
OTHERS' VIEWS
Have Parents and Government fulfilled their Responsibility to the Nigerian Child?
Happy Children’s Day to all who, according to Section 277 of the Child’s Rights Act 2003 (CRA), are children, that is, those who are below the age of 18. Section 1 of the CRA provides inter alia, that the best interest of the child shall be primary consideration, while Section 3 thereof reinforces the applicability of Chapter IV of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended)(the Constitution), that is, Fundamental Rights, to children (also see Section 6-17 of the CRA).
I have seen different themes for 2025 Children’s Day such as, “Look Up”. Another theme, “Children: Our Future and Our Responsibility”, is apt for this discussion. How well have Parents and Government lived up to their responsibilities to the children of Nigeria, and protected their fundamental rights? Not that well, I would say. See NDPHC Ltd v Michael (2024) LPELR-79937(SC) per Tijjani Abubakar, JSC on the importance of fundamental rights. Even though Nigeria is one of the 196 countries that has ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Adopted by the UN in 1989, came into force in 1990 and ratified by Nigeria in 1991, it appears that the CRA may be yet another law enacted by Nigeria, to give the impression that the country is in tune with international best practices; but, in reality, the CRA isn’t properly implemented, as the welfare of the Nigerian child doesn’t appear to be a priority.
From the Beginning
From birth, the life of majority of Nigerian children is hard. A few days ago, I asked Tunde to visit a Government Hospital in Lagos, to do some findings. Tunde found 15 babies (13 female 2 male), some, newborn, some, a few months old, one who had even been found abandoned on the street possibly by her mother; babies who couldn’t be discharged from the hospital after being born or falling sick, because their parents couldn’t afford to pay their hospital bills - one bill was as low as N25,000. The first failure of the Nigerian system. Children from poor families are unable to be born comfortably, or get medical treatment. I do agree that Family Planning should be taught much more aggressively, so that people learn that it’s wrong to keep having children that they cannot cater for; and part of the responsibility of creating such awareness amongst Nigerians, is something that should be borne by the people’s elected representatives; however, they have failed abysmally in this regard, and we seem to be having a population explosion instead.
Education
Then, despite the educational objectives set out in Section 18 of the Constitution (also see Section 15 of the CRA), Nigeria has possibly the highest number of out-of-school children in the world. As a result of insecurity and the targeting of school children for kidnapping by terrorists and criminals, starting with the Chibok Girls in 2014 (11 years later, over 100 of them remain unaccounted for, while Dapchi girl, Leah Sharibu hasn’t been found seven years on), some Parents have opted to keep their children at home for safety reasons. Many Parents also, instead of sending their children to school, prefer for them to engage in child labour to boost the family’s income - the children are made to work on farms, and hawk all sorts of goods on the streets of different Nigerian cities instead. Others are drafted into different households all over the country, to work as house helps (see Sections 12 & 28 of the CRA on a child’s right to leisure and prohibition from exploitative labour). Let us not forget children that are sexually abused and raped by family members and neighbours, and in the households where they are sent to do forced labour, or even by those on the streets where they hawk their wares, thereby inflicting physical and psychological damage on them for life. Already, the future of such children may be doomed to suffering, poverty and even crime. I find Section 28(1)(d) of the CRA a bit odd, as it provides that a child shall not be employed as domestic labour outside their own home or family environment. Does that mean that it is lawful for a child to be used as a domestic worker in their own homes, the way the ‘wicked step mothers’ use their step children, beating and starving them for good measure?
On the side of Government, the different levels of Government have failed to meet the educational objectives. The standard of education in most Government Schools is low, while the condition of their facilities is extremely poor. I remember the scandal when Senator Adams Oshiomhole was Governor of Edo State, where he fished out a Primary School Principal who couldn’t read the affidavit attached to her credentials! Another one, who was unable to speak proper English, spoke in pidgin English, answering “Na me” when a student was asked who their teacher was! Pray tell, what would such people be able to teach children, in terms of formal education, not having any themselves?! This is so unfair to the Nigerian child, who is only able to be educated via the public educational system.
While I was a Secondary School Student at Queen’s College, Yaba, Lagos, a Federal Government School, one daughter of a Head of State was my senior by a year, while a daughter of another Head of State was my junior by a couple of years. Today, one of the allegations levelled against former Governor of Kogi State is that he used State money to fund his children’s education at a private school, American International, Abuja, allegedly paying their fees in advance, until they all complete their education there. He didn’t send his children to Government schools, knowing that they are poorly funded and ill-equipped. But, Yahaya Bello isn’t alone in this - many top Government officials even send their children abroad to study, with funds they loot from the Nigerian treasury, while majority of the Nigerian children do not get the type of education that is required, due to all round paucity of funds.
Contrast this state of affairs to a country like Finland, where the public education system is believed to be one of the best in the world, so much so that they do not really have private schools there. There is equal opportunity for all, regardless of wealth and social status. The children of the rich, top government officials and the poor, all attend public schools that deliver best quality education. And, when they get to the tertiary level, those who attend Nigerian Public Universities sometimes stay there much longer than they should, because of the incessant strikes of the Academic Staff Union. Certainly, Government has not fulfilled Section 18(1) of the Constitution, which mandates equal and adequate educational opportunities at all levels for all. In Nigeria, the ‘privileged’ children who are obviously in the minority, have the best opportunities, because they are able to pay.
Discrimination Against the Girl Child in Particular
The female child is worse off than her male counterparts, as she’s discriminated upon from childhood to adulthood. First, in some Nigerian cultures, the girl child’s right to dignity, humane treatment and protection, freedom from torture is ignored, as they are still made to undergo FGM (female genital mutilation). See Section 34(1)(a)-(c) of the Constitution & Sections 11, 16-17 of the CRA. Some little girls are cut (circumcised) even before the age of 5, or before they reach the age of 14. FGM is a criminal offence, punishable with up to 4 years imprisonment - see Section 6 of the Violence Against Persons (Prohibition) Act 2015. Aside from community health education on the dangers of FGM, those who perpetrate this heinous act against girl children, should be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. This will send a resounding message to all and sundry, that these outdated repugnant practices will no longer be tolerated by the society.
The girl child is also married off, many a time to older men from when they are as young as age 12. See Section 21-23 of the CRA which prohibits child marriage and betrothal, and prescribes a punishment of up to 5 years imprisonment for doing same (a felony offence). Also see Section 42(1)(a) of the Constitution which prohibits discrimination. As a result of their being physically underdeveloped, having not reached puberty, some girls end up as Vesicovaginal Fistula Patients (VVF) (urinary incontinence caused by an abnormal opening between the bladder and the vagina), after being made to have sex and get pregnant before their reproductive organs are fully developed. Because of the smell of the leaking urine, these girls are then usually evicted from their homes by their husbands and ostracised by society, due to no fault of theirs.
A couple of States, Zamfara and Kano, are yet to domesticate the CRA. Zamfara is no surprise, because when the CRA was enacted in 2003, the then Governor, Ahmed Yerima himself, was alleged to prefer marrying underaged girls! Strangely, even though Section 29(4)(a) of the Constitution, in reference to naturalisation and renunciation of citizenship, sets full age at 18 and above, Section 29(4)(b) thereof unfortunately, makes a proviso that an underaged married girl is deemed to be of full age by virtue of her marriage. This is nonsense. How can you ‘deem’ a 12 year old to be 18, because they are married? This is a blatant lie. See the case of Orji v Dorji Textile Mills (Nig) Ltd & Ors (2009) LPELR-2766(SC) per Niki Tobi, JSC where the Supreme Court held inter alia that to deem “….means to treat a thing as being something that it is not, or as possessing certain qualities that it does not possess. It is a formal word, often used to create legal fictions”. Be that as it may, the boy child doesn’t suffer this kind of discrimination, as I have never heard of 12 year old boys, being forced to marry 35 or 40 year old women, like little girls are constrained to do!
The discrimination against the girl child usually follows her into adulthood, and that’s why there are hardly any women in the Legislature, most of them in Ministerial positions are Junior Ministers, and there is still the ongoing affirmative action agitation for 35% of positions to be filled by women in all institutions.
‘Runs’
The failure of successive governments, coupled with corruption and other factors, has pauperised Nigerians. Many young-adult females are the ones who now take care of their families instead of the parents, and they also fund the education of their younger siblings by doing ‘runs’, aka prostitution. Over a decade ago, I went to do some charity work at the General Hospital, Broad Street. I met this 23 year old female Youth Corper. She had come for her monthly check up and medication, as she was HIV+. I discovered that, as a result of her family responsibilities and the desire to be a University graduate to ensure a brighter future, she did runs as her source of income for funding. She ended up with her degree, and HIV in the bargain!
Conclusion
It is obvious that the lot of majority of Nigerian children, leaves a lot to be desired. What do they have to celebrate today? Sadly, not much. Their fundamental rights have been breached, and constantly continue to be trampled upon in more ways than one, and their future, compromised. The Government and many Parents, have failed the children, so much so that some are already hardened criminals. It is also not unusual for law enforcement, to place underaged children in Police cells and adult correctional facilities. A case in view is that of the children, in which 38 out of 75 were alleged to be underage, who were charged with terrorism offences and trying to overthrow the Government, following their alleged role in the #EndBadGovernance Protest last year.
However, from education to morals, nothing appears to be on course for the children, particularly the children of the ‘masses’. With technology, the world has become a global village. While many children who have had the benefit of a private education in Nigeria are able to hold their own anywhere they go, how does an average Nigerian child who cannot afford to enjoy the benefits of a private education, and is stuck with Teachers who cannot read or speak English, compete with their counterparts in other parts of the world like Finland? The rising scourge of drug addiction in the ranks of the youths, is also a cause for concern.
Nigeria needs to take the welfare of children more seriously, as they are the leaders of tomorrow.
[OPINION] How Governor Soludo Celebrated Wife’s Honorary Doctorate, Praised Her Advocacy for Healthy Living - Christian Aburime
Admin
Anambra State Governor, Professor Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, beamed with pride and admiration as he joined countless admirers in celebrating his wife, Mrs. Nonye Soludo, on the conferment of a prestigious Doctorate Degree (Honoris Causa) in Food and Nutrition by the Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University (COOU), Igbariam.
The recognition, awarded during the university’s convocation ceremony, honours Mrs. Soludo’s remarkable contributions to public health, food awareness, and nutrition advocacy through her flagship initiative, Healthy Living with Nonye Soludo—a programme that has grown into a movement touching lives in both urban and rural communities.
In an emotionally resonant message shared across his official platforms, Governor Soludo poured encomiums on his wife, referring to her as a visionary whose passion has reshaped health consciousness in Anambra
“Warmest congratulations to my darling wife, Nonye Soludo, on being conferred with a Doctorate Degree (Honoris Causa) in Food and Nutrition by the Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University,” the Governor wrote. “This recognition is a testament to her tireless advocacy for healthy living, which has inspired countless individuals through her initiative, Healthy Living with Nonye Soludo. I am proud of her dedication to promoting wellness and nutrition, and I'm grateful to COOU for this honour. Cheers to my Queen!”
The First Lady’s programme, launched shortly after the Soludo administration took office, has been widely acclaimed for demystifying nutrition and encouraging healthy habits through media campaigns, school outreach, local training, and community health fairs. Her model integrates practical food education with lifestyle improvement, targeting families, schools, and market women.
Behind her calm demeanour and graceful composure is a determined advocate who understands the link between a healthy citizenry and sustainable development. Through weekly radio programmes, market activations, fitness walks, and collaborations with healthcare professionals, Mrs. Soludo has brought nutrition literacy to the grassroots—often using relatable language and indigenous food examples to connect with ordinary people.
Her efforts have also led to partnerships with health experts and civil society organisations, contributing to better maternal and child health outcomes across the state. In schools, her nutrition clubs have helped reduce junk food consumption among pupils, replacing it with fruits and locally sourced nutritious alternatives.
The conferment ceremony at COOU drew a distinguished audience of academics, policy-makers, traditional rulers, and other important dignitaries. In her acceptance speech, Mrs. Soludo expressed deep appreciation to the university, reiterating her commitment to using the recognition as renewed motivation to expand the frontiers of her advocacy.
“I see this honorary doctorate not as a personal accolade but as a call to greater service. Health is wealth, and our people deserve to live well, eat right, and thrive,” she said.
Governor Soludo’s public tribute was not only a spousal commendation but also a reaffirmation of his administration’s holistic approach to governance—where health, education, and wellbeing form the pillars of state-building.
As the First Lady’s profile continues to rise, her story stands as a compelling reminder that impact does not always begin with a political title but often with empathy, vision, and relentless work. With this latest recognition, Mrs. Nonye Soludo further cements her legacy as a transformative voice in Nigeria’s public health narrative—walking side by side with her husband in the mission to build a liveable, healthy, and prosperous Anambra
The decision of the Umo Eno administration to complete the long-abandoned 200-room hotel and a 5,000-capacity convention centre at the Tropicana complex in Uyo is a clear testament to the governor’s maturity; good intentions and good conscience. For the first time in a long while, we have a leader who is not driven by pettiness and meanness in the course of running the government. The Tropicana Complex was initiated by the Akpabio administration in 2008 as a major entertainment and shopping centre, but it was steeped in controversy right from inception. Former governor Attah lampooned the project, arguing that the location was not suitable for such a big multipurpose construction. Attah’s criticisms embarrassed Gov. Akpabio and Akwa Ibom people lost interest in the project. Obong Attah is a strong voice in the state, and when he speaks, many listen.
The failure of Gov. Akpabio to deliver the project before he left office only reinforced Attah’s criticisms. Only the cinemas were functional when Akpabio left. The convention centre was abandoned at the foundation level. The hotel appeared fully built, but it was not open. The children’s park was abandoned with some equipment uninstalled. Rumours flew all over the place on why the Tropicana was abandoned. Some claimed that tests conducted had revealed that the soil condition was not suitable for the construction of a high-capacity project like the convention centre. There were also rumours that the hotel was sinking and would collapse in two years!
Sometime in 2019, I confronted Akpabio with these stories. He debunked the rumours, and told me that the hotel was fully completed and the furnishings he ordered had arrived in 40 containers; and that his successor had deliberately refused to furnish the hotel and open it for business. ‘’But I hear that the building is sinking, Senator’’, I pushed back. ‘’That’s a lie’’, Akpabio countered, adding ‘’the place is solid. I awarded the contract for the furnishing of the hotel to your friend’s wife (he mentioned her name). The containers had arrived, but my successor has deliberately refused furnish the hotel and open it hotel for business’’. With so much money spent on the project, the Tropicana Complex became the single biggest and costliest abandoned project in Akwa Ibom. It was synonymous with corruption and wastes.
I was personally pained by the abandonment of the Tropicana because I had supported and endorsed the project in a series of articles I wrote then, distancing myself from Gov. Attah’s trenchant criticisms. I flew in from Lagos through Port Harcourt to attend the flag-off of the construction of Tropicana by President Yar’Adua. It was obvious that the President was not in good health, but he managed to attend the ceremony in person. The air was thick with expectation and the excitement was palpable. Women sang, danced and the speeches were energetic. Akpabio described the project as unique, noting that it would offer a complete family package of shopping and entertainment - while the children would be playing in the water parks, their parents would be shopping in the malls. The Tropicana was presented as our answer to the Tinapa in Calabar, which was created by another youthful governor, Donald Duke, as Nigeria’s answer to Dubai! But while the Tropicana limped along, the Tinapa flopped soon after Duke left office in 2007.
Gov. Udom Emmanuel added value to the Tropicana by renovating it, creating more malls and inviting a supermarket chain, Grand Square, as the lead retailer. Together with the cinemas, the place then became the best leisure and shopping destination in Uyo. But the hotel and convention centre remained abandoned. Instead of completing the two projects, Gov. Udom Emmanuel chose to build a 21-storey building a few meters from the hotel.
Each time I drive on Udo Udoma Avenue, the sight of the abandoned 12-storey hotel and the thoughts of the billions that went down the drains would tug at every strand of my being. I would then remember the promise made by Ben Murray Bruce, one of the major contractors of the Tropicana on the day of the flag-off. ‘’Mr. President’’, Bruce addressed President Yar’Adua at the ceremony, ‘’this convention centre will be so beautiful that you will want to host the PDP National Convention here when it is completed’’. He went on: ‘’Mr. President, before now, there were some petty farmers on this land, growing various crops, but we have assured the farmers that we shall extend scholarships to their children for relocating them from this location’’. That was in October 2008 during the fag-off of the project. President Yar’Adua died less than two years after the ceremony; and the Tropicana remained uncompleted as a symbol of official depravity.
Then came Saturday, May 24, 2025. Gov. Umo Eno went to the Tropicana to flag-off the construction of the convention centre and the completion of the 200-bed hotel. Both would be completed and put to use next year. The governor said he chose to complete the long abandoned projects because ‘’I came not only to deepen peace and unity in my state, but to deploy my finisher’s anointing, especially on projects that may have gulped billions of our state’s resources already’’. He spoke of the benefits of the hotel and the convention centre as important elements of the tourism industry which he is reviving in the state; and noted that together with the ARISE Park he’s building, Uyo will be a preferred destination for conferences; leisure; recreation and pleasure. Of course, our world-class stadium has made us the football capital of the country already.
Gov. Eno deserves our commendation for electing to be a statesman; instead of a politician. He does not talk of Attah’s project; Udom’s project or Akpabio’s project. For him, all abandoned projects were funded by the people’s money and should be completed and put to use for the benefit of the people. This is the mark of a true and genuine leader who has the love of the state at heart. Eno is not interested in self-glorification and aggrandizement. He only wants to leave the state better than he met it. That is true leadership.
At the Alaafin’s Garden Hall in Oyo on 6 November, 1934, Alaafin Siyanbola Ladigbolu held a storming meeting with the Resident of Oyo Province, the Honourable Mr. H. L. Ward-Price. The Resident was the equivalent of today’s governor; the Province equated today’s state. That meeting was called to discuss the news filtering out that the white man was moving the capital of Oyo Province from Oyo town to Ibadan.
The meeting was held in a very tense atmosphere. The Lagos Daily News of 13 November, 1934 carried the proceedings verbatim. There is an excerpt here:
The Aláàfin: I summoned this meeting with a view to ascertaining whether the ugly rumour of your impending removal from Ộyó to Ibadan was true or not as I have not been authoritatively informed by you.
The Resident: Who told you that I am removing to Ìbàdàn?
The Aláàfin: No one did but it is a general talk among my people that you are packing up.
The Resident: But who told you that? The Aláàfin should not believe foolish talks and rumours.
The Aláàfin: If you want to prove the veracity of my statement, just give three pence to a small boy in the street with the request to bring in as many persons as he can find talking on this subject. You will be surprised at the crowd that will throng this place in a minute. It is a common saying everywhere.
The Resident: Anybody can say what he or she likes but I do not think the Aláàfin believes everything he hears.
The Alâàfin: I do not believe everything but this is too general to be a lie. I and my people do not want you to go. But if you say that you are not leaving Oyó, I am satisfied.
The Resident: I am transferring my Provincial Office to Ibàdàn. That is, my clerks are going to Ibàdàn and I am going to make Ibàdàn my business place. But I shall be living in Ộyộ.
The Aláàfin: How is it then that you say just now that you are not leaving Ộyó? This is rather suspicious. I do not like it.
The Resident: But can’t the Aláàfin see the difference between the Resident and his staff? I am not removing from Ộyộ; my clerks are.
The Aláàfin: I do not want you or your staff to leave Ộyó. Why? I am not pleased at the mere suggestion of it.
The Resident: You see, at Ộyó I have so much work to do through my mails coming in in great abundance. The mails are received twice weekly. Replies to some letters are sometimes delayed through that cause. Whilst at Ibàdàn I can get my mails every day and writing can be reduced or facilitated by the use of phone messages. Letters come from Forestry Department, Agricultural Department, etc., etc. which can be answered at once.
The Aláàfin: But you are not the first Resident to experience the difficulties of which you now complain. How is it that your predecessors never complained of this and were able to satisfy all concerned? Besides, these difficulties can be easily adjusted. I am not pleased that you should go to Ibàdàn for that reason.
The Resident: As I have said, while my office remains at Oyó, I shall never have to know the people of Oyó very well. Even some of the chiefs before me now (referring to the Ộyó chiefs present) are not well known to me because I am constantly engaged upon my work at the Residency. But if I go to İbàdàn, then my work is over. I can come to Ộyo two or three days. I shall then be able to devote more time to Oyo affairs than I have hitherto done.
The Aláàfin: This sounds strange! But you are known and addressed as the Resident of Oyo not of Ibàdàn.
The Resident: I am also Resident for Ibàdàn, Saki, Ifè, etc., etc. as well.
The Aláàfin: Exactly so by virtue of my position as the overlord of the places cited. But Oyó is your home. You are my Resident.
The Resident: Yes, I admit that Ộyo is my headquarters and I shall continue to reside there when I finish my work at Ibàdàn. At least I wish to try it; if not successful, I shall bring back my office. I have no mind of changing my headquarters. Do you think I can change that without the sanction of the Governor?
The Aláàfin: All right. But I am not pleased.
The Resident: Yes, the Aláàfin and the chiefs need not entertain any fear as I shall continue to carry on my work as usual.
The Aláàfin : All right, let us hope so.
It happened. If Ibàdàn was the capital of the old Western Region and the old Western State and is the capital of Oyo State today, the above is the story as told by J. A. Atanda in his ‘The Divisional Power Structure in the New Oyo Empire, 1914 – 1934’. The article deals with so many issues including the troublous Ibadan-Oyo relations.
As it turned out, the Resident moved the capital from Oyo to Ibadan without approval from Lagos. And he got away with it. The Aláàfin believed he did it because ‘rebellious’ Ibadan had won him over. The truth was that the Aláàfin had become too hot for everyone to handle and relate with. Ward-Price did it because he thought the Aláàfin was behaving as if he was the boss of everyone – including even the Resident. A month earlier (October 1934), the Aláàfin had reportedly declared that “I know that there is no (one) else besides me but God.” The Resident was supposed to be Alaafin’s boss; he was today’s governor. The man had powers and he used it to teach some lessons in power relations.
Earlier still in 1934, that same Resident had told Oba Aromolaran I, the Owa Obokun of Ijesaland, in his palace in Ilesa that “white ants are eating the legs of the Aláàfin ‘s chair without his knowing.” It was interpreted in Yoruba to the Owa who did not ask the white man to explain what he meant. The oba knew that it was an official acknowledgement of a gradual setting of the sun of what historians call the New Oyo Empire which started with the founding of a new Oyo town in about 1830. Mr. Emmanuel Adedeji Kayode was the orderly (asojú) to the Owa Obokun from 1920 to 1942. He listened to that conversation between Ward-Price and Owa. He retold it to Professor J. A. Atanda in an interview held at his Ereja Quarters residence in Ilesa on 13 June, 1966.
I do not know in person the present Aláàfin of Oyo, Oba Akeem Owoade. I have not met him but the first and the only newspaper interview he has granted since his choice as the Aláàfin was conducted by me – on the phone. He sounded calm and humble throughout that interview engagement. He spoke on his expectations and laid out his plans for his people. I think I was impressed. Although I know that like an aircraft, the take-off is always difficult, still I feel there are already too many negative vibes since this oba’s coronation. I am writing this today as my own incision in his occiput on how he flies his plane, particularly his handling of the current crisis over the composition and chairmanship of the Oyo State Council of Obas.
The contentious Oyo State Council of Obas bill was passed some days ago. The new Aláàfin and his townspeople are not happy with that bill. But the authors of the bill originally proposed making Aláàfin the permanent chairman; in his absence, Olubadan and Soun were to serve as concurrent chairmen in that order of ranking. Very loud protests by Aláàfin’s people that their king would not share the seat with anyone even when he is absent woke up the other side – Ibadan and Ogbomoso. They reacted by rejecting the bill as originally drafted, and demanded a rotation of the chairmanship. They will share the seat two years apiece. Now, they’ve won.
They would win. In particular, the Ibadan would win. They have so much resistance and activism in their checkered history to guide them. Besides, they are brave and daring in reaching for whatever they covet. Their ancestors had it. At the beginning of the Ibadan-Ijaye war in 1861, an Ibadan General who later in life became famously known as Basorun Ogunmola, was reported to have boasted a promise that: “After shaving the crown of the head (Ijaye), he would shave the occiput (Abeokuta).” That was the Ibadan warlord’s way of promising to destroy one enemy after the other. He did not mention Oyo and its king, the Alaafin, but it is there in history that when it was his time to be Baale of Ibadan, Ogunmola told the Alaafin that the title he wanted was that of Basorun, Oyo’s prime minister. And he had it even while someone was holding the title in Oyo.
Professor Bolanle Awe in a 1965 piece wrote that Ogunmola and, much later, Aare Latosa while establishing an Ibadan empire stretching over the whole of Yorubaland “openly discarded the support and friendship of the Alaafin of Oyo. Of the two leaders, however, Ogunmola was the wiser, in that he replaced the Aláàfin’s friendship with that of the British government…” (See Awe’s ‘The end of an experiment: The Collapse of the Ibadan Empire, 1877-1893’). The effect of that foundational friendship with the new power, the British, is what we see later in the colonial government acknowledging Ibadan over Oyo as the new power centre.
Potshots aimed at Oyo are Ibadan’s regular bugle songs of freedom. A conference of Yoruba Chiefs was to be held in Ibadan in May 1939. Then a storm ensued over a custom-made damask cloth for the conference. The cloth had the photograph of Olubadan Abasi Alesinloye holding a tiger on a leash. The Aláàfin protested vehemently and the government banned the cloth from being sold and worn throughout the province. Why did the Aláàfin protest? Ruth Watson explains in her ‘Civil Disturbance is the Disease of Ibadan’ (2003, page 159) quoting Olubadan’s driver: “Abasi was holding a tiger, that signifies Oyo under Ibadan because that tiger sign (symbol) belongs to Alaafin. He had rope tied around that tiger’s neck, it was pulled tight.” Between that time, 1939 and now, so many events have occurred which have served to relive that experience of a tiger on a leash. Many more will happen.
The present Ibadan-Oyo crisis over the chairmanship of Oyo State Council of Obas and Chiefs I find very vexatious and unnecessary. The new Aláàfin should shake off suffocating creepers from his orange tree and own himself. He should move closer to his ancestor, Atiba, and ask him how he used diplomacy to make the Ibadan serve his purpose; how his son, Adelu, got the Ibadan fight his wars, particularly the decisive one against Kurunmi of Ijaye in 1861-1862. The Aláàfin needs Ibadan and other Yoruba towns more than they need him. I pray for his success but the current noise so early in his reign is very distracting and unnecessary. In fact, if I were the Aláàfin, I would call a strategic, unilateral ceasefire on this council of obas thing; I would withdraw my troops while I reach out to rival kingdoms. There are greater things ahead to do together.
“Vision is the art of seeing what is invisible to others” (Jonathan Swift). Yoruba ancestors saw today and made it a rule of behaviour that obas must never leave their kingdoms. They also decreed it a taboo for obas to meet face to face. Throughout the period of obedience, no oba compared his height with another and none talked down on another. But the British broke the pot, first in 1886 to sign a treaty; second in 1925 at a durbar for the visiting Prince of Wales. The really bad one was in 1937 when the British called and held a Conference of Obas of Western Province. Since then, intrigues and fights over who sits where have combined to ruin the family.
What do our obas really do with the present so-called council of obas? What will happen if a state does not have that council? I do not want to ask what will happen if there really is no oba in a town. Should custodians of culture be found fighting over a council that is practically powerless and of no developmental value to the society? Besides, and this is important: Is there an oba today whose kingly arms reach out beyond his kingdom? There was an Oyo Empire at a time when there was no Ibadan. There was an Ibadan Empire which succeeded Oyo Empire at the demise of Oyo and its powers. Today, neither exists.
From the epochal 1934 to date, Ibadan has not stopped insisting that the present Oyo is not the Old Oyo to which their ancestors belonged and which they served. The British in the 1920s set up a court of appeal for Oyo province and made the Aláàfin its chairman. What was the reaction from Ibadan? Ibadan people refused to take their cases to that court. I got an interesting paragraph from Professor Toyin Falola: “The Aláàfin ‘s Appeals
Nigeria is a nation of parties—literal and metaphorical. It is a Nation too vibrant for monolithic politics. From the fiery debates over whose jollof rice reigns supreme to the cultural pride in regional delicacies like Amala, Tuwo, and protein-laced soups, Nigerians are wired to reject monotony. This culinary diversity mirrors the country’s political appetite: a craving for choice, competition, and flavor. The idea of a one-party system? As implausible as a national consensus on the “best” dish. The 2023 presidential election results, and the political drama unfolding since, only reinforce this truth.
While it is a feast of fractured mandates, a look at the 2023 verdict—whether court-backed, IREV-maligned—reveals no landslide, only a smorgasbord of lessons. The figures speak plainly. President Bola Tinubu of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) secured 8,794,726 votes (37% of valid votes), narrowly defeating Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) with 6,984,520 votes (29%) and Peter Obi of the Labour Party (LP) with 6,101,533 votes (25%). Rabiu Kwankwaso of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) trailed with 1,496,687 votes (6%). Tinubu’s victory was neither a sweep nor a mandate of invincibility. Notably, Atiku and Obi’s combined votes (13 million) dwarfed Tinubu’s tally, underscoring a fragmented opposition’s self-inflicted defeat. Had Kwankwaso aligned with Obi or Atiku swallowed his ambition to back a single challenger, the APC’s grip might have snapped.
But let’s not sugarcoat it: the opposition’s failure wasn’t just tactical—it was existential. The PDP, once a behemoth that governed for 16 years, now resembles a retirement home for recycled ideas, while the LP’s surge, though impressive, relied more on Obi’s cult of personality than institutional depth. The NNPP? A regional footnote. Meanwhile, Tinubu’s 37%—the lowest winning share since 1999—exposes a leader ruling with a fractured mandate in a nation where 63% voted against him.
We see a geography of discontent with the nation sliced three ways, such that it further diluted Tinubu’s dominance. He won 12 states, the same as Atiku, while Obi clinched 11 states plus the Federal Capital Territory (FCT). This regional split—Tinubu in the Southwest, Atiku in the Northwest/Northeast, Obi in the Southeast/South-South—reveals a nation divided yet defiant against hegemony. In Lagos, Tinubu’s “kingmaker” aura cracked as Obi snatched the state, a symbolic blow to the godfather’s invincibility. In Kano, Kwankwaso’s NNPP trounced APC, proving that even the North’s political machine isn’t monolithic.
But here’s the rub: Nigeria’s voting patterns are less about ideology and more about identity. Ethnicity and religion still dictate ballots, with parties serving as vehicles for regional champions. The Southeast’s embrace of Obi, a Christian Igbo, and the North’s loyalty to Atiku, a Fulani Muslim, underscore this reality. Tinubu’s “national” victory? A patchwork of backroom deals, not a unifying vision.
For APC, it must be a gathering storm or a gathering rot, two years is a lifetime in Nigerian politics. The PDP’s 16-year rule collapsed in 2015 under the weight of arrogance and corruption. Today, the APC faces similar vulnerabilities, even as it parades new defectors. Since 2023, the party has absorbed governors, senators, and influencers from the PDP and LP—a trend it touts as strength. But history warns otherwise.
Defectors in Nigerian politics are political nomads, driven by opportunism, not ideology. Recall how Governor Godwin Obaseki defected from APC to PDP in 2020, only to later feud with his new party. Or Senator Dino Melaye, a serial defector whose loyalty shifts with the wind. These “fair-weather allies” dilute party cohesion, breeding internal strife and policy paralysis. The APC’s swelling ranks now resemble a crowded marketplace—full of noise, low on trust. Is this a Trojan horse strategy to implode the party from within? Perhaps. After all, a party bloated with rivals becomes a theatre of war.
It is also important to note that there is also the opposition’s inertia, more like the art of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. While the APC grapples with defection-driven chaos, the opposition’s inertia is equally glaring. Beyond critiquing the APC’s failures—rising insecurity, economic ruin, corruption—the PDP and LP offer little innovation. Their playbook? Recycled promises from the 1990s. Where are the bold visions for Nigeria’s 21st-century crises?
Take youth unemployment: 53% of young Nigerians are jobless, yet neither PDP nor LP has articulated a credible plan to harness this demographic time bomb. Where is the Marshall Plan for renewable energy in a nation where 92 million lack electricity? Or the blueprint for healthcare in a country losing doctors to global brain drains? Instead, opposition leaders recycle slogans like “restructuring” and “unity,” buzzwords as empty as a campaign promise.
Peter Obi’s 2023 momentum, fuelled by youth disillusionment, exposed a hunger for fresh faces. Yet, the LP’s post-election strategy has devolved into legal theatrics and social media hype. Meanwhile, Atiku, 77, clings to his perennial candidacy like a relic, oblivious to a nation where 63% of the population is under 25. The opposition’s fatal flaw? Mistaking anti-APC sentiment for pro-opposition fervor. Nigerians crave solutions, not slogans.
Scary for analysts like us, is the silent majority, the 36 Million ghost voters and our democracy’s unseen crisis. They are perhaps the loudest message from 2023, the 36 million registered voters who stayed home. With just 24 million votes cast (29% of 93 million registered voters), apathy overshadowed enthusiasm. In 2015, turnout was 44%; by 2023, it plummeted to a historic low. For many, politics feels like a choice between “the devil and the deep blue sea.”
But apathy isn’t indifference—it’s dissent. Nigerians are protesting a system rigged against them: a 2023 election marred by voter suppression, technical glitches, and allegations of judicial complicity. Why vote when the courts “correct” the people’s “mistakes”? Why engage when politicians swap parties like runway models change outfits?
This disillusionment is a tinderbox. If 2027 mirrors 2023’s apathy, Nigeria risks a legitimacy crisis—a government elected by a minority, ruling over a seething majority. The stakes? Not just democracy’s survival, but social stability in a nation where 70% live in poverty.
Yet, Nigerian politics thrives on chaos and surprise. Today’s underdog could be tomorrow’s kingmaker. President Muhammadu Buhari lost three elections before clinching power in 2015. Peter Obi rose from LP’s obscurity to win 25% of the 2023 vote. Who’s next?
Watch the youth. With 42% of Nigerians under 14, the next generation is a sleeping giant. Movements like #EndSARS proved their power—and their rage. A candidate leveraging youth angst, tech, and social media could redraw the political map. Imagine a “zebra” candidate—an outsider like #EndSARS activist—channelling this energy into a presidential bid.
Or watch the states. Governors like Babajide Sanwo-Olu (Lagos) or Alex Otti (Abia) are building subnational legacies that could eclipse federal failures. A coalition of progressive governors might just bypass Abuja’s dysfunction altogether. I believe that there are wildcards and game-Changers—the zebras in the room.
The kitchen is still hot: No One-Dish Democracy. Nigeria’s political menu will never be a one-dish affair. The APC’s current lead is no guarantee of 2027 success, just as the opposition’s disarray isn’t permanent. For democracy to thrive, parties must evolve beyond transactional defections and tired rhetoric. Voters, too, must re-engage, turning apathy into accountability.
To the political class: Adapt or perish. The youth are watching, the hungry are waiting, and the clock is ticking. To Nigerians: The 2027 pot is simmering. Will you add your ingredient, or let others dictate the flavor?
As the dance toward 2027 begins, one truth endures: in a nation where jollof rivalry sparks passion, political complacency is a recipe for disaster. Nigeria’s democracy, like its parties, thrives on vibrancy, not monochrome. The next act awaits—and the audience is starving for change—May Nigeria win!
Prince Charles Dickson PhD
Politics in Nigeria over the years has always been denominated by notable peculiarities. This of course is relative to time and season. The gamut of its aesthetics resides in the frills and thrills, dramas and theatrics, which it throws up. Electioneering engenders colourful rallies in stadia and open arenas, complete with songs, chants and dance. Oftentimes, such events build up into resplendent carnival crescendos in the African sunshine. Roadshows offer similar excitement, music booming and blaring from loudspeakers mounted on branded automobiles, electrifying the streets and cities, as huge processions accompany mobile platforms. It is the season when aliases are minted and sobriquets conjured, when major political dramatis personae are conferred with novel honorifics and nomenclatures.
Nigeria’s First and Second Republic politics featured notable legends like Jeremiah Obafemi Awolowo; Samuel Ladoke Akintola; Augustus Meredith Adisa Akinloye; Moses Adekoyejo Majekodunmi; Busari Adelakun and Adeniran Ogunsanya, from Nigeria’s present day South West. From the South East came icons like Alvan Azinna Ikoku; Nnamdi Benjamin Azikiwe; Kingsley Ozumba Mbadiwe; Michael Iheonukara Okpara, while today’s global North had the Abubakar Tafawa Balewas; Sa’adu Zungurs; Aminu Kanos; Yusuf Maitama Sules, among others. Awolowo was nicknamed Awo evidently derived from the full spelling of his surname, while the fearless, daring Adelakun was festooned with the alias Eruobodo, which means the “river fears no one.” For his pan-Africanist endeavours, Azikiwe was commonly referred to as Zik of Africa, while Aminu Kano was the Baba’n Talakawa, on account of his strident advocacy for the proletariat, the down-trodden.
Aliasing on the political trail subsists even up until the present. Lamidi Adedibu a colossus in the politics of Oyo State in his time, was reputed for his affinity with the underprivileged. As many urchins and street kids who accessed his expansive home in Molete, Ibadan, were assured of regular meals, the staple being amala, yam flour. While Adedibu in one breath was the exemplar of amala politics, he was also famously known as Alaafin Molete. Alaafin is the title of the king of Oyo, a foremost kingdom in Yoruba and Nigerian history. Adedibu was said to have been eminently influential in his district, Molete, Ibadan, his hands strengthened by the swarming army of youngsters beholden to him as their ultimate benefactor. His wishes were his commands. The title of Alaafin, arguably the Number One royal in Oyo State, was therefore appropriated and honorarily bestowed on him. For as long as he lived, Adedibu was a major factor in the politics of Oyo State, whose voice indeed echoed in Aso Villa, seat of national governance.
Nigeria’s botched Third Republic brought forth Isiaka Adetunji Adeleke as Governor of Osun State, in January 1992. He was a very cosmopolitan and charismatic personality who was born in Enugu in Nigeria’s South East. He was noted for the remarkable styling of his headgear, which pointed skywards like that of a chef, as against the norm in Yoruba land. He contested for the governorship of Osun State on the platform of the extinct Social Democratic Party, (SDP) and won, just months after the creation of the entity in August 1991. The manner of his first time sweep of the gubernatorial poll earned him the sobriquet Serubawon, the one dreaded by his adversaries. Isiaka Adeleke’s younger brother, Ademola Adeleke who like his older sibling is Governor of Osun State, has since adopted and popularised his brother’s signature cap. Such are the variegated spin-offs of politics in our own part of the world.
Conversations around Nigeria’s 2027 presidential poll have begun rather early. The administration of President Bola Tinubu is barely two years in office, yet the national space has been drowned in the din of an election which is more than 700 days away. Cross-carpeting and defections have assumed fever-pitch as politicians try to secure their places in the political scheme, post-2027. Governors, parliamentarians, government appointees, serving and retired continue to move around like yo-yos. Their whole lives, their eternal relevance seem solely predicated on the sustenance of their proboscis, deep inside the torso of our collective patrimony. Many politicians in the present milieu have become permanent fixtures in our politics. As though they are the only Nigerians capable of adding value to governance and nation-building.
Proclamations about Tinubu being the sole presidential candidate of the All Progressives Congress, (APC) in the 2027 presidential ticket have been made. He will run unopposed. Olusegun Obasanjo, the First President of the ongoing Fourth Republic, was challenged at the 2003 presidential primary of his party at the time, the Peoples Democratic Party, (PDP), by no less a politician and statesman, than Alex Ekwueme, Nigeria’s Second Republic Vice President, a foundation member of the PDP. This underscores the politics of accommodation promoted by Obasanjo a strong President in his own era. Affirmations are equally being chanted, as affixture to the on your mandate we shall stand chant, popularised by Tinubu promoters during the 2022/2023 electioneering exercise. Mere mortals are making matter-of-fact declarations and pronouncements with the manner of certitude and conviction about the future which presupposes they know the plans and workings of the mind of the Almighty God Himself.
Nigeria’s former Vice President, Atiku Abubakar, has remained a very formidable factor in Nigeria’s politics since the days of the primordial SDP, back in 1992. Despite being a newcomer to partisan politics having just retired from public service at the time, Atiku posted a notably strong performance for a newbie at the party’s presidential primary in 1993. This ensured he was a decider in the subsequent emergence of Moshood Kashimawo Olawale Abiola, (MKO), as presidential candidate of the SDP. Abiola beat Baba Gana Kingibe, in the runoff between both men, in Jos that year, largely because of Atiku’s personal sacrifice. Atiku continued to hone his skills as a politician, build cross-national friendships and relationships and to align with democratic elements even under the dreadful regime of Nigeria’s former pseudo-maximum ruler, Sani Abacha. He was tracked to his Kaduna home by Abacha agents and attacked. A number of armed security operatives on guard in his house were neutralised just as he escaped by the whiskers and went into exile.
Atiku was Governor-elect of Adamawa State, early 1999. He was awaiting inauguration when he was chosen to pair Obasanjo’s presidential ticket, after the PDP presidential primary. Instructively, the primary took place in Jos, where the SDP presidential primary in which he previously participated, held six years before. The Obasanjo/Atiku ticket won the presidential election proper and Atiku Abubakar became the First Vice President of Nigeria subsisting Fourth Republic. Talk about one politician who has friends and associates across all of Nigeria’s 774 local government areas and you find that in Atiku Abubakar. He needs not grope in the dark searching for acolytes. And because he is ever in touch with his affiliates and foot soldiers, they rally spontaneously to his beckoning and causes.
If there is one politician today whose name evokes trepidation in the ranks of the establishment, that person has to be Atiku Abubakar. His vast public service experience; his successful forays into the private sector; his profound knowledge of the Nigerian conundrum; his deft organisational skills; his flexibility as a team player; his charm and charisma, combine to underline his formidability. Concerned Nigerians in recent weeks and months, have been reaching out to Atiku to lead the charge for change in the nation’s political leadership. While the overall socioeconomic health of the nation is draped in gloss and fine print by incumbents, the situation is excruciating on the streets. There is palpable hunger, worsened by skyrocketing inflation. Insecurity continues to pummel the citizenry by way of kidnappings, banditry, insurgency and wanton killings across the breadth of the country. Depression has accentuated suicide rates as many succumb to despair and despondency. The national space is thick and dark with tangible foreboding.
True, Nigeria’s opposition parties are almost irredeemably discombobulated as we speak. The very thought of Atiku commitedly attempting to sew a pathway out of the tatters, however, is very concerning to the status quo. The experience of the 2023 presidential election where the APC capitalised on the fact of the dismemberment of the PDP behemoth into three political smithereens remains very fresh. Hopefully, political archaeologists will some day unearth the debauchery and chicanery which attended the tallying of the final results of that election. To forestall a recurrence of that incident, a viable cross-party partnership is being conceived to rescue Nigeria from its present abyss, as Nigerians continue to agonise about the glaring failures and failings of the incumbent regime. This underlines mass angst, with the Tinubu administration consistently fingered for excruciating hardship and the attendant national lachrymose.
The evolving political alliance calculated to confront the incumbent dispensation, is gathering adherents by the day. At the centre of this movement is Atiku Abubakar whose every guest, every visit to like-minded politicians, every event he participates in, evokes interest and debate, in opposing political quarters. Atiku is fittingly the contemporary Serubawon. He is the one whose sneezes reverberate across the political sphere, causing tremors in the ranks of his adversaries. The journey to 2027, by the way, is just beginning. There are no foreclosures as yet. Not at all.
Olusunle, PhD, Fellow of the Association of Nigerian Authors, (FANA), is an Adjunct Professor of Creative Writing at the University of Abuja
[OPINION] Gatekeepers or spectators? National assembly’s two-year performance gap - Dakuku Peterside
AdminLast week’s column took state governors to task, and the response was electric: inboxes flooded, phone lines buzzed, and hashtags trended. Nigerians are starved for public office scorecards that rely on more than rumour and partisan noise. In that spirit, and with the second anniversary of the 10th National Assembly staring us in the face, the spotlight now swings toward the legislature.
In Washington, where we borrowed our presidential model, lawmakers live under the unforgiving glare of the Legislative Effectiveness Score: fifteen indicators that weigh everything from the originality of bills to the art of steering them through committees. Add the Healthy Congress Index (HCI),which checks the institution’s pulse—how often it debates and how transparent the votes are—and you have an ecosystem where inertia is quickly shamed. Abuja, by contrast, offers no such dashboard. All we possess are lofty promises voiced from the rostrum on Inauguration Day and the quiet, often-seething expectations of 220 million citizens. Those promises form the spine of this mid-term review; those expectations supply its moral urgency.
First, the numbers. In its opening year, the Senate introduced 464 bills and passed 19; in the second year, up to this May, 341 bills produced a meagre seven enactments. The House looked busier—1,727 bills filed by December 2024, 114 of them passed—but peel away the seven executive-sponsored measures and the apparent productivity deflates. Committee clerks admit that roughly one-third of all texts are recycled from earlier parliaments, some lifted almost verbatim from the 8th and 9th Assemblies. It is legislative déjà vu: copy, paste, rename, re-announce. Quantity, yes. Originality and rigour, no. This Assembly would languish in the bottom quartile by the American yardstick that prizes innovation and shepherding skill.
The quality deficit shows up in what lawmakers choose to rush. The National Anthem Bill of 2024—re-introducing the 1960 song “Nigeria, We Hail Thee”—sailed through first, second and third readings in a single sitting, then became law within eight days. Critics wondered why a symbolic lyric change earned lightning attention while food-price bills languished. A similar haste-then-rethink story dogs the Students’ Loan Act: passed in 2023, repealed and reenacted in 2024 after design flaws emerged. Speed seems reserved for headline bills and presidential priorities; everything else becomes legislative traffic.
If legislative output has been underwhelming, economic stewardship has been positively somnolent. The economy has seesawed from subsidy removal through currency free-fall to inflation that makes a mockery of monthly pay slips, yet Parliament has rarely mounted an independent critique of budgets, revenue forecasts or tax proposals. Hearings on the 2025 Finance Bill—an instrument that will decide whether families stay afloat or sink—featured more cabinet ministers than civil society witnesses. The optics are unmistakable: the legislature has abandoned its role and now promoting the agenda of the executive . The National Assembly held just two stand-alone debates on monetary or fiscal strategy and rubber-stamped the record-sized 2025 budget in 31 sitting hours—barely one-third the time the 8th Assembly devoted to the smaller 2016 estimates.
Where the economy goes, social misery follows. Nigerians now speak of poverty, food prices, banditry, kidnappings and unemployment as if they were the weather—inescapable, ever-present, uncaring. One might expect a flurry of poverty-reduction bills, police reform blueprints, or social welfare overhauls. Instead, the Order Paper remains eerily devoid of landmark initiatives. The lone poverty-relief measure that did clear both chambers has been trapped in the harmonisation mill for half a year, gathering dust while food queues at all gatherings lengthen.
Public sentiment is matching the numbers. Citizens have noticed. A media sentiment scan across 18 dailies found a 72-per cent negative slant toward the Assembly this year. The latest Afrobarometer country brief finds that only 19 % of Nigerians trust National Assembly “somewhat” or “a lot,” a figure lower than the police and barely above political parties. In an era when Instagram comedians draw bigger live audiences than oversight hearings, that statistic feels less like survey data and more like lived reality.
When the Policy and Legal Advocacy Centre (PLAC) set out to gauge public faith in National Assembly, its findings were bleak: confidence in the National Assembly hovered near rock bottom. Wanting to test whether that verdict was an outlier or a mirror, I sifted through months of news coverage and then spoke, quietly and without a script, to two hundred Nigerians spread across markets, campuses and motor parks. Their verdict echoed PLAC’s numbers—distrust has hardened into something close to resignation. The Speaker of the HOR, writing in the Guardian, conceded that Parliament must “earn back the people’s faith.” It takes no political genius to decode that sentence: the legislature’s legitimacy is in free fall, and even its highest officers can feel the rush of air.
Why the distance? Many civil society voices point to the Electoral Reform Bill, which should sit at the heart of any democracy worth the name. Instead, it idles on committee desks, adjourned and re-adjourned while more photogenic bills leapfrog it on the order paper. Electoral rules shape everything else—how leaders are chosen, how accountable they feel, and how national resources are shared. Treat that foundation lightly, and the cracks spread into every social and economic wall we’re trying to shore up. Until lawmakers urgently confront that truth, the trust deficit they bemoan will only widen.
Another reason for that collapse is the anaemic quality of debate. Plenary sittings open without forming a quorum. Though you have 100 per cent attendance on the register, the Senate hardly witnesses more than 40 persons on the floor. The House of Representatives (HOR) is worse; not more than 50 members are out of 360 on a good day. Bills often sprint through first and second readings in minutes. Committee rooms—those sweatshops of legislative business —registered a mere 14 investigative hearings in two years, compared with 61 during the equivalent stretch of the 8th Assembly, confirming that the watchdog’s bark now registers as a whimper. Civil society groups invited to testify say draft bills sometimes arrive the night before or not at all. Oversight this thin cannot scarify an errant minister, let alone a recalcitrant bureaucracy.
Institutional reform, loudly trumpeted on inauguration day, has suffered the same fate. The presiding officers promised digital voting boards, live attendance logs, televised committee sittings and a root-and-branch rewrite of the standing orders. Two years later, the boards are dark, the logs are unpublished, the cameras are absent, and the rulebook is “with consultants.” Promises postponed are promises broken. Misuse of voice voting for a serious national issue, such as declaring a state of emergency in Rivers state, screams of a National Assembly ready to sell its soul for the “porridge” of the Executive.
And then there is money—the ₦6.9 trillion worth of projects smuggled into the 2025 budget, spanning a staggering 11,122 individual schemes. There is no need assessments, community consultations, or GPS-tagged disclosure of location —just pork-barrel politics on a scale large enough to feed an ark. This total legislative add-on is above the combined capital votes of health and education. Just imagine that!
Civil society trackers can find locations for barely a quarter of the projects, procurement portals list even fewer contractors. The optics feed a perception of “Legis-looting” so potent that 21 citizens have already sued the presiding officers for budget opacity, while anti-graft agencies circle but have yet to pounce.
Patterns emerge: a recycling culture that dilutes policy innovation; deference to the Executive that hollows out checks and balances; token oversight that lets scandals slip through the net; opaque spending that deepens the conviction that everyone under the dome is on the take. Each pathology feeds the next like cogs in a depressing machine.
What to do? Borrow, yes—but not mindlessly—from the United States. The National Institute for Legislative Studies could design a Nigerian Legislative Effectiveness Index in concert with civil society and the media, weighting originality, cross-party sponsorship, committee diligence and real-world impact. Every bill should face a “rigour filter” before the second reading: a clear problem statement, a fiscal note, and evidence of stakeholder consultation.
Constituency projects could be forced into the sunlight by a public, geo-tagged dashboard that lets citizens upload smartphone photos of progress—or the lack thereof. Committees deserve independent counsel, research budgets and minority-party chairs for at least 30 per cent of probes, reversing the rubber-stamp culture. And National Assembly must anchor quarterly, nationally televised debates on the economy, timed to the budget cycle, forcing lawmakers either to defend fiscal choices or fold under the klieg lights.
None of this is utopian. All of it is achievable. The 10th National Assembly is not the laziest in purely numerical terms—thousands of bills tell that story—but by any honest qualitative yardstick, it is the least consequential in a decade. Nigeria’s cascading crises require a legislature that legislates, scrutinises and inspires confidence. The good news is that redemption is still possible; the bad news is that the window is shrinking by the week. Citizens have started counting the seconds aloud. Whether lawmakers can still convert this chorus of disillusion into a spur for reform will decide not only the legacy of the 10th Assembly but also, in part, the trajectory of Nigeria’s fragile democracy.
Two years remain. That is enough time to pivot from legislative theatre to legislative therapy: subject every new bill to rigorous stakeholder input , schedule quarterly macro-economy debates that cannot be waived; and adopt a Nigerian-tailored Legislative Effectiveness Index data. These and not outrage should drive the end-term review. Until such reforms take root, the 10th National Assembly’s legacy risks being summed up in one brutal statistic—nineteen per cent.
Since leaving office in May 2023, former Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari has evoked all manner of sentiments. While his die-hard supporters idolize him for his perceived integrity and simple mien, most Nigerians write him off as, perhaps, the most inept to ever lead Africa’s most populous Black nation. Indeed, very few people look back at Buhari’s tenure for inspiration or with any nostalgic feeling, not necessarily because the present administration has done substantially better, but because the systemic rot in the nation’s economy assumed a worse dimension on Buhari’s watch.
Buhari sunk so low in the estimation of reasonable Nigerians that only a handful of those who served in his 8-year administration will defend it with any pride. And, as if he is aware of the public disdain for his low-energy performance, the former military strongman has tactfully remained out of public view, holed up mostly in his Daura village.
The past month, however, was different. Not only was Buhari drawn into the public space once again by politicians seeking to benefit from whatever remains of his goodwill, but the flurry of activities connected to political realignments ahead of the 2027 elections thrust him into an undeserved positive spotlight.
Like a bride, he is being gilded in gold; his flaws are being buried in the heap of eulogies by all manner of opportunistic politicians. The gilding has come from leaders of his APC desirous of using his influence to mend the cracks in the party, as well as opposition politicians who are interested in latching onto his famed popularity among the North’s talakawa.
The visit by governors of the ruling All Progressives Congress at his newly renovated Kaduna home threw up similar visits by leaders of the fledgling coalition of opposition politicians led by Atiku Abubakar and Nasir el-Rufai, as well as the APC National Working Committee, led by its National Chairman, Alhaji Umar Ganduje. But it was the governors’ visit and the overly patronizing words of their leader, Governor Hope Uzodinma, that agitated many Nigerians.
Ostensibly for the Eid-el-Fitr celebrations, the visit had all the trappings of partisan politics following the disquiet in the APC over President Tinubu’s lopsided appointments that relegated members of Buhari’s faction in the APC, the Congress for Progressive Change.
After praising Buhari for publicly affirming that the APC remains his party, despite CPC members’ grumblings, Governor Uzodinma of Imo State, who is also the Chairman of the Progressive Governors Forum (PGF), went on a mission to gild the man in gold. He claimed, without offering evidence, that Buhari’s handling of the nation’s affairs during his presidency, specifically security, the economy, and anti-corruption, was outstanding and commendable. He was quoted in a statement by Garba Shehu, Buhari’s media aide, as saying “Your Excellency, your legacy in Nigeria’s history is secure…Your administration gave expression to our party’s core principles through your focus on security, economic recovery, and anti-corruption. Your efforts reclaimed territory from insurgents, extended social investment programs … and ushered in road and rail revolution that is still bearing fruit…”
Uzodimma was either massaging Buhari’s ego or he was genuinely trying to rewrite history. He did not bother to elaborate on the nation’s security gains when he was in power, nor the positives of whatever economic policies he initiated. But, since the scars of Buhari’s poor handling of those two national issues – security and the economy – are still fresh, it is important to interrogate Uzodinma’s claim against the reality of our experiences.
Buhari was in charge when the Global Terrorism Index shockingly ranked Nigeria as the third most insecure nation on Earth, a designation that highlighted the alarming levels of violence and instability that plagued the country. On his watch, terrorists displayed a brazen audacity, carrying out attacks on a wide range of targets, from strategic national institutions to elite military formations, leaving many citizens feeling vulnerable and unsafe in their homeland.
In what seems to be an attempt to rewrite our recent history, it appears that he has conveniently forgotten, perhaps deliberately, some of the most egregious incidents that marked the era of terrorism. A few reminders will suffice. Notably, over a hundred armed terrorists on motorcycles launched a daring assault on Kuje Prison, successfully freeing nearly a thousand of their associates who were held behind bars. This audacious breach of security not only exposed the vulnerabilities in our correctional facilities but also raised critical questions about the effectiveness of the national security apparatus under Buhari.
To further illustrate the poor security climate, in 2021, terrorists shockingly invaded the prestigious Nigerian Defence Academy, a key institution responsible for training the nation’s military leaders. In this attack, they killed two soldiers. Even the Brigade of Guards, the elite team assigned to protect the President himself, faced a serious security breach, shamefully so for a regime headed by a retired army general.
So what was the basis of Governor Uzodinma’s outlandish claims?
If Buhari’s handling of the nation’s security was poor, his economic policies were nothing short of disastrous. And to call him a prudent man and an anti-corruption hero would be to distort the realities of his administration. For a leader who inherited a debt profile of just over 10 billion dollars, it is astonishing to note that Nigeria’s debt soared to nearly 45 billion dollars during his tenure, a steep increase that raised serious questions about the administration’s fiscal prudence.
It was under Buhari’s administration that the controversial policy of upfront payment for proceeds from the country’s oil was introduced. This practice, novel in its absurdity, seriously undermined the financial stability of the nation, the scars of which exist till today..
In addition to these absurdities, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2007 was brazenly contravened as the Central Bank of Nigeria was exposed to trillions of Naira through that dubious mechanism known as Ways and Means. Like many of his policies, this ultimately jeopardised the nation’s financial health, with all its negative impact that still torment hapless Nigerians to this day.
It was political opportunism at its best for the governors to seize such a visit, ostensibly for the Eid-el-Fitr, to turn facts on their head.
I can understand President Bola Tinubu’s continued pandering to Buhari, including the reported renovation of his Kaduna home. Although their relationship has occasionally been viewed as politically transactional, Tinubu has made deliberate efforts to maintain close ties with Buhari for broader strategic aims, especially in preventing the emergence of a rival APC faction around Buhari.
He owes his emergence to the former President, but he hasn’t bothered to praise him unduly, mainly because, in saner climes, Buhari ought to still be with anti-corruption agencies rendering account of what was generally adjudged a disastrous tenure. It is Tinubu’s aides that find it expedient once in a while to take swipes at Buhari, blaming him for the mess they met on the ground in 2023.
The plaudits on Buhari are not only misplaced, they are fundamentally disconnected from the lived experiences of Nigerians. While one may not begrudge Governor Uzodinma the right to promote his party and its leaders by painting them in whatever bright colours he finds necessary, decency demands that he does so without insulting the sensibilities of other Nigerians.
Nigeria, this Thursday, May 29, 2025, marks its 26th anniversary ending brutal military rule, and embarking on the road to democracy. I am reminded, on this occasion, of three political figures who contributed to this situation.
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu emerged into national consciousness in 1992 when he was elected the Senator representing the Lagos West Constituency. The following year when the June 12 presidential election, won by Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola, was annulled by the Babangida junta, he became one of the major advocates of de-annulment. He was like Abiola, a good social mixer and seemed to have friends in high places. Also, when shortly after the Abacha coup and the head of the junta needed to meet Abiola for secret discussions, they each had a witness: Abacha had General Oladipo Diya who was his Deputy, while Abiola had Tinubu. Abiola and Tinubu were populists and shared Abiola’s political agenda: “Hope ’93, Farewell To Poverty: How to make Nigeria a better place for all.”
When six years later, he ran for gubernatorial election in Lagos State, Tinubu seemed to have dusted up that manifesto. At his inauguration as Governor, he promised Lagosians a better life and assured them of “a good economic programme that will eradicate poverty and provide employment for the jobless…” Equally, Rauf Aregbesola, when, in 2007, he ran for the gubernatorial election in Osun State, unfolded a similar programme. His Six-Point Agenda promised to promote functional education, banish poverty, banish unemployment, restore healthy living, banish hunger and, enhance communal peace and progress.
When the Abacha regime cracked down on pro-democracy activists, Tinubu went into exile in 1994 and returned in 1998 after the dictator’s death. Abiola had died in detention under controversial circumstances on July 7, 1998. On his return from exile, Tinubu ran for the gubernatorial election of Lagos State in January 1999 and won. The Director of his campaign team, the Bola Ahmed Tinubu Campaign Organisation, BATCO, was Aregbesola. The latter had ran for the House of Representatives in 1992 while Tinubu ran for Senate in the same Lagos West area. Tinubu had won while Aregbesola lost, but that campaign had brought them together. When in 2003, Tinubu ran for re-election, Aregbesola was, again, the Director of his campaign team that ensured victory.
After Tinubu’s 1999 victory as governor, his team penned down Aregbesola as Senior Special Adviser to the Lagos State House of Assembly. But when the list of the new cabinet in the state was announced on radio, Aregbesola was amongst the commissioners named. Apparently, Tinubu had put his foot down, insisting that the former should be in his new cabinet. Aregbesola was named Commissioner for Works and Infrastructure. He spent eight years during which the salutary work of the Ministry in executing huge road construction and building massive public works, was one of the undeniable achievements of the Tinubu administration. This partly led to the contested claims that: “Tinubu built Lagos”.
Aregbesola’s demonstrable competence, knowledge and commitment were so visible in his first four years as Commissioner, that Governor Bisi Akande of Osun State approached Tinubu to allow Aregesola become his running mate in his 2003 bid for re- election. Aregbesola did not want to cut short his service in Lagos State and, clearly, Tinubu still needed the services of the latter, not just in his cabinet but also for his re-election for a second term. Besides, Tinubu’s re-election promised to be quite tough because he had openly confronted the dictatorial tendencies of President Olusegun Obasanjo.
For instance, following clashes between the police and a militant ethnic group, the Oodua People’s Congress, OPC, Obasanjo on January 13, 2000, wrote Tinubu a letter threatening to impose emergency rule on Lagos State. Obasanjo told Tinubu: “When either by utterance, action or indeed inaction, a Chief Executive shows a loss of control in the maintenance of law and order in his state, it becomes incumbent on the Federal Government to take appropriate action to arrest the situation, usually in the form of the imposition of a State of Emergency. “Mr. Governor, I regret that I have not seen any action on your part in the recent past to suggest that you are in control of the security situation in Lagos State. On the contrary there is evidence of increasing disorder, loss of lives and property and a general sense of fear among the citizens of Lagos State. This is an intolerable situation.”
Tinubu had responded, blaming the Obasanjo administration for the insecurity. The latter, he wrote, ran a Police which was “undermanned, ill-equipped, poorly motivated and demoralised”. He advised it to either live up to its responsibilities or “allow for the necessary constitutional amendment to allow the states to bear their own cross”. Also, Tinubu had rejected the overt directives of Yoruba leaders that the six states in Western Nigeria, including Lagos State, should back the 2003 re-election bid of President Obasanjo. The states had been run by the opposition Alliance for Democracy, AD. Clearly, the Presidency was displeased by Tinubu’s opposition and he knew he had an uphill task in his hands. So, Akande’s request that Aregbesola became his running mate in Osun State could not be met.
As it turned out, in the South-West, only Tinubu was returned in the gubernatorial election as his five other colleagues, fell to the onslaught of Obasanjo’s Peoples Democratic Party, PDP. Once he became the Governor of Osun State, Aregbesola displayed the spirit of Tinubu’s relatively outstanding performance in Lagos. When at the expiration of his tenure in Osun State, he returned to Lagos, his GRA Ikeja home was called “Second Bourdillion” in reference to his closeness to Tinubu who lived on Bourdillion Road, Ikoyi, Lagos. It was an indication that some saw Aregbesola as Tinubu’s deputy in politics, at least in the politics of South-Western Nigeria.
Tinubu was carrying on the populist vision of Abiola and Aregbesola was helping to realise that vision. But politically, the three politicians had some divergent positions. Abiola was a populist of the Right, Tinubu was Centre Right, while Aregbesola was Left. Abiola was very close to the military top brass. Tinubu did not wholly embrace military rule but worked closely with Abiola for the birth of the Abacha military regime. In contrast, Aregbesola distanced himself from the military. Given his role in the 1978 student uprising against military rule, he disliked the latter. He, like many in the Left, viewed the military as political usurpers. So, while Abiola and Tinubu might have had some confidence that the military would agree to disengage and willingly return to the barracks, Aregbesola thought the Generals had a hidden agenda. All three have played major roles in the contemporary politics of the country.
[OPINION] Mrs. Soludo’s Honorary Degree Symbolizes Soludo Government’s People-Centered Model, as COOU Celebrates 25 Years of Academic Excellence - Christian Aburime
AdminThe conferment of an honorary doctorate degree on the wife of the Anambra State Governor, Mrs. Nonye Soludo, during the combined 11th to 15th convocation ceremonies of Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University (COOU), was more than a ceremonial highlight—it reflected the Soludo administration’s people-centered development model that integrates health, education, and community empowerment.
Held at the university’s Igbariam campus, the event marked a historic milestone in the life of the institution, as it celebrated 25 years of academic excellence. Dignitaries, faculty members, students, alumni, and state officials gathered to honour graduating students and reflect on the evolution of the university over the years.
In his address, Anambra State Governor, Prof. Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, used the occasion to reflect on the transformation of COOU since his assumption of office. “The university is far different from what it used to be since my last time here,” he noted, emphasizing that government alone cannot fast-track development. Instead, he advocated for strong partnerships with the private sector and local communities to drive innovation and growth.
Governor Soludo paid tribute to the founder of the university, the late Governor Dr. Chinwoke Mbadinuju, noting that his legacy must not go unnoticed. “Late Dr. Mbadinuju is not celebrated enough here. We must find something significant to immortalize him,” the governor stressed. He also extended commendations to other past leaders and stakeholders who have contributed to the university’s development, affirming, “I celebrate all men of goodwill who love and believe in education as the bridge to the future.”
The Acting Vice Chancellor, Prof. Kate Omenugha expressed pride in the university's stable and uninterrupted academic calendar over the past several years. “We are proud to combine five years of academic success into this celebration,” she remarked. “This stable academic calendar is a legacy we intend to sustain as we move forward.” Prof. Omenugha also lauded Governor Soludo for his numerous contributions to the university community and welcomed continued partnerships to enhance educational opportunities. “We appreciate the governor for his unwavering commitment to our institution,” she said.
Also speaking at the event, the Pro-Chancellor of COOU, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu emphasized the university’s commitment to community engagement and progressive ideas. “We have celebrated our heritage this week, and we intend to forge a vibrant future for this university,” he said, describing the university community as a place where differing views can coexist in a spirit of mutual respect. "I encourage everyone to join in and actively participate in this journey,” he added.
The Commissioner for Education, Prof. Ngozi Chuma-Udeh echoed these sentiments, applauding the governor’s prioritization of education as a foundational pillar for progress in Anambra State. “Governor Soludo’s government remains unwavering in its mission to elevate education in our state,” she affirmed.
The highlight of the day, however, was the conferment of an honorary doctorate degree in science and food nutrition to Mrs. Nonye Soludo, in recognition of her outstanding contributions to health and nutrition, particularly through her flagship initiative, Healthy Living with Nonye Soludo. The programme, which promotes nutrition education, clean eating, and wellness advocacy across communities in the state, has become a grassroots movement, aligning perfectly with her husband’s development vision.
In her remarks, the Governor’s wife expressed deep appreciation for the honour bestowed on her by the university. “This honour belongs to every caregiver, every woman working daily to raise healthy families. I thank the university and our people for supporting our journey,” she said. Her award also signals the university’s recognition of wellness advocacy as a critical aspect of educational and human development.
The event drew an impressive crowd of dignitaries, including Deputy Governor, Dr. Onyekachukwu Ibezim; Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Somtochukwu Udeze; House of Representatives member representing Ihiala, Dr. Paschal Agbodike; traditional rulers, and other high-ranking officials.
As COOU celebrates a quarter century of academic excellence, the Soludo administration’s multi-sectoral investment in human capital—spanning education, health, and youth development—continues to redefine governance in Anambra. Mrs. Soludo’s award, while honorary in form, carries the weight of real impact, offering a powerful statement that in Anambra State, development starts with the people.
More...
[OPINION] Peeping Into Adegoroye’s New Book: Leadership in Nigerian Civil Service… - Martins Oloja
AdminAs a reporter, writer, editorialist and columnist, I love good books and I have invested in a lot of them. So, when I see good books on any subjects, I buy anywhere I go. I have bought a lot through big brothers abroad and now the Amazon. That is how so many bookstores including ‘Glendora’ ‘Readers Are Leaders’ bookshops have somewhat made me ‘richer’, anyway. I will collect my long- patronage discount from them anytime soon.
And so I have just looked into the seeds of our times and I have seen another good book in the works by one of Nigeria’s finest and most significant academics in Nigeria’s mainstream civil service, Dr. Goke Adegoroye. He retired as a federal permanent secretary in 2010 and on the day of retirement, he presented his first book, titled, ‘Beyond Yours Faithfully’. In 2015, he also presented his second book in two volumes. Yours sincerely wrote the Afterword for the first two books.
The new book titled, ‘Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs’ will be unveiled on June 4, 2025 in the nation’s capital, Abuja. I can tell you for free, the book smacks of “a good newspaper, which, Arthur Miller says, “is a nation talking to itself”. Wait for it.
And here is the thing, public officers and public servants will find the book useful for master class on ‘How to and how not to run a country’s civil service. Besides, the book will be good for public officers who would like to remember Nigeria as it used to be. What is more, it is a rich resource on rewriting manifestos for a new Nigeria where mediocrity and docility nurtured by corruption will no longer be tolerated. Wait for it. Let’s peep into the book through some excerpts below from the author’s preface and dedication:
Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs’, chronicles this leadership journey across five decades—from the 1970s to the present—covering my academic training, environmental work in the 1980s and 1990s, leadership in public administration in the 2000s, and my continued advocacy in retirement.
Leadership remains the single important determinant in management and governance. It reflects vision, courage, and the capacity to steer an organization towards achieving its goals. Its scope spans managing resources, developing future leaders, overseeing change management, decision-making, communication, team building, and crisis response.
Sadly, public perception of leadership within the Nigerian civil service has been one of steady decline—marked by eroding competence, weakened capacity and diminishing professionalism. The present is widely seen as a pale shadow of a more illustrious past, hence the persistent nostalgia for what are often termed the “glorious years” of the Nigerian civil service. Those years are associated with revered figures such as Simeon Adebo, Jerome Udoji, Sule Katagum, Abdul Aziz Attah, Ibrahim Damcida, Philip Asiodu, Allison Ayida—stalwarts of the pre-and immediate post-independence era. Their legacies, characterised by outstanding contributions to the development of the civil service have become benchmarks. Yet, the oft-repeated adulation of that era serves not only as a lament but as a critique of the subsequent generations of leadership and their capacity—or lack thereof—for mentorship and succession planning.
In recent times, and in the absence of structured documentation, the narrative of the civil service has been shaped largely by the personal experiences of officers whose achievements, though notable, often reflect an ego-driven record of service. These tales—frequently amplified by the ego of the narrators and of their era’s leadership—tend to highlight luck rather than systemic merit. Conversely, in quieter tones, we encounter the anguish of devoted and honest officers, who, despite their commitment and patriotism, found themselves victims of a system that rewarded self-preservation over merit. These individuals were often severely shortchanged by the very institutions they served with their heart and soul.
Furthermore, the manipulation of public service rules by those in leadership, often to protect themselves, has impeded reform implementation. These conflicting realities present an opportunity for introspection, particularly for those of us who have walked the corridors of civil service leadership. Our reflections must contribute to forging a new path—one anchored on justice, fairness, and most crucially, integrity.
Contrary to the perception of the civil service as a cult, its inner workings are not as secretive as presumed. Much of what happens within is common knowledge among civil servants, passed around in trusted circles and, increasingly, disseminated via social media. Platforms such as WhatsApp now host these stories—some told in self-adulation by actors who, during their time, were part of the problem. These narratives, rich with potential insights, are often relegated to informal discourse and risk being lost to time or reduced to myth. If the civil service is to muster the courage to act with integrity, it must begin with regular, open, transparent and objective documentation of leadership conduct. By being confronted with accurate portrayals of their actions, today’s leaders —Permanent Secretaries and Heads of the Civil Service—may better align with integrity, knowing that their records will one day come under public scrutiny. In this regard, I draw inspiration from the extensive documentation of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s public service years in his memoirs, Not My Will (1990) and My Watch (2014), which detail his engagements with military peers, cabinet members and the civil service leaderships.
Leadership at the top tiers —Heads of Service, Permanent Secretaries, and Civil Service Commission officials— is unique. These roles are not merely administrative; they are custodial. They are responsible for institutional renewal, the grooming of successors, and the general health of the service. The experiences and cases discussed in this book highlight both what works and what does not—and why. At the heart of these challenges are the screening and preparation of directorate-level officers, the methods for appointing them into leadership positions, and the quality of those who have held such offices since 1999.
I have been fortunate to serve in diverse roles across the public sector: from academia to environmental management, from the Presidency to being the inaugural Director General and later Permanent Secretary of the Bureau of Public Service Reforms (BPSR). I also served in the Manpower Development Office (MDO) in the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF); as well as in the Ministries of Education; Tourism, Culture and National Orientation; Interior; and finally the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) where I retired. Guided by the biblical charge “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven”, I anchored my service on a commitment to integrity as the foundation for leadership.
My journey began in 1975 as a Graduate Assistant at the University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University). Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs chronicles this leadership journey across five decades—from the 1970s to the present—covering my academic training, environmental work in the 1980s and 1990s, leadership in public administration in the 2000s, and my continued advocacy in retirement.
Leadership is neither a straight path nor an easy sail. It is a continuous learning process—marked by growth, resilience, betrayal, and eventually, triumph. The leader must perform, inspire, endure, and ultimately prevail.
This book is the story of a 50-year journey through career and advocacy, offering lessons from the vantage point of one who has both observed and influenced leadership at the top. I write as a scientist using the civil service ecosystem as my laboratory—measuring real-time outcomes of policy and personnel decisions while those involved are still alive and the impacts are still observable. I write also in protest—against the entrenched culture of sycophancy in the service, where narratives are twisted to please incumbents or vilify rivals. And I write with objectivity—choosing to observe as an outsider with insider knowledge, resisting the temptation to rely solely on personal interviews, knowing that others may someday present their side in their own memoirs.
For Nigeria to achieve the greatness we envision, the civil service must become both the target and the tool for restoring good governance—provided elected leaders are willing to apply the necessary political will. My hope is that this book will offer practitioners and scholars of public administration the insight needed to interrogate the system more and develop solutions that will bring real transformation.
To those whose names appear in these pages or whose interactions with me are cited—who may feel aggrieved— I tender a sincere apology. My intention is not to cast aspersions but to use these cases illustratively, to provide learning material for today’s and tomorrow’s leaders. These events occurred during our shared stewardship. Their inclusion is a form of patriotic duty, for once we reach the apex of our careers, it is the least we owe the system we claim to love—especially if we are genuine about improving it. Indeed, these cases already exist in public memory and records as part of the broader narrative of our time in service.
This book is a natural sequel to Restoring Good Governance in Nigeria: Volume 1 The Civil Service Pathway and Volume 2 Leadership and Political Will (published in 2015). It not only complements those volumes but elevates the discussion on leadership effectiveness a decade on. That my advocacy on the importance of integrity in the human resources management processes— appointment, promotion and discipline—and on the need for central government coordination still fails to move administrations to act is, in itself, a major justification for this work.
As with the previous volumes, Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs is written in simple free flowing prose, to ensure accessibility to practitioners, policymakers, and everyday citizens invested in Nigerian bureaucracy. It is a provocation—intended to stir the conscience of those who have wielded administrative power. It is a lesson in human relations, leadership and mentorship. It is a call for integrity in public service and a challenge to management training institutions to rethink their role in restoring public confidence.
Will integrity in civil service leadership catalyse the emergence of good governance in Nigeria? Only time—and the choices of our political leaders—will tell…
Dedication
This book is dedicated to my country Nigeria with abiding faith in her manifest destiny and the potentials that leadership integrity in political office and the civil service holds for good governance; and to the coming generations of Nigerian civil servants, in the hope that the lives of those on the stage today may inspire you to dedicate yourselves to serve Nigeria in truth and in deed.
Marte, the headquarters of the eponymous Local Government Area (LGA) on the western floodplains of the Lake Chad in Borno State, north-east Nigeria, has been a site of lingering contest between Nigerian troops on the one hand and Islamist insurgents of Boko Haram on the other for over one decade. At 3,154 km2, Marte LGA is just a little under the size of all of Lagos state.
For a while between 2014 and 2015, Boko Haram reportedly bivouacked in Marte on its way to its more permanent operational headquarters in the Sambissa Forest. For much of 2015, control of the town exchanged hands in succession between the Nigerian Army and Boko Haram. Around May 2015, Boko Haram reportedly took back the city from the Nigerian troops who had held it for three months from February of the same year.
For the most part, Nigeria has controlled Marte thereafter with the exception of a brief duration in 2021, when the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) temporarily visited havoc upon a military base in Marte.
All that appears to have changed recently. Around Monday, 12 May 2025, Islamist insurgents reportedly attacked the Forward Operating Base of the 153rd Task Force Battalion in Marte, resulting in considerable carnage. Sources familiar with the early morning attack reported that “over 10 soldiers were killed and hundreds of personnel deserted. The (terrorists) burnt down armoured tanks and made away with arms and ammunition.” The beleaguered governor of Borno State, Babagana Zulum, has been left appealing to his ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to ensure that Marte does not fall back into the hands of Boko Haram and its allies.
In the same week that they attacked Marte, the insurgents also attacked the 3rd Battalion base in Rann, in Kala Balge district, killing at least five soldiers and leaving at least four others reportedly injured. The intensity and scope of the attacks by Boko Haram in Borno State in the past six months led the state governor to raise an alarm last April, suggesting that the country was “losing ground” in the fight against Islamist terror.
National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, a retired assistant inspector-general of the Nigeria Police Force, who has run for and is credibly rumoured to retain ambitions for another tilt at the presidency, ostensibly failed to get the governor’s memorandum. Addressing the National Summit, so-called, of the APC, the NSA claimed to have killed 13,543 Boko Haram elements in the first two years of the administration and recovered over 11,000 arms from them. He notably did not mention the haul of arms the insurgents have been busy harvesting from Nigerian military formations. Over the same period, he claimed, “124,408 Boko Haram fighters and their families” also surrendered.
It is unfortunate that the ruling party has chosen to make national security a party political matter. It is even more tragic that the wannabe political opposition has allowed them to get away with it. The result is a vacuum of leadership in the security sector filled and fed with an atrocious body count of Nigerian casualties whose death and suffering barely register on the priorities of the people supposed to protect the country, its people and communities.
The central problem is a failure of strategy. To understand this, it is necessary to explain that the presidency is many jobs in one. A president is – among other things – party leader, chief marketer of the country, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Every one of these roles of the president can be delegated except the last. As commander-in-chief, the president sets the security strategy.
For over 50 years, Nigeria’s national security strategy docked onto the neighbourhood of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). There was good reason for that. The country’s northern boundaries feed into the southern rim of the Sahel. With Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to its north as founding members of ECOWAS, the country could count solidly on friendly neighbours as buffers against the historical brutalities of Sahelian violence.
This understanding was at the heart of the transformation of the ECOWAS from an economic integration arrangement envisioned at its foundation in 1975 into a collective security arrangement in 1981. For much of the period since then, this arrangement held together.
However, following the military coup in Niger Republic in July 2023, the country lost its marbles and decided to bite its nose in order to spite its sovereign face. On behalf of ECOWAS, President Tinubu committed the blunder of threatening to invade another member of the ECOWAS collective security arrangement. He alone knows what he was thinking.
The hubris of President Tinubu’s handling of the coup crisis in Nigeria is inexplicable. With a landmass of over 1.267 million km2, Niger Republic constituted about 22% of the 5.8 million km2 of the landmass of ECOWAS. The idea of an invasion of the country in order to militarily restore the ousted administration of President Mohamed Bazoum was always worse than bluster; it was plainly unviable.
In invoking war against Niger on behalf of ECOWAS, President Tinubu managed in one stroke to violate the prohibition against the use of force in international law; create the impression that Nigeria’s Sahelian neighbours did not matter; and suggest that France was a more important factor to Nigeria’s neighbourhood strategy than its immediate neighbours.
That much should have been evident to the people who thought up the idea. But the damage was beyond a resort to fantastic bluster, where hard-nosed rationality was needed. The costs have been prohibitive and rising; and the result has been devastating.
In September 2023, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger created their own collective security arrangement and orbited off into the realm of Russia’s mercenary diplomacy. Since then, the consequences for Nigeria have been stark. In the period since September 2023, and despite the fantasies of NSA Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s internal security situation has disintegrated into mayhem.
In the north-west states of Sokoto and Kebbi, a new terror group, Lakurawa, has taken root. South of Kebbi, in Kwara State, another new terror group, Mahmuda, runs murderously rampant. To the east of Kwara in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, vast swathes of territory and communities in Benue, Nasarawa, and Plateau states are being emptied in intense attacks credited to so-called “foreign herdsmen.”
The politicians are reluctant to acknowledge what is obvious and the soldiers have been trained not to say that their commander-in-chief has left them in an insecurity pickle. But that is exactly what President Tinubu has done with the way he has brought about the transformation of ECOWAS from an integrated security arrangement for the region into a rump of an association of Atlantic West African States (AAWAS).
The evidence is everywhere in the rising casualty count, which NSA Nuhu Ribadu will not acknowledge. According to monitoring coalition, Nigeria Mourns, 4,416 people were killed in atrocities in Nigeria in 2023. In 2024, President Tinubu’s first full year in office, the number rose 21.2% to 5,353, including 308 security personnel. 88.5% of these killings occurred in Northern Nigeria. Another 5,171 were abducted.
Behind these numbers are people, families, communities, traumas that both Nuhu Ribadu and the ruling APC will not allow Nigerians to see, hear, acknowledge or mourn. They are the experiences of loss and indignity that the dissolute wannabes in the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP) cannot bring themselves to ask the APC to account for or acknowledge.
On 28 May, the civic Coalition Nigeria Mourns invites all Nigerians wherever they may be to spare a thought for all these victims and their loved ones in a National Day of Mourning (NDoM) “to rage, resist, and demand action from the government” in memory of all who have been killed or violated. A more responsible government would not have waited for a group of unarmed, unelected citizens to remind them.
A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at chidi.odinkalu@tufts.edu
Blood-thirsty jackasses are on the prowl in the digital forest of the world wide web. They prey on the gullibility of their captive audience. Nothing sells like bad news, and that is what they have aplenty. Through the instrumentality of various apps otherwise designed for positively creative ends, they bend reality or create something attuned to their depravity to spread fear, horror, hate, and, ultimately set the stage for massacre or ethnic cleansing.
Flashback
It is a trend that started about one decade ago but gained primacy around 2018 when the Nigerian police highlighted a case in which incendiary images on Facebook fuelled more than a dozen killings in Plateau State. That part of the country had been on the boil for several months with horrendous killings of farmers and rural folk by marauding bands of militias, some of whom were suspected to be foreigners. Ethnic profiling of the Fulani tribe was rife.
In the midst of the grisly sacking of villages and the attendant loss of lives, some e-jackasses saw an opportunity to escalate things by posting fake photographs of imaginary victims butchered by imaginary Fulani warriors. One picture showed a baby with open machete wounds across his head and jaw. Another showed a man’s skull hacked open. There were pictures of huts burnt to the ground. Other graphic posts showed bloodied corpses dumped in mass graves, and children murdered in their beds.
The e-jackasses who posted the images claimed that there was a massacre underway in the Gashish district of Plateau State in which Fulani Muslims were killing thousands of Christians from the state’s Berom ethnic group. The truth is that there was actually an attack which claimed many Berom lives in that area but the photographs posted on Facebook had nothing to do with that particular incident.
According to the BBC Africa Eye, “Some of the most incendiary images circulating at the time had nothing to do with the violence in Gashish. The image of the baby, which was shared with a call for God to “wipe out the entire generation of the killers of this innocent child”, had first appeared on Facebook months earlier. The video in which the man’s head was cut open did not even come from Nigeria, it was recorded in Congo-Brazzaville nearly a thousand miles away, in 2012.
So, what the e-jackasses preyed on was the power of outrage. The aim was to shock the consumers of their fib to such an extent as to become part of an unthinking mob. It was bad enough that some children were killed in the Plateau crisis, but the sense of abominable savagery was heightened when a fake photograph of babies divided into halves with the use of a meat cleaver was shared to millions of Facebook users.
If you didn’t bother to trace the source of the photos, you’d think that they were of the plateau killings. And whereas the extra-legal killing of any human being is condemnable, the deliberate inflammation of passion with the use of fake graphics to activate a mob is totally reprehensible.
Since then, there has been a discernible pattern of revving up tension by internet jackals who dispense journalistic carrion in the name of “Breaking News”. The more horrific the photos, the greater the mileage made by the posts— and the wider the net of victims both of the garbage posts and the ensuing inter-tribal and inter-religious mayhem.
Imaginary Victim
Only recently, a tendentious piece of fake news trended massively on social media alleging that one 22-year-old Zainab Muhammadu who had recently converted to Christianity had been arrested by the Muslim establishment and was due to be tried under the Islamic Sharia law. The combustible story generated nationwide indignation, particularly in the southern parts. Against the background of historic contestations between the two major religious groups, public commentators warned against the opening of another war front that could compound the country’s security situation.
An online news medium had quoted ‘family sources’ as saying that Zainab’s crime was converting to Christianity. According to the report, Zainab’s journey of faith started when she met one Pastor Samuel, a National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) member posted to her area. However, when the authorities discovered her change to Christianity, they ordered her arrest.
According to the story, the trial was to be held the following Friday. Many legal experts and human rights advocates decried the development as a gross violation of a Nigerian citizen’s constitutional right to religious freedom.
One of the religious groups that lapped up the story is the Christian Rights Agenda (CRA) which promptly issued a statement fin which it called on President Bola Tinubu to immediately intervene to save the supposed victim. The body noted that, “In most states of the Northwest and Northeast, government officials, including emirs, engage in massive forceful conversion of Christians, especially women, young and underaged girls, but here they are now trying to murder Miss Mohammed who willingly converted to Christianity.”
The organisation also drew attention to the incidence of terrorism and banditry and how the twin evils had led to the forceful conversion of Christian girls to Islam by the terrorists. They reminded the nation of the well known case of Leah Sharibu who is still being held by the terrorists for refusing to renounce her faith.
Some other Christians also rose in defence of their faith, reminding the nation of the case of Deborah Samuel who was alleged by some of her schoolmates to have committed blasphemy against Islam and was stoned to death and then incinerated in plain sight. Her suspected killers were arrested and charged with bailable offences following which they were eventually acquitted for lack of diligent prosecution.
Bomb Defused
The Zamfara State government was mindful of the time bomb in its hands and moved fast to douse the tension by declaring that the Zainab story was false. The government said it had checked with all relevant authorities and security agencies to verify the authenticity of the story and also confirmed with the Grand Khadi of the Zamfara Sharia Court of Appeal regarding any similar cases. There was no such case before any Shari’a court in Zamfara State.
Sulaiman Idris, the spokesman for Governor Dauda Lawal, said the wide dissemination of the fabricated story exemplified yellow journalism. He urged the relevant security agencies to investigate the source of the “misguided story” which, in his view, was designed “to create significant religious tension” in Zamfara State.
It turned out that the photograph used to illustrate the imaginary victim of religious intolerance was that of an American citizen who lives in Texas, Ms Aliaa Reeves, who has probably never heard of Zamfara State all her life and is certainly not on trial in the state. Her photograph was simply pinched from a social media site and used to illustrate the imaginary victim.
So, if the situation ballooned into an inter-faith conflagration with the usual killings, arson, displacement and human misery, it would all have been in pursuit of a lie!
Why do we do these terrible things to ourselves?
It is time that e-jackasses in news outlets and the social media who enjoy their grisly chortle at the expense of our collective rest of mind, stepped back to rethink their pastime. It’s easy to start a bushfire but when the wind takes over, it may consume the pyromaniac too.