OTHERS' VIEWS
![[OPINION] Why African countries should trade amongst themselves - Etim Etim](/media/k2/items/cache/cd0695ce3f6b8593ed36f99e6e3c6ab0_L.jpg)
Africans could be incredibly hard on themselves. We complain about bad leadership, corruption, the economy, the weather and even our accent. But the continent continues to record noticeable achievements in key sectors. Take intra-African trade, for example. Decades ago, we rarely had anything to buy from one another. But according to Afrexim Bank, in 2023, despite a volatile global economic landscape, intra-African trade remained resilient, standing as a beacon of hope for sustainable development in Africa.
It grew at 7.2% year-on-year, reaching $192 billion, which accounted for 15% of total African trade in 2023, up from 13.6% from the previous year. Although this is a notable triumph, African business leaders are not resting on their oars. They want to trade more amongst themselves; break down barriers that keep us from visiting each other more freely and integrate the continent into a large economic bloc. But there are important challenges to overcome before the continent could deepen its intra tade volume.
Last week, Access Bank Plc hosted the inaugural Africa Trade Conference in Cape Town, South Africa, bringing together industry leaders, policymakers, and trade experts to drive solutions for accelerating intra-African trade and unlocking the continent’s economic potential. The conference tackled critical challenges, including limited access to capital, market information gaps, trust deficits between trading partners, and the urgent need for modernised trade infrastructure.
Roosevelt Ogbonna, the bank’s managing director/CEO delivered the opening remarks, setting the tone for discussions by highlighting the critical barriers hindering trade across Africa. He emphasised the urgent need for financial sector collaboration to facilitate seamless access to capital and foster a business environment where African enterprises can scale and compete globally.
“We must invest in the initiatives that ensure that we can bring businesses together, forge trust, and create the connections necessary for trade. In doing so, we must stamp out the narrative that ‘Made in Africa’ is inferior to any product made anywhere else in the world. We must buy Africa, be proud to wear Africa, and invest in Africa because that is what the continent needs to leap forward into the next generation,” Ogbonna stated.
He highlighted the need for Africa to take control of its economic destiny by fostering deeper collaboration, investing in financial infrastructure, and creating home grown solutions that drive sustainable growth.
Ogbonna underscored the shifting dynamics of global trade and increasing need for Africa to look inward. The world, he noted, has become more fragmented, with rising nationalist tendencies and supply chain disruptions that have disproportionately impacted the continent. These challenges, he argued, present an opportunity for Africa to strengthen its trade networks, support local businesses, and build the resilience needed to compete on a global scale.
However, for this vision to become a reality, several structural barriers must be addressed. One of the critical issues is the challenges businesses face in securing capital. While many African enterprises have the ambition to scale, the excessive cost of financing often inhibits their ability to expand. He advocated a financial services sector that is designed to empower businesses, making capital more accessible and affordable.
His words: “Many businesses on the continent struggle to find capital or access to capital and the right structure of capital, and when they do find it, the cost of capital is so significant that it makes it unbelievably expensive for them to be able to raise capital and still do business competitively. That has to change. We have to create a financial services sector that empowers businesses, one that makes it easier and seamless for businesses to be able to access capital, to able to invest in growth, invest in innovation, and of course, the muscle they need to expand beyond their local boundaries. It is clear that we need to create a network of Africa financial giants who are willing to create home grown solutions to support the continent in achieving the objectives that we have set for ourselves.”
Beyond financial constraints, limited access to market intelligence remains a major hurdle. Many African businesses lack the necessary insights to identify trade opportunities beyond their local markets. Leveraging technology to enhance information-sharing can bridge this gap, enabling businesses to make informed decisions and seize growth prospects across the continent.
Apart from capital, Ogbonna highlighted the critical role of access to information. Many businesses struggle to find the data and intelligence necessary to make informed decisions and identify opportunities beyond their national borders. He stressed that leveraging technology to bridge this gap will be instrumental in driving cross-border trade and creating a more connected Africa. He also addressed the issue of trust between trading partners, noting that historic challenges, inconsistent regulations, and varying standards have contributed to a lack of confidence in intra-Africa trade.
Overcoming this scepticism, he affirmed, requires deliberate efforts to harmonise standards, foster cooperation, and shift perceptions about the quality of African goods and services. He urged African businesses to take pride in what they produce, invest in local industries, and reject the notion that products made on the continent are inferior to those from elsewhere.
There is also the urgent need to modernise Africa’s trade routes and infrastructure. Drawing on historical examples, he pointed out that Africa once had well-established trade corridors that connected it to the Middle East and Asia. Today, however, inefficient transport networks and regulatory bottlenecks make it easier for businesses in Angola to trade with Portugal than with South Africa or Nigeria. He called for a renewed commitment to building the infrastructure and regulatory frameworks necessary to facilitate seamless trade across the continent, ensuring that goods, services, and capital can move freely between African nations.
The Access Bank Africa Trade Conference represents a significant step toward fostering dialogue, building partnerships, and driving policy initiatives that support Africa’s economic transformation. As the continent continues to navigate global uncertainties, events like this serve as a reminder that Africa’s future lies in its ability to collaborate, innovate, and build a sustainable trade ecosystem that benefits all.
With Africa’s population projected to surge to 2.5 billion by 2050 from 1.2 billion, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) stands as the most significant free trade initiative since the formation of the World Trade Organisation. By fostering economic integration, AfCFTA has the potential to reshape trade dynamics across the continent, creating a unified market that enhances industrialisation, boosts employment, and strengthens Africa’s global competitiveness.
Recognising this transformative opportunity, Wamkele K. Mene, Secretary-General of AfCFTA, emphasised the urgency of fully implementing the agreement to unlock its immense benefits.
He said: “The AfCFTA is not just a trade agreement; it is an instrument for Africa’s industrialisation and economic sovereignty. It is a tool that will enable us to break down historic trade barriers and build an Africa that is self-sufficient, competitive, and prosperous. But for this to happen, we must commit to operationalising the agreement fully, ensuring that businesses, particularly SMEs and women-led enterprises, have access to the information, capital, and platforms they need to thrive.”
Also, Kanayo Awani, Executive Vice President of Afreximbank, emphasised the importance of financing mechanisms that support African businesses in their expansion across borders. She reaffirmed Afreximbank’s commitment to championing trade finance solutions and infrastructure investments that will unlock Africa’s trade potential.
“At Afreximbank, we understand that trade finance is the lifeblood of economic development. Without it, businesses cannot scale, industries cannot innovate, and Africa cannot fully realise its trade potential. This is why we have developed instruments such as the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) to facilitate seamless transactions across borders, reducing reliance on foreign currencies and strengthening intra-African trade,” Awani remarked.
The conference featured an insightful testimonial from Nathalie Louat, Global Director at the IFC/World Bank Group, who pointed out the pivotal role of trade finance in enabling cross-border transactions and supporting financial inclusion. She underscored the long-standing partnership between IFC and Access Bank in fostering Africa’s economic resilience.
Several high-level panel discussions explored strategies to overcome trade barriers and enhance market access through innovative solutions. Experts from leading institutions, including Deutsche Bank, Traydstream, OWP Partners, Fiducia International, and more, examined how infrastructure improvements, digital solutions, and policy harmonisation could drive economic growth and boost intra-African trade.
Dr. Marc Auboin from the World Trade Organization (WTO) shared key insights on how digital transformation is reshaping Africa’s supply chain landscape, creating efficiency and unlocking new global market opportunities. Tanya Dos Santos-Ford from GIBS Business School also led a session on sustainable trade practices, emphasising the need for environmentally responsible economic growth strategies.
The event culminated in an awards ceremony recognising outstanding contributions to intra-African trade and economic transformation. Tradepass Commodities Limited (Ghana), Chemaf International FZE (DR Congo), and Harvest Group of Companies (Zambia) were honoured for their impact on SMEs and women-led trade enterprises. Bulkstream Limited (Kenya) and Electricidade de Moçambique (Mozambique) received awards for advancing intra-African trade, while Tennant Metals South Africa Pty Ltd was recognised as an Emerging Leader in Trade.
The International Finance Corporation (IFC) was awarded the Climate Finance Leadership Award, while Afreximbank received the Champion of Intra-African Trade Award. The African Development Bank (AfDB) and Africa Finance Corporation (AFC) were celebrated for their roles in economic transformation and infrastructure finance, respectively.
The prestigious African Icon Award was presented to IHS Group, Dangote Industries Limited, and MTN Group Limited for their significant contributions to Africa’s economic progress. As the conference ended, Seyi Kumapayi, Executive Director, African Subsidiaries at Access Bank, reaffirmed the institution’s commitment to supporting trade finance, fostering regional integration, and championing policies that create an enabling environment for businesses across Africa.
[TheCable]
[OPINION] Tinubu Reforms: Efficacy of Executive Orders Over Legislative and Judicial Procedures - Magnus Onyibe
Admin![[OPINION] Tinubu Reforms: Efficacy of Executive Orders Over Legislative and Judicial Procedures - Magnus Onyibe](/media/k2/items/cache/b3ef5d519f6497d5865dba23e23dd336_L.jpg)
President Bola Tinubu’s decision to end the roughly forty (40) years of subsidizing petrol pump prices on the very day of his inauguration—May 29, 2023—is a prime example of the use of executive orders, one of the three (3) legitimate tools of governance. Subsequently, the long-standing policy of maintaining a fixed exchange rate for the naira against foreign currencies, which had been in place for several decades, was also discontinued.
As a consequence of these two (2) drastic reform measures implemented through executive orders, the Nigerian economy went into a tailspin, recording an inflation rate of over 34%. However, stability is now gradually being restored, much to the relief of the current administration and the long-suffering people of Nigeria.
Below is how President Tinubu issued these two (2) executive orders in his inaugural speech on May 29, 2023, which triggered socioeconomic turmoil:
"We commend the decision of the outgoing administration in phasing out the petrol subsidy regime which has increasingly favoured the rich more than the poor. Subsidy can no longer justify its ever-increasing costs in the wake of drying resources. We shall instead re-channel the funds into better investment in public infrastructure, education, health care, and jobs that will materially improve the lives of millions.
Continuing, President Tinubu stated:
"Monetary policy needs a thorough housecleaning. The Central Bank must work towards a unified exchange rate. This will direct funds away from arbitrage into meaningful investment in the plant, equipment, and jobs that power the real economy."
Then he concluded by saying "Interest rates need to be reduced to increase investment and consumer purchasing in ways that sustain the economy at a higher level.
"Whatever merits it had in concept, the currency swap was too harshly applied by the CBN given the number of unbanked Nigerians. The policy shall be reviewed. In the meantime, my administration will treat both currencies as legal tender."
It was not surprising that after the speech, hell was let loose as the price of petrol shot up as high as N1,300 per liter shortly after. But today it is selling for a little over N800 naira per litre.
In the twenty-two (22) months since President Bola Tinubu assumed leadership of Nigeria following his victory in the presidential election held on Saturday, February 25, 2023, he has directed the affairs of the country from Aso Rock Villa, Nigeria’s presidential seat of power. His policies, to say the least, have been revolutionary, leading to an unprecedented rise in the cost of living thankfully is currently on a downward slope heading towards stability.
Since taking office, as highlighted earlier, the president has leaned heavily on executive orders rather than relying on traditional legislative and judicial processes. Generally, President Tinubu’s preference for executive orders appears to have been proven to be more efficacious for his administration compared to conventional governance methods—or so it seems.
This article seeks to assess the veracity of that assumption by conducting a comparative analysis of the three primary approaches to governance in a democratic setting: leveraging executive, legislative, and judicial instruments. To achieve this objective, we must examine the merits and demerits of these tools, particularly in the context of Nigeria under President Tinubu’s leadership.
Before delving further into the effectiveness of these governance tools in Nigeria’s democratic environment, it is appropriate to take a brief look at how executive, legislative, and judicial powers have been applied in democracies around the world.
For a holistic assessment and understanding of governance tools, it is pertinent to trace their origins back to ancient times—specifically, to Cleisthenes in Athens, Greece, in the 6th century BC, where democracy was first introduced. It was later nurtured by thinkers like Aristotle and Cicero.
We will also examine France, where democracy was further refined under the influence of Enlightenment philosophers such as Alexis de Tocqueville, Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
Next, we will consider India, the world’s largest democracy with a population of 1.4 billion. Finally, we will reflect on the United States of America (USA), the world’s foremost democratic nation and leader of the free world, from which Nigeria borrowed its current presidential system of governance.
To carry out this analysis effectively, below is a comparison of the three (3) well-established governance tools in democratic settings: Executive Orders, Legislative Procedures, and Judicial Actions.
Executive Orders
1. Definition: Official directives issued by the head of state or government, outlining policies, decisions, or actions. A notable example is the United States, where President Donald Trump extensively leveraged executive orders to fast-track the implementation of his far-reaching policies under the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) agenda.
2. Purpose: Enables swift decision-making, bypassing legislative delays.
3. Characteristics: Binding, enforceable, and often irreversible without subsequent orders or legislation.
4. Examples: Executive orders issued by US and Nigerian Presidents. US President Donald Trump issued an avalanche of executive orders in less than 60 days of occupying the White House as president. So also, president Tinubu in Nigeria issued at least two well-known executive orders with highly consequential effects.
Legislative Procedures
1. Definition: The formal processes by which laws are created, amended, or repealed by elected representatives.
2. Purpose: Ensures representation, deliberation, and accountability in lawmaking.
3. Characteristics: Involves debate, voting, and potential amendments.
4. Examples: US Congressional lawmaking, Nigerian National Assembly legislative processes.
5. Observation: Notably, policies processed through this method—such as the four (4) tax reform bills—are still stuck in the National Assembly, awaiting legislative approval. This aspect will be examined further later in this discussion.
Judicial Actions
1. Definition: Decisions, rulings, or orders issued by courts to interpret laws, resolve disputes, or enforce rights.
2. Purpose: Uphold the rule of law, protect individual rights, and provide checks on the executive and legislative branches.
3. Characteristics: Binding, precedent-setting, and subject to appeal or review.
4. Examples: US Supreme Court decisions, and Nigerian Supreme Court judgments.
5. A typical example in Nigeria is the Supreme Court judgment on local government financial autonomy. Long after the ruling, local governments’ financial autonomy has yet to be implemented. The Punch newspaper reported yesterday, Monday, March 17, that state governors are lobbying the federal government to delay implementation. We will delve deeper into this issue later in this discussion.
To fully grasp how the three (3) governance tools function in a democracy, it is essential to analyze their characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages. Different presidents apply these tools based on a needs assessment, balancing efficiency with democratic accountability.
Comparison of Governance Tools
Executive Orders
• Definition: Swift, binding, and enforceable directives issued by the head of state to expedite decision-making.
• Advantages: Efficient, allows rapid crisis management, bypasses legislative gridlock.
• Disadvantages: Can be abused or misused as it bypasses legislative oversight.
In the US, former President Donald Trump issued a raft of executive orders on his first day in office, a practice that critics viewed as an abuse of power. However, his supporters—who were in the majority, as he defeated his opponent Kamala Harris in the November 5, 2023, presidential election—argued that he needed speed to fulfill his agenda within the four (4) years of his term. Given the constraints of time, Trump prioritized executive orders over legislative or judicial processes to deliver on his campaign promises.
Legislative Procedures
• Definition: The process by which laws are created, amended, or repealed through debate and voting in a legislative body.
• Advantages: Ensures representation, deliberation, and accountability.
• Disadvantages: Can be slow, prone to gridlock, and influenced by special interests.
A key example in the US is the overturning of Roe v. Wade, a landmark ruling that guaranteed women the right to make reproductive decisions without government interference for over half a century. The influence of special interests was evident in this decision.
Similarly, in Nigeria, some northern leaders fear that the proposed tax reform bills—particularly the provision allowing about 60% of Value Added Tax (VAT) revenue to remain in the states where it is generated—would disadvantage their region. This has led to opposition to the reform, despite assurances from the Tax Reform Committee Chairman, Taiwo Oyedele, that these concerns are unfounded.
Judicial Actions
• Definition: Court rulings that interpret laws, resolve disputes, and check the powers of the executive and legislature.
• Advantages: Binding, precedent-setting, upholds the rule of law, and protects individual rights.
• Disadvantages: Can be slow, dependent on judicial independence, and open to interpretation.
For example, the legal battle over local government autonomy in Nigeria went from lower courts to the Supreme Court. Yet, despite the ruling, implementation has been stalled. Another example is the controversy over the rightful Emir of Kano between Sanusi Lamido Sanusi and Ado Bayero. The multiple interpretations of court rulings in that case resulting in a lacuna highlight the challenges of relying on judicial decisions for governance.
Interplay of the Three Governance Tools
As the analysis above reveals, each governance tool has strengths and weaknesses. A skilled and politically savvy president must know when to apply each tool to achieve the desired outcome.
Ideally, in a democracy, these tools interact and balance one another:
• Executive Orders can be challenged or overturned by legislative or judicial actions.
• Legislative Procedures can be influenced by executive orders or judicial interpretations.
• Judicial Actions can be affected by executive orders or legislative changes.
This dynamic is currently playing out in the US, where courts have suspended several of President Trump’s executive orders. Given that he has only one term to implement his policies, he is using the governance tool that allows him to act swiftly—though these decisions remain subject to legal challenges.
The balance of power among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches ensures that no single branch dominates, thereby promoting accountability, representation, and the rule of law.
Tinubu’s Use of Executive Orders: A Case Study
Against this backdrop, Nigerians should critically assess President Tinubu’s decision to declare “petrol subsidy is gone” during his inaugural speech on May 29, 2023. It is a statement that he has revealed was unscripted and spontaneous.
Many Nigerians have criticized him for not consulting widely before making such a declaration, given the profound impact it has had on both rich and poor citizens. However, in light of the governance tools discussed above, would Tinubu’s critics—those who opposed the decision for genuine, non-partisan reasons—still hold the same view?
Tinubu’s reliance on executive orders to remove the petrol subsidy and float the naira must be evaluated against the slow pace of legislative and judicial processes. For instance:
• The tax reform bills, first introduced in the National Assembly on October 8, 2024, remain stuck in the legislative process.
• The Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy, delivered on July 11, 2024, is yet to be implemented.
In contrast, Tinubu’s executive actions on fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate unification were swiftly executed and are now yielding positive economic results. Given that Nigeria’s economy was on the brink of collapse, he likely saw no alternative but to act decisively to prevent further decline.
This is the point some of us have been strenuously trying to put across to critics over the past 22 months of Tinubu’s watch.
Conclusion
Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of governance tools helps in evaluating a leader’s decisions. While legislative and judicial processes ensure democratic accountability, they can be slow and prone to political interference. Executive orders, though expedient, carry risks of overreach.
However, in Tinubu’s case, his controversial approach but a display of political adroitness is arguably necessary to avert the economic disaster that was imminent in our country.
With the benefit of hindsight, Nigerians must ask: Did Tinubu act recklessly, or was his decision a necessary intervention to stabilize the country?
Ultimately, governance is about making tough choices, and the effectiveness of any leader depends on their ability to navigate the complex interplay of executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
By and large executive orders have proven to be a more efficacious governance tool if time constraints are a significant factor as they save time and allow a dynamic president to cut through the bureaucratic bottlenecks to quickly achieve set goals.
The above strategy is exactly the methodology that President Tinubu has adopted to achieve success in his deep reforms which peaked in less than 18 months after which the negative consequences petered out and the positive gains began to manifest before the midterm of his administration which is coming up on 29 May- mere two months.
Imagine if Tinubu had applied the legislative or judicial option in governance to the issue of petrol subsidy removal, and elimination of multiple naira exchange rate windows, they would still be in operation and Nigeria would be mired in retrogression as it has been in the past four (4) decades (1984/5) or so since the nation was advised by development experts and institutions against retaining the obnoxious subsidy on petrol and buffeting the naira which we all agree were wrong-headed policies but which no leader in the past had the guts or gumption to end.
Being the astute political strategist that he is, my prediction is that President Tinubu will not introduce any new policies that would discomfit Nigerians until he seeks re-election in 2027 and returns to Aso Rock Villa as the winner of the 2027 presidential election. Thereafter, he will tackle the challenges of industrialization which will be driven by a revolution in electricity power generation, transmission, and distribution which is a necessary precondition to industrial take-off that we all crave since it is the only sure path to prosperity for all Nigerians.
Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy alumnus, and former Delta State commissioner (2003-2007).
![[OPINION] Alternative to Judicial Supremacy: A Case for Renewed Debate - Umar Ardo](/media/k2/items/cache/f0932e126582c85ec1ecadb7ba7bb402_M.jpg)
In my book Court and Politics: Chronicling my Experience in the Nigerian Theatre, I brought to the fore my personal experience on the unwholesomeness of some judgments of the Nigerian courts on certain critical political matters affecting our democracy. Because I am seen as a marginal player, my testimony went unheeded. But lately, it seems the chicken has finally come home to roost.
2. In the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings in Nigeria, particularly in cases such as those involving Imo governorship, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, former Senate President Ahmed Lawan, PDP Chairman Uche Secondus, Rivers State legislators, etc. legal and political circles have reignited one critical issue I raised in my book – i.e. a long-standing debate on judicial supremacy in presidential democracy! These cases have attracted widespread criticism because of the central figures involved, but they represent only a fraction of the judicial decisions that I have raised concerns about. Numerous other rulings affecting lesser-known individuals remain buried in law reports, yet their implications on the destruction of our democracy are no less consequential.
3. The real question, however, is not just about the correctness or otherwise of these judgments but about the very structure that grants the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, the final say in constitutional interpretation. In essence, should courts hold ultimate authority over the meaning of the constitution and the law in a presidential democracy? Or should constitutional interpretation be a shared responsibility among the branches of government?
4. To answer these questions appropriately, it should be clearly understood that the judicial supremacy in a democracy itself is basically of political foundation. The very idea that the judiciary is the ultimate interpreter of the constitution and the law is not a self-evident truth but a political arrangement. In democratic presidential systems, particularly of the American system that we copied, judicial supremacy exists largely because political actors – executive and legislative – have historically volunteered to cede interpretative authority to the courts, allowing them to assume the role of final arbiters of constitutional meaning. This voluntary surrender of interpretative power has been sustained by, and on the condition of, the judiciary’s ability to maintain public confidence in its impartiality, reasoned judgment and fidelity to justice.
5. However, this equilibrium is fragile, and certainly not sacrosanct. When courts repeatedly issue rulings that appear arbitrary, politically motivated or legally dubious, the foundation of this judicial supremacy becomes precarious, and threatened. A judiciary that oversteps its bounds or consistently delivers judgments that defy legal logic risks eroding the very deference upon which its authority rests. If judges become political actors in robes, then the logic of their supremacy collapses, inviting a political response that could diminish their interpretative monopoly.
6. It therefore becomes the right of citizens to look for an alternative to judicial supremacy. Taking cue from the United States, alternative to judicial supremacy is departmentalism, a constitutional doctrine championed by Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States. Jefferson rejected the idea that the courts alone had exclusive authority to interpret the constitution and the law. Instead, he argued that each branch of government – the executive, legislature and judiciary – should independently interpret the constitution as it applies to its functions.
7. Under departmentalism, the President, Congress and the Courts all have equal authority to determine what the law means within their spheres of influence. This doctrine maintains that courts may issue rulings, but their interpretations do not necessarily bind the executive or legislative branches beyond the particular cases at hand. While this approach has never gained traction to supplant judicial supremacy in the United States, it has still remained a recurring theme in American constitutional thought, resurfacing whenever the judiciary is perceived as overreaching. For instance, President FD Roosevelt also espoused the idea, leading to his bitter feud with the Supreme Court.
8. Given the troubling trend of judicial decisions in Nigeria today, might it be time to consider departmentalism as a safeguard against judicial excesses? The foundational argument for judicial supremacy is that it provides legal stability and prevents the executive and legislature from arbitrarily shaping the law to suit their interests. But what happens when it is the judiciary itself that subverts the law, bending it to political interests or delivering rulings that are manifestly unjust and illogical?
9. Judicial supremacy in Nigeria is sustained by two pillars: (1) the belief that courts are neutral arbiters, and (2) the willingness of political actors to abide by judicial interpretations. If either pillar weakens, the system automatically faces crises of legitimacy.
10. The aforementioned judgments by the Supreme Court, and those in my book, which many perceive as legally unsound or politically motivated, are already testing these foundations. If this trend continues, Nigerian politicians and legal scholars must begin to seriously explore departmentalism as a viable counterweight. The judiciary’s authority, after all, is not self-enforcing; it exists only so long as the political system accepts its decisions as legitimate. If public trust in the courts deteriorates beyond a certain threshold, calls for judicial reform – or even a fundamental restructuring of constitutional interpretation – should very well start gaining momentum.
11. Lately, the situation in the United States demonstrates how judicial supremacy can be challenged when the judiciary is perceived as an extension of political interests. President Trump’s repeated attacks on the U.S. legal system, particularly on Supreme Court rulings he viewed as biased, have fueled broader skepticism about the neutrality of the judiciary. This skepticism, on his return to power, is now translating into a more pronounced debate over the limits of judicial power in a democratic system.
12. The time has come for an intellectual and political debate on the efficacy, desirability or otherwise of judicial supremacy in Nigeria’s presidential democracy. Should judges have the final say in interpreting the constitution, even when their rulings contradict the spirit of democracy, public interest or common sense? Or should constitutional interpretation be a shared function among all branches of government, as departmentalism suggests?
13. If the judiciary continues to issue questionable rulings without accountability, Nigeria’s political actors are duty bound to re-evaluate the balance of power in constitutional interpretation. The consequences of such a shift could be profound, altering the very structure of Nigeria’s democracy. The judiciary must hence recognize that its authority is not absolute but contingent upon its ability to uphold the law fairly, speedily, consistently and independently.
14. A legal system that prioritizes power over principle is unsustainable. If decisions of the Nigerian courts continue to undermine public confidence, Nigeria may find itself at a constitutional crossroads, where the Jeffersonian school of thought should gain prominence and surface as a counterbalance to an increasingly unaccountable judiciary.
15. The debate is overdue.
[OPINION] Asake, Fatherhood, And The Cycle Of Neglect: A Wake-Up Call For Nigerian Men And Their Children - Isaac Asabor
Admin![[OPINION] Asake, Fatherhood, And The Cycle Of Neglect: A Wake-Up Call For Nigerian Men And Their Children - Isaac Asabor](/media/k2/items/cache/f38cad0c0de5866c26cde8d0cd2bada7_M.jpg)
Fatherhood is not just a biological event; it is a lifelong responsibility that extends beyond conception. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, the trend of men denying responsibility for pregnancies is worrisome. The recent scandal involving Nigerian music sensation Asake and his father has once again brought this issue to the fore, sparking conversations about the responsibilities of men toward their offsprings and the moral obligations of children to their parents.
In many cases, men walk away from their responsibilities, leaving women to bear the burden of raising children alone. These children, often brought up in hardship, grow to become successful individuals. Yet, the cycle of neglect continues as some of these children, in turn, neglect their absentee fathers. This vicious cycle is one that demands urgent attention because it speaks to the breakdown of family values and moral responsibility in our society.
Without a doubt, the controversy surrounding Asake’s father is not an isolated incident. The story has been met with mixed reactions, with many Nigerians expressing disappointment in the singer’s apparent estrangement from his father. However, upon deeper reflection, it raises fundamental questions: Should a child care for a father who abandoned him at birth? Should a father expect love and support from a child he once denied?
Asake’s case mirrors countless similar stories in Nigeria, where men irresponsibly deny paternity, leaving women to shoulder the responsibility of parenthood alone. The consequences of such actions are dire, affecting the emotional and psychological well-being of the child. Many children grow up feeling unwanted and rejected, leading to resentment toward their fathers. Consequently, when they achieve success, they see no reason to acknowledge or support the very men who once discarded them.
In fact, the denial of paternity is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. Countless women have shared heartbreaking stories of being abandoned during pregnancy, left to raise children on their own. Some men deny responsibility outright, while others, under the influence of family pressure or societal stigma, shy away from acknowledging their children.
This issue is exacerbated by the lack of legal frameworks that hold men accountable for their responsibilities. Unlike in some Western countries where child support laws ensure that fathers contribute financially to the upbringing of their children, Nigeria lacks strict enforcement mechanisms to curb this menace. This legal loophole emboldens irresponsible men to continue this reckless behavior without facing consequences.
Children who grow up without the presence of their fathers often face emotional and psychological struggles. The absence of a father figure can lead to low self-esteem, difficulty in forming relationships, and even behavioral problems. Many of these children grow up harboring deep-seated resentment against their absentee fathers.
Beyond personal grievances, the societal impact of this trend is equally alarming. A society where fathers abandon their responsibilities fosters a culture of irresponsibility and broken homes. This ultimately affects the moral fabric of the nation, leading to an increase in crime, social vices, and a general sense of neglect among the younger generation.
While it is easy to place sole blame on irresponsible fathers, mothers and society at large also have a role to play. Some women knowingly get involved with men who have a track record of abandoning their children. Others fail to take legal steps to demand accountability from these men.
Society, on its part, must stop enabling men who engage in paternity denial. Rather than shielding such men or making excuses for them, communities should begin to hold them accountable. Churches, traditional institutions, and even employers can play a role in ensuring that men who father children take responsibility for them.
While the anger of children abandoned by their fathers is understandable, it is also important to stress that children must not completely eschew their moral responsibility toward their parents. No matter the circumstances of birth, there is an African cultural expectation that children take care of their parents in old age. Forgiveness should be encouraged, as resentment only breeds bitterness and continues the cycle of emotional suffering.
Successful children should be cautious not to adopt the very neglect they suffered. The ability to rise above personal grievances and extend care to an estranged parent, even if minimal, is a sign of strength and growth. This does not mean blindly accepting toxic relationships, but rather, ensuring that bitterness does not cloud the opportunity to set a better example for future generations.
It is time for Nigerian men to take fatherhood seriously. Bringing a child into the world is not just about biology; it is about emotional, financial, and psychological commitment. Men must understand that denying a child today might lead to severe consequences in the future, not just for the child but for themselves as well.
Legal reforms are necessary to ensure that men who abandon their children are held accountable. Nigeria must implement and enforce child support laws that compel men to contribute to the upbringing of their children. DNA testing should also be made more accessible and affordable to address paternity disputes fairly.
At the family level, parents must begin to instill in their sons the values of responsibility and accountability. Fatherhood is a privilege, not just a duty, and men must be made to understand that their actions have lasting consequences.
On the part of children, those who have suffered abandonment should seek healing and closure. Therapy, counseling, and support groups can help individuals navigate the trauma of absentee fathers. Forgiveness, though difficult, can be a powerful tool in breaking the chain of generational pain.
The Asake scandal is just one of many stories that highlight the growing trend of men abandoning their paternal duties and the resultant estrangement between fathers and their children. It is a wake-up call for Nigerian men to take responsibility and for successful children to embrace the path of forgiveness.
A society thrives when families function effectively. The neglect and abandonment of children must stop, and at the same time, children who achieve success despite hardships must not fall into the same trap of neglecting their parents. By addressing these issues holistically, Nigeria can begin to mend the broken bridges of family and instill values that promote responsibility and care. The time to act is now.
[OPINION] From Natasha to Ushie: How Tinubu and Akpabio’s War on Women’s Voices is Turning Nigeria into an International Symbol of Oppression - John Egbeazien Oshodi
Admin![[OPINION] From Natasha to Ushie: How Tinubu and Akpabio’s War on Women’s Voices is Turning Nigeria into an International Symbol of Oppression - John Egbeazien Oshodi](/media/k2/items/cache/b83d1499040cb158f985f155ff83b3fb_M.jpg)
The case of Ushie Uguamaye, a National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) member, facing alleged threats for criticizing President Tinubu’s administration highlights a concerning pattern of suppressing dissent in Nigeria. Her experience mirrors the ongoing controversy surrounding Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, further reinforcing fears that the government is actively silencing critical voices rather than addressing the legitimate grievances of its citizens.
This government continues to disgrace itself nationally and globally, oblivious to the reality that we now live in an interconnected digital age where nothing remains hidden. Every act of repression, every abuse of power, and every silencing attempt is instantly broadcasted worldwide. They fail to grasp that control over narratives has shifted—people no longer rely solely on state-controlled media, and information spreads faster than censorship can contain it. America, Britain, France, Canada, and other world powers are watching, and no government can escape international scrutiny anymore.
Freedom of Speech Under Attack
Uguamaye’s viral TikTok video did not contain hate speech or incitement to violence—it was an expression of frustration over Nigeria’s economic hardship and poor governance. In her video, she simply said, “Tinubu, you are a terrible president.” This was not a coup attempt, nor was it a call for anarchy—it was a cry of frustration, a sentiment shared by millions of Nigerians struggling under rising costs, unemployment, and a declining standard of living.
Yet, instead of engaging with her concerns, the response from NYSC officials was intimidation and threats. Amnesty International Nigeria’s condemnation of the threats against her serves as a reminder that freedom of speech is a fundamental right, enshrined in the Nigerian Constitution and upheld by international law. When government agencies such as the NYSC resort to coercion rather than dialogue, it highlights a growing and dangerous trend of authoritarian governance.
The world is not blind. Nigerian leaders may think they can silence their people in isolation, but international watchdogs, human rights organizations, and foreign governments are watching. The more they suppress voices, the more their actions become global headlines, painting Nigeria as a country that fears criticism rather than embracing democratic debate.
Government’s Missteps and the ‘Streisand Effect’Rather than defusing the situation through dialogue, NYSC officials allegedly sought to pressure Uguamaye into deleting her video. However, their intimidation tactics backfired, amplifying her voice and drawing national and international attention. This is a classic example of the “Streisand Effect”—where attempts to suppress information lead to even greater public awareness.
In today’s world, social media ensures that no injustice goes unnoticed. The era of backdoor repression, where government officials could stifle dissent in silence, is long gone. Instead of learning from past mistakes, the administration continuously exposes itself to public embarrassment by failing to acknowledge that suppression only strengthens resistance.
A Pattern of Silencing Women
The parallels between Uguamaye’s case and that of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan are striking. Akpoti-Uduaghan was suspended from the Senate shortly after publicly accusing Senate President Godswill Akpabio of sexual harassment. Now, Uguamaye faces threats for speaking out against government failures. Just as Akpabio attempted to suppress Natasha, we now see an NYSC official allegedly calling and threatening Uguamaye, attempting to coerce her into silence.
The tactics remain the same—intimidation, manipulation, and the abuse of institutional power to subdue female voices that challenge the system. Nigerian women who dare to question authority are met with hostility, threats, and systemic efforts to erase their voices. These patterns reflect deep-seated misogyny within governance structures—structures that view women as threats when they refuse to conform to silent obedience.
The government has not learned its lesson. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan has already taken Nigeria’s suppression of women’s voices to the global stage at the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) in New York, exposing its tactics to international scrutiny. Now, this young woman—part of a fearless digital generation—may take it even further. Unlike previous generations, she has the full power of social media and international advocacy at her fingertips. Nigeria’s leadership is making the same mistake again, failing to recognize that the suppression of voices only makes them louder.
The Role of International ScrutinyWith Amnesty International and other human rights organizations weighing in, Nigeria’s government is under increasing global pressure to uphold democratic principles. If Uguamaye’s case gains further traction, she may even take her grievances to international platforms such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) or the United Nations, just as Akpoti-Uduaghan did.
The international community is no longer a passive observer—global human rights groups, diplomatic bodies, and foreign governments are all closely monitoring Nigeria’s response to dissent. The country’s image is deteriorating on the world stage, as repression continues to overshadow any claims of democratic progress. The government’s actions not only weaken its credibility but also reinforce the perception that Nigeria is governed by leaders who fear accountability.
The psychologist in me urges Nigerian leadership: Learn. Learn before it is too late. Repression is not governance. Silencing voices is not strength. Every time you try to hide the truth, it will find its way to the global stage, exposing you to greater humiliation. If you believe suppressing a young woman’s voice will make her disappear, you have gravely misunderstood the modern world. The more you suppress, the more defiant people become. Natasha globalized your oppression at the IPU—Ushie, from a fearless digital generation, may take it even further.
The Tinubu Administration’s Dilemma
President Tinubu’s administration now faces a critical choice: continue down the path of repression or embrace a more democratic approach by engaging with dissenting voices constructively.
A competent and confident leadership would recognize the growing dissatisfaction among citizens and seek to engage with them. Instead, this administration appears to believe that repression is a sustainable strategy in the digital age. It is not. Suppressing critics only fuels discontent, fosters resentment, and damages Nigeria’s international reputation.
Rather than allowing NYSC officials to intimidate Uguamaye, the administration should consider inviting her for a dialogue, listening to her grievances, and addressing the concerns she raised in her video. Doing so would demonstrate maturity, empathy, and a commitment to democratic ideals. Unfortunately, the government continues to opt for force rather than understanding, deepening public disillusionment with its leadership.
Conclusion: A Call for Institutional Accountability
The Nigerian government must come to terms with an inescapable truth: in a democracy, the suppression of voices does not erase dissent—it magnifies it. Threatening individuals like Ushie Uguamaye for expressing frustration or Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan for speaking out against sexual harassment does not restore order; it exposes the fragility of leadership. Silencing criticism does not mask failures; it confirms them. True governance is not about control—it is about courage. It is about addressing real concerns, not punishing those who raise them.
President Tinubu, you always say you asked for this job. That is true, sir, but leadership is not just about assuming power—it is about managing it wisely. Many under your administration are not helping you. They are acting recklessly, targeting women, abusing institutional authority, and pulling your leadership into a vortex of controversy that diminishes your legacy. You may not have personally directed these actions, but history will not distinguish between what you ordered and what was done under your watch. The world is watching, and in an era where digital footprints are eternal, judgment is swift and lasting.
When Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan was threatened for daring to expose sexual harassment, it sent a dangerous message that the system protects predators and punishes survivors. Now, Ushie Uguamaye is facing intimidation simply for voicing an opinion. These are not isolated incidents—they are symptoms of a deeper cultural resistance to accountability. This is no longer just about Nigeria. This is about the global perception of your administration. It is about whether the world sees Nigeria as a country that respects democratic values or one that stifles them.
Sir, I urge you to pause. I hope you are checking your blood pressure, prioritizing your health, and reflecting on the weight of this moment. Even your own daughter—whether by coincidence or conviction—has taken a stand for these women. If those closest to you can recognize the problem, why do so many within your administration continue to behave as though accountability is an option rather than an obligation? Leadership is not about silencing critics—it is about proving them wrong through decisive action, ethical governance, and a commitment to justice.
As a psychologist, I say again: Learn. Learn before your suppression of voices becomes the very thing that dismantles your authority. Learn before the culture of fear you permit today turns into the resistance you cannot contain tomorrow. The world is no longer silent, and neither are the people you seek to suppress.
The paths of two legends lately crossed at Baze University. The first was an educationist, entrepreneur, and scholar known as Sen. Datti Baba-Ahmed, and the second was a scholar, journalist, writer, and TV presenter named Dr. Reuben Abati. The two are in their fifties, although the former is midway, while the latter races to sixty in a few months. Both are notable achievers, brilliant in their endeavours and often an eleven on a scale of one to ten on their beats. Not unexpectedly, they crossed paths on a typical academic turf at the upbeat Baze University, Abuja’s first and fourteenth-anniversary lecture.
Datti Baba-Ahmed imagined Baze University when he was about age thirty-five. He had been up and about before then as a management and research consultant and a scholar after a PhD. at the Ivy League University of Westminster, with a foray into the legislature. Tales had it that he was hardly taken seriously by those in the audience on his plans. The reason was that private universities were then often the brainchild of more senior citizens or faith-based organisations, deeply rooted in fortune and finance and firm in institutional features. Datti Baba-Ahmed was, therefore, going to dare where the elders trod.
He stuck to his guns and guts, pulling through reductionist advisory barriers, conscious and unconscious nitpicking reproofs, and birthed Baze at about thirty-nine. With a license at hand, a sprawling space, and an echo away from the Abuja City centre, his experiment still looked like a joke. However, fourteen years later, the university now sits at a commanding height of fame, bursting with enthusiastic learners and a burgeoning club of knowledge producers and sharers. Eleven convocation ceremonies after, nine faculties, and about a hundred programmes on song at both the undergraduate and postgraduate levels, it was just right to create a stage to stimulate thought on national issues and mark a remarkable feat.
Sen. Baba-Ahmed testifies: “It is an honour to celebrate fourteen years of excellence, innovation, and academic distinction at Baze University, a journey rooted in the belief that education is a powerful tool for national transformation. From humble beginnings to becoming a beacon of educational excellence, the university has consistently shaped minds, nurtured talents, and produced graduates ready to impact society positively. The presence of Dr. Reuben Abati, a distinguished journalist and intellectual, highlights the critical role of education in fostering leadership and national progress.”
Enter Reuben Abati. Dr Abati was a regular university lecturer in Ogun State until he joined the elite editorial board of the then inimitable The Guardian Newspaper. That board then paraded the leading thinkers in the land, to wit, Olatunji Dare, Lade Bonuola, Femi Kusa, Okey Ikechukwu, Yemi Ogunbiyi, and others. He quickly passed as the youngest with a groundbreaking doctoral degree from Ibadan. However, that was only in his biological age, not ideation and perspicacity. He showed this in his double barrel columns, one on Fridays and the other on Sundays, where he regularly captured social and political essences in stimulating inks atop power prose.
He was reputed as a shaper, a repository, and a surveyor of goings-on, with a magisterial voice on contexts. He would later become a presidential spokesperson and then a TV presenter. Every morning as a presenter, Abati has arguably upped the ante in real-time analysis, in the reflection of researched thoughts, the showcasing of balance, and the pattern of learnedness in the narrativization and examination of issues. His inclination to present a case, in advance of analysis, syncs with the textbook protocol of editorialising, just as the desire to give the audience their rightful window, the outlet to make up their minds, and form their opinion, from a presenter’s discussion. Channels TV Dr. John Momoh, a veritable Chevening Scholar, has been an apostle of the transmission genre. It is expositional, rather than impositional, inclusive, rather than exclusive, in addition to liberalising ratiocination.
With his wife, the ravishingly beautiful Mrs. Kikelomo Atanda Owo-Abati also in the audience, Abati mounted the podium on the back of his impressive pedigree, speaking on the seminal topic of “Leadership in a Disruptive Era: Ethics, Accountability, and the Future of Governance in Nigeria.” His intervention came after the critical opening of the ceremony by the university vice-chancellor, renowned educationist, former permanent secretary in multiple federal ministries, and professor of Consumer Science, Professor Jamila Shu’ara.
Professor Shu’ara paid homage to those who powered the university dream prior, concluding with worthy regard to the ultimate visioner, Sen. Baba-Ahmed. Read her “In just 14 years, Baze University has emerged as a beacon of academic excellence and innovation under the visionary leadership of its founder, Senator Datti Baba-Ahmed. From its humble beginnings, the university has witnessed remarkable growth, expanding into nine dynamic faculties that offer a wide array of cutting-edge programmes tailored to meet the evolving demands of the global landscape.”
She added “This strategic expansion underscores a steadfast commitment to nurturing intellectual rigour, fostering creativity, and producing globally competitive graduates. Establishing a world-class, standard hospital further exemplifies this transformative vision, positioning Baze University as a hub for academic pursuit and a centre of medical excellence and community service. The university’s trajectory is a witness to Senator Baba-Ahmed’s dedication to advancing higher education in Nigeria, creating an institution that continues to set new benchmarks in quality, innovation, and societal impact.”
Dr. Abati thereafter began saluting Baba-Ahmed, whose contribution can be underscored with regards to “how he has dedicated himself to the task of service by giving back to his own country and helping in the education industry to build the same country that nurtured him, by devoting time and resources to the empowerment of the younger generation through knowledge and skills. I salute also the diligence and commitment of all the men and women, who in various ways have joined this enterprise of building young persons into better men and women, providing an enabling environment for the flowering of the human spirit and the ideal of the university.”
He then pontificated with philosophic confidence: “The entire trajectory of human survival is on the production of knowledge, epistemology and adaptability, and as man learns anew, he strengthens his capacity to live. The significant burden that man faces is that the more he learns, the more he sees that he still needs to know. In the endless search for knowledge, he expands his horizons. Man, inexorably, realises that he is not the wonderful creature that he thinks he is, but a gnat, a small part of the Cosmos, a dot in God’s design, a work in motion, who needs to adapt and innovate, reinvent himself, to remain alive and relevant in the larger canvas of things. We keep learning to live, and the university, as a place of learning, stands at a critical pathway in this process.”
Zeroing in on Nigeria, the writer stressed that Nigeria’s governance challenges demand urgent and comprehensive reforms from all sectors of society. “Transformative leadership, institutional strengthening, and ethical decision-making are crucial for the nation’s stability and prosperity. Policymakers must prioritise evidence-based decisions, long-term goals, and public participation, while political leaders should embody integrity and place national interests first. Civil servants must uphold professionalism, and citizens must actively hold leaders accountable. Ethical leadership is critical to addressing the nation’s socio-economic issues, including poverty and unemployment, and requires transparency and responsibility.”
His summary: “Reforms should include judicial independence, enhanced anti-corruption efforts, and digital innovations like e-governance to improve service delivery. Citizen engagement should be encouraged primarily through media, civil society, and academia. Leadership recruitment must prioritise merit, proven ability, and service over corruption and entitlement. Only through a collective effort can Nigeria establish a governance system that is transparent, inclusive, and responsive to its people’s needs. The future of Nigeria’s governance depends on committed reform now.”
No doubt some excellent submission from Abati, who graduated as the best overall student at the University of Calabar, where he earned his Bachelor of Arts degree, and furthered his education by obtaining a Bachelor of Laws (LL. B) from the Lagos State University (LASU) and a Master of Arts (M.A.) from the University of Ibadan. He also earned a Master’s in International Law and Diplomacy (MILD) from the University of Lagos after his doctorate (Ph.D.) from the University of Ibadan. Abati is a fellow of the Nigerian Guild of Editors (FNGE) and the Nigerian Institute of Management (FNIM), with an Honorary Fellowship from the Nigeria Academy of Letters. He was Hubert H. Humphrey Fellow in Journalism, a prestigious programme that further honed his expertise in the field. His appearance at Baze was one icing, with more to come, for him, Sen. Datti Baba-Ahmed and Baze University, a typical case of morning yet on the day of the increase. Over.
• Abiodun Adeniyi is a professor of communication and registrar, Baze University.
![[OPINION] The runaway state and the debris of democracy - Owei Lakemfa](/media/k2/items/cache/279dea3c74d6378930156d5143dc6a7f_S.jpg)
Some Nigerians in the social media are beginning to question whether the system in the United States, US, under Donald Trump is democracy. But I think they should start by asking themselves if what we practise in Nigeria is democracy.
Section 14(2) of our Constitution declares unequivocally thus: “Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority.” Since neither Americans nor Nigerians exercise sovereignty, then neither country, properly speaking, practises democracy.
This is because democracy is basically the decentralisation of power in ways that ensure the empowerment of the people in the affairs of the state and society; the humanisation of the political arena; and the development of society. To put this in a more contemporary usage, democracy is a system of government by popular representation, based on the vote of the electorate in which the will of the people prevails.
First, we may need to agree that democracy is not value-free. In fact, it comes in various shades and forms. In other words, there is not a single road to democracy. So, concepts such as ‘Western Democracy’ and ‘Liberal Democracy’ are, at best, contentious. Rather, there are various types of democracy, be it British Westminister, Chinese Peoples’ Democracy or American Presidential.
Today, US democracy has delivered what is perhaps its most unique verdict and most powerful President since its July 4, 1776 Declaration of Independence. Donald Trump, operating outside the majority Republican Party, seized the party with his Make America Great Again, MAGA, group which is now the dominant faction.
He won both the popular and Electoral College votes. The party he dominates controls both the Senate and House of Representatives. Additionally, his party has a 6-3 majority in the Supreme Court. So, perhaps for the first time in US history, one man has control of the Executive, Parliament and Supreme Court majority. But for the fact that this is happening in the US, it would have been called a dictatorship. Conscious of his powers, Trump is trying to run the United States with Executive Orders, and the world with sanctions and threats.
So, democracy is not a given. There is no commodity called democracy which can be bought off the shelves. It is a product of each society. One of the reasons why democracy seems to falter in Africa is that we have tried to copy other peoples’ political systems and, uncritically, adapted them to our situation. Part of the fallout has been political instability, so serious that all West African countries, except Senegal, have witnessed destabilising military coups.
So, Africa must develop its own democracy, based on its history, values, culture, tradition and diversities. The basis of such democracy must be equity for, and equality of, all. This means that we must not allow the rule of any dominant or powerful ethno-nationality, religion or region. Minorities must have a sense of belonging and clear roles in running the state.
We must allow ideas to blossom and groups to breathe. For instance, communities should have the right to form political parties of their choice, based on their needs and aspirations, as it was in the First Republic.
So, the political system should be liberalised, democratised and humanised. Africa’s democracy should ensure that the populace is so empowered that even if the electoral system throws up an Adolf Hitler or a Donald Trump, the populace should be able to curb his excesses.
Also, democracy is not a religion. It is not a set of beliefs. Rather, it is practical governance that must solve the existential and developmental needs of the people.
One of the greatest Africans that ever lived was Amilcar Cabral, the liberation fighter who led the independence movement of Guinea Bissau and Cape Verde. He said in 1974: “Always bear in mind that the people are not fighting for ideas, for the things in anyone’s head. They are fighting to win material benefits, to live better and in peace, to see their lives go forward, to guarantee the future of their children…”
So, the people are not just living for the ideals of democracy, capitalism, liberalism, socialism, or any ‘ism’. Rather, they want food on the table, clothes on their backs, roofs over their heads, healthcare when they are sick, education for their children and security of their lives and property.
It is if these basic needs are met that they would fight for principles, or fight to ensure they are provided their basic needs. If democracy provides these basic needs, God help anybody who tries to endanger the system that provides them.
Nobody needs talk to my generation of Nigerians about the nightmare that was the cumulative 29-year military misrule that we suffered. This is why some of us insist that democracy must deliver dividends to the people, if we expect them to defend it.
However, the issue is beyond unconstitutional; there is the equally important issue of peoples’ reaction to such unconstitutional change.
In clearing the debris of democracy in places like Nigeria and reconstructing people- centred democracies, it is important to re- orientate the military. It should not be encumbered with basic civilian duties such as involvement in running elections. Its personnel’s role should simply be to perform their civic duty of voting.It should simply adhere to its code of ethics.
By taking the road to democracy, we are basically saving the military from itself as it has the tendency to commit suicide by constantly purging its ranks in the name of coups, counter-coups, attempted coups and phantom coups. Although the military is claimed to be the strongest institution in society, but in reality it is one of the weakest. History has shown that when the state collapses, the military is the first that goes under. Put differently, the first sign that a state has collapsed is the collapse of its military. The first indication that the Syrian state had collapsed on December 8, 2024 was that its mighty military had melted away.
In contrast, the civil service remained, and continued to run administration. In reality, the civil service that is supposed to be seen, not heard, is a far stronger institution. So any thought that the military in any country is above society is illusory. The military must be humble and dutifully serve the society which is the only body that can defend it when the chips are down.
As we build or rebuild democracy, Nigerians should realise that the democracy of the rich, by the rich for the rich, as in the US, will not be of use. Nor will the democracy of the cunning by the cunning for the smart, as in Europe, be useful. Our democracy, more so as we head towards 2027, will not be useful if based on ethnocentric, religious, regional or calculations by the greedy. Only a people- centred democracy where no one will be oppressed will serve our needs.
![[OPINION] Nasir el-Rufai: The bloodlust of a presidential wannabe - Chidi Odinkalu](/media/k2/items/cache/7986ebbbd78a7d4d690b4a2972f279b9_S.jpg)
In the week in which former Kaduna State Governor, Nasir el-Rufai abandoned the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, to chart a different political trajectory with the Social Democratic Party, SDP, his son, Bashir, characteristically made it known that “Southern Kaduna residents will keep seeing sheghe if they continue to attack indigenous Fulani herdsmen.”
Three things about this, among many, were chilling. One is the absence of any interest in addressing the underlying problem of coexistence between communities. The second is the enthusiastic investment in violence. The third is the indiscriminate nature of the promised violence. This was not the first time that an outburst of candour from the el-Rufai clan was laced with unconcealed thirst for human blood.
In January 2019, as the country prepared to go to the polls in a presidential election the following month, the administration of Nasir el-Rufai’s political benefactor, Muhammadu Buhari, guillotined then Chief Justice of Nigeria, Walter Onnoghen. The manner and timing of the decision drew very sharp international rebuke. In response, Governor el-Rufai went on national television to warn that any foreign observers perceived as meddling in the elections “will go back in body bags.” As influential continental news magazine, Africa Report, delicately put it, these were the words of a man who had “previous on the ‘anti-meddling’ approach to diplomacy.”
This “‘anti-meddling’ approach to diplomacy” appears to be a family investment. Abubakar Idris was a committed supporter of former Kano State Governor, Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, who lived in Barnawa, in Kaduna South Local Government Area of Kaduna State. From there Mr. Idris, who was better known as “Dadiyata”, engaged in vigorous criticism of the ruling APC, one of whose founders happened to be Nasir el-Rufai.
On or about 2 August 2019, Dadiyata vanished. He has not been seen since then. A digital visibility campaign to help locate his whereabouts continues under the hashtag #WhereIsDadiyata. Four and a half months after Dadiyata disappeared, on 23 December 2019, Bashir el-Rufai ominously tweeted: “The same clowns who encouraged him when he was creating false stories and capitalizing on lies that could endanger lives solely for political ends are the same individuals trending hashtags asking #WhereisDadiyata. Dangerous lies in the public space have consequences.”
Less than three months later, on 11 March 2020, Bashir’s brother, Bello, currently a member of the House of Representatives, went one better with an even more chilling gloat in poor verse: “The things that we’ve done to protect the name are unsettling. But no regrets though, the name’ll echo. Years later, none greater. Death to a coward and a traitor, that’s just in my nature!”
At his inauguration as Kaduna State governor in May 2015, Nasir el-Rufai identified insecurity as “an obstacle to progress” and promised to “work with law enforcement officials to drastically reduce violent crime” and “insure safety of life and limb.” By the time he left office eight years later, he had achieved the exact opposite.
Forgetting this promise, Nasir el-Rufai as Governor brooked no criticism or opposition. No cruelty was considered beyond the pale for them. For daring to disagree with him, el-Rufai demolished the homes of the zonal vice-chair of his party, Inuwa Abdulkadir; and of his Senator for Kaduna North, Suleiman Hunkuyi.
He was only just beginning. His regime compiled a jaw-dropping list of body bags. Some, like Dadiyata, disappeared, never to be seen again. Others, like Maiwada Raphael Galadima, Agwam Adara III, paramount ruler in Kajuru, turned up dead or decapitated. The Agwam Adara was ostensibly returning home from a consultation with the state government on a crisis in his domain when he was abducted. Abducted with him, his wife was released after the abductors murdered her husband. The Governor was missing from his funeral. After his burial, Nasir el-Rufai swiftly abolished his kingdom and purported to divide it up into emirates.
Under Nasir el-Rufai and by appointment of the Nigerian Union of Journalists, NUJ, Kaduna State attained “notoriety as the deadliest state for journalists in Nigeria to operate.” They were not the only endangered species. The strategic research group, SBM Intelligence, concluded also that “Kaduna was the most dangerous state for priests, who were often kidnapped during services.”
His signal accomplishment was to displace Boko Haram from the top of the league of atrocities. This was no easy feat. In May 2014, the United Nations Security Council listed the Jama’atu Ahlis-Sunna Lidda’Awati Wal-Jihad, (the Islamist insurgency better known as Boko Haram) as a terrorist organization. Three years earlier, the Gaji Galtimari Presidential Committee on the Security Challenges in the North-East Zone of Nigeria had reported that the group “started as an innocuous non-violent group” around 2003.
Since then, Borno State, the epicentre of Boko Haram’s atrocities habitually topped the national league table of mass-casualty killings in Nigeria. The monitoring coalition, Nigeria Mourns, reported a peak of 6,138 atrocity casualties in Borno State in 2015. Over the next five years, casualty count in Borno State appeared to drop off quite significantly.
Over 760 kilometres away from the Borno State capital, Maiduguri, in Kaduna, the historical capital of Northern Nigeria, it almost appeared as if the state government led by Nasir el-Rufai was envious of Borno’s position. In 2015, when Borno State hit the peak in atrocity killings, Nigeria Mourns recorded 411 casualties in Kaduna State. By 2020, this had risen to 628. In Borno State in the same year, the count was 1,176 killed.
In 2021, el-Rufai’s Kaduna State overhauled Borno to take over the top position in the national body-count of mass-casualty atrocities. That year, Nigeria Mourns recorded 587 killed and 119 abducted in Borno State. In Kaduna State, it counted 1,114 killed and 1,225 abducted. In 2022, at least 1,346 were abducted in Kaduna State. The comparable figure for Borno State was 77.
To be sure, Kaduna State had a well-advertised history of chronic violence dating back to the 1980s and accounting for tens of thousands killed over the period. Under Nasir el-Rufai, however, virulent executive bigotry drove the state beyond the edge through methodical segregation. Leena Hoffman captured the depth of Kaduna’s crisis of sectarian segregation under him: “the river that runs through the city of Kaduna, the state capital, highlights the starkness of the divide: the northern half is unofficially called Mecca; the south, Jerusalem.”
The most intense site of chronic mass-casualty atrocities in Kaduna State was Southern Kaduna, which is characterised by linguistic and ethnic diversity coexisting with a high concentration of the State’s non-Muslim populations. For many people, there was only one explanation for the exponential spike in mass-casualty atrocities in Kaduna State – the State governor, Nasir el-Rufai. His administration was widely “accused of a conspiracy of silence” in support of the murderous campaign of extermination in Southern Kaduna.
In one of his earliest acts as governor, Nasir el-Rufai sought exculpation for bandit pastoralists from the chronic massacre in Southern Kaduna, claiming that he had already “spent government money to pay Fulani herdsmen to stop violence in Southern Kaduna.” About the armed “bandits” who were to emerge as the fall guys for the violence, Governor el-Rufai later described them as “just collections of independent criminals. It is a business for them.”
When Mr. el-Rufai stepped down from office in 2023, mass-casualty atrocities in Kaduna crashed spectacularly. Nigeria Mourns recorded 413 atrocity killings in Kaduna and 393 abductions. The only thing that appears to have occurred to bring about this transformation was a change in the occupant of the office of Governor.
In January 2017, an audio emerged in which he gloated over the untimely death in 2010 of former President, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, his high school contemporary at Barewa College, Zaria on whom he had also visited unrestrained bile in his memoirs. Columnist, Farooq Kperogi, observes that Nasir el-Rufai “embodies one of the most morbidly toxic strains of political intolerance in Nigeria. He exteriorises his discomfort with opposition by literally wishing death upon his opponents or claiming credit for their death.”
Bloodlust such as this can never be slaked. Out of power today, el-Rufai seeks to re-brand himself as an ecumenical politician invested in pluralism. Those who make the mistake of jumping into political bed with him will have themselves to blame.
A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu
![[OPINION] Rivers: Backlash of a supreme verdict - Dakuku Peterside](/media/k2/items/cache/bd6c351bfa9898798bd6802fd026648a_S.jpg)
In his book “The Power of Regrets”, Daniel Pink explores how retrospection can be a powerful tool for growth and improvement. Reflecting on the Supreme Court judgment that has thrown Rivers State into chaos, I ask myself fundamental questions. If the Supreme Court justices were to reflect on their ruling, would they regret the consequences it has unleashed? What about the two primary political figures at the heart of the crisis—Governor Siminalayi Fubara and Minister Nyesom Wike? What could be their regrets when they reflect on what is going on? Most significantly, the people of Rivers State, bearing the brunt of the judgment’s repercussions, indeed have the deepest regrets, spanning social, economic, and political dimensions. Their sense of injustice is palpable. Regrets are a part of life. Pink said clearly from his research that we all have something we wish we had done differently.
Justice is the bedrock of any democratic society, providing stability, fairness, and order. However, when a Supreme Court ruling not only deepens an existing crisis but also fuels political strife, it calls into question the Judiciary’s integrity and role in governance. The recent Supreme Court judgment concerning Rivers State has ignited a political firestorm, raising fundamental questions about its implications for governance, democracy, and the rule of law.
A meta-analysis of 134 expert legal commentaries in the media on the ruling reveals an overwhelming consensus—130 commentators argue that the verdict did more harm than good, failing to uphold legal standards and instead entrenching political instability. Those 130 commentators believe that the apex court did not dwell on the law but rather on extraneous issues. Only four legal experts expressed a differing opinion, highlighting the near-universal disapproval of the judgment within the legal community.
Justice Mojeed Owoade (rtd) led 11-man Independent Judicial Accountability Panel delivered a scathing critique of the judgment. The panel noted that the Supreme Court failed to resolve the crucial issue of the alleged defection of 27 lawmakers, leaving a gap in legal interpretation. In their words, “the judgment of the Supreme Court in the consolidated appeals leaves a gap as to whether the issue of the alleged defection of 27 members of the Rivers State House of Assembly is still alive or has been settled. This is because the court commented on the defection issue without actually addressing it.” This failure is significant given that a similar case in 2012 saw the Supreme Court uphold the removal of lawmakers who defected without due process.
One of the most contentious aspects of the judgment was its handling of local government elections. The Supreme Court verdict in annulling the elections did not follow any precedence known to law. To make matters more complicated, the Supreme Court nullified the elections without providing a timeline for fresh polls, leaving the fate of governance in limbo. LGA chairmen have been elected and sworn in yet the Supreme Court without hearing the chairmen or their political parties annulled the election. The only justification given by the apex court is that INEC had not updated the voter register. The fact that this is a hatchet job does not require a soothsayer .
This judicial oversight has triggered widespread confusion. Over 10,000 local government workers remain uncertain about their employment status. Vital social services may be affected .
Even more curious is the fact that 32 other states have conducted local government elections under similar conditions without interference. Why was Rivers State singled out? The Supreme Court ruling raises serious concerns about selective judicial intervention and inconsistency in legal precedents.
In another troubling move, the Supreme Court ruling directing the withholding of federal allocations to Rivers State, a constitutional entitlement without preconditions , has plunged the people of Rivers state into financial uncertainty. How could the Supreme Court expose the people of Rivers State to unprecedented suffering based on a disagreement between two politicians? The Supreme Court has previously ruled that the federal government lacks the authority to withhold statutory allocations due to constitutional infractions, as seen in the case of Lagos State vs. the Federal Government. This action contradicts the court’s precedent, particularly in the landmark Lagos State vs. Federal Government case, where the court ruled that federal allocations cannot be withheld due to constitutional infractions.
The impact of this decision is profound. Thousands of civil servants face delayed salaries and economic hardship. Infrastructure projects and public services have ground to a halt. The ruling has exacerbated economic instability in a state critical to Nigeria’s oil revenue, which accounts for nearly 40% of the country’s crude oil production. Instead of resolving the crisis, the Supreme Court ruling has deepened the political turmoil in Rivers State, creating a perception of partisanship within the Judiciary. By failing to uphold impartial justice, the court has inadvertently set a dangerous precedent where judicial rulings can be weaponised for political ends. Future political conflicts may escalate as parties exploit judicial verdict gas.
Fubara and Wike, who is fighting through his proxies, must be full of regrets if they have a conscience. The thrill of defeat and the agony of victory cannot help them. For Wike, the Supreme Court ruling has given him an opportunity to assert his dominance over Rivers State’s political landscape- real or imagined . After the Supreme Court judgement, Wike has invested time, media appearance and money to escalate the crisis and prove that he is the “political god of Rivers State “. If Wike has any regrets,they are likely overshadowed by his sense of imperial entitlement .
Fubara, on the other hand, has struggled to maintain stability while attempting to comply with the apex court ruling. He has repeatedly attempted to present the budget to the Rivers State House of Assembly, highlighting his commitment to complying with legal processes. The intentional act of the Assembly making itself unavailable for the Governor to present the budget is not about Rivers State’s interest but about their ego and one man’s interest. They have prioritised their personal and political gains over the well-being of Rivers people. Added to that is the assembly’s latest attempt to ambush the Chief Judge of the state and hound him out of office.
While politicians manoeuvre for power, the real victims of this crisis are the ordinary people of Rivers State. Rivers people will be exposed to unprecedented social dislocation, crimes and hardship. The judgment has led to economic hardship due to delayed salaries and disrupted services. Increased crime rates have been fuelled by political instability and financial strain. There has been an erosion of trust in the Judiciary and democratic institutions.
Furthermore, the judgment risks disrupting Nigeria’s oil revenue. Niger Delta youths and militant groups witnessing the impoverishment of their families while their resources sustain the nation, may resist oil extraction, further threatening national economic stability.
This is one judgement that, in all respect has led to the displacement of the confidence of the people in the Judiciary by the perceived manipulation of judicial processes and proceedings in the far-reaching decisions of the Supreme Court on issues of defection of the 27 former lawmakers that were not pleaded by the parties before it or tried by the Federal High Court. Rivers people and the rest of Nigerians cannot understand how the Judiciary in the 21st century Nigeria would allow a baleful manipulation of the processes to allow a clear violation of Section 109(1)(g) of the 1999 Constitution by defectors to the point of the Supreme Court rewarding such travesty by punishing the Governor who at all material times has worked to protect and defend the Constitution by his Oath of office.
The Supreme Court should have better handled the critical point of the status of the 27 decamping legislators. A more balanced approach would have sent a different signal . In the past, the Judiciary has taken firmer stances on similar cases, such as in 2007 when lawmakers who defected in Anambra State were asked to vacate their seats by constitutional provisions. Instead, this particular ruling has emboldened political actors seeking to privatise the state ,undermine governance, creating an atmosphere where impeachment and humiliation of the Governor appear viable strategies for political gain. The general perception in Rivers State is that the president has unleashed his minister against the people of Rivers State. None of these scenarios benefit the people of Rivers State.
Thankfully , the Governor had not acted in disobedience to any court order since appeals were filed in all of the rulings on interlocutory applications in the courts below. Generally speaking, parties are bound by the judgment of Courts, which are or constitute a final determination of matters brought by litigants. Thus, it is wrong or unfair to unnecessarily accuse a party of disobedience to Orders subject to appellate jurisdiction on cases pending before the lower Courts.
When we speak of justice, we reach for the foundation of human existence. Justice is the cornerstone of human togetherness. The rule of law should be a stabilising force, ensuring justice and accountability. However, in this case, it has been manipulated to aggravate the crisis rather than assuage it. The Supreme Court’s ruling has failed to uphold its fundamental duty—to serve justice impartially and safeguard democratic stability. Morally dubious decisions haunt us, and some justices of the Supreme Court involved in the Rivers State case must be dealing with their regrets. Restoring confidence in the Supreme Court requires addressing perceptions of bias and ensuring decisions are grounded in constitutional principles rather than political agendas.
The Supreme Court ruling on Rivers State has left a trail of confusion, economic hardship, and political instability. It has raised serious questions about the Judiciary’s integrity and its mediatory role. There must be mechanisms for judicial accountability and reforms to prevent future rulings that exacerbate crises rather than resolve them to restore public confidence in the legal system. Justice in a democracy should serve the people, not feudal lords or political interests. It should provide stability, not chaos. The Supreme Court must rise above political influences and uphold the principles of fairness, integrity, and constitutionalism. Only then can democracy truly thrive in Rivers State and across Nigeria.
![[OPINION] NATASHA: How Not To Love Akpabio - Mon-Charles Egbo](/media/k2/items/cache/f2e775790d6fa20f783a580365795409_S.jpg)
Unarguably, the 10th Senate is now neck-deep into its most sensational defining moments since its inception. Its integrity and by extension, the national assembly, is on trial.
But for the record, Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension was a sequel to her unruly conduct on the floor of the Senate.
Again, and so far, the president of the senate, Godswill Akpabio did not sexually harass Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan.
However, there was indeed a very close relationship between Natasha and Akpabio.
For example, both of them have the same day of birth which could have been marked individually, but Natasha sacrificed her celebration just to honour Akpabio’s event at his Akwa Ibom State.
Furthermore, Natasha was not only a first-timer; she came to the senate about six months after her colleagues were inaugurated, yet she was assigned the chairmanship of a ‘juicy committee’ in addition to being nominated to represent Nigeria at the Inter-Parliamentary Union, IPU. In other words, she stepped into bigger shoes than her legs, though as a deliberate policy, all four female senators head committees.
So in summary, what has thrown the senate into this messy situation is a relationship breakdown between Akpabio and Natasha where the latter is seemingly on a vendetta mission.
Then instructively, the unfortunate escalation of the feud was facilitated by those who ‘love’ Akpabio more than the rest of us. They are responsible for this avoidable attack on our democracy. Their ‘love’ for Akpabio is merely driven by regional sentiments, his office and of course, President Bola Tinubu’s political interest. Impliedly, it is this cupboard love which undermines national interest that has boxed the Senate into this tight corner.
To begin with, there was an outburst during the plenary wherein Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan alleged victimization against Senate President Godswill Akpabio.
Two days later, she took to national television to add that she had been sexually harassed by Godswill Akpabio on two particular occasions. She emphasized that it was her refusal to succumb to the pressure that put her in a disadvantaged position culminating in her removal as chairman of the Committee on Local Content and also reallocation of her seat.
Meanwhile, it was her refusal to take up her newly assigned seat and the refusal of Akpabio to allow her to speak from her old sitting position that triggered the outburst which indeed, violated the priviledges of the senators. The anger and resentment of the senators were to be aggravated by the television outing. She could have exploited all the internal mechanisms to address her concerns rather than exposing the institution to public ridicule.
But as condemnable as her actions are, it was the ensuing reactions that did worse harm.
This is because actions that are lacking in strategy and tact ultimately undermine target goals and objectives, despite the genuineness of the intentions.
In this context, Natasha made an allegation that cast doubt on the integrity of Akpabio, both as a senator and an embodiment of the most critical arm of the federal government. But rather than perceive it as a national concern given that the Senate of the Federal Republic was under attack, it was reduced to a war of attrition between the two senators.
Apart from his wife, those who ‘love’ Akpabio more than the rest of us allowed primordial sentiments to becloud their senses of judgment. The old-fashioned mentality of “we and they” is today elevated to a towering height where no one remembers any longer why she was suspended in the first place.
Within hours after Natasha’s outburst at the senate, an aide of the senate president took to social media to cast aspersions on her, describing her in the most derogatory manner to the extent of writing that Natasha puts on transparent dresses to the senate.
Similarly, a principal officer of the senate variously rose in media defence of the senate president and went all out against Natasha including telling Nigerians how Natasha had six children by six husbands, among others.
Yet again, within hours after Natasha’s television presentations, the senate president’s wife understandably driven by emotion, held a press conference in defence of her husband. Amidst her arguments, she expressed an opinion that Natasha’s husband was certainly not in support of what the wife said about and against Akpabio. This was immediately followed by a protest against Natasha by some women at Uyo, Akpabio’s Akwa Ibom state capital calling her names.
Meanwhile, Natasha had slammed a suit against the office and person of the senate president for defamation by the aide of Akpabio who was also joined as a defendant.
Equally not done by the media defence of her husband, Akpabio.s wife instituted a case of defamation against Natasha.
Then expectedly, Natasha’s husband issued a public statement admitting that Akpabio indeed harassed Natasha sexually and that he had earlier confronted Akpabio on the matter.
It was at this point that a cross-section of Nigerians called for a thorough investigation of the weighty allegations. Raising concerns about the impact of the issue on the image and reputation of the federal legislature, they were unanimous that Akpabio should vacate his office pending the conclusion of the suggested probe.
But, except for ignorance or mischief, this call is overtly untenable because a mere allegation is not sufficient for any leader to step aside. History is replete with cases where officeholders were removed when it became necessary. So, if Akpabio is found wanting, he knows that nothing spares him. Not even those who ‘love’ him more than the rest of us.
Continuing, Akpabio’s spokespersons variously absolved their principal of the allegations, rightly faulted the calls for Akpabio’s resignation and remarkably, hinted that the allegation stemmed from a gang-up against Akpabio because he is from the South-South geo-political zone of the country and also that Natasha was avenging her removal from the ‘juicy’ committee.
Still on national television, former senator Florence Ita-Giwa argued that it was infantile and questionable for Natasha to allege sexual harassment, having gone through the rigours of elections. Does this imply that sexual harassment is either common or non-existent in the Senate?
As for Senator Ireti Kingibe, her only concern was that, of all the four female senators, Natasha has been the only one who has enjoyed the best of priviledges. Whatever this connotes is left to conjecture but it asserts that there was a rosy era for Akpabio and Natasha.
Fast forward! There were protests for and against Akpabio at the gate of the national assembly with the latter receiving a bloody nose from the security operatives.
Meanwhile, the senate had activated its committee on ethics, priviledges and public petition to review Natasha’s disruptive conduct at the plenary.
But following the senate spokesperson’s modest argument that the senate was not investigating the sexual harassment allegations because there was no complaint before the senate, Natasha was to formalise her allegation with a petition which was also referred to the same committee.
It is note-worthy that in all these, Akpabio was loudly silent.
But curiously, even before the submission of Natasha’s petition, the chairman of the committee had publicly and vehemently defended Akpabio even when the committee had yet to look into the allegations.
Then at this point, Senator Akpabio spoke! He denied the allegation of sexual harassment and challenged Natasha to prove him wrong. To deepen this, he allowed Natasha to present her petition. There is no better way to kick-start a fair hearing, even though some of his comments after the suspension tend to negate this!
Instructively again, Natasha had secured a court injunction restraining the committee from taking action with regard to her outburst on the floor of the Senate apparently aware of the ultimate outcome. But the committee bungled the opportunity to rescue Akpabio. Rather than obey the ruling of the court and possibly hear the allegation of sexual harassment, it not only went ahead but shifted its sitting date forward and recommended a six-month suspension for Natasha in addition to dismissing her sexual harassment petition on a technical ground. However, the petition was billed to fail ab initio. Yes! Akpabio was openly disparaged for being “emotional” by allowing the presentation in the first place.
Not deterred, Natasha presented another petition which was endorsed by her constituents. And again, it was referred to the same committee before she was eventually suspended.
Given the barrage of backlash that has continued to trail the suspension, especially relative to the silence on the unruly conduct of Natasha, the senate majority leader issued a statement stressing the core reasons for Natasha’s suspension. Yet he, being a lawyer, was silent on why the Senate was questionably hasty in its action despite even the pendency of a valid court rule.
By this singular act, the senate lost an opportunity to redeem itself and particularly, Akpabio.
Hence, Natasha, being escorted out of the chamber upon suspension, had threatened that “this injustice will not be sustained”. She took her quest for justice to the Inter-Parliamentary Union, IPU, thereby further internationalizing the matter. Her co-delegate from Nigeria did not instantly counter Natasha but chose to wait for the close of the session before reading the same statement by the senate majority leader to a non-existent audience.
Then back home, there was a solidarity protest for Akpabio at the United Nations building in Abuja preceded by the second vote of confidence in Akpabio by the senate.
Empirically, it was the actions and inaction of the committee on ethics, priviledges and public petition that truly represent the injustice that “will not be sustained”. After all, “action begets reaction”.
For instance, how the issue of the adjustment of the sitting arrangement was overshadowed by the allegation of sexual harassment has made a mess of the integrity of the Senate and particularly, its president.
Also, apart from the poor conduct of the committee, when seats are rearranged, is it a convention for the affected senators not to be notified formally? If not, then a ‘lover’ has created a war front for Akpabio except the communication was a collective decision.
Again, Natasha, in her outburst on the floor of the Senate, did not say anything about being sexually harassed. No doubt, she might have made up her mind, but logically, her resort to the media platform was in reaction to what the aide of Akpabio wrote about her. Similarly, her husband might not have joined the battle had Akpabio’s wife not challenged him.
Equally, there could not have been protests at the national assembly had Uyo women not fired the first salvo and also, the allegation could not have gained traction in some quarters had there not been insinuation of regionalism and mindless invasion of Natasha’s marital privacy.
So, inferentially once again, the opportunity she was denied to either prove her case or incur further wrath of the senate is now abundantly offered to her at the court of public opinion.
But in the final analysis, it is Akpabio that has a lot to lose. Until this allegation of sexual harassment is trashed formally, the image and reputation or public goodwill that translates to huge political capital at the appropriate time will continue to elude him. It is not about defending him with desperation but about enhancing opportunities to establish his innocence. Votes of confidence, protests and advocacies do not, and cannot constitute proof of innocence. Those concerned should understand that attacking individuals and their comments or offending the sensibilities of dissenting voices only aggravates issues otherwise this is certainly how not to love Akpabio.
Egbo is a parliamentary affairs analyst.
More...
![[OPINION] Niger’s Crippling Fuel Crisis - A Warning to AES Countries - Paul Ejime](/media/k2/items/cache/6ad701750c2d53b8056e8ed5ece34227_XS.jpg)
THE crippling fuel shortages in Niger and the change in thinking towards development aid by the developed World are clear warnings to Africa on the urgent need to deepen regional integration, and more so for the self-proclaimed Alliance of Sahel States, AES countries, making a public show of quitting the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) at all costs.
Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso have effectively formalised their withdrawal from ECOWAS, having served notice to quit the regional economic bloc in January 2024, but the organisation in a demonstration of good faith, has allowed them a nine-month grace period until September 2025 to rejoin if they change their mind.
Last December, the Niger junta leader Abdourahamane Tchiani without any proof, went on his country’s state television to accuse Nigeria of attempts to destabilise Niger. Niger’s Foreign Minister, Bakary Yaou Sangare had also alleged that Nigerian government was complicit in a purported December 13 sabotage of the Niger-Benin oil pipeline in Gaya.
The Niger government summoned Nigeria’s Charge d’affaires in Niamey to complain.
Nigeria dismissed all the allegations as unfounded, while the ECOWAS Commission issued a public statement in defence of Nigeria.
As it turned out, and as Nigeria stated then, Tchiani was only using the playbook of the AES junta leaders - using propaganda and disinformation to divert attention from the mounting governance problems they faced.
Nigeria has no reason to destabilise its smaller neighbour, which it continues to support materially and otherwise, including in infrastructure development such as road construction, rail projects, and fuel supply at concessionary rates.
Three months on, reality has now dawned on the Tchiani-led junta. Niger has been facing unprecedented severe fuel shortages for several weeks, characterised by winding queues at the few filling stations with supply and the stifling economic activities across the land-locked country, listed by the United Nations Development Report as among the poorest in the World.
With nowhere else to go, the once arrogant Niamey junta turned to Nigeria for a bailout, but this time, without the usual publicity.
According to industry sources in Niamey and Abuja, the situation was so desperate that the Tchiani-led junta swallowed its pride and allowed a delegation led by the Chief Executive of the Niger Petroleum Company, SONIDEP to visit Abuja on an S.O.S. mission.
Following a meeting with Nigerian petroleum industry officials, which was largely unannounced “some 300 fuel trucks were approved for immediate delivery across the border to Niger,” according to the sources. The terms or details of the agreement were not available.
Industry officials in Niger blamed the severe fuel shortages on the confrontation between the junta government in Niamey and the Chinese oil companies, which have long dominated Niger’s petroleum sector.
The China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) was said to have granted the Niger government an advance of about US$400 million in 2024, using future crude oil deliveries as collateral to help Niger cope with the lingering effects of the sanctions earlier imposed by ECOWAS following the July 2023 military coup that brought the Tchiani regime to power - the sanctions have since been lifted.
When it was time for Niger to repay the Chinese, the cash-strapped junta government was alleged to have attempted to arm-twist China, forcing the Asian country to slap billions of dollars in tax demand on the Niger Refinery Company.
The escalated crisis culminated in the expulsion of three Chinese officials working in the Niger oil sector last week.
Official sources in Niamey said the move was the latest by the military government to “assert greater control over national resources.”
In a separate development, Niger's Ministry of Tourism is reported to have revoked the licence of a Chinese-operated hotel in Niamey, citing alleged discriminatory practices.
The two countries are said to be working to avoid a break-down of relations, particularly in the critical oil sector, which has also been hit by unresolved disputes over the Niger-Benin oil pipeline, a project designed to boost Niger’s crude exports.
The military junta had failed to publicly acknowledge the gravity of the economic crisis, with the State-controlled media reportedly ordered to maintain a news blackout on the national fuel shortages and the general economic hardship. But public anxiety is mounting amid spiralling inflation, high unemployment, especially among youths, and high cost of living, with desperate motorists resorting to the costly black-market for fuel, that is where the scarce commodity was available.
Despite the AES countries’ populist and arrogant posturing to leave ECOWAS, the regional organisation has left open, diplomatic channels for negotiations and rapprochement.
Ghana’s President John Mahama recently paid visits to the military governments of the three countries, with bilateral and regional issues featuring in the discussions.
Also, as the AES region grapples with heightened jihadist attacks and regional instability, a high-level nine-man delegation from the three countries visited Nigeria recently to understudy non-kinetic approaches to combating violent extremism.
Informed sources said the visit was in recognition of a policy shift in Nigeria borne out of the realisation that military option alone cannot defeat terrorism and insurgency. A recent study showed that about 7% of terrorist groups that operated between 1968 and 2006 were militarily defeated, while more than 40% of groups ended their violence through negotiated settlements.
The AES countries, which accused ECOWAS of being under external influence, as part of the reasons for their withdrawal, have severed major ties with Paris, closed French military bases and expelled French soldiers from their territories as part of their professed assertion of sovereignty and independence.
However, all three are still members of the West African Economic and Monetary Union, UEMOA, with French affiliation.
The French Treasury controls the national currency of the three countries, the franc CFA, fixes the exchange rate, and maintains their their bank reserves.
The junta leaders are also broadening relations with Russia and China, including military cooperation with Russia, while accusing ECOWAS of being under foreign influence.
But as the experience from the Niger fuel shortages and the cut of development aid by advanced economies have shown, regional cooperation and integration are the more realistic options for Africa’s sustained development and survival.
Speaking at the Munich Security Conference (MSC) in Germany in February, President Mahama described the USAID pullback by the President Donald Trump administration and the cut in development aid by Britain as “adversity in opportunity” for Africa. He emphasised the need for African countries to strengthen their economic resilience and reduce dependence on foreign aid.
In his address titled “Building or Burning Bridges: Economic and Development Cooperation Amid Multi-polarisation,” Mahama acknowledged the changing geopolitical dynamics. He noted that while the U.S. played a central role in shaping the post-World War II global order, its current shift could be disruptive.
In the same vein, Nigeria’s Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, Director-General of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), recently told African leaders at the African Union headquarters in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, to consider foreign aid as a thing of the past.
She urged them to be innovative and look inwards “to uplift the lots of your people instead of looking increasingly for help from where help is drying up.”
These teachable lessons are applicable to all African countries, especially the AES group.
It is within the rights of the AES members as sovereign nations to pursue their common interests both as Sahel States and ECOWAS members, just as similar other groups - Mano River Union, Zone of Prosperity, Conseil de l'Entente (Council of Accord or Understanding), UEMOA and the Chad Basin Authority/Commission.
Paul Ejime is a Global Affairs Analyst and Consultant on Peace & Security and Governance Communication
![[OPINION] Every generation MUST… - Opeyemi Adamolekun](/media/k2/items/cache/503e10544ef964881db417dabb2863ea_XS.jpg)
“Every generation must, out of relative obscurity, discover its mission, fulfill it, or betray it.” — Frantz Fanon
On February 26, 2010, Chude Jideonwo sent an email titled “Where is the outrage?” about the state of the nation to a few people.
If the present government realises that it can do anything and get away with it, then we are doomed.
But how can we be doomed when we actually have the power to make our voices heard? At The Future Awards 2010, many young people heard clearly when the Keynote Speaker, Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, said, “In Nigeria, generation Y, 70% of our population of 105 million is under 30 years old.” We are in the majority. We have the power to actually make change happen. So what is our excuse? What will we tell our children – that we lay down and took whatever they hit us with?
No.
…………….
Listen guys, whatever industry we work in, no matter how much money we have, if Nigeria becomes a failed state, we will all suffer! We all have a stake in this! We will be unable to drive our flashy cars and have the great events and do fine dinners if we have no country!
This rally will be the first phase. Other things will come up later. But this one we have to do first. This is the one we need you for. This is one we have to make a statement with.
This is our country; our duty; our future.
I wasn’t one of the recipients, but the actions that followed that email would change the course of my life. Chude was 24 years old at the time and he couldn’t understand why young people were spending time on social media while Wole Soyinka, Femi Falana, and Tunde Bakare, under the banner of the “Save Nigeria Group (SNG),” were on the streets protesting a future that was less about them. President Yar’adua was MIA, there were killings in Jos, there was no electricity, and fuel scarcity had returned.
In 18 days, with heavy lifting from Adebola Williams, Chioma Chuka and a few others, the #EnoughIsEnough protest was organised to the national assembly in Abuja on March 16, 2010. The day was incidentally Chude’s 25th birthday. Omotola Jalade-Ekeinde, Waje, Dele Momodu, Stella Damasus, Audu Maikori, Omawumi, Charly Boy and Efe Omoregbe (2Face/2Baba’s Manager) were some of the pop culture icons that participated in the protest. I was invited to join the protests by my friend, Bisola Edun, and it sounded like good fun! Another protest followed in Lagos on April 13th. The #EnoughIsEnough protests in Abuja and Lagos led to the birth of Enough is Enough Nigeria, aka EiE Nigeria, aka EiE! I have now led EiE for fourteen years.
In October 2020, young Nigerians were frustrated with the Nigeria Police Force, especially the SARS Unit that harassed youth with tech gadgets and unconventional hairstyles, tagging them as fraudsters. An incident in Benin triggered the #EndSARS protests that would see a reincarnation of young Nigerians across all strata — entrepreneurs, professionals, pop culture icons — lend their voices, resources and time to express their frustration via street protests. The protests in Lagos, the epicentre were led by young Nigerians like Rinu Oduala, who was 22 years old at the time.
A prominent organising hub was the Feminist Coalition — young women in their twenties who mobilised and deployed financial resources to ensure the nationwide protests had legal support, food & water, and protection. The #EndSARS protests ended when the federal government opened fire and murdered innocent protesters. Some of the #EndSARS energy was repackaged to support a 3rd force — Peter Obi — in the 2023 presidential elections. The elections were unfortunately rigged when technology was jettisoned as legal guidelines were ignored.
It’s now March 2025, and the outrage is still there — expressed through content and conversations — but there’s a reduced appetite for street protests and governance-related matters.
Nevertheless, silence is not an option. During the #EndSARS protests, most young people were unaware of the #EnoughIsEnough protests, which had happened ten years before. The #EndSARS protests are still raw, but in another five, ten years, what will people remember? Maybe the increased use of technology and social media platforms would ensure the stories are not lost.
Beyond the stories of what young people did and the lives lost, how will young people respond to leadership that has no vision and consistently shows in words and actions that it is not interested in building a Nigeria that allows its citizens to maximise their potential and fulfill their dreams? It’s even more interesting because the current president knows civil society well. He has funded and participated in protests and opposition politics. And in a nation where even the “middle class” are struggling, from where will the resistance come?
Young people are finding ways to make things work despite the government, and we see it exemplified in the arts — music, fashion, movies, and painting. But there are some things only the government can do at scale, education, healthcare, and infrastructure topping that list. Four states in the region with the poorest education outcomes have chosen to close down all primary and secondary schools for 5 weeks during Ramadan. Schools in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) remain open. What exactly are we doing? Patients are dying at University College Hospital (UCH), Ibadan, because there is no electricity to power the hospital. UCH used to be Nigeria’s best hospital. Our institutions are another area that has been badly hit — the judiciary being a prime example. You don’t have to look further than the fiasco in Rivers and Kano states.
The list is endless, and the direct impact on our lives tells the story well. However, a government that receives no pushback and has no consequences to its “anyhow” behaviour will continue to behave “anyhow”. As in 2010 and 2020, the people who have the most to lose are Nigeria’s youth. In 15 years, EiE has tried to help citizens connect the dots and engage governance from their “Office of the Citizen” because public servants are servants of the public, the people. We have made some progress, but there’s still much more to do. From wards to local governments to states, young people must mobilise their numbers to understand that they still have the power to change Nigeria’s trajectory. Citizens who understand their power to elect and hold those in public office accountable can truly move mountains! No messiah is coming from anywhere, as current global affairs remind us.
How will you respond?
Evil is amplified when good people choose to be silent. I will not be silent. — Opeyemi
Opeyemi Adamolekun is the executive director of Enough is Enough (EiE) Nigeria (www.eie.ng), which she has led for fourteen years.
![[OPINION] Professor Osundare at 78 - Korede Abdullah](/media/k2/items/cache/52a5b03ea61782a4035d71ef9604d37b_XS.jpg)
My first encounter with the renowned poet and literary titan Professor Niyi Osundare was in 1996 through one of his masterful proses. I stumbled on an old copy of the famous Newswatch magazine — a 1987 edition — in my brother’s house in Lagos. Newswatch, as a magazine of both the elite and the hoi polloi, paraded the crème de la crème of Nigerian journalists led by the iconic late Dele Giwa in the days of yore.
As I was flipping through the magazine from the cover page to the last page where Prof. Osundare held a column, I felt like a I had found a goldmine! The prof wrote a moving, glowing tribute to the legendary Thomas Sankara, a pan-Africanist, revolutionary and iconoclastic military head of state of Burkina Faso who was assassinated by his friend, Blaise Compaoré in a military coup on October 15, 1987.
As an avowed lover of flowery words myself, I caught the bug of Osundare’s elegant use of words. And from that unforgettable encounter, I literally felt in love with his irresistible literary sophistication and his captivating writing prowess. From that day, the fire of my literary enthusiasm was further fueled. And I have not looked back. I eagerly look forward to consuming analytical and thought-provoking literary outputs which emanate from the literary icon.
Prof Osundare is not one to garnish the truth or call a spade any other name. He always tells the truth to power through his satirical, pungent poems which he fearlessly deploys effusively to hit the target like a dart. The Ekiti-born professor abhors mediocrity and like a revolutionary, he has used his pen to change our vast world to make it a better place. I once watched him on a TV show, saying in Ekiti dialect — ẹrun kàn i jẹ, kí ẹrun kàn a hò – meaning, it is an injustice for one person to be feeding and the other one to be starving. This underscores how concerned he is about the plight of the common man.
At 78, (two years shy of becoming an octogenerian), Prof. Osundare has never slowed down in his both literary and public engagement. I join your admirers to fete you as you celebrate your birthday. May your light continue to shine brilliantly and illuminate the dark recess of socio-political enclave. As a typical Ekiti intellectual, may your poetic pen always roar like a thunder!
Ọ̀rọ̀ọ́lẹ̀ Baba Òkè,
Oke rú yọ̀yọ̀,
Mi kí mi yà fọn’ná,
Oke ṣ’ọra d’uta,
Mọ yá ‘Lósunta,
Ọ̀run Ùkẹ́rẹ́,
Oke suan ṣ’orire,
Ọ̀ṣun Ukẹ́rẹ́, leèyí, r’aiye kete!
Happy birthday and many happy returns the literary icon!
Korede Abdullah is a lawyer, writer and public affairs analyst
![[OPINION] The Abia Interim Report - Chidi Amuta](/media/k2/items/cache/c54096607bc8a7ef74a62827171732d5_XS.jpg)
Adapted and excerpted from a Keynote Address at the 2025 Abia Think Tank Annual Lecture at the Lagos Country Club, Ikeja, on 1st March.
B
orn in a dictatorship and nurtured under a fledgling but untidy democracy, Abia state has had a tortuous encounter with statehood. Its citizens have hardly found cause or space to celebrate their sovereign rights let alone savour the entitlements that make citizens in a democracy proud and confident.
On the contrary, Abia people have for over 24 years tumbled from one season of state capture to another. Democratic transitions have been for these people more of ritual migrations from one imperial rule to a feudal oligarchy, from one depressing season of exploitation to a more humiliating fanfare of deception in the name of governance. True, all manner of miscreants have come and gone, claiming electoral mandates that remain unverified. Extremely poor people have been frightened off the bad roads by authorized hooligans blaring sirens with accompanying goons with horsewhips and assault rifles.
However, in the more recent period since after the 2023 governorship election, Abia has witnessed an unusually positive frequency of media mention than in the over two and half decades of its previous existence. On balance, good news from Abia has far outweighed bad news.
We need to put in context what the state witnessed for a whole two and half decades prior to 2023. In the period between 1999 and 2023, Abia state was an unusual political experience among the states of the federation. While it was guided and governed by the Nigerian constitution, Abia operated more like a feudal enclave and unregulated extractive colony with peculiar characteristics.
•It was synonymous with the name of whatever governor was in power as if it was a private estate
•Its most enlightened and illustrious citizens were consciously excluded from its governance and mostly lived and earned their living outside the state. The state economy was so privatized that the commanding heights were controlled by the imperial governor, his family and cult of friends.
•Over the 24 year period under reference, the quantum of resources that accrued to the state from both the Federation Account and Internally Generated Revenue was not matched in any way by the volume or tempo of development in the state.
•Even in the small area of the South East, Abia developed more negatively than all the other states in the region.
• In the same period, an annual Google search of the economy of the state indicated that in each of those years, of the five richest people in Abia State on a year-on-year basis, three at the top of the list coincided with the most prominent political figures.
The inevitable conclusion therefore is that for whatever reason, Abia was essentially a feudal enclave for 24 years (1999 to 2023) and has only been struggling to free itself from feudal captivity since after the 2023 governorship election. Between 1999 and May 2023, the state does not qualify as a democratic sub sovereign part of the Nigerian federation. Politics and the democratic process were only deployed as instruments for state capture by different factions of the Abia political elite. Once captured, the state in each of these years was run more like either a private feudal enclave or an unregulated extractive colony.
As in a feudal dominion, Citizenship rights were in abeyance while citizen expectations of the good life were limited by the extent of the interests of the feudal oligarchy. The indices indicated a drastic deviation from the requirements of a democratic state. The rights of the citizens to fair treatment were grossly violated. The entitlement of the people to good government in terms of healthcare, education, security , infrastructure and emoluments could not be guaranteed.
The governor was more of an emperor ruling above criticism and reproach. In 24 years, no Abia governor was taken to court by a citizen on account of rights infringement or acts of misgovernance. Like feudal emperors, our successive governors were more of imperial feudal overlords.
The machinery of state was ‘privatized’ as the separation of powers was observed mostly in default. The legislature ran the errands of the executive governor and seemed to have a duty to pass legislations ‘for’ the governor routinely. The legislations that rolled out of the State House of Assembly were more of feudal decrees and imperial edicts than debated laws of a democratic assembly.
The judiciary had no independent voice as judges owed their appointments, promotions and general welfare to the benevolence of the imperial governor. Officials of the state judiciary were selected and hired on the basis of loyalty to the governor and the party cabal in power.
In the public service, corrupt officials kept their jobs for as long as they knew on whose behalf they were eroding the state. Another way of putting this is to say that state officials were agents licensed to commit acts of criminal malfeasance on behalf of the presiding emperor governor.
Quit routinely, the imperial governor set up and empowered an assortment of task forces and mobile courts to collect sundry revenues and levies in the name of the state but account to no institution of public accountability. Public accountability was mistaken for creative accountancy.
From available records, between 1999 and 2007, the Governor’s Office issued and signed off on newspaper full page advertisements of the state’s financial statement compiled and “audited” by the same Governor’s Office. In other words, the governor authorized expenditure, spent the money, ‘accounted’ for it, audited the expenses and informed the public accordingly that the audit had been certified!
Yet the same government had in its pay roll an Accountant General, an Auditor General and could easily have hired an external audit firm to look through its accounts. The regimes that followed were not so gracious. They rendered no accounts, had no public procurement routines that I am aware of nor bothered with the finer points of public accountability. They did what comes to thieves naturally: they kept silent on matters of financial accountability!
Rightly regarded, Abia in the years of feudal captivity could not be described as a feudal enclave, even one in desperate disrepair. It was not also an extractive colony. In a feudal estate, the manorial overlord cares about the state of the agricultural land, the welfare of the farm hands and the productivity of the feudal enterprise. Similarly, in an extractive colony, the extracting authority may have the minerals and produce as his primary target. But he also realizes that the magnitude of his loot is a function of the state of the colony.
Under the colonial dispensation in Nigeria, for instance, it was in the best interest of the colonial enterprise to run an efficient railway system to evacuate the produce, maintain schools for the colonized to get educated, keep them healthy through health centres and generally maintain law and order through courts that dispensed justice according to colonial law.
In the Abia state in the years under feudal capture, the governments failed as both a badly run feudal enclave and as a dysfunctional extractive colony. The state failed as a government. It failed as an organized criminal cartel. It failed its people, failed itself as an organized syndicate of enlightened thieves (“there is honour even among thieves”, it failed the nation and failed the concept of democratic sovereignty.
Therefore, the question that Abia needed to answer with the outcome of the 20223 governorship election was simple: would the state correct course and return to the path of responsible democratic governance or continue as a feudal enclave under the captivity of a political oligarchy.
The picture of the state on the eve of the governorship election in 2023 was sad and almost tragic. Abia was easily the most indebted state in the federation with a debt portfolio of over N189.9 billion. The then government that ratcheted up most of this debt inherited only a debt of about N35 billion from its predecessor.
On the eve of the election, Abia was the state with the longest period of default in the payment of the salaries of staff in the public sector especially education and health. Doctors and teachers were owed anywhere between 24 to 30 months in salary arrears. The state university ran consistently on upwards of an average of six months in arrears of salaries and allowances of staff. The state polytechnic at Aba was in default of salaries and allowances to the tune of over 30 months. The state polytechnic had virtually lost its accreditation. Unpaid academic and administrative staff supplemented their livelihood as Keke and Okada riders or petty traders in inconsequential merchandise.
Doctors in government health institutions went without salaries almost indefinitely. The sick no longer bothered to go to any of the state’s general hospitals or health centres knowing well that they were likely to come out feet first. Drug prescriptions are worthless since most pharmacies in state hospitals had a permanent sign on display: “OUT OF STOCK”.
The city of Aba was in decay. Drainage was absent. Sewage system was unheard of. Aba was literally an inhabited refuse dump. Mounds of refuse greeted the eyes at nearly every inch of the city which had a permanent stench of something dead. Most roads in the town were in desperate disrepair. Some people had forgotten when some of these were roads as many had become deep gullies and waterways. Adjoining the many dilapidated roads were one or two uncompleted flyovers that the state government had been building and commissioning in bits for the better part of the last couple of years.
The sorry state of Abia state then was inscribed boldly on the faces of most citizens. People were hungry, angry , poor, unkempt, aggressive and viciously frustrated. Hope and optimism were the most scarce commodities in Abia by May, 2023.
What the state needed urgently was not just a new occupant of whatever government house there was in Umuahia. What the state needed was a transformative leadership to rescue the state from feudal captivity and restore the social contract between the government and the people. The task was to make political power translate into the welfare of the people, and redefine the political space in terms of the real needs of real people .
Since the inception of the Otti administration, governance has been essentially about reestablishing trust, inspiring confidence and renewing hope in the state.
From reports of public response to the efforts of the Otti government so far, people were initially a bit hesitant to embrace the modest achievements for fear that excitement could end up in a return of the betrayal of past decades. Two and half decades of serial betrayal and habitual disappointment have frightened people from something called government. Worse still, the long period of bad experienced has deepened the distrust to the degree that when people began receiving their emoluments as and when due, they said it was “419” and did not quite believe it. When street lights came back on in Aba, people were frightened for fear it might be a bad dream or ill omen.
Alongside the confidence rebuilding process, the government has proceeded with modest efforts to managing the state’s economy better and to address the scandalous infrastructure decay. From the reports since the last year and half, there is reasonable progress.
We have read the pleasant stories about the inauguration of the Aba power project by Geometrics Ltd leading to a commendable level of power supply, a plus for a place that depends on constant power to operate its small to medium manufacturing establishments. Courageous urban renewal effort has proceeded with the clearing of refuse, reconstruction of some dilapidated roads.
In tandem, I understand that a series of micro credit and small business support programmes are being instituted to empower the people and reignite the latent entrepreneurial power of the state
I also understand that public sector workers like teachers and civil servants have begun receiving their emoluments regularly. So also have retirees and pensioners. The cries of anguish that used to emanate every month from relations in the villages have subsided and been replaced by good wishes and prayers that the good days should persist.
However, there is an urgent need for caution. The social contract is not just about roads, bridges, drainages and street lights. It is about restoring the democratic essence of the sovereign state. Democracy was never defined as a system of landscape decoration. While citizens in a truly democratic state expect efficient social services and infrastructure, they expect a sense of ownership of the state and the restoration of rights.
That reversal of direction and rescue from feudal oligarchy is the legacy that the political struggle ahead in the state is all about whether the feudal tradition will be allowed to return or not. The struggle ahead in Abia state is not just the retention of power by one clique or faction of the Abia political elite. It is not about which party retains the key of the uncompleted Government House in Umuahia.
The current administration will be missing the point if it limits its battle for political survival to the survival of the party in power. It is more. It is a protection of the fundamental rights of the people to own the government of their choice. It is the protection of the rights of people to receive regular salaries, to demand and get good healthcare, sensible education, reasonable infrastructure that works and the freedom to challenge the government if they feel that the affairs of the state are not going well.
Let there be no mistake about it. The feudal state in Abia served certain interests. It was about growing and sustaining an unproductive financial oligarchy in the name of politics. It was about continuing to grow a criminal tradition in government. That gang is still intent on returning to power. They will invoke all manner of crude methods and tools to return to power. Huge money, violence, blackmail, thuggery, judicial antagonism weaponisation of sectionalism in order to upturn the new order.
The current opposition that is building up in the state is an attempt to recapture the state and re-entrench the feudal order. At the partisan level, it is a battle for familiar partisan supremacy through alignments and alliances for electoral prevalence. But the battle for power and supremacy in Abia in the years ahead is a battle for the hearts and minds of the people of Abia.
Beyond rescuing Abia state from feudal captivity, the state needs to claim a position of leadership in the Nigerian federation. We have an unusual endowment as a people. Our entire populace is intrinsically entrepreneurial. We are an informal school of native capitalism. You do not need to teach the Abia man, woman or child how to become a trader, a provider of goods and services and how to grow wealth.
The challenge of the moment is to harness the natural potential of Aba into a regional trade and manufacturing potential. Abia needs to become a hub for made in Nigeria small to medium scale manufacturing. The position of the state on the north-south rail link and the intersections of federal highways from the South West to the Eastern heartland needs to become a logistical asset linking the state from the sea in Port Harcourt to the vast demand fields of the northern hinterland.
Above all, Education must remains the priority export of the state to the nation. But in today’s world, the emphasis must go beyond conventional classroom chalk and black board teaching and learning. Abia must aspire to lead the nation in the new digital learning. We must invest in manpower for tomorrow and leapfrog our education to prepare citizens for the new world of information technology and Artificial Intelligence. One strategy is to embark on continuous teacher education through in- service training every vacation. Ultimately, the average Abia school teacher at every level must by law hold a minimum of a university first degree. Illiterates cannot train the work force of the future. Those from other states who want to teach in the Abia schools system in the future must meet a higher certification requirement if we must lead the nation towards the future.
The beckoning challenge of the new ABIA is to leap from the dark ancestry of superstitious origins to the brilliant light of new modern beginnings. There is no need to wait. Taiwan did not wait. Singapore did not wait. Malaysia did not wait. Nor did South Korea or even Dubai. Rwanda is not losing a second either.