There is something they say about digging yourself into a hole. It usually takes more  time to claw your way back. That is, if you ever want to see light again. 

The Nigerian Communications Commission, NCC, did not intentionally dig itself into a hole. Some people, given the responsibility to curate the day-to-day operations of the regulatory authority, dug the system into a hole. The Commission has been trying to fight its way back ever since, although it will take a longer time because of the absence of a board.

I was recently informed that the regulator will institute the Telecom Identity Risk Management Platform, TIRMP, by the last quarter of this year, to streamline the activities of churned numbers in the industry. That may not seem much but it’s one of the several actions the regulator is taking to fight its way out of the abyss. I am pretty sure that, at the end, people will be happy that such a step was ever taken. In the meantime, let’s do a little flashback to prove that, also in the last quarter of last year, the Commission executed some actions to demonstrate a seriousness that was more positive than pretentious. I will state just two. 

One: Early last year, the regulator revised its telecommunications statistics to reflect Nigeria’s updated population estimates of 216,781,381, as projected by the Nigerian Population Commission, NPC, in 2022. The adjustment replaced the previously used 2017 population estimates of 190m. 

There was only going to be one sure outcome. The teledensity dropped from 115.63 per cent to 102.30 per cent as the subscriber base also plummeted to 154.6m. It was a bold decision that jolted the industry into reality, an action that could hardly be contemplated previously when it was needed most. 

Two: And this is connected to the foregoing. At the conclusion of the NIN-SIM regulation exercise, a much criticised programme,  jointly executed by the NCC and the National Identity Management Commission, NIMC, the number of lines on the mobile networks dropped to 154m, with one operator losing as much as 40m lines. The announcement was made in October. It caused a lot of discomfort and business reimagining. 

One would say that such an industry would have a lot of churned numbers. But it is much more than that. There are other reasons. At the dawn of the mobile industry, it was a thing of prestige for one subscriber to carry as many phones as the pouch can accommodate, those who wanted to enjoy the full expression of conspicuous consumption, although it was more of the limitations of the networks that were having a lot of headache in rolling out services after being jilted by a government that had promised so much. 

The story has changed. Growth has plateaued and the economy has not been any kinder. For over a decade now, there are so many people slipping into multi-dimensional poverty for whom telephony means very little. For these people, it is a matter of the stomach first, the art of the mastery of survival in challenging times, while for the rest of us who had luxuriated in class, the economy has levelled everybody. Without seeking economic lessons, a number of subscribers have resorted to using one phone. So, there are more reasons for churn numbers in the industry; which is why it is salutary that the regulator has taken a decision to sanitise their use. 

For more understanding of the churning process, the regulator explained that “when a phone number (MSISDN) has not carried out any Revenue Generating Event, RGE – outgoing or incoming calls or SMS, charged USSD sessions, data use, or any other activity on the line that generates income for the operator – for over 180 days, the MSISDN is deemed as inactive. If this inactivity continues for another 180 days, that is a total of 360 days, the line becomes eligible for churning, and recycling”.

Literally, the number has gone into a recycling bin where it can be retrieved by the operator and reassigned to a new subscriber, according to the QoS Regulation and Business Rules 2024.

But that’s just the beginning of a new journey as the dangers are embedded in the old number which could be harmful to the previous owner or be put to some unsavoury use by the new owner.

According to the regulator, the recycling of lines presents challenges, particularly when the previous owners of the reassigned numbers still have those numbers linked to services they used before the numbers were recycled. It presents issues of security and integrity of phone number ownership. 

This is the reason the TIRMP is being put in place, to serve as some kind of clearing house for those numbers, help maintain their integrity and prevent innocent phone users from being harmed. 

An NCC source gave further understanding. Any time a number is recycled, sensitive details of the previous user, like bank details, including balances, fintech details and even health, could still be in the number that can be manipulated by unscrupulous individuals. The Commission, according to the source, is therefore working with all the stakeholders, including the security agencies, the Central Bank, banks, fintechs and telecoms service  providers, to ensure that every churned number will go to the platform which will automatically notify all the stakeholders. Is that what they call flagging?

The NCC is only acting within its regulatory powers to ensure that industry phone users are protected. For instance, in  the UK, Ofcom, the communications regulator, is responsible for overseeing the recycling of mobile phone numbers.

In the UK, an MNO is allowed to deactivate an unused number, which is given a dormancy period of between 30 to 90 days, depending upon the carrier, before the number is reassigned. Although the operator is allowed to reset or erase data linked to the number, it is generally accepted that traces of its history can still be present, especially with online services that use SMS-based two-factor authentication. 

Numbers are a limited resource which are strictly managed by the regulator and assigned to the operator. As it is in Nigeria, so it is in the UK where Ofcom ensures the reassignment of numbers by operators after the dormancy period due to the limited pool of available numbers. 

But the Federation of Communications Services, FCS, of the UK has published procedures for mobile phone recycling that aims to discourage fraudulent activities and provide a clear defence against charges of handling of goods. A feature of such procedures is to ensure “that operators will place blocks on the records of devices for a wider variety of reasons.”

A clear point here, however, is to ensure that subscribers are preserved and that operators do the right thing by going through the platform which the regulator is putting in place. It portends a win-win for all stakeholders, including the subscribers.

“It will reduce fraud risks and improve our digital and financial services by enabling service providers to proactively detect and act, particularly to high-risk numbers, while updating customer KYC details where applicable,” the regulator said. 

It is a good step in the right direction to checkmate the little demons that usually coalesce into giant forces to trouble the wider ecosystem. Much like the journey of a thousand miles beginning with one step. The challenge is to take the step at all, and that’s what the NCC has done. 

It’s 65 years of Nigeria’s independence and 32 years after the watershed and epochal June 12 presidential election. The landmark election was won by Bashorun MKO Abiola, who was also the Aare-Ona-Kakanfo of Yorubaland. Unfortunately, that election was annulled by the military junta of Ibrahim Babangida. Tomorrow, June 12, has been declared Democracy Day in Nigeria and will be observed as a public holiday. The winner of that election has been posthumously conferred with the highest title of Grand Commander of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. For the benefit of Millennials and Genzs, who were not born at that time, the events leading to and after that election are worth recalling the same way I did on this page on June 12, 2024.

On August 27, 1985, General Ibrahim Babangida overthrew the Head of State, General Muhammadu Buhari. Instead of answering Head of State, he decided to call himself Military President, which is an aberration. Soon after seizing power, he inaugurated a Dr Samuel Cookey-led 17-member Nigerian Political Bureau on January 13, 1986. According to Wikipedia, the bureau was set up to conduct a national debate on the political future of Nigeria and was charged, among other things, to “review Nigeria’s political history and identify the basic problems which have led to our failure in the past and suggest ways of resolving and coping with these problems”.

He thereafter released an elongated transition to a civil rule timetable.  Initially, the transition was supposed to end in October 1990, but IBB, as Babangida was fondly called, shifted it to 1993. He banned old politicians and called for a new breed. He established the Centre for Democratic Studies and made Prof. Omo Omoruyi the pioneer chairman. The centre was to train politicians in a democratic ethos. He set up the National Electoral Commission, headed by Prof. Humphrey Nwosu. IBB established a two-party system for Nigeria. He formed the National Republican Convention and the Social Democratic Party. The NRC elected Chief Tom Ikimi as its national chairman, while the SDP elected Chief Tony Anineh as its national chairman. Both chairmen are from Edo State. Babangida did not just establish the political parties; he built party secretariats for them across the country and provided grants to run the parties.

Elections for local governments, state Houses of Assembly and governorship positions were held at different times between 1991 and 1992. The transition was to end with the presidential election on June 12, 1993. However, events leading up to that day were ominous. A group called the Association for Better Nigeria, led by Abimbola Davies with Chief Arthur Nzeribe as a promoter, went to court to stop the election from holding.  On June 10, 1993, a Federal Capital Territory High Court Judge, Justice Bassey Ikpeme, ordered NEC not to conduct the June 12, 1993 election based on the prayers of Nzeribe. However, the election was held as there was already a decree which resulted in the ouster of any court ruling stopping the poll.

There were some things which are novel in the June 12, 1993 poll.  NEC used what it termed Option A4 voting technique (open ballot system, where members in a party primary queued behind the aspirants or their pictures). This was the method adopted by NEC for the presidential primaries of the two political parties. The election itself was, however, conducted with ballot papers in what was termed the modified open ballot system.

In a transcribed speech of IBB annulling the election, which was published by Daily Post on June 12, 2017, it stated inter alia, “Apart from the tremendous negative use of money during the party primaries and presidential election, there were moral issues which were also overlooked by the Defence and National Security Council. There were cases of documented and confirmed conflict of interest between the government and both presidential candidates, which would compromise their positions and responsibilities were they to become president….It is true that the presidential election was generally seen to be free, fair and peaceful. However, there was a huge array of electoral malpractices virtually in all the states of the federation before the actual voting began. There were authenticated reports of electoral malpractices against party agents, officials of NEC and also some members of the electorate. If all of these were clear violations of the electoral law, there were proofs of manipulations through offer and acceptance of money and other forms of inducement against officials of NEC and members of the electorate.”

I was an undergraduate student at the University of Lagos when the June 12, 1993 election was held and subsequently annulled. I participated in the civil protests to make the military junta rescind that decision. In fact, I wrote to air my view on   OGBC FM Mailbag 2084, which was a popular programme on the Ogun State Broadcasting Corporation. The programme was then anchored by Busayo Olaifa, Babakura Abajato (he later became the Commissioner for Information in Borno State), Toun Sogbesan and the like. It used to be held at 6pm on Friday. Little wonder the programme was rested after the June 12 debacle.

The agitation to disannul the June 12 election led to the killing and maiming of many protesters. Indeed, most, if not all tertiary institutions in the six South-West states of Lagos, Ogun, Oyo, Ekiti, Osun and Ondo were shut down indefinitely. Workers under the Nigeria Labour Congress also embarked on an indefinite strike. Some newspapers, including The PUNCH and broadcast stations, were proscribed.

Some journalists were arrested and clamped into detention without trial, while others had to go into exile. The National Democratic Coalition, popularly called NADECO, was formed, and the incumbent President Bola Tinubu was a prominent member. Pro-democracy activists floated Radio Kudirat. The struggle eventually consumed the winner of the election, Chief MKO Abiola, who died in detention after he was arrested for declaring himself president at Epetedo in Lagos. His wife, Kudirat Abiola, was assassinated. Another person martyred by the June 12 struggle was Pa. Alfred Rewane.

This year marks the 32nd anniversary of the June 12, 1993 election. How have we fared in our democratic journey? Unfortunately, our electoral process seems not to be throwing up credible leaders due to the manipulative tendencies of the political class. Money and violence are the twin evils beleaguering our elections now. To contest elections in Nigeria, you must have a war chest (money in millions and billions). If you don’t have it, you either sell off your property to raise the gargantuan amount needed or look for a godfather to bankroll your political aspiration. Many of the godfathers are shylocks who will squeeze you dry. (If in doubt, ask former Governor of Anambra State, Dr Chris Ngige).

Because of the huge financial outlay needed to contest elections, contestants, therefore, don’t want to take chances and do not want to see politics as a sport. They go for broke. They want to win at all costs. Failure is not an option. Thus, they induce voters and unleash violence on the supporters of their opponents. Indeed, assassinating political opponents is a game for them. That was what happened in Enugu State ahead of the February 25, 2023 national elections when unknown gunmen killed the Labour Party senatorial candidate for Enugu East District, Oyibo Chukwu, alongside five supporters who were inside his vehicle. The killing took place three days before the senatorial election.

June 12, 1993, was symbolic because it was deemed the freest and fairest poll, though not without flaws. I beseech the Nigerian political elite to allow for credible elections which will see not only moneybags but people of ideas and integrity being voted into political offices. The politics of a winner-takes-all, zero-sum game is dangerous and counterproductive. It’s why elections have become a mere routine without delivering the dividends of democracy or good governance.

President Bola Tinubu has flown with one wing of the naira-for-petroleum transaction bird by asking the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited to sell petroleum to local refineries, including Dangote Refinery, in naira. This may lead to the renaming of Nigeria’s currency as the petro-naira.

Of course, the deal is not properly implemented. Some saboteurs within the NNPCL and its ecosystem, who are working in the interest of foreign paymasters, have made sure that it will not be properly implemented so that the President will be forced to abandon it.

Even with the sabotage, Nigerians cannot deny the advantages of the policy as they have recently witnessed regular announcements of steady reductions in the price of petrol by Dangote Refinery, which is compelling NNPCL to reduce the price of its (albeit) imported petrol.

The other wing of the naira-for-petroleum deal, which is the real McCoy, is the sale of petroleum to foreign buyers who will be expected to first buy naira from the Central Bank of Nigeria, through approved protocols, and then use the acquired naira to buy petroleum from NNPCL.

By this novel payment protocol, which North American and West European economic interests will fight with weapons, including insurrection, Nigeria will still receive the convertible currencies, and the naira will also return to the Nigerian financial system.

So, Nigeria will still have the convertible currency in its foreign reserves, which can always be used to pay Nigeria’s foreign obligations and pay for goods imported by citizens and corporate organisations. You could say that Nigeria will be able to eat its cake and have it.

Soon after he was sworn in for his second term as President, Donald Trump openly threatened 100 per cent import tariffs if BRICS nations—Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and five other associate countries—replace the US dollar with any other currency as the reserve currency.

His words: “We are going to require a commitment from these seemingly hostile countries that they will neither create a new BRICS currency, nor back any other currency to replace the mighty US dollar, or they will face 100 per cent tariffs.”

A video of an unidentified Kenyan that is making the rounds on the internet explains that the current international economic and financial architecture is made to serve the interests of the probably 50 or so nations that set it up. That is not surprising.

For sure, former colonial countries that were not part of the deliberations of the metropolitan powers should not expect the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to serve their interests.

But the best way to go is for Nigeria to find a way to join BRICS as a full member, and not as an associate so that the acronym will change to BRINCS, as some had speculated in the past before some of Nigeria’s previous presidents chickened out.

What are the advantages of this move? The metropolitan economies, including Uncle Sam, will think very deeply before taking any steps against the economy of BRINCS. For their support for Ukraine in the war against Russia, Germany and Italy were compelled to pay for Russian gas with the Russian ruble.

The economies of the BRINCS nations should be on the north side of 40 per cent of the global economy, and their population, more than 55 per cent of the world’s population, cannot be disregarded by the International Monopoly Capital that is perennially looking for investment markets.

It will be a good win for Nigeria if the President can find the courage to implement this policy. But by far, its most important advantage is that as demand for the naira increases, the naira will gain strength. As every Economics 101 university student knows, the law of demand and supply promises to raise the price of a commodity when there is an increased demand for it.

Another advantage, albeit in the long term, can be achieved if the Minister for Industries, Trade and Investments joins “hardknocks” corporate players from the bricks-and-mortar sector of the economy with the intellectual PhDs economic advisers to devise a template to revitalise the comatose manufacturing factories of Nigeria.

The expected increase in local production of consumer goods will eliminate, or significantly reduce, the need for Nigerians to import such consumer goods and the need to procure foreign currencies to pay for the imports.

This reduction on foreign convertible needs will significantly reduce the pressure on the naira and make it even stronger. In any case, the current financial and payment structures of the world are not written in concrete. They were devised to serve the interests of the Western metropolitan economies.

If this structural pressure is removed, the prices of consumer goods will crash and the high cost of living will drastically fall, to the advantage of poor Nigerian citizens who are still struggling daily with the negative impacts of the removal of subsidy from petrol, electricity and the naira.

Also, if the manufacturing firms and the agricultural farms can be more productive, they will be able to pay higher tax revenues to the government and reduce Nigeria’s dependence on foreign loans and the sale of petroleum to finance its annual budgets.

The President, who has belled the cat by ordering the sale of petroleum by NNPCL to local refineries in naira, should go the whole hog and sell the commodity to foreign buyers for naira. He must seize the moment in the interest of Nigeria’s economy.

After all, American President Trump is already disrupting old landmarks of given economic assumptions and payment protocols of the world. Every country should be able to play the game of disruption. Who dares, wins, according to an old saw.

If the international monopoly capital responds with venom, as is to be expected, Nigeria should respond with bolder steps. You would have observed that when President Trump imposed a 145 per cent tariff on Chinese imports, China retaliated with a 125 per cent tariff on American goods.

Soon after, both nations, knowing that they need each other, were compelled to tone down their rhetoric and issue a joint statement declaring a 90-day suspension of the tariff war, to further explore a more sanguine approach to resolving their trade differences.

The suspension of hitherto uncharitable words against each other shows a degree of mutual respect and recognition of the strength of each other’s economy. Everyone knows that the two economies are intertwined, even if they do not openly acknowledge it.

Let no one lose sight of the fact that China Inc. and America’s Wall Street are opposite sides of the same coin, economic Siamese twins that have been in business even before the days of the anti-imperialist and anti-Christian Boxer Revolution in China between 1899 and 1901.

If these economic policy suggestions are diligently followed, Nigeria should have a steady inflow of convertible currencies, strengthen the naira, drive higher revenue into the government’s exchequer, reduce debts and make more consumer items available to Nigerians—in the medium to long-term.

Though Uncle Tom economic experts of Nigeria will argue vehemently for the given economic theories that serve the interest of the West only, President Tinubu and his economic team should look beyond them and do everything necessary to right the unilaterally given economic wrongs done by the West.

As it struggles with the consequences of its poor handling of the rash of military coups in the West African region, the leadership of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) appears to have run out of ideas and creativity in search of an effective solution.

By their decision to use military force to restore constitutional order in Niger following the army takeover of government in that country on 26 July 2023, and the sweeping sanctions imposed on coup plotters in Mali, Guinea, Burkina Faso and Niger, including travel and flight bans, ECOWAS leaders should have known that they were on slippery grounds.

In its 50 years of existence, the regional bloc is better known for acquitting itself credibly in conflict prevention, management, and resolution, especially ending the civil wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone and effectively restoring constitutional order in member States after military coups.

While Article 45 of the Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance 2001 permits the Mediation and Security Council to apply measures including sanctions in the event of an unconstitutional change of government, the Authority of Heads of State and Government had always maintained a principled stance in deploying a combination of tools/strategies - diplomacy and tough decisions, where necessary, in tackling conflicts.

Article 45.1 states: “In the event that democracy is abruptly brought to an end by any means or where there is massive violation of Human Rights in a member State, ECOWAS may impose sanctions on the State concerned.” 

45.2. explains: “The sanctions which shall be decided by the Authority may take the following forms, in increasing order of severity:

• Refusal to support the candidates presented by the member State concerned for elective posts in international organisations

• Refusal to organise ECOWAS meetings in the Member State concerned

• Suspension of the member State concerned from all ECOWAS decision-making bodies. During the period of the suspension, the member State concerned shall be obliged to pay its dues for the period.

45.3. During the period of suspension, ECOWAS shall continue to monitor, encourage and support the efforts being made by the suspended member State to return to normalcy and constitutional order.

45.4. On the recommendation of the Mediation and Security Council, a decision may be taken at the appropriate time to proceed as stipulated in Article 45 of the Protocol Relating to the Mechanism for Conflict Prevention, Management, Resolution, Peace-Keeping and Security 1999.

On Restoration of Political Authority, this Article stipulates: “In situations where the authority of government is absent or has been seriously eroded, ECOWAS shall support processes towards the restoration of political authority. Such support may include the preparation, organisation, monitoring and management of the electoral process, with the cooperation of relevant regional and international organisations. The restoration of political authority shall be undertaken at the same time as the development of respect for human rights, enhancement of the rule of law and the judiciary.”

It should be noted that ECOWAS’ military interventions in Liberia and Sierra Leone, through its Ceasefire Monitoring Group, ECOMOG, in the 1990s, were under different circumstances and at the behest of the beleaguered governments. Also, in 2016/2017, the deployment of Nigerian air assets and the preparation by Senegalese troops to march on the Gambia only followed the uncompromising position of then-President Yahya Jammeh, who rejected ECOWAS’ mediation, claiming victory in the December 2016 election, which he lost. In the end, Jammeh was exiled to Equatorial Guinea without any military confrontations.

Also, under the 1999 and 2001 Protocols, there are provisions for the deployment of good office missions, including military chiefs, Council of the Wise/Elders or appointment of a Chief Mediator. But ECOWAS leaders did not exhaust these non-kinetic alternatives before going for an aborted military option in Niger. Also, the imposition of travel and flight bans effectively foreclosed the possibility of interactions or negotiations with the coup leaders.

Similarly, Nigeria’s cut of electricity supply to Niger did not derive from any ECOWAS instruments.

Article 52 of the 1999 Protocol states that: “In accordance with Chapters VII and VIII of the United Nations Charter, ECOWAS shall inform the United Nations of any military intervention undertaken in pursuit of the objectives of this Mechanism,” but this was not the case on Niger.

The embarrassment from an unprecedented and unpopular decision for kinetic option in Niger, which fell through, has forced ECOWAS leaders into an uncomfortable situation, and their bending over backwards to placate the junta leaders - a strategy fraught with potential uncertainties and unsavoury consequences.

Most critically, the implementation of some decisions taken by the ECOWAS Council of Ministers at its extraordinary meeting in Accra, Ghana 22-23 May 2025, on the contingency arrangements for the departure of Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger (known as the Alliance of Sahel States, AES, could damage the integrity, unity and cohesion of the regional bloc irreparably, and hasten its further disintegration.

Article 91 of the ECOWAS Revised Treaty 1993 is unambiguous on the withdrawal of any member state from ECOWAS. Article 91.1 states clearly: “Any member State wishing to withdraw from the Community shall give to the Executive Secretary (President of the Commission) one year's notice in writing… At the expiration of this period, if such notice is not withdrawn, such a State shall cease to be a member of the Community.

91.2. During the period of one year… such a member State shall continue to comply with the provisions of this Treaty and shall remain bound to discharge its obligations under this Treaty.”

ECOWAS rules do not provide for “group withdrawal,” and following the precedent with Mauritania's withdrawal in 2000, there was no need for the ECOWAS Council of Ministers to reinvent the wheel, the way it did in Accra.

The junta leaders announced their countries’ withdrawal from ECOWAS “with immediate effect” in January 2024.

However, under the 1993 treaty, that withdrawal only became effective by January 2025, and acting on humanitarian grounds, ECOWAS granted its staff from the AES countries until September 2025 to leave with an additional three months’ pay until December 2025.

Yet, the Council at its Accra meeting decided to: 

a. ”adopt a two-phase disengagement process for the affected staff. The first phase will involve staff in Senior Professional positions… and all G-Staff from the three countries that are working at ECOWAS institutions to be relocated and will take effect at the end of September, based on termination letters already sent to the staff concerned. The (ECOWAS), Commission is given until the end of December 2025 to recruit staff to fill the resulting vacant positions. The second phase will involve P4 Staff and below and will be carried out on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific circumstances of the staff concerned, including age and the priority needs of the institutions.”

“On regional market and economic integration, the Council underscored that Free Movement and Economic matters are at the core of regional integration and deserve particular attention in discussing separation modalities with the exiting countries.

In a needless move to accommodate the AES countries, “(The) Council noted the existence of various legal frameworks which are the foundation of regional economic integration and directly affect Community citizens… stressed the need to ensure a collective approach to negotiations as a regional bloc based on existing regional instruments such as the Protocol on free movement of persons, the ECOWAS Trade Liberalisation Scheme and the Common External Tariff.”

Additionally, while it “reiterates the clarity, in the relevant provisions of the ECOWAS staff Regulations, that only nationals of ECOWAS member States are eligible for employment as staff members,” the Council still called for a “Review of the Staff Regulations to reflect current circumstances.”

The Council further authorised the ECOWAS Bank for Investment and Development (EBID), ”to continue with its commitments under ongoing projects in Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger. Still, the Council decided that EBID disengage with staff from the three Countries.”

To many analysts, these concessions are not only too many, but unwarranted and may come back to haunt ECOWAS and its aspirations for regional integration. The junta leaders have been unrepentant in denouncing ECOWAS and all that it stands for while portraying themselves as populist power grabbers determined to perpetuate themselves in the saddle.

ECOWAS should assert itself as a rule-based organisation. However, its dilemma is that for the past 10 to 12 years, the bloc has ignored or tolerated “constitutional and electoral coups, and human rights violations” by some of its leaders in blatant breach of its own rules. There are also some fifth columnists within, working against ECOWAS.

The Constitutional Convergence Principles under Article 1 of the 2001 Protocol stress among others:

- Separation of powers by the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary.

- Empowerment and strengthening of parliaments and guarantee of parliamentary immunity.

-  Independence of the Judiciary.

- Every accession to power must be made through free, fair and transparent elections.

-  Zero tolerance for power obtained or maintained by unconstitutional means, and,

- Popular participation in decision-making, strict adherence to democratic principles and decentralisation of power at all levels of governance.

Yet, in their inordinate quest to obtain or retain power at all costs, some ECOWAS leaders have trampled on the regional principles, while the Authority of Heads of State has rendered dormant or ineffectual the ECOWAS Commission and its management, which are supposed to coordinate the programmes and activities of the regional institutions.

As ECOWAS celebrates the 50th anniversary of its formation through the 28th May 1975 Treaty of Lagos, its drastic problems require drastic solutions.

For a start, the ECOWAS Commission should undertake an urgent and transparent recruitment exercise to fill any vacant positions from the teeming army of qualified professionals among the 400 million community citizens and release staff from countries whose leaders despise the regional bloc.

Since the proud junta leaders believe that their landlocked poor countries are self-sufficient, ECOWAS should not reward their arrogance.

To regain its past glory, navigate emerging threats and bequeath an enduring legacy to the next generations, ECOWAS leaders at national and regional levels must change tact and lead by example with vision and dynamism, beginning with effective management of the lingering threats in member States such as Togo, Guinea Bissau, Sierra Leone, The Gambia and Cote d’Ivoire. 

Paul Ejime is a Media/Communications Specialist and Global Affairs Analyst