The New Year 2025 promises to be full of conflicts, most of them avoidable. The hottest spot might be in the Middle East where fierce proxy conflicts are going on with Israel at the centre. Only the naïve would think that the wars Israel has been involved are entirely fought by it, whereas that country is a proxy of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, NATO.

It is backed by the war machine of the West mainly run by the United States, US, United Kingdom, UK and France. They provide Israel with intelligence, embedded soldiers, missiles and anti-missile shields, military hardware and, of course, funds. On August 13, 2024, the Department of State announced that the US alone had approved a $20 billion weapons package to Israel which includes advanced airto-air missiles and fighter jets.

Those countries also have their warships on the side of Israel. Such warships include the American USS Wasp, USS New York and USS Oak Hill while the UK has its Royal Navy and Royal Air Force. On its part, France, has the Languedoc and Alsace warships in the area which can come to Israel’s aid as it did when Iranian missiles were fired at Israel. This is why Israel is enabled to carry out genocide in Gaza and the West Bank, and attacks in Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iran.

There is the senseless war in Sudan in which troops from the same armed forces, nationality, religion, language and culture are engaged in a siblings conflict. Its only parallel, in terms of stupidity, is the 36-year conflict in Somalia. Another that comes a bit close is the 13-year civil war in Libya ignited and controlled by NATO. In West Africa, the conflicts are mainly against terrorists and bandits with Nigeria being the main centre. Some of the countries, namely Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have entered into a military and economic alliance to fight the criminals.

They have also expelled France which not only exploits the situation in those countries, but also plays a double game. Partly for these reasons, countries like Chad and Senegal have joined in expelling the French military, while, disturbingly, Nigeria is getting closer to the same France. The conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo, DRC, which became complicated when the USA, UK and Belgium organised the ouster and execution of founding Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba on January 17, 1961, are still raging.

The DRC’s main sin is that it has huge mineral resources. The low intensity combats in the Central African Republic, CAR, took ethnoreligious dimensions in 2013. It is still simmering. One country that has strenuously tried not to be involved in armed conflicts is China despite having territorial disputes with countries like Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, India, Brunei, Malaysia and the Philippines. It has also refused to take the bait of the US to draw it into an economic war. China’s strength lies in this and advancing its economic interests and powers as is evident in the Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, BRICS+ alliance.

A unique country that has strenuously avoided war and has tried to be friends with all humanity is Cuba. Apart from the April 1960 Bay of Pigs Invasion in which it defeated mercenaries from the US, and its unique sacrifice in fighting the Apartheid armed forces to free Africa from colonialism, Cuba has, since its 1959 revolution, avoided war. The only unique wars it has fought in many countries have been against diseases and pandemics like Ebola and COVID-19.

But the main challenge of Cuba is that the US treats it like a mortal enemy. Its primary sins include the fact that it is a mere 151 kilometres from the US city of Florida. Now, the US regards Cuba as its backyard and believes it must always control it. This, Cuba has heroically rejected, insisting on its sovereignty and freedom to run its own affairs. Secondly, Cuba in pre-revolutionary times was the playground of the US Mafia and the rich. The American elites have insisted on returning Cuba to that status.

Thirdly, Cuba in carrying out its revolution and insisting on its maintenance, is seen by the US establishment as a bad example in the hemisphere which must not be allowed to stand. Fourthly, the US sees Cuba as an inspiration to revolutions across the world. Fifthly, it sees Cuba as being very dangerous because it is socialist and, an ally of radical governments across the world. So, since 1962, the US has tried to squelch tiny Cuba which is a mere 109,884 kilometres or the size of the US state of Tennessee.

One of its main weapons against Cuba is to impose a blockage against it, stopping it from trading freely or running its business. On October 30, 2024 the United Nations General Assembly voted for the 32nd time that US ends its illegal 62- year economic, commercial and financial blockade against Cuba. The resolution, passed by 187-Member States, with only the US and Israel voting against, and Moldova abstaining, again reaffirmed the total support of the international community for the just struggle of the Cuban people and government.

But as it has done since 1992, the US continues to ignore the rest of humanity. This Christmas week marking the birth of Jesus Christ, known as the Prince of Peace, the Cuban nation decided to march in its capital city, Havana, to demand that the US brigandage and injustice against the Cuban people must be brought to an end. The peace march led by Cuban President Miguel Díaz Canel Bermudez and his successor, Raúl Castro Ruz, passed in front of the US embassy.

During the march, President Bermudez said: “We do not profess the slightest feeling of hatred against the American people. To the noble citizens of that country, we offer our full respect, and our hand is always extended to strengthen the bonds of brotherhood between the two peoples…but if the US persists in its efforts to undermine our sovereignty, our independence, our socialism, they will only find rebellion and intransigence.” The US message to Cuba is clear: when chosen by war, you’ve no right to choose peace.

There is no denying the fact that for many Nigerians, this is their bleakest Christmas ever. It is not because they have lost the zeal to celebrate. No! They simply cannot afford to even contemplate, not to talk of actually making merry in this triumphant season. Happiness has become a luxury in the land. Rather than celebrating, many Nigerians are mourning. That, in itself, is a tragedy.

But the bigger tragedy is the fact that despite the obvious sad realities, President Bola Tinubu continues to live in denial, refusing to accept the truth of our unpleasant circumstances. He has perfected the art of playing the ostrich, burying his head in the sand rather than face the reality which is a direct consequence of the policies of his presidency. Granted, the fact that he continues to deny the consequences of that reality is typical, yet his feigned pretence during his media chat on Monday is amoral.

It is difficult to say with any measure of certainty if Tinubu’s denial of the stark realities is a defense mechanism, a way of protecting himself from a truth that is too bitter to accept or if he truly believes that Nigeria is at the cusp of redemption. In his perfunctory ripostes to the questions thrown at him, he came across as an impervious leader who is disconnected from the prevailing sad realities.

Fielding questions from journalists at his Lagos residence on topics that included subsidy removal, tax bills, economic reforms, size of governance and corruption, Tinubu displayed an unbecoming cavalier attitude, pretending not to see a correlation between the policies of his administration, particularly the sudden removal of fuel subsidy, floating of the Naira and hiking of electricity tariff, and the country’s dire straits. These are policies that have led to an unprecedented cost of living crisis.

What is most disconcerting is the hypocrisy. He blamed the citizens for their financial woes, accusing them of ostentatiousness. Just like his Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu, who on April 6, 2024, accused Nigerians of lacking the culture of power consumption management, Tinubu chastised fellow citizens along the same line. “It is not negative to learn to manage. You learn to control your electricity bill, switch off the light, let’s learn to manage,” he said on Monday.

But good leaders lead by example, demonstrating the behaviours and values they expect from others. People are more likely to follow leaders who practise what they preach. Tinubu has not demonstrated that capacity. For instance, Nigerians agree on the need to cut the cost of governance. Tinubu has the largest cabinet ever. Yet, he would not countenance any idea of reducing the size of his bloated cabinet. “I am not prepared to reduce the size of my cabinet,” he told his interviewers. “I saw the need when I put them together. Don’t give someone an assignment they cannot fulfil.”

One of the areas he saw a need was in the creation of Ministry of Livestock Development. Before now, livestock development used to be a department in the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security that already has two ministers. Creating another ministry out of the parent ministry is superfluous. It is like creating a Ministry of Football or Ministry of Lawn and Table Tennis as a substantive standalone ministry out of the Ministry of Sports Development. The President knows this for a fact. Yet he had to fritter away scarce resources on the altar of prebendal politics.

It is needless talking about his take on corruption because I doubt if there is any discerning Nigerian that will expect him to wage a vigorous war against corruption. Suffice it to say that it is highly disingenuous for the leader of a political party that made a song and dance of prosecuting former top military officers, including a former National Security Adviser, for allegedly stealing public funds while in office, to now say that he will not probe “any service chief,” because doing so will be tantamount to disrespecting the military institution.

But what I found most distasteful was the attempt to deflate the criticism of his government’s harsh economic policies for the fatal stampedes that occurred in Oyo, Anambra and Abuja last week claiming the lives of scores of hapless citizens mostly women and children.

On December 18, 35 children were confirmed dead during a stampede at a funfair event in Ibadan, Oyo State capital; on December 21, ten people, including children, also died in another stampede at the Holy Trinity Catholic Church in the Maitama district of Abuja during the distribution of palliatives; at least another 22 people died during a rice distribution event in Okija, Anambra State, on the same day. 

Blaming the organisers of the charity events for the fatalities, Tinubu said he has been sharing palliatives in his Lagos residence for 25 years without an incident. “It is very sad that people are not well organised. We just have to be more disciplined in our society… I have been giving out foodstuff and commodities, including envelopes in Bourdillon, for the last 25 years, and I have never experienced this kind of incident because we are organised and disciplined. If you know you won’t have enough to give, don’t attempt to give or publicise it.”

That is most uncharitable. While it is true that he has been giving out foodstuff, commodities and money to his cronies for the last 25 years without any ugly incident, it is also true that the Catholic Church through the St. Vincent de Paul society, Chief Ernest Obiejesi and his ObiJackson Foundation, and even Queen Naomi and her Wings Foundation have also been organising such charity events without fatal stampedes.

The Catholic Church is, perhaps, one of the most organised groups in the world. There was the presence of policemen and local vigilante at the Okija event. The difference between what happened this year and previous years is that Tinubu’s administration has pushed many more people into the poverty loop, orchestrating extreme hunger in the land. The uncertainty has made the desperation worse. Poverty has a way of robbing people of their dignity. When possible starvation is added to the toxic brew, life becomes meaningless.

The difference between what happened in previous years and what is happening now is captured in the lamentations of Amarachi Nwosu, a 32-year-old woman, who miraculously survived the stampede with his three-year-old son Obinna at the Holy Trinity Catholic Church grounds on Saturday.

“It has been hard. The cost of food is unbearable. Even a cup of rice is now a luxury for us. I didn’t even know what was happening. I just wanted to get food for my children. I thank God we survived. But what do we eat now?”

Eighteen-year-old Terngu Nyam, who survived with a broken arm, went there for the sake of his starving family. “I just wanted to help my mother. We’ve been struggling to eat one meal a day. I didn’t think this would happen.”

Tinubu should not talk down on organisations, churches and individuals who are helping to clear the mess he has made of governance by seeking ways of easing economic hardship caused by a cost-of-living crisis.

What is leading to these tragedies is not lack of organisation. It is the sheer number of people who are now turning up for palliatives because of the mass poverty and starvation. Some of these people had waited overnight to get food. For instance, Amarachi arrived at the Holy Trinity Catholic Church grounds in Maitama from her Mararaba home, a distance of about 25 kilometres around 5am. That is desperation.

These deadly crowd crushes have become a recurring decimal under Tinubu’s watch. In March, two students died and 23 were hurt as thousands of people gathered for bags of rice being handed out by authorities at Nasarawa State University. Four women were killed later the same month outside the office of a wealthy businessman in Bauchi, where they were waiting to collect a cash gift of N5,000 to help pay for food during Ramadan.

In any other country where almost 70 people, mostly women and children are trampled to death, the government will declare a day of national mourning and the national flag will fly at half-mast. Not in Nigeria. Instead, Tinubu said: “I see this as a grave error on the part of the organisers, but things are improving. It doesn’t kill our happiness for the season; we should just get on with it.”

Which things are improving? And where is the happiness when over 70 families have been thrown into deep mourning as a result of circumstances beyond their control?

Tinubu and his supporters may continue living in denial, but the fact is that these fatal stampedes are a direct consequence of the cost of living crisis in the country caused by the fiscal and monetary policies of his government in the last 18 months. Living in denial will not take away that fact. 

From the second stint in the White House for Donald Trump to a turbo-charged football calendar, here are five things to watch in 2025:

– Trump 2.0 –

On January 20, Donald Trump will be inaugurated as 47th president of the United States, 11 weeks after his convincing win in the election against Democrat Kamala Harris.

The Republican’s swearing-in ceremony in front of the US Capitol in Washington comes four years after the attack on the seat of US democracy by Trump supporters, who did not accept he lost the 2020 election.

Trumps’ return, at the age of 78,  comes despite four indictments and a criminal conviction and after a campaign that also included two failed assassination attempts on him.

With a list including vaccine sceptic Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as health secretary and Elon Musk co-heading a department of government efficiency, there is concern at what his second term could mean for the United States, and the world.

He has vowed to Make America Great Again, retreating from multilateralism in favour of power politics.

In late December the president-elect pledged to “stop the transgender lunacy” on day one of his presidency, and to immediately begin “the largest deportation operation in American history” of illegal migrants.

– Climate –

Could 2025 be the year when our greenhouse gas emissions stop their steady climb around the world?

Researchers are pointing to signs from the world’s biggest polluter China, responsible for 30 percent of global emissions, where fossil fuel carbon dioxide emissions are projected to tick up only marginally this year.

Glen Peters, of the Global Carbon Project, says overall CO2 emitted by burning coal, oil and gas across the world could peak in the next few years.

This carbon pollution is the main driver of increasingly dangerous climate change.

But even if there is a peak, Ignacio Arroniz Velasco, of the E3G think tank, said countries cannot afford to “relax”, and should then quickly decrease their emissions to aim for carbon neutrality.

– Football frenzy –

In 2025 the question of football overkill and player burnout will likely dominate amid a supercharged calendar.

There is the expanded 32-club Club World Cup awaiting players in the summer, when usually they would have had time to recover from national leagues.

And this coming after a particularly busy season that sees a much-anticipated extended Champions League — the leading European club competition — in a new format.

All this is part of a trend in football to ramp up the number of high-profile matches — the next World Cup in 2026 will welcome a whopping 16 more countries, resulting in 104 games rather than 64.

The spectre of Saudi Arabia will also loom large as the host of the 2034 World Cup pumps more money into the game, with potentially transformative consequences.

Other controversies likely to cause sparks include the continued use of VAR technology, currently locked in a love-hate relationship with players, fans and pundits.

– Kumbh Mela –

The largest gathering of humanity on the planet will take place from January 13 to late February when 400 million are expected to attend a spectacular Hindu festival on India’s sacred riverbanks.

Held every three years, rotating between four different holy places, the Kumbh Mela takes place at the site where the holy Ganges, Yamuna and the mythical Saraswati rivers meet.

Classified by UNESCO as intangible cultural heritage, the mega-festival will involve a makeshift city in the northern city of Prayagraj. The last time the festival took place there, in 2013, it drew 120 million people. 36 people died in a stampede.

Hindus believe that taking a dip in Sangam, the confluence of the rivers, will cleanse them of their sins and help them attain “moksha”, setting them free from the cycle of birth and death.

– Oasis and BTS comebacks –

On the one side, the grisly bad boys of Britpop, on the other the fresh-faced darlings of K-Pop.

Both Oasis and BTS are set to return in 2025, much to the delight of their fans, after stints off the stage for very different reasons.

Led by the Gallagher brothers Liam and Noel, Oasis will return after a high-profile bust-up in 2009 — one of many — led to a 15-year split.

The band behind “Wonderwall” and “Champagne Supernova”, songs that achieved anthem-like status in the 1990s, go on a world tour kicking off in Britain and Ireland then heading to North and South America.

In the initial scramble to buy tickets from official sites, many fans who missed out sought alternative sources — leading to a landslide of ticket scams.

It will be a very different vibe in South Korea, where wildly popular K-Pop boy band BTS promises to reunite in June after its seven members finish their mandatory military service.

It is the comeback millions of fans and an entire multibillion dollar industry has been waiting for.

Experts say the megastars’ return to performance and public life could lift South Korea’s cultural exports juggernaut even higher.

eab-rap-ico-ot/jmy/giv

© Agence France-Presse

South Korea’s parliament has voted to impeach Han Duck-soo, its acting president — two weeks after it voted to impeach President Yoon Suk Yeol.

Han, who was prime minister, took over as acting president after Yeol was impeached by parliament following an attempt to impose martial law in the country.

Opposition lawmakers first filed an impeachment motion against Han on Thursday after he blocked the appointment of three judges chosen by parliament to oversee Yeol’s case.

They argued that he was stalling Yeol’s impeachment process.

There was chaos in parliament as the vote held on Friday.

Woo Won-Shik, speaker of the assembly, announced that only 151 votes would be needed to pass the impeachment bill. This meant that votes from the ruling People Power Party (PPP) were inconsequential.

The announcement elicited a protest, with the PPP lawmakers who gathered in the middle of the chamber chanting “invalid!” and “abuse of power!”

They asked the speaker to step down, with most of them boycotting the vote.

A total of 192 lawmakers voted for Han’s impeachment. The acting president will be suspended from his duties as soon as he is officially notified by parliament.

Like Yeol, his impeachment would have to be confirmed by the constitutional court, which has 180 days to rule on whether the vote should be upheld.

Reacting to the impeachment, Han said “I respect the decision of the national assembly,” adding that he “will wait for the constitutional court’s decision”.

[TheCable]

In line with the recommendations of the State Advisory Council on Prerogative of Mercy, Governor Ademola Adeleke has exercised prerogative of mercy towards 53 convicts serving various convictions within the Nigerian Correctional Service.

The letter of commutation dated December 24th, 2024 and which has since been received and acknowledged by the relevant prison authorities read as follows:

"WHEREAS: the inmates whose names are set out in the schedule to this order have been convicted to various terms of imprisonment to wit.

(i) Simple offences and have served substantial portions of the sentences, 

(ii) Convicts sentenced to death

"(having spent a minimum of 10 years in custody.)

"AND WHEREAS: following the recommendation made to me by the state advisory council on the prerogative of mercy that I should exercise my power in relation to the said inmates in order to mark the 2024 Christmas celebration.

"AND WHEREAS: in the case of the 30 (thirty) inmates convicted of simple offences, I have decided in accordance with the said recommendation to remit and forgive the remainder of the said sentences in whole.

"AND WHEREAS: I have decided in accordance with the said recommendation to grant outright pardon to 12 (Twelve) inmates convicted of simple offences.

"4 (Four) Convicts have their sentences commuted from death to outright pardon. AND WHEREAS: I have decided in accordance with the said recommendation to commute the sentences as follows;

"1 (One) convict has his sentence commuted from death to 15 (Fifteen) years imprisonment.

"6 (Six) Convicts have their sentences commuted from death to outright release.

"Now know ye therefore that, I Senator Ademola Jackson Adeleke, the Governor of Osun State of Nigeria, in exercise of the power conferred on me by paragraph (a), (c) and (d) of subsection (i) of section 212 of the constitution of the federal republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as Amended), I am pleased to extend my grace and mercy unto the said inmates.

"My will and pleasure thereof, is that you commute the death, life and years of imprisonment as indicated herewith in the schedule"

Those in the schedule are as follows:

CONVICTS RECOMMENDED FOR OUTRIGHT PARDON (SIMPLE OFFENCES)

1. OLABOMIJI NURUDEEN

2. MUSTAPHA ISAH

3. OLALEKAN ABDULLAHI

4. AYOMIDE OLOJEDE

5. AKEEM RAPHAEL

6. ADEYEMI ABIODUN

7. OLADIPUPO SEGUN

8. OMISAKIN SUNDAY

9. ADEMOLA ADIO

10. TUNDE OLAPADE

11. LATE CHIEF WOLE OLA

RUFUS OJO

12. OMOLOYE OLAJIDE

OLAYEMI

CONVICTS RECOMMENDED FOR OUTRIGHT RELEASE (SIMPLE OFFENCES)

1. OLUBO SUNDAY

2. ISAH UMAR BIODUN

3. FAWAS KAREEM

4. OMIRIN TEMITAYO

5. OLARENWAJU AYOMIDE

6. DARE SUNDAY

7. OLADAPO TUNDE

8. GANIYU SAHEED

9. ADEWUMI SODIQ

10. ADEBAYO ADEOYE

KEHINDE

11. LASIS KAZEEM

12. DAUDA OJO (59 YEARS)

13. ISMAILA RAJI

14. OSENI MICHEAL

15. AJAYI KOREDE

16. ABIONA NURUDEEN

17. OSHI SAMUEL

18. SHEU YUSUF OLATUNJI

19. OJO AANU

20. MUSTAPHA KEHINDE

21. LASIS ABEEB

22. ALEXANDRA IORLAHA

23. OJO TAIWO

24. AZEEZ MUJEEB

25. AKINYEMI DAVID

26. ADEOSUN ADEKUNLE

27. OLAOBAJU SAMUEL

28. ADURA ADEFEMI

29. PAUL BASIL

30. KUNLE DAVID

CONVICT RECOMMENDED FOR OUTRIGHT PARDON FOR GOOD CONDUCT (CAPITAL OFFENCES) - 4 (FOUR)

1. SUNDAY MORAKINYO

2. SEGUN OLOWOOKERE

3. TUNDE OLAPADE

4. DEMOLA ODEYEMI

CONVICT RECOMMENDED FOR OUTRIGHT RELEASE ON HEALTH GROUND, (CAPITAL OFFENCES) -

1 OLUWAFEMI FAGBEMI

2 BEWAJI SUNDAY

3. AMEHIN GEORGE

4. AYOMIDE ARULOGUN

5. TAIWO OLUWATOBI STEPHEN

6. ABUBAKAR ABDULAZEEZ

CONVICT RECOMMENDED TO BE COMMUTED FROM DEATH TO 15 YEARS IMPRISONMENT HAVING SPENT AT LEAST 10

YEARS IN CUSTODY

1. OJEKUNLE TIMOTHY

Signed

Mallam Olawale Rasheed,

Spokesperson to the State Governor.

With only 15 months left for banks to meet the deadline for the new share capital benchmarks, the Central Bank has warned that the March 2026 deadline will not be shifted. Speaking to this writer, a CBN director said, ‘’the idea of extension or shift of the deadline does not arise. They were given more than two years to meet the new threshold, and by our calculations, that is enough time. We are not contemplating an extension’’. So far, of Nigeria’s 36 lenders, only Access Holdings has concluded the capital raising exercise, bringing in a little over N351 billion from its Rights Issue of 17.772 billion shares that sold for N19.75 per share. The offer closed in August. With this, Access Bank has thus become the first to meet the CBN’s N500 billion minimum capital requirements for Banks with International Authorization well ahead of the March 2026 regulatory deadline. The bank’s share capital would increase to N600 billion, N100 billion above the regulatory minimum requirement.

 For the other 35 banks, the next one year will be a crowded and busy period. A few have gone far while many others are yet to make appreciable progress. Some like the other four tier one lenders – GT; UBA; First Bank and Zenith – have already announced their offers, but are yet to conclude the process, others, especially the small regional and some national banks are still lagging behind. There have been a host of challenges, though, even among the big ones. FBN Holdings, the parent company of First Bank, has had its programme slowed down considerably by Boardroom crisis. The long drawn battle between Femi Otedola and Oba Otudeko for the control of the company has just been settled, with Otedola emerging chairman of the holding company. While Zenith Bank has had to juggle both capital raising with reconstituting itself into a holding company at the same time, GT Bank has just survived a major service disruption and customer backlash due to migration to a new IT platform.

 To meet the new capital requirement, the banks are expected to go for public offers; rights issues; private placements; mergers and acquisitions or a combination of these. In terms of mergers and acquisitions, there are indications that two banks, Providus and Unity, are in talks to merge together. Both are national banks, but with a combined market share of less than 20 per cent in terms of deposit liabilities. Providus has a huge Lagos State shareholding just as Northern State governments hold huge interests in Unity Bank. ‘’That’s the only discussions in the market for now for mergers and acquisition; but I won’t be surprised if more candidates join the discussions in the next few months’’, said a senior executive of a bank.

 Younger and better managed banks seem to be doing better generating new capital. Nixon Iwedi, executive director of Globus Bank said his bank is on track to meet the deadline. ‘’We are raising N150 billion through a private placement and Rights Issue. The first has been successfully completed and we are on the second phase now’’, he said, noting that they prefer to approach the process in a rather quiet and restrained manner. Globus has a national license and the minimum for this category is N200 billion.

 For Access Holdings, the process has become quite a momentous. It has become the first Nigerian financial holding company to successfully execute a fully digital Rights Issue embracing the power of technology to improve access to equity capital market. By leveraging the NGX’s E-offer platform, the company provided its shareholders with a convenient and efficient subscription process, leading to the participation of many of its retail shareholders in addition to institutional investors. Speaking on the successful offer, Board Chairman Aigboje Aig-Imoukhuede, said: “The Access brand has always resonated strongly with the local and international capital markets. Since 2004, Access Bank has raised billions of dollars in capital to meet successive CBN recapitalization directives. We are pleased that this time we are the first to breast the tape. The success of the Rights Issue demonstrates the resilience of Nigeria’s capital market and reinforces our shareholders confidence in the present value and potential of our company’’.

 While a few banks are already set on a course of action to meet the deadline, many others are still weighing their options. As a CEO pointed out to me, ‘’it is too early to understand the options that they would explore. It would become clearer as we get into the second half of 2025’’.

Nonetheless, the Nigerian capital market has once again demonstrated capacity and depth to meet the expectations of investors, issuers and professionals. We saw this during the indigenization programme of Gen. Yakubu Gowon; the privatization programme of Gen. Babangida and the consolidation programme of President Obasanjo. Its mutualization a decade ago also signified the market’s ability to adapt to change.

Apart from General Sani Abacha, I have met one-on-one with every Nigerian leader since 1992, from General Ibrahim Babangida. However, I have only participated in one televised live group media chat with former President Olusegun Obasanjo. 

If you have met Obasanjo before – whether for an interview or anything else – you might agree that he’s a handful and more. You never know what to expect with Obasanjo, especially when he is in his lair. 

I narrowly missed being punched by the former president during an untelevised interview in his Library in the Villa in 2004 for asking why his government was letting a political outlaw, Chris Uba, run amok in Anambra State. The combined effort of presidential aides, the late Remi Oyo and Professor Julius Ihonbvere, rescued me from Obasanjo’s fury.  

Are you OPC?

My experience wasn’t very different during the live presidential media chat. I had asked him why he ordered a shoot-on-sight against members of the militant Yoruba self-determination group Oodua People’s Congress (OPC), which operated mainly in the South West, Obasanjo’s home base.

He was livid. He warned me, on air, that if I were going to bring the irreverence of my weekly column to the Villa, he would immediately throw me out of the panel. I insisted on an answer, to which he said, “If you’re a member of OPC, tell your people that I mean what I said!”

Three presidents, different styles

Presidents Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari, whom I also met at different times in different untelevised encounters in the line of duty, were distinct in their peculiar ways. 

Yar’Adua spoke a little, measuredly and candidly. Jonathan was gentle, felicitous, and vulnerable without a care in the world. Buhari was taciturn, defensive, and tight-lipped, except when you touched on a raw nerve, mainly around his family or his relationship with Babangida, with whom he has had a fascinating Tom-and-Jerry relationship. 

I poked Buhari on this soft spot in an untelevised group interview in 2016. His unusually animated, angry reply inspired a widely publicised story that covered The Interview magazine, entitled “Why Babangida removed me from power.”

Road to interview

The Monday televised interview with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu differed in many ways. Multiple sources, including those inside his cabinet, had pressured him to host an interview many times, but he refused, insisting that the time was not right and that there was much to be done. 

In October, 17 months into his presidency, there was a nearly interview on the eve of the planned second round of the #EndBadGovernance protest. He cancelled at the last minute for personal reasons. 

When I received a message on December 18 that I had been selected for a panel to interview the president, I assumed it would be live. Not that there’s any journalistic rule forbidding a recorded interview. Some of the best interviews I’ve read about or seen, from Oriana Fallaci to Larry King, were recorded. In a more recent example, the CNN interview with President-elect Donald Trump was recorded on November 25 and aired on December 12.

Live or recorded?

However, I hoped the interview with Tinubu would be live – a point I later found was shared by all panel members – because this was the first nearly halfway into his presidency. If eating this toad had taken 19 months, it’s better to eat it big for Nigerians to hear their president engaging them unfiltered. 

The choice of live or recorded can sometimes be tricky. Like Ebenezer Obey’s famous story in the song of the Journeyman and his Donkey, you can’t please everyone. Some want it live because it allows spontaneity and could sometimes be a window on the persona of the interviewee. Others prefer a live interview for traps to catch the interviewee in their unguarded moments, which is why others oppose it.

The panel

We—a panel of seven—comprising Dr. Reuben Abati (ARISE TV/ThisDay), Maupe Ogun-Yusuf (Channels TV), Nnamdi Odikpo (NTA), Jide Otitoju (TVC), Umar Farouk Musa (VOA), Ruth Olurounbi (Bloomberg News), and me—wanted to have this interview live and for two hours for the reasons I’ve explained.

That didn’t happen. Hours before the interview, which was postponed from Sunday to Monday because of the tragic deaths from palliative stampedes in different parts of the country, we finally settled for 90 minutes. The questions were entirely ours to decide, and that was what happened. 

Some folks have been upset that the interview was not live and, to make matters worse, not a brawl. One gentleman, obviously with a heavy heart, said, “I expected my seniors on the job to rattle the President.” I get that. Another was not even interested in the interview. He aimed at me instead, saying that even though I’m an Igbo man (which I’m not), I did not wear a red cap (which I’ve never worn) because of an “inferiority complex!”

To cut or not?

It’s the nature of recorded interviews—and this one was no exception—that not everything is aired. Twenty questions were prepared, and at least 17 were asked point-blank, excluding unscripted queries and follow-ups. 

Among the unaired questions were whether the President considered Nyesom Wike, the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), a political liability and whether direct payments to the local governments were not a derogation of the principle of federalism, which recognises the centre and the states as the fundamental constituent units of the federation. 

Questions also arose about #Endsars and state police and whether the president would request the Code of Conduct Bureau to release his assets, as one or two newspapers requested under the FOIA of 2011.

His answers were fascinating. He described Wike as a performing minister and a very good man. He said it twice, slowly but louder and with a hearty laughter of approval the second time. In response to the Supreme Court’s judgement on local government autonomy, he said, “There are at least two ideological views on that. The thing is that the constitution created the local governments, and there isn’t such a thing as ‘unfunded mandate.’” 

Translation: If the law created local governments, it is not unlawful for them to receive their funding directly. That debate continues.

‘I’ll consider’

On state police, he said he didn’t expect any obstacles but expected a negotiated outcome in the country’s best interest. His response to the question on asset declaration was even more fascinating. I remember that in 2012 this question left Jonathan with a media chat black eye. He was asked if he didn’t care about the growing public demand that he should declare his assets. In what was initially thought to be a slip, he said, “I don’t give a damn!” That turned out to be a damn good headline the next day. 

Tinubu took a different approach. He said he had done his part by filing his assets as required by the law and would do so again at the point of exit. But when asked if he would ask the CCB to release it since there is currently no law mandating the CCB, despite the FOIA, he said, “I will consider doing so.” That, I think, is worth holding onto.

Everything couldn’t be covered in a one-hour broadcast, and perhaps one live or recorded interview will hardly satisfy the pent-up hunger to hear the president. But one presidential interview at a time, the gap is closing.

The ongoing leadership crisis at the University of Abuja (UniAbuja) reflects deeper systemic challenges that extend beyond the mere selection of a Vice-Chancellor. As a psychologist, it is clear that the interplay of emotional, ethnic, seniority, youthfulness, and religious biases driving this crisis is damaging to the institution’s mission and the well-being of its stakeholders. Leadership should not be about clinging to outdated traditions but about fostering progress through unity, innovation, and inclusivity.

The constant infighting has undermined the university’s fundamental purpose: serving students and advancing education. Whoever ultimately assumes the Vice-Chancellor position—whether it is Prof. Aisha Maikudi or another qualified candidate—must rise above personal, political, and sectarian agendas to prioritize transparency and institutional growth. This is a pivotal moment for UniAbuja to part with relics of the past and adopt governance models that reflect the realities of modern academia.

UniAbuja has the potential to transform into a beacon of progress. However, this transformation requires leadership grounded in collaboration, innovation, and a student-centered vision. It is time to move beyond power struggles and embrace changes that align with the evolving demands of global academic landscapes.

The leadership crisis at UniAbuja highlights the dysfunction and outdated governance models that continue to hinder Nigerian academia. What should have been a transparent and structured process to select a Vice-Chancellor has devolved into violence, favoritism, and resistance to reform. These events reveal a toxic environment where regressive mindsets obstruct much-needed progress. While this writer and psychologist remains neutral, it is difficult to ignore the backward arguments opposing innovation and reform—arguments that perpetuate stagnation in a system in dire need of evolution. Apologies to readers for this extended explanation, but such a critical issue warrants deep reflection.

Violence as a Governance Tool: An Alarming Trend in Academia

The use of violence and intimidation to resolve disputes at UniAbuja signals a deeply rooted crisis. Reports of thugs disrupting Senate meetings, journalists being assaulted, and academics silenced illustrate a governance culture where intimidation has become normalized. Such actions, including the brutal treatment of Channels Television reporters and the vandalism of their equipment, tarnish the university’s reputation and undermine its mission as a center of intellectual excellence. This descent into coercion reflects a system incapable of engaging in constructive dialogue.

Rejecting Violence and Nepotism in Governance

Reports of attempts to impose Acting VC Prof. Aisha Maikudi, allegedly despite not meeting job advertisement criteria, expose systemic governance failures. Allegations of nepotism, favoritism, and rushed processes raise serious concerns about transparency. While Maikudi’s rapid ascent—from becoming a professor in 2022 to her appointment as Deputy Vice-Chancellor (DVC)—has drawn criticism, the real issue lies in the absence of an open and impartial selection process.

It is crucial, however, to avoid conflating these criticisms with a rejection of progress or innovation. The resistance to arbitrary benchmarks should not be mistaken as support for rigid traditions. If the only objection to Prof. Maikudi’s candidacy is her inability to meet tenure-based criteria, then such objections must be dismissed. Her ability to lead, innovate, and adapt should be the primary criteria—not the length of her tenure. These outdated benchmarks, while once relevant, no longer align with the evolving demands of contemporary university leadership. Leadership today requires vision, strategic thinking, and a commitment to fostering collaboration—qualities that cannot be measured solely by years of service or academic titles.

Manipulation of Leadership Processes: Merit Takes a Back Seat

The allegations surrounding Acting Vice-Chancellor Prof. Aisha Maikudi’s candidacy expose the failures of the leadership selection process. Claims that the selection joint board was manipulated to favor her while sidelining numerous other qualified candidates raise serious concerns about transparency and fairness. These controversies overshadow any potential merits of her candidacy and cast doubt on the integrity of the entire process. 

Outdated Benchmarks: A Hindrance to Progress

One of the most glaring issues is the reliance on outdated benchmarks to determine leadership eligibility. Critics of Prof. Maikudi cite her limited post-professorial experience as a disqualifier, clinging to traditional metrics such as years of tenure and academic publications. However, this narrow focus fails to account for the qualities needed to lead a modern university. Leadership in today’s world demands innovation, strategic thinking, and the ability to foster collaboration and adapt to global challenges. The obsession with arbitrary qualifications traps institutions in mediocrity and stifles progress.

Backward Thinking Reflects an Institution Stuck in the Past

The insistence on rigid academic qualifications as the sole measure of leadership capability highlights a regressive mindset. Today’s university leaders must go beyond academic expertise; they must be strategic thinkers, resource mobilizers, and visionaries capable of navigating global challenges. Clinging to outdated benchmarks not only limits the pool of potential candidates but also fails to equip institutions for the future. It reflects an institution that is unwilling—or unable—to adapt to the realities of modern academia.

This does not mean endorsing a rejection of academic standards but rather advocating for a holistic approach that values diverse leadership qualities. It is time for institutions like UniAbuja to move past the rigidity of tradition and embrace a future where leaders are chosen for their ability to inspire transformation, innovate, and build sustainable institutions.

Students as Forgotten Stakeholders in the Crisis

The ongoing leadership crisis at UniAbuja has glaringly neglected the university’s most critical stakeholders—its students. At its core, a university exists to serve its students, equipping them with the skills, knowledge, and resources necessary to thrive in an increasingly competitive and interconnected world. Yet, in the current atmosphere of administrative battles, internal power struggles, and outdated traditions, the essential focus on student-centered goals has been abandoned.

Students require leaders who prioritize their growth and development through the provision of modern facilities, innovative curricula, and access to global opportunities. Instead, they are left to bear the fallout of a leadership system bogged down by outdated benchmarks and internal conflicts. The struggles to impose candidates or cling to antiquated traditions fail to address the pressing needs of the student body, leaving them under-resourced and underprepared to meet the demands of a rapidly evolving global economy.

The university’s purpose must transcend the ambitions and egos of those at the helm. A leadership crisis that prioritizes self-interest and perpetuates stagnation inevitably fails the very people it exists to serve. Students do not benefit from rigid adherence to outdated academic benchmarks or from the resistance to reform that keeps the institution tethered to the past. They deserve leaders who are visionaries, willing to implement bold changes that modernize the university, enhance academic offerings, and create clear pathways for success in today’s world.

Africa is Moving Forward: UniAbuja Risks Falling Behind

Across Africa, universities are increasingly embracing forward-thinking leadership models to address the demands of a rapidly evolving academic landscape. Institutions in Ghana, Kenya, and even Nigeria’s private universities have begun to prioritize leaders with entrepreneurial mindsets and innovative visions. These institutions understand that success requires adaptability, inclusivity, and a commitment to modernization. By clinging to outdated practices, UniAbuja risks falling further behind, not just regionally but globally, in its ability to attract and retain top talent and students.

If Objections Are Rooted in Tradition, They Must Be Dismissed

Again, if the opposition to Prof. Maikudi’s candidacy hinges solely on her inability to meet outdated academic benchmarks, such objections deserve to be dismissed outright. To be blunt, this reasoning is nonsensical and reflects a rigid adherence to the past rather than a forward-looking perspective. The argument that two to three years of professional experience renders her incapable of leading senior professors is an outdated and elitist mindset. Universities are not mere bastions of hierarchy—they are enterprises, dynamic ecosystems requiring leaders who understand that modern academic institutions must function as centers of innovation and influence, not just tradition.

Leadership in today’s universities demands vision to see beyond immediate challenges, adaptability to navigate the complexities of a rapidly changing world, and an unwavering focus on outcomes that benefit students, staff, and the institution as a whole. If Prof. Maikudi—or any candidate—has been vetted transparently and demonstrates the capacity to lead with these qualities, then objections rooted in tradition are not only misplaced but harmful to progress. Institutions must embrace leaders who drive transformation, not cling to the nostalgia of ineffective and exclusionary traditions.

The Absence of HR Processes: A Structural Flaw

One of the most glaring omissions in the UniAbuja crisis is the absence of a professional Human Resources (HR) framework in the leadership selection process. HR departments are designed to ensure transparency, inclusivity, and alignment with institutional goals. By establishing clear, objective criteria, HR-led processes can eliminate personal biases and political interference. Such frameworks prioritize merit and innovation, focusing on the qualities that truly matter in leadership. If HR processes had been in place, the controversies surrounding Prof. Maikudi’s candidacy and the subsequent chaos could have been avoided entirely.

The Way Forward: Reform and Innovation

The UniAbuja crisis highlights the urgent need for systemic reform in Nigerian academia. Institutions must adopt transparent governance models that prioritize student outcomes, embrace innovation, and break free from the constraints of tradition. Balanced HR frameworks must guide leadership appointments, ensuring that decisions are based on merit and institutional goals rather than personal or political interests. Universities must focus on selecting leaders who can adapt to global challenges, foster collaboration, and implement transformative policies.

Educating Key Stakeholders

Nigeria’s educational stakeholders, including the Minister of Education, the National Universities Commission (NUC), university senates, and the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), must urgently adapt to the evolving demands of modern university leadership. These institutions are not just centers for teaching and research—they are engines of national development and global competitiveness. For them to succeed, their leadership must reflect the qualities required to navigate complex challenges in a globalized world.

The Role of the Minister of Education and NUC

The Minister of Education and the NUC hold the power to champion reforms in university leadership appointments. By prioritizing transparency, merit, and innovation, they can introduce guidelines aligned with global best practices. Modern Vice-Chancellors must go beyond academic credentials to embody visionary leadership, strategic insight, and entrepreneurial abilities with a proven capacity to foster growth and collaboration.

University Senates and ASUU Must Embrace Change

ASUU, while vital in advocating for academic standards, must move beyond its attachment to outdated traditions and its interference in leadership selection. ASUU is not an HR department, and its influence often disrupts the reforms needed for progress. Likewise, university senates frequently act as gatekeepers of entrenched practices rather than champions of modernization.

This approach hinders not only universities but also students, the economy, and the broader educational system. Students suffer the most from outdated methods, as leadership controversies divert focus from modern curricula, improved facilities, and global opportunities. Universities need leaders who prioritize student-centered goals and institutional advancement over rigid academic hierarchies.

ASUU and senates must support environments that promote transparency, fairness, and inclusivity in leadership selection. Decisions should focus on candidates’ vision, innovation, and ability to secure funding and foster global partnerships. Adopting professional, merit-based frameworks will align Nigeria’s universities with international standards, benefiting students and the nation’s economic development.

The Importance of Open Competition

The debate over the Vice-Chancellor position at UniAbuja highlights the need to move beyond rigid academic benchmarks like 10 years of professorial experience or a long list of international publications. While these qualifications reflect academic dedication, they are not sufficient indicators of the leadership needed to guide a modern university. Leadership today demands vision, strategic thinking, and an inclusive approach to institutional growth, with a focus on delivering transformative academic experiences for students.

Modern universities prioritize leaders who can build international partnerships, secure funding, and foster collaborations that benefit students and faculty. Entrepreneurial skills and resource management are just as critical as academic credentials, ensuring institutions remain adaptive and competitive. Relying solely on traditional standards often excludes candidates with diverse, non-traditional experiences that could revolutionize governance.

Globally, universities are appointing leaders from entrepreneurial and professional backgrounds who bring creativity, adaptability, and global engagement to their roles. A Ph.D. or strict academic benchmarks are no longer mandatory; what matters is the ability to align institutional goals with societal impact and innovation.

UniAbuja has a chance to modernize its selection process by adopting inclusive and transparent criteria that value academic credibility alongside vision and innovation. Academic achievements like international publications are valuable but should not outweigh broader leadership qualities. Transformative leadership will ensure Nigerian universities can compete globally and provide exceptional opportunities for students and staff.

How Modern Societies Approach University Leadership

In modern educational systems, the process of selecting university leaders reflects professionalism, transparency, and alignment with institutional objectives. Unlike traditional methods that emphasize rigid academic benchmarks, these systems focus on attracting leaders who can inspire innovation and navigate complex global challenges. Human Resources (HR) departments play a pivotal role in ensuring that the selection process is fair, inclusive, and strategically oriented.

Comprehensive Job Advertisements

Universities in advanced societies craft detailed job advertisements that go beyond academic credentials to outline the leadership qualities, strategic vision, and practical skills required for the role. These advertisements attract a diverse pool of candidates, including those with entrepreneurial or professional backgrounds, ensuring that potential leaders are evaluated on their ability to meet the evolving demands of modern academia.

Merit-Based Selection Panels

The evaluation process is carried out by diverse, merit-based selection panels comprising internal and external stakeholders. These panels focus on candidates’ strategic vision, leadership capabilities, and track records of delivering measurable results. This ensures that the chosen leader has the capacity to drive institutional growth and foster an inclusive academic environment.

Embracing Transparency and Change for a Better Future

Modern university leadership demands openness and inclusion at every level of the selection process. By actively engaging students, faculty, and administrative bodies, universities can ensure that their leadership choices reflect the collective needs of the academic community. Professional oversight eliminates biases and ensures that decisions are made based on merit. If Nigerian universities adopt these approaches, they can move beyond outdated governance models, prioritizing innovation and growth to compete globally.

Leadership Beyond Academic Titles

A Vice-Chancellor or President should embody transformative leadership, far surpassing mere academic credentials. Insisting on outdated benchmarks risks rendering institutions irrelevant in a world that values innovation, adaptability, and visionary thinking. Leadership today must focus on advancing institutions to meet the demands of a rapidly evolving educational landscape.

The time to break free from outdated practices in Nigerian universities is now. Sticking to rigid traditions only hinders progress while the world continues to evolve. Universities must prioritize inclusivity, innovation, and transformative leadership to achieve national and global educational goals.

The ongoing leadership crisis at UniAbuja highlights the critical need to refocus on students. A leadership framework that overlooks their needs is fundamentally flawed. Institutions must foster an environment where excellence in education, innovation, and inclusivity replace outdated traditions and administrative distractions.

What Does Infighting Bring?

Does infighting provide better facilities, reliable electricity, clean water, or smooth roads for growth? Does it offer students the innovative programs and global opportunities they need? Clearly not. Infighting only distracts from education’s true purpose, leaving students and society worse off.

This is the moment for UniAbuja and Nigerian universities to transform into engines of progress, focusing on students and adopting governance frameworks rooted in transparency, innovation, and inclusivity. Whoever emerges as Vice-Chancellor, whether it’s Prof. Aisha Maikudi or another candidate, it’s time to drop the emotional, sentimental, and personal power games. Let’s leave behind the ethnic, religious, and political nonsense that only divides and distracts. These petty squabbles do nothing to advance education or improve the lives of students.

What truly matters is creating an environment where learning thrives, students’ needs are prioritized, and universities serve as hubs of innovation and progress. Let the focus shift from power struggles to meaningful outcomes. The future of Nigerian academia demands leaders who can unite diverse perspectives and steer institutions toward global competitiveness. Let’s ensure this is the legacy UniAbuja leaves for its students and the nation.

Former Minister of Women Affairs, Uju-Kennedy Ohanenye, disclosed on Wednesday that she was sacked less than two weeks after some Nigerians donated money for some projects she wanted to implement in the Ministry.

She explained that as a minister, there were some projects she wanted to implement that were not in the current budget.

According to her, she made an appeal to raise funds for some categories of vulnerable Nigerians and was surprised that people gathered at the Aso Rock Villa and donated over ₦200 million naira.

Speaking during an interview with Channels Television, Kennedy-Ohanenye disclosed that she was however sacked less than two weeks after the donations and before the donated funds could be utilized.

The former Minister said she was, therefore forced to ask the secretary in charge to write to the bank to do a reversal of the funds to the donors.

“The programmes I initiated like the mobile courts, going to rescue small girls hawking on the streets, I did not have money for that because it wasn’t part of what was budgeted for.

“When I called on Nigerians, I was so surprised a lot of them gathered at the villa and donated money to this effect. They were very happy to support it.

Unfortunately, not up to two weeks after the donations, I was sacked. When that happened, there was no way I could use that money. I asked the secretary in charge to write to the bank to do a reversal of the funds,” she narrated.

Also speaking during the interview, Kennedy-Ohanenye said she has no regrets over some actions she took as minister.

Naija News reports that Kennedy-Ohanenye was one of the Ministers sacked by President Bola Tinubu in October 2023 during a cabinet reshuffle.

She was fired alongside four other ministers at the time – Lola Ade-John (Tourism), Jamila Bio Ibrahim (Youth Development), Tahir Mamman (Education) and Abdullahi Muhammad Gwarzo (Housing and Urban
Development).

Speaking on the incident during her interview, she however disclosed she handled matters related to her office to the best of her knowledge and has no regrets.

“I have a responsibility given to me to man that place and make sure things go right. I wouldn’t have tolerated anybody trying to rubbish deceit given to me.

“There must be an impact on people. I’m glad that I didn’t give such chance and I have no regret in the way I did my job. That was the highest way I would have done that,” she said.

[NaijaNews]

Telecom operators may get approval to increase call and data tariffs before the end of first quarter of 2025, a top official of one of the four big telecom companies said.  

The top official who pleaded anonymity stated that the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) might give the telcos approval to increase rates of calls, SMS, and internet bundles.

If the approval is given, it will mark the end of over a decade of lobbying by telecom giants like MTN Nigeria, Airtel, and 9Mobile, who have been consistently calling for price adjustments to reflect economic realities. 

Daily Trust reports that despite soaring operational costs driven by inflation, telecom operators have not been allowed to raise prices in the last 11 years. 

“We strongly hope that our approval to increase tariffs has been granted by the federal government. We hear they will allow us to do some upward review of tariffs by the first quarter of 2025. This sector is seriously bleeding; no new investment because of soaring operating costs. Some of us are already making losses. We just hope the sector will not be allowed to die”, the top official who pleaded anonymity told journalists in Lagos. 

Industry sources said the telecoms tariffs could rise by up to 40%.

This means to make a one minute call may cost N15.40 up from N11 and SMS charges will rise from N4 to N5.60. For data plans, the price of a 1GB bundle will increase from N1,000 to at least N1,400.

In a December 20 interview, the minister of Communications, Innovation and Digital Economy, Dr Bosun Tijani, acknowledged the need for price adjustments, stating: “We think there may be a need for that”. 

The NCC is responsible for reviewing and approving tariff adjustments in the telecommunications industry. 

Daily Trust reports that MTN Nigeria reported a N137 billion loss in 2023, with losses expanding to N514.9 billion in the first nine months of 2024. Airtel Africa also reported losses of $89 million in Financial Year 2024, largely driven by challenges in Nigeria.

Despite the grim outlook in the telecoms sector for much of the year, President of the Association of Licenced Telecommunication Operators of Nigeria (ALTON) Gbenga Adebayo argues that cost-reflective prices will incentivise investment and help improve quality in the long run. s

The spokesperson for the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), Reuben Mouka could not be reached for confirmation of proposed tariff increase approval as of filing this report yesterday.