The progressive signature of Pope Francis on the Vatican was unmistakable from the beginning of his papacy. Since the Catholic pontiff died on Easter Monday the remarkable positions taken by the Bishop of Rome on many socio-economic and political issues have been amply acknowledged in tributes from diverse quarters. The Pope stood for world peace. He preached compassion. He opposed the widening inequality and social injustice which define the world. He cautioned against irresponsibility in matters of climate change. He appointed women to positions of responsibility in the Vatican. He condemned the suffering of women and children as Israel bombed the occupied territory of Gaza just as he rejected anti-Semitism.  With his immense moral authority, the Pope took many other steps in solidarity with the poor and the weak. Expectedly, the difference that Pope Francis was making attracted the attention of observers globally.

It could be a fitting farewell to Pope Francis to reproduce a tribute that this reporter paid to the pontiff on this page on Christmas Day 2013. It was entitled “Pope Francis, Truly of the People.”

Below is the piece:    

“As Pope Francis celebrates his first Christmas today in the Vatican as the leader of Catholics all over the world, it may be apposite to draw attention to the emerging character of his papacy.

“At least one discernible trait in the doctrinal development taking place in the Vatican is quite relevant to the message of Christmas: Pope Francis has reinvigorated the message of compassion which is at the heart of Christianity and other great religions.

“In other words, it is important to spare a thought about the social relevance of evangelism. It is on this point that Pope Francis is a leader to watch.

“Take a sample.

“On his twitter page last Thursday, the Pope said: ‘Let us pray that God grant us the grace of knowing a world where no one dies of hunger’.

“Now that is a great departure from the sort of evangelism that blames the victims of hunger; some other leaders of faith would say the hungry man is suffering from the consequence of his sins. Doubtless, the pontiff is carrying out a reform of the message issuing from the church. Some would even call what is taking place a revolution of sorts. There is no way you could be honestly critical of the world in which millions of human beings live in abject poverty without being critical of the dominant ideology of the age. It is such a case that mass poverty is what global capitalism has got to show for its so-called ideological triumph in the cold war. “Hence, Pope Francis has been unequivocal in his criticism of the recklessness of neo-liberal capitalism, which has wreaked havoc in the economies of even the developed capitalist societies. He has condemned the growing inequality in the global economic system.  He has never assumed the posture of a technical expert; he has only demonstrated a social conscience in his faith. This is the lesson other religious leaders should learn from the Pope. The Pope has been reported as posing this sobering question: ‘How can it be that it is not a news item when an elderly homeless person dies of exposure, but it is news when the stock market loses two points?’ It is a question that those who glibly proclaim the end of ideology should sometimes ponder.

“On another occasion, he said: ‘People continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth … will bring about greater justice in the world. This opinion expresses a naive trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power.’ The matter is put more explicitly when the Pope argues as follows: ‘As long as the problems of the poor are not resolved by rejecting the absolute autonomy of markets … no solution will be found for the world’s problems or, for that matter, to any problems.

“By the way, these random quotations from the statements that the Pope has made in the last few months are merely to illustrate the clarity of purpose in his message. More significantly, the fact that these statements are made by the Pope makes them to be weighty in global terms. After all, there was a Pope who was reputed to be a member of the ideological tripod that facilitated the ‘collapse of communism’. This is a frequent reference to the ideological roles of former American President Ronald Reagan, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul in the days of the cold war. Similarly, the message of Pope Francis is resonating today in liberal and conservative quarters. However, unlike Pope John Paul, Pope Francis does not appear destined to be a hero of the Right. Members of the Tea Party in the United States already see something red about the Pope, which the rest of the world is, perhaps, not seeing yet.

“Little surprise that those who are cocooned in the extreme right corner of the ideological spectrum are quick to dub the Pope a ‘Marxist’ for his message of compassion for the poor in a Christ-like manner.  Interestingly, the Pope has defended himself unambiguously against the charges of ‘Marxism’. He said: ‘Marxist ideology is wrong. But in my life I have met a lot of Marxists who are good people, so I do not feel offended… That does not mean being a Marxist.’ It is also instructive that as an Argentine, the Pope has lived under the regime of neo-liberal orthodoxy in economic management with its socially destructive consequences.

“He is no stranger to the effects of global capitalism on the quality of life of the poor. Yet he is no liberation theologian. If anything, he is on record to have been critical of the leftist liberation theologians in Latin America in those days.

“Pope Francis is only reminding the Church of the primary question of compassion in its origins; this is a question that market forces do not yet have an answer. You don’t have to be a communist to appreciate this fact about humanity. All that is needed is to be socially sensitive to the widening inequality in the world today. This is the point that the conservative segment of the Pope’s audience should always bear in mind, as they are wont to assail him with ideological criticisms. It is cheery news that not a few observers across the ideological spectrum are   watching the doctrinal direction in the Vatican with keen interest.

“The TIME Magazine seems to capture the essence of the new direction of the Pope when it declared him ‘Person of the Year’ last week for ‘pulling the papacy out of the palace and into the streets, for committing the world’s largest church to confronting its deepest needs and for balancing judgment with mercy…’ Besides, he has made a forceful case for a ‘greater presence’ of women in the church. There is a lot of truth in the observation which the magazine puts like this: ‘These days it is bracing to hear a leader say anything that annoys anyone. Now liberals and conservatives alike face a choice as they listen to a new voice of conscience: Which matters more, that this charismatic leader is saying things they think need to be said or that he is also saying things they’d rather not hear?’

“It is refreshing to know that the message from the Vatican is not only about abortion and homosexuals. While he maintains the fundamental views of the church on these largely social and biological issues, he is nudging the church away from getting fixated on the issues. On homosexuality, he once asked: ‘who am I to judge?’  Now, this is far from being rhetorical. It is a possible call for a rethink.

“What is, however, not in dispute is that poverty and inequality are doing a greater havoc to humanity. In words and action, the Pope is reminding the world of this material reality.

“The Pope exudes humility and prefers a simple life. Some other men of God do not see the contradiction between their lives of opulence (sometimes bordering on obscenity) and the poverty of the majority in the congregation. By rejecting the burgeoning inequality in the world today and making compassion a focus of evangelism, Pope Francis truly belongs to the people.”

Yes, the foregoing was just a humble observation of Pope Francis nine months after his papacy began. From the tributes now being paid across the globe to his memory since he died two days ago, the beautiful story of Pope Francis has been that of “morning shows the day.” Some of the great things being said today about Pope Francis were already manifest 12 years ago when he became the head of the Catholic Church.

He held on to his faith to the last minute.

May the compassion, justice and peace about which Pope Francis consistently preached to the world come to pass.

In a time when most religious homilies have been reduced to performative sermons void of national relevance, Bishop Matthew Hassan Kukah of the Catholic Diocese of Sokoto continues to remind Nigerians that the pulpit can still be a place of truth, courage, and accountability. His 2025 Easter Message, delivered during the Holy Saturday Service, is not just a homily, it is a clarion call that holds a mirror up to the Nigerian state and its leadership. In a country plagued by hypocrisy and muffled truths, Bishop Kukah’s sermon is, indeed, worth digesting and ruminating over.

His message, rich in metaphor and grounded in the harsh realities of Nigeria, forces us to reckon with the nation’s spiritual and socio-political condition. Using the cross as a metaphor, Kukah paints a grim yet honest portrait of a country bleeding from every corner, crippled by insecurity, hunger, and poor governance. He doesn’t mince words, and in doing so, he does what many in positions of influence fear: he speaks truth to power.

Kukah opens his homily by drawing a parallel between the crucifixion of Christ and the suffering of Nigerians. He refers to the nation’s current situation as being akin to dangling on a cross, innocent, tortured, and abandoned. “Mr. President, Nigeria is reaching a breaking point. The nation is gradually becoming a huge national morgue,” he warns.

This metaphor is not poetic exaggeration, it is brutally accurate. From Sokoto to Enugu, Maiduguri to Lagos, families wake up unsure of whether they or their loved ones will fall victim to the day’s dose of savagery. Kidnappings, killings, and general insecurity have become so normalized that the announcement of tragedies barely elicits shock anymore. Nigeria, Kukah rightly notes, is hanging on a cross constructed by decades of political recklessness, but now, the nails are being driven deeper by a government that seems increasingly detached from the agony below.

One of the boldest elements of the homily is Kukah’s direct address to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu. “Mr. President, we all admit that you neither erected this cross nor did you effect our collective crucifixion,” he says, acknowledging that Tinubu inherited a mess. But that is where the understanding ends. The bishop swiftly pivots to reality: Nigerians are tired of hanging on this cross.

Kukah demands action, not explanations, not excuses. His tone is firm but not disrespectful, clear but not confrontational. In a country where sycophancy has become a norm among many religious leaders, his audacity to call on the President to “bring us down from this cross” is not only refreshing but necessary.

Kukah does not dwell only on physical suffering. He expands the discussion to the moral and psychological torment of Nigerians. He highlights the culture of cynicism, hopelessness, and loss of faith in leadership. The bishop reminds Christians, however, that Easter is fundamentally a season of hope, hope that defies logic and endures beyond pain.

This is a critical spiritual and philosophical insight. Nigerians have endured so much pain that many no longer expect improvement, they merely hope to survive. And this is dangerous. A nation that no longer expects progress that no longer believes in its future is on a fast track to implosion. Kukah is essentially saying: reigniting hope is not just spiritual, it is political. It must be backed by tangible action.

In what could be described as one of the most piercing portions of the homily, Kukah calls out the futility of palliative-driven policies. He rightly points out that “mere palliative distribution diminishes the dignity of citizens.” Nigeria has become a nation where government handouts are presented as policy achievements, and Kukah is having none of it.

He presses the President to make food security a fundamental right, not a seasonal handout. His challenge goes beyond hunger. It speaks to the heart of a broken governance system, one that has mastered the art of temporary relief but fails at sustainable solutions.

Kukah’s homily takes a darker turn when he reminds Nigerians that some of today’s bandits were once political tools. “Some of our public officers confessed that they brought our current killers into our country as a strategy for upstaging the government of the day.” This is a chilling revelation, and one that indicts the political class across board. It lays bare the reality that Nigeria’s insecurity is not an accident, it is, in part, a consequence of calculated greed and a hunger for power.

Now, these political tools have mutated into monsters. They no longer take orders, they issue them. Kukah warns that Nigeria’s very foundation is under threat from these “ravenous predators.” If these threats are not dismantled immediately, Nigeria risks becoming a failed state in both function and soul.

Kukah ends his message with a dire warning: that government inaction is beginning to look suspicious. He questions whether the persistence of insecurity is due to incompetence or whether those in power are benefiting from the chaos. “Are Nigerians lambs being sacrificed to an unknown god?” he asks. That’s not just a rhetorical question; it’s a haunting accusation.

This is perhaps the most damning part of the homily. It questions the very moral fiber of the nation’s leadership. Is the state merely overwhelmed, or is it compromised? Are our leaders simply helpless, or are they profiting from our helplessness?

Even as Kukah critiques and challenges the nation’s leaders, he does not lose sight of the essence of Easter. He reminds Christians that Christ’s resurrection is the ultimate emblem of hope. This is not a message of despair, it is a call to action, a spiritual charge to believe again, act again, and reclaim our country.

Kukah’s sermon is what a prophetic message should be: bold, honest, faith-filled, and politically aware. It is a message that should make leaders uncomfortable and citizens reflective. It is a sermon that forces us to think, not just about what is, but about what ought to be.

In a country starved of sincerity, Bishop Kukah’s 2025 Easter message serves as both mirror and map. It reflects the nation’s failings with unapologetic clarity, and at the same time, offers a roadmap for renewal. This is no ordinary sermon, it is a national document of conscience.

Nigeria needs more leaders like Kukah, who are not afraid to tell uncomfortable.

Rivers State, one of Nigeria’s most strategically important states politically and economically, has lately become a theatre of absurdity, where the rules of democratic governance have been replaced with the treacherous tactics of a chessboard. The unfolding drama, characterized by betrayals, power tussles, underhanded moves, and calculated silence, raises a pertinent question: Who is really playing Rivers State like a political chessboard to satisfy his selfish ambition?

From the outside, it may look like a mere clash between Governor Siminalayi Fubara and his predecessor, Nyesom Wike, now the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). But look deeper and you will see a more sinister power play, one where the state is being treated like a pawn in a much larger, more dangerous game.

Rivers State was not always like this. Known for its rich oil resources and vibrant people, the state used to stand as a symbol of strength in the Niger Delta. However, in recent years, it has become increasingly evident that political godfatherism has entrenched itself in the corridors of power. At the center of this debacle is the unresolved tension between Wike and Fubara, an embarrassing soap opera that has eroded the state’s dignity.

Governor Fubara was supposedly Wike’s protégé. He emerged as the governorship candidate under controversial circumstances, allegedly handpicked by Wike himself to serve as a placeholder for the minister’s extended influence. But like many political godsons who suddenly find themselves in power, Fubara is now resisting the overbearing hand of his godfather.

Let’s be brutally honest, no political chess game is played without a grandmaster. Someone is holding the strings, someone with a national ambition, someone who sees Rivers State not as a place of people and culture, but as a stronghold to consolidate power. The state’s politics are being manipulated, not for development or peace, but for raw political gain. Wike, known for his brash and confrontational style, has refused to let go of power, and his desperation for political relevance, perhaps as a future presidential or vice-presidential hopeful, has led to the current debacle.

His hand is seen in every move, covert and overt. From the sudden defection of lawmakers loyal to him, to the persistent impeachment plots against Fubara, and his eventual suspension as a state of emergency was declared, to his unguarded utterances while chaos brews, Wike appears to be orchestrating every move, like a general moving pieces on a board. The question is: to what end?

This is not the first time Nigeria is witnessing a fallout between a political godfather and a godson. From Lagos to Kano, this unholy arrangement has always ended in disaster. But the Rivers State case is particularly worrisome because it appears the state’s interest is not even a factor in the equation. Developmental concerns, governance, and the welfare of the people have all been sacrificed at the altar of ego and ambition.

The 2023 elections were meant to mark a turning point for Rivers. Instead, the elections handed the state back to a shadowy cabal determined to hold it hostage. The current rift has paralyzed governance. Projects have stalled. The civil service is in limbo. Tensions are so high that even security agencies are reportedly taking sides. Is this what Rivers people voted for?

Let’s not romanticize Fubara as an innocent victim either. He knew the game he was getting into. He knew he was handpicked for a reason, to be loyal to Wike. But the moment he attempted to assert his independence, the game changed. This is a classic case of a pawn trying to become a king. His newfound resistance, though commendable in democratic terms, appears reactive rather than strategic. He has failed to build the kind of political coalition necessary to withstand a force like Wike, and his political naivety is becoming more apparent by the day.

However, one cannot entirely blame him. He was placed in office under the illusion of loyalty and expected to dance to a tune that was never his. When he tried to compose his own music, the conductor cut him off.

The most tragic part of this game is the suffering of the ordinary people of Rivers State. While political elites are busy plotting their next move, ordinary citizens are grappling with poor infrastructure, worsening insecurity, environmental degradation, and a dwindling economy. The recent destruction of public properties, factional loyalist violence, and breakdown of legislative functions are telltale signs that the state is dangerously teetering on the edge of anarchy.

The question, then, is not just who is playing the game, but why the people of Rivers are allowing themselves to be played.

We must also look at the wider political implications. The All Progressives Congress (APC), which now counts Wike as one of its strongest backers at the national level, is watching this crisis unfold with keen interest. Wike’s crossover from PDP to APC, in all but name, has allowed him to leverage the federal structure in his favor, putting Governor Fubara in a precarious position. It is as though the state is being offered as a political dowry to the APC in exchange for Wike’s ambitions down the line.

This political chess game is not confined to Rivers alone. It is a dangerous template that, if left unchecked, will spread to other states. What Wike is doing in Rivers today, others will replicate tomorrow. The presidency’s silence over the entire saga is even more troubling. Are they tacitly approving this method of control?

Nigeria’s democracy is still growing, and this growth is being stunted by political desperadoes who believe in power for power’s sake. The Rivers State situation is a clarion call for political maturity. It is time for Rivers leaders, both past and present, to rise above personal ambition and put the state first.

Civil society groups, traditional rulers, and respected elders in the Niger Delta must intervene. The National Assembly should not be silent while a federating unit is being torn apart by a selfish political feud. And Rivers people must rise and demand better. Their state should not be reduced to a mere pawn in someone’s ambition.

So, who is playing Rivers State like a political chessboard? The signs are clear. The moves are obvious. The ambition is evident.

It is time for Rivers people to say, “Enough is enough.” The state deserves better than being reduced to a political playground for personal ego trips. Until Rivers is allowed to breathe, grow, and function without the suffocating grip of self-styled godfathers, its future will remain uncertain, just another pawn in a never-ending game of political chess.

And just like in chess, when pawns are carelessly played, they are easily sacrificed. The people of Rivers must not allow themselves to be sacrificed. Not this time.

The unveiling of the Artificial Intelligence Collective last week by Dr Bosun Tijani, Minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, is a good call by the Nigerian government to play a lead role in the development and deployment of AI to resolve socio-economic challenges while developing new opportunities.

The Collective is a gathering of experts and distinguished personalities from the tech industry, communications, academia, civil society and the private sector which, in the expectation of the government, will develop a strategy to build a sustainable AI ecosystem, one that supports innovation while safeguarding ethics and inclusion.

AI is more than the new kid on the block. It’s a monster that holds the keys to future economic growth and development. It has the capacity to do virtually anything, except probably standing on a street corner and whispering some love notes to a friend. AI has no feelings but has the capacity to achieve good.

My judgement call derives from the Minister’s conscious effort to put the country on the front row in building out an AI ecosystem that will be of more benefit to the nation while providing a template for the rest of the continent. There are always benefits for those who make the first move at the dawn of new technologies. They enjoy the advantages of the first movers.

History is replete with such developments as humanity is always pushing the frontiers of knowledge and putting technology to test in the most esoteric way. There is always a harvest of glory and then wealth.

Look at this. The space race started in the 50s. The Soviet Union of which Russia remains the most visible surviving face, sent the Sputnik into space in October 1957. The development was too much for America to stomach as the country’s President, J.F. Kennedy challenged his nation to land a man on the moon between 1960 and 1970. By July 1969, the objective was achieved as Apollo11 docked three men on the moon who planted an American flag in that planet hitherto unreached by man.

Since then the wisdom in President Kennedy’s positon not to concede the importance of space to any other nation of the world is only too obvious. More countries of the world have joined the space race. Our dear country, Nigeria, even had to contact the Chinese to build a satellite for us to have a leg in the space business. Space technology has become a big boom for businesses. You can’t fly a plane without space technology. You can’t steer a ship without space technology. Telecommunications and broadcasting are dead without space technology. In fact, life may actually be put on hold without space technology. Call that hyperbole! It only adds colour to our exaggerated beliefs.

At the moment, fun has become an element of the game. Only recently, billionaire Jeff Bezos, flew an all female crew into space with his Blue Origin rocket. Within 11 minutes of return flight, the six women got beyond the limits of the earth into that space of weightlessness before returning in a capsule. And perhaps too tucked into her seat to enjoy an opportunity to wave to God, pop star, Katy Perry, burst into Louis Armstrong’s song, What a Wonderful World. CBS reporter, Gayle King called it the highlight of the journey for her, according to a BBC report of the event.

Another billionaire, Elon Musk, who has become more of a politician lately, with his SpaceX, has long redefined the history of space technology, going beyond tourism to even sending a crew for space rescue mission recently from the International Space Station (ISS).

British billionaire, Richard Branson, wouldn’t let the Americans have the entire space to themselves alone. Virgin Galactic planned a monthly tour to space. A ticket is said to cost a hefty $450,000 from $200,000; while in the summer of 2021, Blue Origin once auctioned a seat for $28m!

So there is so much to benefit from new technologies beyond the veneer of politics. And methinks the minister is not playing politics but genuinely concerned about Nigeria benefiting from this new genre of technology with the capacity to have a profound impact on humanity well into the foreseeable future.

At the Paris AI Summit in February 2025 where Nigeria was present fortunately, the global community came to pitch for their countries. For instance, Vice President JD Vance who represented the United States argued that of the projected $700bn investment in AI by 2028, half of the money should come to his country because of the attraction it presents.

Dr Tijani said at the time that “Artificial Intelligence is an opportunity for humanity to be better, and we cannot afford to take our eyes off it.” He is also very concerned about Nigeria leading AI discourse in the global south where needs and direction are different from what obtains in the developed north.

But more of the strategy was about the country last week. “The country’s model involves identifying and engaging with Nigerian researchers and experts in AI, both locally and internationally, to develop a comprehensive strategy that addresses the nation’s specific needs and challenges,” he said.

From the personalities present at the launch, including Prof Olayinka David-West, Dean, Lagos Business School, and Dr Olubayo Akanmbi, CEO, Data Science Nigeria, representatives of relevant industries and their positive positions expressed, this writer has little room for doubt. However, there is some fear that this launch shouldn’t be another layer upon the stack of problems waiting to gain serious attention in the tech ecosystem or in the government basket of issues waiting to be addressed.

There are quite a number of them but I will pick only two for the purpose of this writing. The mobile industry is projected to hit $11trillion in economic value and 8.4 percent of global GDP by 2030. Without doubt Nigeria is expected to benefit from this economic windfall. Unfortunately, the regulator of the telecommunications industry, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), whose duty it is to curate the process and ensure such benefits, has not been able to recover from the harassment received under the previous administration. It is therefore reasonable to observe that without being spruced up in terms of training and necessary financial provision, the organisation may find it difficult to meet expectations from critical stakeholders. It is in the interest of the government for the NCC to once again wear the ironclads of the regulator and be able to meet even the most basic aspirational expectations of these stakeholders.

The Minister may tell me that he is not in charge of the broadcast industry and its regulator, the National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) but the activities can hardly be separated. Look at it this way. The Digital Switchover (DSO) that should have ended in 2021 has hardly moved a needle. This writer is not aware of any timetable at the moment to bring the process to a conclusion. The attraction at the time was that a proper execution of DSO would free up some broadcast frequencies for telecom services. Apart from bringing more money to the coffers of the government, the new frequencies will help to deepen telecommunication service availability and penetration. A minister so desirous of growing the telecoms industry with the aim of introducing new bouquets of services should take more than a cursory interest in the DSO process and encourage his broadcast counterpart with shared and beneficial opportunities.

As a writer, I have long understood the emptiness of words, how cheap they can be, according to Prof Femi Osofisan, and the need for those in government to go beyond the confines of words. I encourage Dr Bosun Tijani to match his enthusiasm with action and add the agility of youthfulness to achieve the kind of results that history cannot ignore. He doesn’t need to be told that technology can be very harsh in documenting our efforts for posterity.