Latest News
OTHERS' VIEWS
[OPINION] A Cry for Justice—Madam Chief Justice, The Judiciary Must Not Be Used to Destroy Rivers State - John Egbeazien Oshodi
Admin![[OPINION] A Cry for Justice—Madam Chief Justice, The Judiciary Must Not Be Used to Destroy Rivers State - John Egbeazien Oshodi](/media/k2/items/cache/c72bef490bc387adf60ea38163eae178_L.jpg)
Your Ladyship,
I write this letter with profound sadness, my heart weighed down by the state of our judiciary. My hands shake—not from fear, but from the deep sorrow of witnessing what should be the last refuge of justice being turned into a tool for political manipulation. Madam Chief Justice, you are the steward of our judiciary, a symbol of integrity, and a model for legal excellence—yet under your watch, justice appears to be slipping away, leaving confusion, hardship, and despair in its wake.
This is not just a matter of legal technicalities—it is about real people, real lives, and the survival of an entire state. Children will go to bed hungry, not because their parents are lazy, but because their state has been deliberately strangled. The sick will be left without medicine, lying in pain on hospital beds, because political power plays have cut off critical funding. Workers, who have spent years serving the people, will soon cry out in anguish as their salaries are left unpaid, their families staring at an uncertain future.
I think of the market woman, who rises before dawn to ensure her children do not starve, only to find that the government she relies on is being torn apart. I think of the young graduates, full of dreams, only to realize that their future is being traded away for political interests. I think of the elderly, who have given their lives to this nation, now watching it descend into disorder, as lawlessness and political interference overshadow fairness and the rule of law.
Madam Chief Justice, we all know that judicial rulings are not always free from political influence. You have been part of this system for decades—you have seen how the judiciary is sometimes used for purposes beyond justice. But even if what happened under these five justices cannot be undone, I ask you to reflect in private, away from the pressures of politics, and ask yourself: Was this truly fair? Was this truly just? Is this the mark you want to leave on history?
And most critically, what happens now to the Federal High Court in Port Harcourt, which is still actively handling this case? The matter has not been dismissed. The court is still in session. But now, the judges there sit in utter confusion, caught between fulfilling their legal duty and the overwhelming shadow of a Supreme Court ruling that came too soon.
Madam Chief Justice, what direction are they to take? Do they abandon their role? Do they ignore the case before them? Do they yield to pressure? Or do they uphold the Constitution as they swore to do?
You hold the power to guide this situation toward justice. You hold the power to preserve the integrity of the courts
Madam Chief Justice, I cry for Rivers State. I cry for Nigeria.
A Judiciary in Disarray—Confusion in the Lower Courts
Madam Chief Justice, if you remain silent, history will remember.
The Federal High Court in Port Harcourt had set April 16, 2025, to rule on the defection case. The law was clear, the judicial process was in motion, and due process was being followed. Yet, before the court could speak, before justice could take its rightful course, five Supreme Court justices—Justice Uwani Musa Abba-Aji (Presiding), Justice Emmanuel Akomaye Agim, Justice Ibrahim Mohammed Musa Saulawa, Justice Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme, and Justice Jamilu Yammama Tukur—ignored judicial boundaries, disregarded the ongoing legal process, and rushed in to deliver a ruling that has now left the Federal High Court in complete confusion.
My Lord, what was the rush? Who was pursuing them? Why did they not allow the Rivers court to reach its decision? Now, the Federal High Court is left in disarray, uncertain whether to proceed, abandon its own ruling, or bow to an already delivered judgment.
Justice is meant to be orderly, structured, and impartial—so why create chaos where there should have been clarity? Why throw the judiciary into turmoil instead of letting the law take its natural course?
What happens now? What do the judges in Port Harcourt tell the people? Do they bow in shame, knowing that their authority has been stolen? Do they throw away their own ruling because the Supreme Court has spoken before them? How does the judiciary justify this?
Madam Chief Justice, I beg you, with everything that is left of the rule of law, do not let this stand. The Constitution is clear—once lawmakers defect, they lose their seats automatically. This is not politics. This is not opinion. This is law. So why, then, has the Supreme Court chosen to ignore it?
Why has it chosen to breathe life into political lawlessness?
The Judiciary’s Role in Rivers State’s Collapse
And now, look at the results of this judicial blunder.
Governor Fubara—a man elected by the people—is suddenly being dragged into a battle for his survival. The same lawmakers who should be working for their state have abandoned their duty. They are not in the Assembly. They have gone on indefinite leave. They refuse to work. But the Supreme Court ordered Fubara to present a budget. How? To whom?
And now, because they refuse to sit, because they refuse to listen, because they refuse to fulfill their constitutional duty, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has been ordered not to release state allocations.
Madam Chief Justice, do you see what this means?
It means that children will no longer receive free education because schools will shut down. It means that state workers will not be paid. It means that hospitals will run out of medicine. It means that pensioners who have already been struggling will have nothing left to survive on.
It means that Rivers State is now in a slow, painful process of economic strangulation.
Political Desperation—The Darkest Path
And what happens when people can no longer eat?
What happens when mothers watch their babies cry in hunger?
What happens when fathers who have worked all their lives realize their salaries will no longer come?
What happens when the sick lie helpless in hospitals with no medicine, no doctors, and no way to survive?
I will tell you what happens.
Chaos. Protest. Desperation. And, God forbid, bloodshed.
And when that day comes, when the streets of Rivers State erupt, when innocent people start dying, when angry youths pick up stones and march against oppression, who will history hold responsible?
Madam Chief Justice, the time to act is now.
The Supreme Court’s Name in the Mud
The actions of these five justices violate the principles outlined in the International Judicial Accountability Principles (IJAP) and the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP) guidelines. These frameworks emphasize judicial restraint, especially when a matter is actively before another court.
By bypassing the ongoing proceedings, the Supreme Court has undermined the integrity of the judicial process and public trust in legal institutions (THISDAYLIVE).
A Call for a Review—The Law Must Speak Again
The Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners (ALDRAP) has called for a review of the Supreme Court’s judgment, highlighting concerns about its lack of alignment with previous judicial decisions and constitutional provisions (THISDAYLIVE).
Madam Chief Justice, you can stop this.
You can stand for truth, not politics.
You can correct this injustice, before Rivers State is plunged into irreversible chaos.
I do not ask you to interfere in the pending case in Port Harcourt.
I do not ask you to take sides in politics.
I ask you to do what is right.
I ask you to let the law prevail.
I ask you to not let history remember your name for this miscarriage of justice.
I ask you to be the voice of the voiceless, the protector of the people, the defender of democracy.
Save Rivers State. Save the Judiciary. Save Nigeria.
Madam Chief Justice, you have the power to change this.
If you choose to remain silent,
If you watch Rivers State collapse,
If you turn away while the people suffer,
Then history will not be kind.
Madam Chief Justice, save your name. Save the judiciary. Save the people. Save Nigeria.
If the courts cannot stand for justice, who will?
I write this in tears. I write this in grief. I write this as a citizen who still believes in the power of truth.
Do not let the law die. Do not let the people suffer. Do not let Nigeria bleed.
[OPINION] An Open Letter to President Tinubu, Senate President Akpabio, and Speaker Tajudeen Abbas: The Rivers State Emergency, the Test of Leadership, and the Unseen Turns of Tomorrow - John Egbeazien Oshodi
Admin![[OPINION] An Open Letter to President Tinubu, Senate President Akpabio, and Speaker Tajudeen Abbas: The Rivers State Emergency, the Test of Leadership, and the Unseen Turns of Tomorrow - John Egbeazien Oshodi](/media/k2/items/cache/69467beabf4d6f8259c20a3fe78a93a1_L.jpg)
Your Excellencies,
Nigeria finds itself in yet another avoidable crisis, this time centered around Rivers State, a region vital to the country’s economic and political landscape. To his credit, President Bola Tinubu stepped in at a moment when tensions were escalating dangerously, with political discord threatening to spill over into full-scale unrest. Given the volatility of the situation, his decision to declare a state of emergency in Rivers—suspending Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and lawmakers—may have been driven by the need to prevent an immediate breakdown of law and order. However, while this intervention may have temporarily calmed rising tensions, it has also deepened national anxiety and raised serious questions about the federal government’s role in the crisis.
Officially, the justification for this action is security concerns and pipeline vandalism, but the Nigerian people are not deceived. While the security of vital infrastructure is an important national concern, the core of the Rivers crisis is not merely about lawlessness or economic sabotage—it is a battle for political control, one that has been intensifying since Minister Nyesom Wike refused to relinquish his grip on the state he once governed. The silence of the federal government regarding Wike’s disruptive influence, paired with the forceful sidelining of Fubara, has sent a troubling message: powerful political figures are protected at all costs, while elected leaders who refuse to bow are removed under the guise of stability.
The Burden of Public Perception and the Shadow of One Man
Mr. President, except for the Speaker of the House, you, Senate President Akpabio, and Minister Wike have openly positioned yourselves against Governor Siminalayi Fubara. This is not a whispered conspiracy or a baseless accusation; it is the painful public perception, one that has deeply settled in the minds of Nigerians. It is what people see, what they feel, and what they are struggling to understand.
Even in your emergency address, a moment that could have reassured Nigerians and reinforced balance in governance, you placed the weight of responsibility on this quiet, cool-headed governor, a man who—by all indications—has tried to steady the ship amid the turbulent storm that surrounds him.
Not once. Not once did you directly or indirectly acknowledge the root of the crisis—Wike.
What Exactly Does Wike Have On You?
Sir, let’s be real, a therapeutic question must be asked because Nigerians are asking it already:
What does Wike have on you all?
Mr. President, again—what exactly does Wike have on you? This is not a rhetorical question, sir. Nigerians are perplexed, confused, even entertained at this point because no man should be this politically untouchable unless he holds something deeper than we can see.
Is it God, juju, or secrets buried too deep to reveal? Because, let’s be honest, no man can consume you—unless you allow him to. But right now, the message being sent is louder than any press statement or emergency declaration:
You can hit Fubara, but you won’t touch Wike.
This has become more than a leadership issue—it is now a test of your authority. And the message it sends? That one man sits above even you, Mr. President.
The People Are Watching—Hit Him or Prove You Are Under Him
Nigerians are watching, and they are speaking loudly:
“Deal with Wike, unless he has something on you. And even if he does, for God’s sake, hit him one way or another for balance.”
You came into power as a man who takes bold action, who moves without fear—so why does it seem that Wike is an exception to that rule?
If you can hit Fubara, suspend lawmakers, and declare an emergency, then for balance, hit Wike. Prove you are not under his influence. Prove that no man holds sway over you.
Because, Mr. President, if you continue to punish one man while shielding the other, then Nigerians will conclude the truth for themselves: Wike is bigger than the presidency.
And that, sir, is not an image of strength—it is an image of submission.
A Dangerous Precedent That Demands Urgent Correction
At a time when Nigeria should be strengthening its democratic institutions, ensuring that elected officials are protected from undue political interference, and reinforcing the autonomy of state governments, this crisis has instead revealed a deep contradiction in how power is managed.
The people of Rivers—and indeed, Nigerians as a whole—are watching closely. The perception growing across the nation is that this state of emergency was never about protecting Rivers—it was about protecting Wike’s influence.
And this is a dangerous precedent—one that must be urgently corrected with balanced leadership.
If the government’s true aim is fairness and stability, then justice must be applied equally.
If Governor Fubara is to be reprimanded, then Wike must not walk untouched.
Mr. President, hit Wike the way you hit Fubara—or prove to Nigerians that you are under his control. The choice is yours, but the people have already made up their minds.
MILITARY OCCUPATION: A TEMPORARY FIX WITH LASTING CONSEQUENCES
Yes, military occupation under this state of emergency is meant to last six months. Even if extended, one reality remains unchanged: Governor Fubara was elected by the people. And since your declaration, Nigerians have been murmuring, “There Tinubu goes again, helping Wike.” They recall that every time you have intervened in the Rivers crisis, your actions have tilted in favor of Wike, sidelining Fubara. Now, this emergency declaration follows the same pattern—excusing Wike’s excesses while shifting the weight of responsibility elsewhere.
But let’s be realistic. Even with an extended military presence, you cannot control or possibly stop everyone. The population of Rivers State runs in millions, and their growing frustration cannot be silenced by force. Port Harcourt alone is home to millions, many of whom remain loyal to their elected governor. Military occupation may give a temporary sense of control, but it will not erase the people’s will.
History has repeatedly demonstrated that when people feel oppressed, they resist. The psychological burden of political suppression breeds resentment, anger, and, ultimately, defiance. Your administration must understand that governing through force is unsustainable. You cannot rule by intimidation—only by justice, fairness, and respect for democratic choice.
THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TRAUMA OF GOVERNANCE BETRAYAL
Leadership extends beyond policies and strategies; it is built on trust, perception, and the emotional state of the people you govern. Right now, the people of Rivers State feel deeply betrayed. This is not just politics—it is psychological trauma on a collective scale.
When people elect a leader, they are not just voting for governance; they are investing their hopes, struggles, and aspirations in someone they believe represents them. The forced sidelining of Fubara is not just a political maneuver—it is an act of disenfranchisement, a direct insult to the very people who voted for him. It sends a chilling message that their voices, choices, and votes are disposable.
The consequence? Mass frustration, suppressed anger, and a growing distrust in the federal government. Nigerians are not naïve. They have watched how this administration has handled Wike—with favor, protection, and indulgence—while Fubara has been repeatedly undermined, isolated, and now forcefully removed. The people see the injustice, and their response will not be silence.
MILITARY FORCE CANNOT HEAL A POLITICAL WOUND
History is filled with lessons about the futility of military intervention in political matters. The use of security forces in Rivers State may create an illusion of control, but even if military presence is extended indefinitely, it will not fix the root cause of the crisis.
Rivers is a state of millions, with Port Harcourt as a political and economic nerve center. The idea that military occupation will pacify an entire population is both unrealistic and dangerous. You can send armed forces to patrol the streets, but you cannot suppress thoughts, emotions, and resistance indefinitely.
When a people feel unheard, they do not simply fade away. They adapt. They resist. They find new ways to express their frustration—through civil disobedience, economic disruption, or prolonged defiance. Right now, the people of Rivers are watching. They are recording. They are remembering. Every unjust act against their elected governor deepens their resentment and fuels a crisis that force alone cannot resolve.
Be warned—Rivers and the entire Niger Delta are watching. The people are not blind to injustice, and even if the military remains stationed in Rivers indefinitely, they cannot consume or silence everyone.
A political wound cannot be healed with military boots. Justice is the only cure.
THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF FEDERAL MISMANAGEMENT
Rivers State is not just a political entity—it is a national economic asset. It is one of Nigeria’s largest oil-producing states, generating billions of dollars in revenue. Any instability in the region is not just a Rivers problem; it is a Nigerian problem.
Already, global oil markets are taking note of the crisis. Investors are growing concerned that continued unrest will lead to reduced oil production, sabotage of energy infrastructure, and instability in business operations.
If this crisis spirals further, Nigeria will experience:
Declining oil production as local communities begin to withdraw cooperation.
Increased energy infrastructure attacks, as seen in past grievances with the Niger Delta region.
Loss of investor confidence, leading to capital flight and economic downturn.
Greater economic hardship for ordinary Nigerians, as revenue from Rivers begins to drop.
A government that truly values national stability must understand that you cannot undermine the leadership of an oil-rich state and expect economic peace. The Nigerian economy cannot afford another prolonged crisis in an oil-producing region.
THE INCONSISTENCY OF PRESIDENTIAL INTERVENTIONS: WHY FUBARA, NOT WIKE?
One of the most glaring contradictions in this entire situation is the selective intervention of the presidency.
Why is Governor Fubara, an elected leader, being treated as the problem, while Minister Wike, the source of the instability, remains untouched, unchecked, and unaccountable?
Why has President Tinubu not once publicly criticized Wike for his disruptive role in Rivers governance? Why has the Senate President remained silent on the one person fueling division in Rivers State?
Nigerians are watching, and they are asking difficult questions. If this is about restoring order, why does Wike remain free to operate? Why does it seem as though this entire situation is being engineered to weaken Fubara while empowering Wike?
REBUKING WIKE—A NECESSARY STEP FOR BALANCE
Mr. President, even if for nothing else but psychological balance, rebuke Wike. Even superficially. Speak to him publicly. Condemn his role, even symbolically. Let the people of Rivers State see that their grievances are being acknowledged.
The psychological damage of selective justice is real. The people of Rivers need to hear you say Wike’s name—not in praise, not in justification, but in acknowledgment of his disruptive role.
If Wike is not held accountable, the people will see this administration as complicit in the crisis, rather than a neutral force trying to resolve it.
Even those who may support your administration are questioning the selective silence. This is a moment that requires strategic leadership, and sometimes, a few words can be more powerful than military action.
THE URGENT CALL FOR ACTION
Public self-reflection from President Tinubu, indirectly acknowledging the concerns of favoritism while reaffirming his commitment to impartial governance.
A public rebuke of Minister Wike—even if symbolic—to signal fairness to the people of Rivers.
Immediate reduction of Minister Wike’s influence over Rivers State’s affairs to restore the authority of the elected governor.
A shift from military intervention to political reconciliation, ensuring that this crisis is resolved through governance, not force.
A commitment from the National Assembly to uphold institutional independence, preventing political interference in state-level leadership.
FINAL WORDS: CHOOSING JUSTICE OVER POLITICAL ALLIANCES
Mr. President, Rivers State is not just another political battlefield; it is a symbol of Nigeria’s democratic future.
If this crisis is handled with bias, if Wike remains shielded while Fubara is continually undermined, your administration will bear a defining stain—one that history will not erase.
Leadership is not just about loyalty; it is about fairness, courage, and the wisdom to act beyond political debts. The decisions you make today will shape not just the road to 2027, but your legacy in the years beyond. If this crisis is managed with injustice, the trust placed in your leadership will fracture, and the echoes of today’s actions will fuel tomorrow’s resistance.
Yes, Wike fought to deliver Rivers for you in 2023, using every means within his reach. Yes, 2027 looms ahead, but no one controls the future. That is why, in this moment, you must stand on the side of justice. As you rebuke Fubara during this emergency declaration, do not turn a blind eye to Wike’s role in this crisis. Let him too feel the weight of accountability. True leadership is not about selective discipline; it is about ensuring that justice prevails, no matter how powerful the individual.
History will not forget this moment. It will record whether you chose to rise above politics or allowed personal alliances to plunge Nigeria into further instability.
Be careful—Rivers and the entire Niger Delta are watching. The people are not blind to injustice, and the Nigeria Police and Military cannot suppress them all.
The choice is yours. Nigerians are watching. Nigerians are waiting.
[OPINION] Illegality Of Dissolution Of Elected Democratic Structures In Nigeria - Femi Falana, SAN
Admin![[OPINION] Illegality Of Dissolution Of Elected Democratic Structures In Nigeria - Femi Falana, SAN](/media/k2/items/cache/e6da47cfc00b7616c934c805ffa7994b_M.jpg)
The decision of President Bola Tinubu to suspend Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, Mrs Ngozi Odu, and all elected members of the Rivers State House of Assembly for six months is illegal as it cannot be justified under any of the provisions of the 320 sections of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.
No doubt, Section 305 of the Constitution empowers the President to take extraordinary measures to restore law and order if, among other reasons, there is actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof to such extent as to require extraordinary measures to restore peace and security or there is a clear and present danger of an actual breakdown of public order and public safety in the Federation or any part thereof requiring extraordinary measures to avert such danger.
But, the extraordinary measures which may be adopted by the President to restore peace and security in the Federation or in any particular State does not include the suspension of an elected Governor, an elected Deputy Governor and the dissolution of other democratic structures. For the avoidance of doubt, section 45(3) of the Constitution provides that a 'period of emergency' means "any period during which there is in force a Proclamation of a state of emergency declared by the President in exercise of the powers conferred on him under section 305 of this Constitution."
Thus, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Nigerian Constitution, the office of an elected governor can only become vacant upon death, ill health, resignation, or impeachment. Even where the office of the Governor becomes vacant for any reason whatsoever, the Deputy Governor shall be sworn in as the Governor.
And where the offices of the Governor and Deputy Governor become vacant at the same time, the Speaker of the State House of Assembly shall become an Acting Governor for not more than 3 months. During the 3-month period, a fresh election shall be conducted by the Independent National Electoral Commission for the election of a new governor.
It is pertinent to state that the failure of a House of Assembly to function in Rivers State can not be a justification for the dissolution of democratic structures in any State of the Federation. Indeed, the Constitution had envisaged that a State House of Assembly may not be able to function due to one reason or another. Hence, section 11(4) of the Constitution stipulates as follows:
"At any time when any House of Assembly of a State is unable to perform its functions by reason of the situation prevailing in that State, the National Assembly may make such laws for the peace, order and good government of that State with respect to matters on which a House of Assembly to be necessary or expedient until such time as the House of Assembly is able to resume its functions; and any such laws enacted by the National Assembly pursuant to this section shall have effect as if they were laws enacted by the House of Assembly of the State:
Provided that nothing in this section shall be construed as conferring on the National Assembly power to remove the Governor or the Deputy Governor of the State from office."
In 2004 and 2006, we condemned the illegal dissolution of democratic structures when President Olusegun Obasanjo imposed emergency rules on Plateau State and Ekiti State, respectively. Regrettably, on both occasions, the Supreme Court refused to determine the constitutional validity of the dissolution of democratic structures on the ground that the suit were procedurally incompetent because they were instituted during the six-month emergency period by the suspended legislators in the name of Plateau State without the authorization of the Sole Administration of the state!
However, in 2013, when a state of emergency was declared in Adamawa, Borno and Yobe States by former Presidents Goodluck Jonathan, we urged him to reject the pressure mounted on by anti democratic forces to remove the elected Governors and dissolve democratic structures in the affected States. President Jonathan followed the path of constitutionalism.
In 2021, the then Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami SAN announced the plan of the federal government to declare a state of emergency in Anambra State over insecurity and threat to a complete breakdown of law and order in that part of the Federation We advised President Buhari not to demolish democratic structures even if emergency rule was imposed on the state. President Buhari followed the path of constituionalism.
In the cases of Adegbenro vs. Attorney-General of the Federation (1962) 1 NLR 338 F.R.A. Williams V Dr. M.A. Majekodunmi (1962) 1 NLR 328 the Supreme Court of Nigeria validated the Emergency Powers Act 1961 to justify the dissolution of democratic structures as well as suspension of fundamental human rights in western region. As there is no equivalent of the Emergency Powers Act 1961 under the current constitutional dispensation, the suspension of an elected Governor by an elected President is a constitutional anomaly under the 1999 Constitution.
In Attorney General of the Federation v. Attorney General of Abia State & Ors (2024) LPELR-62576 (SC) filed by the Bola Tinubu administration, the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that the removal of elected chairmen and councilors as well as appointment of sole administrators or caretaker committees by State Governors to run local government councils are illegal and unconstitutional. It follows to reason that the suspension of elected governors and elected members of the House of Assembly by the President is illegal and unconstitutional in every material particular.
To that extent, a serving or retired military officer can not be imposed as a Sole Administrator to govern any state in Nigeria. Similarly, a military officer cannot be appointed by the National Assembly as a Sole Administrator to govern the Nigerian people during a war between Nigeria and another country.
In the Speaker, Bauchi State House of Assembly v Hon Rifkatu Danna (2017) 49 WRN 82 and several other cases, Nigerian Courts have held that the suspension of elected legislators is illegal and unconstitutional. Therefore, the National Assembly should not endorse the illegal suspension of the Rivers State legislators that have not defected from the People's Democratic Party to the All Progressive Congress. Instead of approving the illegal dissolution of democratic structures in Rivers State, the National Assembly should assist Governor Fubara by invoking its powers under section 11 (4) of the Constitution "to make laws for the peace, order and good government of that State"
Therefore, we are compelled to call on President Bola Tinubu to follow the path of constituionalism without any delay. The President should proceed to reinstate the suspended Governor Fubara and Deputy Governor Odu and restore all democratic structures in Rivers State. This call is without prejudice to the duty imposed on the President to adopt extraordinary measures to restore law and order in Rivers State under Governor Fubara in strict compliance with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended.
![[OPINION] The Mike Adenuga in Elon Musk - Olabode Opeseitan](/media/k2/items/cache/aa3fdc85920ae5d5d8c16565f1a084f2_M.jpg)
They were both born, raised and acculturated in Africa.
They both left their motherland, Africa, in search of the elusive golden fleece, driven by their unique aspirations and visions for the future.
After completing their academic pursuits, one returned to the continent of his birth to combine the entirety of his experience with the mystical ingenuity of his Ijebu people to build enduring, multi-generational wealth.
The other chose to remain in the United States, recognizing that pursuing the American dream offered a more exponential path to success than returning to Africa. To contextualize the impact of this choice, the net worth of the wealthiest South African Johann Rupert, is $12.8 billion, while Elon Musk’s net worth is $335.2 billion, the highest in the world.
The gulf between their wealth is as vast and unbridgeable as the ocean. If Elon had remained in Africa, he might not have topped Johann’s net worth of $12.8 billion. He made the right call back then.
Back to Adenuga and Musk, one is now in his early 70s, the other in his early 50s.
Both share striking similarities across the nobility in the leadership value chain:
Entrepreneurial Vision & Leadership: Both are visionary business leaders who have significantly shaped their industries—Musk in fintech, space, electric vehicles, and AI, and Adenuga in telecommunications and oil. Their ability to innovate and lead massive enterprises highlights their strong leadership qualities.
Courage & Risk-Taking: Both leaders exhibit extraordinary courage in taking risks. Musk has pushed forward with revolutionary ideas in space travel and electric vehicles despite scepticism and huge setbacks, while Adenuga disrupted Africa’s telecom and took bold steps in the oil industry, competing in both instances against African and global giants.
Generosity & Philanthropy: Both are known for their charitable efforts. Musk has contributed to renewable energy, space exploration, and AI safety, while Adenuga has funded scholarships and community development programs in Nigeria and beyond, where he is also regarded as the king of individual empowerment.
Influence & Global Impact: They are both highly influential figures in their regions and globally, shaping industries, inspiring entrepreneurs, and influencing policies in technology and business.
Loyalty: Both have shown dedication to their missions and the communities they serve. Musk focuses on global tech, while Adenuga prioritizes Nigerian and African development.
I used The Nurturing Nobilities Group (TNNG) parameters for nobility in leadership to rate the two leaders, and the outcome was a hit. The rating was based on public perception and documented actions.
Despite differences in style and personal philosophy, their overall nobility scores are remarkably equal, showcasing their shared commitment to innovation, leadership, and societal impact. Musk excels in disruptive vision but faces criticism on ethics and humility, while Adenuga balances ambition with community-focused humility.
The Divergence: Conventional Wisdom
While strikingly similar across several pillars of nobility, they are remarkably different in conventional wisdom. While both are highly rated for strategic innovation, Adenuga shows distinct discretion regarding practical wisdom in business-government relations.
Take the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) in the US for instance. How would Mike Adenuga have handled such a situation? Efficient government operations are undeniably essential for any nation. If implemented with transparency and impartiality, DOGE promises to become a groundbreaking initiative. Elon Musk’s visionary approach to devising a program that could cut government costs, boost efficiency, stimulate economic growth, and reduce national debt brims with transformative potential.
However, Mike Adenuga likely would not have volunteered to run such an organization directly. Given the magnitude of the billionaire class’s investment, he believes in minding his own business and nurturing his enterprises privately. He does not see why a business leader should expose his enterprises to undue risks by actively participating in governance and running a business department.
That is, indeed, conventional wisdom. Political neutrality is the bridge that connects all customers of a product across party lines. Once any political party thinks a business leader has crossed the political line, it may call for a product boycott. The consequences might be disastrous if the situation is not diffused or effectively managed.
Therefore, Adenuga believes entrepreneurs must not be openly affiliated with any government. Even when he has sympathies and affinities, he prefers to show them privately as his inalienable right.
He also firmly maintains that if you are a businessman with extensive investment in a country, never fight the government in power, especially in Africa. They will crush you.
A Case Study in Conventional Wisdom
In 2007, President Olusegun Obasanjo’s government moved against Mike Adenuga and his business interests. He could have chosen to fight back but was more concerned about his extensive business investments across Nigeria. He knew the government’s agenda was to use trumped-up charges as an excuse to take over the running of Globacom. He understood the government had no capacity to run such an operation and feared his staff might lose their jobs while the business could be ruined. He made the tactical decision to leave the country in self-exile.
It took the intervention of President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua to persuade him to return to the country. Now of blessed memory, Yar’Adua said he would do whatever it took to motivate rather than antagonize or persecute investors who create jobs and keep the oil of a nation’s progress flowing.
This approach to business-government relations represents Adenuga’s conventional wisdom: maintain political neutrality, focus on business growth, and avoid confrontations with the state. While Musk may possess the “Adenuga spirit” in entrepreneurship and vision, this fundamental difference in engaging with political power sets them apart.
Where Musk sees direct engagement as a path to influence, Adenuga sees discretion as the better part of valor. Both approaches have their merits, but in the African context, Adenuga’s conventional wisdom has preserved his business empire through turbulent political transitions – an affirmation of the power of subtle influence over confrontation.
This is a tribute to celebrate Dr. Mike Adenuga’s 72nd birthday in advance from a global comparative perspective. May the fountain of his wisdom never run dry.
![[OPINION] Rivers State and her fair-weather friends - Jide Oluwajuyitan](/media/k2/items/cache/6798b44a7034840ce73006589c190786_M.jpg)
There has been no dull moment in Rivers State since 2023 when Siminialayi Fubara upon inauguration chose to fight his own government. But with the Supreme Court’s February 28 declaration that there has been no government in Rivers in the last two years, in spite of all the drama, including bombing of the assembly complex, conducting LGA election in defiance of court order, and presentation of budget to a three-man assembly, we now know all have been noise without substance or ‘a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing’ (William Shakespeare).
No thanks to Rivers fair weather friends led by the likes of Ikenga Ugochinyere, an Imo member of the House of Representatives, who today claims to speak on behalf of opposition lawmakers coalition in the House. His undefined mission during most of his N6.5m one-hour “news commercialization’ appearances, seems to be targeted at further destabilization of PDP or prolonging the nightmare of people of Rivers State. Of course, we also have sympathisers of Labour and PDP in borrowed toga of Arise TV journalists whose motive for fighting Fubara’s war like a slave is Wike, his estranged impetuous and abrasive godfather.
Fubara by virtue of the February 28 Supreme Court ruling had an opportunity to dig himself out of the hole. President Tinubu’s call on him to stoop to conquer because ‘compromise is democracy’s highest badge of honour was another chance. Fubara however chose to keep huffing and bluffing because of backing by meddlers like Ugochinyere and Arise TV. Last Thursday, the former gave vent to this by first taking an hour slot of “news commercialisation” in TVC and later the same day in Arise platform to embark on his usual monologue.
And what did he fritter the N6.5m on? The assembly’s alleged intention to seek court order to stop the conduct of the local government and, the assembly’s plan to amend the Rivers Independent Electoral Commission law.
It is sad Fubara thinks some windbags from outside his state love his state more than the state’s elected lawmakers who by the way, do not need permission of interlopers to make laws.
And as for Arise TV, its last Thursday’s analysis of Wike’s Wednesday chat with some journalists was a disservice to journalism. There were misrepresentation of facts, outright lies, odious comparisons and an attempt to set the Ijaw nation against other nationalities in the Niger Delta region.
First, Arise TV along with Jake Epelle, their invited quest, agreed that Governor Fubara has been thoroughly humiliated, ridiculed and dishonoured because of his humility. They all agreed Fubara needs to become more Machiavellian since his humility has become a burden. They declared with shocking finality, that Tinubu was behind the crisis in Rivers even without proof.
They falsely claimed Rivers House of Assembly locked out the governor. How do you lock out someone who was not being expected? Governor Fubara himself confirmed he was on a road show or out to play to the gallery by branching at the assembly quarters when he was scheduled to commission some projects in Okirika at 10am. He left with the following parting words “maybe they are still working on the letter and will later get in touch with me”.
On impeachment, it was unfair to impute meaning to what Wike said in an answer to Arise TV question. He had said impeachment which is enshrined in our constitution is not criminal and that heaven will not fall if anyone who committed impeachable offence is impeached. In any case, if anyone slammed with impeachment charges is a good politician, he will know what to do, he added.
It was also pure mischief to give the impression that Wike was disrespectful of the Ijaw nation during the chat. In fact what can be taken away from what he said was that those making threat to destroy pipelines are politicians in government; that Ijaw whose sons including Tompolo secured the contract to protect the oil pipelines cannot at the same time be threatening to blow off the pipeline. He said people should stop arrogating power to blow off the pipelines only to Ijaw as other groups within the Niger Delta are also capable of doing the same.
The fact that the Ijaw national body has denounced the Ijaw Youths making such reckless statement seem to have vindicated Wike’s claim that such threats were planted by politicians in government
I am not sure the issues of the population of Ijaw nation, the fourth largest group in Nigeria was the focus of discussion. Wike’s reference to Ijaw during the media chat was to the effect that except in Balyelsa State, the Ijaw nation does not constitute a majority in Akwa Ibom, Delta, and Rivers; that in the spirit of live and let live, he and some illustrious Ijaw elders agreed the gubernatorial ticket should be ceded to Ijaw in 2023. Arise TV only demonstrated its partisanship by exhibiting such disdain for Wike who they said does not know Ijaw constitutes the fourth largest population because of what they attributed to his academic deficit!
Finally, attempt by Arise TV to draw a parallel between the tragic mismanagement of our crisis of nation-building by President Nnamdi Azikiwe and Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa which led to the collapse of the first republic and current crisis in Rivers where an elected governor is at war with an arm of his government is borne out of mischief.
And what are the facts?
S. L. Akintola, the Premier of Western Region was legally removed by his party, a decision upheld by the Privy Council in London, the highest judicial body at the period. Akintola then sought the help of Zik and Balewa, coalition partners at the centre against his principal. The duo had been bitter enemies of the West out of envy for her giant strides and for leading the battle for the creation for the Calabar-Ogoja-Rivers (COR) and Middle Belt states from the east and the north respectively.
Zik and Balewa, who did not see the need to declare state of emergency in the east or in the north where Isaac Boro’s Niger Delta Uprising and Tiv’s popular uprising had to be suppressed by the military, illegally declared state of emergency in the West because a few NCNC member started throwing chairs just as vote of confidence was about to be passed on Adegbenro by the Western House as enshrined in the constitution. (Premiers Ahmadu Bello and Okpara had earlier breached the constitution by their refusal to recognize Adegbenro).
The first victim of the state of emergency was Awo who was detained in mosquito-infested Lekki while Akintola who had been constitutionally removed and Fani-Kayode of NCNC were imposed as Premier and deputy premier of Western region by Balewa and Zik.
In breach of constitutional provision which disallowed the centre from interfering in the affairs of the regions, Zik and Balewa decided to probe the administration of Western Region between 1952 and 1962. At the end Awo was indicted and accused of theft while his deputy who single-handedly controlled the affairs of the region from 1959 was let off the hook because he served as the prosecution witness.
To ensure Awo will be too old to ask how Nigeria was being run by the time he gets out of prison, he was slammed with treasonable charges which provided an excuse for Zik and Balewa, the coalition leaders, to send Awo and his colleagues to 10 years imprisonment.
The Yoruba waited patiently for the 1964 Western Regional election to liberate themselves but Fani-Kayode publicly swore he and Akintola would win the election whether the people voted for them or not. Zik and Balewa, as coalition leaders, went on to massively rig the 1964 election in favour of their stooges – Akintola and Fani-Kayode.
It was at this point the people of the West resolved that ‘those who sowed the wind must reap the whirlwind’. Violence, code-named “Operation wet e” broke out with dead bodies littering major streets of major towns in Yoruba land. The battle was against those Yoruba identified as traitors.
We cannot trivialise the above historical facts by attempting to draw a parallel between it and Fubara’s self-inflicted 2023 crisis when he blindly decided to fight his own government. And except for those engaged in mischief to give a false narrative of our past history, there is no basis to compare Zik and Balewa’s malevolent handling of Western Region crisis with President Tinubu’s handling of Fubara’s disagreement with an arm of his government.
President Tinubu did what a statesman should do by making Fubara sign a truce with the warring members of an arm of his government in the presence of Rivers elders. If he breached his undertaking, it was because he, as an office holder, who does not know that in a democracy, rulers rule but others dictate the tune, allowed himself to be misled by Arise TV and non-politicians in politics who probably do not know better.
![[OPINION] Life imprisonment for Nigeria’s merchants of death - Jide Ojo](/media/k2/items/cache/77362010960d5dd59772feed8ac8d708_M.jpg)
There are several merchants of death prowling the nooks and crannies of Nigeria. They range from bandits, kidnappers, ritual murderers, and manufacturers of fake and substandard products. All of them deserve severe punishment including life imprisonment at the correctional centres. I shudder reading the press statement by the Director General of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control, Prof. Moji Adeyeye, on the recent efforts of her agency to rid Nigeria of fake, expired and substandard drugs.
NAFDAC said it evacuated over 100 truckloads of substandard, falsified, and banned medicines and narcotics from the Idumota Market in Lagos State, Onitsha Market in Anambra State, and Aba Market in Abia State, in six weeks. The NAFDAC director general said if the substandard and banned medicines were allowed in circulation, they could ruin the nation by reducing the quality of life of millions of Nigerians. Adeyeye made the remarks in Lagos on Friday, March 14, 2025, at a briefing while giving an update on the unprecedented enforcement exercise carried out in the three markets, where unregistered, banned, expired or medicines with other violations worth over a trillion naira were confiscated.
She further disclosed that the agency concluded the enforcement exercise in Idumota and Aba on February 28, 2025, while the exercise still lingered in Onitsha until March 8. She was quoted as saying, “What we have found could ruin a nation. What we have found could destabilise a government. What we have found could reduce the quality of life of millions of Nigerians. If you have diabetes, or hypertension, which need daily treatment, such people could die easily with what we have found.” The NAFDAC boss stated that with a large population of Nigerian youth below 40, the narcotics seized could take their lives, and fuel banditry, and terrorism.
She said over 100 40-footer truckloads were evacuated with 27 truckloads from Idumota, already destroyed while in Aba and Onitsha markets about 80 40-foot truckloads of unregistered, banned medicines and narcotics were seized and evacuated. For Aba and environ, she disclosed that 14 truckloads of violative medicines were evacuated from the Osisioma warehouse alone, four truckloads from the Ariara Road warehouse and 10 truckloads of the medicines were seized from the markets.
According to her, in Onitsha, there are 110 lines where they sell drugs, aside from the plumbing market, and the wood plank markets. From the plumbing section, Prof. Adeyeye explained that warehouses were filled to the brim, without windows, with temperatures more than 40 degrees Celsius, subjecting the medicines to degradation before the user starts to use them. She said the agency evacuated 10 40-foot truckloads of tramadol from the plumbing, wood plank and the fashion lines of the market, also noting with dismay that about four truckloads of syrup with codeine that was banned almost seven years ago were also evacuated.
In last Saturday, March 15, 2025, edition of this newspaper, the President of the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria, Tanko Ayuba, in an interview with The PUNCH correspondent Ajibade Omape gave insights into the menace of counterfeit and substandard drugs. According to him, the World Health Organisation reports that substandard antibiotics have contributed to over 169,000 deaths from childhood pneumonia globally. Furthermore, a 2018 study published in the American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene estimated that 64,000–158,000 deaths from malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa were linked to counterfeit or substandard anti-malarial drugs.
The PSN president further said that a study in The Lancet found that 1.27 million deaths worldwide in 2019 were directly caused by antimicrobial resistance, with many cases linked to counterfeit antibiotics. In Nigeria, malaria resistance to first-line treatments like artemisinin combination therapy is growing due to counterfeit anti-malarial drugs. Similarly, multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis is rising because of the proliferation of fake TB medications. If left unchecked, this trend could make common infections untreatable.
Ayuba traced some of the causative factors to include the following: weak enforcement, corruption, and the high demand for affordable medications. Many Nigerians, due to poverty, opt for cheaper drugs without verifying their authenticity. A 2017 study by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime reported that West Africa accounted for 40 per cent of the world’s trade in falsified medicines. Nigeria’s porous borders allow counterfeit drugs to enter from China, India, and neighbouring countries. Furthermore, limited funding for regulatory agencies like NAFDAC and the Pharmacists Society of Nigeria makes it difficult to combat the sale of fake drugs.
The PSN president said under Nigeria’s Counterfeit and Fake Drugs (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, offenders can face a fine of N500,000, or five years imprisonment. That is a mere slap on the wrist! By comparison, China imposes the death penalty for drug counterfeiting, while the US enforces life imprisonment for offenders under the FDA’s Drug Supply Chain Security Act. PSN advocates for harsher penalties, including a minimum of 20 years imprisonment and asset forfeiture for large-scale counterfeiters.
Kudos to NAFDAC on the unprecedented seizures! However, I am concerned that there was no mention of arrests of the merchants of death who engaged in these illicit activities that are inimical to human health. Is it that NAFDAC is contented with seizure of the illicit drugs while the perpetrators are allowed to go back to illicit trade? That is tantamount to mopping a leaking roof. Unless and until the perpetrators are arrested, investigated and jailed for life, they will not desist. Imagine the entire country being exposed to public health challenges because of the inhumane activities of hundreds of greedy businessmen and women who care less about the welfare and well-being of their fellow human beings.
It is heartrending that the WHO Global Surveillance Report on Substandard Medicines identified Nigeria as a major transit point for counterfeit drugs. I fully endorse the position of the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria on the need for severe penalties, including asset forfeiture. Not only that, PSN’s recommendation of pharmacovigilance and pharmaceutical manufacturers investing in tamper-proof packaging, holograms, and blockchain tracking are also well thought out. Wholesalers must ensure that their supply chains are monitored through regulatory-approved distribution networks to prevent flaws and breaks in their supply chains.
The PSN president’s suggestion to the Nigerian public is very instructive. When asked about how consumers can identify counterfeit drugs, he said, “For the public, I would advise that when purchasing drugs or medication, they should buy only from registered pharmacies. This will drastically reduce the consumption of counterfeit pharmaceutical products. Secondly, the public should be wary and always check for NAFDAC registration numbers on the packaging of drugs to ensure that they are not counterfeit or unregistered. There is also an avenue to use SMS authentication codes (MAS—Mobile Authentication Service) to verify the authenticity of the drugs after purchase to avoid using counterfeit drugs to treat illnesses. According to a 2021 WHO report, MAS has reduced counterfeit malaria drug sales by 30 per cent in Nigeria since its implementation.”
The National Assembly needs to amend our laws to tighten the nuts and bolts by prescribing stricter punishments for the merchants of deaths who engage in the sale of counterfeit and substandard drugs, beverages, water, wines and spirits. Media and civil society need to intensify public enlightenment by collaborating with the Pharmaceutical Society of Nigeria. PSN should intensify routine raids of drugstores and pharmacies for counterfeits, expired and substandard drugs and drinks. Better funding of NAFDAC is a must. A stitch in time saves nine!
![[OPINION] This article has no title - Lekan Sote](/media/k2/items/cache/30a312c821f0fa8e43c80f2e16b46562_S.jpg)
After seeing the quantum of decontamination work being done by the Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project to remedy the heartless damage done to the soil of Ogoniland, it became difficult to pick which title best suits this article.
The first title that came to mind was “In Limbo in Ogoni Death Row”. Then came “Ogoninisation of Nigeria” and, finally, “Nigeria is a Crime Scene”. The first title uses death row cells, where condemned criminals await the hangman, as a metaphor for Ogoni people awaiting the death of their lives and livelihood, from the contamination of their land.
It is reminiscent of the way Saro-Wiwa and other members of the Ogoni-nine patiently waited for the hangman sent by General Sani Abacha to snuff out their lives under the supervision and watchful eyes of a military administrator.
“Ogoninisation of Nigeria” is a way of saying that the scorched earth that became the fate of Ogoniland awaits other communities with oil wells, petroleum refineries, crude and refined petroleum pipelines, petrol depots and stations. Petroleum products, with low viscosity, spread faster, wider and deeper than crude petroleum with higher viscosity.
“Nigeria is a Crime Scene” describes the continuous, cavalier, defilement of oil-producing communities by players in Nigeria’s oil sector, like International Oil Companies, Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited and its predecessor, regulators, and other government agencies and private organisations.
If you took a flying boat from Goi to Bomu, bent down to plant a mangrove tree, felt dizzy and had to be rushed back to the shore, after water was poured on your head, you will understand the depth of the injustice done with the hanging of Saro-Wiwa and the damage done to the soil, water, health and livelihood of the people of Ogoniland.
Apart from extremely hazardous health implications, the contamination degrades the soil, waterbodies and residential areas. This greatly impaired the lives and livelihood of farmers and fishermen in Ogoniland.
The irony is that fishmongers in Rivers State now get their fresh fish supply from Lagos State, a negation of the assumption that you cannot bring coal to Newcastle, whose last deep mine was incidentally closed in 2005 after the decline that started in the 1980s.
In 1993, the Federal Military Government, probably mindful of the irresponsible negligence of NNPC, IOCs and illegal artisanal refineries, asked United Nations Environment Programme to assess the level of degradation of the Niger Delta, using Ogoniland as a focal point. The UNEP study, which started in 2009, submitted its report to the Federal Government in 2011.
Among other things, the report found that the observed level of contamination was higher than the Nigerian government’s stated threshold, which suggests that the government was negligent in enforcing its own safety policies. Also, the failure of biological processes and surface crusts, resulting from burning, greatly hampered natural and cheaper pollution attenuation processes.
When spilled oil gets to their roots, plants die. And fish die in polluted rivers or move to safer regions. Poisonous volatile organic compounds, like benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, alkanes, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons become more prevalent in affected communities.
These cause cancer, respiratory and neurological problems, infertility and blindness. Benzene, a carcinogen, was detected in both Ogoniland soil and the groundwaters. When inhaled, its particles, generated from illegal refineries, lead to the premature death of patients with underlying heart and lung diseases.
UNEP’s recommendations included decommissioning of drill assets that failed integrity assessment tests: discouragement of illegal refineries (but because of competition against IOCs, the report did not suggest trade cooperatives for the illegal refineries under government supervision); immediate oil spill remediations; and regular cleanup of contaminated soil and sediments.
In 2016, the Federal Ministry of Environment established the Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project to implement the UNEP Report to remediate and restore polluted Ogoniland soil and groundwaters. The mandate included initiating and developing work programmes to remedy hydrocarbon-impacted areas; ensuring full recovery of the ecosystem; providing appropriate technologies for remediation of the soil and groundwater; and responding to future remediation needs.
HYPRED demarcated the pollution-impacted areas into three zones that could either be the low-impacted sites that affect only lands that include farmlands; the medium-impacted sites that include land and groundwater areas; and the high-level impacted sites that include residential areas where people reside.
By the way, anyone living in Lagos and other such high population density urban centres in Nigeria should be aware that, by this definition, they are indeed living in the high-level impacted areas with the petrol stations, petroleum product depots and petroleum products pipelines in their neighbourhoods.
With the potentially nationwide cleanup that HYPREP is likely to embark upon in the future, the $1bn said to have been earmarked for the cleanup cannot complete the job. HYPREP, the special-purpose vehicle set up to do the job, has already embarked upon a lot of activities that will require a lot of money in Ogoniland.
Some of the projects are a 100-bed hospital with facilities to treat cancer, a cottage hospital, and several solar-powered waterworks schemes to deliver potable water to both pollution-impacted communities and those free of pollution. It is also planning a power plant project.
The highly ambitious Centre of Excellence and Environmental Restoration, recommended by the UNEP Report, is under construction. Its mandate is to train experts in environmental and monitoring skills; teach livelihood skill sets; assist members of the community with business plans; and, where necessary, enable local and foreign training for qualified members of the communities.
Yet HYPREP is carrying out its core responsibility of land and water remediation, replanting of mangroves in the rivers that have been cleaned, and training youths that have been forcibly weaned away from land and fish farming livelihoods by the oil pollution.
If no one will mind what may appear to be a repetition of facts, it is necessary to reiterate that the purpose of the decontamination project is to get the people back to their original occupation of farming and fishing.
The good news is that grass is already re-growing in some parts of highly-impacted Ogoniland, even in the dry season. This work, though very expensive, must continue so that the lives and livelihoods of the communities in Ogoniland can be restored.
Though the international green lobby insists that fossil fuels must be phased out, because of its negative global warming effect, it will take a long time to phase it out. But NNPCL and the IOCs must dedicate funds to research for technology that can prevent or control future contamination of the soil and water of petroleum mining, refining and storage communities.
The government should increase the decontamination budget; intensify and extend the cleanup to the other parts of the Niger Delta and the rest of Nigeria; encourage the National Oil Spill Detection and Response Agency to be prompt in monitoring and ensuring remediation in affected communities.
In addition, state governments should discourage private boreholes and empower municipal water corporations to take responsibility for potable water. Because pollution is practically nationwide, state waterworks should drill water from aquifers far below contaminated soils in communities that host petrol depots and stations.
Australian poet, Gemma Troy, who said, “Your words can plant gardens or burn whole forests down,” may be telling players in Nigeria’s petroleum sector to be more cautious in the way they carry out their operations.
![[OPINION] Tinubu’s Authoritarian Attack on Democracy in Rivers State - Farooq Kperogi](/media/k2/items/cache/b9a848f32301bc59c185044fe53f1724_S.jpg)
In the wake of a Supreme Court-triggered crisis in Rivers State —masterminded by Nyesom Wike, whose outsize influence over the judiciary has earned him the fittingly dubious distinction of being the de facto head of Nigeria’s “judiciary” — President Bola Tinubu has, with a stroke of imperial presidential pronouncement, declared a state of emergency and suspended democracy.
In a twist as darkly ironic as it is emblematic, he has chosen to replace elected officials with a retired military officer by the name of Vice Admiral Ibok-Ete Ekwe Ibas, effectively reviving the tired and dangerous fallacy (actively nurtured and propagated by Nigeria’s past military dictators) that when civilians falter, only soldiers can "restore order."
This move reinforces the infantilization of civilian governance and reduces democracy to something that must be periodically "rescued" by the men in fatigues.
Interestingly, in May 2013, Tinubu himself condemned the declaration of a state of emergency in Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa as a dangerous assault on democracy and a ploy to rig the 2015 election.
“The body language of the Jonathan administration leads any keen watcher of events to the unmistakable conclusion of the existence of a surreptitious but barely disguised intention to muzzle the elected governments of these states for what is clearly a display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2015,” he said.
Now, with his own state of emergency in Rivers, two years before the 2027 election in which he will seek a second term, the question writes itself: Is this, too, a “display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027”?
Or do the rules of democracy shift when the emperor changes robes?
One hopes Tinubu has fully considered the ramifications of his decision. He based his suspension of democracy in Rivers on the Supreme Court’s tendentious declaration that “there is no government in Rivers State.”
Well, for the millions of Nigerians already struggling under the weight of his government’s reckless economic policies, “there is no government in Nigeria” right now. Governance, for most, is an abstraction at best and an illusion long shattered at worst.
Should the military intervene to restore governance?
[OPINION] Generalist-Professional Controversy in the Civil Service: Reform Options for Nigeria - Tunji Olaopa
Admin![[OPINION] Generalist-Professional Controversy in the Civil Service: Reform Options for Nigeria - Tunji Olaopa](/media/k2/items/cache/77f9dc828ee6983cbb23a038581ab9f4_S.jpg)
In this piece, I want to pay critical attention to the reform significance of the relationship between what has been called the “cult of the generalists,” on the one hand, and the necessity for more of a cadre of specialist or professionals given the imperative demand of the knowledge age, on the other. This discourse might appear academic at first glance. However, we immediately grasp its significance when we understand that a civil service system that must anticipate the challenges of the future needs to adequately articulate a governance, strategic and operational managerial framework that has the capability of preparing the civil service for such a future. How does this distinction affect the way we think about development on the continent? It does because it is intimately connected with the evolving nature of work, and how work mediate the significance and urgency of national productivity. The nature of work in the twenty-first century has changed drastically. Work is no longer place-based and full-time/lifetime vocation. It is now more remote-based, and attended by all sorts of dynamics.
This therefore brings to the fore the imperative of connecting this changing workplace with the traditional understanding of the public service in public administration studies. How a public service performs, therefore, has a lot to do with how the business model of the public service is organized and connected with the developmental framework of the state. When the Northcote-Trevelyan Report of 1854 was submitted, as part of the reform effort to transform the operational basis of the British Civil Service, it was founded on one of four significant premises:
- “Entrants should not be recruited for life into a specific department but would enter a Home Civil Service that would facilitate inter-departmental staff transfers. Civil servants, therefore, would need to have had a general education and to be generalist rather than specialist in their knowledge and experience.
One critical implication of this development is the emergence of the cadre system which served as the basis for the establishment of a generalist class—administrative, executive and clerical—as the top administrative echelon of the civil service system in a descending hierarchical order of responsibilities and qualifications. This elite administrative echelon was solely responsible for policy initiation and implementation.
In its Nigerian incarnation, the Administrative Staff College of Nigeria (ASCON) offers three streams of general management courses, for professionals and administrators, that appeals to the lower, middle and top management cadres. These courses are “general” in the sense that they have nothing to do with the specialized training that participants and officers have as professionals before attending. The assumption behind the general management courses is that while an officer could remain a specialist until she gets to GL 14, advancing to the top management position requires taking on more general management responsibilities that demands more multidimensional financial, human and managerial imperatives. Thus, whether a generalist-administrator or core professional, becoming a top management officer is a status that leans more to general management, and is preparatory to becoming a permanent secretary—a position that makes the officer simultaneously a chief administrative officer, chief policy adviser and chief accounting officer.
The relationship between the cult of generalists that the Nigerian civil service system inherited from the British and the necessity of specialized and professional competence is one significant tension that the system has to contend with in terms of institutional reform. The colonial structure of the civil service was first addressed by the Gorsuch Commission of 1956 which recommended the creation of a cadre division of civil service personnel corresponding to general education standard of the period. The four divisions were: sub-clerical and sub-technical; clerical and technical; executive and higher technical; and administrative and professional. Each of these divisions was further divided into cadres. The professional class contained cadres like engineering, education, law, accountants, medical, etc. On the other hand, the contribution of the 1959 Newns Commission was the introduction of a Westminster organizational model which is more compatible with a ministerial framework. The Newns Commission recommended the grafting of the ministerial structures on the colonial departmental structure. This new arrangement, for instance, created the position of the permanent secretary on whom the Minister could depend on all decisional and administrative matters, especially those bothering on specific technical needs that require liaising with the professional heads of department.
Unfortunately, however, this wholesale transplantation of the Westminster model—the most significant underlying structural arrangement of the Nigerian civil service system till date—has constantly frustrated almost all reform intentions and implementation because it failed to take the peculiarity of the Nigerian context into consideration. The cadre system created a subsisting conflict between the generalists and the specialists, and this inevitably led to the tension that subverted service delivery efficiency in the departments. Within this system, key operational tasks are undertaken by generalist officers who have no expertise in the area. And this leaves the system weakened in terms of the urgent need for a specialist section with requisite professional qualification that matches competence with specific job and task. To cite a rather critical example, a very large proportion of the workforce at the Federal Civil Service Commission is made up of pool of generalist-officers who are without sufficient knowledge and expertise that could enable them deploy fundamental concepts and models in the field of HRM and public administration to bring professionalism to bear on their job. And this leaves a significant gap in terms of professionally trained and certified HR practitioners that are trained to take on specialized functions and tasks. Working under the influence of the Fulton Report of 1968, the Udoji Commission report made a valiant effort to dislodge the cult of generalists by recommending—under the burden of performance management, central to the managerial revolution sweeping public administration—the infusion of the public service with new professionals and specialists whose competences can be contracted to specific performance task within a result-oriented management system. The fundamental dimensions of the Udoji Report dealing with managerial dynamics were not implemented, unfortunately.
The generalist-specialist controversy is not unique to public administration. It pervades the entirety of the managerial structure of both the public and private management, as well as executive government. And this is because it impinges on workplace efficiency and performance management. Within public administration, government organizations possess a strong preference for recruiting public officers with broad-based and multidisciplinary knowledge over those public officers—the specialists—with professional expertise and competences in specific fields and areas. This “cult of generalists” derives from a general belief in management and administration that a generalist approach is superior for managing complex policy issues and navigating diverse government functions, even when highly technical knowledge might be required. In the private sector, the concern is not different. The workplace of the twenty-first century is leaning more in the direction of multidimensional expertise—a sort of Jack-of-all-trade. Indeed, there is the argument that generalists provide “marginal value”—the extra value that people are willing to pay, far above the value that specialist create. And this is because generalist appeal more to the general population, and specifically the general managerial requirement of any institution or organization. In both the public and the private sectors, the general manager is denoted by six fundamental tasks: (a) shaping and reshaping the workplace and its many environments, like dictating the performance standard, business concepts and personnel values; (b) designing strategic vision and mission; (c) strategically putting the available resources together; (d) attracting and harnessing the high performing managers and staff; (e) dealing with structural, institutional and organizational dynamics, decisions, and problems that anticipate future challenges; (f) supervising day-to-day operations and implementation of organizational decisions.
I suspect, however, that no matter the acclamation for a generalist orientation in the public and private sectors, or even the argument for the specialists in government, arguing for either of them is in bad taste. Every organization or institution requires both. It is as simple as that. The reality of effective managerial presence in the public service requires that the generalist and the specialist possess a bit of competences required in the other’s domain, and this involve a range of subsidiary skills, for instance in policy analysis and project management. For instance, there is no generalist that would have any justifiable excuse not to have some significant and specialist expertise aside the general management skills. This is the core reason why core bureaucratic skills that were the competences of generalist administrators are now actively being professionalized. These include economists, planners, procurement, records management, financial management and accounting systems, Human Resources, organization, operations and management research and management research, knowledge and talent management, training administration, HR information system, ICT, policy research and analysis, statistics and data management, decision science, investment planning and promotion, project management, negotiation, crisis and conflict resolution, strategic planning, pension management, PPPs, and so on.
And on the other hand, to be an efficient professional public manager and administrator demands some significant generalist competences not only in people management but also some core establishment issues, especially in the management of the policy process and strategic planning. Such a specialist public administrator must have significant experience and expertise in the management of the five Ms of management: men (HR), money (finance), methods (management techniques), machine (technology), and materials (inventory, stocks and procurement).
To offset the low efficiency and performance quotient of the system as well as the diminished managerial creativity of public officers, we need to insist, as a matter of regulatory gatekeeping, that every officer aspiring to top leadership positions in the civil service must acquire core specialist and generalist competency, and the system must see to it that officers are sufficiently rounded in these skills as part of professional development and leadership pipelining to top administrative level positions. This is a recognition of the fact that on the one hand, the civil service is not just an academic/intellectual space where candidates dazzle with erudition and breathe of intellectual rather than getting things done which is the core of bureaucratic professionalism. And on the other hand, running the business of government demands a whole multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary cocktail menu of a mix of strategic, tactical and operational skills.
The reform program and strategy that must undermine the fundamental structural bases of administrative and managerial operation in the Nigerian civil service system must factor this understanding of the generalist-specialist dynamics and relationship into consideration. Taking them as adversarial opposites will not work for reform.
[OPINION] NYSC Corper Saga: The Silencing of Dissent and the Need for Activism and Patriotism in Nigeria’s Education System - Ajiboye Amos Olakunle
Admin![[OPINION] NYSC Corper Saga: The Silencing of Dissent and the Need for Activism and Patriotism in Nigeria’s Education System - Ajiboye Amos Olakunle](/media/k2/items/cache/353839b3c588c0adc92ca491c76ed62f_S.jpg)
A few days ago, a young Nigerian woman serving in the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) did something brave. She posted a video online, calling out the inefficiency of the Nigerian government and the heartbreaking state of the economy. Instead of listening to her concerns, the government and the NYSC responded with threats, trying to silence her. This isn’t just about one young woman’s frustration, it’s a snapshot of the bigger problems Nigeria faces: a broken system, a failing economy, and millions of people who feel hopeless. It also shows why we urgently need to teach activism and patriotism in our schools. We need a generation of young Nigerians who are informed, engaged, and ready to fight for a better future.
The NYSC: A Relic of the Past That’s Lost Its Way
The NYSC was created in 1973, two years after the Nigerian Civil War, with a noble goal: to unite the country. The idea was simple, send young graduates to live and work in parts of Nigeria outside their home regions, so they could learn about different cultures and build bridges between communities. At the time, it made sense. But nearly 50 years later, the NYSC feels outdated and out of touch.
Today, the NYSC is more of a burden than a benefit for young Nigerians. Corps members are often sent to unsafe areas, where many have lost their lives due to poor security and lack of support. The program doesn’t guarantee jobs or teach skills that are useful in today’s economy. For many, it’s just a year of wasted time and missed opportunities.
The recent incident with the corps member who criticized the government shows how the NYSC has become a tool for silencing dissent. Instead of empowering young people to contribute to national development, it’s being used to enforce conformity and suppress free speech. The threats against her are a clear sign that the NYSC, as it stands, doesn’t align with the values of democracy and freedom.
The Economic Catastrophe: A Nation on the Brink
The young woman’s video didn’t just call out the NYSC, it also highlighted the economic disaster that’s crushing millions of Nigerians. Her words struck a chord with countless people who are struggling to survive in a country where the economy is in freefall, prices are skyrocketing, and jobs are nowhere to be found. She called the president “terrible,” a sentiment many Nigerians share as they feel abandoned by their leaders.
Nigeria’s economic crisis isn’t an accident. It’s the result of years of mismanagement, corruption, and bad decisions. The government has failed to diversify the economy, build infrastructure, or create opportunities for businesses to thrive. Instead, it’s squandered the nation’s wealth, leaving ordinary people to suffer. The corps member’s criticism wasn’t just valid, it was necessary. In a democracy, citizens have the right to hold their leaders accountable, and no one should be silenced for speaking the truth.
Why We Need Activism and Patriotism in Nigeria’s Education System
Nigeria is at a crossroads. Corruption is rampant, the economy is collapsing, and many people have lost hope. To turn things around, we need to start with our education system. By teaching activism and patriotism in schools, we can raise a generation of young Nigerians who are informed, engaged, and ready to fight for a better future.
The Case for Activism in Education
Activism isn’t about causing trouble, it’s about standing up for what’s right. In a country like Nigeria, where corruption and inefficiency are everywhere, activism isn’t just important, it’s essential. By teaching activism in schools, we can empower young people to question injustice, demand transparency, and take part in the democratic process.
This means teaching students about their rights, how to engage in their communities, and how to use tools like social media to advocate for change. It also means teaching them about Nigeria’s history of activism, from the fight for independence to the pro-democracy movements of the 1990s. When young people learn about the struggles of the past, they’ll be inspired to keep fighting for a better future.
Activism in education can also help break the culture of silence and fear that allows corruption to thrive. When young people are taught to speak out against injustice, they’re less likely to accept it as adults. This shift in mindset is crucial for building a society where leaders are held accountable and the needs of citizens come first.
The Role of Patriotism in Nation-Building
Patriotism is about loving your country and working to make it better. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, patriotism has been reduced to empty slogans and rituals, like reciting the national anthem or waving the flag. Real patriotism is about taking responsibility for your country’s future and doing the hard work to improve it.
Teaching patriotism in schools means helping students understand Nigeria’s rich cultural heritage, its diverse communities, and the values that unite us as a nation. It also means instilling a sense of civic duty encouraging young people to contribute to their communities and put the common good above personal gain. This kind of patriotism can help heal the ethnic and religious divisions that have torn Nigeria apart for decades.
But patriotism doesn’t mean blindly supporting the government. True patriots love their country enough to demand better from their leaders. This is where activism and patriotism come together. A truly patriotic citizen is one who fights for justice, holds leaders accountable, and works tirelessly to build a better Nigeria.
A Call to Action: Scrap or Reform the NYSC and Fix Our Education System
The NYSC, as it exists today, is a relic of the past that no longer serves the needs of young Nigerians. It’s time to either scrap it completely or make it optional. Forcing young people into a program that offers no real benefits and puts them at risk is unfair and counterproductive. Instead, the government should focus on creating opportunities for young Nigerians, like job training programs, grants for entrepreneurs, and investments in education and healthcare.
At the same time, we need to address the economic crisis that’s pushing millions of Nigerians to the brink. This means tackling corruption, diversifying the economy, and putting policies in place that prioritize the well-being of citizens. The young woman who spoke out against the government’s failures shouldn’t be threatened she should be celebrated. Her courage is a reminder that Nigerians are tired of suffering in silence and are ready to demand change.
We also need to reform our education system to include activism and patriotism. This isn’t just a nice idea it’s a necessity. The government, educators, and civil society organizations need to work together to make this happen. This could mean updating the national curriculum to include lessons on civic education, human rights, and Nigeria’s history of activism. It could also mean organizing debates, mock elections, and community service projects to give students hands-on experience in activism and nation-building.
Conclusion: Building a Better Nigeria Starts with Us
The incident with the NYSC corps member is a small example of the bigger problems Nigeria faces: a government that doesn’t listen, an economy that’s collapsing, and a generation of young people who are losing hope. The threats against her are a slap in the face to democracy and a clear sign that the government cares more about silencing dissent than solving problems.
It’s time for Nigerians to stand up and demand better from their leaders. The NYSC needs to be scrapped or reformed. The economic crisis needs to be addressed with urgency and transparency. And most importantly, the government needs to stop intimidating citizens who speak the truth. The young woman who criticized the government isn’t the problem, she’s a voice for millions of Nigerians who are tired of being ignored. It’s time for the government to listen and act.
By teaching activism and patriotism in our schools, we can empower the next generation to demand accountability, fight for justice, and work tirelessly to build a better Nigeria. This isn’t just about education, it’s about survival. Nigeria’s future depends on the values and skills we teach our young people today. The time to act is now.
More...
![[OPINION] Why African countries should trade amongst themselves - Etim Etim](/media/k2/items/cache/cd0695ce3f6b8593ed36f99e6e3c6ab0_XS.jpg)
Africans could be incredibly hard on themselves. We complain about bad leadership, corruption, the economy, the weather and even our accent. But the continent continues to record noticeable achievements in key sectors. Take intra-African trade, for example. Decades ago, we rarely had anything to buy from one another. But according to Afrexim Bank, in 2023, despite a volatile global economic landscape, intra-African trade remained resilient, standing as a beacon of hope for sustainable development in Africa.
It grew at 7.2% year-on-year, reaching $192 billion, which accounted for 15% of total African trade in 2023, up from 13.6% from the previous year. Although this is a notable triumph, African business leaders are not resting on their oars. They want to trade more amongst themselves; break down barriers that keep us from visiting each other more freely and integrate the continent into a large economic bloc. But there are important challenges to overcome before the continent could deepen its intra tade volume.
Last week, Access Bank Plc hosted the inaugural Africa Trade Conference in Cape Town, South Africa, bringing together industry leaders, policymakers, and trade experts to drive solutions for accelerating intra-African trade and unlocking the continent’s economic potential. The conference tackled critical challenges, including limited access to capital, market information gaps, trust deficits between trading partners, and the urgent need for modernised trade infrastructure.
Roosevelt Ogbonna, the bank’s managing director/CEO delivered the opening remarks, setting the tone for discussions by highlighting the critical barriers hindering trade across Africa. He emphasised the urgent need for financial sector collaboration to facilitate seamless access to capital and foster a business environment where African enterprises can scale and compete globally.
“We must invest in the initiatives that ensure that we can bring businesses together, forge trust, and create the connections necessary for trade. In doing so, we must stamp out the narrative that ‘Made in Africa’ is inferior to any product made anywhere else in the world. We must buy Africa, be proud to wear Africa, and invest in Africa because that is what the continent needs to leap forward into the next generation,” Ogbonna stated.
He highlighted the need for Africa to take control of its economic destiny by fostering deeper collaboration, investing in financial infrastructure, and creating home grown solutions that drive sustainable growth.
Ogbonna underscored the shifting dynamics of global trade and increasing need for Africa to look inward. The world, he noted, has become more fragmented, with rising nationalist tendencies and supply chain disruptions that have disproportionately impacted the continent. These challenges, he argued, present an opportunity for Africa to strengthen its trade networks, support local businesses, and build the resilience needed to compete on a global scale.
However, for this vision to become a reality, several structural barriers must be addressed. One of the critical issues is the challenges businesses face in securing capital. While many African enterprises have the ambition to scale, the excessive cost of financing often inhibits their ability to expand. He advocated a financial services sector that is designed to empower businesses, making capital more accessible and affordable.
His words: “Many businesses on the continent struggle to find capital or access to capital and the right structure of capital, and when they do find it, the cost of capital is so significant that it makes it unbelievably expensive for them to be able to raise capital and still do business competitively. That has to change. We have to create a financial services sector that empowers businesses, one that makes it easier and seamless for businesses to be able to access capital, to able to invest in growth, invest in innovation, and of course, the muscle they need to expand beyond their local boundaries. It is clear that we need to create a network of Africa financial giants who are willing to create home grown solutions to support the continent in achieving the objectives that we have set for ourselves.”
Beyond financial constraints, limited access to market intelligence remains a major hurdle. Many African businesses lack the necessary insights to identify trade opportunities beyond their local markets. Leveraging technology to enhance information-sharing can bridge this gap, enabling businesses to make informed decisions and seize growth prospects across the continent.
Apart from capital, Ogbonna highlighted the critical role of access to information. Many businesses struggle to find the data and intelligence necessary to make informed decisions and identify opportunities beyond their national borders. He stressed that leveraging technology to bridge this gap will be instrumental in driving cross-border trade and creating a more connected Africa. He also addressed the issue of trust between trading partners, noting that historic challenges, inconsistent regulations, and varying standards have contributed to a lack of confidence in intra-Africa trade.
Overcoming this scepticism, he affirmed, requires deliberate efforts to harmonise standards, foster cooperation, and shift perceptions about the quality of African goods and services. He urged African businesses to take pride in what they produce, invest in local industries, and reject the notion that products made on the continent are inferior to those from elsewhere.
There is also the urgent need to modernise Africa’s trade routes and infrastructure. Drawing on historical examples, he pointed out that Africa once had well-established trade corridors that connected it to the Middle East and Asia. Today, however, inefficient transport networks and regulatory bottlenecks make it easier for businesses in Angola to trade with Portugal than with South Africa or Nigeria. He called for a renewed commitment to building the infrastructure and regulatory frameworks necessary to facilitate seamless trade across the continent, ensuring that goods, services, and capital can move freely between African nations.
The Access Bank Africa Trade Conference represents a significant step toward fostering dialogue, building partnerships, and driving policy initiatives that support Africa’s economic transformation. As the continent continues to navigate global uncertainties, events like this serve as a reminder that Africa’s future lies in its ability to collaborate, innovate, and build a sustainable trade ecosystem that benefits all.
With Africa’s population projected to surge to 2.5 billion by 2050 from 1.2 billion, the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) stands as the most significant free trade initiative since the formation of the World Trade Organisation. By fostering economic integration, AfCFTA has the potential to reshape trade dynamics across the continent, creating a unified market that enhances industrialisation, boosts employment, and strengthens Africa’s global competitiveness.
Recognising this transformative opportunity, Wamkele K. Mene, Secretary-General of AfCFTA, emphasised the urgency of fully implementing the agreement to unlock its immense benefits.
He said: “The AfCFTA is not just a trade agreement; it is an instrument for Africa’s industrialisation and economic sovereignty. It is a tool that will enable us to break down historic trade barriers and build an Africa that is self-sufficient, competitive, and prosperous. But for this to happen, we must commit to operationalising the agreement fully, ensuring that businesses, particularly SMEs and women-led enterprises, have access to the information, capital, and platforms they need to thrive.”
Also, Kanayo Awani, Executive Vice President of Afreximbank, emphasised the importance of financing mechanisms that support African businesses in their expansion across borders. She reaffirmed Afreximbank’s commitment to championing trade finance solutions and infrastructure investments that will unlock Africa’s trade potential.
“At Afreximbank, we understand that trade finance is the lifeblood of economic development. Without it, businesses cannot scale, industries cannot innovate, and Africa cannot fully realise its trade potential. This is why we have developed instruments such as the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS) to facilitate seamless transactions across borders, reducing reliance on foreign currencies and strengthening intra-African trade,” Awani remarked.
The conference featured an insightful testimonial from Nathalie Louat, Global Director at the IFC/World Bank Group, who pointed out the pivotal role of trade finance in enabling cross-border transactions and supporting financial inclusion. She underscored the long-standing partnership between IFC and Access Bank in fostering Africa’s economic resilience.
Several high-level panel discussions explored strategies to overcome trade barriers and enhance market access through innovative solutions. Experts from leading institutions, including Deutsche Bank, Traydstream, OWP Partners, Fiducia International, and more, examined how infrastructure improvements, digital solutions, and policy harmonisation could drive economic growth and boost intra-African trade.
Dr. Marc Auboin from the World Trade Organization (WTO) shared key insights on how digital transformation is reshaping Africa’s supply chain landscape, creating efficiency and unlocking new global market opportunities. Tanya Dos Santos-Ford from GIBS Business School also led a session on sustainable trade practices, emphasising the need for environmentally responsible economic growth strategies.
The event culminated in an awards ceremony recognising outstanding contributions to intra-African trade and economic transformation. Tradepass Commodities Limited (Ghana), Chemaf International FZE (DR Congo), and Harvest Group of Companies (Zambia) were honoured for their impact on SMEs and women-led trade enterprises. Bulkstream Limited (Kenya) and Electricidade de Moçambique (Mozambique) received awards for advancing intra-African trade, while Tennant Metals South Africa Pty Ltd was recognised as an Emerging Leader in Trade.
The International Finance Corporation (IFC) was awarded the Climate Finance Leadership Award, while Afreximbank received the Champion of Intra-African Trade Award. The African Development Bank (AfDB) and Africa Finance Corporation (AFC) were celebrated for their roles in economic transformation and infrastructure finance, respectively.
The prestigious African Icon Award was presented to IHS Group, Dangote Industries Limited, and MTN Group Limited for their significant contributions to Africa’s economic progress. As the conference ended, Seyi Kumapayi, Executive Director, African Subsidiaries at Access Bank, reaffirmed the institution’s commitment to supporting trade finance, fostering regional integration, and championing policies that create an enabling environment for businesses across Africa.
[TheCable]
[OPINION] Tinubu Reforms: Efficacy of Executive Orders Over Legislative and Judicial Procedures - Magnus Onyibe
Admin![[OPINION] Tinubu Reforms: Efficacy of Executive Orders Over Legislative and Judicial Procedures - Magnus Onyibe](/media/k2/items/cache/b3ef5d519f6497d5865dba23e23dd336_XS.jpg)
President Bola Tinubu’s decision to end the roughly forty (40) years of subsidizing petrol pump prices on the very day of his inauguration—May 29, 2023—is a prime example of the use of executive orders, one of the three (3) legitimate tools of governance. Subsequently, the long-standing policy of maintaining a fixed exchange rate for the naira against foreign currencies, which had been in place for several decades, was also discontinued.
As a consequence of these two (2) drastic reform measures implemented through executive orders, the Nigerian economy went into a tailspin, recording an inflation rate of over 34%. However, stability is now gradually being restored, much to the relief of the current administration and the long-suffering people of Nigeria.
Below is how President Tinubu issued these two (2) executive orders in his inaugural speech on May 29, 2023, which triggered socioeconomic turmoil:
"We commend the decision of the outgoing administration in phasing out the petrol subsidy regime which has increasingly favoured the rich more than the poor. Subsidy can no longer justify its ever-increasing costs in the wake of drying resources. We shall instead re-channel the funds into better investment in public infrastructure, education, health care, and jobs that will materially improve the lives of millions.
Continuing, President Tinubu stated:
"Monetary policy needs a thorough housecleaning. The Central Bank must work towards a unified exchange rate. This will direct funds away from arbitrage into meaningful investment in the plant, equipment, and jobs that power the real economy."
Then he concluded by saying "Interest rates need to be reduced to increase investment and consumer purchasing in ways that sustain the economy at a higher level.
"Whatever merits it had in concept, the currency swap was too harshly applied by the CBN given the number of unbanked Nigerians. The policy shall be reviewed. In the meantime, my administration will treat both currencies as legal tender."
It was not surprising that after the speech, hell was let loose as the price of petrol shot up as high as N1,300 per liter shortly after. But today it is selling for a little over N800 naira per litre.
In the twenty-two (22) months since President Bola Tinubu assumed leadership of Nigeria following his victory in the presidential election held on Saturday, February 25, 2023, he has directed the affairs of the country from Aso Rock Villa, Nigeria’s presidential seat of power. His policies, to say the least, have been revolutionary, leading to an unprecedented rise in the cost of living thankfully is currently on a downward slope heading towards stability.
Since taking office, as highlighted earlier, the president has leaned heavily on executive orders rather than relying on traditional legislative and judicial processes. Generally, President Tinubu’s preference for executive orders appears to have been proven to be more efficacious for his administration compared to conventional governance methods—or so it seems.
This article seeks to assess the veracity of that assumption by conducting a comparative analysis of the three primary approaches to governance in a democratic setting: leveraging executive, legislative, and judicial instruments. To achieve this objective, we must examine the merits and demerits of these tools, particularly in the context of Nigeria under President Tinubu’s leadership.
Before delving further into the effectiveness of these governance tools in Nigeria’s democratic environment, it is appropriate to take a brief look at how executive, legislative, and judicial powers have been applied in democracies around the world.
For a holistic assessment and understanding of governance tools, it is pertinent to trace their origins back to ancient times—specifically, to Cleisthenes in Athens, Greece, in the 6th century BC, where democracy was first introduced. It was later nurtured by thinkers like Aristotle and Cicero.
We will also examine France, where democracy was further refined under the influence of Enlightenment philosophers such as Alexis de Tocqueville, Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
Next, we will consider India, the world’s largest democracy with a population of 1.4 billion. Finally, we will reflect on the United States of America (USA), the world’s foremost democratic nation and leader of the free world, from which Nigeria borrowed its current presidential system of governance.
To carry out this analysis effectively, below is a comparison of the three (3) well-established governance tools in democratic settings: Executive Orders, Legislative Procedures, and Judicial Actions.
Executive Orders
1. Definition: Official directives issued by the head of state or government, outlining policies, decisions, or actions. A notable example is the United States, where President Donald Trump extensively leveraged executive orders to fast-track the implementation of his far-reaching policies under the “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) agenda.
2. Purpose: Enables swift decision-making, bypassing legislative delays.
3. Characteristics: Binding, enforceable, and often irreversible without subsequent orders or legislation.
4. Examples: Executive orders issued by US and Nigerian Presidents. US President Donald Trump issued an avalanche of executive orders in less than 60 days of occupying the White House as president. So also, president Tinubu in Nigeria issued at least two well-known executive orders with highly consequential effects.
Legislative Procedures
1. Definition: The formal processes by which laws are created, amended, or repealed by elected representatives.
2. Purpose: Ensures representation, deliberation, and accountability in lawmaking.
3. Characteristics: Involves debate, voting, and potential amendments.
4. Examples: US Congressional lawmaking, Nigerian National Assembly legislative processes.
5. Observation: Notably, policies processed through this method—such as the four (4) tax reform bills—are still stuck in the National Assembly, awaiting legislative approval. This aspect will be examined further later in this discussion.
Judicial Actions
1. Definition: Decisions, rulings, or orders issued by courts to interpret laws, resolve disputes, or enforce rights.
2. Purpose: Uphold the rule of law, protect individual rights, and provide checks on the executive and legislative branches.
3. Characteristics: Binding, precedent-setting, and subject to appeal or review.
4. Examples: US Supreme Court decisions, and Nigerian Supreme Court judgments.
5. A typical example in Nigeria is the Supreme Court judgment on local government financial autonomy. Long after the ruling, local governments’ financial autonomy has yet to be implemented. The Punch newspaper reported yesterday, Monday, March 17, that state governors are lobbying the federal government to delay implementation. We will delve deeper into this issue later in this discussion.
To fully grasp how the three (3) governance tools function in a democracy, it is essential to analyze their characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages. Different presidents apply these tools based on a needs assessment, balancing efficiency with democratic accountability.
Comparison of Governance Tools
Executive Orders
• Definition: Swift, binding, and enforceable directives issued by the head of state to expedite decision-making.
• Advantages: Efficient, allows rapid crisis management, bypasses legislative gridlock.
• Disadvantages: Can be abused or misused as it bypasses legislative oversight.
In the US, former President Donald Trump issued a raft of executive orders on his first day in office, a practice that critics viewed as an abuse of power. However, his supporters—who were in the majority, as he defeated his opponent Kamala Harris in the November 5, 2023, presidential election—argued that he needed speed to fulfill his agenda within the four (4) years of his term. Given the constraints of time, Trump prioritized executive orders over legislative or judicial processes to deliver on his campaign promises.
Legislative Procedures
• Definition: The process by which laws are created, amended, or repealed through debate and voting in a legislative body.
• Advantages: Ensures representation, deliberation, and accountability.
• Disadvantages: Can be slow, prone to gridlock, and influenced by special interests.
A key example in the US is the overturning of Roe v. Wade, a landmark ruling that guaranteed women the right to make reproductive decisions without government interference for over half a century. The influence of special interests was evident in this decision.
Similarly, in Nigeria, some northern leaders fear that the proposed tax reform bills—particularly the provision allowing about 60% of Value Added Tax (VAT) revenue to remain in the states where it is generated—would disadvantage their region. This has led to opposition to the reform, despite assurances from the Tax Reform Committee Chairman, Taiwo Oyedele, that these concerns are unfounded.
Judicial Actions
• Definition: Court rulings that interpret laws, resolve disputes, and check the powers of the executive and legislature.
• Advantages: Binding, precedent-setting, upholds the rule of law, and protects individual rights.
• Disadvantages: Can be slow, dependent on judicial independence, and open to interpretation.
For example, the legal battle over local government autonomy in Nigeria went from lower courts to the Supreme Court. Yet, despite the ruling, implementation has been stalled. Another example is the controversy over the rightful Emir of Kano between Sanusi Lamido Sanusi and Ado Bayero. The multiple interpretations of court rulings in that case resulting in a lacuna highlight the challenges of relying on judicial decisions for governance.
Interplay of the Three Governance Tools
As the analysis above reveals, each governance tool has strengths and weaknesses. A skilled and politically savvy president must know when to apply each tool to achieve the desired outcome.
Ideally, in a democracy, these tools interact and balance one another:
• Executive Orders can be challenged or overturned by legislative or judicial actions.
• Legislative Procedures can be influenced by executive orders or judicial interpretations.
• Judicial Actions can be affected by executive orders or legislative changes.
This dynamic is currently playing out in the US, where courts have suspended several of President Trump’s executive orders. Given that he has only one term to implement his policies, he is using the governance tool that allows him to act swiftly—though these decisions remain subject to legal challenges.
The balance of power among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches ensures that no single branch dominates, thereby promoting accountability, representation, and the rule of law.
Tinubu’s Use of Executive Orders: A Case Study
Against this backdrop, Nigerians should critically assess President Tinubu’s decision to declare “petrol subsidy is gone” during his inaugural speech on May 29, 2023. It is a statement that he has revealed was unscripted and spontaneous.
Many Nigerians have criticized him for not consulting widely before making such a declaration, given the profound impact it has had on both rich and poor citizens. However, in light of the governance tools discussed above, would Tinubu’s critics—those who opposed the decision for genuine, non-partisan reasons—still hold the same view?
Tinubu’s reliance on executive orders to remove the petrol subsidy and float the naira must be evaluated against the slow pace of legislative and judicial processes. For instance:
• The tax reform bills, first introduced in the National Assembly on October 8, 2024, remain stuck in the legislative process.
• The Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy, delivered on July 11, 2024, is yet to be implemented.
In contrast, Tinubu’s executive actions on fuel subsidy removal and exchange rate unification were swiftly executed and are now yielding positive economic results. Given that Nigeria’s economy was on the brink of collapse, he likely saw no alternative but to act decisively to prevent further decline.
This is the point some of us have been strenuously trying to put across to critics over the past 22 months of Tinubu’s watch.
Conclusion
Understanding the strengths and weaknesses of governance tools helps in evaluating a leader’s decisions. While legislative and judicial processes ensure democratic accountability, they can be slow and prone to political interference. Executive orders, though expedient, carry risks of overreach.
However, in Tinubu’s case, his controversial approach but a display of political adroitness is arguably necessary to avert the economic disaster that was imminent in our country.
With the benefit of hindsight, Nigerians must ask: Did Tinubu act recklessly, or was his decision a necessary intervention to stabilize the country?
Ultimately, governance is about making tough choices, and the effectiveness of any leader depends on their ability to navigate the complex interplay of executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
By and large executive orders have proven to be a more efficacious governance tool if time constraints are a significant factor as they save time and allow a dynamic president to cut through the bureaucratic bottlenecks to quickly achieve set goals.
The above strategy is exactly the methodology that President Tinubu has adopted to achieve success in his deep reforms which peaked in less than 18 months after which the negative consequences petered out and the positive gains began to manifest before the midterm of his administration which is coming up on 29 May- mere two months.
Imagine if Tinubu had applied the legislative or judicial option in governance to the issue of petrol subsidy removal, and elimination of multiple naira exchange rate windows, they would still be in operation and Nigeria would be mired in retrogression as it has been in the past four (4) decades (1984/5) or so since the nation was advised by development experts and institutions against retaining the obnoxious subsidy on petrol and buffeting the naira which we all agree were wrong-headed policies but which no leader in the past had the guts or gumption to end.
Being the astute political strategist that he is, my prediction is that President Tinubu will not introduce any new policies that would discomfit Nigerians until he seeks re-election in 2027 and returns to Aso Rock Villa as the winner of the 2027 presidential election. Thereafter, he will tackle the challenges of industrialization which will be driven by a revolution in electricity power generation, transmission, and distribution which is a necessary precondition to industrial take-off that we all crave since it is the only sure path to prosperity for all Nigerians.
Magnus Onyibe, an entrepreneur, public policy analyst, author, democracy advocate, development strategist, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy alumnus, and former Delta State commissioner (2003-2007).
![[OPINION] Alternative to Judicial Supremacy: A Case for Renewed Debate - Umar Ardo](/media/k2/items/cache/f0932e126582c85ec1ecadb7ba7bb402_XS.jpg)
In my book Court and Politics: Chronicling my Experience in the Nigerian Theatre, I brought to the fore my personal experience on the unwholesomeness of some judgments of the Nigerian courts on certain critical political matters affecting our democracy. Because I am seen as a marginal player, my testimony went unheeded. But lately, it seems the chicken has finally come home to roost.
2. In the wake of recent Supreme Court rulings in Nigeria, particularly in cases such as those involving Imo governorship, Senate President Godswill Akpabio, former Senate President Ahmed Lawan, PDP Chairman Uche Secondus, Rivers State legislators, etc. legal and political circles have reignited one critical issue I raised in my book – i.e. a long-standing debate on judicial supremacy in presidential democracy! These cases have attracted widespread criticism because of the central figures involved, but they represent only a fraction of the judicial decisions that I have raised concerns about. Numerous other rulings affecting lesser-known individuals remain buried in law reports, yet their implications on the destruction of our democracy are no less consequential.
3. The real question, however, is not just about the correctness or otherwise of these judgments but about the very structure that grants the judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, the final say in constitutional interpretation. In essence, should courts hold ultimate authority over the meaning of the constitution and the law in a presidential democracy? Or should constitutional interpretation be a shared responsibility among the branches of government?
4. To answer these questions appropriately, it should be clearly understood that the judicial supremacy in a democracy itself is basically of political foundation. The very idea that the judiciary is the ultimate interpreter of the constitution and the law is not a self-evident truth but a political arrangement. In democratic presidential systems, particularly of the American system that we copied, judicial supremacy exists largely because political actors – executive and legislative – have historically volunteered to cede interpretative authority to the courts, allowing them to assume the role of final arbiters of constitutional meaning. This voluntary surrender of interpretative power has been sustained by, and on the condition of, the judiciary’s ability to maintain public confidence in its impartiality, reasoned judgment and fidelity to justice.
5. However, this equilibrium is fragile, and certainly not sacrosanct. When courts repeatedly issue rulings that appear arbitrary, politically motivated or legally dubious, the foundation of this judicial supremacy becomes precarious, and threatened. A judiciary that oversteps its bounds or consistently delivers judgments that defy legal logic risks eroding the very deference upon which its authority rests. If judges become political actors in robes, then the logic of their supremacy collapses, inviting a political response that could diminish their interpretative monopoly.
6. It therefore becomes the right of citizens to look for an alternative to judicial supremacy. Taking cue from the United States, alternative to judicial supremacy is departmentalism, a constitutional doctrine championed by Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States. Jefferson rejected the idea that the courts alone had exclusive authority to interpret the constitution and the law. Instead, he argued that each branch of government – the executive, legislature and judiciary – should independently interpret the constitution as it applies to its functions.
7. Under departmentalism, the President, Congress and the Courts all have equal authority to determine what the law means within their spheres of influence. This doctrine maintains that courts may issue rulings, but their interpretations do not necessarily bind the executive or legislative branches beyond the particular cases at hand. While this approach has never gained traction to supplant judicial supremacy in the United States, it has still remained a recurring theme in American constitutional thought, resurfacing whenever the judiciary is perceived as overreaching. For instance, President FD Roosevelt also espoused the idea, leading to his bitter feud with the Supreme Court.
8. Given the troubling trend of judicial decisions in Nigeria today, might it be time to consider departmentalism as a safeguard against judicial excesses? The foundational argument for judicial supremacy is that it provides legal stability and prevents the executive and legislature from arbitrarily shaping the law to suit their interests. But what happens when it is the judiciary itself that subverts the law, bending it to political interests or delivering rulings that are manifestly unjust and illogical?
9. Judicial supremacy in Nigeria is sustained by two pillars: (1) the belief that courts are neutral arbiters, and (2) the willingness of political actors to abide by judicial interpretations. If either pillar weakens, the system automatically faces crises of legitimacy.
10. The aforementioned judgments by the Supreme Court, and those in my book, which many perceive as legally unsound or politically motivated, are already testing these foundations. If this trend continues, Nigerian politicians and legal scholars must begin to seriously explore departmentalism as a viable counterweight. The judiciary’s authority, after all, is not self-enforcing; it exists only so long as the political system accepts its decisions as legitimate. If public trust in the courts deteriorates beyond a certain threshold, calls for judicial reform – or even a fundamental restructuring of constitutional interpretation – should very well start gaining momentum.
11. Lately, the situation in the United States demonstrates how judicial supremacy can be challenged when the judiciary is perceived as an extension of political interests. President Trump’s repeated attacks on the U.S. legal system, particularly on Supreme Court rulings he viewed as biased, have fueled broader skepticism about the neutrality of the judiciary. This skepticism, on his return to power, is now translating into a more pronounced debate over the limits of judicial power in a democratic system.
12. The time has come for an intellectual and political debate on the efficacy, desirability or otherwise of judicial supremacy in Nigeria’s presidential democracy. Should judges have the final say in interpreting the constitution, even when their rulings contradict the spirit of democracy, public interest or common sense? Or should constitutional interpretation be a shared function among all branches of government, as departmentalism suggests?
13. If the judiciary continues to issue questionable rulings without accountability, Nigeria’s political actors are duty bound to re-evaluate the balance of power in constitutional interpretation. The consequences of such a shift could be profound, altering the very structure of Nigeria’s democracy. The judiciary must hence recognize that its authority is not absolute but contingent upon its ability to uphold the law fairly, speedily, consistently and independently.
14. A legal system that prioritizes power over principle is unsustainable. If decisions of the Nigerian courts continue to undermine public confidence, Nigeria may find itself at a constitutional crossroads, where the Jeffersonian school of thought should gain prominence and surface as a counterbalance to an increasingly unaccountable judiciary.
15. The debate is overdue.
[OPINION] Asake, Fatherhood, And The Cycle Of Neglect: A Wake-Up Call For Nigerian Men And Their Children - Isaac Asabor
Admin![[OPINION] Asake, Fatherhood, And The Cycle Of Neglect: A Wake-Up Call For Nigerian Men And Their Children - Isaac Asabor](/media/k2/items/cache/f38cad0c0de5866c26cde8d0cd2bada7_XS.jpg)
Fatherhood is not just a biological event; it is a lifelong responsibility that extends beyond conception. Unfortunately, in Nigeria, the trend of men denying responsibility for pregnancies is worrisome. The recent scandal involving Nigerian music sensation Asake and his father has once again brought this issue to the fore, sparking conversations about the responsibilities of men toward their offsprings and the moral obligations of children to their parents.
In many cases, men walk away from their responsibilities, leaving women to bear the burden of raising children alone. These children, often brought up in hardship, grow to become successful individuals. Yet, the cycle of neglect continues as some of these children, in turn, neglect their absentee fathers. This vicious cycle is one that demands urgent attention because it speaks to the breakdown of family values and moral responsibility in our society.
Without a doubt, the controversy surrounding Asake’s father is not an isolated incident. The story has been met with mixed reactions, with many Nigerians expressing disappointment in the singer’s apparent estrangement from his father. However, upon deeper reflection, it raises fundamental questions: Should a child care for a father who abandoned him at birth? Should a father expect love and support from a child he once denied?
Asake’s case mirrors countless similar stories in Nigeria, where men irresponsibly deny paternity, leaving women to shoulder the responsibility of parenthood alone. The consequences of such actions are dire, affecting the emotional and psychological well-being of the child. Many children grow up feeling unwanted and rejected, leading to resentment toward their fathers. Consequently, when they achieve success, they see no reason to acknowledge or support the very men who once discarded them.
In fact, the denial of paternity is not a new phenomenon in Nigeria. Countless women have shared heartbreaking stories of being abandoned during pregnancy, left to raise children on their own. Some men deny responsibility outright, while others, under the influence of family pressure or societal stigma, shy away from acknowledging their children.
This issue is exacerbated by the lack of legal frameworks that hold men accountable for their responsibilities. Unlike in some Western countries where child support laws ensure that fathers contribute financially to the upbringing of their children, Nigeria lacks strict enforcement mechanisms to curb this menace. This legal loophole emboldens irresponsible men to continue this reckless behavior without facing consequences.
Children who grow up without the presence of their fathers often face emotional and psychological struggles. The absence of a father figure can lead to low self-esteem, difficulty in forming relationships, and even behavioral problems. Many of these children grow up harboring deep-seated resentment against their absentee fathers.
Beyond personal grievances, the societal impact of this trend is equally alarming. A society where fathers abandon their responsibilities fosters a culture of irresponsibility and broken homes. This ultimately affects the moral fabric of the nation, leading to an increase in crime, social vices, and a general sense of neglect among the younger generation.
While it is easy to place sole blame on irresponsible fathers, mothers and society at large also have a role to play. Some women knowingly get involved with men who have a track record of abandoning their children. Others fail to take legal steps to demand accountability from these men.
Society, on its part, must stop enabling men who engage in paternity denial. Rather than shielding such men or making excuses for them, communities should begin to hold them accountable. Churches, traditional institutions, and even employers can play a role in ensuring that men who father children take responsibility for them.
While the anger of children abandoned by their fathers is understandable, it is also important to stress that children must not completely eschew their moral responsibility toward their parents. No matter the circumstances of birth, there is an African cultural expectation that children take care of their parents in old age. Forgiveness should be encouraged, as resentment only breeds bitterness and continues the cycle of emotional suffering.
Successful children should be cautious not to adopt the very neglect they suffered. The ability to rise above personal grievances and extend care to an estranged parent, even if minimal, is a sign of strength and growth. This does not mean blindly accepting toxic relationships, but rather, ensuring that bitterness does not cloud the opportunity to set a better example for future generations.
It is time for Nigerian men to take fatherhood seriously. Bringing a child into the world is not just about biology; it is about emotional, financial, and psychological commitment. Men must understand that denying a child today might lead to severe consequences in the future, not just for the child but for themselves as well.
Legal reforms are necessary to ensure that men who abandon their children are held accountable. Nigeria must implement and enforce child support laws that compel men to contribute to the upbringing of their children. DNA testing should also be made more accessible and affordable to address paternity disputes fairly.
At the family level, parents must begin to instill in their sons the values of responsibility and accountability. Fatherhood is a privilege, not just a duty, and men must be made to understand that their actions have lasting consequences.
On the part of children, those who have suffered abandonment should seek healing and closure. Therapy, counseling, and support groups can help individuals navigate the trauma of absentee fathers. Forgiveness, though difficult, can be a powerful tool in breaking the chain of generational pain.
The Asake scandal is just one of many stories that highlight the growing trend of men abandoning their paternal duties and the resultant estrangement between fathers and their children. It is a wake-up call for Nigerian men to take responsibility and for successful children to embrace the path of forgiveness.
A society thrives when families function effectively. The neglect and abandonment of children must stop, and at the same time, children who achieve success despite hardships must not fall into the same trap of neglecting their parents. By addressing these issues holistically, Nigeria can begin to mend the broken bridges of family and instill values that promote responsibility and care. The time to act is now.