The measures currently being implemented by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited to tackle crude oil theft and pipeline vandalism is yielding tremendous results as the Nigerian oil and gas industry achieved its highest crude oil and condensate output in nearly 18 months, with a production of 1.72 million barrels of crude and condensate.

This improvement is the result of months of collaboration with operators to co-create unique solutions to peculiar challenges, mainly evacuation issues faced by individual operators, stakeholder management, political will, and support from government institutions.

Data from the NNPC showed ghaf as of 25th of September 2023, the Nigerian oil and gas industry achieved its highest crude oil and condensate output in nearly 18 months, with a production of 1.72 million barrels of crude and condensate.

This improvement, it was gathered is directly attributable to the reopening of operations along corridors with a history of security challenges, the restart of production from facilities that have been shut down for extended periods due to evacuation challenges, the completion of Turn Around Maintenance (TAM) of some assets, completion, and hook-up of infill wells, and critical NEPL well intervention projects.

In September 2023 alone, ABO TAM was completed, while ESSO-operated offshore Assets (Erha & Usan) recorded significant gains.

Similarly, the old and new Kolo Creek Trunklines were reopened, while production was restarted into the Okodia-Rumuekpe line (Zone 7) effectively enabling the recommencement of production from the SPDC East Assets including Nun-River and Kolo Creek.

Also, AITEO Exploration and Production, NNPC Eighteen Operating Limited, Heirs Energies Limited, Total Energies (OML 58 & 102) and Mobil (Etim & Inim) all ramped up production in September 2023, contributing sizeable volumes to Nigeria’s national output.

These improvements, combined with prevailing crude oil, have significantly improved the overall mood of the industry, with operators able to meet their obligations to contractors and a line of sight to healthy returns on investments.

The NNPC Ltd, it was learnt, has also been consistent and timely in meeting its cash call obligations with the much-improved production output.

“There is indeed a lot to be optimistic about, and there is still enough room for improvement. NNPC Ltd. is pursuing all avenues to meet and exceed expectations,” a top official said.

The fate of the suspended Chairman of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, Abdulrasheed Bawa, remains uncertain 112 days after his arrest.

Bawa was suspended from office by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu on June 14th, 2023 and Abdulkarim Chukkol was appointed to act in his capacity.

The Department of State Services (DSS) had immediately picked up Bawa for questioning at the DSS headquarters at about 9:pm on the same day he was suspended.

The DSS Spokesman, Peter Afunanya confirmed the arrest in a statement saying: “The Department of State Services (DSS) has invited Mr. Abdulrasheed Bawa, the suspended Chairman of Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).”

Before his arrest, some civil society groups had called for his removal for allegedly disobeying court orders.

But 112 days after, no further statement has been issued about him.

But while in detention, Bawa is said to have refused to cooperate with his interrogators and revealed little.

However, recent reports in the media claim Bawamay have agreed to a deal that could see him resign as EFCC chairman and walk home in peace.

It is also reported that President Tinubu may soon appoint a new EFCC chairman together with the Director General, Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) and ICPC chairman.

Some prominent lawyers and civil society groups have called for his release after months in detention without trial.

A lawyer, Nkereuwem Anana, had also filed a suit seeking an order for the immediate release of the embattled EFCC Chair from custody.

The lawyer is seeking the sum of N100 million from the federal government for compensation to Bawa for “unlawful and continuous” detention by the DSS.

Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court in Lagos has slated October 9, 2023, for the court hearing.

The U.S House of Representatives Speaker, Kevin McCarthy, was voted out of office on Wednesday by colleagues in his Republican Party, alongside those in the Conservative and Democratic Parties.

The House voted 216-210 to remove McCarthy while few Conservatives joined Democrats and Republicans to remove him.

A number of Republicans accused McCarthy of aligning with the policies of the Democrats and not taking a critical stand against President Joe Biden.

He was accused of not making moves to end the war in Ukraine, secure the US border and make America energy independent again – an ideal that was championed by former US President, Donald Trump.

McCarthy told the press he would not contest for speakership again in the House of Representatives dominated by Republicans.

He equally accused former US Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, of supporting the Republicans that were not in alignment with his political ideals.

“I may have lost this vote today, but as I walk out of this chamber I feel fortunate to have served,” McCarthy said.

The development is reportedly the first in U.S. history.

It was engineered by McCarthy’s colleagues in the Republican Party who disagreed with his disposition towards a number of political issues.

The Democrats aligned with the Republicans to perfect McCarthy’s removal through a vote.

Former US president Donald Trump is also being blamed for McCarthy’s removal and a number of foreign media claim Trump is rallying his Republican House members to press ahead to remove president Joe Biden.

The House has adjourned to next week for lawmakers to choose a new speaker.

The Republicans are searching for a replacement within the party.

The Republicans are also reportedly planning to impeach Biden.

The National President of Arewa Youths Consultative Forum, (AYCF), Yerima Shettima has stated that it is too early to accuse President Bola Tinubu of engaging in lopsided appointments.

Shettima said this while speaking with Daily Post.

He stated that the region is keenly watching Tinubu’s administration.

Shettima noted that Tinubu only took over power three months ago, adding that every administration has its own method of doing things.

The AYCF president stated that he believes the president has good intentions for the North and they are patiently waiting to see his plans unfolds.

Shettima, said, “It’s too early to conclude that appointments are lopsided or there is nepotism.

“He took over the government just three months ago, so naturally, every government has its own style, but what’s important before Nigerians is who are we picking? Are they competent? Can they give us what we want as a nation?

“Since we have tried nepotism over time and it didn’t work, can we try competency? I’m sure Tinubu has not made all the appointments, so let us not put the cart before the horse; let’s give him the benefit of the doubt and see how far he would go and after a while, we will respond accordingly.

“I’m not part of those who believe that they would just imagine things and assume that all is not well.

“As for the North not being favoured, we are watching at the moment, but we are not in a hurry to conclude that he is not doing anything good because I believe he has good intentions; until he proves otherwise then we will look for an alternative.

“But for now, let’s not be in a hurry because it’s still early. We didn’t get it exactly how we wanted it, and we didn’t expect it to be this way.

“We are not in a hurry; we Northerners don’t believe in propaganda or talking anyhow.

We will give him the benefit of the doubt until he gives us reason to react, and then he will see us in full colour. Even if we can’t get our way now, there are elections ahead of us so we will decide before then.”

Benue State Governor, Rev Fr Hyacinth Alia has ordered the Urban Development Board in the state to investigate the encroachment of government lands by residents within Makurdi, the State Capital.

This was contained in a statement by the Governor’s Chief Press Secretary, Tersoo Kula, on Wednesday in Makurdi.

Governor Alia gave the order when he visited Benue Links, the state-owned transport company, to inspect ongoing work on erosion control and other maintenance work in its office premises.

He ordered the board to, within the shortest time, identify and summon all those who have built on waterways, as well as those who have illegally possessed government lands.

”Those who encroached on lands or built on waterways must present their titles and other relevant documents for assessment and verification, ”he said.

Governor Alia maintained that the state will not fold its hands while people suffer the greed of a few individuals

Jurgen Klopp wants Liverpool’s match at Tottenham to be replayed due to the VAR error that cost them the opening goal at the weekend.

Spurs went on to win the Premier League game 2-1.

The fallout from the VAR failure in Saturday’s defeat, in which officials wrongly disallowed Luis Diaz’s goal due to a misunderstanding over the on-field decision, is still being felt.

Referees body Professional Game Match Officials Ltd (PGMOL) released the audio conversation between the match officials after a request from Liverpool, but Klopp said that had made little difference to their thinking.

“The audio didn’t change it at all,” he told a press conference on Wednesday. “It is an obvious mistake. I think there should be solutions for that. I think the outcome should be a replay.

“The argument against that would be it opens the gates. It is unprecedented. It has not happened before.

“I’m used to wrong and difficult decisions, but something like this never happened and so that is why I think a replay is the right thing to do.”

Questioned over whether the club had asked or would formally ask the Premier League for a replay, Klopp added: “At this stage we are still going through the information we have.”

Liverpool also had Curtis Jones and Diogo Jota sent off as their unbeaten start to the season came to an end.

PGMOL released a statement admitting a “significant human error” had led to the wrong decision being made.

[Vanguard]

The Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Peoples Republic of China share the same  National Day, October 1.

Perhaps, one other thing that Nigeria shares with China is a relatively large population. Nigeria has the largest population in Africa while until it was recently overtaken by India, China was the most populated  country in the world.  China with a population of 1.425 billion is  now second to India with a population of 1.428  billion.

On October 1, the Chinese people celebrated their National Day with  a high degree of pomp. According to the China Global Television Network, colourful activities were staged in many places in the country. Chinese aboard the world’s highest and longest plateau railroad, the Qinghai-Xizang railway,  sang praises of their nation. Remarkably, parents took their children on “patriotic tours of  museums, memorials and former revolutionary sites.”  One of such sites is the Jinggangshan Revolutionary  Museum located in the eastern Jiangxi Province. For the first time, two neighbouring cities, Shenzhen and Hong Kong SAR, joined hand to organise a drone light show to commemorate the day.

In China, October 1 of every year marks the beginning  of the “Golden Week,” a 7-day holiday  featuring state-organised festivities such as fireworks, sports events, cultural shows and concerts.

The Chinese engage in these activities not because China is a paradise. Indeed China  has multi-dimensional problems. There are sustained pressures for political reforms. China, as one of the greatest polluters in the world,  faces immense ecological dangers. Despite its celebrated economic expansion, gross inequality is still a huge social challenge. The vast country is certainly not an Eldorado of unlimited prosperity.

Yet, October 1 is not a day of lamentation in China; it is a celebration amidst reflection on the past and making a prognosis about the future.

For China, the significance of October 1 is far from receding in the nation’s  collective memory. The people and their leaders  still remember that on October 1, 1949 the great  Chinese revolutionary  leader, Mao Zedong (Chairman Mao)  declared the creation of the People’s Republic of China. Without hesitation, the Chinese  honour the memories of Chairman Mao and other great nationalists and revolutionaries  in their history. For instance, some western observers are still puzzled that despite the right-wing prejudiced  vilification of Mao’s legacy, the Chinese people and their leaders have a more judicious view of their history. They are more  conscious than foreigners of the errors of their  founding fathers. But in their estimation,  these errors have not  erased   the heroism of Mao and others  from the pages of history. This is the same way  Thomas Jefferson remains an American hero despite  owning over 600 slaves. The Chinese are wise to  deploy useful ideas from their  past  in China’s   development journey. This is in spite of  the dark spots of their history.

That is the tale of October 1 in one land.

The foregoing could be contrasted with the perpetual “low-key celebration” in another land. This was case during the  63rd   independence anniversary in Nigeria on the same October 1. For many years, the negative  refrain  has been that of “no cause for celebration” because of  the mounting socio-economic  problems in the land. Emeritus  professor of communication, Olatunji Dare, captured the attitude  of Nigerians towards October 1 in his last  Tuesday column in THE NATION. In a piece entitled “Countdown to October 1,”  the eminent professor summed things up as follows: “It is that time of year again when Nigerians, contemplating their country’s troubled past and uncertain future, engage in an orgy of collective self-flagellation tinged with self-pity, if not self-loathing; when an anniversary that should be an occasion for rejoicing and renewal breeds, instead, resentment and recrimination.

“It is the time we rue the road not taken as well as the road actually followed; an occasion that stirs up wrenching lamentations about what might have been if the right people had taken charge and pursued the right policies.

“For every ten persons who dismiss the occasion as unworthy of celebration, there is at least one person who regards it a great achievement worth remarking in and of itself that Nigeria has not gone the way of former Yugoslavia or the former Soviet Union.”

In this October 1 season, the question often glibly asked is this: “what is there to celebrate  about the Nigeria?”  This is quickly  followed by a litany of woes. It is as if the day is specially set aside for a competition among sharp-tongued critics to  talk down on Nigeria. Hence, October 1 has been turned into a day of lamentation about unfulfilled expectations of  the nation. It is almost forgotten now  that it is actually a day  to celebrate Nigeria’s freedom from the shackles of colonial rule. It is specifically  an occasion to reflect on the challenges of nation-building. October 1 is a day to remember those who fought for freedom and their dreams of building a great nation. It is a gross historical misnomer to say that Nigeria got her independence “on a platter of gold.”  Fighters for freedom were brutalised, imprisoned and persecuted. For the great inspirations embodied in it, the story should be told and retold of the enormous  sacrifice and nationalism  of the youths of the colonial era  who made the anti-colonial  struggle in many theatres their respective careers. The story  should be told for the great inspirations embodied in it. For instance,  some members of the  Zikist Movement were in their teens and twenties when they made history. The movement was  named after the nationalist leader, Dr. Nnamdi Azikiwe. The Zikists  operated in very difficult terrains. Without tools, their various activities and voices  constituted a dynamo in the anti-colonial  struggle. At a point the young men even  became impatient with the more pragmatic  approach of  their eponymous hero and inspirer, Azikiwe, who they simply called  Zik. Today’s youths who yearn for progress  should be familiar with the nationalist  exploits of the Mokwugo Okoyes, Anthony Enahoros, Raji Abdallahs, Za’adu Zungurs,  Kola  Baloguns etc.

It was , therefore, fitting that President Bola Tinubu devoted  the first few paragraphs of his October 1 message to the real purpose of the occasion as he  acknowledged  the heroism of the founding fathers. He also appropriately stressed the  “bonds of intangibles”   which should join Nigerians together  despite their differences. These bonds, according to the President are those of “peace,” “progress” and “prosperity”  with “justice” as the bedrock of all things concerning Nigeria. Really, as some commentators have rightly observed, the National Day message from the President should be in a class of its own. It is not necessarily  another opportunity to give an account of stewardship  or to articulate policies in the various sectors and departments of national life. The ministers and heads of agencies and departments are expected to  be doing policy articulation all the time. They should be explaining the policies to the public. It is an imperative of accountability to do so every time. The National Day message should be deliberately made that of hope. Such a message should be imbued with what constitute national values, virtues and goals. Useful values  that  could be inherited from the past should be reinvigorated and promoted for the generation waiting to take the mantle of leadership in the various sectors.

To summon the Chinese example again, the trajectory of the development of China is still largely modulated by its specific  history, culture and the intangibles of values and virtues. Two American scholars, Christopher Marquis and Kunyuan Qiao,  drew attention to this trend in a recent book entitled “Mao and Markets: The Communist Roots of Chinese Enterprise.”  The kernel of the empirical  findings of the authors is that China’s  universally  acclaimed economic success  is shaped by values and virtues inherent  in the communist legacy  of Chairman Mao. In their views, “a spectre of Mao” still hovers in Chinese institutions. In other words if you want do business in China you may need to study Mao on discipline, respect for the party and institutions, subordinating   private interest to  national interest, preference for the collective purpose etc. In short, the Chinese patriotism and nationalism cannot be ignored in their business behaviours.  Those who approach China  by first  denigrating its past may not fully understand the system. The Chinese leadership, of course, detests this approach which they label as “historical nihilism.”

These are some of the values the Chinese celebrate on October 1 so that the succeeding generations of leaders would learn from the legacy of their forbears. 

For clarity, criticisms  of the government in power are legitimate. In fact, it is a patriotic duty to criticise those in power.  This should, however, be distinguished  from hate speech, which is destructive.  As former British Prime Minister Winston Churchill once put it: “Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.”

Churchill made a lot of criticisms of  the government of his country, but he did  so with a lot of logic. He was prime minister twice. First, he was in the saddle during World War II, from 1941to 1945,  and secondly from 1951 to 1955. On another occasion while he was out of power Churchill said: “When I am abroad, I always make it a rule never to criticize or attack the government of my own country. I make up for lost time when I come home.” Churchill seemed to have made a fine philosophical distinction between patriotism (love for one’s  nation)  and nationalism (loyalty to the country). Both virtues are essential elements for nation-building. And historically patriotism is an older virtue than nationalism, which arose  in the West only 18th Century. 

The point at issue is that the National Day  is not an occasion to denigrate the nation in the name of criticising those in power.

The National Day is an occasion for soul-lifting messages even amidst deep reflection. It should not be reduced to a moment for recounting only the woes of the nation. 

Above all, Afropessimism, the  unscientific proposition that  the black man is doomed on the path to human progress,  should  have no place in a season when freedom from colonial bondage should be celebrated. The tone of the season should be that of optimism despite the challenges of development.

The Nigerian variety of Afropessimism is particularly toxic. In the world of the pessimists, Nigeria has made no progress at all  since October 1, 1960. That is, of course, empirically false. Progress has been made; but it is definitely far from being enough given the missed historical opportunities. At least, one indisputable  gain of independence is that of freedom and national dignity. Those who lived under the indignities of colonial Nigeria would probably appreciate  better the historical significance of October 1.

President Bola Tinubu’s ministerial nominee, who replaced former governor of Kaduna State, Nasir el-Rufai, Mr Abbas Lawal Balarabe, suddenly slumped in the Senate Chamber during screening.

Balarabe is former Secretary to the Government of Kaduna State.

The nominee had chaired a 65-man transition committee ahead of the swearing-in of Senator Uba Sani, as governor of Kaduna State on May 29. 

He  also headed the transition committee of the state in 2015 and served as the vice-chairman of the committee in 2019.

The Red Chamber had in August declined to confirm three ministerial nominees who included el-Rufai, Senator Abubakar Sani Danladi (Taraba) and Stella Okotete (Delta) over lack of security clearance.

President Tinubu in his letter urged the Senate to consider his  request expeditiously.

[ThisDay]

For nearly four years, since the dramatic twist that brought in Douye Diri to office as Governor of Bayelsa State on 14 February 2020, much attention has focussed on the former senator representing Bayelsa Central Senatorial District. The reason is not far-fetched: after successive governments in the State from 1999 have lived below expectation in addressing it's development challenges, Diri had promised to steer the state on a new development trajectory.

The Alamieyesiegha/Jonathan administration of 1999-2007 was riddled with crises, one of which led to the removal of the governor in 2005. After a lacklustre 5-year administration led by Timipre Sylva, punctuated by two interregnums, one within and another after, it took the coming of Henry Seriake Dickson in 2012 for a meaningful direction to be created for the state's development. But not until Governor Douye Diri did the state embark on the present magnitude of aggressive development of the state physical infrastructure.

The Bayelsa 2023 governorship election fixed for November 11, will pitch incumbent Diri, the candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) against Sylva of the All Progressives Congress (APC). If the contest is a match-up of both men's performances in office as many people believe, the need becomes compelling to interrogate Diri’s performance even before his first term ends.

A riverine and estuarine state, Bayelsa is highly challenged topographically. It is submerged in mangrove swamps and lies almost entirely below sea level which has made the development of its physical infrastructure almost impossible. As the popular saying goes, Bayelsa is more delta than Delta State and has more Rivers than the neighbouring Rivers State.

Nowhere else has Diri excelled in office than in his determination to defy the odds and expand the existing network of roads in the state famous for its single entry/exit point.

Governor Douye Diri

Late last month, members of the Nigerian Guild of Editors took time off from their retreat in Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State capital, to see some of the projects that have earned the government plaudits across the country. Coming a few days after the Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Saad Abubakar III had inaugurated the 10.2 kilometer Gloryland dual carriageway, the project tour was revealing indeed.

The state government's partnership with Zipline for real time distribution of needed drugs to rural health centres would appear to be Governor Diri’s most outstanding project. But it is nowhere near the massive investment in road infrastructure, especially the deliberate plan to connect all local government headquarters and open up areas never before reached by road.

It was exciting watching over a dozen drones take off in turns with small packs of needed drugs to riverine and unreachable areas, and return seamlessly within minutes to the central drugs depot in Yenagoa. It is even more exciting for the health workers who make the drugs requisition online, stand outside and watch their packs drop within minutes, conveniently in front of their governments health facilities. The drone have been programmed for pin-point accuracy across all facilities within the state, under any weather conditions.

Equally impressive is the ongoing effort to turn the vast Bayelsa swamps into hectares of rice farms. For a state with a preponderance of business interests in oil and gas, the government's desire to steer the populace towards farming is quite notable. So far, it has cultivated over 150 hectares of rice farm in Otuasega and other places across the state, not necessarily as a business venture but to sensitise people and businesses to rice farming.

Going by what David Alagoa, the state Commissioner for Agriculture said, the initiative is yielding fruits. Businesses and corporate organisations including the National Youth Service Corps are gearing up to take advantage of the program to cultivate over 4000 hectares in the soil-rich state.

The Yenagoa ring road, the 21km Elebele-Igbogene road and the new Yenagoa city link road are three of the landmark roads that are redefining the once-sleepy state capital. But in terms of its significance to opening up the rural areas, the recently completed 42km Sagbama-Ekeremor road, the 21-kilometer Nembe-Brass road and the Yenagoa-Oporoma road will count as the real game changers.

Not only will they heighten socio-cultural activities in the areas, the potential for increased economic activities in the hinterland is huge. The Yenagoa-Oporoma road which will connect the Southern Ijaw LGA with a large navigational bridge, for instance, is novel. When completed as promised before the end of Diri’s first term, it will mark the first time motor vehicles will drive into the oil rich Southern Ijaw.

With one of the largest oil and gas reserves in the country, there exists no accessible road into the Brass area as a whole. Over the years, multinational corporations have accessed their facilities there by hopping in and out with helicopters. With the new road from Nembe to Brass underway, Governor Diri is determined to break the jinx. This project not only resonates with most people in the state, it heightens expectation among the multinationals that the jetty proposed into the nearby Atlantic ocean may finally be realised.

 Timipre Sylva

How Diri’s performance will impact the forthcoming November governorship election, is anyone's guess. Former governor Timipre Sylva does not appear a good match in the circumstances and less than six weeks into the election, his campaign is yet to gain any traction against that of the incumbent. His performance in his first outing was anything but impressive, and not many remember the tenure with fond memories.

Many say he has very little in concrete terms to showcase in his years of public service, including the period he served as minister of state for Petroleum under the Buhari presidency. That perception of lacklustre performance record has now become his major albatross going into the governorship contest.

Added to that is his broken promise never to run for the office of governor again. After receiving commendations for that principled position, he did a volte face last year and entered the race, inelegantly muscling out David Lyon from the contest. Lyon who was the obvious front-runner in the APC at the time, had missed being sworn in as governor in 2020 by a hair-breath when a court judgment upturned his victory a day to inauguration.

Rather than inherit the huge goodwill that propelled Lyon's impressive outing four years ago, Sylva’s candidature has thrown the APC in Bayelsa state into turmoil. The crisis that followed the controversial primaries that schemed out Lyon and other credible contenders, has split the party leaders into opposing camps. It is a fire that is threatening to consume Sylva’s ambition of a second stint in Creek Haven, the state's seat of power.

The ex Governor of Ekiti state, Dr. John Oluwakayode Fayemi (58), CON, from Isan Ekiti has admitted what we knew all along, that liberal democracy is not working in this country.
He has previously served as governor of Ekiti state between 2010 and 2014 and also served as Minister of Solid Minerals Development under President Muhammadu Buhari GCFR from November 11, 2015 to May 30, 2018 before he resigned to contest for a second term as Governor of Ekiti state. He handed over as governor to his chosen successor, Mr. Abiodun Abayomi Oyebanji(55) on October 16 last year.

At present, he is a lecturer at Kings College, University of London, his former school. After completing his studies at the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile Ife, he joined THE GUARDIAN newspaper, before venturing into academics and later into politics.
On Tuesday September 5, this year, he made the admission on liberal democracy while delivering a key note address at a national dialogue organised to celebrate the 60th birthday of Prof Udenta Udenta, founding national secretary of Alliance for Democracy (AD).

While speaking at the event, the ex-governor criticised the “winner-takes-all” nature of Nigeria’s democracy stating that the nation’s current challenges could not be effectively addressed without adopting proportional representation, where election rewards are distributed among contestants based on their share of the vote.
“Today, I read former President Olusegun Obasanjo’s interview in The Cable saying our liberal democracy is not working and we need to revisit it, and I agree with him. We must move from the political alternatives. I think we are almost on a dead end of that.”

“What we need is alternative politics, and my own notion of alternative politics is that you can’t have 35 per cent of the vote and take 100 per cent. It won’t work! We must look at proportional representation so that the party that is said to have won 21 per cent of the votes will have 21 per cent of the government. Adversary politics bring division and enmity,” he said.
On a personal note, while I was working in Ibadan secretariat in the Ministry of Works and transport, Western state, his father’s office was opposite mine, the then Ministry of Information. When I switched to Journalism in early 1972, while working in the Nigerian Tribune, I used to visit his father, who took me like a junior brother.
His father was then working under Chief Festus Oladipo Shadare from Akure, who was then the Chief Information Officer in Western state. His dad’s colleagues at that time included my late friend, Femi Olurin from Ilaro in Ogun state, Chief Adewole Atandeyi (84), from Akure who retired as Chief Information officer in Ondo state, Mr. John Fademi (82) from Ijebu Ijesha in the present day Osun state and others.

General Yakubu Gowon (88) GCFR appointed Brigadier General Christopher Oluwole Rotimi(88), governor of Western state on April 1, 1971, likewise Brigadier Rotimi appointed Chief Samuel Kolawole Babalola(1931-2020) from Ipoti Ekiti as Commissioner for Health.

Dr. Fayemi’s father, Chief John Fadeyi Fayemi served as Information Officer under late Chief S.K Babalola. Dr Fayemi’s parents were then living at Agodi in Ibadan.
Chief Fayemi retired as a zonal information officer when Ekiti state was created. He died in 2009 at 86, just before his son became governor.
My keen interest in Dr. Fayemi grew when he went into politics in this republic and fortunate enough he has had his own share in serving the people, both at the national level and the state level. No one can predict his political future. What he has said deserved some commentary. The question I will like to ask, is who gave us this liberal democracy we are practicing?
Out of office, if these two men (Dr. Kayode Fayemi and former President Olusegun Obasanjo) are today questioning the validity of our liberal democracy, we should be worried. Afterwards empiricism in the philosophy of science emphasizes evidence, especially as discovered in experiments. It is a fundamental part of the scientific method that all hypotheses and theories must be tested against observations of the natural world rather than resisting solely on a prior reasoning, intuition, or revelation. Empiricism, often used by natural scientists, says that “knowledge is based on experience” and that knowledge is tentative and probabilistic, subject to continued revision and falsification”. Empirical research, including experiments and validated measurement tools, guides the scientific method.
It is often said that it is those who wears the shoes that know where the shoes pinches.

If former President Obasanjo, who was part of the Supreme Military Council that imposed on us this Presidential System of government is part of those complaining today about liberal democracy, we have to note that something is wrong. You may not like the messenger but you must examine the message.
Except for the President, the governors, legislators and their aides including Ministers and Commissioners and probably friends, no one is benefitting from the liberal democracy. The people are getting impoverished everyday. It is no exaggeration that there is extreme poverty in the land irrespective of who is leading us. I wonder why we are sticking to this type of democracy that is not yielding results and making us more miserable. Is there no alternative? And why must we recite every script on liberal democracy? Can’t we adopt another system of government that will be beneficial to us all? We have to admit that the liberal democracy is not working in our interest at all.

Nigerians are of the few people in the world who have never had a say in how they are being governed. What has happened in Nigeria and what is presently happening is enough to bring a revolution in other parts of the world. Everything has been imposed on us.

There are other alternatives to liberal democracy. We have Noocracy- a democracy in which only the wise and competent are allowed to stand and vote, Sociocracy- a democratic system of governance based on consent decision making, circle organization, subsidiarity and double-linked representation, New Democracy- Maoist concept based on Mao Zedong’s “Bloc of Four Classes theory in post-revolutionary China, Market democracy-- another name for democratic capitalism, an economic ideology based on a tripartite arrangement of a market-based economy based predominantly on economic incentives through free markets, a democratic polity and a liberal moral-cultural system which encourages pluralism.
Others are Participatory democracy – involves more lay citizen participation in decision making and offers greater political representation than traditional representative democracy, e.g., wider control of proxies given to representatives by those who get directly involved and actually participate, Semi-direct democracy – representative democracy with instruments, elements, and/or features of direct democracy and Grassroots democracy – emphasizes trust in small decentralized units at the municipal government level, possibly using urban secession to establish the formal legal authority to make decisions made at this local level binding.
Let us look at what liberal democracy means. According to Wikipedia, “Liberal democracy, substantive democracy or western democracy is a form of government that combines the structure of a representative democracy with the principles of liberal political philosophy. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, universal suffrage, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified or uncodified, to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. The purpose of a constitution is often seen as a limit on the authority of the government. A liberal democracy may take various and mixed constitutional forms: it may be a constitutional monarchy (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Japan, Norway, Spain, the United Kingdom) or a republic (France, India, Ireland, the United States). It may have a parliamentary system (Australia, Canada, India, Ireland, the United Kingdom), a presidential system (Indonesia, the United States), or a semi-presidential system (France). Liberal democracies are contrasted with illiberal democracies and with dictatorships.
Liberal democracy traces its origins—and its name—to the Age of Enlightenment. The conventional views supporting monarchies and aristocracies were challenged at first by a relatively small group of Enlightenment intellectuals, who believed that human affairs should be guided by reason and principles of liberty and equality. They argued that all people are created equal and therefore political authority cannot be justified on the basis of noble blood, a supposed privileged connection to God or any other characteristic that is alleged to make one person superior to others. They further argued that governments exist to serve the people—not vice versa—and that laws should apply to those who govern as well as to the governed (a concept known as rule of law). Some of these ideas began to be expressed in England in the 17th century. By the late 18th century, leading philosophers such as John Locke had published works that spread around the European continent and beyond. These ideas and beliefs influenced the American Revolution and the French Revolution. After a period of expansion in the second half of the 20th century, liberal democracy became a prevalent political system in the world.
Liberal democracy emphasizes the separation of powers, an independent judiciary, and a system of checks and balances between branches of government. Multi-party systems with at least two persistent, viable political parties are characteristic of liberal democracies. In Europe, liberal democracies are likely to emphasize the importance of the state being a Rechtsstaat, i.e. a state that follows the principle of rule of law. Governmental authority is legitimately exercised only in accordance with written, publicly disclosed laws adopted and enforced in accordance with established procedure. Many democracies use federalism, also known as vertical separation of powers, in order to prevent abuse and increase public input by dividing governing powers between municipal, provincial and national governments (e.g. Germany, where the federal government assumes the main legislative responsibilities and the federated Länder assume many executive tasks). The characteristics of liberal democracies are associated with increased political stability, lower corruption, better management of resources, and better health indicators such as life expectancy and infant mortality.
John Locke was the first to develop a liberal philosophy as he coherently described the elementary principles of the liberal movement, such as the right to private property and the consent of the governed. The Agreement of the People (1647), a manifesto for political change proposed by the Levellers during the English Civil War, called for freedom of religion, frequent convening of Parliament and equality under the law
Liberal democracy traces its origins—and its name—to the European 18th-century, also known as the Age of Enlightenment. At the time, the vast majority of European states were monarchies, with political power held either by the monarch or the aristocracy. The possibility of democracy had not been a seriously considered political theory since classical antiquity and the widely held belief was that democracies would be inherently unstable and chaotic in their policies due to the changing whims of the people. It was further believed that democracy was contrary to human nature, as human beings were seen to be inherently evil, violent and in need of a strong leader to restrain their destructive impulses. Many European monarchs held that their power had been ordained by God and that questioning their right to rule was tantamount to blasphemy.
These conventional views were challenged at first by a relatively small group of Enlightenment intellectuals, who believed that human affairs should be guided by reason and principles of liberty and equality. They argued that all people are created equal and therefore political authority cannot be justified on the basis of noble blood, a supposed privileged connection to God or any other characteristic that is alleged to make one person superior to others. They further argued that governments exist to serve the people—not vice versa—and that laws should apply to those who govern as well as to the governed (a concept known as rule of law).
Some of these ideas began to be expressed in England in the 17th century. There was renewed interest in Magna Carta, and passage of the Petition of Right in 1628 and Habeas Corpus Act in 1679 established certain liberties for subjects. The idea of a political party took form with groups debating rights to political representation during the Putney Debates of 1647. After the English Civil Wars (1642–1651) and the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the Bill of Rights was enacted in 1689, which codified certain rights and liberties. The Bill set out the requirement for regular elections, rules for freedom of speech in Parliament and limited the power of the monarch, ensuring that, unlike almost all of Europe at the time, royal absolutism would not prevail. This led to significant social change in Britain in terms of the position of individuals in society and the growing power of Parliament in relation to the monarch.
By the late 18th century, leading philosophers of the day had published works that spread around the European continent and beyond. One of the most influential of these philosophers was English empiricist John Locke, who refuted monarchical absolutism in his Two Treatises of Government. According to Locke, individuals entered into a social contract with a state, surrendering some of their liberties in exchange for the protection of their natural rights. Locke advanced that governments were only legitimate if they maintained the consent of the governed and that citizens had the right to instigate a rebellion against their government if that government acted against their interests. These ideas and beliefs influenced the American Revolution and the French Revolution, which gave birth to the philosophy of liberalism and instituted forms of government that attempted to put the principles of the Enlightenment philosophers into practice.
When the first prototypical liberal democracies were founded, the liberals themselves were viewed as an extreme and rather dangerous fringe group that threatened international peace and stability. The conservative monarchists who opposed liberalism and democracy saw themselves as defenders of traditional values and the natural order of things and their criticism of democracy seemed vindicated when Napoleon Bonaparte took control of the young French Republic, reorganized it into the first French Empire and proceeded to conquer most of Europe. Napoleon was eventually defeated and the Holy Alliance was formed in Europe to prevent any further spread of liberalism or democracy.
However, liberal democratic ideals soon became widespread among the general population and over the 19th century traditional monarchy was forced on a continuous defensive and withdrawal. The Dominions of the British Empire became laboratories for liberal democracy from the mid 19th century onward. In Canada, responsible government began in the 1840s and in Australia and New Zealand, parliamentary government elected by male suffrage and secret ballot was established from the 1850s and female suffrage achieved from the 1890s.
Reforms and revolutions helped move most European countries towards liberal democracy. Liberalism ceased being a fringe opinion and joined the political mainstream. At the same time, a number of non-liberal ideologies developed that took the concept of liberal democracy and made it their own. The political spectrum changed; traditional monarchy became more and more a fringe view and liberal democracy became more and more mainstream. By the end of the 19th century, liberal democracy was no longer only a liberal idea, but an idea supported by many different ideologies. After World War I and especially after World War II, liberal democracy achieved a dominant position among theories of government and is now endorsed by the vast majority of the political spectrum.
Although liberal democracy was originally put forward by Enlightenment liberals, the relationship between democracy and liberalism has been controversial since the beginning and was problematized in the 20th century. In his book Freedom and Equality in a Liberal Democratic State, Jasper Doomen posited that freedom and equality are necessary for a liberal democracy. In his book The End of History and the Last Man, Francis Fukuyama says that since the French Revolution, liberal democracy has repeatedly proven to be a fundamentally better system (ethically, politically, economically) than any of the alternatives, and that democracy will become more and more prevalent in the long term, although it may suffer temporary setbacks. The research institute Freedom House today simply defines liberal democracy as an electoral democracy also protecting civil liberties”.
When the colonialists arrived in our land years ago, they brought the bible and this thing called liberal democracy. We never resisted. They took away our tradition and stripped us naked. We retained the Bible but the colonialists have abandoned the Bible for us.

We married the parliamentary system of democracy until the ARMY terminated it January 15, 1966. The military then imposed the Presidential System of government on us, we did not resist it. The military on their own terminated it on December 31, 1983 and they restored it on May 29, 1999. Since then, we have been fumbling and wobbling with this system of government.
I am happy Dr. Fayemi described our democracy as “winner takes all democracy”. We all know what a winner takes all, entails.
In the Middle East, what is being practiced is no more democracy but autocratic pragmatism. They are no longer following the rules and dictates of the so called western democracy.
In an article published by the British magazine, THE ECONIMIST, in its September 15 to 22 edition, it was quoted as saying “If you thought the Middle East was stagnant, think again. The gulf economies are among the richest and most vibrant on the planet, helped by a Brent crude oil price that rose back to over $90 per barrel this week. A $3.5 trillion fossil-fuel bonanza is being spent on everything from home-grown artificial intelligence models and shiny new cities in the desert, to filling the coffers of giant sovereign-wealth funds that roam the world’s capital market looking for ideals.
As for the cash flows in, the chaos shows signs of receding, thanks to the biggest burst of diplomacy for decades. Saudi Arabia and Iran have negotiated détente in a rivalry that has lasted since the Iranian revolution in 1979. Civil wars in Syria and Yemen are killing fewer people, as their sponsors seek de-escalation. Following the Abraham accords between Israel and some Arab governments, Saudi Arabia is considering recognizing the Jewish state, 75 years after its creation. The region’s global clout is rising--- four countries are about to join the BRICS club of non-aligned powers that want a less Western-dominated world.

As our briefing explains, these shifts begin a new chapter in the Middle East marked by fresh opportunities and new dangers. The region’s leaders are testing ideas that have caught on in much of the world, including embracing autocratic pragmatism as a substitute for democracy, and multipolar diplomacy instead of the post-1945 American-led order. The Middle East is also a place where threats that will menace the world in the 2030s may play out early, including nuclear proliferation, extreme weather and even greater inequality, as weak countries fall further behind.
Many occupants of the White House have left office wishing they could forget all about the Middle East. But whether you run a super-power or a small business, it matters as much as ever. Although it has only 6% of the world’s people, it has a chokehold on the global economy. As the lowest-cost oil producer, its share of crude exports is 46% and rising. Its share of exports of liquefied natural gas, in great demand since Russia’s pipelines to Europe shut down, is 30% and going up, too. Thanks to its location, 30% of all container trade and 16% of air cargo passes through the region. With $3trillion of assets, its sovereign-wealth funds are among the world’s largest. Its wars and disorder often spill across borders; its refugees affect politics as far away as Europe.
The past two decades have been miserable in the Middle East. Democratic project ended in failure and bloodshed, in Iraq after the American-led invasion of 2003 and in several countries after the Arab spring in 2011. Islamic State sought to kill its way to creating a caliphate, while in Syria Bashar al-Assad doused his own people in chlorine and nerve agents.
Yet now, as the fighting ebbs, three big changes are visible. First, the region is having to take more responsibility for its own security, as America’s appetite to intervene militarily has evaporated. Alongside this, trade patterns have become multipolar: the IMF reckons 26% of Middle Eastern goods exports exports to China and India, almost double the level in 2000 and roughly twice the share headed for America and Europe. Recently, the geopolitical alignment has led to a desire to de-escalate conflicts.
Second, the energy transition creates an urgent need to escape the familiar patterns of oil booms and busts. Instead there is a powerful incentive for the Gulf to lift fossil-fuel production in the next decade before demand dwindles permanently, and spend the proceeds on diversifying local economies.
The final shift is a weariness in public opinion. Political experiments, whether democratic or islamist, are tarnished. Instead, people across the Middle East yearn for economic opportunity. Forget Canada or Sweden: polls show the country young arabs admire most is the UAE, with its stability and thriving economy under iron-fisted dynastic rule. At the same time, less Western involvement in security and trade also means less pressure for human rights or democracy”.
There is a Yoruba adage that says “no one will tell the blind that the market is over until he or she hears no sound”. This liberal democracy is ruining us.