President Joe Biden within seven weeks from December 1, 2024, granted over 2,500 pardons including for his son,  Robert Hunter Biden.

Hunter had been convicted  on a nine-count charge   for  tax felony amounting to $1.4 million,  evading tax assessment  and filing false tax returns. He faced a maximum 17 years in prison.  His sentencing was scheduled for December 16, 2024. But fifteen days before, Biden  not only pardoned his son, but also granted him  immunity  from additional or new charges that can be brought against him especially by the Trump administration. It stated that Hunter  has immunity:  “For those offenses against the United States which he has committed or may have committed or taken part in during the period from January 1, 2014, through December 1, 2024”

His predecessor and successor, President Donald Trump in one day, on January 20, 2025, issued over 1,500 pardons. Both men within seven weeks granted over 4,000 pardons. The process the two  political rivals are basically abusing,  is the power of pardon granted the United States, US President   under Article II Section 2, Clause 1   of the American constitution. This  provides that: “The President…shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except  in Cases of impeachment.”

However, there remains a problem Trump  still needs to solve over the Capitol Hill violent invaders against whom he claims “ a grave national injustice” had been perpetrated. The US Constitution grants the   President power to pardon people convicted, but not power  to halt on-going trials. Now, some of the judges have merely dismissed the cases. This leaves open the possibility that charges can brought  against the accused in future. There are still some 300 such cases pending which judges might be holding up or delaying.  Perhaps Trump can learn from Biden granting  his son immunity from any prosecution.

Biden with his total 8,064 pardons granted from 2021 -2025 holds  the record of granting the most pardons in US history. While the pardons granted this week by Trump, were basically to free convicted criminals  who levied war against the state in an attempt to reverse the 2020  Presidential Elections which he had lost, some of the pardons by Biden were  to correct cases  of historical injustice the White establishment had visited on American Indians  and African Americans in its  bid to maintain supremacy and dominance over the country.

I first heard the name, Leonard Peltier on August 12, 2024 at the  International Conference to End Colonialism In The World which was held in Abuja.  The Opening Address was  from  Puerto Rican freedom fighter, Oscar Lopez Riveria who had spent 38 years in US jails. I had remarked that Africa’s Nelson Mandela had spent 27 years in jail   and that as far as I knew, Riveria had been  the  longest serving political prisoner in history. But Kazi Toure, of the International  People’s Senate National Jericho Movement, USA and, former US political prisoner, corrected me.  He told me about the then 79-year old Indigenous American Indian freedom fighter called Leonard Peltier who was in his 49th year in US jails.

Peltier was serving two life sentences for allegedly killing two Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI agents, Jack Coler and Ronald Williams on June 26, 1975  in a shootout on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota.  The immediate dispute was over the Indians insistence on self-determination and,  Native Treaty Rights.  The agents had gone to serve arrest warrants. The American state and system including  the FBI knew Peltier was innocent of the crimes. The FBI had forensic evidence proving that the shots that took the lives of the officers did not come from Peltier’s gun, but chose to suppress  the fact at the trial. It also manufactured fake affidavits and distorted facts.  

Peltier  had been  denied parole including at a  July, 2024 hearing  and, was not  eligible again for parole  until 2026. He was a leader of the American Indian Movement, AIM  which the state wanted to destroy. AIM had in 1973 taken over  the village of Wounded Knee on the Pine Ridge reservation. This led to  a 71-day standoff with federal security forces. The increased clashes led to the face off two year later for which Peltier was sent to prison.

The injustice done to Peltier had turned him into the symbol of the indigenous peoples’ resistance  and a living legend. It was for this and the insistence by the FBI for a pound of flesh from the American  Indian people, that saw him spend half a century wasting in prison.  Appeals by international  figures  including Nelson Mandela, Pope Francis, Bishop Desmond Tutu and the actor, Robert Redford did not move the American establishment.

As the Biden era was winding up,  the local and international activists who for decades had pushed for presidential pardon, decided to make a last second push. On Wednesday, January 15, 2025, Kazi posted an appeal by freedom activists titled “Tell Biden: FREE Leonard Peltier!” The appeal was that people should call President Biden that day and the next  on 2024561111 or text the White House on 302404 0880   with the simple message: “Grant Leonard Peltier Clemency” I thought the campaigners for a last second clemency were simply  optimists. 

I did not think a Biden would have the courage to grant Peltier pardon  especially when the FBI and the establishment were  openly opposed.  In fact,  FBI Director,  Christopher  Asher Wray wrote Biden this month saying that Peltier must  not be granted clemency. He repeated the false claim that: “Peltier is a ruthless murderer who has shown a complete lack of remorse for his many crimes.”

But as Biden was handing over power to Trump on Monday, January 20, 2025, the White House issued a statement that Peltier was now a free man!  He is to be released from a Florida federal detention on February 18, 2025.  Biden’s release of Peltier, is a healing process for the indigenous American Indian people who have faced genocide.  Another healing process Biden set off  was his posthumous pardon for Pan African Prophet Marcus Garvey who was falsely accused in 1923 of mail fraud.

Garvey who wanted to unite all Black people in the world, had set up empowerment businesses. When one of them, the large Black Star shipping line collapsed, the racist American establishment used that as an  excuse to charge him with “mail fraud” over the sale of the company’s shares. Using a corrupt judicial system, he was railroaded into prison. His connived conviction was then used in December 1, 1927 to deport him to his native Jamaica. Pardons in the US have essentially become weapons to be wielded for political purposes rather than to further the aims of justice.

It is no longer news that the former Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly, Mudashiru Obasa, was ousted by his colleagues on Monday, January 13, 2025 while he was holidaying in the U.S., thus bringing his 10-year cruise on the Lagos gravy train to an abrupt stop.

Obasa was first elected in 2007 to represent Agege Constituency 1 and subsequently emerged Speaker in June 2015, chalked in an unprecedented third term, becoming powerful, or so he thought. And because, as the 19th century writer Lord Acton remarked, “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely,” he got carried away and became conceited.

He started seeing himself as a political kingmaker, treating his colleagues condescendingly and had no respect for Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu. But apparently he didn’t reckon with the Igbo proverb which says that “when an idol becomes too powerful and arrogant, it is told the wood it was carved from.” That was exactly what happened. His colleagues said that much when they accused him of becoming an existential threat. 

Tobun Abiodun, who represents Epe Constituency 1, alleged shortly after Obasa’s ouster that he was impeached to save Lagos State and the House of Assembly. Accusing the former Speaker of gross misconduct and unconscionable abuse of office, Abiodun said Obasa’s impeachment had become inevitable. “The members of the parliament today have decided to change the leadership of the House.

You know the constitution made it clear that the House has the power to regulate its proceedings. The members felt they have had enough of the leadership of Rt. Honourable Mudashiru Obasa… We have resolved to work together and ensure that we move the parliament to the next level. We cannot open our eyes and allow the parliament to dwindle. We owe the constituents a duty of ensuring that the sanity and integrity of the House are restored. We have unanimously agreed to carry out this action to save our image, and save the state.”

One of his crimes was his undisguised lack of respect for Governor Babajide Sanwo-Olu. Matters came to a head during the 2025 budget presentation  on November 22, 2024 when he declared that he was neither too young nor lacked the requisite experience to run for the governorship “I have made it a personal task to mobilise people on the platform of Mandate, which has been misconstrued by some political detractors as being a selfish aspiration on the ground for me to become governor of the state,” he crowed impetuously.

“There is the need, however, to correct this wrong impression. My concern is about building our party, and whatever we do is mainly for this cause. To the blackmailers who have embarked on the mission to distort and redefine our mission, let me state it unequivocally here, our intention is to promote our party on the platform of Mandate. Becoming governor is secondary; it is something that I have not given serious consideration. Nevertheless, that does not mean I am too young or lack experience to run; whereas, those who have been before me are not better off.”

Of course, one of those that was there before him is President Bola Tinubu. Obasa’s needless outburst was political indiscretion stretched too far, a sacrilege reminiscent of the  Nza  bird, one of the smallest birds in Igbo folklore, that bumped into a sumptuous meal and after having his fill challenged his “Chi” (personal god) to a wrestling match. Little wonder that the same lawmakers who unanimously passed a vote of confidence in him, turned around barely two months later to sack him ignominiously 

Obasa must have realised by now that he actually did not belong to the ‘owners of Lagos club.’ When they met to decide his fate, he was not even summoned to defend himself. He was not emotionally intelligent. Now, he has become a political leper that no one wants to openly associate with. The visits to his house have drastically reduced. As the 2027 political signalling in Lagos State becomes clearer, things will get worse for him politically. It will even be more so as his capacity for political patronage shrinks.

Today, Agege, his constituency is calm and the people have moved on. His few hangers-on who wanted to demonstrate at the Lagos State House of Assembly were quickly rounded up by policemen and taken away in a Black Maria even as they were singing, “on your mandate we shall stand.”   That is the nature of politics. As Ndigbo would say,  onye bu igu ka ewu na eso  – a goat follows whoever has palm frond. Loyalties have shifted and there are no apologies.

But Obasa’s ouster shouldn’t be an end in itself. The lawmakers are within their rights to choose who leads them. They have exercised that right by replacing Obasa with Hon. Mojisola Lasbat Meranda, who has also made history as the first female Speaker of the Lagos State House of Assembly. But it is not just enough to impeach him.  In moving the impeachment motion under ‘Matters of Urgent Public Importance,’ which was adopted by 32 out of 40 members of the House, Hon. Femi Saheed made allegations of financial misconduct, abuse of office and authoritarian leadership against Obasa.   Most recently, there have been reports alleging that he approved the withdrawal of ¦ 43 billion for lawmakers’ vehicles. Most of these allegations were made by the lawmakers themselves, so it should be assumed that they are not frivolous.

It behoves, therefore, the State Assembly to submit a petition to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to probe the fraud allegations against Obasa and the anti-fraud agency to do the needful. Not only that, Obasa claimed to have received a bachelor’s degree in Law from Lagos State University in 2006. But recently, a document which surfaced on the social media reveals that his name is not in the record of legal practitioners in Nigeria. The document, a response by the Supreme Court to a verification request by an anonymous petitioner on his status as a lawyer, was dated July 24, 2020 and signed by one Gertrude Karenton-Mordi on behalf of the Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court.

Titled, “Re: Verification of Mudashiru Ajayi Obasa as a Solicitor and Advocate of the Supreme Court of Nigeria,” the apex court, according to the document, advised the impeached Speaker to come forward with relevant documents for enrolment, as his name was not found in their records. Addressing the petitioner, the apex court wrote: “We acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 23rd July, 2020 on the above captured subject matter. This is to inform you that we have checked our records and cannot find the name: MUDASHIRU AJAYI OBASA on the numerous Rolls of Legal Practitioners kept in this Honourable Court.

MUDASHIRU AJAYI OBASA is at liberty to come to this Honourable Court with his Call to bar and qualifying certificates for enrolment. If he has done a change of name, he is expected to show proof of same.” Supreme Court spokesperson, Dr Fetus Akande, has confirmed the document, acknowledging that, “It emanated from our office.” Obasa’s apologists insist it is a non-issue because law degree, or in fact any university degree for that matter, is not a prerequisite for becoming a lawmaker or even Speaker.

That is true. The immediate past governor of Katsina State,  Aminu Bello Masari, became Speaker of the House of Representatives without any. That is how low the bar is when it comes to leadership in Nigeria. But it is a crime to ascend political office with forged certificates. I know that Obasa can challenge his accusers to cast the first stone if they can. And the truth is that they cannot. But that should not be the norm. Ours should not be a country where certificate forgers call the shots in public office without any consequences.

In the last few months, there have been talks about rebasing the two important economic indicators, the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and the Consumer Price Index (CPI).

While the GDP calculates the value of all goods and services in the economy within a year, the CPI calculates the average change in prices over time that consumers pay for a basket of goods and services. It is a key measure of inflation and reflects the cost of living.

Both have a base year, which is compared with other years in the compilation. For example, the last rebased year for GDP in Nigeria was 2014.

Recently, the National Bureau of Statistics indicated that it would release the results of the newly rebased GDP and CP1 by the end of January. This has excited stakeholders in the economy because rebasing the two important economic indicators would mean increased national income for the country.

This is because the result is likely to lead to an increase in per capita income in Niger. After all, the GDP is expected to expand as a result of the inclusion of new economic activities in the new calculation.

According to the press release issued by the NBS on Monday,” The activities of some sectors of the economy have grown tremendously since the last rebasing, making them significant among other sectors of the economy. They include Marine & Blue Economy, Art, Culture, Tourism and Creative Economy, Information and Technology, Innovation, and Digital Economy activities. ”

When rebased, Nigeria’s GDP is expected to expand, reflecting a more accurate picture of the economy’s true size. Consequently, per capita income — GDP divided by population — is likely to increase, even if real incomes remain unchanged.

Given these insights, it is safe to say that the result holds profound implications for Africa’s largest economy. As these figures are updated to reflect current economic realities, the outcomes could reshape perceptions of Nigeria’s economic standing and influence policymaking, investment, and citizen welfare. This is certainly a good music to hear for most of Nigeria. But would it increase real growth in the economy?

In retrospect, Nigeria’s GDP nearly doubled during the rebase of 2014, making it Africa’s largest economy, surpassing South Africa. This was because the rebasing accounted for new industries like telecommunications, entertainment (Nollywood), and e-commerce, which had grown significantly since the previous base year of 1990.

While this statistical adjustment doesn’t necessarily translate to immediate improvements in living standards, its implications are far-reaching.

Pundits who are concerned about real income growth. They have concerns about statistical figures that would create an impression of higher income for an already improvised economy where the majority of the citizens are multidimensionally poor. They fear that people might be worse off in the face of a likely increase in inflation, which has climbed to 34.80% in December, up from 34.60% in November 2024. This marks the fourth consecutive monthly increase, driven primarily by heightened demand during the festive season, leading to price surges in food and non-alcoholic beverages.

Food inflation slightly decreased to 39.84% year-on-year in December, compared to 39.93% in November. Notable price increases were observed in staples such as yams, sweet potatoes, corn, rice, and fish.

These inflationary trends have exacerbated Nigeria’s cost-of-living crisis, with more than 60% of the population living in poverty and many spending over 63% of their income on food.

However, an increase in gross income and per capita income as a result of the rebasing would neutralise these negative effects. Here are a few factors that will advance the positive impact.

First, Nigeria’s standing in global rankings, portraying the nation as more prosperous, may increase. This can positively influence international investors, who often consider economic indicators like GDP and income levels when making decisions. A rebased GDP could bolster confidence in Nigeria as an investment destination, potentially attracting foreign direct investment (FDI).

Secondly, the higher per capita income will prompt policymakers to re-evaluate socioeconomic strategies. For instance, the government might shift its focus from poverty alleviation to wealth distribution and middle-class expansion. This is closely related to the objective of the Tinubu tax reforms, which was recently embraced by the Nigerian Governors Forum. ( NGF) .However, this could also mean a reduction in access to international aid or concessional loans, as Nigeria might no longer qualify under certain global thresholds for low-income countries.

At the same time, a rebased GDP that highlights underrepresented sectors such as technology, entertainment, and services could spur efforts to diversify the economy. Policymakers might prioritize these emerging sectors, reducing reliance on oil and addressing the vulnerabilities associated with fluctuating global oil prices.

Yet, CI rebasing will provide more accurate inflation data, influencing monetary policy. This could lead to better-targeted interventions by the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to control inflation and stabilize the naira, directly impacting the cost of living for Nigerians.

The Nigerian creditworthiness would also increase because the debt-to-GDP ratio would be reduced. In the eyes of international financial institutions, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, Nigeria may be viewed as a more creditworthy nation. This can result in better access to loans with favourable terms and reduced borrowing costs.

Closely related is the fact that Nigeria’s elevated economic status can enhance its bargaining power in negotiating trade deals, enabling access to more beneficial terms in international trade agreements.

Similarly, there will be an Improved Human Development Index (HDI): High per capita income often correlates with better health, education, and living standards, which can boost Nigeria’s HDI ranking. This improved ranking can reflect positively on Nigeria’s global image and attract international partnerships.

Nigeria will also likely graduate from Aid Dependency. With higher income levels, Nigeria may reduce its dependence on international aid, transitioning towards self-sufficiency and enhanced economic sovereignty. That may likely attract global talent and partnerships. A wealthier economy can attract global talent, investors, and innovators seeking opportunities in Nigeria’s growing markets.

Other countries and organizations may seek partnerships with Nigeria, recognizing it as an influential player in the global economy.

More importantly, and at this time in our national life, a stronger economy backed by higher per capita income can stabilize and strengthen the naira in international currency markets. A stronger currency enhances Nigeria’s purchasing power globally, reduces import costs, and fosters economic stability.

The real income will, therefore, at the end of the day improve, as economists would say, all things being equal.

All things have been equal because the government plays a pivotal role in making real income improve.

This must be sustained by infrastructure development and human capital investment that will maximize these benefits and ensure inclusive growth that uplifts all Nigerians.

For ordinary Nigerians, the implications of the higher income could lead to improved access to international markets and more jobs due to increased investments.

On the whole, the planned GDP and CPI rebasing represents a critical step in modernizing economic measurements and aligning them with current realities. While the increase in per capita income will bolster Nigeria’s image and offer new opportunities, it also highlights the need for deliberate actions to address poverty by all Nigerians, policymakers must ensure that statistical growth is matched by real improvements in living standards.

Ajibola, former MD of DailyTrust, writes from Abuja.

On January 15 of every year, Nigerians remember what they were told was the most tragic incident that destroyed the ideal nation their founding fathers were building. That was the day Kaduna Nzeogwu and his co-conspirators executed a coup that ended the First Republic. As horrific as the events of that day were, that was not where the water entered the husk of the melon.

This year, Senator Shehu Sani argued that Nigeria has yet to recover from the assassination of Sir Ahmadu Bello and others killed on that day. It is hard to quarrel with Sani’s perspective. Even for people like Sani, who were not born when the incident happened, those interested in ensuring they did not forget had etched the narrative into them. It is a time-tested survival mechanism for humans to tell stories to younger generations to guide them in navigating their world. This ancient system of teaching the young about experiences started when our human forbearers were still living in trees.

Unfortunately, our forefathers noted that those who did not know where the rain started to beat them would never know where it stopped.

In the last few days, I have been recalling my conversations with the University of Ibadan-trained historian, Professor Chieka Ifemesia, who recently joined our ancestors. The core thesis of Ifemesia’s analysis of Nigeria’s malady was that “two ideas of nation-building have conflicted in Nigeria since amalgamation.” The clouds had been gathering since 1914, but it was in 1953 that the rain started to beat us, not in 1966.

By the year 1953, southern leaders were ready for Nigeria to become an independent nation. They were pushing for a three-year plan that would have granted Nigeria independence in 1956, one year before Ghana. The only problem was that the leaders of the north felt their region was not ready.

The north feared the south would dominate the new nation. As a result, the north argued for a delay. Their leaders believed that if given a few years, they could catch up on the number of northerners who had gone to school and were qualified to take part fully in governing Nigeria.

That was the country’s mood when, on March 31, 1953, Anthony Enahoro moved a motion at the Federal Parliament in Lagos for Britain to grant Nigeria independence by 1956.

Immediately, southern politicians in the Action Group and the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) joined him. The leaders of the north insisted on a gradual process. Ahmadu Bello proposed a compromise: the Enahoro bill should state self-government “as soon as possible” rather than “in the year 1956.”

The southern leaders’ insistence on 1956 led to all parties walking out of parliament, leaving the British colonial administrators in Nigeria at a loss as to whom to negotiate with.

As northern leaders left parliament, Lagos’ crowds jeered them on their way home. Northern leaders returned to Kaduna and issued a statement. In their 1953 statement from Lugard Hall in Kaduna, northern leaders listed eight points that the southern leaders had to meet before they would return to Lagos.

For all intents and purposes, the northern leaders were ready to leave the country. Southerners like Samuel Akintola, Anthony Enahoro, and other pro-independence politicians took their campaign for independence to the north.

That was how the riot of 1953 started.

On May 15, 1953, Northern People’s Congress supporters staged a demonstration to show Akintola and his team that they did not support their mission in the north.

The next day, Saturday, May 16, 1953, the Kano Native Authority withdrew the permission initially granted to Akintola and his group to hold their meeting at Colonial Hotel, Kano. Subsequently, mobs stormed the hotel and threw stones at Akintola and his fellow independence activists inside.

Initially, two people died. Then, the mobs moved to Sabon Gari.

By Sunday, May 17, it had escalated into a full-scale inter-ethnic crisis. The mobs chanted anti-Yoruba songs as they went on a rampage. British authorities called in the military to help quell the situation. By the time it was over, 46 people, mostly southerners, were dead.

The day after the riot, the British colonial government imposed a state of emergency in Northern Nigeria before they regained control of the situation. The British administrative officers also conducted a probe. At the end of the probe, their statement read: “No amount of provocation, short-term or long-term, can in any way justify their behaviour… the seeds of the trouble which broke out in Kano on May 16 (1953) have their counterparts still in the ground. It could happen again, and only a realisation and acceptance of the underlying causes can remove the danger of recurrence.”

That was the crux of Nigeria’s problem. The British identified the existence of the seeds of the trouble that broke out in Kano on May 16, 1953. They warned it could happen again unless Nigerians realised and accepted the underlying causes.

Of course, Nigerians neither realised nor accepted the underlying causes. Meanwhile, the seeds in the ground continued to absorb water and oxygen as their embryo’s cells enlarged. Again, for emphasis, one underlying cause is Ifemesia’s argument: the two conflicting ideas of nation-building that have plagued Nigeria since amalgamation.

After the riot, Ahmadu Bello and the northern leaders in the NPC issued another list of demands. This time, they presented it as a condition for their return to the Federal Parliament in Lagos.

The demands of the northern leaders included safeguards ensuring regional autonomy. The negotiations for Nigeria’s unity went so well that Ahmadu Bello was comfortable staying in the north as premier while he sent his protégé, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, to Lagos to serve as prime minister.

This is the uncontested sketch of what happened in 1953.

However, the underlying causes of the 1953 riot in Kano were neither addressed nor accepted. And nobody uprooted the seeds of the trouble in the ground. When they manifested again in 1966, it was not just rain this time; it was thunder and hailstones.

Whether in 1953 or 1966, we understand that if there are two players in a story, there are at least three perspectives: one from each player and a third from a neutral observer. Finding a neutral observer is not as easy as it seems. Those who consider themselves victims often have more compelling stories. Those considered perpetrators also hold what they believe to be interesting narratives—if only anyone cares to listen attentively.

In most deeply devastating human events, different players at different times cross the line that separates victims from perpetrators. Even when history, the ultimate arbitrator, renders its verdict, it struggles to pinpoint the exact moment of no return—the moment when identifying and accepting the underlying causes could have prevented the tragedy.

As humans, we have continued to do the easy part—pointing fingers and apportioning blame—rather than the difficult part of working toward a solution to prevent a recurrence. And when history repeats itself, we blame our stars rather than our inaction.

Rudolf Ogoo Okonkwo teaches Post-Colonial African History, Afrodiasporic Literature, and African Folktales at the School of Visual Arts in New York City. He is also the host of Dr. Damages Show. His books include “This American Life Sef” and “Children of a Retired God,” among others. His upcoming book is called “Why I’m Disappointed in Jesus.”