
OTHERS' VIEWS
The most topical political issue this Easter weekend is Gov. Umo Eno’s public endorsement of President Tinubu for a second term and the discussions it’s generated across the country. Eno is a PDP governor who has not hidden his affection and support for the President and the Senate President, Godswill Akpabio, and has succeeded in building bridges across political divide in his state. On many occasions, he has asked Akwa Ibom people, irrespective of party leanings, to rally around the two leaders; but this week, he took the platitude a notch higher. At the flag off of the Akwa Ibom section of the controversial Lagos-Calabar coastal road on Tuesday, the governor announced to the assembled crowd of APC and PDP chieftains that ‘’President Tinubu will be reelected for a second term and I will support him’’. APC members applauded and cheered him, while PDP chieftains looked stunned in disbelief.
At another event the following day at Ikot Ekpene township stadium, the governor repeated the same pro-Tinubu message, this time with additional flavour. ‘’I will tell you the reason when the time comes and you will see with me why we should support him so that he can complete what he started. You will see what he’s doing for our state and you will know why we should not go elsewhere’’, he said. APC supporters and members in the audience, which included Senator Akpabio’s wife, applauded; but PDP stalwarts appeared nonplussed. In return, Mrs Akpabio, apparently speaking the husband’s mind, also endorsed the governor and asked the people to support his reelection ‘’irrespective of the party you belong to’’ ,noting that the governor has performed well in office. She was essentially returning a favour the governor has extended to Akpabio since he was elected Senate President in 2023.
Since he assumed office two years ago, the governor has kept a safe distance from partisan controversies, but this is the first time he’d be in the news for openly rooting for his opponents. For being the first PDP governor to break rank with his party and openly campaign for the reelection of the President, Eno has created a stir in PDP and upended political calculations in some quarters. If this were in the Second Republic when political parties were managed almost like a military formation, the governor would be accused of anti party activities, but this is Nigeria of 2025 when indiscipline is writ large in the parties and rules, norms and traditions are obeyed in the breach. The PDP itself has been systematically weakened by its own internal contradictions. After all, a former governor and PDP chieftain is serving in Tinubu’s cabinet as a prominent minister, and he’s using his position to further undermine the party. So, Eno is justified to chart his course.
Speculations are rife on the possible reasons behind the governor’s decision not to support his party in the next election. Many even conjecture that it’s a somewhat quid pro quo strategy to cement his own reelection. But the governor waved that off. ‘’I support the president’s re election because I’m convinced that the South must complete eight years in the presidency, just as the North did’’, he said in an exclusive interview with me on Good Friday evening. ‘’My party (PDP) must do the right thing, and we must put our house in order. Can you show us a credible alternative to President Tinubu at this moment? The President is doing his best and we should support him’’, he said, stressing, however, that he is not planning to defect from his party.
Gov. Eno’s romance with APC has many implications. He is essentially taking a dig at Atiku Abubarkar who is clearly looking to contest again in 2027. The 78-year-old former Vice President was the standard bearer of PDP in the last two presidential elections, even going against the rotation between North and South in 2023. Many PDP leaders have asked him not to run again so as to make way for fresh hands to lead the party. But Atiku seems adamant and there are indications that his entry into 2027 race may further divide the party. APC leaders in Akwa Ibom are understandably excited at the turn of events. Chief Don Etiebet, former Petroleum Minister and APC leader, praised the governor for endorsing the president and commended Senator Akpabio for backing the governor for a second term.
But some PDP leaders are not sure of what to make of their governor’s position. Some like State Party Chairman Emmanuel Akpan and Emmanuel Enoidem, SAN, who was the chairman of the governor’s election political group, refused to comment when I called. But a few are quite clear-headed about it. Says Isantim Kenneth Okon, Chairman of Ibom Community Watch, the state’s security outfit: ‘’the governor is our leader; when he speaks, we listen; and when he moves, we follow. But in this case, the governor should ensure that we get something in return from the president. President Tinubu will have to return the favour by supporting the state government’s desire to develop a deep sea port. The port will change the economy of Akwa Ibom forever and it’s very dear to our people’’. I agree with Okon on this, and it’s a point Gov. Eno also emphasized when we spoke.
The governor rejects the assumption that he’s supporting Tinubu in order to secure the president’s backing for his own re election. He told me: ‘’By the grace of God, I am a contented man. I will forever remain thankful to God, my political father Udom Emmanuel and Akwa Ibom people for their trust. I will always follow my conscience. I have my conviction to support this president to succeed. If God is for me, what can man do for me?’’
Meanwhile, Eno deserves some credit for building cross-party political alliance between PDP and APC in the state. If it is firmed up and implemented, he and Akpabio would be returned unopposed and President Tinubu will go beyond the 30% threshold APC has scored in the last two presidential elections in the state. It will also bring an end to the gubernatorial ambitions of folks like Senator Ita Enang and Senator Bassey Albert who have been warming up to run again in 2027. The loser would be the PDP which scored over 50% of the vote in the 2023 presidential race. But if this alliance fails, a big political battle will ensue in the state.
The progressive signature of Pope Francis on the Vatican was unmistakable from the beginning of his papacy. Since the Catholic pontiff died on Easter Monday the remarkable positions taken by the Bishop of Rome on many socio-economic and political issues have been amply acknowledged in tributes from diverse quarters. The Pope stood for world peace. He preached compassion. He opposed the widening inequality and social injustice which define the world. He cautioned against irresponsibility in matters of climate change. He appointed women to positions of responsibility in the Vatican. He condemned the suffering of women and children as Israel bombed the occupied territory of Gaza just as he rejected anti-Semitism. With his immense moral authority, the Pope took many other steps in solidarity with the poor and the weak. Expectedly, the difference that Pope Francis was making attracted the attention of observers globally.
It could be a fitting farewell to Pope Francis to reproduce a tribute that this reporter paid to the pontiff on this page on Christmas Day 2013. It was entitled “Pope Francis, Truly of the People.”
Below is the piece:
“As Pope Francis celebrates his first Christmas today in the Vatican as the leader of Catholics all over the world, it may be apposite to draw attention to the emerging character of his papacy.
“At least one discernible trait in the doctrinal development taking place in the Vatican is quite relevant to the message of Christmas: Pope Francis has reinvigorated the message of compassion which is at the heart of Christianity and other great religions.
“In other words, it is important to spare a thought about the social relevance of evangelism. It is on this point that Pope Francis is a leader to watch.
“Take a sample.
“On his twitter page last Thursday, the Pope said: ‘Let us pray that God grant us the grace of knowing a world where no one dies of hunger’.
“Now that is a great departure from the sort of evangelism that blames the victims of hunger; some other leaders of faith would say the hungry man is suffering from the consequence of his sins. Doubtless, the pontiff is carrying out a reform of the message issuing from the church. Some would even call what is taking place a revolution of sorts. There is no way you could be honestly critical of the world in which millions of human beings live in abject poverty without being critical of the dominant ideology of the age. It is such a case that mass poverty is what global capitalism has got to show for its so-called ideological triumph in the cold war. “Hence, Pope Francis has been unequivocal in his criticism of the recklessness of neo-liberal capitalism, which has wreaked havoc in the economies of even the developed capitalist societies. He has condemned the growing inequality in the global economic system. He has never assumed the posture of a technical expert; he has only demonstrated a social conscience in his faith. This is the lesson other religious leaders should learn from the Pope. The Pope has been reported as posing this sobering question: ‘How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?’ It is a question that those who glibly proclaim the end of ideology should sometimes ponder.
“On another occasion, he said: ‘People continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth … will bring about greater justice in the world. This opinion expresses a naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power.’ The matter is put more explicitly when the Pope argues as follows: ‘As long as the problems of the poor are not resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets … no solution will be found for the world’s problems or, for that matter, to any problems.
“By the way, these random quotations from the statements that the Pope has made in the last few months are merely to illustrate the clarity of purpose in his message. More significantly, the fact that these statements are made by the Pope makes them to be weighty in global terms. After all, there was a Pope who was reputed to be a member of the ideological tripod that facilitated the ‘collapse of communism’. This is a frequent reference to the ideological roles of former American President Ronald Reagan, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul in the days of the cold war. Similarly, the message of Pope Francis is resonating today in liberal and conservative quarters. However, unlike Pope John Paul, Pope Francis does not appear destined to be a hero of the Right. Members of the Tea Party in the United States already see something red about the Pope, which the rest of the world is, perhaps, not seeing yet.
“Little surprise that those who are cocooned in the extreme right corner of the ideological spectrum are quick to dub the Pope a ‘Marxist’ for his message of compassion for the poor in a Christ-like manner. Interestingly, the Pope has defended himself unambiguously against the charges of ‘Marxism’. He said: ‘Marxist ideology is wrong. But in my life I have met a lot of Marxists who are good people, so I do not feel offended… That does not mean being a Marxist.’ It is also instructive that as an Argentine, the Pope has lived under the regime of neo-liberal orthodoxy in economic management with its socially destructive consequences.
“He is no stranger to the effects of global capitalism on the quality of life of the poor. Yet he is no liberation theologian. If anything, he is on record to have been critical of the leftist liberation theologians in Latin America in those days.
“Pope Francis is only reminding the Church of the primary question of compassion in its origins; this is a question that market forces do not yet have an answer. You don’t have to be a communist to appreciate this fact about humanity. All that is needed is to be socially sensitive to the widening inequality in the world today. This is the point that the conservative segment of the Pope’s audience should always bear in mind, as they are wont to assail him with ideological criticisms. It is cheery news that not a few observers across the ideological spectrum are watching the doctrinal direction in the Vatican with keen interest.
“The TIME Magazine seems to capture the essence of the new direction of the Pope when it declared him ‘Person of the Year’ last week for ‘pulling the papacy out of the palace and into the streets, for committing the world’s largest church to confronting its deepest needs and for balancing judgment with mercy…’ Besides, he has made a forceful case for a ‘greater presence’ of women in the church. There is a lot of truth in the observation which the magazine puts like this: ‘These days it is bracing to hear a leader say anything that annoys anyone. Now liberals and conservatives alike face a choice as they listen to a new voice of conscience: Which matters more, that this charismatic leader is saying things they think need to be said or that he is also saying things they’d rather not hear?’
“It is refreshing to know that the message from the Vatican is not only about abortion and homosexuals. While he maintains the fundamental views of the church on these largely social and biological issues, he is nudging the church away from getting fixated on the issues. On homosexuality, he once asked: ‘who am I to judge?’ Now, this is far from being rhetorical. It is a possible call for a rethink.
“What is, however, not in dispute is that poverty and inequality are doing a greater havoc to humanity. In words and action, the Pope is reminding the world of this material reality.
“The Pope exudes humility and prefers a simple life. Some other men of God do not see the contradiction between their lives of opulence (sometimes bordering on obscenity) and the poverty of the majority in the congregation. By rejecting the burgeoning inequality in the world today and making compassion a focus of evangelism, Pope Francis truly belongs to the people.”
Yes, the foregoing was just a humble observation of Pope Francis nine months after his papacy began. From the tributes now being paid across the globe to his memory since he died two days ago, the beautiful story of Pope Francis has been that of “morning shows the day.” Some of the great things being said today about Pope Francis were already manifest 12 years ago when he became the head of the Catholic Church.
He held on to his faith to the last minute.
May the compassion, justice and peace about which Pope Francis consistently preached to the world come to pass.
In a time when most religious homilies have been reduced to performative sermons void of national relevance, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah of the Catholic Diocese of Sokoto continues to remind Nigerians that the pulpit can still be a place of truth, courage, and accountability. His 2025 Easter Message, delivered during the Holy Saturday Service, is not just a homily, it is a clarion call that holds a mirror up to the Nigerian state and its leadership. In a country plagued by hypocrisy and muffled truths, Bishop Kukah’s sermon is, indeed, worth digesting and ruminating over.
His message, rich in metaphor and grounded in the harsh realities of Nigeria, forces us to reckon with the nation’s spiritual and socio-political condition. Using the cross as a metaphor, Kukah paints a grim yet honest portrait of a country bleeding from every corner, crippled by insecurity, hunger, and poor governance. He doesn’t mince words, and in doing so, he does what many in positions of influence fear: he speaks truth to power.
Kukah opens his homily by drawing a parallel between the crucifixion of Christ and the suffering of Nigerians. He refers to the nation’s current situation as being akin to dangling on a cross, innocent, tortured, and abandoned. “Mr. President, Nigeria is reaching a breaking point. The nation is gradually becoming a huge national morgue,” he warns.
This metaphor is not poetic exaggeration, it is brutally accurate. From Sokoto to Enugu, Maiduguri to Lagos, families wake up unsure of whether they or their loved ones will fall victim to the day’s dose of savagery. Kidnappings, killings, and general insecurity have become so normalized that the announcement of tragedies barely elicits shock anymore. Nigeria, Kukah rightly notes, is hanging on a cross constructed by decades of political recklessness, but now, the nails are being driven deeper by a government that seems increasingly detached from the agony below.
One of the boldest elements of the homily is Kukah’s direct address to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. “Mr. President, we all admit that you neither erected this cross nor did you effect our collective crucifixion,” he says, acknowledging that Tinubu inherited a mess. But that is where the understanding ends. The bishop swiftly pivots to reality: Nigerians are tired of hanging on this cross.
Kukah demands action, not explanations, not excuses. His tone is firm but not disrespectful, clear but not confrontational. In a country where sycophancy has become a norm among many religious leaders, his audacity to call on the President to “bring us down from this cross” is not only refreshing but necessary.
Kukah does not dwell only on physical suffering. He expands the discussion to the moral and psychological torment of Nigerians. He highlights the culture of cynicism, hopelessness, and loss of faith in leadership. The bishop reminds Christians, however, that Easter is fundamentally a season of hope, hope that defies logic and endures beyond pain.
This is a critical spiritual and philosophical insight. Nigerians have endured so much pain that many no longer expect improvement, they merely hope to survive. And this is dangerous. A nation that no longer expects progress that no longer believes in its future is on a fast track to implosion. Kukah is essentially saying: reigniting hope is not just spiritual, it is political. It must be backed by tangible action.
In what could be described as one of the most piercing portions of the homily, Kukah calls out the futility of palliative-driven policies. He rightly points out that “mere palliative distribution diminishes the dignity of citizens.” Nigeria has become a nation where government handouts are presented as policy achievements, and Kukah is having none of it.
He presses the President to make food security a fundamental right, not a seasonal handout. His challenge goes beyond hunger. It speaks to the heart of a broken governance system, one that has mastered the art of temporary relief but fails at sustainable solutions.
Kukah’s homily takes a darker turn when he reminds Nigerians that some of today’s bandits were once political tools. “Some of our public officers confessed that they brought our current killers into our country as a strategy for upstaging the government of the day.” This is a chilling revelation, and one that indicts the political class across board. It lays bare the reality that Nigeria’s insecurity is not an accident, it is, in part, a consequence of calculated greed and a hunger for power.
Now, these political tools have mutated into monsters. They no longer take orders, they issue them. Kukah warns that Nigeria’s very foundation is under threat from these “ravenous predators.” If these threats are not dismantled immediately, Nigeria risks becoming a failed state in both function and soul.
Kukah ends his message with a dire warning: that government inaction is beginning to look suspicious. He questions whether the persistence of insecurity is due to incompetence or whether those in power are benefiting from the chaos. “Are Nigerians lambs being sacrificed to an unknown god?” he asks. That’s not just a rhetorical question; it’s a haunting accusation.
This is perhaps the most damning part of the homily. It questions the very moral fiber of the nation’s leadership. Is the state merely overwhelmed, or is it compromised? Are our leaders simply helpless, or are they profiting from our helplessness?
Even as Kukah critiques and challenges the nation’s leaders, he does not lose sight of the essence of Easter. He reminds Christians that Christ’s resurrection is the ultimate emblem of hope. This is not a message of despair, it is a call to action, a spiritual charge to believe again, act again, and reclaim our country.
Kukah’s sermon is what a prophetic message should be: bold, honest, faith-filled, and politically aware. It is a message that should make leaders uncomfortable and citizens reflective. It is a sermon that forces us to think, not just about what is, but about what ought to be.
In a country starved of sincerity, Bishop Kukah’s 2025 Easter message serves as both mirror and map. It reflects the nation’s failings with unapologetic clarity, and at the same time, offers a roadmap for renewal. This is no ordinary sermon, it is a national document of conscience.
Nigeria needs more leaders like Kukah, who are not afraid to tell uncomfortable.
Rivers State, one of Nigeria’s most strategically important states politically and economically, has lately become a theatre of absurdity, where the rules of democratic governance have been replaced with the treacherous tactics of a chessboard. The unfolding drama, characterized by betrayals, power tussles, underhanded moves, and calculated silence, raises a pertinent question: Who is really playing Rivers State like a political chessboard to satisfy his selfish ambition?
From the outside, it may look like a mere clash between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike, now the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). But look deeper and you will see a more sinister power play, one where the state is being treated like a pawn in a much larger, more dangerous game.
Rivers State was not always like this. Known for its rich oil resources and vibrant people, the state used to stand as a symbol of strength in the Niger Delta. However, in recent years, it has become increasingly evident that political godfatherism has entrenched itself in the corridors of power. At the center of this debacle is the unresolved tension between Wike and Fubara, an embarrassing soap opera that has eroded the state’s dignity.
Governor Fubara was supposedly Wike’s protégé. He emerged as the governorship candidate under controversial circumstances, allegedly handpicked by Wike himself to serve as a placeholder for the minister’s extended influence. But like many political godsons who suddenly find themselves in power, Fubara is now resisting the overbearing hand of his godfather.
Let’s be brutally honest, no political chess game is played without a grandmaster. Someone is holding the strings, someone with a national ambition, someone who sees Rivers State not as a place of people and culture, but as a stronghold to consolidate power. The state’s politics are being manipulated, not for development or peace, but for raw political gain. Wike, known for his brash and confrontational style, has refused to let go of power, and his desperation for political relevance, perhaps as a future presidential or vice-presidential hopeful, has led to the current debacle.
His hand is seen in every move, covert and overt. From the sudden defection of lawmakers loyal to him, to the persistent impeachment plots against Fubara, and his eventual suspension as a state of emergency was declared, to his unguarded utterances while chaos brews, Wike appears to be orchestrating every move, like a general moving pieces on a board. The question is: to what end?
This is not the first time Nigeria is witnessing a fallout between a political godfather and a godson. From Lagos to Kano, this unholy arrangement has always ended in disaster. But the Rivers State case is particularly worrisome because it appears the state’s interest is not even a factor in the equation. Developmental concerns, governance, and the welfare of the people have all been sacrificed at the altar of ego and ambition.
The 2023 elections were meant to mark a turning point for Rivers. Instead, the elections handed the state back to a shadowy cabal determined to hold it hostage. The current rift has paralyzed governance. Projects have stalled. The civil service is in limbo. Tensions are so high that even security agencies are reportedly taking sides. Is this what Rivers people voted for?
Let’s not romanticize Fubara as an innocent victim either. He knew the game he was getting into. He knew he was handpicked for a reason, to be loyal to Wike. But the moment he attempted to assert his independence, the game changed. This is a classic case of a pawn trying to become a king. His newfound resistance, though commendable in democratic terms, appears reactive rather than strategic. He has failed to build the kind of political coalition necessary to withstand a force like Wike, and his political naivety is becoming more apparent by the day.
However, one cannot entirely blame him. He was placed in office under the illusion of loyalty and expected to dance to a tune that was never his. When he tried to compose his own music, the conductor cut him off.
The most tragic part of this game is the suffering of the ordinary people of Rivers State. While political elites are busy plotting their next move, ordinary citizens are grappling with poor infrastructure, worsening insecurity, environmental degradation, and a dwindling economy. The recent destruction of public properties, factional loyalist violence, and breakdown of legislative functions are telltale signs that the state is dangerously teetering on the edge of anarchy.
The question, then, is not just who is playing the game, but why the people of Rivers are allowing themselves to be played.
We must also look at the wider political implications. The All Progressives Congress (APC), which now counts Wike as one of its strongest backers at the national level, is watching this crisis unfold with keen interest. Wike’s crossover from PDP to APC, in all but name, has allowed him to leverage the federal structure in his favor, putting Governor Fubara in a precarious position. It is as though the state is being offered as a political dowry to the APC in exchange for Wike’s ambitions down the line.
This political chess game is not confined to Rivers alone. It is a dangerous template that, if left unchecked, will spread to other states. What Wike is doing in Rivers today, others will replicate tomorrow. The presidency’s silence over the entire saga is even more troubling. Are they tacitly approving this method of control?
Nigeria’s democracy is still growing, and this growth is being stunted by political desperadoes who believe in power for power’s sake. The Rivers State situation is a clarion call for political maturity. It is time for Rivers leaders, both past and present, to rise above personal ambition and put the state first.
Civil society groups, traditional rulers, and respected elders in the Niger Delta must intervene. The National Assembly should not be silent while a federating unit is being torn apart by a selfish political feud. And Rivers people must rise and demand better. Their state should not be reduced to a mere pawn in someone’s ambition.
So, who is playing Rivers State like a political chessboard? The signs are clear. The moves are obvious. The ambition is evident.
It is time for Rivers people to say, “Enough is enough.” The state deserves better than being reduced to a political playground for personal ego trips. Until Rivers is allowed to breathe, grow, and function without the suffocating grip of self-styled godfathers, its future will remain uncertain, just another pawn in a never-ending game of political chess.
And just like in chess, when pawns are carelessly played, they are easily sacrificed. The people of Rivers must not allow themselves to be sacrificed. Not this time.
The unveiling of the Artificial Intelligence Collective last week by Dr Bosun Tijani, Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, is a good call by the Nigerian government to play a lead role in the development and deployment of AI to resolve socio-economic challenges while developing new opportunities.
The Collective is a gathering of experts and distinguished personalities from the tech industry, communications, academia, civil society and the private sector which, in the expectation of the government, will develop a strategy to build a sustainable AI ecosystem, one that supports innovation while safeguarding ethics and inclusion.
AI is more than the new kid on the block. It’s a monster that holds the keys to future economic growth and development. It has the capacity to do virtually anything, except probably standing on a street corner and whispering some love notes to a friend. AI has no feelings but has the capacity to achieve good.
My judgement call derives from the Minister’s conscious effort to put the country on the front row in building out an AI ecosystem that will be of more benefit to the nation while providing a template for the rest of the continent. There are always benefits for those who make the first move at the dawn of new technologies. They enjoy the advantages of the first movers.
History is replete with such developments as humanity is always pushing the frontiers of knowledge and putting technology to test in the most esoteric way. There is always a harvest of glory and then wealth.
Look at this. The space race started in the 50s. The Soviet Union of which Russia remains the most visible surviving face, sent the Sputnik into space in October 1957. The development was too much for America to stomach as the country’s President, J.F. Kennedy challenged his nation to land a man on the moon between 1960 and 1970. By July 1969, the objective was achieved as Apollo11 docked three men on the moon who planted an American flag in that planet hitherto unreached by man.
Since then the wisdom in President Kennedy’s positon not to concede the importance of space to any other nation of the world is only too obvious. More countries of the world have joined the space race. Our dear country, Nigeria, even had to contact the Chinese to build a satellite for us to have a leg in the space business. Space technology has become a big boom for businesses. You can’t fly a plane without space technology. You can’t steer a ship without space technology. Telecommunications and broadcasting are dead without space technology. In fact, life may actually be put on hold without space technology. Call that hyperbole! It only adds colour to our exaggerated beliefs.
At the moment, fun has become an element of the game. Only recently, billionaire Jeff Bezos, flew an all female crew into space with his Blue Origin rocket. Within 11 minutes of return flight, the six women got beyond the limits of the earth into that space of weightlessness before returning in a capsule. And perhaps too tucked into her seat to enjoy an opportunity to wave to God, pop star, Katy Perry, burst into Louis Armstrong’s song, What a Wonderful World. CBS reporter, Gayle King called it the highlight of the journey for her, according to a BBC report of the event.
Another billionaire, Elon Musk, who has become more of a politician lately, with his SpaceX, has long redefined the history of space technology, going beyond tourism to even sending a crew for space rescue mission recently from the International Space Station (ISS).
British billionaire, Richard Branson, wouldn’t let the Americans have the entire space to themselves alone. Virgin Galactic planned a monthly tour to space. A ticket is said to cost a hefty $450,000 from $200,000; while in the summer of 2021, Blue Origin once auctioned a seat for $28m!
So there is so much to benefit from new technologies beyond the veneer of politics. And methinks the minister is not playing politics but genuinely concerned about Nigeria benefiting from this new genre of technology with the capacity to have a profound impact on humanity well into the foreseeable future.
At the Paris AI Summit in February 2025 where Nigeria was present fortunately, the global community came to pitch for their countries. For instance, Vice President JD Vance who represented the United States argued that of the projected $700bn investment in AI by 2028, half of the money should come to his country because of the attraction it presents.
Dr Tijani said at the time that “Artificial Intelligence is an opportunity for humanity to be better, and we cannot afford to take our eyes off it.” He is also very concerned about Nigeria leading AI discourse in the global south where needs and direction are different from what obtains in the developed north.
But more of the strategy was about the country last week. “The country’s model involves identifying and engaging with Nigerian researchers and experts in AI, both locally and internationally, to develop a comprehensive strategy that addresses the nation’s specific needs and challenges,” he said.
From the personalities present at the launch, including Prof Olayinka David-West, Dean, Lagos Business School, and Dr Olubayo Akanmbi, CEO, Data Science Nigeria, representatives of relevant industries and their positive positions expressed, this writer has little room for doubt. However, there is some fear that this launch shouldn’t be another layer upon the stack of problems waiting to gain serious attention in the tech ecosystem or in the government basket of issues waiting to be addressed.
There are quite a number of them but I will pick only two for the purpose of this writing. The mobile industry is projected to hit $11trillion in economic value and 8.4 percent of global GDP by 2030. Without doubt Nigeria is expected to benefit from this economic windfall. Unfortunately, the regulator of the telecommunications industry, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), whose duty it is to curate the process and ensure such benefits, has not been able to recover from the harassment received under the previous administration. It is therefore reasonable to observe that without being spruced up in terms of training and necessary financial provision, the organisation may find it difficult to meet expectations from critical stakeholders. It is in the interest of the government for the NCC to once again wear the ironclads of the regulator and be able to meet even the most basic aspirational expectations of these stakeholders.
The Minister may tell me that he is not in charge of the broadcast industry and its regulator, the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) but the activities can hardly be separated. Look at it this way. The Digital Switchover (DSO) that should have ended in 2021 has hardly moved a needle. This writer is not aware of any timetable at the moment to bring the process to a conclusion. The attraction at the time was that a proper execution of DSO would free up some broadcast frequencies for telecom services. Apart from bringing more money to the coffers of the government, the new frequencies will help to deepen telecommunication service availability and penetration. A minister so desirous of growing the telecoms industry with the aim of introducing new bouquets of services should take more than a cursory interest in the DSO process and encourage his broadcast counterpart with shared and beneficial opportunities.
As a writer, I have long understood the emptiness of words, how cheap they can be, according to Prof Femi Osofisan, and the need for those in government to go beyond the confines of words. I encourage Dr Bosun Tijani to match his enthusiasm with action and add the agility of youthfulness to achieve the kind of results that history cannot ignore. He doesn’t need to be told that technology can be very harsh in documenting our efforts for posterity.
[OPINION] Francis: Epitome of Simplicity and Friend of the Poor, Undaunted by Controversy - Paul Ejime
Admin[OPINION] Insecurity Scourge: Can Civilians Owning CCTV or Bearing Arms End It? - Magnus Onyibe
AdminIn the course of delivering a lecture at Al-Hakim University in Ilorin, Kwara State, on Thursday, April 17, the Inspector General of Police, IGP Kayode Egbetokun, PhD, implored Nigerians to acquire Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras to be installed in their residences and places of work.
He argued that it is part of the much-vaunted, but yet-to-be-implemented, state/community policing initiative.
My immediate reaction as soon as I read the news in the mass media was: Good idea, but how feasible is it for the average Nigerian to procure CCTV at such prohibitive cost, and how can it be operated without a stable supply of electricity?
Has the idea been put through the crucible of critical thinking?
Shortly after the IGP’s proposal, on Saturday, April 19, a highly respected former Defence Minister and ex-Chief of Army Staff, T.Y. Danjuma, took an extreme position by proposing that civilians should defend themselves because the government has failed to do so — and that they will perish if they do not resort to self-help. Addressing a large gathering, he reportedly told his people: “I once asked you to rise and defend yourselves. I am still repeating it today with more seriousness — rise and defend yourselves. The killers have obtained sophisticated arms; we don’t know where they got them. But you people should also ask to get arms wherever they got theirs. You must defend yourselves against the killers. You should know they are well-armed to kill you and ready to take your land. Be ready for them — they are also humans like you.”
Impliedly, the Army General is advocating that civilians should bear arms to protect themselves from the vicious invaders that appear hell-bent on killing them.
That is not the first time Gen. Danjuma has made such a call.
Based on records, he has done so twice.
My immediate reaction when I read his advice was: Has this idea of fire-for-fire been thought through? While it may appear like a plausible short-term solution, in the long run, would mutual self-destruction be an efficacious response to the seemingly intractable internal insecurity challenge?
To me, it echoes the era of nuclear bomb proliferation — a reckless enterprise — and the current non-nuclear arms proliferation agreement, which was reached when it became apparent that a nuclear arms race would result in the mutual destruction of mankind.
Could the license to kill or be killed be a reasonable solution to the killings by outlaws engaging in the orgy of slaughter in Nigeria’s countryside? Would solving one security challenge in that manner not trigger another?
Very importantly, have we, as a nation, taken a critical look at the experience of the United States of America, where the system of civilians bearing arms has resulted in a gun epidemic? One so debilitating that it has defied solutions, even by the leaders of the most powerful and wealthiest nation in the world such the death tally may be comparable to that of nations at war?
I think if we devote enough time to doing due diligence on the call for civilians to bear arms, more Nigerians will dread the prospect than those who desire it.
In any case, at least the IGP’s proposition on civilian CCTV ownership marks a shift in the position of the Police Force, which has long been opposed to the concept of state police.
This is based on the presentation made by the IGP in the past.
In making his case against the decentralization of the police force, the IGP had taken a position against the birthing of state police for the reasons of being prone to abuse by politicians amongst other factors.
However, in my view, the difference between the concept of state police and community police may lie in the fact that the former will be controlled by the respective state governors, while the latter will still be centrally controlled by the IGP in the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja — at least there is a consensus that the current framework of policing in Nigeria is inadequate.
As such, there is a need for a paradigm shift.
Since the return of multi-party democracy in Nigeria in 1999, I have consistently advocated for a state policing system.
While President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999–2007) was the first to moot the idea — when criminality started rising around the country, a reflection of the freedom that came with nascent democratic rule after decades of military dictatorships — the idea has suffered a stillbirth, 25 years later.
By the same token, I have often wondered aloud why the Police Force, which is constitutionally charged with the responsibility of maintaining internal law and order, has been emasculated within the country’s security architecture.
Again, based on former President Obasanjo’s military background as an ex-military Head of State, it was a natural course of action for him to resort to the use of military force instead of the police to curb internal insecurity.
As such, the police—already defunded and hobbled by multiple military regimes to prevent it from posing a threat during Nigeria’s long period under military rule—had been rendered almost comatose.
Somehow, that military kinetic approach to enforcing internal security, as opposed to the more appropriate, less militarized, and non-kinetic method in which the police are adept and more efficacious, has been sustained—with a consequential deterioration in the level of security and safety of lives and property in our country.
We will delve into the apparent usurpation of the role of the police in internal security by the military, whose primary responsibility is to defend our country against external threats.
Yet, the armed forces have taken over the role of the police and, in the process, based on available records, have expended more than an estimated $16 billion between 2012 and 2018 on security—even though Nigeria has not been at war with any other country.
Rather, our country has been faced with the menace of non-state actors: religious insurgents exhibiting extremism; bandits who initially engaged in cattle rustling but have scaled up to kidnapping for ransom; and the perennial clashes between farmers and herders, whose animals destroy crops. This has been worsened by land-grabbing schemes of nomadic herdsmen, compounded by a new strain of fortune seekers stirring up insecurity, especially in areas rich in solid minerals. The agenda of this last category of outlaws is to cause mayhem in specific locations so they can illegally extract our country’s natural resources—such as rare earth minerals—after rendering the targeted areas ungovernable.
While the reality is that it is the police who have the mandate—and are specifically trained—to deal with the type of criminal activities wrecking our country, as highlighted above, the military has been executing the task of trying to maintain peace, a task for which it is ill-equipped. In my view, that is one of the key reasons the marauders have been having the upper hand and why insecurity in Nigeria has been on an upward trend.
For instance, while N6.11 trillion has been allocated to the Ministry of Defence in the 2025 budget of N49.74 trillion, only N1.1 trillion was provided for the Ministry of Police Affairs.
So, while the military is getting an elephant-sized allocation, the police have been given an ant-sized share of funds in the 2025 budget.
This is even though ensuring the internal security of lives and property is the police’s constitutionally assigned responsibility.
Be that as it may, one is not oblivious to the fact that the Ministry of Defence covers the Army, Air Force, and Navy, which explains its N6.11 trillion budget. Nevertheless, since internal security falls within the purview of the police, it should have received the lion’s share of the funds devoted to keeping Nigerians and their property safe and secure within the country.
Before delving further into the non-prioritization of police funding to take charge of internal security—while emphasis continues to be placed on funding the military, which has received the highest allocation in yearly budgets over the past 25 years—let us first examine the IGP’s proposition that Nigerians acquire CCTV as part of his concept of community policing and as a citizen contribution toward stemming the crisis of insecurity, which has reached alarming proportions in our beloved country.
To be sure, the idea of Nigerians acquiring CCTV is quite laudable. In fact, the cities of London, Dubai, and New York are practically forests of CCTV cameras, which have proven efficacious in crime control.
But from the point of view of affordability for Nigerians, it is very expensive to acquire and operate. As such, it may be an unrealistic expectation.
The challenge is especially compounded by the lack of a steady electricity supply that continues to plague our country.
Therefore, to make CCTV affordable for the average Nigerian—at least initially—the Federal Government of Nigeria (FGN) should remove the import duty on it.
Subsequently, the government should provide funding support for a few firms to begin assembling CCTV systems locally, thereby reducing costs.
The selection of the firms to be supported should be done through an open and competitive bidding process.
Imports should not be allowed to continue beyond 18–24 months, within which time the infrastructure and capacity to assemble the items locally would be expected to develop.
To boost local assembly, there must be a government support scheme to empower the same firms assembling CCTV cameras to also assemble solar panels and drones, as part of a bundled package.
They should likewise assemble electricity meters, Point-of-Sale (PoS) machines, and ATMs, using Completely Knocked Down (CKD) units imported and assembled by Nigerian workers.
The production of these items is not rocket science, and private firms can establish joint ventures (JVs) with European, North and South American, or Asian companies—including Chinese, Korean, and Indian manufacturers. It may recalled that back in the day, Adebowale Industries, a local entrepreneur was assembling radio, television sets, and other electronic gadgets here in Nigeria.
Government support—through subsidies, equity investments via the Ministry of Finance Incorporated (MOFI), tax holidays, and customs duty exemptions—must be guaranteed.
In the same vein, the newly established CreditCorp should be mandated to provide Nigerians with credit facilities to acquire CCTVs and solar panels assembled locally. This would not only enhance security but also create jobs and increase the country’s productivity quotient.
With a population of over 220 million, Nigeria has a sufficiently large market to justify local production.
I am convinced that this proposition is a win-win: security will be improved through widespread CCTV coverage, people will feel safe enough to return to farms and factories, job creation will rise, and, by extension, the economy will grow—ultimately boosting our GDP.
That is not all. There’s also the added value of technology transfer, as Nigerians working in these assembly plants will learn to build these gadgets through collaboration with foreign technical partners.
That said, one fact that must not be ignored is that with the IGP’s proposition for citizens to acquire CCTV, the responsibility for monitoring crime—to proactively prevent it or to track and apprehend criminals—is being shifted from the government to the people.
But perhaps this shift is justified, as it has been proven that public funds invested directly in citizens tend to yield better returns than those funneled through government contractors, which often fall victim to corruption.
As may be recalled, in 2012 or thereabouts, a contract was awarded to ZTE Corporation of China for $470 million to install 2,000 solar-powered CCTV cameras across Nigeria.
According to a House of Representatives ad hoc committee that investigated the deal, ZTE collected a $100 million upfront payment but only installed 40 cameras—most of which remain non-functional.
The committee described the project as a monumental failure, attributing the outcome to corruption and mismanagement. The goal of the initiative had been to monitor and deter crime in Lagos, the commercial nerve center, and Abuja, the nation’s capital.
Therefore, it’s perhaps a credit to the creative ingenuity of the current IGP that he is seeking to circumvent the well-known corruption associated with government contracts by pivoting CCTV ownership to citizens. I would add that such acquisition should be supported by the government.
Just imagine if the $470 million earmarked for ZTE in 2012 had instead been used to subsidize individual CCTV ownership under a model like the one now proposed by IGP Egbetokun and expanded upon here.
Had that approach been adopted back then, perhaps today’s alarming insecurity levels would either not exist or would be drastically reduced, as criminals would have had no hiding places.
Incidentally, the same scourge of corruption that scuttled the deployment of CCTV cameras in Abuja and Lagos has characterized the military’s kinetic approach to combating insecurity in Nigeria—a crisis now in its 25th year, having started during Obasanjo’s administration in 1999.
In the 2014 national budget, about $2.5 billion was allocated to security agencies under the supervision of then National Security Adviser, Col. Sambo Dasuki.
Following the defeat of President Goodluck Jonathan and the PDP in 2015 and the takeover by Muhammadu Buhari and the APC, allegations surfaced that the security funds had been misappropriated and diverted to fund the 2015 elections.
At this point, it is important to examine how insecurity started and degenerated to the current dire state.
It began as a form of religious insurgency, following the adoption of Sharia law (a legal and moral code based on Islamic principles) in Zamfara State during Obasanjo’s presidency in 1999.
The religious extremism that accompanied the law was soon hijacked and transformed into a front for political thuggery and criminality.
Curiously, since that time, mineral-rich Zamfara has consistently been a hotspot for insecurity in Nigeria.
Arising from this, I believe that religion is another factor fueling insecurity in the country.
Some of the perpetrators of heinous crimes have used the pretense of jihad—a claim that many Islamic clerics have rightly denounced—to commit atrocities. These criminals have killed both Christians and Muslims indiscriminately.
Once those hiding under the guise of religion to perpetrate crimes bordering on genocide and ethnic cleansing are exposed and apprehended, our security agencies will be in a stronger position to restore peace.
In addition to religion, another major factor driving insecurity is external influence.
There are foreign interests behind the chaos in states rich in rare earth minerals. These actors fund criminal activities to make such areas ungovernable, thus enabling illegal mining and exploitation of resources.
They began in Zamfara and have now shifted their attention to Plateau State, which is rich in lithium and other valuable minerals.
One clear thing is that the same playbook criminals have been using in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) for about 100 years is now being deployed in Nigeria.
Strikingly, what is happening in Darfur, South Sudan—defined by armed conflicts driven by external interests in fossil fuel resources over the past five decades—is not dissimilar.
Due to a gap in policing in our country, foreigners are roaming freely in our hinterlands, mapping out resources. In some cases, we’ve even seen trending videos of foreigners handing out cash to our police officers—presumably as compensation for favors.
In more security-conscious climes, foreigners are not allowed to travel into the hinterlands, let alone contest for resources with locals without proper licensing.
But in Nigeria, foreigners are present in our forests and solid mineral sites, extracting and carting away natural resources under the radar.
At one point, small propeller airplanes were landing on narrow paths in Zamfara State, carting away precious stones to unknown destinations for processing—allegedly in connivance with security forces.
Aside from their official duties of protecting public officers and Very Important Personalities (VIPs), some police personnel have been seen offering protection to individuals of questionable character—people they ought to be apprehending. These individuals then move around intimidating ordinary Nigerians with loud sirens and vehicle convoys while citizens go about their daily struggle to eke out a living.
With a paltry police strength of about 400,000 officers in a country with an estimated population of 220 million—and many of them engaged in VIP protection—there are not enough personnel to respond adequately where marauders strike.
As a result, there have been multiple instances where bandits return to previously attacked locations within days or weeks to wreak more havoc on unprotected victims.
One cannot fathom why the operationalization of state or community policing remains in abeyance and why the police force continues to be underfunded.
We have a youth bulge in this country. I do not understand why the authorities have not embarked on a massive recruitment drive to enlist and train young Nigerians into the police force to secure the hinterlands and repel marauders.
We also need a dedicated forest police unit—an idea previously proposed by the Minister of Solid Minerals, Dr. Dele Alake. This specialized force would patrol forests and protect our natural resources, which are the primary targets of criminal syndicates fomenting violence in resource-rich areas.
In addition to the regular police force, I would argue that it is time to reintroduce the National Guard—originally established by General Ibrahim Babangida—as an elite police unit to tackle the evolving security threats across the country.
The recent tragic events in Plateau and Benue States, where numerous lives have been lost, highlight the urgency of adopting extraordinary measures to combat insecurity.
Commendably, in his Easter message, President Tinubu, while felicitating with Christians, also commiserated with those who lost loved ones in the attacks, stating:
“Just as Christ triumphed over death, so too shall our country triumph over every challenge we face.”
He went further to reassure Nigerians:
“I have given clear directives to the Armed Forces and all relevant security agencies to end insecurity decisively and without delay.”
Given President Tinubu’s record of thinking outside the box, we can hope that his directive to the National Security Adviser, Nuhu Ribadu—himself a retired Assistant Inspector General of Police—will yield positive results.
That said, one pressing question remains: Will putting the police at the center of the renewed effort to restore peace lead to a lasting solution to the resurgent insecurity?
Well, we won’t know until we try.
Also, is this resurgence in violence connected to the politics of 2027, when the next electoral cycle begins?
Time will reveal the truth as the situation unfolds.
My argument for a more central role for the police in internal security is based on the fact that they are better trained in managing civil conflicts. How could the military have been involved in the infamous Lekki, Lagos toll gate killing of protesters in 2020 during the Endsars riots, if it was not involved in internal security?
Some pundits argue that insecurity has persisted because the military—whose expertise is in kinetic warfare—has been overwhelmed, as what is truly needed are policing skills to handle banditry, inter-communal conflicts, and various criminal activities.
Even the military has admitted that non-kinetic approaches might yield better results than the military tactics they’ve traditionally relied on. In fact, they have begun shifting toward non-kinetic strategies.
So why is the police—naturally more adept at non-kinetic methods—not being empowered to take the lead in a combined military-police strategy?
Let me be clear: I have nothing against our brave military men and women. I greatly admire them.
My father, David Ebiye-Onyibe, was a soldier who fought in World War II and the Nigerian Civil War as a medic. He died in active service on December 28, 1970, when I was a toddler.
After his passing, I was taken to Benin City from Agbor to sit for the entrance exam into the Nigerian Military School, but I was underage and couldn’t be admitted.
Because of that history, I have an eternal admiration for the military, and I always feel a sense of pride when, at airports abroad, uniformed service members receive special recognition through public announcements and are offered privileges and perks.
That said, beyond the inability of the military to play the role of internal security agent effectively, another major reason insecurity persists in Nigeria is religion.
Some of the criminals behind these atrocities are deceived into believing they are engaging in jihad, not realizing they are pawns feeding the greed of a few powerful kingpins.
Fortunately, some traditional rulers and Islamic clerics in the North have taken a stand, distancing themselves from the terrorists and condemning the senseless violence that has devastated lives and properties in the hinterlands.
Once these impostors—those hiding under the cloak of religion—are exposed and held accountable, our security agencies will be better positioned to restore peace and harmony among Nigeria’s many ethnic groups.
More importantly, we must confront the external factors in the rising insecurity.
There are foreign elements funding criminality in areas rich in rare earth minerals—especially in Plateau State—so they can operate in lawless conditions.
This same method was used in Zamfara, and now the focus has shifted to Plateau, largely because of its lithium deposits.
It’s the same strategy that has been in use in the DRC for over a century.
And just as external powers once armed the Janjaweed militia in Darfur, South Sudan, similar external forces are at play here.
Although the Nigerian military has made gains—repelling some attacks and neutralizing notorious gang leaders—millions still live in fear, especially in remote areas where the government seems distant and unresponsive.
Clearly, there’s a gaping hole in our policing architecture.
I cannot fathom why the implementation of state or community policing is still pending, or why the police remain poorly funded.
We have a youth bulge and a high unemployment rate.
Why aren’t our leaders seizing this opportunity to train and engage young people in law enforcement, transforming them into productive contributors to national security?
I do not understand why a massive recruitment drive into the police force has not been initiated—complete with cutting-edge training, equipment, and high-tech tools to secure our forests and hinterlands.
We also urgently need the forest police unit that Dr. Dele Alake proposed—dedicated to protecting our natural resources and fending off criminal syndicates.
Furthermore, I believe it’s time to reintroduce the National Guard, created under Babangida, to serve as an elite security force capable of handling the evolving security challenges.
General T.Y. Danjuma’s extreme position—encouraging self-defense among his people—may have stemmed from a deep sense of helplessness and frustration.
His home state, Taraba, as well as Benue and Plateau, has seen consistent attacks and loss of lives.
While not disputing anything Gen. Danjuma said, a resort to self-help in the form of widespread armament among civilians may have unintended consequences.
If inter-communal conflicts arise, will these weapons not be turned against fellow Nigerians over land disputes or cultural disagreements?
This is why we must take seriously the IGP’s call for citizens to own CCTV systems, and Gen. Danjuma’s warning, both of which highlight the rising wave of killings in recent weeks.
If the situation improves through a new paradigm shift in security—placing the police at the forefront, bolstered by strategic military support—then perhaps the urgency for civilians to arm themselves will diminish.
Before then Nigerians can not wait to exhale by having the yoke of insecurity removed as part of the existential challenge hindering them from being productive to self and society.
ONYIBE, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, democracy advocate, author, and development strategist.
Caleb Muftwang, the Governor of Plateau, made a grave mistake by hosting the Ambassador of Israel, an ethno-fascist, genocidal, child-killing, terrorist & apartheid nation in his state. I watched the show of shame & almost threw up.
As a Christian how does this Muftwang feel about receiving mass murderers, ethnic cleansers & religious bigots in his official residence?
More importantly, as a human being, how can he sleep at night after doing this?
Outside of that does he not know about the role that Israel & her strongest allies are playing in the killings in the North & even in his own state?
Does he not know who is really behind the terrorists that have plagued our nation both North & South?
Does he not know who is really benefiting from the carnage & land-grabbing?
Does he not know that their objective is to plunge us into a civil & religious war whilst they pick up the pieces?
Someone tell him to ask his Zionist friends who created, founded, funds and arms ISIS, ISWAP, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Al Qaeda & virtually every other terrorist organisation in the world.
Tell him to ask them who uses these evil forces to divide, destabilise & destroy the foreign nations which they seek to control & dominate.
Tell him to ask them why none of the terrorist organisations mentioned above have EVER attacked Israel or targetted the Israelis?
Tell him to ask them who funded and sold arms to the Biafrans more than anyone else during our civil war.
Tell him to ask them how African Jews from Ethiopia (known as the Falashas) that are seeking to become Israeli nationals are treated in the Zionist state and how they are subjected to and injected with strange and toxic chemicals in order to prevent them from having children and "contaminating" the white/European bloodline of the non-semitic Ashkazi Jews that rule that dark and accursed country.
Receiving the emissary of an insensitive & callous beast, a bloodthirsty tyrant, a feral psychopath & a delusional meglomaniac like Bibi Netanyahu & showering accolades on him is an insult to the martyred women & children of Gaza & a big slap on the face of those that are fighting Israeli occupation in Palestine.
Worst still in doing so the Governor has inflicted a deep spiritual wound on himself & his Government.
Bringing a Jewish snake into your house will not help you to solve your problems in Plateau state no matter what they promise to do for you: it will only make them worse.
As they say, "beware of the Greeks, especially when they bring gifts!" The Trojans learnt this lesson the hard way! Let us hope the same fate does not befall you.
Meanwhile did your guest tell you that they spit on Christians in his country?
Did he tell you that according to their holy book known as the Talmud, our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ was a liar and a rogue and is now burning in hell whilst swimming in a pool of human faeces?
Did he tell you that they discriminate against both Christians and Muslims and that they detain and slaughter them like flies?
I learnt that the day after he left Plateau state no less than 100 more people were killed by the terrorists: why am I not surprised?
This Muftwang has much to learn!
(Chief Femi Fani-Kayode is the Sadaukin Shinkafi, the Wakilin Doka Potiskum, the Otunba Joga Orile, a former Minister of Culture and Tourism, a former Ministerof Aviation and a former Senior Special Assistant on Public Affairs to President Olusegun Obasanjo)
I found myself inventing that verse as today’s headline. The verse came sounding like “The Lord is my shepherd/ I Shall not want…” The twenty-third Psalm. Yesterday was Easter Sunday; today is Easter Monday. All Judases are shamed.
Life here is bitter as brine. The green pastures are withered. The still waters are poisoned. More and more, victims fall in undeclared wars in Benue and Plateau. Terrorists rebrand and relaunch in Borno and Niger and Zamfara. The Commander-in-Chief is absent in flesh, in body and soul. But I must be quiet, because the president is my brother.
Some twenty-something years ago, one of us (I can’t remember who the person was) blurted out a question:
“The name of your governor, ‘Alamiyeseigha’, reads like a tongue-twisting clause. What does it mean?”
Our guest was the Bayelsa State Commissioner for Information.
The guest sat up, grinned and looked round the Tribune boardroom. She then smiled out the answer.
I thought that was deep. I quickly got it stored in the depth of my brain. True. God is never wrong. But brother? An argument would have ensued but that commissioner, Mrs Ruth Benamaisia Opia, went into an intelligent analysis of how and when a brother is deemed not wrong: She said a brother is never wrong in the presence of outsiders. She might be right. Among her audience were a people whose own culture instructs them to first deal with the fox before spanking the cock. They also say you don’t sell your brother cheap; if you do, you won’t be able to buy him back expensive.
“Kin-blood is not spoiled by water.” That is how 12th-century German poet, Heinrich der Glîchezære, couches it in his epic, Reinhart Fuchs (Reynard the Fox). I am supposed to love and be loyal to the king because he is my brother. Is my brother, the king, supposed to love and be loyal to me? Christian scholar, T. L. Westow, in his ‘Who is my Brother?’ published in May 1964, declares that “nobody can eat for somebody else.” That may be true in biology; it is not true in politics. What do you think my brother, the president, is doing on my behalf in Europe? He has been there for the past two weeks.
Because my brother is the president, he can do anything and get away with it. And he has been doing it. The president is the law. He keeps a very good company in the US President Donald Trump. Last week, Trump complained about his country’s Federal Reserves chair, Jerome Powell. “I’m not happy with him. I don’t think Powell is doing the job. He will leave if I ask him to.” An American reacted: “Why has anybody but Trump run anything? Just get rid of congress, senate, Supreme Court, etc. He’s so smart; he can run everything.” It is too late to recommend the same here. President Bola Tinubu is the smartest somebody ever created. He had been the law long before he became president. Presidential powers have only enlarged his coast, and we are happy and grateful for the answered prayers.
I have no problem with Tinubu staying put abroad. The only issue I have with it is that in his absence, Muhammadu Buhari’s eunuch is having an erection again. I don’t like that. It is risky. While I agonise over the resurgent eunuchs, I will not stop stopping critics from hampering my president with the constitution and all its provisions. Scrap the law, scrap the courts, the legislature, everything; sack the governors, give the president their functions and budgets. Make him President and Governor General of the federation. Trash all the scrapped. Scrap Abuja and let the super man reign from wherever he finds comfort. Why not?
My brother, the president, is in Europe, running the country effectively unseen like an unseen poem. It is my duty as a brother to expose the ignorance of critics who say the president residing abroad is immoral and illegal. I should tell such critics that the people who created Nigeria started Nigeria with that arrangement. When the two Nigerias were brought together in 1914, the first ‘president’ (nicknamed Governor General) reigned six months in Nigeria; four and a half months in London; one and half months cruising on the high seas. Lord Lugard gave his employers that condition and he got it, he maintained and enjoyed it for several years. A befitting office with full complement of competent staff was even provided for him righ t inside the colonial office in London. That is our history.
Shakespeare says there is no darkness but ignorance. Ignorant critics say my brother does not delegate as the constitution dictates. They should read history. Our president’s ancestor, Lord Lugard had two deputies called Assistant Governors. From 1914 when he took charge till he left in 1919, he delegated neither power nor responsibility to any of them. There were complaints and grumblings, home and abroad; the Governor-General ignored them all. Nothing happened. Nothing will happen if President Tinubu keeps that foundational tradition alive. He has a duty to run his government undisturbed from the Moon, even from inside the Sun.
If my brother is not ready for home, it is my duty to beg him to stay back wherever he is. It is also my duty to attack his attackers here. He should not rush home after these Easter holidays simply because sibling rivalry is pushing some of our bad brothers to demand his immediate homecoming. The president should work harder in London – or cross the English Channel back to Paris, and continue where he stopped.
Last week, from wherever he was, the president set up an eight-man committee on his pet census project, five out of the eight members are from his sitting room. Because he is my brother, I am not supposed to mention this and say he was wrong to use his household to rule the whole world.
For those who are not happy that five brothers out of eight make the list of Tinubu’s census committee, I recommend, in the spirit of this Easter season, ‘The Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard’. It is a Bible passage:
“Then the mother of Zebedee’s sons came to Him with her sons, kneeling down and asking something from Him.
“And He said to her, ‘What do you wish?’”
“She said to Him, ‘Grant that these two sons of mine may sit, one on Your right hand and the other on the left, in Your kingdom.’” (Mathew 20:20,21).
What you just read is a brother to the right; his blood brother to the left. The Master was number one. The brothers would be numbers two and three. And there were twelve disciples. The two brothers were John and James. Whose cousins or nephews were they? Find out whose sister their mother, Salome, was.
Some neighbours are already saying that without them in 2027 my brother will be sent back home empty-handed. They should shut up, and go and listen to Juju music Commander Ebenezer Obey. He warns that no one should vow that without them their friend won’t find food to eat. They should not say that again Sustenance is God’s. He is the only provider. If they want war in 2027, my brother will give them. I will watch the bull fight; my popcorn is ordered.
So, those who are not happy with my brother’s nepotism should go drink iced water. They should wait for their own time. Nigeria is a tripod. Every good and every bad must get entered in the country’s balance sheet. Muhammadu Buhari had his own fill. We shouted, but Bayajidda II pointed us to his kurmo (deaf) ears. Goodluck Jonathan had aides who helped him do his own so well that he became Azikiwe.
I read Keith Ferrazzi’s ‘Never Eat Alone: And Other Secrets to Success.’ But I will not join outsiders to quote that book and warn the solo man that he “can’t get there alone” and “in fact, can’t get very far at all.” I will also refrain from reading ‘What do you think of eating alone?’, a recent piece written by The Korea Times’ senior advisor, Park Moo-jong. There is a spice in that piece. It is from Desmond Morris, English zoologist, ethologist and author of ‘The Naked Ape’: “One may eat alone in the privacy of one’s own home, but to eat alone in a public place is to invite suspicion of personal failure at best and deviancy at worst.” If the president were not my brother, I would have expanded that verdict to accommodate what critics say of him here. I would have said that Nigeria is a public, multi-regional, multi ethnic entity and that no group, no matter how smart, or wise or vicious can kidnap Nigeria and hold it hostage for long. But the president is Yoruba and Muslim like me, so I won’t undermine my brother. I won’t join those who say that even the British who created the country did not succeed in putting it in purdah for as long as they wished.
President Bola Tinubu is a brother to some because he is a Muslim. To some others he is a brother because of the language he speaks — his mother tongue – Yoruba. Still, to some others, he is a brother because of the fraternity of politics he leads. Common to these concentric circle of brotherhoods is the charge that his wrong must not be said from any mouth there. Scores killed in Plateau, 56 murdered in Benue, the Commander-in-Chief is rocking the cities of Paris and London. He must not be accused of playing Nero while his Rome burns. Our brother must never be said to be wrong.
This president campaigned and pledged to renew our hopes in a better Nigeria. Where are the promised “sparkling springs” and the “babbling brooks”? A brother has no right to question his brother, the president. If he is your brother, tell him not that he lives in an illusory world where failure is praiseworthy success and poverty is wealth. The people’s suffering notwithstanding, rejoice with your brother.
A brother is never wrong. Like the anonymous American army major said in the Vietnam war, there is nothing bad to have my brother destroy the town in order to save it. The king can invent his own reality and call us to project it for the world to admire and applaud. We will obey him; he is our brother.
Poverty unravels homes; policies upend businesses. But what is real is unreal because the president is my brother. We hear politicians of various ailments hail the president for making Nigeria great again. Even some opposition governors are rushing into his Noah’s Ark. Reality has different versions. When it is bad as we have it, regime washers create a positive one and command me to praise it. They say we must celebrate their reality because it is done everywhere, even in America where we borrowed this system that sells the freeborn into slavery. If that sounds interesting to you, read ‘Bad for Democracy: How the Presidency Undermines the Power of the People’ by Dana D. Nelson. It was published in 2008 long before Donald Trump came with his ideology of alternative truth.
You see them on TV boasting of unprecedented achievements and daring you to contradict them. They did and do it where we copied our constitution. Towards the 2004 presidential election in the US, a Bush administration official with the swag of a conquistador told a New York Times reporter, Ron Suskind: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality judiciously, as you will, we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.” This sounds like what my brother’s government can say in Nigeria. The government is a pack of confidence men. We – you and I – exist to only study, write and talk about what they do.
My brother is dining alone somewhere across the Mediterranean Sea. Some people say he is in Paris, France; some say he is in London, United Kingdom. I am supposed to thank him for eating on my behalf abroad while I yawn at home. As I do that, I should also ask what will end anyone’s ‘eat alone’ regime if they do not change? An Arabian proverb speaks on the consequences of fencing off others from a communal feast. They say he who eats alone vomits alone. They also say he who eats alone chokes alone. The Tigrigna of Eritrea and northern Ethiopia say: He who eats alone dies alone. The NURTW has a more radical version. Its members shout: “Eat alone, Go away!”
More...
China and Nigeria, two continental giants that entered the late 1970s with similar per capita incomes, have since taken opposite economic trajectories. In China, the decisive moment was Deng Xiaoping’s 1978 decision to “open the windows” and let the world’s capital know-how to blow in. In Nigeria, the same decade ushered in the oil boom that encouraged governments to depend on volatile export rents rather than the hard grind of production. Nearly half a century later, the contrast is stark: China ships $3.58 trillion a year worth of merchandise each year to the US, runs the world’s biggest high-speed rail and electricity networks, and has reduced extreme poverty to the low single digits, whereas Nigeria still relies on diesel generators to power most factories and holds the unfortunate record of hosting the planet’s largest pool of people living on less than $3 a day.
I was recently in China as part of a Nigerian business delegation that wanted to revolutionise rail freight. We toured Chinese rail manufacturing factories and saw the cumulative effect firsthand. At Yiwu, a market city once famous only for cheap toys, outbound trains roll directly into the customs yard, clear export formalities in hours and join a trans-Eurasian schedule that reaches Madrid in eighteen days. We counted five layers of the process—terminal handling, port queue, ocean leg, inland haulage, and warehouse sorting—that would each add days and dollars back home. We also noticed that the Chinese yard foreman carried a tablet tracking real-time wagon diagnostics; the Nigerian equivalent would be on a clipboard waiting on a generator to restart the Wi-Fi.
The macro numbers simply crystallise what we observed on the ground. Manufacturing generates roughly twenty-seven per cent of the Chinese GDP and employs more than one hundred million people. In Nigeria, the share by 2024 has slid below ten per cent and continues to fall. Chinese logistics costs average seven to nine per cent of a retail item’s final price; Nigerian goods often surrender a quarter to a third of their value to the road, the checkpoint and the generator. The pertinent question is, what made China succeed and Nigeria fail?
Policy consistency is the first, and perhaps most underrated, source of that divergence. Beijing’s five-year plans differed in detail but never in direction: everyone sought deeper industrialisation, more export capacity, and a higher rung on the technology ladder. By contrast, Lagos, Abuja and the thirty-six state capitals have veered from import substitution to outright deregulation to state-owned “transformation agendas,” each abandoned as soon as the next political cycle arrives or the oil price slumps. For investors deciding where to put a steel mill or a chip assembly plant, the difference between a twenty-year horizon and a four-year horizon is the difference between “build” and “walk away.”
Infrastructure magnified that gap. Beginning in the early 1990s, China poured roughly eight per cent of its GDP every year into roads, ports, airports and—most outstandingly—rail. A lattice of 45,000 kilometres of 250 to 350 km/h track now links almost every provincial capital; freight versions of those lines move 10,000-tonne trains from Chongqing to Shenzhen in a single day. One academic study finds that high-speed rail access lifts a connected city’s GDP by more than fourteen per cent within five years, mostly by slashing logistics times and widening labour catchment areas for firms. Nigeria, meanwhile, rehabilitated a few colonial-era lines and launched several standard gauge projects, but even its showcase Abuja–Kaduna and Lagos- Ibadan routes move fewer passengers in a week than China’s busiest corridor handles before breakfast. Most cargo still crawls along cratered highways where police checkpoints and kidnappers impose an unofficial “fear tax” on every bag of cement or basket of tomatoes.
China achieved rapid growth by heavily investing in manufacturing. This is unlike Nigeria, where manufacturing contributes less than 12.68% in Q2 2024 and more than 8.21% in Q3 2024. China’s investment in High-Speed Rail (HSR) has led to a significant drop in the cost of goods. Recent initiatives like “Made in China 2025” focus on advanced manufacturing sectors such as robotics, aerospace, new-energy vehicles, and biotechnology to increase the value chain and reduce reliance on foreign technology.
Reliable energy is the next Faultline. Guangdong province alone generates more electricity than the entire Nigerian grid, and it does so continuously; Chinese aluminium smelters, textile mills and data centres are designed around the assumption that the power will stay on. Nigerian manufacturers assume the opposite. They buy diesel gensets, pay triple the Asian price for each kilowatt hour they consume, and pass that cost on to consumers—who already face some of the steepest logistics markups in the world. When energy constitutes thirty per cent of a product’s ex-factory price, no patriotic marketing can keep that product competitive abroad.
China’s factories also had people who could keep the machines running. A high school graduate in Jilin can programme a PC and interpret a process control chart because technical and vocational colleges occupy a place of prestige that academic-heavy universities once monopolised. As a result, Chinese employers can field 3,000-strong shifts of technicians able to retool a smartphone assembly line on the weekend. Nigeria’s educational culture remains firmly certificate-oriented; private surveys suggest that more than four-fifths of recent university graduates lack basic spreadsheet or coding competence. The mismatch forces multinationals to fly expatriate engineers into Lagos or—more often—to put the factory in Ethiopia, Vietnam or Guangdong instead.
Automation sharpened the divide still further. In 2024 alone, Chinese firms installed nearly 300,000 industrial robots—more than Europe and the Americas combined. Robots weld car bodies and ship parts, insert smartphone cameras and package frozen dumplings; the technicians who maintain them earn multiples of the average urban wage. Nigeria ordered only a few hundred units that same year, primarily for soft drink bottling plants in Lagos and Ogun. Without automation, productivity plateaus; without productivity, wages stagnate; without rising wages, the domestic market stays too shallow to justify mass production. The cycle feeds on itself.
Oil dependence made everything worse. Crude accounts for well over half of Nigeria’s government revenue but employs fewer than one per cent of its labour force. When Brent prices soar, ministries hire, contractors splurge, and imports surge; when prices crash, capital projects halt, debts pile up, and Naira devaluations wipe out household purchasing power. Chinese planners did court commodity cycles—the country still consumes half the world’s copper and iron ore—but their fiscal lifeline was value-added, not raw rents. Tax receipts rose in tandem with factory output, giving Beijing a steadily expanding pool of local currency resources to finance the next port or rail line.
Insecurity compounds Nigeria’s structural costs. Hundreds of lives and thousands of work hours vanish each year due to armed robbery, terrorist attacks or kidnaping along the Lagos–Kano highway. Firms pay for private guards, convoy fees and kidnap insurance; those outlays translate directly into higher shelf prices and lower margins. China indeed grapples with crime and corruption, but industrial zones in Shenzhen or Suzhou are patrolled, litigated and powered in ways that let a container leave the factory gate and reach the port with minimal friction or added cost. Logistics is the key enabler of manufacturing.
Yet none of these gaps is destiny. Nigeria’s poverty is a product of a mix of bad leadership and bad choices. Nigeria’s heavy reliance on oil causes economic vulnerability. Nigeria’s education system emphasises certificates over practical skills, creating a gap between what is taught in schools and what employers need. Over 85% of Nigerian graduates lack digital skills, making them less competitive in the job market. The SMART schools championed by the Enugu State government aim to start closing the IT gaps, and other states in Nigeria are expected to create more of these schools.
Nigeria still has an unreliable electricity supply, inconsistent fiscal policies, shifting regulations, and excessive bureaucracy. Years of focus on ease of doing business have improved things, but we are far from average. Nigeria’s service-led growth has benefited the educated middle class and corrupt government officials and is less employment-intensive. Despite having a young population, massive arable land and growth potential, Nigeria has remained a country of poor people.
Nigeria still possesses assets China would envy: a median age under twenty, vast swathes of uncultivated arable land, abundant sunshine for solar power and a coastline perched between the Atlantic trade lanes and Africa’s interior. What it lacks is the deliberate sequencing that China pursued. Reliable baseload power and a north-south freight rail spine must precede, not follow, any talk of mega parks or local content mandates. Technical colleges must receive the same prestige and funding as universities. We applaud the efforts of the Minister of Education in creating and masterminding the technical and vocational school strategy. Special Economic Zones must specialise in textiles in Kano, agro-processing in Benue, and light engineering in Aba so suppliers and toolmakers can cluster rather than scatter. Nigeria must adopt Industrial clusters as a potential strategy. Industrialisation breeds employment, alleviates poverty, and creates high income and GDP growth, which creates wealth and a better quality of life for citizens.
If those choices are made and sustained, the virtuous cycle that lifted China is also ready to spin in Nigeria: hard infrastructure lowers cost, factories sprout, wages rise, domestic demand deepens, tax receipts multiply, and the next round of infrastructure becomes easier to finance. History shows that such cycles do not begin with genius inventions or windfall resources; they start when governments decide that electricity at midnight and freight trains at dawn are more important than oil rents at noon. China made that decision decades ago and grew rich. Nigeria still can. President Widodo of Indonesia grew their economy within ten years by furthering an export-oriented strategy with in-country value addition, embarking on expansive infrastructure development, reducing poverty to 1%, and almost doubling per capita income. Can we do this in Nigeria? Yes, we can! Today’s dismal rankings will look like a brief preface to a more prosperous chapter
Adelabu Adegoke was one of the most flamboyant and charismatic politicians in pre-independence Nigeria. When one day, the press asked him about deliberations in the Western Region House of Assembly, he replied that it was a “peculiar mess”. He pronounced the words with a Yoruba intonation making the two words sound like “Penkelemesi”. So, his sobriquet became Penkelemesi.
Today, his grandson, Adebayo Adelabu, is the Minister of Power who rather than do the job he is paid for, prefers serving Nigerians peculiar mess as menu. Under his watch, the national grid in 2024 on average, collapsed monthly and, power supply remains epileptic while tariff is astronomically increased. In other words, Nigerians under him pay astronomical electricity tariff for the darkness supplied.
However, rather than be quiet, Adelabu insults Nigerians at per second billing. For those who may not be aware, Nigerians as customers buy everything in the hope of being supplied electricity. We buy all: from wires, poles, transformers to meters with which we are billed. Despite these, Adelabu adds to the injury with insults and loads of Trump-like alternative truths. For instance, in April, 2024, Adelabu needed to astronomically increase electricity tariff in line with the biddings of the International Monetary Fund, IMF, and the World Bank who falsely claim that the cost of electricity is too cheap in Nigeria.
So, the grandson of Penkele spins a tail in which he blames and insults Nigerians for the epileptic power supply and why they had to be punished with high tariff increases. He said: “A lot of people will come back from work, they want to have dinner, or they want to see their colleagues down the road, they switch on the AC for the room to be cooling before they come back. Some people will be going to work in the morning, a freezer that you left on for days, they will still leave it on when all the items in the freezer are frozen and five, six, eight hours of their absence will not make it to defreeze, they will still leave it to be consuming power just because we are not paying enough.”
In his 2024 Independence Day message which also marked his one year in office, the Minister told Nigerians that over 40 per cent of us are enjoying 20 hours of electricity daily. The truth is that while some Nigerians have less than four hours of electricity supply daily, many have less. There are actually towns that were not supplied electricity at all within that period. In fact, as at April 18, 2025 areas in Kaduna metropolis like Romi and Sabo, for weeks, have had less than two hours power supply daily!
In any case, where did the increase in power distribution come from when for decades our maximum power distribution capacity remains 4,000 megawatts? Nigerians knew Adelabu was lying because that was not the reality of their existence. Also, Adelabu knew he was lying because as the Yorubas say, two persons cannot be deceived simultaneously; if the person being deceived does not know, the deceiver knows what game he is playing. However, Nigerians were too hungry to be bothered about debunking such optics by a man belching at the nation’s table. This spin by Adelabu on hours of power supplied is not original. It is an old template in the files of the Power Ministry. It was used on June 9, 2020 by one of his predecessors, Mamman Kwagyang Saleh, who on June 9, 2020 on the Nigerian Television Authority, claimed Nigerians were enjoying 18-24 hours of power supply every day.
Adelabu had also tried to play on the intelligence of Nigerians. While not increasing power distribution above the 4,000MW we have had for over a decade, he categorised consumers into what he classified as Band A, B, C. Under this false categorisation, he billed those in Band B, N63 per kilowatt-hour and those in Band A N209 per kilowatt-hour. After achieving the tariff increase, the Ministry decided to “regularise electricity tariffs” which is an euphemism for tariff increase and obliteration of the deceptive ‘Band’ system.
In his latest outing on April 17, 2025, Adelabu held a long, sonorous press briefing with no verifiable statistics to back his claims. He told Nigerians: “We have increased our generation to 6,003 megawatts, up by 1,700 megawatts in one and a half years since President Tinubu assumed office. It took Nigeria over 40 years to achieve an incremental 2,000 megawatts of average energy; we achieved this in less than two years.”
The claim by Adelabu that it is the Tinubu government that has increased power generation to 6,003MW is contradicted by facts from the supervisory Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission, NERC. In its “Daily Energy Watch” for January 28, 2015, the agency stated that power generation was 6,421 MW. In January, 2017, Buhari’s Minister of Power Babatunde Fashola announced a power generating capacity of 7,000MW. When Fashola in his Monday, July 9, 2018 press briefing made similar claims as an indication of progress, the eleven distribution companies under their Association of Nigerian Electricity Distributors, ANED, issued a statement accusing the government of lying as the country had almost hit that mark before Buhari came to power on May 29, 2015.
So, Minister Adelabu’s claims ten years later, that due to hard work the Tinubu administration had significantly increased power generation to 6,003 MW, cannot but be a fallacy. Generally, contrary to the claims of Adelabu, our power sector is in a sorry state and urgent steps need to be taken. One of them is the overdue review of the demonstrably fraudulent 2013 privatisation which handed over the sector to mainly incompetent distribution companies some of which have gone bankrupt. The review has statutorily been due since 2018.
If need be, the privatisation should be reversed. The Dominican Republic did so in 2003, the German cities of Berlin and Hamburg also did, and California with a $3 trillion economy equally did. This led to the liquidation of Enron on July 16, 2005. Nigeria which began to generate and distribute electricity in 1896, has one of the best experiences in the world. Along with public power supply, we also had an independent or private power company called Nasco which was established in 1925. The latter was quite efficient and reliable. But the Federal Government smashed Nasco on the basis that no company should compete with NEPA/PHCN. Along with the reversal of the privatisation swindle, the Nasco model remains a viable one. Anybody interested in further reading can pick a copy of the 2020 book: “The light in the tunnel may be an oncoming train: A Research on Privatisation in Nigeria focusing on electricity”, which I co-authored with Ahmed Aminu Yusuf.
Two boys were playing together in the garden. Soon, the play degenerated into an argument, and they engaged in a shouting match. From afar, the father of the boys cautioned them to stop arguing and continue their play, but they wouldn’t budge. Shortly after, they lunged at each other and almost engaged in fisticuffs. The father, at this point, wades in. He ordered one of the boys, his step-son, to go to the naughty corner and face the wall for six minutes while he told the other boy, his biological son, to continue his play in the garden.
The above scenario aptly captures the developments in Rivers state. President Bola Tinubu on March 18 2025, declared a six-month emergency rule in the state, following the political crisis that pitched the state governor, Siminalayi Fubara, against the FCT minister, Nyesom Wike, on one hand and the state house of assembly on the other.
The disagreement was primarily between Wike, the immediate past Rivers state governor, and Fubara, one of his long-standing allies whom he installed as his successor. Wike’s angst was that he might lose his political status in Rivers as Fubara was allegedly trying to bring down the structures that helped him to become governor. After almost two years of unending strife without any headway, President Tinubu, as the father of the nation, decided to wield the big stick by suspending Fubara and his deputy for six months. He also suspended the members of the Rivers assembly, but every right-discerning person knows they are not the major gladiator in the battle, just a pawn in the game. He left Wike to continue his job in his cabinet.
Of course, the president’s action has elicited mixed reactions from Nigerians. While some have argued that based on the provisions of sections 1(2), 14(1)(c), 176(1) (2) and 305(1) of the 1999 Constitution, the suspension of democratically elected officials in Rivers state is unlawful and unconstitutional, others have justified the suspension, saying no responsible government will fold its hands and allow Rivers State, a major economic lifeline of the country to go up in flames.
However, the majority of Nigerians share the view that to be fair, the president should have also suspended Wike, who is a major player in the crisis rocking the state. This would have made him sober and take a deep introspection over the issues at stake. But that is not to be the case, as Fubara’s temporary displacement seems to have given Wike the feeling that he has the upper hand. He has been granting interviews with his characteristic bumptiousness while Fubara is at home licking his wounds and brooding over the incident.
In the latest media parley he had with some select journalists, Wike even expressed dissatisfaction with the presidential declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and suspension of the governor, saying what he wanted was outright removal.
Hear him: “As a politician, I am not happy with the declaration of Emergency Rule in Rivers state. I wanted the outright removal of the governor. But for the interest of the state, the president did the right thing to prevent anarchy in the state. The matter is in court, but people must say the truth. The governor was gone. It is not on my place to make it good for the governor. As a politician, my business is not to make him comfortable and that is why there is power plane.”
Wike’s remarks are grossly unacceptable, a direct affront to the president, and one would have expected the presidency to call him to order, telling him to face the task assigned to him in the FCT. Whether his intervention is constitutional or not, the president has acted in what he considers the best interest of Rivers. Fubara, who was at the receiving end, has quietly accepted his fate, but Wike continues to talk garrulously and pour petrol on fire. His comments, if left unchecked, can infuriate the supporters of Fubara, many of whom have been made redundant by the sole administrator, Ibok-Ette Ibas, who appears to be pursuing an ‘obliterate anything Fubara’ agenda.
Wike was even seen in a video last week in London, where he hosted the suspended lawmakers. Of course, that is one of the consequences of his not being suspended. In the recent media parley, he even said he is ready to forgive Fubara if he apologises to him. Except if he truly knows from within his heart that he wronged Wike, but if not, I think it will be very idiotic for Fubara to offer any apology at this point. If his fight with Wike is not because of any breach of agreement (Ngige-Chris Uba saga), if it is for the interest of the good people of Rivers state, then any apology from him will amount to utter wimpishness.
I am not in support of Fubara. He keeps creating an impression of a flawless ‘Sim’ple man, but that appears to be a mere facade. In fact, I was alarmed last week when I read reports that he donated the sum of N300 million to the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) to hold a conference in Rivers State. Only God knows how much of Rivers’ resources he has donated so far, yet he created the impression of a man who places a premium on frugality and is judiciously using taxpayers’ money. Nobody would have known this if not for his suspension from office and the fact that the NBA moved the conference away from Rivers state, which prompted the sole administrator to ask for a refund.
What, however, impresses me about Fubara is the maturity and dignified silence he has maintained since his suspension. One inciting word from him to his supporters could have set the state on fire. He has, however, remained silent, allowing Nigerians, especially Rivers women, to fight the battle on his behalf. That is quite commendable, and his silence shouldn’t be taken as a sign of weakness.
On the other hand, Wike too should have a sober reflection. The current face-off between him and Fubara, is it karma at work? The law of karma states that your deeds and actions, whether good or bad, will eventually return to you. I read an old news item recently where former governor of Rivers state, Rotimi Amaechi, was more or less lamenting his recommendation of Wike, who was his former chief of staff, to be a minister.
Amaechi while addressing clergymen of the Niger Delta Bishops’ Forum who visited him in Government House, Port Harcourt in August 2013 said: “I hear you also visited Nyesom Wike. I try not to talk about Wike. I say so because he is my subordinate, I try not to talk about him but I hear you visited him. Why I won’t talk about him is that Nyesom Wike, his second tenure as Obio Akpor council chairman was by the grace of God, but I was the architect of that second term. Nyesom Wike was appointed chief of staff by me. Nyesom Wike, as a minister of state, I nominated him. I was under pressure from the president to drop him, but I refused. The president persuaded me to drop him and bring a woman, but I refused. I hear he is going all over town saying I didn’t appoint him. I didn’t appoint him, the president appointed him, but I nominated him to be a minister as the chairman of the Nigeria Governors’ Forum. I did, but you know, character doesn’t come easily, character is a very difficult thing, and I am a man of character.”
In writing this article, I sought the opinion of a senior lawyer on why the president didn’t suspend Wike. Though he chose to remain anonymous, he said: “It will appear that the president has taken a side in the Rivers crisis. Much as he tries to put up a face, it is very evident that he has leaned in the direction of Wike. For a balance of the situation, something should have been done to Wike to show a kind of fairness, but the presidency does not see it that way. Their view is that if Wike was suspended, it will seem like a punishment.
“They believed that the suspension of democratically elected institutions in Rivers is not seen as a suspension but as a temporary solution to the crisis. According to them, the governor would have been impeached and the crisis would have escalated, but by suspending him, the president has saved him from impeachment. However, that argument does not gel with the average Nigerian who thinks that Wike, being a major player in the crisis, would have also been awarded a penalty.”
In conclusion, there are pertinent questions to ask, which are very germane to the Rivers crisis. Will the president’s intervention bring a permanent solution to the crisis in the state? After the six-month suspension is over, what next? With no peace-making efforts in sight, will the president extend the suspension, thereby technically keeping Fubara out of office till almost the end of his tenure?
With Wike still firing from all cylinders and saying he wants an outright removal of Fubara, will that improve or worsen an already bad situation? Eleven PDP governors are challenging Fubara’s suspension in court; if they triumph, will the president respect the court order and terminate the reign of the sole administrator?
What happens if, after six months, the president restores Fubara to his position and the lawmakers loyal to Wike still go ahead and impeach him?
Akinsuyi, former group politics editor of Daily Independent, currently studies sustainability communications at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
On the evening of 5 April 2012, the prime-time bulletin on the television news of the Malawi Broacasting Corporation (MBC), announced to the country that the president, Ngwazi Professor Bingu wa Mutharika, “had been taken ill and had been flown to South Africa for specialist treatment.” At another end of the capital city, Lilongwe, a presidential convoy was on its way to the Kamuzu International Airport (KIA) where an air ambulance awaited with instructions to fly to South Africa a president who was supposedly alive but unwell.
Earlier in the day, around 11:00 in the morning, Ngwazi Professor Bingu had collapsed while receiving in audience the Member of Parliament representing the south-east constituency of the capital city, Lilongwe, Agnes Penemulungu. The judicial commission of inquiry which later investigated what transpired thereafter received evidence which showed quite clearly that the presidential court had not prepared nor practiced for the possibility of a life-and-death emergency involving the president. Elton Singini, a senior judge, chaired the inquiry.
The commission of inquiry established as a fact that the president died earlier in the day inside the ambulance en route to Kamuzu Central Hospital in the capital city. According to the inquiry report, “the President was brought in dead (BID) at Kamuzu Central Hospital [KCH] at around 11.25 in the morning” of 5 April.
At the time of the news bulletin announcing that he was to be flown to South Africa later on the same day, President Bingu had been dead for over eight hours. Despite being aware of this, the presidential retinue instructed staff at the hospital to apply cardio-pulmonary resuscitation (CPR) on the presidential remains for over two hours. In the process, they crushed his rib-cage.
More was to follow. At the airport, the air ambulance pilots from South Africa declined to board the body, citing the fact that their permission was to fly with a patient not a dead body. High level conversations ensued between Lilongwe and Pretoria. It may have helped and was certainly relevant that Malawi’s Foreign Minister at the time was Peter Mutharika, President Bingu’s younger brother who was also intent on stepping into the shoes of his just deceased brother. Peter needed time to set the wheels in motion to leap-frog Vice-President, Joyce Banda in the succession stakes.
South Africa’s President, Jacob Zuma who had retired for the day had to be woken up to personally authorize the flight. Shortly after mid-night on 6 April 2012, the air ambulance took off for South Africa. In Malawi, the people were told their president was headed to South Africa for medical attention. In South Africa, the authorities knew that the air ambulance on its way from Lilongwe would arrive with the dead body of Malawi’s president. Shortly after 02:30 on 6 April, the aircraft landed at South Africa’s National Defence Force (SANDF) Waterkloof Airbase on the outskirts of Pretoria. From there, it was transferred to a mortuary.
The authors of all this malign chicanery designed to deceive the people of Malawi, however, forgot to also notify the processes of bio-chemistry. By the time the body arrived the morgue in South Africa, it had been “in the open without refrigeration for about 18 hours after death.” As a result, the very important and high profile invitees to the state funeral of President Bingu which took place on 23 April, 2012, had to endure the uncomfortable company of flies, as well as the majestic fragrance of human of putrefaction. As the report of the Justice Elton Singini Commission of Inquiry recorded, “the body had started decomposing as evidenced by the smell and a few flies hovering around.”
Four years earlier, in August 2008, Levy Mwanawasa, the president of neighbouring Zambia, died in a military hospital near Paris in France. While attending the summit of the African Union in Cairo, Egypt, on 29 June 2008, President Mwanawasa had collapsed following what was later understood to be an aneurysm (Stroke). He was stabilized there before being transferred to France where he died two months later. At his death, it came out that two years earlier, during his first term as president in 2006, President Mwanawasa had suffered an earlier stroke.
For that, he received extended treatment in the United Kingdom. No one told Zambians.
The year after the death of President Mwanawasa, in June 2009, Omar Bongo, who had ruled Gabon for 41years died in hospital in Spain. When he left Libreville at the beginning of the previous month, his compatriots believed that their president, the doyen and favorite of France Afrique, was away on a working visit – a phrase all too familiar to Nigerians – to his favorite haunts in Europe. At his death, it emerged that more than one month before his death, President Bongo had been hospitalized for cancer treatment in Spain.
President Bongo was not the last long-serving African president to die in Spain. On 8 July 2022, former Angolan president, Jose Eduardo dos Santos, died also there after prolonged cancer treatment. Following his death, a family crisis broke out over his funeral, which delayed the repatriation of his remains to Luanda for more than one month. Six weeks after his death, in the third week of August 2022, a judge in Spain finally authorized the return of the body of President dos Santos to Angola for burial.
When he departed Nigeria on 2 April, the presidency in Abuja issued a statement claiming that Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Nigeria’s president, was off to France on a “short working visit”, during which he would “retreat to review the progress of ongoing reforms and engage in strategic planning ahead of his administration’s second anniversary.” They barely stopped short of telling Nigerians that their president was headed to Lourdes for the grace of its historic apparitions. President Tinubu is a Muslim; it was in the middle of the Christian season of Lent and no one had apparently bothered to advise him or his image makers that it is usually Christians who undertake two week-long retreats in the middle of this season.
The day after the end of the initially announced 14 days, the same presidential retinue disclosed that the president had relocated from France to the United Kingdom, from where he was doing an excellent job as Nigeria’s president in Europe.
The evidence seems inescapable that President Tinubu has significant health challenges and needs regular medical attention from doctors overseas. For this, his destination of choice is clearly France. In 22 months as president, Tinubu has made at least eight trips to the country under different guises for a cumulative period of over 60 days.
While that he’s been away this time, hundreds – if not more – had been killed in massacres in different parts of Nigeria. As president, Tinubu is also the Commander-in-Chief of Nigeria’s armed and security forces. Yet, from Europe, he is reported to be passing the buck to state governors to do that which only he has the tools to accomplish under Nigeria’s constitution.
Excluding the five years and three months of the presidency of Goodluck Jonathan from February 2010 to May 2015, Nigeria has had a presidency in near-permanent occupancy of sanatoriums overseas for 15 years. The Action Congress of Nigeria (ACN), which Tinubu led, was aggressively voluble in asking for candour on the health status of a terminally ill President Umaru Yar’Adua.
After going into marriage with Muhammadu Buhari’s Congress for Progressive Change (CPC) to create All Progressives Congress (APC), they made virtue of unlooking when Buhari took up residence in foreign hospitals for much of his presidency.
It should be no news that a man of President Tinubu’s age is unwell. Those invested in concealing that reality from Nigerians are more interested in protecting their present perquisites than in the wellbeing of their principal or of the country.
The presidency is more than just an office. For those around the occupant of the office, it also means money, power, and privilege. To preserve it, most people in and around the presidency take liberties, sometimes, even with the wellbeing of their principal or with accountability to the people in whose name he holds office. For the country and even for the president, the wages of this interminable subterfuge are prohibitive.
A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu