vision of "One State, One People, One Agenda," prioritizing the needs of ndi Anambra and executing projects that have transformed the state. The Governor, thereafter, expressed his profound gratitude to all the support groups as well as their leadership 

The Cordinator of the All Soludo Support Group, ASSG, Mr. Chinedu Nwoye, flanked by other conveners, pledged to support the governor in fulfilling his manifesto and vision for the state.

Unanimously, they expressed their profound satisfaction with the sterling achievements of the administration saying that they did not make a mistake by supporting the Governor’s first term in office.

This development comes on the heels of a similar endorsement by Anambra State students, who contributed two million naira to support Governor Soludo's re-election bid. The Soludo Vanguard, a grassroots support group, has also mobilized support for the governor's re-election campaign.

UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin said on Thursday it would be “a bad idea” for FIFA to expand the World Cup to 64 nations for the 2030 tournament.

The 2026 edition in the United States, Mexico and Canada will already see the format increase from 32 teams to 48.

But the head of the Uruguayan football federation, Ignacio Alonso, suggested further expanding the tournament at the last FIFA Council meeting in March. 

Football’s global governing body said it “had a duty to analyse” the proposal, which European chief Ceferin denounced at UEFA’s congress in Belgrade.

“It’s maybe even more surprising for me than for you. I think it’s a bad idea,” Ceferin said.

“I think it’s not a good idea for the World Cup itself and it’s not a good idea for our qualifiers as well, as you know.

“So, I’m not supporting that idea. I don’t know where it came from. It’s strange that we didn’t know anything before this proposal at the FIFA Council.”

The 2030 World Cup will be played in three continents, with Portugal, Spain and Morocco the main hosts.

There will also be three matches in South America — in Argentina, Uruguay and Paraguay — to celebrate the centenary edition. The inaugural World Cup was held in 1930 in Uruguay.

That decision paved the way for Saudi Arabia to hold the 2034 event.

[Vanguard]