In Nigerian Pidgin, the phrase “no be beans” translates to a task far from trivial—a Herculean endeavor. For Professor Tanko Ishaya, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Jos (UNIJOS), this phrase encapsulates his three-year journey of steering one of Nigeria’s foremost institutions through storms literal and metaphorical. Since assuming office in December 2021, his tenure has been a masterclass in balancing ambition with pragmatism, transforming challenges into stepping stones, and proving that effective university leadership requires more than intellect—it demands grit, vision, and an unwavering commitment to collective progress.

This is not a public image article but one that I intend to gradually up the ante till I get to crescendo x-raying the Nigerian tertiary educational systems and structures, what still works and continues to work, and indeed what is no longer working and cannot work, so follow me on this journey.

A university’s backbone lies in its staff, and Professor Ishaya prioritized their welfare from day one. Recognizing that industrial harmony fuels productivity, his administration swiftly resolved lingering disputes with the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU), ensuring postgraduate activities resumed without delay. Over 300 professors and 700 staff members received timely promotions, even before the Governing Council’s constitution—a bold move underscoring proactive leadership.

To alleviate economic hardships, subsidized buses now ply routes across Jos, easing transportation costs for staff and students. The Vice-Chancellor’s Annual Anniversary Awards, launched in 2023, further boosted morale by recognizing exceptional contributions. Staff training programs, though not quantified in the report, reportedly saw hundreds upskilled, aligning with global educational trends. As Ishaya often reiterates, “When staff thrive, the university thrives.”

Students, the lifeblood of any university, witnessed unprecedented attention under Ishaya’s watch. Hostel renovations—from Abuja to Naraguta—addressed decades of neglect. Drainages were cleared, roofs replaced, and security lights installed, transforming dormitories into safer, cleaner spaces. Amid Nigeria’s economic crunch, subsidized buses and a student-work program provided financial relief, while scholarships shielded indigent learners from dropout risks.

The administration’s partnership with the Student Union Government (SUG) birthed milestones: the first online elections, live-streamed SUG debates, and capital projects funded by student initiatives. These efforts reflect a philosophy: “Students are not mere beneficiaries; they are partners in progress.”

UNIJOS’ academic credentials soared under Ishaya. In 2021, only 57.3% of programs held full accreditation from the National Universities Commission (NUC). By 2024, this leaped to 93.3%, a feat akin to academic alchemy. Professional accreditations similarly jumped from 50% to 75%, with disciplines like Medicine, Law, and Pharmacy earning full status.

The introduction of 67 new programs under the NUC’s CCMAS framework and participation in the Times Higher Education rankings—placing among Nigeria’s top 45 universities—signaled UNIJOS’ rising global profile. Behind these numbers lie relentless audits, curriculum reforms, and a Senate-driven quality assurance mechanism. “Excellence is not an accident,” Ishaya notes. “It is intentional.”

Research under Ishaya’s watch became a catalyst for national development. The TETFund-backed COVID-19 psychological impact study and the indigenous SJN3T CorVac vaccine project showcased UNIJOS’ problem-solving prowess. The African Centre of Excellence in Phytomedicine (ACEPRD) gained international acclaim, pioneering tick vaccine research and winning grants for sustainable health solutions.

Collaborations with institutions like the University of Wisconsin and Greece’s University of Piraeus expanded horizons, while plagiarism detection software and research ethics policies fortified academic integrity. For Ishaya, “research is the bridge between theory and Nigeria’s developmental realities.”

Infrastructure projects, many funded by TETFund, transformed UNIJOS’ landscape. Completed projects include a 500-seater auditorium, hostels, perimeter fencing, and a state-of-the-art urology center at Jos University Teaching Hospital (JUTH). Ongoing ventures—lecture halls, drainage systems, and a sports complex—promise to erase the infrastructural deficit inherited from decades of underfunding.

ICT integration became a hallmark. Solar-powered data centers, fiber-optic networks, and biometric Senate attendance systems modernized operations. Over 300 lecturers trained in digital teaching tools, while hybrid learning and automated postgraduate processes cemented UNIJOS’ tech-savvy reputation. “A 21st-century university cannot lag in technology,” Ishaya asserts.

Strategic partnerships with entities like the Nigeria Customs Service, Chengdu University, and the International Organization for Migration (IOM) unlocked resources—auctioned vehicles, staff exchanges, and sports complexes. The upcoming NUGA Games in 2025, a first for Northern Nigeria since ABU Zaria’s 1973 hosting, positions UNIJOS as a cultural and athletic hub.

Yet, Ishaya’s tenure faced titanic challenges. COVID-19 disrupted academic calendars, delaying graduations and NYSC mobilizations. An eight-month ASUU strike in 2022 drained revenues and stalled projects. Natural disasters—rainstorms destroying faculties, an inferno gutting the Veterinary Hospital—tested resilience.

Funding remains a thorn. With no federal takeoff grant since inception, UNIJOS battles inflation, unpaid bills, and recruitment freezes. Illegal mining on Naraguta Campus and land encroachments compound security woes. “We operate in a context of scarcity,” Ishaya admits, “but scarcity breeds innovation.”

Three years in, Professor Tanko Ishaya’s stewardship exemplifies transformative leadership. His mantra—“We cannot do it alone”—acknowledges the communal effort behind UNIJOS’ strides. From staff and students to alumni and partners, each stakeholder has fueled this journey.

As Ishaya eyes 2026, challenges persist, but so does resolve. The proposed Centre of Excellence in AI and Cybersecurity, alumni endowment funds, and WASH initiatives hint at a future where UNIJOS rivals global giants.

To manage a university, truly, no be beans. It requires a leader who sees beyond crises to possibilities—a leader like Tanko Ishaya, whose legacy is not just in structures or accreditations, but in reigniting belief that Nigerian universities can, and will, excel.

Professor Ishaya’s story is a testament to what visionary leadership can achieve against all odds. As UNIJOS marches toward its 50th anniversary, one thing is clear: the seeds planted in these three years will blossom into a harvest of excellence, proving once again that with grit and unity, even the loftiest dreams are within reach, like I say these days—May Nigeria win.

The rapid escalation between Israel and Iran in the past 48 hours has reignited global fears of a wider regional war—with ripple effects already shaking oil markets, shipping routes, and diplomatic fault lines. At this critical moment, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and Africa’s leadership must not remain on the sidelines.

As the leader of Africa’s most populous nation and largest economy, Tinubu is uniquely positioned to shape a decisive African response that blends security, economic foresight, and diplomacy.

Security risks are real. As conflict intensifies in the Middle East, extremist elements across the Sahel and West Africa may exploit the vacuum to escalate regional insurgencies. Increased Houthi and Red Sea militant activity could also disrupt ECOWAS trade corridors. Nigeria must boost its intelligence coordination, maritime security, and work with Gulf and African navies to secure critical shipping routes.

On the economic front, global oil prices spiked by over 9%—which may benefit Nigeria’s oil revenues but simultaneously threatens domestic inflation. Tinubu should fast-track energy subsidy reforms, build strategic petroleum reserves, and deepen fiscal-monetary synergy to shield the Naira from global shocks.

But it is on the diplomatic stage where President Tinubu can truly step into a continental leadership role. TRAZ Intelligence and Security Solutions Ltd. recommends three urgent diplomatic actions:

1. Propose a “Global Energy and Conflict Response Fund” at the upcoming G7 Summit, aimed at insulating vulnerable economies from geopolitical energy disruptions.

2. Advocate for Africa’s inclusion in strategic global dialogues—especially on energy and security. The G7 must work with the African Union to co-create sustainable peace strategies.

3. Host an ECOWAS emergency virtual summit, offering Abuja as a neutral venue for a Middle East peace dialogue under the proposed African Peace Corridor Initiative. Nigeria can serve as a bridge between the Global South and conflict actors.

In times of chaos, leadership must not only react—it must anticipate and propose new frameworks for global peace and resilience. Africa is no longer a spectator. With Tinubu at the helm, Nigeria has an opportunity to anchor a new era of African diplomacy.

The world is watching. It’s time for Africa to lead.

Temitope Olodo is the CEO of TRAZ Intelligence and Security Solutions Limited 

When he opened the All Nigerian Judges Conference in February 2003, then Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Mohammed Lawal Uwais, who died on 6 June 2025, six days short of his 89th birthday, lamented the fact that State Chief Judges in Nigeria “go begging for funds from their governors”; a practice pioneered by the military. It was part of a wider complaint about the historical legacies of judicial corrosion inherited from military rule. It also reflected the values of a man for whom judicial integrity was a way of life, and an independent judiciary was a constitutional mandate of the highest salience.

In 1976, Mohammed Lawal Uwais secured a loan from the Nigerian Building Society to enable him to build a modest home in Kaduna for his mother, Hajiya Hajara. At that point, Uwais had worked as a judge of the High Court for over four years, including a stint as Acting Chief Justice of the North Central (later Kaduna) State. Yet he had only one bank account with Union Bank.

Nearly thirty years later, entering his tenth year as Chief Justice of Nigeria, Uwais’ office as CJN suffered what looked like a mysterious burglary. The Chambers of the Chief Justice is supposed to be a sanctuary inside the Supreme Court of Nigeria where the CJN presides over the judicial shrine. It ought to be one of the most protected spaces in the country. The idea of a burglary in that office is so ordinarily implausible as to make the provenance of such an act easily predictable.

The burglary coincided rather conveniently with a period of intense judicialization of the political antipathy between then vice-president, Atiku Abubakar, and his principal, Olusegun Obasanjo, over the latter’s attempt to succeed himself by lifting constitutional term limits that he had sworn to preserve and protect. That political conflict spawned a succession of high-profile cases which ended up at the Supreme Court, resulting in decisions that constrained the caprice of the president. Entirely characteristic of CJN Uwais, the court in case after case, handed President Obasanjo a judicial shellacking with neither flash nor flourish.

It later turned out that the convenient burglar appeared to have been desperate to find non-existent material to dent the record of an uncompromising CJN and probably afflict him with indelible ignominy. Instead, all they could find were records indicating that the man had maintained the same bank account for over four decades and with impeccable integrity.

Few would have predicted this turn of events in the relationship between Uwais and the man who preferred him to the Supreme Court as a sprightly 43-year-old in August 1979. On 11 August 1979, the country had voted in a contentious presidential ballot in preparation for the return to civil rule after 13 years and nine months of bloody military rule. Five days later, on 16 August, the Federal Electoral Commission (FEDECO) announced Shehu Shagari of the National Party of Nigeria (NPN) the winner.

On 15 August, army general and departing military ruler Olusegun Obasanjo appointed two new Supreme Court justices. One was a Pharmacist-turned-lawyer and Attorney-General of the Federation, Augustine Nnamani. The other was Mohammed Uwais, something of a judicial prodigy. The following week, Obasanjo also appointed a new CJN, Atanda Fatayi Williams, to oversee the adjudication of the dispute over the 1979 election.

As Attorney-General of the Federation, Nnamani had authored the Electoral Act at the centre of the presidential election dispute. That precluded him from sitting on the dispute and catapulted Uwais onto the bench that would ultimately decide the destination of the presidency in 1979.

For Uwais, this guaranteed that his Supreme Court career would begin at the very deep end. It was a new high in a career that was destined for the very top. He had the good fortune of being born in Zaria, home to some of the most elite schools in the country.

The son of a railway worker from Zaria, Abdullahi Uwaisu and his wife, Hajara, Mohammed Lawal Uwais was bereaved of his biological father at the age of six in December 1942. When his mother remarried two years later to a headteacher, Mohammed Jumare, Mohammed Uwais acquired a stepfather who inspired his educational pursuits under the watchful eyes of a doting mother. His high school education was at the elite Barewa College, where he was junior to Yakubu Gowon and in the same class and good friends with Gowon’s nemesis, Murtala Mohammed.

A graduate of the Institute of Administration at Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, Uwais did his vocational legal training at the Inns of Court in London before becoming part of the pioneer set of lawyers graduated by the Nigerian Law School in 1963.

After his admission to the Nigerian Bar, Uwais returned to his civil service career, this time in the Ministry of Justice, first in the Northern Region, and then in the North Central (later Kaduna) State. Mohammed Bello, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) under whom he worked as State Counsel, became his colleague at the Supreme Court and immediate predecessor in the office of CJN. In the Ministry of Justice of the North Central State, Uwais became Solicitor General and Permanent Secretary in 1971.

The following year, under the government of his high school senior, Yakubu Gowon, Uwais was appointed Acting Judge of the High Court of the North Eastern State. He was only 36.

In 1975, when his high school mate, Murtala Mohammed, emerged as military ruler after overthrowing Gowon, Uwais was offered the office of Chief Justice of the North Central State but turned it down in favour of a more senior serving expatriate judge, A.W.E. Wheeler. When the military established the Court of Appeal the following year, Wheeler preferred him from Kaduna State to the bench of the new court at 40. When Uwais got to the Supreme Court three years later, he was only 43. He went on to serve as Justice of the Supreme Court for 27 years, setting a record of apex court durability that is unlikely to be threatened.

When Nigeria returned to civil rule in 1999 after another 15 unbroken years of military rule, Uwais had already been in office as the eighth indigenous CJN for four years. He was well-placed to stabilize the judiciary through the teething years of institutional adaptation.

Uwais spent 11 of his 27 Supreme Court years as CJN, making him the second longest in that office after Adetokunbo Ademola, the first indigenous Chief Justice, who logged a record 14 years in that office until 1972. Uwais instituted and oversaw rigorous standards of judicial discipline and performance. A mere four years into civil rule, by the beginning of 2004, over 20 judicial officers had been relieved of their positions for judicial malfeasance. Under him, the Nigerian judiciary was voted “Man of the Year” in 2005.

Two years after his retirement as CJN, Uwais came out of retirement to head a blue-ribbon panel on electoral reform in Nigeria. His characteristically thoughtful report continues to suffer neglect to the detriment of democratic sustainability in the country.

Uwais was quietly uncompromising on judicial integrity. In a profound set of interviews with Princeton University in 2009, CJN Uwais underscored the need to eliminate bribery, corruption, nepotism and political interference within the judicial systems. A committed institutionalist with a peerless recall on the evolution of Nigeria’s judiciary, Uwais declined to write any memoirs.

The father of a very senior lawyer and husband to a wife both capable and experienced as a lawyer, Uwais did not nominate any members of his family to the bench. Many of his successors in the office of CJN, who served for less than a fraction of his tenure, were compulsive nepotists in favour of family members with less than marginal qualification or ability.

Current CJN, Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, paid tribute at his death to the capacity of Mohammed Uwais to “lead without pretence, and to mentor without fanfare.” Uwais made his earthly exit on Friday, 6 June 2025, entirely in keeping with how he lived his life - without fanfare.

That your dream is coming back alive! Every part of your life will be healed today. Yes, the bones will rise again! What can be more debased, ashy and dead like the dry bones in that valley in the book of Ezekiel? Tell me. But the Spirit of God told the man of God to speak to them. These bones were old, dry, scattered and in a valley. Jesus Christ! They were indeed in their final resting place. Case closed! All hope lost. But with God it cannot be over until he says it’s over. He is the God of all flesh and nothing, I repeat, nothing is impossible to him. There maybe things you have concluded in your life, or waiting for, life is coming back to it today! I don’t know how, but I know who will do it. He has commanded me to speak to you and I am already doing that. The dry bones were to become alive again but Ezekiel must speak to it. He must ignore the condition (dryness), history (old) and environment (scattered) and speak by faith and obedience. God always overrules all these qualifications. I don’t care about you condition. I don’t care how long you have been in it and I don’t care where you are now or the things happening around you. In obedience to the word and leading of God I speak to you situation now. Be free in the name of Jesus! Be restored! Let’s read this divine drama in the book of Ezekiel Chapter 37:1- 12: 

  “The LORD took hold of me, and I was carried away by the Spirit of the LORD to a valley filled with bones. He led me around among the old, dry bones that covered the valley floor. They were scattered everywhere across the ground. Then he asked me, ‘Son of man, can these bones become living people again?’ ‘O Sovereign LORD,’ I replied, ‘you alone know the answer to that.’ Then he said to me, ‘Speak to these bones and say, ‘Dry bones, listen to the word of the LORD! This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Look! I am going to breathe into you and make you live again! I will put flesh and muscles on you and cover you with skin. I will put breath into you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the LORD’ 

  So I spoke these words, just as he told me. Suddenly as I spoke, there was a rattling noise all across the valley. The bones of each body came together and attached themselves as they had been before. Then as I watched, muscles and flesh formed over the bones. Then skin formed to cover their bodies, but they still had no breath in them. Then he said to me, ‘Speak to the winds and say: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Come, O breath, from the four winds! Breathe into these dead bodies so that they may live again.’

    So I spoke as he commanded me, and the wind entered the bodies, and they began to breathe. They all came to life and stood up on their feet – a great army of them.”  

  Speak, speak and speak man of God. Yes, the power is in your tongue. God has deposited it there. He simply wants you to be like him. Open your mouth. You are what you confess. Continue speaking to that situation. You will eventually speak it into existence. Don’t give up! He spoke and the world that was in chaotic and formless began to take shape. He spoke and the things that were not came to be. He spoke and the light came out of darkness. When we speak, when we speak the word according to direction of the Sprit, great things happen - miracles, healing, signs and wonders take place. When we speak the dead will come back to life, the captives will be delivered and their ashes will turn to beauty.  Ezekiel obeyed the Spirit and the collection of dry, old and scattered bones came back to life. Praise God! Yes, the word of God said that as God is so we are. Every dead part of your life, your dream, your vision, your ministry, your relationship, your ministry will come back to life today in the name of Jesus! Stop listening to your experience, your sight, your history and your environment. But focus on the word of God that you are reading today. What he did then he will do again. He has not changed. Yes, those dry bones in your life shall live again! What is about to happen in your life will defy all logic and explanations. I am already hearing the rattling noise in that valley. Praise God! Get my book / audiobooks Power of Midnight Prayer by Gabriel Agbo now. Till next week, God bless! Share this message.

In Nigeria, democracy is backsliding because of the frightening collapse of responsible, transparent and accountable governance under the watch of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC) said today, as the nation marks Democracy Day and 26 years of continuous democratic governance.

Weakening of Democratic Institutions 

“Right now, the nation’s democratic institutions are at their weakest points and consistently failing the people, while authoritarian tendencies continue to rise. Failure of leadership, erosion of public trust, rising corruption, impunity, compromised electoral processes, and shrinking civic space are some of the key indicators of deliberate undermining of democratic values. 

Political leaders must retrace their steps to safeguard the democratic rule that was fiercely fought for,” said Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, Executive Director of CISLAC.

“Instead of building on the gains of democratic rule of the past, the country is regressing into a governance model defined by unaccountable leadership, weak institutions, killings and absolute exclusion of citizens from decision-making,” Rafsanjani added.

Electoral Credibility and Voter Trust

CISLAC is concerned over Nigeria’s deteriorating electoral credibility, noting that elections have become mere exercises in futility for many citizens, marked by violence, voter suppression, vote buying, and judicial interference in electoral outcomes—creating political banditry aimed solely at state capture for personal gains.

“There is widespread voter apathy and growing distrust in the electoral system. Political parties lack ideology and discipline, functioning merely as platforms for elite bargains and transactional personal gains,” Rafsanjani stated.

CISLAC stresses the urgent need for electoral and political party reforms to restore public trust in Nigeria’s democratic processes.

Corruption and Lack of Oversight at State Level

While anti-corruption efforts at the federal level are frequently touted, CISLAC is deeply troubled by the pervasive and largely unchecked corruption at the state level.

“Many state governors operate without transparency, supported by compromised state assemblies and an almost total lack of oversight. We must decentralize anti-corruption efforts and empower state-level institutions to function independently,” said Rafsanjani.

Judiciary and Rule of Law

The judiciary is also under pressure, as delays in access to justice, conflicting court judgments, and perceived political interference continue to undermine the rule of law.

“A functional democracy depends on an impartial and independent judiciary. But what we see today in Nigeria is a system under pressure from political actors, lacking financial autonomy, and rapidly losing public confidence,” Rafsanjani warned.

CISLAC calls for comprehensive judicial reform to ensure timely, impartial justice and uphold the supremacy of the rule of law.

Persistent Insecurity and Failure of National Strategy

“Despite repeated promises, insecurity continues unabated. Citizens are not safe, and the government has yet to present a coherent national security strategy that addresses both symptoms and root causes,” CISLAC said.

The federal government must adopt a people-centred security approach that prioritizes civilian protection and addresses long-standing causes of conflict.

Economic Mismanagement and Worsening Poverty

CISLAC is alarmed by the continued economic hardship facing millions of Nigerians, despite government claims of saving trillions of naira from the removal of fuel subsidies. While the removal was presented as a necessary economic reform, citizens have been left to suffer skyrocketing inflation, unaffordable prices for food and transport, and a lack of basic public services.

“The so-called fuel subsidy savings have not translated into tangible relief for ordinary Nigerians,” said CISLAC. “Instead, more people have been plunged into poverty, unemployment remains high, and there is no clear strategy for economic recovery or social protection.”

The lack of transparency and accountability in managing these funds is widening the trust deficit between government and citizens.

Clampdown on Civic Space and Civil Liberties

CISLAC strongly condemns the continued clampdowns on civic voices, peaceful protesters, journalists, activists, and civil society organizations working on human rights and anti-corruption in Nigeria.

“The arrest and harassment of young Nigerians calling for good governance, and the intimidation of NGOs like Amnesty International, show a disturbing intolerance for accountability. This shrinking civic space is incompatible with any credible democratic system,” said Rafsanjani.

Call for Reforms to Rescue Nigeria’s Democratic Future

As Nigeria celebrates another Democracy Day, CISLAC stressed the need for concrete, deliberate, and far-reaching reforms to rescue the country’s democratic project.

“Democracy is more than elections. It must demonstrate good governance, strong institutions, protection of rights, and active civic participation. We call on the Nigerian government to end the ongoing repression, embrace people-oriented reforms, and restore the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic system,” Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani concluded.

In a June 9, 2025, interview with TVC, Maryam Abacha claimed that the more than $3.8 billion recovered from the United States, United Kingdom, France, Switzerland, and other countries, popularly known as the "Abacha loot," was actually money her husband had "saved" for Nigeria. According to her, these funds inexplicably "vanished" soon after General Sani Abacha's death in 1998.

"Who is the witness to the monies being stashed away?" she asked pointedly. "Did anyone see the signatures or concrete evidence of money being hidden abroad? Those funds my husband set aside for Nigeria disappeared within months, yet no one discusses that."

Echoing Maryam Abacha's revisionist narrative, retired Major Hamza Al-Mustapha, Abacha’s former Chief Security Officer, asserted in an interview with BBC Hausa Service on June 12, 2025, that what we now call "Abacha loot" was actually intended to boost Nigeria’s entrepreneurial spirit so that businesspeople could provide essential goods and services at affordable prices, like Libya’s economic policies under Muammar Gaddafi.

"The funds weren't deposited under Abacha's personal name," Al-Mustapha emphasized.

These attempts at reframing history were thoroughly addressed in my May 23, 2020, column titled, "History of Abacha’s Theft is Being Rewritten Before Our Eyes," reproduced below:

In her historical fictional narrative titled “The Lost Sisterhood,” Danish-Canadian writer Anne Fortier quotes one of her characters as saying that “those who control the present can rewrite the past.” This is playing out right before us in what I called the curious posthumous deodorization of Abacha’s grand larceny in a May 7, 2020, social media update.

 Loyalists and beneficiaries of Sani Abacha’s dictatorship control Nigeria’s present, and they are trying to exploit this privilege to rewrite the sordid past of their benefactor while the rest of the country is fixated on other issues.

Muhammadu Buhari has always been invested in cleansing Abacha’s appallingly grubby reputation as a murderous larcener. During the 10th-year-rememberance anniversary of Abacha in Kano in June 2008, for instance, Muhammadu Buhari remarked that, contrary to settled narratives in the Nigerian public sphere, Abacha never stole from Nigeria.

This 2008 Buhari declaration birthed a fringe, outlandish but nonetheless popular narrative in northern Nigeria that Abacha’s reputation as a ruthless crook who stole billions of Nigeria’s patrimony and salted it away in Euro-American financial institutions was the handiwork of Olusegun Obasanjo who was taking a posthumous pound of flesh from Abacha for imprisoning him.

In the aftermath of the unrelenting repatriation of what has now been called the “Abacha loot” from Western banks, a new farcical story line was fabricated, which is that Abacha actually “saved” the money for Nigeria for a rainy day!

Apart from Buhari’s public defense of Abacha’s larceny in 2008, the posthumous discursive purification of Abacha’s image as a greedy, conscienceless thief was largely informal and took place on the margins of polite society.

Abubakar Malami, Buhari’s Attorney General and Minister of Justice, officialized the revisionism of Abacha’s thievery.  In a May 4, 2020, tweet, Malami described repatriated Abacha loot as “Abacha assets.” “I am happy to confirm that the Federal Republic of Nigeria on Monday 4th May, 2020 received $311,797,866.11 of the Abacha assets repatriated from the United States and the Bailiwick of Jersey,” he wrote.

The change from “Abacha loot” to “Abacha assets” was a willful rhetorical move designed to lend official credence to the hitherto fringy, informal but nevertheless robust narrative that Abacha didn’t steal Nigeria’s money.

Led by Sahara Reporter’s Omoyele Sowore, Nigerians on social media pounced on Malami’s tweet and compelled him to retract his incompetent attempt at revisionism. In a woolly, shamefaced, error-ridden retraction, Malami said, “It is to be noted that by way of antecedence [sic] that Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN has been consistently describing the recovered funds as ‘Abacha loot’ at several fora during the process of recovery of the looted funds, particularly before the eventual repatriation of the funds.”

But it didn’t stop there. Buba Galadima, a former Buhari protégé who is now at loggerheads with him because he has been shut out of the orbit of governance, has taken off from where Malami backed off. In a May 17, 2020, interview with The Nation, he said the estimated $5 billion Sani Abacha stole from Nigeria's trough was actually "saved" for Nigeria—on the advice of Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein—in anticipation of US sanction against Nigeria so that "even if Nigeria's account was blocked by the US, there won't be panic."

Galadima, who was Director General of the National Maritime Authority during the Abacha junta, said the notion that Abacha stole from Nigeria’s till is “based on ignorance.” When an editor forwarded excerpts of the interview to me on WhatsApp, I’d dismissed it as fabricated. I was wrong.

As I pointed out on social media on May 17, the idea that the Abacha loot was “saved” for Nigeria stands logic on its head, considering that Abacha "saved" some of that money in the US whose impending blockage he was allegedly plotting against. How do you "hide" something from someone by "saving" it in his house?

Plus, even Buhari, the choirmaster of the Abacha sanitization chorus, has grudgingly conceded that his former boss stole from Nigeria’s public treasury. For example, in an April 27, 2016, tweet, Buhari said, “Nigeria is awaiting receipt from Swiss Govt. of $320 million, identified as illegally taken from Nigeria under Abacha.”

“Illegally taken” is merely a synonym for stealing. In a February 4, 2020, statement from the US Embassy in Nigeria about the repatriation of the “Abacha loot” from US banks, the US government was unambiguous in stating how the money got to its banks.

“The monies were laundered by [Abacha’s] family, including his sons Ibrahim and Mohammed, and a number of close associates,” the statement from the US reads. “The laundering operation extended to the United States and European jurisdictions such as the UK, France, Germany, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and Luxembourg.”

One of those associates who helped Abacha launder huge sums of money is Kebbi State Governor Atiku Bagudu to whom the Buhari regime wanted to hand over $100 million of the recovered money, according to Bloomberg, but for the resistance of the US government. If the money was “saved” for Nigeria, why did Buhari want to hand over some of it to a person who has been identified as an accomplice in its theft?

The US Department of Justice identified Bagudu as one of Abacha’s networks of proteges that, “embezzled, misappropriated and extorted billions from the government of Nigeria.”

It isn’t only the US that unequivocally describes the repatriated funds as the product of Abacha’s criminal despoliation of Nigeria’s resources. 

In a June 12, 2017, Radio France International report titled “Swiss make deal with Nigeria on final payout for Abacha loot,” we learn that “The cash was originally frozen in Luxembourg and confiscated by the Swiss as part of a criminal investigation into Abba Abacha, Sani Abacha’s son. Switzerland had already returned some 700 million dollars following appeals by Nigeria.”

In a “Stolen Asset Recovery Initiative - Asset Recovery Watch” bulletin, there’s also a case against “Family of former President Sani Abacha,” where we read that, “In 2006, the World Bank was involved in a similar framework, providing institutional support for the return and use of approx. $723 million in public funds that had been corruptly diverted by General Abacha.”

Not all the money Abacha stole has been recovered. Of the $5 billion that Abacha looted and squirreled away—or "saved" for Nigeria, to use Galadimian logic—in the banks of countries that wanted to "block" Nigeria's money, $3.624 billion has been recovered so far. Can Galadima help Nigeria recover the rest of the money since he appears to know where the money has been "saved"?

The purveyors of the transparently fraudulent narrative that Abacha “saved” money for Nigeria in foreign banks which his detractors have decided to call “loot” should be told that they can’t rewrite history.

People, mostly young northerners who hadn’t come of age when Abacha’s evil regime reigned, have sent me private messages asking that I help stop the “demonization” of Abacha. For them, it’s a regional and religious project. But that’s misguided. Islam teaches us to be fair, just, and truthful. It doesn’t teach us to lie to salvage the image of a dead thief among us.

 The unvarnished truth is that Abacha did NOT save money for Nigeria; he STOLE from it with conscienceless glee. It’s distressing that one has to even say this in spite of the clear evidence that stares us in the face.

A few months ago, I saw Mrs Maryam Abacha at the Abuja Continental Hotel (formerly Sheraton Hotel). She was about to alight from a car when I caught a glimpse of her. For a 78-year-old woman, she still looked elegant and gorgeous — nearly 27 years after she was shorn of the power and the glory of being Nigeria’s first lady. I imagined how she has coped with the tragedy of losing many loved ones, including her husband and two of her sons, Ibrahim and Abdullahi, over the years.Even though I was never a fan of her husband who ruled Nigeria with maximum brutality between 1993 and 1998, I still had an urge to greet her —out of courtesy for an elderly woman.But I let it pass.

The next time I would see the woman was on TV. There was nothing elegant or gorgeous in her words. She only reopened old wounds. This is one of those instances when silence is golden. If Mrs Abacha was talking to toddlers and teens, I would have understood her: they might be unable to counter her. After all, that is how history is taught in some parts of Nigeria nowadays.People make up“alternative facts” and pass their imaginations and fabrications to the next generation. But she was speaking to anaudience that included those of us who witnessed the murderous and plundering regime of her husband. Some of us will not allow her to re-write history. No, she can’t gaslight us.

Regarding the billions of dollars looted by her husband, she demanded to know who witnessed the plunder, as if she was talking to a congregation of retards. “Who is the witness of the monies that were being stashed?Did you see the signature or the evidence of any monies stashed abroad? And the monies that my husband kept vanished in a few months. People are not talking about that.” She evensent posers toAbacha’s critics: “Why are you blaming somebody? Is that tribalism or a religious problem or what is the problem with Nigerians?Where did he steal the money from? Where would he have stolen the money from?And because Nigerians are fools, they listen to everything.”

I don’t know where to start from. But before we get to the pillaging of the national treasury by Abacha and his associates, we should first attend to her “tribalism” and “religious” problem. For the record, it was Gen Abdulsalami Abubakar, a northerner and a Muslim, who started the process of identifying and recovering the Abacha loot. In July 1998, he set up a special investigation panel (SIP), headed by Mr Peter Gana, then a deputy commissioner at the special fraud unit (SFU) of the police force. Within four months, the SIP found evidence of organised plundering at the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN). The panel sent a preliminary report to the government, detailing the financial crimes.

The looting was well orchestrated through the office of the national security adviser (ONSA). Mr Enrico Monfrini, the Swiss lawyer engaged by President Olusegun Obasanjo to go after the looted funds, detailed the activities of the “Abacha criminal organisation” in an article published in 2008. There was a pattern to the looting: ONSAwould senddubious funding requests for “security operations” to Abacha who would then authorise the CBN to release the monies. Thefunds were directly remitted in cash ($1.131 billion and £413 million) and in travellers’ cheques ($50 million and £3.5 million) by the CBN to ONSA, who then organised for direct delivery to Abacha at home.

According to Monfrini, the funds would thereafter belaunderedthrough Nigerian banks or by Nigerian or foreign businessmen to offshore accounts belonging to Mohammed, his eldest surviving son, Abba (Mohammed’s brother),Abdulkadir Abacha (Abacha’s brother) and Abubakar Bagudu (an investment banker). Monfrini said there were 36 instances that funds totalling $386 million were wired by the CBN“to foreign bank accounts abroad held by offshore companies belonging either to members of the Abacha criminal organisation or to Nigerian or foreign businessmen, who then remitted the same sums to members of the organisation”. I don’t know how this can be justified.

Recovery started duringinvestigation by the SIP. Several assets, including the Cowry House on Akin Adesola Road, Victoria Island, Lagos, and physical cash were seized by the federal government. Numerous looted assets were also identified, forcing the Abubakar administration to promulgate the Forfeiture of Assets, Etc (Certain Persons) Decree No. 53 of May 26, 1999 to give legal backing to the recovery and restitution process. This law, now an Act of Parliament, ordered the confiscation of real estate, movable assets, and cash acquired and held illegally by Abacha’s associates, including the late Alhaji Abdulazeez Arisekola Alao, the Aare Musulumi of Yorubaland and well-known Abacha man.

Within a short time, over $800 million was returned to the government.Growing in confidence and capitalising on European human rights laws, the Abachas started placing legal hurdles on the way of the Nigerian government to stop further recovery. The government decided to start criminal proceedings against them and their associates. The criminal proceedings and mutual assistance proceedings in Europe in 2000 forced the Abachas and their associates to disclose that they had $600 million stashed in Switzerland, $630 million in Luxembourg and $200 million in Liechtenstein. They had violated the decree by failing to disclose those assets and they were caught pants down.

Monfrini succeeded in freezing almost all the identified assets of the “Abacha criminal organisation” worldwide. It was discovered that over 20 companies paid bribes at the request of Abacha, in additionto insanely inflated contracts awarded to companies controlled by his family. Abacha was the designated beneficial owner of just three of the over 100 accounts used by the “organisation”. The designated beneficial owners of the rest were his sons and various cohorts, both civilian and military. Obasanjo had to enter into a global settlement agreement(GSA) with the Abachas in 2004 to encourage them to cough up all the looted funds in exchange for immunity from prosecution.

After Obasanjo left office, the Abachas began to play games to stall on the recovery and restitution of the remaining loot. Liechtenstein, in particular, was reluctant toreturn the €185 million traced to its jurisdiction because of the suits filed by the Abachas, even though the funds had been frozen by court orders since 2000. It was established by investigators that €179 million was a bribe paid by Ferrostaal AG of Germany, one of the world’s largest steel traders, when Abacha awarded them the contract for the construction of the Aluminium Smelter Company of Nigeria (ALSCON), Ikot Abasi, Akwa Ibom state. The Germanspaid the bribe to Liechtenstein accounts owned by the Abachas.

If Mrs Abacha is truly looking for the “witnesses”tothe stashing by her husband, she does not need to look far away from home. More so, the facts are documented in court proceedings in Nigeria and abroad as well as in an agreement signed with the government by her children. The Abachas were even allowed to keep some assets under the “complete waiver” granted by Obasanjo just to get them to make full disclosure of what disappeared from the CBN safes into their pockets.Since 1999, her family has coughed up over $2 billion of the loot traced to them, not forgetting the about $500 million returned under President Muhammadu Buhari — who once said Abacha was not a thief.

Mrs Abacha repeated the fable that her husband left robust reserves that vanished “within months” after his death.I believe this myth has come to stay, but the real fact is that when Abacha died in June 1998, our foreign reserves were about $6 billion and we had outstanding FX obligations in excess of $3 billion. There were several commitments, including hosting the 1999 FIFA World Youth Championship, funding NNPC JV cash calls and repaying Paris Club debts, that needed to be met. Crude oil wasaround $10 a barrel and OPEC had reduced production quotas. The rosy picture painted of “robust reserves” is urban legendnot backed by facts. But it is a tale to be told forever.

Mrs Abacha does not like the fact that people are still criticising her husband 27 years after death disrobed him as our maximum ruler and potential life president. She,apparently, has a small point. She believes the husband has a right to be forgotten. She, indeed, has a small point. It is not as if looting started and ended with her husband. It is not as if Nigeria has been governed by leaders with clean hands and pure hearts since Abacha died. After all, many of those who colluded with him and enabled his repressive reign have since been rehabilitated into the society and celebrated as elder statesmen. So why should Abacha still be demonised after 27 years? She, in fact, has a small point.

The problem, I think, is that her husband was in a class of his own. He did more damage to our national psyche than many are ready to give him credit for.He set sickening precedents for subsequent governments. The sleazy foundation did not die with him: it, instead, became a culture. Under Abacha, we had dual exchange rates: N22 officially and N80 on the streets. The black market rate was almost four times higher than the official!Arbitrage became a new economy. The free moneywas used to fill the mouths of the sycophantscampaigning for Abacha to transmute from military to civilian president. It was the progenitor of the insane arbitrage between 2015 and 2023.

Under Abacha, our refineries went comatose and “turnaround maintenance”contracts became an oil block on its own while fuel importation was embraced as the business of choice for his family members and associates.Subsequent governments came and discovered the dual honeypot of “turnaround maintenance” contracts and fuel importation. They refused to let go. Abacha showed the way by sowing the seed. Do I need to remind Mrs Abacha of the importation of “foul fuel” that damaged car engines across the country? Or do I really need to remind her of the assassinations and bombings — and the human rights abuses that turned Nigeria into a gigantic gulag under Abacha?

Nonetheless, I do not believe any human being is completely bad. In my books, Abacha had the best record in the management of the gains of subsidy removal. He set up the Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund thatdid tangible projects across Nigeria. Also, I will forever give him a thumbs-up for accelerating the take-off of the Nigeria LNG. But he did far more evil than good. Today, when people try to re-write history bysaying that Abacha ran the economy better, I chuckle. Memory of pain does not last. That is why some women keep visiting the labour room. But the perfidy and pains of the murderous Abacha years can never be wished away by his widow. Or his supporters. Never. Ever.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

UNCLE SAM IS 90

I was quite young when I was appointed Saturday Editor of THISDAY in 2002 by Mr Nduka Obaigbena. A senior journalist asked me: “Simon, you have risen so early in your career. I wonder how much longer you will remain in journalism.” I smiled and offered him a simple answer: “Uncle Sam.” He got my drift instantly. Prince Sam Amuka-Pemu, whom we call “Uncle Sam”, is the publisher of Vanguard. He has been a journalist all his life, edited big publications, and written unputdownable columns. He has produced leaders in the media and other fields. He has never joined a political party or taken a political appointment, yet he is a fulfilled man. Uncle Sam remains an inspiration even at 90. Hooray!

ONE-PARTY STUFF

Addressing the national assembly on Democracy Day, President Tinubu defended the mass defection to the All Progressives Congress (APC), insisting that he believes in the multi-party system. I have my view on these defections which I will write on later. However, not being one to resist an opportunity to throw a few stones at the opposition, Tinubu added: “Political parties fearful of members leaving may be better served by examining their internal processes and affairs rather than fearfully conjuring up demons that do not exist. For me, I would say try your best to put your house in order. I will not help you do so.” And now this: “It is, indeed, a pleasure to witness you in such disarray.” Ouch!

ADAMS AND PEACE

There was a major drama on Wednesday at the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Lagos, when Senator Adams Oshiomhole and Air Peace locked horns. What we know is that Oshiomhole, former labour leader, embarked on “aluta” when he was told he arrived late for his flight and would not be boarded. What we are unsure of is his allegation that the staff were extortingother passengers to board them despite the lateness. What we know, based on video evidence, is that the former Edo governor blocked the entrance gate and delayed the flight. It is not impossible that passengers were asked for a bribe (this is Nigeria) but the ex-APC chairman did not conduct himself well. Unbecoming.

NO COMMENT

According to those tracking the development, seven places have been named after President Bola Tinubu since he was inaugurated in May 2023. At this rate, there will be at least 14 places named after him by the time he finishes his first term. For sure, he did not invent it. In fact, it has become a culture to be naming things after sitting governors and presidents. Many commentators think immortalisation, as we call it, should only be after they have left office. But that is not even what is amusing me today. A commenter wrote on X: “INEC will be announcing the 2027 Presidential election result from (the renamed) Bola Ahmed Tinubu International Conference Centre.” Hahahaha.

Thank you, Mr. President. If any seer had predicted in 1993 that a day would come when the heroes of the June 12 struggle would be honoured, such a crystal gazer would have been labelled a fraud. Everything was loaded against the pro-democracy groups. Many of those operating under the radar lived in trepidation. The fear of Col. Omenka, the dread of every editor and reporter, was the beginning of wisdom. I remember that on one occasion when he sent his boys to scatter Academy Press on the suspicion that the next edition of MONTHLY LIFE was going to carry a story not favourable to the Abacha government, I was simply whisked to Apapa. Some people taken away like that never returned.
The Abacha season was the era the vultures ate.

Restoration

The restoration of June 12 to our national remembrance happened two years ago when President Muhammadu Buhari, on the prodding of his political allies led by Senator Bola Tinubu (now Nigerian President), kept a date with history by acknowledging the truth about the 1993 elections squarely won by Chief MKO Abiola. He apologised to the pro-democracy groups on behalf of Nigeria and bestowed national honours on the winner and his running mate, Babagana Kingibe. Buhari also changed Nigeria’s Democracy Day from May 29 (the day the military handed over to democratically elected leaders) to June 12, the day the 1993 election that would have ushered in Abiola’s presidency, was conducted.

Last year, President Tinubu hosted some programmes to mark the day, culminating in a dinner well attended by veterans of the democracy struggle. The 2025 edition, however, witnessed the rolling out of a honours list in which various categories of national awards were conferred on many of those who had been in the trenches during the democratic struggle. I congratulate those who made the list. It’s payback time for their sacrifice. But there are many names missing. The presidency has promised to compile a fuller list.

I was particularly delighted by the recognition given to late Prof. Humphrey Nwosu, the man who conducted the election. In my advocacy on the matter last year when Nwosu was still alive, I wrote as follows: “Abiola would not have been the hero he turned out to be if Nwosu had not conducted the most transparent election in Nigeria. No election before or after that epochal electoral exercise has come close to Nwosu’s Option A4 in transparency and acceptability!” Better late than never!

Col. Abubakar Dangiwa
Another prominent person who is yet to be accorded the recognition due to him is Col. Abubakar Dangiwa Umar (rtd), an officer who lost his commission because of his insistence that his bosses do the right thing. In an interview he granted TELL magazine, which I quoted in my article titled, “For Abubakar Dangiwa Umar @ 75”, he had made several revelations about the plot to bury the June 12 agitation.
Excerpts: What eventually transported Umar to the pantheon of authentic role models, instructively, wasn’t his soldiering heroics or administrative ingenuity but his loyalty to principles and devil-may-care courage in confronting his bosses at a time when such a posture could have led to a kangaroo court-martial and, possibly, summary execution.
In a rare interview with TELL magazine, he made some startling revelations… In the midst of all the sacrifice and personal risk, there were people who still thought that Umar’s steadfastness was too good to be true:
“Sadly enough, people keep wondering how, for goodness sake, can a Fulani man from the Sokoto royal family really fight for the interest of a Yoruba man (over the June 12 issue). There are people that are sceptical because of my geographical extraction, because of who I am, my personality. They cannot believe that I could support the cause of June 12 if that means swearing in a Yoruba man. What they don’t understand, the point they miss, is that one is not fighting purely for a Yoruba man. One is fighting for justice. One is fighting for truth and truth really has a universal language.”

NADECO
The National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) was, at a time, the main umbrella under whose shade many democratic activists found accommodation. President Tinubu himself sponsored many of NADECO’s activities. Indeed, at last year’s Democracy Day dinner, Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi disclosed that several of his trips to promote the democratic cause abroad were sponsored by Asiwaju Tinubu.
There is no reason why ALL the 49 founding signatories at the formation of NADECO would not be on the honours list. The 49 signatories were: Chief Michael Adekunle Ajasin (Leader), Mallam Lawal Dambazzau, Commodore Ebitu Ukiwe, Chief Anthony Enahoro (Deputy Leader), Major General Adeyinka Adebayo (rtd.), Chief Bola Ige, Commodore Dan Suleiman, Dr Chukwuemeka Ezeife, Professor Anya O. Anya, Colonel Yohanna Madaki, Reverend Father Moses Adasu, Dr Beko Ransome-Kuti, Reverend Tunji Adebiyi, Chief Ade Ojo, Chief Ralph Obioha, Chief Empire Kanu, Chief Michael Anyiam, Dr. Sola Soile, Vice Admiral Akin Aduwo, Chief E. Duru, Mr. Nick Dazzang, Mr. Labaran Maku, Dr A. A. Akingba and Mr Babas Eko Oyekanmi.
Also on the list were: Mr Alex Ayatolla, Mrs Sarah Jubril, Alhaji Ganiyu Dawodu, Mr O. P. Edodo, Mr A. Barber, Otunba Olabiyi Durojaiye, Chief Olusegun Osoba, Chief John Odigie-Oyegun, Prof. Bolaji Akinyemi, Alhaji Mohammed Siraj Hamza, Dr. Wahab Dosunmu, Otunba Aboyade Cole, Major General Olufemi Olutoye (rtd), Chief Sobo Sowemimo, Dr. Steve Achema, Chief Olaniwun Ajayi, Chief Olu Falae, Brigadier-General Jonah Jang, Chief Abraham Adesanya, Chief Ayo Adebanjo, Mr. Alao Aka-Bashorun, Mr. Emmanuel Njiwah, Chief Vincent Nwizugbo and Dr. Uma Eleazu.

The list of other prominent NADECO leaders would include Mr. Ayo Opadokun, Mr. Wale Osun, General Alani Akinrinade, Femi Falana, Senator Bola Tinubu, Lam Adesina, Chief Segun Adegoke, Chief Adebayo Adefarati, Clement Nwankwo, Rear Admiral Ndubuisi Kanu and Senator Kofo Bucknor Akerele to among others (Source: “Battle Lines: Adventures in Power” by Olusegun Osoba).

In my piece last year, I also remembered some of those whose paths crossed mine as we navigated the treacherous minefield of Nigerian journalism and social activism at the time: If I may remember some of those whose paths crossed mine in those days of goggled evil: Nze Mark Odu, B.K. Ogala, Moshood Fayemiwo, Jimmy Imo, Joe Igbokwe, Eddy Okparaoji, among others.

Bagauda Kaltho
The joy that President Tinubu has put in the hearts of some activists’ families is unquantifiable. Take the case of the family of Bagauda Kaltho, an investigative journalist, who was eliminated by agents of the military government while claiming that he wasn’t in their custody. Terrible things happened in those days and it is good to remind ourselves of those things so that we don’t fall back into those traps. Military rule is Golgotha. That aberration ate some of the most productive years of my generation.
Bagauda Kaltho, an investigative journalist as good as they came in those competitive days, was kidnapped and murdered by agents of the military government. Then, they spread all sorts of scandalous stories about him hoping to thereby duck the scent of death hanging over them. That was a couple of days after Ken Saro-Wiwa had been judicially murdered by the same military government. Those were, indeed, the days of the vultures.
Kaltho’s wife was full of praises for the recognition accorded her late husband at last. “My husband disappeared sometime between late 1996 and early 1997 in the line of duty. This national honour is not only a validation of my husband’s unwavering commitment to truth, justice, and the defence of democratic ideals, but also a powerful reminder that the sacrifices of those who speak truth to power are never forgotten,” she said. And I say it’s payback time for goodness.

Of all the nations that profess an embrace of democracy, Nigeria has had a field day of celebrations in recent times. Last year, we celebrated 25 years (a quarter of a century) of the return of democracy from over four decades of military autocracy. In 1999, Nigerian history and providence chased off a stubborn military  hegemony and replaced it with a hurried and untidy transfer of power to elected civilian authority.

More recently, we have just been celebrating two years of the Tinubu presidency, the 5th  such dispensation in the post military period. And last Thursday, once again in an annual  ritual that has been in place since after the annulment of the June 12, 1993 election, we observed yet anther episode of the annual June 12

Democracy Day. Prior to now, Democracy Day used to be  on May 29th, the day Nigeria returned to democracy after the decades of military rule. Political pressure and expediency has since consecrated June 12 into a national Democracy Day over and above May 29th.

In all this jumble of anniversaries, there is a sense in which Nigeria may have become one nation in which democracy both as a concept and national event has become almost a deity with an annual worship calendar. Different national leaderships now make it a duty to celebrate and observe the various democracy anniversaries if only to remind themselves of their fundamental commitment to developing and consolidating a democratic culture.

For a nation that has spent the better part of its post- colonial history under non-democratic rule, these fetish observances can be justified. From 1966 to 1999, the greater part of Nigerian history was spent under the jackboot of military leaders. Of the 15 leaders that the nation has been under since after1960, 7 have been pure military officers thrown up by coups in one form or the other. In terms of duration of reign, of the 65 years since after independence in 1960, only roughly 46 years have been spent under sporadic civilian democracies, interrupted, except in the last 25 years, by military interventions.

Of course, no one can celebrate our long military interregnums. Yet no one in their right mind can dismiss the years of military rule as completely wasted. On the contrary, it can be argued that the greatest and boldest acts of nation building in Nigeria took place under the military. The founding fathers hardly began the task of national building. But their single most important achievement was the procurement of flag and anthem independence in 1960. The edifice they inherited from the colonialists was an unfinished business. It was an arrangement, not a viable nation state.

They left us a tripartite ethnic behemoth. Hegemonic peer group conflicts led to ethnic tension and eventually a sad and wasteful civil war. The military intervention that followed, though sad in itself, led to many nation building initiatives. There was the creation of states from 12 to the present 36 state structure of the federation. The military dismantled the hegemonic four region structure  and reduced the lure of regional hegemony and antagonism. The military also began the process of integration of the nation by de-sectionalising the security forces. A unified national police and military command structure was created for the nation. Under the new arrangement, personnel from all over the country were deployed to serve all over the country irrespective of their states of origin, thus ending the threat of regional hegemony and ethnicisation of national security institutions which was at the root of the crisis and civil war. 

More strategically important, it was the military under the leadership of General Yakubu Gowon that pioneered the establishment of key national unity institutions. The National Youth Service Corp (NYSC) Scheme, now in its 52nd year was established to forge in young Nigerian graduates a new sense of national unity. There was also the establishment of Unity Secondary schools to offer secondary school education to Nigerian children in their formative years while they embraced a system of national merit moderated by a sense of balance and unity. Children were encouraged to attend these unity schools all over the nation to embrace national unity while growing up under a regime of meritocracy that also allowed for a certain equality of opportunities.

Similar nation building initiatives like the Civil Service Reforms, the Federal Character Principle,  quota system and balancing of opportunities in the public services were also initiated. While the policies to pursue a balanced federation were pursued, there was an allowance for the states as federating units to aspire to their individual attainments to excel and develop along their own lines and at their own pace.

However, the mechanisms of nation building adopted by the military were not always well thought out. In an attempt to balance the federation and unify aspirations, the military tended to see the nation more as a barrack than as an organic  polity with inherent human diversity and internal differences. The military tended to apply a uniform template  which did not provide for the difference of culture and rate of development of different parts of the country. This has of course led to a certain uneven development among different zones of the country. But it does not invalidate the principle of pursuing  the challenge of nation building.

The years of democratic intervention in our national history have had their inherent values as well. They have posited a political counter culture to the years of military autocracy. By its nature, military rule is inherently restrictive in terms of citizen freedoms and rights.

The military did not allow the freedoms of expression, association and belief to flourish. A nation, no matter how well structured, is first and foremost an organic  domain of freedom. When people are not accorded their full rights in a free society, development and national structure mean little. The military restricted freedom in the national space to their unified vision and garrison perspective.

With hindsight, we cannot forget too soon our experience under the military jackboot. The military beat us up if they felt we were not observing garrison discipline. They occasionally  flogged us with horsewhips for minor traffic offences. They curtailed the freedom of the press, did not allow the flowering of civil society organizations nor allow the flowering of ideas that were antithetical or opposed to the dominance of their authoritarian ethos. You dared not disagree with government. Dissent was treasonous. A society that restricted ideas was bound to die instalmentally.  Under the military, our nation was dying gradually as a union of ideals. That was the tragedy that befell Nigeria in the decades of military rule.

However, the spells of democratic civil rule that intervened allowed our people to exhale once again. Due process replaced impunity. Debate replaced ultimatums and commands. Institutions like National and State Assemblies provided avenues for policies and programmes of government to be subjected to interrogation and cross examination. Government lost its magisterial absolutism as elected officials who were accountable to the people replaced arbitrarily selected officialdom.

As against the prevalence of decrees and other forms of arbitrary rule, the moments of democratic rule have allowed for the return of formal legislation at national, state and local government levels as the sources of legislations to guide the making of laws for  governance.

Democracy has brought with it the familiar challenges of matching freedom with development. Nigeria’s adoption of the US-type presidential system poses the challenge matching the form of democracy with the substance of social and economic development. Under the existing democratic system, there are 774 local governments, 36 state governments plus one FCT government. And of course, there is an almighty federal government with 40-50 odd ministries and over 500 extra ministerial departments strewn all over the country.

Questions have been raised about the appropriateness  of Nigeria’s present form of democracy as an instrument for development of the country. The central problem is how the nation’s economy can sustain the elaborate machinery of the democratic institutions and also generate enough  extra to fund social and economic developments for a nation as large and complex as Nigeria.

In spite of nearly a quarter of a century of formal democracy, therefore, Nigeria is yet to imbibe the cultural attributes of a democratic society.  Our politicians still act with impunity on policy issues. The tendency to take arbitrary actions over and above legislated ones remains a constant temptation of the political leadership. The impulse to clamp down on free speech remains a constant temptation with key politicians as they occasionally order the  arrest and detention of journalists and opposition figures sometimes for weeks without trial.

In recent times, a few state governors have degenerated into imperial autocrats. They have harassed and intimidated their opponents, used intemperate language in their public utterances and tended to blackmail their appointees into toeing whatever partisan routes they have opted for.

A more interesting spillover of military authoritarian culture on current Nigerian democracy is the deliberate enlistment of military security operatives by politicians during electoral contests. This tendency is a carryover of the notion that military fiat can be summoned to  influence the outcome of electoral contests.

It is not only politicians and political leaders who have continued to suffer from this nostalgia for the military days. Even among the civil populace, elements of garrison mentality still linger. People occasionally invite soldiers to settle inter personal squabbles.  Soldiers still beat up civilians like power company workers, tax collectors and rival traders in market related squabbles. In disagreements, policemen and soldiers have engaged in open fisticuffs with each other in defiance of law enforcement agencies. In all of these incidents, the basic democratic belief in the rule of law and due process  is often jettisoned in favour of  jungle justice.

In the electoral process itself, Nigerian democracy has continued to wrestle with the basic requirements of the democratic process. Every democracy depends for its credibility on the reliability of the electoral process itself.  Ballots must be cast unimpeded. They must be counted and their count must be the sole determinants of the final outcome of the electoral contest. Once this process is compromised or tampered with in any manner, then the democracy in question is less than  free and fair. No matter how elaborately a democracy celebrates itself,  ceremony cannot in and of itself confer legitimacy and credibility on the system.

It is commendable that Nigeria has scaled these significant milestones in its democratic journey. It is also opportune that the milestones of democratic transition are celebrated and marked. These ceremonies indicate an irreversible commitment to the sustenance of democracy as a permanent feature of the Nigerian political ecosystem.

Democracy is by no means a destination. It is a process and often a turbulent journey. That journey must however indicate a trajectory of progress. The periodic observance of campaigns and electoral time tables is in itself a sign of progress and commitment to democracy as a destination. But successive governments that result from democratic processes must themselves renew their commitment by reinforcing the guardrails of the democratic endeavor not just as occasional showmanship but as an ingrained cultural value system. A leadership that results from a given democracy can only be as credible as the process that produced it. A credible democracy is therefore the bedrock of a respectable nation.

‘Those of us at The PUNCH newspapers were completely blotted out; yet, we stood and fought for June 12 more than even the Concord newspapers owned by MKO Abiola, the symbol of the June 12 struggle. I stand to be corrected because facts and figures back up this claim’.

THE media is awash with June 12 stories not only because it is another anniversary of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election won by Chief MKO Abiola but also because the presidential address by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu provided enough meat for people with diverse interests and motives to feed fat on. For the President’s political opponents, there was nothing the president would have said that they would not tear in pieces. Has fuel price returned to the N187 it was before Tinubu made his “subsidy is gone” announcement? Has the Naira exchange rate returned to the pre-Tinubu merger of the official and black market exchange rates? Has insecurity abated all over the country? What of the cankerworm of corruption: Has it been fought to a standstill? Have cries of “we are hungry” ceased completely all over the land?  The answer to all these questions is capital NO!

 The President himself admitted that much, even if indirectly, in his address to the joint session of the National Assembly. He reeled out all the policies and actions of his government. He told us that reasonable progress has been made. He encouraged us to keep faith with his government; that he could see light at the end of the tunnel. Not many Nigerians can see what he sees, though. But that does not mean that he did not see what he claims to have seen. His position is vantaged; besides, how many times did Elijah send his servant to look towards the sea to see whether there was any sign of the abundant rain he had declared to murderous King Ahab? Seven times! This was even after he had declared that he heard the sound of the abundance of rain. No one else heard the sound: Not the king and not the servant. And Elijah had to pray really hard before what he prophesied became reality. (1 Kings 18: 41 – 46). Taking a cue from that, Tinubu still has a lot of work to do to bring to reality the better life he keeps promising Nigerians is around the corner. At best, therefore, Nigeria is still “work in progress”

 Will the President’s opponents understand and appreciate this? I do not think so! Remember, the President once told us we should not pity him; that he asked for this  job; he begged to have it, and he crossed many streams and climbed many hills before his invocation of “Emilokan” became reality. So, don’t expect the opposition to pity him. Here, politics is winner-takes-all. The President himself is not showing the opposition any pity. He told them in his address that their grief is his joy; their pain, his delight. That was after he had said he had no intention or plot to turn Nigeria into a one-party state, but if the opposition, unable to put its house in order, gifts the President a one-party state, so be it! 

What the President forgot to do was cap that section of his speech with the former governor of Rivers state and FCT minister, Nyesom Wike’s signature song: “As e dey pain dem/E dey sweet us/As e dey sweet us/E dey pain dem” President Tinubu left no one in doubt that the gale of defections that has hit the PDP sweets his stomach. More of it!

 President Tinubu is a politician par excellence! Give that to him! He gave everyone something to cheer as well as to deride in his long list of June 12 heroes. Some unpardonable errors of repetition of names gave the impression that the list must have been hastily compiled. More diligence is needed in the future. Granted that everyone could not have made the list, there were some omissions that were unexplainable. I doff my hat for the President for the many names of my professional colleagues that made the list. But some must have been deliberately omitted because they are not in the administration’s good books. Every top editor on the “The News” stable got onto the list except Babafemi Ojudu! I saw only Dare Babarinsa from TELL magazine. When Niran Malaolu called me on Friday evening to invite me to his radio station for a program on Monday, I asked him why his name was missing on the list. George Mbah, Chris Anyanwu and so many others. Those of us at The PUNCH newspapers were completely blotted out; yet, we stood and fought for June 12 more than even the Concord newspapers owned by MKO Abiola, the symbol of the June 12 struggle. I stand to be corrected because facts and figures back up this claim. But like I said earlier, maybe everyone cannot be on the list at one and the same time. Maybe next time..

 But the truth is that not everyone who was a June 12 hero can be honoured or will ever be honoured. Many were mowed down in their hundreds all over Lagos and some other places by Abacha. Who knows those ones? Who can ever identify them? What of those who just disappeared? Only those who had a name were known. And only those who have someone in the corridors of power to mention their name will be remembered. And, even at that, only those who are in the good books of the government will be pencilled down for such awards. But I have a suggestion: Let us have a cenotaph for “Unknown June 12 hero”, just like we have for “ Unknown soldier”. And just like we lay wreaths on the unknown soldier cenotaph every January 15th, let us do similarly for the unknown June 12 hero evry June 12th, if not all over the country but at least in the FCT Abuja and Lagos, where many of the victims were callously mowed down by Abacha. That way, the known heroes may get their rewards and the unknown may get theirs as well. Having said that, Tinubu’s initiative to revisit June 12 is good. He was one of us in that struggle. He is, thus, like a river that has not forgotten its source. The shame and regret now will be for those before him who had the opportunity to do but neglected to do.

 As I close, let me say that I think the name “Democracy Day” is an abnormality. This country is yet to experience democracy properly so-called. The grundnorm of every democracy is the Constitution. The 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) is a fraud. It claims that “We the people” of Nigeria gave ourselves the constitution when we did not. That constitution is a military imposition, rammed down our throats by the retreating Gen. Abdulsalami Abubakar military junta. In fact, it is said that the entire constitution was drafted by one Prof. Yadudu – single-handedly. The 1960 Constitution was the only constitution negotiated by the leaders of the various Nigerian peoples. I have a grouse with the 1963 so-called Republican constitution because of the way the conspiracy of Balewa and Zik created the Mid-west out of the Western Region to whittle its power and influence while the behemoth Northern Region and Eastern Region were left intact despite the serious agitations by the minorities there for the creation of regions for them.

 Democracy is defined as “government of the people, by the people and for the people”. Since 1999 when this Fourth Republic took off, we have not had a government “ by the people”. All elections have been rigged. We have not had a government “of the people”; the ruling class in power is disconnected from the people it purports to lead, serve or represent. Since 1999, we have not had a government “for the people”. They have all, in the main, existed for their own personal and selfish interests. Which is why the people’s condition and existentialism get worse government after government. It does not just rain for the mass of our people, it pours! Perhaps our rulers – not leaders in the real sense of the word – will get born-again and turn a new leaf tomorrow or the day after! 

 Now, when people also say we have had 26 unbroken years of democracy, I disagree. What we have had, at best, is civil or civilian rule. Governments are hardly civil here: so, let’s not bedeck them in borrowed robes. But we have had civilians in power – even at that, I cannot count 26 years. Obasanjo was, soul and spirit, a military man merely donning “agbada” or civilian dress for the eight years he was in office as president; ditto Buhari. So, 26 – 16 = 10 years. By my own calculation, we have had only 10 years of civilian rule. For the 16 years that they were in office, Obasanjo and Buhari ruled like military despots.

 Let me note the speaker of the House of Representatives’ plea to Tinubu to do something about the country’s epileptic power supply. I like that subtle reminder by the speaker to Mr. President that having solved his own power problem with a multi-billion Naira solar contract, he should not abandon hapless Nigerians to their fate. As I write this, no light!

 Mr. Speaker also thanked the President for putting more money in the pockets of legislators for constituency projects – but where are the projects? We can’t see them. Someone said they are in the stomachs, pockets and offshore bank accounts of legislooters! Enhanced financing of the three tiers and arms of government has not translated into enhanced performance or the trickle down of the “dividends of democracy” to the grassroots level. Who bells the cat?