
OTHERS' VIEWS
Since Afenifere leader Pa Ayo Adebanjo passed away on February 14 at 96, many have praised his significant contributions to Nigeria as a frontline nationalist, a key role player in the politics of the first and second republics, and an uncompromising devotee of the late Chief Obafemi Awolowo.
Active in the First Republic Action Group, the Second Republic Unity Party of Nigeria, and Alliance for Democracy from 1999, Baba Adebanjo fought tirelessly for democracy. He consistently advocated for true federalism and the country’s political and economic restructuring based on the 1963 Republican Constitution.
Pa Adebanjo was also a well-known activist who stood for equity, truth, and justice. He fought against all forms of injustice and oppression including military dictatorship.
In this respect, I recall his relationship with President Bola Tinubu.
When Asiwaju Tinubu, then a founding chieftain of the defunct AD, decided to run for Lagos governorship, Pa Adebanjo fully supported him, championing transparency in the process that produced him as the candidate of his party. Despite the initial opposition within the party, Baba Adebanjo and other young party members opted for open party primaries, helping Tinubu to emerge as the candidate. Tinubu went on to win the governorship election and was inaugurated on May 29, 1999.
Grateful for the support, Asiwaju maintained a strong relationship with Baba Adebanjo. Even when their political paths diverged, Tinubu held Baba in high regard. The President said this much in his incisive tribute to Pa Adebanjo, which I quote in part thus:
“In moments of national crisis, Baba’s courage shone brightest. When democracy hung in the balance after the annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, he joined the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) as one of the leading voices against military dictatorship, helping to galvanise a movement that became the bedrock of our collective struggle to reclaim democratic governance.
“His unwavering commitment to truth and justice extended to my journey as a governorship candidate in 1999. Baba Adebanjo’s steadfast support was instrumental in my election as Governor of Lagos State under the platform of the Alliance for Democracy.
“Though our political paths diverged in later years, my respect and admiration for him never wavered. Until his death, I shared a deep personal bond with Baba Adebanjo; he was like a father figure.”
Many in Tinubu’s position might have taken issue with Baba, who sometimes openly criticised him. But not Asíwájú. As an Omoluabi—a person of good character—Tinubu respects elders and institutions, giving honour where it’s due.
How do I know President Tinubu highly regarded Baba Adebanjo? As a journalist and editor, I was well-known to Baba Adebanjo. I interacted with and interviewed him on many occasions during my active years in journalism. So when I became Asiwaju’s Media Adviser, I became the envoy of sorts, the message-bearer for both. Baba Adebanjo would telephone me, saying, “Rahman, Rahman, so fun Oga e pe mo fe ri. To ba wu yin ke wa, to ba wu yin ke ma wa. Tie na la fe so fun,” meaning “Tell your Principal I would like to see him. If he likes, let him honour my invitation. It’s to his benefit if he comes.”
We visited Baba at his residence in Lekki, Lagos, several times. On other occasions, Baba called at Bourdillon, the Ikoyi residence of Asiwaju, along with his entourage.
There is, however, a hilarious and instructive story about the two, which speaks to the admiration and high regard President Tinubu had for Baba, which essentially is the focus of this article. It was during the 90th birthday of Baba Adebanjo, sometime in April 2018. I remember vividly that that particular birthday fell on a Sunday. But a birthday colloquium came up on a Thursday, three days before the actual birthday. We had lodged in our dairy for Asiwaju, the birthday lecture, as well as other activities and events lined up to celebrate the distinguished elder statesman. While focusing on the birthday date, I forgot the preceding Thursday event at Landmark Event Centre in Victoria Island, Lagos. Luckily for me, around 9am that Thursday, the traditional ruler of Oke-Ila in Osun State, Oba Dokun Abolarin, telephoned me, saying he was in Lagos and asking if Asiwaju was coming for the birthday lecture. Knowing I had failed to alert Asiwaju about the lecture the previous night, I smelled trouble.
I immediately raced to Bourdillion in Ikoyi. When I went upstairs to see Asiwaju, he was reading newspapers, oblivious of any early morning engagement that day, particularly that of Baba Adebanjo. I informed him about the event and apologised that I had my mind set on the birthday date on Sunday. The lecture was slated for 10 am, and time was already 10 am. Asiwaju, livid, sprung to his feet. By this time, my colleague Ademola Oshodi had joined me in Asiwaju’s room. Without any prompting, we prostrated and apologised again.
Those close to President Tinubu know he is a very proficient politician in Yoruba as he is in English, complete with street lingo. Still seething in anger, Asiwaju said in Yoruba, “Hen hen, idobale yin yen ni emi ma te’ bati. Ma de ibi lecture, won a ma so pe mo moo mo pe de ni ki nba le da ijoko won ru,” meaning, “So it’s this your prostrating that will now count. I will get to the event now, and they will allege that I deliberately came late so I can cause a stir and disrupt the lecture.”
Somehow, Asiwaju quickly prepared to attend despite our tight schedule as we were meant to travel to Abuja that same day. We got to the occasion around noon after the program had been on for about two hours. One important personality I could not readily remember was on the podium.
Though we arrived late, Tinubu’s presence stirred excitement, and he delivered a heartfelt speech.
As President Tinubu predicted, his arrival caused a big stir and a temporary halt in the programme. As we made to leave, another commotion that did not subside even after our departure ensued. I suspect Asíwájú’s departure might have signaled the virtual end of the program.
That was not the end of the story, though. A couple of days later, I heard Uncle Jimi Disu, a known Asiwaju critic, on his regular programme then on Classic FM, talking about Baba Adebanjo’s birthday lecture, alleging that Asíwájú ‘sauntered’ into the programme uninvited and disrupted the birthday lecture of the nonagenarian. I could not believe my ears. I went on that program afterward to debunk what he said. I narrated what happened, that Asiwaju had tremendous respect for Baba and that he would have avoided the kind of situation that played out if I had briefed him of the timing of the programme.
This incident underscores the critical role of aides in supporting leaders to function effectively. Aides must guide them accurately, as their actions and inactions can significantly impact leadership outcomes. An oversight on my part unintentionally fueled what would have resulted in animus between Baba Adebanjo and Tinubu.
–Rahman is Senior Special Assistant to President Tinubu on Media, Publicity and Special Duties.
[OPINION] IGP, AGF—You Know the Truth, You Really Do: Learn from Rivers, Let Democracy Live in Osun - John Egbeazien Oshodi
AdminNigeria’s democracy is built on laws, fairness, and respect for institutions. It is not meant to be a game of power, manipulation, or interference. As the Osun State local government election approaches on February 22, 2025, there is one simple truth that cannot be ignored—this election must hold. No hidden agenda, no security excuse, no sudden warnings of violence should be used to stop the people of Osun from exercising their democratic right.
The Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Kayode Egbetokun, and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, you know the truth. You know that democracy cannot be bargained away. You know that Osun State has the constitutional right to conduct this election, just as Rivers State did in October 2024. You know that your responsibility is to protect, not obstruct.
Do not repeat the mistakes of history. Do not allow yourselves to be used. The Nigerian people see everything. They are watching, waiting, hoping that, for once, power will be used to strengthen democracy, not weaken it.
This is not just about an election—it is about the soul of Nigeria. The question that lingers in the minds of Nigerians is whether institutions exist to serve the people or to protect the interests of those in power. The duty of the IGP and AGF is not to serve the ambitions of any political figure or party, but to uphold the law, defend democracy, and preserve national unity.
Adeleke’s Stand for Democracy—This is What Leadership Looks Like
Governor Ademola Adeleke has spoken. He has stood firm, just as Governor Siminalayi Fubara did in Rivers State. He has declared that the election will proceed as planned. But this is not just his decision—it is the law.
The Osun State High Court has ruled that the election must go on. The court has ordered security agencies to provide protection, not excuses. It has given a clear verdict:
The Osun State Independent Electoral Commission (OSIEC) is the only legal authority to conduct local elections.
The IGP, AGF, and security agencies are obligated to protect voters, not suppress the process.
There is no justification for withdrawal of security personnel or the use of fear to manipulate the situation.
There is no room for delay, no excuse for disruption, no hidden loophole to stop what must happen.
This election is not just about local government officials. It is about trust. It is about whether Nigerians can believe in their institutions. It is about whether the law means something or nothing at all.
The Cry of Democracy—Do Not Silence It Again
Nigeria is crying for democracy. Its people are tired—tired of manipulations, tired of interference, tired of power games that destroy the very foundation of governance.
The world has seen it too many times—elections obstructed, delayed, tampered with in the name of “security concerns.” But the people know the truth. And IGP, AGF—you know the truth too.
If there is a security concern, then deploy security to protect voters. If there is a threat, neutralize it—but do not use it as an excuse to stop democracy. If there is violence, punish the perpetrators, not the voters.
Nigerians are not fooled anymore. They know the difference between genuine security concerns and politically motivated interference. They have watched elections unfold under worse conditions in this country, and yet, those elections were not stopped.
So why Osun? Why now? Why, after the court has spoken?
Learn from Rivers—Democracy Cannot Be Defeated
The Rivers State local government election in October 2024 should be a lesson to all. The police pulled security, shut down the electoral commission, and tried to halt the process. But Governor Fubara stood firm. The people stood firm. And democracy stood firm
Despite every obstacle thrown in its way, the election was held. The people voted. The courts upheld it. And those who tried to interfere were left exposed.
Do not let history repeat itself in Osun. Do not drag the nation through another battle between political influence and the rule of law. Nigeria is better than this. We should be better than this.
IGP, AGF—Your Actions Will Be Remembered
The weight of history is on your shoulders. The people of Nigeria will not forget what you do now.
If you allow this election to proceed peacefully, you will be remembered as leaders who stood for democracy, who upheld the rule of law, who protected the people’s right to vote.
If you interfere, you will be remembered as those who chose power over justice, as those who betrayed democracy at a moment when it needed protection the most
The choice is yours.
This is Not About Politics—This is About Nigeria
This writer, a psychologist, sides with no one but stands for Nigeria, democracy, and the rule of law. The duty of leaders and institutions is not to serve political interests but to protect the sanctity of democracy and obey judicial rulings.
The Osun State local government elections must be handled in accordance with legal precedents, with full respect for the constitutional mandate of the Osun State Independent Electoral Commission (OSIEC). Security agencies and federal authorities must ensure that democracy is practiced, not manipulated, and that the rights of Nigerians to choose their leaders are upheld without interference.
The law must be followed, institutions must function independently, and the democratic process must not be sacrificed for political power. Nigeria belongs to its people, not to those who wish to control it for their own gain.
History is a merciless judge. It remembers those who stood for justice and those who bowed to pressure. It records those who strengthened democracy and those who tried to break it.
If the IGP and AGF allow themselves to be used, if they permit interference where the law has already spoken, their names will be written in the same pages as those who tried to undermine the will of the people. But if they stand firm, if they obey the law and do their duty, they will be remembered as defenders of democracy, not tools of political oppression.
A Final Call—Let Osun’s Election Happen
This is bigger than one state. This is bigger than one election. This is about Nigeria itself—about whether we are truly a democracy or just pretending to be one.
The federal government, security agencies, and all stakeholders must work together to ensure that the election is conducted peacefully, fairly, and without manipulation.
The world is watching. Nigerians are watching. History is recording every move.
Let Osun vote. Let democracy breathe. Let the people decide.
IGP, AGF—you know the truth. You really do.
The Nigerian Senate, an institution expected to epitomize decorum and democratic principles, has once again been thrown into the spotlight for the wrong reasons. At the center of this latest drama are two familiar names: Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan. Their repeated clashes raise an important question: what exactly is it between Akpabio and Natasha?
The most recent incident unfolded in the Senate chamber when Senator Natasha refused to move to a newly assigned seat without prior consultation. This seemingly administrative decision quickly escalated into a heated exchange, culminating in Akpabio ordering the sergeant-at-arms to walk her out of the plenary session. This is not the first time that Natasha and Akpabio have locked horns, and given the trajectory of their confrontations, it is unlikely to be the last.
Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is not one to shy away from a fight, especially when she perceives an injustice. As a vocal member of the opposition (PDP), she has been unwavering in her demand for fair treatment and democratic transparency. On the other hand, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, a former governor and a veteran of Nigerian politics, is known for his authoritative leadership style. His tenure in the Senate has not been devoid of controversy, and he has often been accused of high-handedness.
Their first major public clash came months ago when Senator Natasha accused Akpabio of deliberately sidelining her in Senate proceedings, particularly in matters concerning bill presentations. She claimed that despite meeting all requirements, she was continuously denied the opportunity to present bills for a second reading. These allegations, though unproven, add to the growing perception that Akpabio may be deliberately stifling her contributions to national discourse.
It is difficult to ignore the gender dimension in this saga. The Nigerian political space remains overwhelmingly patriarchal, with women often facing undue resistance in leadership positions. Senator Natasha, despite her political experience and advocacy background, has had to fight harder than her male counterparts to gain her footing in the Senate. Is Akpabio’s attitude towards her an extension of this long-standing institutional bias, or is there a deeper personal and political vendetta at play?
Senator Natasha’s resistance to being pushed around is commendable, but it has also put her at the center of controversy. In a country where women who stand their ground are often labeled as “troublesome” or “disruptive,” her defiance is perceived differently by various factions. To some, she is an uncompromising warrior for justice, while to others, she is an agitator disrupting the Senate’s order.
Beyond personality clashes, political interests cannot be ignored. The Nigerian Senate, much like every other political institution in the country, is deeply influenced by party affiliations, regional interests, and personal ambitions. Akpabio, a stalwart of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), has a vested interest in maintaining the dominance of his party’s agenda. Natasha, being an opposition senator from the PDP, naturally finds herself at odds with him.
It is important to note that Senate Presidents, by the virtue of their position, wield enormous influence over legislative proceedings. They decide what bills get priority, who speaks, and, in extreme cases, who stays or leaves the chamber. If Akpabio is indeed using his position to muzzle opposition voices, then this is not just about Natasha; it is about the broader state of Nigeria’s democracy.
The recent decision to move Senator Natasha’s seat may seem trivial at first glance, but in political spaces, symbolic actions often carry significant weight. In many parliaments worldwide, seat arrangements are meticulously planned to reflect power dynamics and alliances. Was Natasha’s seat moved randomly, or was it a subtle power play aimed at diminishing her influence? The lack of prior communication suggests a deliberate attempt to undermine her position.
Her resistance to this move, therefore, is not just about personal comfort but about the principle of consultation and respect. If senators can be randomly displaced without explanation, what stops the leadership from making other arbitrary decisions that stifle dissenting voices?
At a time when Nigerians are grappling with pressing national issues, ranging from economic hardship to insecurity, one would expect the Senate to focus on delivering legislative solutions rather than engaging in internal power struggles. Yet, the chamber appears to be turning into an arena for political gladiators, with the real losers being the Nigerian people.
If the leadership of the Senate is seen as oppressive or biased, it erodes public trust in the institution. Nigerians deserve a Senate that represents all voices, not one that operates as an extension of the ruling party’s interests. Akpabio, as the leader of the chamber, must rise above personal and political differences and ensure fairness in all dealings. On the other hand, Senator Natasha must also find a balance between assertiveness and strategic engagement to avoid being constantly perceived as a disruptor.
The ongoing tension between Akpabio and Natasha must be addressed before it further degenerates. There are a few possible solutions, and this can be attained through clearer communication. In fact, if changes are to be made regarding seating arrangements or legislative procedures, affected senators must be informed beforehand. Transparency can help prevent unnecessary confrontations.
In a similar vein, the Senate should establish stronger mechanisms to address disputes among members. A body that mediates conflicts before they escalate on the floor would be beneficial.
Also, while political affiliations are inevitable, lawmakers must prioritize national interest over party politics. Akpabio must show that he is a leader for all senators, not just APC members.
Again, if Senator Natasha’s claims of being denied the opportunity to present bills are true, then this must be rectified immediately. Every senator deserves a fair chance to contribute to national policymaking.
The repeated clashes between Akpabio and Natasha are a symptom of deeper issues within Nigeria’s legislative system. Whether driven by political rivalry, gender bias, or personal animosity, these tensions must be addressed to ensure the Senate remains a credible institution. If democracy is to thrive, then all voices, especially those in the opposition, must be given a fair platform.
So, again, we ask: what is it between Akpabio and Natasha? Only time will tell. But one thing is clear, Nigerians are watching.
Surely, the parties in the ongoing impeachment crisis rocking the Lagos State House of Assembly (LSHA) ought to have known that such an utterly avoidable internal implosion would make them vulnerable to vicious attacks by those who envy and deplore the fact that their party, the All Progressives Congress (APC), in its various mutations at different times since 1999 as AD, AC, ACD, ACN and now APC, had maintained near one-party electoral dominance of the country’s economic nerve centre over the last two and a half decades. In a widely circulated piece on online platforms, for instance, one Dr Afolabi Gbajumo, after a lengthy dissection of the crisis from his own perspective accused both factions in the current LSHA imbroglio and even the executive of unbridled corruption, illicit accumulation of wealth and venality without the slightest scintilla of evidence.
True, Lagos is not yet anywhere near where it should be in developmental terms as it is still a work in progress as all human communities always are. But it would take the height of intellectual dishonesty not to admit the glaring fact that compared to where she was pre-1999, the megacity state has made remarkable progress on all fronts leaving virtually every other state in the country far behind. Today, she is not only the sixth largest economy in Africa, Lagos is gradually emerging in the ranks of leading megacities of But this is the kind of unfair onslaught that disputants in the LSHA open their party to and it is unfortunate that they are digging in deeper in their trenches in what can only be an ultimately self-destructive internecine warfare. However, what are the issues?
With no less than two-thirds of the members of the LSHA controlled by the APC undertaking his impeachment on January 13, 2025, when he was away on vacation to the US, it is logical to argue that the erstwhile Speaker of the House, Hon. Mudashiru Obasa, had lost not only legal but also moral legitimacy. And there is no doubt that the members of the LSHA are constitutionally empowered to elect and remove their principal officers through stipulated rules and procedures. And the vote of confidence passed on the newly elected Speaker, Mrs Mojisola Meranda, by a majority of members before the House adjourned sine die suggests that the legislators are indeed fed up with Obasa whom they have accused of arrogant, insensitive and corrupt leadership.
The problem is that in politics, things are often not as they seem to be. For example, on 11th November, 2024, members of the LSHA passed a vote of confidence on the allegedly corrupt, insensitive and arrogant Mudashiru Obasa as Speaker of the House. As the This Day Newspaper reported the story, “The vote of confidence on the Speaker coincided with his 52nd birthday as the lawmakers eulogized him for uplifting the country’s democracy through laws that impact positively on the people. Majority Leader, Noheem Adams said during plenary presided over by Deputy Speaker, Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, that his motion, seconded by Hon. Sa’ad Olumoh (Ajeromi Ifelodun. 1), followed a wide consultation”. What then had changed between this time and the ‘impeachment’ of Obasa on January 13 this year?
Again, since Obasa had lost the confidence of the vast majority of his colleagues and it is even claimed that civil servants in the LSHA bureaucracy boisterously celebrated his removal, why was he impeached when he was out of the country on vacation? Since he was so reportedly overwhelmingly unpopular, could he have done anything to stop his removal if he was present? Wouldn’t that have denuded the process of his impeachment of its seeming surreptitious and conspiratorial secretiveness and accorded it more legitimacy? After all, this is not the first time that a Speaker of the LSHA would be removed in this dispensation. Hon Waheed Jokotola Pelumi was the Speaker of the LSHA between June 2, 2003 and December 29, 2005. Pelumi was removed from office by his colleagues and replaced by Hon. Adeyemi Ikuforiji who remained in office from December 29, 2005, till the end of the life of the 7th Assembly in 2015. Pelumi was not removed from office in his absence and the governor at the time, now President Bola Tinubu did not oppose the change of leadership which reinforced his democratic credentials.
It is ironic that those who mobilized a massive security presence in the Assembly premises to facilitate the removal of Obasa cried foul that officials of the DSS had invaded the Assembly premises to prevent the Speaker, Hon. (Mrs Miranda) from accessing her office and allegedly to facilitate the resumption of Obasa who had dismissed his impeachment as defective and not following due process. The DSS has since made public a letter signed by the Deputy Clerk of the House, Mr A.T.B. Ottun, to prevent alleged plans by Obasa to forcefully resume in his office on February 18, 2025. Reports widely disseminated on social media that a cache of sophisticated arms were suddenly discovered in Obasa ‘s office weeks after Mrs Meranda had supposedly been making use of the same office does little to help the credibility of the anti-Obasa elements. It gives the impression of a desperation to de-market and instigate public opinion against the embattled Agege legislator.
During Adeyemi Ikuforiji’s tenure as Speaker, he led the House in offering robust checks and balances to the executive during the tenure of the highly cerebral Governor Babatunde Raji Fashola (SAN). But this the easy going but inwardly steely lawmaker from Epe did without ever insulting the governor or demeaning his office. Thus, that Obasa kept Governor Sanwo-Olu and his entourage waiting for nearly four hours before the commencement of the presentation of the state’s 2025 budget estimates and without any apologies for this slight is inexplicable.
Rather, his needlessly combative speech on that occasion was the height of arrogance which has been widely condemned by the public. Had members of the Assembly limited themselves to Obasa ‘s arrogance and insensitivity which was publicly on display in his treatment of Sanwo-Olu, in the allegations that led to his impeachment, it would be hardly possible to fault their action. But they also leveled grave allegations of financial misdemeanor and recklessness against him which in my view necessitates that he be given the opportunity to defend himself before being sanctioned in accordance with the principle of fair hearing. Since he was not given the chance to defend himself before his impeachment, could this be likened to shaving his head in his absence (apologies to MKO Abiola)?
True to his calm and difficult to ruffle demeanor and simple, unassuming carriage, Sanwo-Olu responded with philosophical serenity and enigmatic taciturnity, to what was perceived as an unwarranted slight on his person and office by Obasa. But then, we must look beyond Obasa ‘s annoying abrasiveness and a disposition to easy combustibility, which makes the prospect of his ever occupying the position of governor as he is rumored to desire, frightening.
It will be recalled that in August, 2023, the LSHA under Obasa ‘s leadership, had rejected 17 of the 39 names Sanwo-Olu had forwarded to the legislature for clearance to be appointed as commissioners in his cabinet. In an unnecessarily bad-tempered speech on the floor of the House during that episode, Obasa had decried the fact that the nominees were grossly unrepresentative of the diverse local government constituencies in the state while also not reflecting the requisite Christian-Muslim balance that had always been taken into account in constituting the State Executive Council.
As the late Oba Olatunji Hazmat, a Frontline Lagos and national progressive political leader of uncommon perspicacity stated in his gripping book, ‘Reflections of A Public Man’, “Lagos may be the greatest cosmopolitan city in Nigeria, but just like the nation itself, it can not march forward even in the matters of the least consideration of governance without accommodating the diverse interests, biases and native proclivities that shape and girdle her formative character…For fairness and wide judgement, the governor, the mayor or any other official of the state must consult others, must bring diverse interests into focus and attention in the choice of cabinet members, in the composition of parastatals and other allied governmental bodies”.
But beyond this, Obasa raised the pertinent point of the undue dichotomy between so called technocrats and politicians in governance in Lagos State and what he perceived as the unfair favouritism given to the former in filling cabinet and non-cabinet positions particularly under the Sanwo-Olu administration. In its report on the face- off between the House and the governor on the matter, the Premium Times of August 29, 2023, wrote that “But some party loyalists said the main reason some nominees who are technocrats were rejected was because they were not known in their constituencies and had no electoral value. Michael Uju, a public affairs analyst, said the disqualification was political. “Unfortunately, there is the sense that most of those rejected by the House are the technocrats among them who are not so much into party politics,” he said.
Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s administration as Premier of the Western Region in the First Republic is still the reference point in qualitative developmental governance in Nigeria. Its achievements were gargantuan and path-breaking. In his autobiography, the great Awo commented on his Cabinet thus, “Second, my team of Ministers was unexcelled. It was a team of which any head of government anywhere in the world would be proud. It was a well-knit, highly disciplined and fanatically loyal team. Each of them knew his subject well”. None of these men would be regarded as technocrats or even intellectuals in today’s lingo. They were educated men and professionals in diverse fields but to be appointed into public office in the Action Group (AG) at the time, you had to have a very strong linkage with your grassroots communities. This was made more imperative by the parliamentary system of the First Republic which required that those to be appointed as Cabinet members first had to win elections into the legislature as elected representatives of their constituencies. Even though he could have couched his argument in less inelegant and confrontational language, Obasa had made the point that he was concerned about the grassroots vibrancy of the APC in the state. This is certainly a pertinent concern even if it is true that his real motive was his assumed governorship ambition in 2027.
The truth of the matter is that although successive APC administrations in Lagos State have performed relatively remarkably well in infrastructure development, social services delivery and security among others – the primary purpose of government – the electoral performance of the party has declined with each election since 2011 and one reason for this is the ever growing alienation and distance between the government and the grassroots. In the 2007 governorship election, Fashola of the AC scored 593,300 votes to 394,956 for Senator Muslim Obanikoro of the PDP. In 2011, BRF scored a record 1,509, 113 votes to win reelection while Shamsideen Adegboye of the PDP recorded 300,450 votes. In 2015, Mr Akinwumi Ambode of the APC had 811,994 votes while Mr Jimi Agbaje of the PDP had 659,788 votes. As for 2019, Mr Babajide Sanwo-Olu of the APC won 739,445 votes to 206, 141 votes scored by Jimi Agbaje of the PDP.
In the 2023 governorship election, Sanwo-Olu won reelection with 762,134 votes to 312,329 votes scored by Gbadebo (Chinedu) Rhodes-Vivour of the Labour Party (LP). To secure his victory after the APC had unprecedentedly lost the earlier presidential election in Lagos to Peter Obi’s LP by nearly 10,000 votes, the party had to scramble frantically to mobilize primordial sentiments to ensure Sanwo-Olu’s reelection.
Had the governorship election come first, would Sanwo-Olu have become history in Lagos State? The answer is anyone’s guess. A school of thought believes that the electorally dysfunctional overly elitist outlook and disposition of governance in Lagos State has heightened under Sanwo-Olu and this is dangerous as the crucial 2027 elections approach, an election in which the triumph of the APC will depend on the degree to which it has regained its organic linkage with the grassroots. This is probably the point Obasa was making but his petulant mode of delivery distorted and undermined his message.
What then is to be done about the seeming impasse as regards the position of Speaker of the LSHA? The right of the members to elect their principal officers cannot be contested but this must be in line with their extant rules, due process and the guidelines of the party. The enthusiastic support given to Hon. Mrs Meranda so far indicates that she enjoys considerable goodwill with her colleagues as well as the bureaucracy in the LSHA. But some voices in the party contend that the next Speaker should come from either Lagos West where Obasa comes from or Lagos East if legislators from Lagos West are not interested in the Speakership position as it is claimed.
Both Mrs Meranda and the governor are from Lagos Central and this contradicts the party’s zoning formula. The aggrieved members no longer want Obasa as Speaker and they have successfully removed him at least until the courts adjudicate in the matter. But they cannot at the same time unilaterally jettison the party’s power sharing formula. Honourable Mrs Meranda has demonstrated her value and the high esteem in which her colleagues hold her which must be a function of her personal attributes despite her having been Obasa’s deputy. But she may have to stoop to party supremacy today to conquer a future that is politically exceedingly bright for her.
The gathering in Abuja on Thursday for the launch of General Ibrahim Babangida’s book was unarguably the most concentrated assemblage of high level political and business leaders in Nigeria in recent times.
Present at the gathering were all five living past presidents and heads of state of Nigeria, though understandably, with the qualified presence of General Muhammadu Buhari who was represented by a proxy. All three former vice-presidents of the Fourth Republic were present. In fact, IBB is perhaps the only one who could have brought Atiku Abubakar and President Bola Tinubu together under the same roof for four hours. I was also astounded by the picture of President Tinubu and President Olusegun Obasanjo.
The richest men in Nigeria, many of whom made their wealth from concessions and other lifts facilitated by Babangida and his successors were also there to hail their mentor.
Who noticed the loud sneer on Atiku as President Tinubu was about to deliver his address when the band struck the refrain in Tinubu’s personal anthem, “On your mandate, on your mandate we shall stand”. Having already stood up as protocol demanded, Atiku was literally cursing the ground on which he stood as the Nigerian Army band struck “On your mandate.”
God forbid something untoward, such as a bomb had been dropped at that venue it would have been reported in the establishment press as the most unfortunate incident in the history of Nigeria.
But thank God it passed off smoothly and we are alive to discuss the revelations from the autobiography of Nigeria’s second longest ruling ruler in a stretch, General Ibrahim Babangida.
No doubt, Babangida just like Gowon, another enduring ruler had time and space to entrench their names with several legacies. For Babangida, the direction of the Nigerian economy towards capitalist adventurism was about the most positive imprint of his administration that endures till date. The Structural Adjustment Programme, SAP which he cunningly implemented without the International Monetary Fund, IMF loan showcased his economic vision.
He was undoubtedly the man who saw tomorrow and with his economic policies enhanced the Nigerian private sector to a dominant role that many other private sector actors in the rest of Africa cannot but envy.
On the political side, IBB also enounced some of the most fundamental solutions to the malevolent shades of politics in Nigeria. His two-party system was about the most radical answer to the ethnicism and other vices that had negated the game of politics in Nigeria.
Under that dispensation we had two Bendel men, Chief Tony Anenih and Chief Tom Ikimi emerge as national chairmen of the two national parties in Nigeria. The emergence of two men from the minority ethnic group in a state that was not Yoruba, Hausa or Igbo showed that the minority could aspire for reckoning under the system he enunciated.
However, with his open eyes the same IBB nicknamed Maradona, dribbled himself into a dead end when he annulled the freest and fairest presidential election in the history of Nigeria.
That decision from the man his foes and even friends call the evil genius was about the most catastrophic decision ever made in the history of Nigeria outside the civil war.
Till last Thursday, he had repeatedly stated that he annulled the June 12 election in the best interest of the nation. But almost everybody knew that it was in his own interest to perpetuate himself in power.
However, coming out last Thursday to say that he erred and made a mistake was disingenuous. It was the typical IBB trying to pull the wool over the eyes of the nation. But this time he only fooled those gathered with him who gave him applause.
He admitted that he committed a crime against the nation by his willful decision to sabotage the mandate of the nation. He seriously diminished himself with his confession. He should have kept his regret.
At what time did he realise that he made a mistake? This is because until very recently he had been singing the chorus of self-justification. However, apparently realizing that no one believed him and that his legacy would go in the wrong side of history he apparently made the move to mollify a wounded citizenry.
With all the institutions that Babangida erected, Nigeria should have been well advanced in democratic and economic infrastructure had he not made the decision to annul the election. Not only were Chief MKO Abiola and his wife killed because of that decision, hundreds of lives were lost directly and tens of thousands if not more, indirectly.
It is an act of delusion for Babangida and his hangers on to think that history or time will erase the great evil that was done, his regret notwithstanding. He simply should have kept quiet. And it is a reflection of the deep moral morass that he inspired that all those men who gathered at the book launch gave him an applause for the evil he did. Saddening that not one of them could stand up to tell him that he did wrong. That is the reason why some still insist that with the present political actors that the Hope that Nigerians envisaged with MKO is still far off.
Even more, the cheer is an incentive for those in various levels of authority today doing evil that there may be no consequences for what they do.
This third installment in the Nicholas Said column series expands on my previous pieces and brings the discussion to a conclusion.
Perhaps the final straw that broke Nicholas Said’s back and drove him to leave combat duties during the Civil War was the imposition of an inexperienced 18-year-old white boy named Lieutenant Robertson James — described as “one of the least qualified officers in the regiment” — as the leader of his platoon.
On the day Said finally received his long-denied back pay of $200, he voluntarily resigned his sergeantship, demoted himself to private, laid down his arms, and requested a secretarial assignment. He later left that role to work at the army hospital.
Dr. Burt Green Wilder, a physician at the hospital, sought an assistant who neither smoked, drank excessively, nor ate pork (and who could write well), criteria that Said, a linguistically gifted ex-Muslim and teacher, met easily. He secured the job as a "hospital assistant."
Soon after, most of his Black comrades in the Civil War were killed or severely wounded in battle. The wounded were brought to the hospital where Said worked. He experienced what Dean Calbreath called his "baptism in blood, which soaked his clothing and clung to his flesh."
Dr. Wilder, impressed by Said’s intellect, described him as “very philosophical in his mind and interested in unusual things, religious problems, etc.”
On May 13, 1865, about a month after Confederate general Robert E. Lee surrendered and the Civil War ended, Said married in South Carolina. The marriage lasted only two years. There’s no evidence it produced any children.
Dr. Wilder, who later became a leading professor of anatomy at Cornell University, refuted the findings of a racist post-war commission that claimed Black people were innately inferior by singling out Said, a "multilingual intellectual from the very interior of Africa," as a direct contradiction.
Instead of returning to the North from where he enlisted in the U.S. Army or to Borno, Said stayed in South Carolina, devoting himself to teaching Black people to read and write for free while farming on the side.
His work caught the attention of General Robert K. Scott of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen, and Abandoned Lands, who praised Said as “a thoroughly educated man and a distinguished linguist, who converses fluently in ten languages and who is equally conversant in both the Greek Testament and the Koran.”
Southern newspapers, incredulous at the idea of such an African, mocked the claim.
Despite the racism he faced in the military, Said found warmth and respect from many white individuals, including Southerners, precisely because of his sharp intellect and unusual multilingual aptitude. That’s why he once remarked, according to Calbreath, that “the kindest people with whom he had ever met and domiciled [with] are the Southern whites.”
He also became one of America’s first Black people to devote their time to getting scores of Black people registered to vote. His accomplishments were so noteworthy that the New York Times’ William Swinton, himself a polyglot, profiled him extensively on August 13, 1867, in an article titled “The Negro Pundit.”
“He has certainly made himself a remarkable philologist. Remarkable it would be in even the most cultured of Caucasians, but still more so in one who bears on his black visage the symbols of his savage race [i.e., Said’s Kanuri facial marks],” Swinton wrote. “For he knows, in addition to English and his native tongue, Arabic, Turkish, Russian, Hebrew, Greek, German, French, and Italian…. Nor is it merely a parrot-like faculty of imitation, for he has a deep penetration of their genius and affinities and, in some instances, a fair, and in others, a profound acquaintance with their literature” (208).
The New York Times profile was republished in over two dozen newspapers. The Nation, a liberal newspaper, even suggested that Said was “was so talented he might make a good candidate for vice president someday, or at least a cabinet secretary or maybe an ambassador to Russia.”
Two months after the New York Times profile, Said wrote about himself in the Atlantic Monthly, one of America’s most iconic magazines. His article, titled “A Native of Bornoo,” caused his profile to soar in South Carolina and got him a more prestigious teaching job at a private school where he taught English and French.
After actively participating in Charleston’s politics, where many Black officials were elected—triggering violent white backlash—Said left the city. He became a peripatetic teacher in rural South Carolina before moving to Georgia.
To gain acceptance in the South, he concealed his Union Army service, even falsely claiming he arrived in the U.S. post-war. His autobiography completely blacked out his participation in the Civil War.
In Georgia, he encountered Lucius Bryan, a virulently racist aristocrat who had written that Africans had “never built a city, never bridged a river, never made the smallest discovery having any tendency to widen the little space that separates him from the gorilla.” But after meeting Said, Bryan softened his stance. He grudgingly acknowledged that Said’s intelligence and learning equaled that of any white man.
So, he encouraged Said to tour Southern states to demonstrate “the possibility of elevating the colored race to a standard of equality with Europeans.”
Said agreed, arguing that Africa “has been, through prejudice and ignorance, so sadly misrepresented that anything like intelligence, industry, etc., is believed not to exist among its natives.”
Beginning his lecture tour in March 1870, he electrified audiences. Though often introverted in one-on-one dialogic engagements, he transformed to a spine-tingling orator on stage. “On the stump, he seemed as one inspired. His sentences were short, clear-cut, and logical. When gesticulating with his arms, the eye could almost see sparks dripping from his fingertips,” Calbreath quoted one observer to have noted.
Attendance at his lectures initially cost 25 cents (about $5 today), later increasing to 50 cents for adults and 25 cents for children. Subscribers also paid similar amounts for his forthcoming autobiography.
During a visit to The Atlanta Constitution (the flagship newspaper in Georgia now called the Atlanta-Journal Constitution) on July 22, 1870, the editors described him as “a very intelligent son of Africa… [who] talks intelligently on almost every subject.”
Said let the editors read a rough draft of his autobiography. They wrote that they were “astonished to find it well written…. The contents are novel, and, as far as we read them, very interesting.”
Other Southern newspapers dubbed him the “wandering African celebrity” or the “learned African.” In Florida, a star-struck bank clerk inscribed on Said’s account application: “This is the wonderful Nickolas [sic] Said, doubtless.”
As his fame grew, so did lecture fees, rising to 75 cents. Fame also made him a magnet for girls. A teenage Georgia girl named Annie from a small town called Bainbridge (which now has a little over 14,000 people) threw herself at him. Their short affair led to a pregnancy, which Said wasn’t aware of.
Annie gave birth to a girl whom she named Nancy Said. No one knows whether her descendants are alive. Short of getting DNA samples from Said’s relatives in Kukawa and comparing them to the probable descendants of Nancy Said in Bainbridge, Georgia, we have no way of knowing.
Despite warnings, he moved to Alabama, a perilous state for educated Black men. Yet, he found surprising warmth there, even impressing a former slave owner and Confederate soldier, Mitchell Smith, who recommended him to local politicians in another Alabama town Said moved to, saying, “Nicholas Said…is, by far, the most intelligent and best-educated man of the African race with whom I have ever conversed.”
Settling in Bladon Springs, Alabama, for four years — the longest he had stayed in one place since his forced displacement from Kukawa — he earned “the highest esteem of the white citizens,” as James S. Evans Jr. (whose son would later destroy Said’s reputation) wrote. “He had a dash about him that was fascinating…. He knew something of political economy, had studied the principles of law, possessed a smattering of knowledge of physics, and had read much on religious topics.”
There, he taught, completed his manuscript, and married again on September 24, 1874, to Rachel Thornton, a 24-year-old single mother with a six-year-old son. There is no information that he had a child with the woman.
In 1877, he left Bladon Springs without his wife and resumed his lecture circuits in Mississippi and Tennessee, carrying his autobiography. This time, he began calling himself Mohammed Ali ben Said, though he later reverted to Nicholas after settling in Haywood County, Tennessee.
In Haywood County, Tennessee, Nicholas Said mysteriously vanished from public view. It seems he fell into depression because of a series of injuriously libelous falsehoods written about him by James Evans Jr., a popular but notoriously mendacious, drunken, and unapologetically racist Alabama journalist whose father respected Said a great deal. These fabrications were republished in multiple newspapers.
Evans conjured stories about Said entirely from his imagination, claiming he was a South African criminal, a linguistically gifted forger and thief serving time in prison. There is no record of Said fighting back to reclaim his reputation.
Some believe he died in Haywood County in 1882, but no official record of his death exists in the United States. Or, as Dean Calbreath speculates, did he return to Borno unnoticed? No one knows for sure.
I have carefully read and listened to former Nigerian military president, General Ibrahim Badamosi Babagida's public remorse and regrets over the atrocious annulment of the June 12,1993 presidential elections. He did this 32 whopping years later. I want to very quickly say that it takes a man with strong guts and balls and a man who has become repentant, born again and has seen the face of God to publicly recant his earlier wrongful deeds and offer public apology to the entire nation. This was no doubt meant to heal gapinng wounds and balm wounded and bruised hearts.
The polls, the best, most transparent and credible elections, ever held in Nigeria till date, were meant to end decades of military d The annulment threw Nigeria into turmoil and widespread unreast, protests, maimings and killings. This forced Babagida to "step aside"; the enthronenent of the Enest Shonekan's Interim Government; and the arrest and detention of Chief Moshood Abiola, the presumed winner who later died in Aso Villa in questionable and suspicious circumstances. Of course, General Sani Abacha who was his second in command later sacked Shonekan in a bloodless coup. For years, IBB prevaricated on the annulment, claiming he did it in the best national interest. But on Thursday the 21st of February, 2025,Babangida during the presentation of his memoirs, "A journey In Service", pointedly regretted in the public: "I regret June 12. I accept full responsibility for the decisions taken and June 12 happened under my watch. Mistakes, missteps happened in quick succession. That accident of history is most regrettable. The nation is entitled to expect my expression of regret ". And wait for it:: he acknowledged for the first time that Abiola won the elections fair and square, trouncing his major opponent, Alhaji Bashir Tofa.
I want to salute Babagida for having the courage and humility to own up like a man; that everything that happened during the June 12 crisis took place under him as the head of state and the president who was also the Commander- in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. I salute him for acknowledging that his government which actually organised unarguably the freest, fairest and most credible elections in the electoral history of Nigeria when it introduced option A4 from electoral books that were hithenlrto unknown to Nigeria or to the world. But unfortunately, regrettably like he now admits, he again turned around to annul the same elections in a way that was most bizarre, curious and unnatural.
To me, that he has come out to open up to doing something wrong and egregious to a bleeding nation should be appreciated. I believe that Nigerians should forgive him because to err is human and to forgive is divine ( Eph 4:32 ). I personally have now forgiven him because I was also a victim of the June12 crisis. It threw up all manners of challenges to me as a person, where in my very youthful age; in my thirties, I found myself marching on the streets of Lagos every day- from Ikeja bus stop roundabout, to Ikorodu road; up to Tejuosho market; from there to Ojuelegba, Surulere; to Mushin; to Shomolu and Igando, Alimosho.
Everyday, we were on the streets, protesting the mindless annulment. Some of us were killed in process; some were lucky enough to escape abroad on self exile. But some of us- very few indeed- refused to flee our dear country; we stayed back. We stared at the military eyeball to eyeball. We challenge authority and spoke truth to power. We challenged impunity and repression. I suffered several detentions across different detention centres. I virtually could not find means of livelihood for my youthful family because I was profiled, my phones bugged and no briefs were coming in. But I personally forgive him because it takes tons of guts to make public confession of having erred and atone for same as he has now done.
It is confession that leads to penance and penance leads to restitution and then forgiveness. If Babagida were to die today, I believe that he will see the face of God because he has prayed God to forgive him; and he has prayed Nigerians to forgive him. Beyond that historic and epochal mistake of the annulment of the June 12 election which constitutes his original sin, let me place it on record that Babagida is one of the greatest presidents that Nigeria ever had in terms of his ingenuity, rulership mantra; ideas for national resurgimento; ideas that contributed greatly to nation-building. These were aside the IMF-induced loans and pills which he introduced and which we again valiantly fought against successfully.
Babagida it was who gave birth to the Federal Capital Territory and laid the solid foundation for virtually everything you see there today. His government was peopled by intellectuals and not by half illiterates and quacks. He recognized and used intellects. He was luminous and he built bridges of understanding, friendship and brotherhood across Nigeria. Nigerians, please, accept IBB's confession and forgive him his sin of annuling the June 12,1993 elections. Let the wounds heal; let the heart melt; and let the spirit of national triumphalism prevail.
[OPINION] Shyngle Wigwe: the burden of a grandfather ‘’A good man leaves an inheritance to his children’’ – Prov. 13:22 - Biodun Bello
AdminAt over 90, this is not how Pastor Shyngle Wigwe had planned to spend the last few years of his long life. For the last 30 years, he’s been living a good life in a peaceful retirement, enjoying the support and benevolence of his industrious and wealthy second son, Herbert, and his other children. But the tragic death of Herbert, together with his wife and son in a helicopter crash in California last year, has not only upended Pa Wigwe’s life in retirement, but has also set him on an embarrassing course of action. By instituting a legal action against his granddaughter in a Lagos High Court and seeking unlimited access to the assets of the deceased son, Pa Wigwe is giving a wrong impression of himself. The optics just doesn’t look good and the general comments out there is ‘’what could this old man be looking for at his age?’’. The unfavourable judgment handed him by the court should be enough reason for him to retrace his steps. In the suit filed by Pa Wigwe and Christian Wigwe as the claimants; and Uche Wigwe; Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede and Otutochi Wigwe as defendants, the claimant sought the court to appoint Pa Wigwe; Otutochi Wigwe and some companies as interim administrators for the son’s estate; appoint Pa Wigwe interim guardian to Herbert’s minor children and order Access Bank; Coronation Merchant Bank and United Securities to release the details of Herbert’s wealth to him.
The court, in its judgment delivered last week, turned down Pa Wigwe’s request, but in the court of public opinion, Nigerians are unanimous in querying the real intentions of the old man. Is Pa Wigwe being nudged on by his other children as is widely assumed? What are they up to? The true intentions of Pa Wigwe could be gleaned from the claimants’ affidavit filed in court to support their case which alleges that the Will left behind by the deceased is only meant to administer the deceased property in Florida, USA, and has no application to the properties in Nigeria. The affidavit also claimed that Aig-Imokhuede has ‘’a strong influence on Uche Wigwe who is the sole Representative of the Will’’; and as the sole trustee as well as business partner of the deceased, Aig-Imoukhuede ‘’does not have the interest of the minors at heart and his position will conflict with the deceased’s position’’. The affidavit further requests the Court to appoint Pa Wigwe and some professional property managers to manage the estate of the deceased. In other words, Pa Wigwe is not only questioning the validity of his son’s Will, he also wants to be in charge of the minor children and the estate of his deceased son. Clearly, this is too much responsibility for a 90-year-old man to ask for.
In their affidavit, the defendants stated that Otutochi had already been ‘’granted legal guardianship of the minors of the estate in a Family Court and is representing them in this suit’’; and that she and Aig-Imoukhuede do not want to be joined as the interim administrator of the estate. The defendants further argued that since Pa Wigwe is the grandfather of the minor children, he does not need a Court Order to see the minors and provide moral counseling to them. He has the right to see them anytime without a court order. They added that Herbert left behind only one Will and that is applicable to all his properties at home and abroad.
It is notable that the Court had in its ruling dismissed all the reliefs sought by the claimants; meaning that Pa Wigwe and others have not been appointed interim administrator by the Court and Access Bank, Coronation Merchant Bank and United Securities have not been ordered to make any disclosures on Herbert’s wealth. But there are a few lessons and questions to ponder. Why were Pa Wigwe and his children excluded from Herbert’s Will? It’s probably because Herbert did not ever imagine that he would die before his aged parents and most likely that his relationships with his siblings were very frosty while he was alive. In fact, those who attended Herbert’s funeral service at the ballroom of Eko Hotel, Victoria Island, Lagos, last March were puzzled, if not embarrassed, at some of the nasty remarks made by some of the siblings about their deceased brother at the event. Such an open display of bile, ill feeling and ill will towards the dead from his siblings is not a natural occurrence; it’s all the more unnatural for the same set of people to turn around and jostle for the wealth of the dead man. But that’s morality. Legally speaking, Pa Wigwe and his children are not included in Herbert’s Will and they do not have any business going after whatever Herbert left behind. His Will should be obeyed. The Will made Uche Wigwe, the executioner of the Will and appointed Aig-Imoukhuede into a Trust that he should set up and chair; and this Trust would handle his affairs on behalf of his children. In the Will, Aig-Imoukhuede was also appointed the legal custodian of the children, and this much he said at Herbert’s memorial service on Sunday, February 9. Even then, the trustee and the executioner have pledged to use their discretion and sense of compassion to accommodate Herbert’s father and the rest of the family in the scheme of things.
And herein lies the burden of Pa Wigwe at this very difficult moment of his last years on earth. He has lost his beloved son; grandson and daughter-in-law in such a tragic circumstance. He should allow himself some peace of mind and space to bring the family together and bless the grandchildren. The number one duty of every grandparent is to gather the family together, bless the children and grandchildren and prepare to go back to his Maker. By the way, the old man should also perfect his own Will.
Systems, practices and cultures of different peoples are observed and documented to form a body of knowledge. So is the behaviour of man under different circumstances and environments, be it in politics, or economic pursuits. Reports of such behavioral studies abound. If we consider that we cannot see far and we cannot see everything within the range of our sight, vision and perception, we will become persuaded that what is left unseen or perceived can someday constitute a different body of knowledge. Meanwhile, what is considered knowledge is documented and stored as material for learning so that knowledge can become widespread. What is learned thus becomes different from what is known, that is that which knowledge is. If what is learned is not internalized, that is digested and made one’s own it disappears from memory. But that which is knowledge is permanent with him who knows it, who has experienced it. This is saying that there may be a gap between what is learnt and that which is known, that which is knowledge. Learning may thus be defined as familiarization with or study of knowledge. And knowledge is the experience of a person which gives him recognition. Knowledge can thus be said to be familiarization with or study of recognition of others, recognition which could be profound or merely exciting.
So as I was saying last week, learning can be imparted to a person at a very early age. A child of three, depending on exposure of his parents can be introduced to learning, but at a much younger age to knowledge. A child of eight months knows that, although fire is beautiful, the tongue that billows is attractive; it could inflict harm and pain. It burns. The child carries that knowledge for life. Knowledge and learning are documented in books and are passed for knowledge for all ages. If we accept that knowledge is derived from experience which gives us recognitions, which recognitions are documented to be learned, it follows that our knowledge can only go as far as the depth of our experiences and the range of our perceptions and recognitions.
As there are problems in the economy, politics and social relationships, the signals are that our knowledge is limited and shallow. A limited knowledge needs to be widened and deepened. The vital knowledge of how and why we as human beings can and should live in peace and harmony with our fellowmen is lacking. Our knowledge of nation-building and international relations is deficient. The result has been that there are wars and the possibility of more wars rises by the day—the Russian-Ukraine war despite the scale of mindless destruction remains irresolvable. No party is backing down in the Israeli-Hamas bitter war. Turn to the Congo. Go in the direction of Sudan it is the same story. War merchants are prowling in the dark alleys; they are prowling in the shadows in the wee hours of the day.
Of what use is all that is paraded as human knowledge if so much problem defying solutions are still confronting mankind? If all that our knowledge for which many lives have been sacrificed and are still being wasted, has produced are the labyrinth of chaos and confusion; the knowledge that has made the world unsafe. It is a great indictment that rather than be a blessing man has been the cause of chaos and confusion that have engulfed our world.
Thus, the knowledge we human beings need greatly and urgently today must be that which reveals how we are to live with our neighbours and how to perfect international relations. It must be the knowledge that reveals the truths of life and existence and their inherent immutable principles. We have been made to be aware that given our limitations, human beings cannot have this knowledge without help.
Long before we sank this deep we had always been afforded help to guide us to true knowledge. As pupils and wanderers in Creation, we human beings need to be taught and guided. We need to be guided. We need to be familiar with how Creation works and the place of creatures that we are in it, our tasks and responsibilities.
The import of that need is driven home with greater impact when man first has knowledge of himself. Who is man? How is he to wander in this world? What are the gifts of Nature placed at his disposal on his path? What is the purpose of his sojourn in this deep valley of matter? The knowledge of Creation and how it works then enables us to be conscious of whether the purpose of that sojourn is being met. How are we to wander on earth without coming to harm?
There are pains; there are tribulations in all parts of the world. The fear of escalating global distress is raised with the emergence of Mr. Donald Trump, his pronouncements and actions. Washington Post had this to say about him: “The President-elect has a record of stepping on his own sunny promises of optimism with darkness and division”. That was before he was sworn in as the 47th President of the United States. He lived up to this billing when on Tuesday he called Ukraine President, Volodymyr Zelensky a dictator to which the latter said in response: “Unfortunately, President Trump – I have great respect for him as a leader of a nation that we have great respect for, the American people who always support us – unfortunately lives in this disinformation space.”
The deficiency in knowledge can only be remedied and covered through total wholesome knowledge. This immeasurable knowledge cannot be found in man for our needs and the needs for all time; what we urgently require is true knowledge. Thus true knowledge is truth itself. Because Truth can only be found beyond man for it is eternal, perfect and consistent, not subject to any alteration, to war or revolution or ideas of men, attributes man does not have, so can true knowledge be found beyond him. It is beyond his calculations or avarice. It is incorruptible. In other words true knowledge can only come from Above. Now we are in the Age of knowledge that gives explanation for all happenings.
Dr. Stephen Lampe says in his great book, The Primordial Laws of Creation, “On account of the Law of Movement, it should be expected that revelations from the Creator would be progressive. Therefore, we should expect new knowledge and new revelations which advance older teachings at critical periods in the development of Creation. Without new revelations, there would be stagnation and retrogression and advancement to the next higher level of spirituality and consequently of civilization would be impossible.”
As I stated last week, if we accept that there is life in the non-physical, we must also accept that beings in the non-physical have knowledge. Does knowledge gained here end with a person’s demise on earth? If the answer is in the negative, it is logical to appreciate the fact that human beings in higher planes, in the Light Region or Paradise must carry higher and richer knowledge. If any of them were to be sent to the earth, it must follow that he will come with higher and richer knowledge. We must by now have been familiar with accounts of such blessed ones among various peoples in different communities and at different times—the Prophets of Old, the Teachers of mankind and so on.
It stands to reason that the Lord Christ and the prophesied Son of Man Who is to appear in these times of chaos and perplexities will bear all the knowledge, indeed complete knowledge, coming from the Highest Heights, being parts of the Almighty in Whom the Father works and They work in the Father as Love and Justice. And so the Lord Christ said “…whatever the Father does the Son does.” Any wonder, therefore, the statements of the Lord are so unfathomably deep that Scribes and Pharisees, His hearers in general, said aloud: “Where did this Man get this wisdom from and these miraculous powers? Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t His mother Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon…?” (Matthew 13: 54-55).
So, it is said about the Son of Man in the great Work, “In the Light of Truth” The Grail Message by Abd-ru-shin: “Ever since the crime committed against the Son of God, the Bringer of Truth, Jesus of Nazareth, the fact that men did not recognise this most important prophecy has lain like a curse upon mankind, and even today they stand before it unsuspectingly as if their eyes were closely blindfolded! The terrible consequence will be that a great part of mankind will stumble on towards destruction, past the only possibility of saving themselves from being cast out.
“This is the prophecy of the Coming of the Son of Man, which the Son of God held forth as a star of hope and also as a serious warning in the face of the constant attacks upon Him by the masses, who through their subservience to the Darkness naturally hated the Bringer of Truth.”
The Message states further: “Jesus spoke of the Coming of the Son of Man as the last possibility of salvation, and also pointed out that with his Coming the Judgment would commence. Therefore those who are still not willing or, to express it differently, those who are too stiff-necked or too indolent to be prepared to accept enlightenment would be irretrievably cast out! From this the conclusion is to be drawn that there will be no further opportunity for consideration and decision. This undoubtedly contains the announcement of great tribulation which will bring to an end a period of patient forbearance. This in turn indicates the impending struggle of the Light against all darkness which must end with violent destruction of darkness!”
Proofs of the point that men come with knowledge gained in centuries of their wanderings in different planes of the world abound around us. We may also ask, for example, what explains the phenomenon of prodigies in different communities. Exactly a year ago, 20 February, 2024, an eight-year-old boy, Ashwath Kaushik, was reported to have beaten a grandmaster, 37, from Poland at a chess tournament in Switzerland. There may be others who may not be prodigies but who strike us in a certain way. Take Wole Soyinka, Chinua Achebe or Mr. Buffet. I have said before, treating this subject that we may ask who taught Aliko Dangote business—the university he went in Egypt? Or the super rich recluse, Michael Adenuga or Femi Otedola, Michael Ade-Ojo or Mrs. Alakija? Take the financial tigers Jim Ovia, Tony Elumelu, Atedo Peterside or Fola Adeola. They were young when I first wrote drawing attention to them in 1993, so I called them young financial tigers. Before them there was the class of Adeola Odutola, Ugochukwu, Michael Ibru, Mobolaji Bank-Anthony, Nathaniel Idowu, Lawrence Omole, Wahab Folawiyo and Dantata. What of men of profound thoughts and deep insights of ages past we are quick to quote? Daniel Swarovski says in his priceless book, The Time is Ripe: “what some regard as a special gift or talent, is in my opinion, the fruit of long experiences gathered in many lives.” Many will remember one of such prodigies who began to compose music before he was 12 years and Johann Bummel who in fact gave public concert at the age of 11. There was the publicised case of a little boy in the East a long time ago who was a preacher and who held his audience spell-bound. Are we going to be surprised when Soyinka goes and comes back he begins to write and stage plays from the age of three years and Achebe turning out his first novel at five? There are talents, Bongos Ikwue, Dan Marayah Jos of Ibrahim and Abraham fame during the civil war, trying to broker peace with his music!
Knowledge lies only in experiencing. Some grain of this truth has been sensed and made to reflect in the saying: “Experience is the best teacher.” All knowledge can arise only out of Truth and we human beings were permitted splitting of this Truth until Christ the Truth and Life Himself descended to our world and in these times, the Age of Knowledge, the Age of the Son of Man promised by the Lord Who is to bring to our remembrance all that Christ had taught us and is to lead mankind to all truths, thus giving the world the secret of Creation. The knowledge so brought is to be absorbed and experienced so it can be internalized by us human beings to make it our own. This knowledge is all and total, overseeing all and it answers all questions of life and existence. And being Rays of the Truth that is Light it awakens and nourishes the spirit. Plants serve to nourish our body, but the Word of Truth is the food of the spirit. Given the chaos and confusion in our world today, and the collapse that is so self-evident in every part of the globe today, total knowledge is imperative.
AI has already become one of the most talked-about topics in crypto, with top industry-specific and financial events, as well as leading analytics companies discussing its impact and potential in compliance, fraud detection, and operational efficiency. As regulators increase scrutiny and illicit actors grow more sophisticated and fast, digital assets businesses are considering integrating AI.
Can AI really help streamline compliance, detect hidden threats, and secure businesses? The reality is more nuanced than simply “plug and play.” AI can’t replace human oversight or responsibility, but it’s a tool that, when implemented thoughtfully, can help maintain the best industry standards. Let’s explore its possibilities.
Finding hidden risks that traditional methods miss
Traditional methods are good at catching known patterns, but they are not as effective at picking up on new or unexpected tactics. AI stands out here, analyzing large volumes of data and flagging anomalies that might fly under the radar of simpler models.
The main advantage of using it in transaction monitoring and detecting illicit activity is in identifying ‘unknown unknowns,’ which traditional scenario-based methods are unable to detect. Additionally, advanced AI tools can adapt to new criminal techniques, letting compliance teams remain proactive rather than reactive.
Meanwhile, verifying data quality and addressing bias are significant for reliable outcomes. AI-based systems still produce false positives, but usually their numbers are lower compared to scenario-based systems. The case study published by Deloitte and United Overseas Bank showed a 5% increase in true positives and a 40% decrease in false positives in transaction monitoring, as well as a 40% rise in operational efficiency.
Saving time, costs, and workforce
The practical benefits of AI are beyond catching hidden threats. As the complexity of regulatory demands rises, many companies face rising costs in both time and workforce. AI-based solutions can help by automating tasks that would otherwise be manual and require more time, for example:
- Prioritizing alerts and flagging high-risk cases.
- Large language models can handle initial writing or policy reviews, freeing compliance officers to focus on critical analysis.
AI allows teams to concentrate on strategic decisions by relieving them of repetitive chores. Smaller crypto firms, in particular, can benefit from this. Free from bulky legacy systems, they can be faster and more flexible in adopting cutting-edge tools to remain competitive against larger players.
Still, staff training is key to helping teams interpret automated findings correctly and make data-based decisions.
Enhancing efficiency, but not regulatory collaboration
Although AI can significantly boost day-to-day efficiency, it is less likely to transform how crypto companies and regulators collaborate. Compliance officers still need to talk directly with regulatory bodies to address policy gray areas, manage ethical dilemmas, and ensure trust.
AI’s job is to streamline internal workflows, not to replace human judgment in those high-level discussions. Ultimately, regulators want clear, accountable communication, something only people can provide.
Using AI for competitive advantage and reputation
Players in traditional finance are already focusing on AI for compliance, and crypto companies that overlook this approach risk falling behind. While merely adopting AI won’t affect a crypto firm’s reputation directly, failing to use it where it’s clearly beneficial can backfire. If a preventable fraud incident or compliance breach occurs, the reputational damage could be severe. So, we can see implementing AI as a competitive advantage.
Moreover, responsibly implemented AI can enhance marketing efforts. Firms are already highlighting their AI-driven tools as evidence of risk management and user protection. When done transparently and ethically, these measures can strengthen consumer confidence and a company’s standing in the industry.
Keeping humans in the driver’s seat
Even as AI can take on a share of compliance tasks, responsibility can’t be delegated to algorithms. Decisions with legal or ethical consequences require a distinctly human touch. AI can flag a suspicious transaction, but the final call on how to handle that alert—whether to freeze an account or close it, for example—should remain with a qualified professional. Retaining control also protects companies from overreliance on technology that, while impressive, can never truly match human intuition and responsibility.
AI is on track to become an important part of crypto compliance. By combining its data-processing capabilities with human insight and ethical judgment, companies can spot threats more effectively, lower costs, and save time. The key is to find the right balance between automation and accountability.
The crypto industry should be encouraged to explore what AI has to offer while recognizing that technology alone doesn’t build trust. Real trust calls for a true commitment to compliance, transparent communication with regulators, and a focus on customer protection. By treating AI as a helpful tool, not a replacement for human judgment, the industry can move toward a safer future.
More...
Black History Month, being observed this February in the United States and many other countries around the world, including Nigeria, affords one the appropriate opportunity to share some thoughts on the rather consequential subject of systemic racism – racism of the kind that is not ad hoc, but seems built into the system itself. The irony of it, though, is that the persistence of racism in many of the concerned countries and situations is not necessarily for want of, but in spite of, efforts to eradicate it! In fact, one of the more baffling, and undoubtedly frustrating, realities confronting people and organizations working in this area has been the seemingly “die hard” nature of the problem, its resilience and persistence despite quite considerable effort over the years to eradicate it. It may actually be recalled in this context that jolted, and no doubt equally revolted, by the Nazi race theories and atrocities of the Second World War, the post-war world reacted, particularly in the West, by deploying considerable effort and resources into the fight to combat racism and racial discrimination, spearheading, for example, adoption by the United Nations of the landmark Universal Declaration Of Human Rights(1948) expressly condemning racism and prohibiting the adoption by Member States of racially discriminatory laws.
Yet, if we take the example of the United States, the truth, as recognized by President Biden himself upon his election in 2020, is that, despite the undeniable progress that has been made, especially in the wake of the great Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s and 70s, there remains an underlying systemic racism in society that refuses to go away and so continues to manifest itself in various ways on the ground: the George Floyd and George Floyd-type incidents, the near legitimization and “mainstreaming” of “white supremacy” ideologies and movements, showcased in the January 6th Capitol insurrection. In Europe, the mounting anti-racism campaigns by football authorities, particularly the FA in England, and the numerous racist avowals and incidents connected with ongoing anti-immigration protests speak to the same fact.
So, what is going on here and why? “Why have all the efforts over many decades failed to defeat or excise this social evil?” My book OF BLACK SERVITUDE WITHOUT SLAVERY, The Unspoken Politics Of The English Language, in proffering a totally new approach to dealing with the systemic racism problem, addresses this particular question by pointing out that the difficulty so far lies in the nature of the problem and the efforts directed at it. I argue, inter alia, that racism, as people encounter it, is an outward expression of the perpetrator’s racial bias mindset, which no amount of clamping down on discriminatory acts, whether in jobs, schools, housing or social interactions, such as has been the case hitherto, can effectively address: only actions targeting the mindset can be relevant.
In order to effectively combat a negative mindset, one must first identify its origin and sustenance – its well-spring, as it were – and then tackle the problem at its roots. The book identifies language as a major repository, as well as purveyor, of racial bias, which then goes on, whether intended or not, to create a racial bias mindset in its users. Using the English language, the world’s dominant and virtually only global language, to illustrate this thesis, I demonstrate that embedded in it is a systemic denigration of “blackness” and corresponding glorification of “whiteness”, which is exemplified by expressions such as blacklist, black sheep, painting someone black, for example, and white list, white knight, white lie, and more. There is, in effect, a “blackness of bad/whiteness of good, badness of black/goodness of white” narrative that runs through the language – and necessarily all thinking in that language – in which “black” basically denotes “bad” and “white”, in turn, denotes “good”. Such a narrative, imbibed over a period (often from birth), and reinforced by everyday usage, must undoubtedly create in users of the language a mindset that is conditioned, subconsciously at least, to shun “black” things while instinctively embracing things designated as “white”.
In such a scenario a black person becomes routinely subsumed – subconsciously or otherwise – into the general category of “black”, and, therefore, “bad”, things, which, in turn, triggers the preprogrammed negative reaction in the other person, regardless of conscious intentions, leaving it to that person’s conscious mind, if aware and so inclined, to make the correction by separating the black person from the general category of “bad” “black” things. It actually may well be that the psychological inability to make this separation accounts for much existing racist disposition.
The white person, too, being also an integral part of the same conditioning system, and indeed its main beneficiary, would likewise get subsumed, subconsciously or otherwise, but this time into the category of “good” things, which, in turn, implicitly “entitles” him or her to favorable or “sympathetic” treatment – so much so that it may indeed form the psychological underpinning to the long-observed phenomenon of decidedly unequal treatment of black and white persons in law enforcement, not just by the police and prison authorities, but often even by judges.
Considering the processes outlined above, one can well perceive racism of the kind under discussion as a kind of social system into which people are indoctrinated by fate (i.e. birth) or by circumstance! As such, the people involved may actually be seen as being themselves entrapped by the system!
Coming now to solutions, it becomes apparent from the foregoing analysis that the key to resolving the systemic racism problem is the elimination of the “blackness of bad/whiteness of good” narrative and its related mindset. Effective action in that regard would be to delink the race-designating terms of “black” and “white” from all qualitative assessment functions in the language and, so, from figurative expressions such as those noted above. Substituting other terms not associated with racial designations for these two terms would render these terms value-neutral and, so, mindset irrelevant, while also ending their unintended racial bias reinforcement effect as part of everyday conversations. A random example of such substitution, strictly as illustration, could be something like dronche, for “black” and freen, for “white”, giving us expressions like “dronche sheep” and “dronche list”, in the case of “black”, and, in the case of “white”, “freen knight”, and “freen magic”, and so on. Of course, whatever new substitute terms are chosen will at first appear strange, unfamiliar and maybe even nonsensical, having by necessity no intrinsic meaning; however, with time and the requisite will these should all become normalized and, more importantly, imbued with the meanings we have chosen for them, just like other invented new terms in the language: “Ms.”, “phishing”, “meme” and others, being examples.
The idea here is that upon successful implementation of such substitution, it would not be long before the older generation, no longer functioning in the “bad is black, good is white” milieu and mindset, would have this connection erased from its consciousness, while for the new-born generation no such linkage would have even existed in their consciousness, thereby leading us, in principle, to a complete and permanent solution of the systemic racism problem!
Conclusion and Notable Points
While no one can say for certain that successful implementation of the solution envisaged here would in and of itself solve all of society’s racism problem, its singular importance lies, nevertheless, in the fact that no fundamental or enduring resolution of the problem seems possible without addressing the underlying mindset issue that the solution targets!
The great merit of the solution proposed here, as argued above, is that it aims to be a real and permanent solution of the problem, rather than a palliative to douse the current crisis, as often happens. Furthermore, this is a solution that will be welcomed by all involved: no longer does the black person have to endure the psychological humiliation and stigma of sharing “labels” with everything bad, ugly and evil, while the white person will be relieved of the awkwardness of being compelled, for want of alternatives, to use terminology which they can sense is demeaning to the other person. Adding to the merits of this solution is the fact that: it costs next-to-nothing to implement, unlike other “social justice” undertakings!
It is important to note once again that the focus in this analysis on the English language is merely strategic: as the dominant international communications medium, it can do – and no doubt has already done – serious damage, spreading the narrative and mindset globally; it can, on the other hand, likewise positively transmit any correction through a large swathe of the global population. Moreover, any reform of English would exert enormous pressure for change on the other languages. This well-known French adage, for example, speaks volumes and requires no commentary: “La diable n’est pas aussi noir qu’ on le dit!”, translating essentially as “The devil is not as black as he is made out to be!” #BADISNOTBLACK&VICEVERSA
•Dr. Okali, a former United Nations Assistant Secretary-General, is Founder-Chairman, Society for the Elimination of Racism In All Language (SERIAL)
[OPINION] Trapped in Chaos: A Psychologist Reflects on the Lagos Assembly Crisis and the Deadly Risk Faced by DSS Officers - John Egbeazien Oshodi
AdminThe events at the Lagos State House of Assembly on February 17, 2025, were more than just another political crisis; they were a moment of dangerous miscalculation that put both the reputation of the Department of State Services (DSS) and the lives of its field operatives at unnecessary risk. As a psychologist and writer, I am not here to take sides but to raise an important concern—one that should trouble even the most hardened defenders of the DSS. The viral video footage does not lie. It captured DSS operatives in the kind of physically vulnerable, life-threatening situation that an elite force should never find itself in. These were not inexperienced recruits; they were trained officers of a national security agency who suddenly found themselves struggling for breath, pinned between determined lawmakers and legislative workers pushing forward against them. Their faces—half-covered by helmets, masks soaked in sweat—showed visible distress. Their bodies were strained under the pressure of the confrontation. And as the tide of lawmakers pressed forward, those officers were seconds away from being completely overpowered.
And so, I ask, what if one of them had not made it out?
What if a DSS officer had collapsed from exhaustion, suffocated in the heat of the struggle?
What if a law enforcement operative had suffered serious injury from the physical force of the crowd?
What if the lawmakers, in the heat of frustration, had retaliated more aggressively?
What if an officer, under extreme stress, had reacted with force that escalated into violence?
This is not speculation. This is exactly what was set into motion on that day. This was not a strategic operation; this was a dangerous misjudgment, one that could have turned fatal within seconds. And that should concern the DSS more than anything else. Because while politicians play their games, it is always the men on the ground—the uniformed officers—who bear the real consequences.
The official statement from the Lagos Assembly, signed by Ogundipe Olukayode, Chairman of the House Committee on Information, Strategy, and Security, confirmed what Nigerians already knew:
Yes, the DSS was invited to provide security—but not to invade the chamber.
Yes, the Clerk requested their presence—but not to seal the Speaker’s office.
Yes, there were security concerns—but on that day, the DSS itself became the biggest threat.
How did an elite security force—an agency feared for its intelligence, operational precision, and enforcement power—allow itself to be turned into the story? The DSS is supposed to neutralize threats before they escalate, yet this time, it became the crisis. Instead of being the force that ensured peace, DSS operatives were physically caught in a power struggle, outnumbered, overwhelmed, and left struggling against the force of a determined Assembly. This is not how an elite force should operate.
There are bigger questions DSS leadership must now answer. Who made the call to position these officers in such a confrontational stance? Who in DSS believed that physically blocking lawmakers from their own chamber would not lead to open resistance? Who in command failed to anticipate that emotions would flare, that the situation would escalate, and that the officers placed at the doors could be trapped in a physical struggle that endangered their own safety?
If the DSS’s true mission was security enforcement, how did it end up in direct physical conflict with lawmakers and Assembly workers? If DSS officers were meant to prevent instability, why were they the ones visibly struggling, unable to maintain control, and ultimately being forced out?
Because the truth is, this was not a strategic operation. This was a tactical failure.
And what was achieved? Despite deploying DSS operatives, sealing the Speaker’s office, blocking the chamber doors, and physically engaging with lawmakers—nothing was stopped.
The Speaker, Mojisola Meranda, still presided.
The lawmakers still convened.
The Assembly still held its session.
Democracy still went on.
And DSS? What did they gain?
If the goal was to stop the session, it failed.
If the goal was to scare the lawmakers, it failed.
If the goal was to prove dominance, it failed.
Instead, DSS officers were physically overpowered, outnumbered, and exhausted, forced to retreat from a battle they should never have been sent into. What was the real objective here? And at what cost
DSS is not a riot squad. DSS is not a political enforcement agency. DSS is not a tool for individual interests. It is an elite security force, designed to protect national stability, not to be thrown into politically motivated conflicts that leave its own officers gasping for air at the doors of an Assembly building.
This incident should serve as a serious warning. It was not just a failure of tactics—it was a failure of leadership within DSS. It was a reckless deployment of operatives, without a clear strategy to ensure their success or safety. The officers involved were placed in harm’s way, while those who issued the orders watched from a distance.
This time, the officers walked away.
But next time?
Next time, the outcome may not be so fortunate.
Next time, someone may not survive the encounter.
Next time, no politician, no government official, and no DSS commander will take responsibility.
And that is why DSS must rethink its approach now. Not because of political pressure. Not because of public scrutiny. But because the lives of its own officers are at stake. No security force should be put in a position where it becomes the crisis instead of the solution. No law enforcement agent should be forced into a battle they were never meant to fight.
DSS must ask itself: Is this what we have become? Are we an agency that strategically ensures security, or one that blindly walks into chaos without a plan?
The time to rethink tactics is now. Because next time, the cost may be irreversible.
Nigeria’s independence in 1960 provided a momentous occasion for the country to pause, re-evaluate its excision from Britain’s clogged colonial policy and make a dash for a decorated prosperous future. The dash wash frighteningly and forcefully promising until the military abandoned their barracks to truncate Nigeria’s future between 1966 and 1970 and for long periods after that. Those wounds have simply refused to heal.
Gratefully, Nigeria returned to democracy in 1999. With the reinstatement of democracy, elections returned as did institutions of government. The executive, judiciary, and legislature have been up and running since then.
At the federal level, it is the national assembly that makes laws. The state houses of assembly take over that task in the states.
However, to say that since 1999, Nigerians have been repeatedly embarrassed with the lack of class and composure shown by many of those who represent them at the federal and state legislature is to put it mildly. Again and again, the supposed representatives of the people have shown by their words and conduct that they are not worth their salt, many times of course, with the executive shamefully compelling them or conniving with them.
The latest assembly that is more akin to a lunatic asylum is the Lagos State House of Assembly. Weeks ago, the long-standing and grandstanding speaker, Mudashiru Obasa, was removed and replaced by Mojisola Meranda . But he has refused to back down or go down quietly, insisting that his removal was flawed and he deserves reinstatement. The fiasco has unsettled the assembly with security personnel moving in to lock out the legislators and their staff some days ago.
What a slap to the face of the people of Lagos State. It is a big slight to President Bola Ahmed Tinubu who is showing impregnable fortitude in trying to fix Nigeria’s problems in Abuja that legislators in his home state are indulging their whims and caprices and are instead behaving like spoilt school kids.
This embarrassment that is made in Lagos is coming very early in the year, but Nigerians have been there many times before. Rivers State was the last to provide such embarrassing theater. Legislators in the Benue State House of Assembly are not exactly at one another’s necks, but their attempt to remove the state chief judge is one of such extensive theatrics that can only come from an overbearing and overexcited state house of Assembly.
It Is in the best interest of Nigerians that those elected to represent them at any level show themselves as people worthy to bear such sacred responsibilities. This is key. They must show themselves consistently as people of excellent character.
No matter the temptation, they must refuse to reduce themselves to the level of touts and truants, which would cast great indignity on their office as legislators.
As for the overbearing executives who lean too hard on the legislature to make it impossible for them to work freely, it is important to remember that separation of powers is the hallmark of the constitutional democracy Nigeria is trying to operate.
It is not about one person. It goes beyond anybody and extends to the health of democracy in Nigeria. If the institutions which underpin democracy in Nigeria perform optimally, the country will be in the best place possible eventually.
It is often said that time heals wounds, but history has shown us that time also demands accountability. After decades of evasion, former military president General Ibrahim Badamasi Babangida (IBB) has finally nurtured his wounded conscience with the truth regarding the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election.
Just as Uthman Dan Fodio once recommended that “conscience is an open wound, only truth can heal it,” the former military president has finally tended to his wounded conscience by admitting the truth about the annulment of the June 12, 1993, presidential election in his book. For decades, the ghost of that historic injustice has haunted Nigeria’s democratic journey, but by coming clean, IBB has, at least, acknowledged the weight of his actions. While his confession does not erase the past, it aligns with Dan Fodio’s wisdom, which says only truth has the power to bring closure to history’s most painful wounds.
Though his somewhat confession has come late, long after many key players in that unfortunate monkeyshines have passed on, it still holds significance for the sake of posterity.
For years, Nigerians have yearned for an honest acknowledgment of the circumstances surrounding the annulment of what is still widely regarded as Nigeria’s freest and fairest election. The event that denied Chief Moshood Kashimawo Olawale (MKO) Abiola his legitimate mandate remains a dark stain on our democratic journey. The excuses and justifications provided over the years never satisfied the thirst for truth. Now, IBB’s belated confession, though not a complete absolution of his role, serves as a historical document that at least gives Nigerians some clarity.
The question on the lips of many Nigerians is: “Why now?” “Why did IBB choose to reveal his truth at a time when the principal victims of his actions are no longer alive to react?” MKO Abiola, the man whose mandate was stolen, died under suspicious circumstances while still demanding justice. His wife, Kudirat Abiola, was assassinated in the course of the struggle. Other activists and journalists who fought relentlessly for the reversal of the annulment either suffered exile, imprisonment, or lost their lives. The Nigerian people endured political repression, economic hardship, and a prolonged transition to democracy. The confession, though welcomed, is coming at a time when justice can no longer be served to those directly affected.
Yet, it is better late than never. By admitting the truth, IBB has at least given Nigerians something tangible to hold onto. The significance of this confession cannot be overlooked. It reinforces the fact that Nigeria’s democratic struggle was not in vain. It also serves as a reminder that no matter how long it takes, the truth has a way of emerging. For those who doubted the sincerity of the opposition to the annulment, this confession is a validation that history had judged rightly.
In fact, IBB’s public acknowledgment should serve as a moral benchmark for others who have, at different political dispensations, contributed to Nigeria’s downfall. Nigeria has suffered repeated betrayals from individuals entrusted with power and responsibility. From electoral manipulations to corruption and governance failures, the country has been plagued by leaders who, like IBB, made self-serving decisions at the expense of the people.
Where are those who orchestrated the economic policies that plunged millions into poverty? Where are the architects of failed government programs that siphoned public funds while leaving citizens in suffering? Where are the political leaders who used ethnic and religious divisions to gain power, only to abandon the people when it mattered most? These individuals, like IBB, owe Nigerians the truth.
Confession is not just about admitting wrongdoing; it is about setting the record straight and giving future generations the opportunity to learn from past mistakes. Those who have played key roles in Nigeria’s political and economic sabotage should follow IBB’s example and admit their misdeeds. This is not about public shaming but about fostering a culture of answerability. Nigeria cannot move forward if its history remains shrouded in lies and deliberate misinformation.
Without a doubt, there is an urgent need for institutional truth-telling. Many countries that have suffered similar political betrayals have implemented truth and reconciliation commissions. South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission provided a platform for perpetrators of political crimes to confess their actions and seek forgiveness. Nigeria has never had such a structured approach to addressing its past.
Imagine a situation where past military rulers, corrupt politicians, and economic saboteurs come forward to acknowledge their wrongdoings. Imagine how much healing it would bring if those who orchestrated electoral frauds admitted their roles and sought national forgiveness. Such a process would not erase the damage done, but it would give Nigeria a stronger foundation for moving forward.
In fact, IBB’s confession has reignited discussions on the role of citizens in holding leaders accountable. While it is easy to blame those in power, Nigerians must also reflect on how they have enabled unpatriotic leadership. Too often, the electorate has been complicit in electing or tolerating corrupt politicians. The culture of political sycophancy, where individuals support leaders based on ethnic or religious affiliations rather than competence, has been detrimental to the nation’s progress.
The lessons from June 12 should go beyond IBB’s confession. Nigerians must demand better governance, transparency, and integrity from their leaders. If we do not hold our leaders accountable, history will continue to repeat itself. Confessions are useful, but they should lead to systemic change.
Beyond individual confessions, Nigeria must explore avenues for restorative justice. While some might argue that IBB’s confession is enough, others believe that justice must go beyond mere words. Should there be reparations for the damage caused by the annulment of June 12? Should there be legal consequences for historical political crimes? These are tough but necessary questions that Nigerians must begin to ask.
Furthermore, the government should take steps to formally document the history of June 12 in school curricula, civic education, and national discourse. We must not allow future generations to be misinformed or manipulated about the true events of the past. If we are to build a stronger democracy, we must learn from our past mistakes and ensure that the mistakes of history are never repeated.
IBB’s delayed confession about the June 12 annulment is not enough to erase the pain and damage caused, but it is still a step in the right direction. It is an acknowledgment that the Nigerian people were wronged, and that truth, no matter how long it takes, will always surface. Other political actors who have betrayed Nigeria in one way or another should take a cue from IBB and come forward with their own confessions.
For the sake of posterity, Nigeria must embrace truth as a necessary component of nation-building. Without honesty about our past, we cannot chart a clear course for the future. As we remember June 12 and its significance, let us also remember that democracy thrives on accountability. The journey to a better Nigeria begins with a commitment to truth, no matter how uncomfortable it may be. The time for silence and denial is over, Nigeria deserves the truth, and it deserves it now.