The other day the government announcement the board appointments of forty-two government agencies and parastatals. Very good news it was for me, hoping that at last, my silent and open prayers must have been answered. I nearly reached for a magnifying glass incase my reading glasses were getting too weak to enable me read the press statement with understanding; alas, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) wasn’t on the list.

“President Bola Ahmed Tinubu has appointed board chairpersons for 42 federal organisations and a secretary to the board of the Civil Defence, Immigration, and Prisons Services.

“The President has also appointed a new managing director for the Nigerian Railway Corporation and a director general for the National Board for Technology Incubation (NBTI).

“President Tinubu directs the board chairpersons not to interfere with the management of the organisations, emphasising that their positions are not executive,” the statement signed by Bayo Onanuga, Special Adviser to the President (Information & Strategy), said in part. This was January 23, 2025.

Ironically, I wasn’t too disappointed. The President of any country is a very busy person. For the Nigerian President, the basket of worries is heavier because there are too many things he has to sort – poverty in the land, the purity of data from the National Bureau of Statistics about the rightness and wrongness of data – whether headline inflation is 34 percent and food inflation is 40 percent; insecurity and daily carnage on our roads, the inability of previous administrations to communicate effectively that Nigeria doesn’t really have enough money to provide all the infrastructure, including roads, and that it must work through Public Private Partnership (PPP) to deliver some services, that the energy sector remains a shame and can really not cater for the development needs of the people, and that life expectations in Nigeria will remain a mirage except all parties are able to come to the reality that the nation must move ahead on a clean slate without bitterness, mistrust and festering acrimonies. There are other sundry issues too numerous and troubling to be listed.

The Nigerian President has too many things to think about and board appointments, though an issue for the loyalists, may not be so compulsive as to serve as distraction or inordinate concern.

However, I want to reiterate my appeal that President Tinubu should appoint a Board for the NCC as a matter of urgency in order to put developmental expectations in the telecommunications sector on a seeming virtual accelerator. As we say in this part of the world, to move the industry forward but moving the industry forward might be too slow to deliver on the promises by this government which has a psychedelic commitment to a digital economy.

The Nigerian Communications Act 2003 does not envisage any day NCC will not have a Board, as it states very clearly that “the President shall ensure at all times there are a minimum of 6 serving Commissioners on the Board at any and all times, made up of – the Chief Executive, 2 Executive Commissioners and three non-executive Commissioners.

A fully composed Board, according to the Act, should consist of 9 Commissioners which include: a chairman, a chief executive who shall also be the Executive Vce Chairman, 2 Executive Commissioners, and 5 non-executive Commissioners, who shall be appointed by the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Those who are advocating for the Board to be constituted, including this writer, harbour the opinion that the diversity of background, experience and knowledge of the members may encourage fresh thinking, hopes, aspirations and fresh drive to the activities and programme implementation at the NCC.

Their expectations are anchored on a provision of the Act which states as follows: Commissioners shall be persons of recognised standing, qualification and experience in one or more of the following fields – finance or accounting; law; consumer affairs; telecommunications engineering; information technology; engineering generally; economics; and Public Administration.

The dream of having all these professionals in one board can be too tantalising to be real but it has happened before and can still happen again if the President picks well irrespective of party affiliations. Unfortunately, these professionals can quickly morph into the garb of politicians and begin a ruination of the system. That is what happened under the last administration which inflicted so extensive a damage on the Commission from which it is still struggling to recover.

But the President, in the statement, warned the newly appointed chairpersons and board members not to interfere with the management of the organisations. Same should be said of the NCC when the Board is constituted because of antecedents that are too ugly to always recall.

But some voices at the NCC are not in a hurry to forget yesterday. A particular source told this writer, “We pray not to have a transactional Board. The last Board was horrible. We want a chairman with capacity.”

All the same, a Board is needed to help the policy thrust of the Commission and facilitate good decision making. A Board that can take the Commission to the next level and bring various experiences to bear on its operations, according to another source.

At the moment, there are only three Commissioners, one of which is the Executive Vice Chairman ((EVC), and two Executive Commissioners, all from a part of the country, which strains a provision of the Act that states clearly that they must be drawn from the 6 geo-political zones of Nigeria subject to confirmation by the Senate.

I do not have the boldness to ever insinuate that the NCC is running in breach of the Act. My only appeal is that the President should constitute the Board and remove the Commission from a needless cul-de-sac and avoidable hermetic strictures.

I was a witness to that day. When the sun crimsoned, the wind roared, and the earth bled. It was the Nyanya bomb blast of April 2014. By cheer happenstance, I was within the area, though removed from the immediate theatre of the carnage. TheCable broke the unfortunate story. I was a staff member of the newspaper at the time.

The thundering blast ripped through the evening air. It was deafening and jarring. Fear and anxiety seized the busy Nyanya junction, which became gridlocked in a barbecue of human parts. Confusion simmered. Making sense of the situation instantly was a bit difficult. What had just happened? Could it be it? And yes, the fears were confirmed.

This experience survives in the recesses of my mind. The trauma never really leaves.

At the time and in subsequent years, Nigeria grappled with a number of security challenges – Boko Haram, kidnappers, bandits, terrorists, and the like. Swathes of territories were carved out by terrorists, the roads became gateways to hell, violent agitations tore at the very fabric of the nation, and school children became merchandise for criminals.

But over time, Nigeria’s security forces have been dutiful in pushing back the frontiers of terror. We must always thank and appreciate our security agencies. They are our last line of defence. They are awake while we are asleep – far removed from the warm embraces of their families to keep us safe.

President Bola Tinubu pledged to ensure the security of life and property, especially as security is a fundamental ingredient for attracting investments and fostering the growth and survival of businesses. The President has been absolutely faithful to his solemn pledge.

As Commander-in-Chief, President Tinubu is silencing the guns on the roads, returning confidence in road travels; he is restoring peace to farmlands, boosting agricultural productivity; removing threats even in forgotten places, and building a cohesive society where recourse over dispute among divergent groups is dialogue and not war-war.

It is important to underline the critical role of the Office of the National Security Adviser under Mallam Nuhu Ribadu as regards pre-emptive, kinetic, non-kinetic, and conciliatory approaches to a myriad of security concerns and potential concerns. There has been a clear demonstration of forward-thinking, innovation, adriotness, and professionalism in the coordination of security apparatuses.

It is not all blue skies as security is always in a flux. But we are not where we used to be. We have gone a leap forward. With the President’s bold and transformative leadership, the ambits of peace will continue to expand, and Nigeria shall continue to prosper.

Nwabufo is Senior Special Assistant to the President on Public Engagement

Innocent ‘2Baba‘ Idibia has finally addressed the rumours surrounding his relationship with Natasha Osawaru, the deputy majority leader of Edo state house of assembly.

On Monday, the award-winning singer made a surprise appearance at the state house of assembly during a plenary session, sparking rumours about his relationship with Natasha.

The rumours suggested that Natasha might have contributed to his separation from his wife, Annie Idibia.

However, in a video shared on Instagram, 2Baba clarified his relationship with Natasha, emphasising that she has nothing to do with his current situation with Annie.

He also expressed his affection for the lawmaker, stating, “Yes, I love her. I want to marry her”.

The ‘African Queen’ hitmaker also defended Natasha, calling her a “young, brilliant, and amazing woman” who has been unfairly labeled as a “home breaker”.

“I said what I said. All of us will be alright… Honourable Natasha, I see she has been dragged, she has been called all sorts of names. She has been labelled as a home breaker. She is a young, brilliant and amazing woman,” he said.

“She has nothing to do with what’s happening between me and Annie. But I see everybody trying to allegedly want to rope her into everything.  Yes, I love her. She is amazing, she is cool, I want to marry her.”

Annie, an actress and model, has been married to 2Baba since 2012, and they have two daughters together. However, their relationship has been plagued by rumours of infidelity and instability.

Last month, the singer announced that he and Annie had not been together for a while and were filing for divorce.

The news of their separation has continued to spark reactions from fans and celebrities alike.

WHO IS NATASHA?

Natasha Osawaru is a 31-year-old politician and lawyer from Edo state. She is the daughter of Desmond Osawaru and Philomina Osawaru and the granddaughter of billionaire Gabriel Igbinedion.

Osawaru, who represents the Egor constituency in the house, is a member of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

The headlines last week gave a kaleidoscopic picture of the Nigerian tragedy: Lagos State allocates N3.5 billion to improve power supply; Kano votes N2.5 billion for mass wedding. It captures the inherent absurdities in our nation and the different the mindsets of its leaders. While a section of the federation is investing in key infrastructure and human capital development, the other half is wasting away resources on things that induce poverty and hasten underdevelopment. In its 2025 budget, Kano State government is allocating N2.5 billion for sponsorship of mass weddings in the 44 LGAs. Total fiscal proposal is N719. 7 billion. Commissioner for Planning and Budget, Musa Shanono says the government is sponsoring mass wedding in order ‘’to promote social responsibility, human rights and transparency, in addition to fostering sustainable society’’.

 Kebbi, another state in the same North West, would splash N54 million to sponsor mass wedding for 300 couples on February 27. Chairman of the organizing committee, Alhaji Suleiman Argungu, said the event is a fulfillment of the pledge made by Gov. Nasir Idris at a similar ceremony last year. The governor had promised that mass wedding would be a regular program of his administration. In addition to the payment of bride prices on behalf of the groom, the couples will receive household items such as furniture and food items ‘’to help them establish a stable marital life’’, according to Alhaji Argungu.

Many states and well-to-do persons in the North routinely sponsor mass weddings to goad poor individuals into marriage. In October 2020, then Senate President Ahmed Lawan sponsored the wedding of 100 couples whom he identified as orphans and the less privileged in his constituency. Over 5,000 persons are wedded every year in such ceremonies. But why are mass weddings so important in Northern Nigeria? There’s a political dimension to it. Although they are presented as welfare or philanthropic gestures, mass weddings are in reality meant to encourage rapid population growth, which the elites believe, ultimately confers electoral advantage to the region. This is why Northern politicians are always quick to boast that the region will always determine who wins Nigeria’s presidential elections.

But they have failed to realize the problems associated with unbridled population growth such as overcrowded cities; resource depletion; unemployment; strain on infrastructure and social services; increased crime; decreased quality of life; increased disease transmission; increased poverty; inadequate housing and overwhelmed healthcare and educational systems. According to UNICEF, there are 18.3 million out-of-school children in Nigeria, of which 10. 2 million are of primary school age and 8.1 million are of junior secondary school level. Most of them are in the North where terrorism has been a big problem.

Instead of tackling this globally embarrassing problem, Northern political leaders are more interested in boosting population growth by offering the poor all-expense paid weddings. The urge to control power and be in public office is stronger than the need to enhance the welfare of their people. But a poverty-stricken and poorly educated population is less likely to take care of its offspring; thus perpetuating a vicious circle of poverty and dragging the rest of the society back. Without skills, education and future prospects, they are easily recruited into terrorist groups; kidnap and robbery gangs. They do not work; don’t pay taxes, but rely solely on alms and government handouts. Some drift southwards where they take to menial jobs in big cities; constituting themselves into social menace and security risks. This is the problem of Northern Nigeria, which has become the Nigerian crisis. Mass weddings are a clear example of how a government’s welfare programme could be counterproductive.

Nigeria has one of the highest fertility rates (number of births per woman) in the world. As at 2022, it was 5.14 per woman. It is far higher in the North, with some states like Katsina hitting 7.4; and lower in the South, as low as 3.2 in some Southern States, according to the economist. The import of this disparity between the two regions is obvious. While one region is far more economically progressive, the other seems to be travelling back in time. A 7.4 fertility rate is higher than what the global rate was in the 1800! Nigeria’s population is growing quite rapidly, faster than GDP’s three per cent growth rate. Income levels are also very low in the country. A recent report by McKinsey & Company, an international consulting firm, stated that less than one million Nigerians in both government and private sector earn up to one million naira per month. Our huge population therefore does not necessarily translate into a big consumer market with more than 70 per cent of the population living in multidimensional poverty. Northern Nigeria underperforms the South in almost all indices: per capita income; employment; school enrolment; WAEC performance; poverty rates and many others. The convention wisdom in many parts of the world is that no young man seeks to marry and start a family until he has a means of livelihood.

In recent times, a few Northern leaders like Gov. Sule of Nassarawa State have admitted publicly that the region has failed in its basic responsibilities to the citizens. Speaking in Lafia at a conference on population dynamics, security, climate change, out-of-school and vulnerable children last November, Sule said it was time for the North to address the challenges of the almajiri system. ’’The almajiri problem is indeed a huge issue for us. It’s time we stopped complaining and took the bull by the horns to solve it. He attributed the persistence of the almajiri problem to systemic failures and the neglect of parental responsibilities.

Mass weddings have not helped the North. Rather, it has perpetuated poverty and it’s time to modify it. One way of doing this is to train the would-be couples in any trade of their choice; give them grants for take-off and offer to sponsor the weddings of only those who can fend for themselves. In that case, mass weddings would become incentives for economic empowerment rather than a tool for subjugation.

The house of representatives has asked the ministry of communications, innovation and digital economy to suspend the approval granted to telecommunications companies (telcos) to increase tariff by 50 percent.

The lower legislative chamber passed the resolution during plenary on Tuesday following the approval of a motion of urgent public importance.

The motion was sponsored by Oboku Oforji, a Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) lawmaker representing Yenagoa/Opokuma federal constituency of Bayelsa state.

In January, the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) approved telcos’ request to increase tariff since the last review in 2013.

Bosun Tijani, minister of communications, innovation and digital economy, had said “the new tariff would allow telecommunication companies to be able to invest in new infrastructure and improve connectivity”.

Moving the motion, Oforji said tariff approval is not justifiable as consumers are grappling with economic hardship and poor network service delivery.

The legislator said telcos must improve their service delivery, and address the “poor network” before increasing their tariff.

“The far-reaching effects of these price hikes will deepen financial struggles for the average Nigerian, threaten the country’s vision of leveraging technology to drive economic revival, exacerbate poverty and widen existing inequalities, hitting lower-income families the hardest,” he said.

“Affordable connectivity is a must for progress in critical sectors like digital banking, education, healthcare, agriculture and e-governance. Informal sector workers who depend on affordable mobile data to access gig work opportunities may find it harder to stay connected.

“Those small businesses, which rely heavily on affordable telecommunication for operations, marketing, and customer engagement, will face additional financial burden. Imagine a scenario where a 10 percent increase is approved.

“It is estimated that a 10 percent increase in telecommunications costs would reduce small business profitability up to 7 percent, potentially leading to the closure of businesses.”

Opposing the motion, Dominic Okafor from Anambra state, said a tariff hike is necessary for improved service delivery.

He said telecom companies should be allowed to raise tariffs, though not by as much as 50 percent.

The motion was adopted when it was put to a voice vote by Tajudeen Abbas, speaker of the house.

Subsequently, the house asked the ministry of digital economy and the Nigerian Communications Commissions (NCC) to “suspend the impending hike in telecommunications tariffs until their service improved”.

[TheCable]

Less than a month after he was sworn in as the 45th President of the United States of America, there have been renewed concerns about whether Donald Trump’s presidency would signal the end of what is often called ‘the American Century.’ The phrase was coined by Time founder and publisher, Henry Luce, the son of a missionary, in a February 17, 1941, editorial in Life Magazine, a sister publication he also founded. Captioned “The American Century,” Luce made a strong plea for America to forsake isolationism and enter World War II to defend democratic values. He argued that under American hegemony, democracy and other American ideals would “do their mysterious work of lifting the life of mankind from the level of the beasts to what the psalmist called a little lower than the angels.” Essentially, Luce urged the USA to assume the role of the world’s Good Samaritan by championing the spread of democratic values across the world.

Luce talked about the ‘American Century’ rather than ‘American Empire’ (as we had with the British empire from 1815-1914) because he felt the missionary power conferred on the country by history was global rather than territorially defined. America seemingly heeded his advice and its involvement proved decisive in ending the Second World War. America also played a crucial role in the reconstruction of Europe after the war through the Marshall Plan. The country’s influence further grew during the Cold War (1947-1991) when it led the Western alliance against the Soviet-led Eastern bloc. After the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States remained the world’s only superpower, and became the hegemon, or what some termed a hyper-power.

Given the global pattern of the rise and decline of great empires and societies, predictions of an imminent decline or collapse of the American Century have a long history. In fact, the twentieth century has witnessed the decline or collapse of at least seven great empires – Mandarin China, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Turkey, Japan, the British empire, and twice over in the case of Tsarist and Soviet Russia. After the terrorist attacks in the US on September 11, 2001 that led to the death of almost 3000 people, mostly Americans, people thought the event was going to accelerate the decline of the only remaining military superpower. America recovered well from it. But talks about its decline, especially with the rise of other poles of economic power – China, the European Union (which was not really seen as a threat until Trump) and recently, the BRICS countries, the old concerns about the possible decline or even a dramatic collapse of the American Century, became revived.

Even before he was sworn in as America’s 45th President on January 20 2025, Trump’s rhetoric had been a source of global concern. The grandiloquence and flurry of Executive Orders, including the use  (or threat of the use) of tariffs even against countries regarded as America’s closest allies such as Canada and the European Union, have raised concerns of how reciprocal response by the affected countries what would affect the world order and America’s global influence.

There are four possible responses against Trumpism that we should watch out for:

One, in international relations, there is what is called the ‘Balance of power theory’. This basically argues that states threatened by a hegemonic power could secure their survival by bandying together to prevent that hegemon from dis-equilibrating the system or to restore equilibrium if the hegemon temporarily succeeds in upsetting the system’s balance.  This presupposes that states threatened by Trump, (and this is virtually all states of the world – old foes and traditional allies alike), may gang up to prevent him from having his way. For instance, Donald Trump has expressed interest in acquiring Greenland – an Island owned by Denmark, a member of the European Union. In response, the EU leaders said they would defend Greenland. In such a scenario one can surmise that if push comes to shove, they will not reject help from America’s traditional enemies, including those President George W Bush referred to as “axis of evil” in 2002. President Bush at that time was referring to Iran, Ba’athist Iraq, and North Korea.

Regarding Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on both its traditional allies and traditional foes, not only is there the possibility of retaliatory response, that threat alone, even if not implemented, could lead to many countries,  taking measures to ensure they forever drastically reduce their reliance on the US – militarily, economically and even culturally. This scenario could paradoxically present opportunities for Africa as countries loosening their ties with the US will look to new frontiers and new markets.

Two, the response of America’s institutions to some of the actions of Trump would also be of interest. America’s institutions have over the years proven themselves to be resilient but some have argued that the country has not had any President in the mould of Donald Trump who seems determined to have his ways in a monarchical fashion. For instance, one of the first actions of President Trump after his second coming was to fire more than a dozen justice department lawyers who worked on two criminal cases against him. The lawyers were fired after Acting Attorney General James McHenry concluded they could not “be trusted to faithfully implement the president’s agenda because of their significant role in prosecuting the president”. Some have sneered that this sort of vindictiveness is usually associated with the so-called Third World countries. Similarly, the Trump administration’s crackdown on immigration — both legal and illegal — has resulted in at least 10 lawsuits, seven of which challenged his Executive Order revoking universal birthright citizenship. There are also litigations on Trump’s Budget Freezes and Firings. The crucial question here is whether American institutions will triumph or whether Trump’s willpower will weaken those institutions to the extent that democracy and the principle of freedom on which America fought and won the Cold War would lose their attractions as organizing elements of American power. If American institutions prevail, it will diminish President Trump’s presidency and his global respectability; if Trump triumphs, it will diminish America’s institutions.

Three, there have been suggestions that many of Trump’s harsh rhetoric, including on the use of tariffs, could be mere brinkmanship. Brinksmanship as a bargaining strategy is usually associated with John Foster Dulles, the US Secretary of State from 1953 to 1956 during the Eisenhower administration. Dulles defined this policy thus:  “The ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary art.” During the Cold War, it was used as a policy by the United States to coerce the Soviet Union into backing down militarily. Trump has used the threat of tariffs against Canada and Mexico as bargaining chips to get what he probably considers as better deals when these countries countered with their own tariff threats. There are however two main dangers with using brinksmanship as a bargaining strategy – the target state may call the bluff, and if the threatening state is unable to implement its threat, future threats will fail to serve as deterrence to unwanted behaviour. The second danger is that if threats become merely seen as brinksmanship, states will develop counter-strategies that will mute the potency of future threats as bargaining chips. For brinksmanship to work, the threat must be credible. If Trumpism leads to the forging of a new global coalition to stop him from disequilibrating the system, then brinksmanship will lose its shine as a bargaining strategy.

Four, Trumpism could lead to an acceleration in the prestige of institutions such as BRICS whose avowed objectives include the creation of a multipolar world that will either drastically reduce or overthrow the current American-led Western system of global governance and security.  BRIC, as an acronym, was coined in 2001 by then Goldman Sachs chief economist Jim O’Neill to underline the growth potentials of Brazil, Russia, India, and China. It became BRICS when South Africa joined the group in 2010. In 2023, six countries – Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, Argentina, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia  – were invited to join the group transforming it into  BRICS+. Together, the BRICS countries account for more than 40% of the world’s population and a quarter of the global economy. The 16th Summit of the group held in the Tatarstan city of Kazan, Russia, from  22–24 October, 2024, and themed “Strengthening Multilateralism for Fair Global Development and Security,”  endorsed the reform of the United Nations Security Council. It also agreed to explore the feasibility of creating an autonomous cross-border settlement and depository system (away from the current Western-driven SWIFT system) and the possible utilisation of national currencies, payment tools, and platforms. There were equally proposals for the invigoration of the group’s New Development Bank (NDB), which was established in 2014, with the aim of providing member countries with greater financial autonomy and resilience against external shocks. At the Kazan Summit, the group announced that Nigeria, along with twelve others, had become partner countries to the BRICS+.  The other twelve are: Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam.

In addition to BRICS, any attempt to acquire or seize Greenland or embark on trade wars with the European Union could potentially turn it into an adversary with shared interest in whittling down America’s power and global influence.  If this happens, the US would be up against a very formidable group of 27 member states with an estimated population of 449 million, an estimated nominal GDP of $19.40 trillion in 2024 or $28.04 trillion (PPP) representing about one-sixth of the global economy.

The EU is often described as a sui generis political entity because it combines the characteristics of both a federation and a confederation. A possible collaboration between BRICS and the European Union would be a frightening scenario for America’s global leadership and influence and could mark the beginning of the end of the American Century.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Jideofor Adibe is a Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Nasarawa State University and founder of Adonis & Abbey Publishers (www.adonis-abbey.com). He can be reached at: 0705 807 8841 (WhatsApp and Text messages only).

• Presidents, Governors, others pay tribute to former GMD Access Holdings

Lagos State Governor, Mr. Babajide Sanwo-Olu, said the late Herbert Wigwe was a firm believer in and supporter of his administration’s development programmes since inception in 2019.

He said the State has felt the absence of the late Group Managing Director of the Access Holdings, very strongly, since his passing in the last one year.

He said there are projects that would have been delivered faster if Wigwe, the co-founder of Access Holdings, was alive, noting that "across the states there are projects with Herbert Wigwe’s footprint."

Governor Sanwo-Olu spoke during the First Year Memorial Service in honour of Wigwe, his wife Doreen, and son, Chizi, organised by the Access Holdings at the Eko Hotels and Suites, Victoria Island, Lagos.

The memorial service was attended by the late Wigwe's family, friends, colleagues, and loved ones, as well as President Emmanuel Macron of France; former President Olusegun Obasanjo; Governors Sanwo-Olu and his Ogun State counterpart, Prince Dapo Abiodun; Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Mr. Wale Edun; Emir of Kano, Muhammadu Sanusi II; present and former public office holders; captains of industries; renowned bankers; and business tycoons.

It would be recalled that Herbert, Doreen and Chizi lost their lives alongside the former Chairman of the Nigeria Exchange Group (NGX), Bimbo Ogunbanjo, in a helicopter crash in the Mojave Desert near the California-Nevada border in United States on February 9, 2024.

Governor Sanwo-Olu, while paying glowing tributes to the late Group Managing Director of the Access Holdings, one year after his death, described the late Wigwe as a believer in the works of his government.

The Governor said the late Wigwe was a builder of not just businesses but also people, ideas and the future, adding that his death was a reality “we never prepared for.”

Governor Sanwo-Olu described Wigwe as a visionary who believed in Nigeria and Africa’s capacity to rise above challenges, adding that he was not just a friend but a brother with whom he shared the vision of good governance and passion for the people together.

He said: “He lived perpetually in the present and the future. He believed in actions, not just words. I saw him transform vision into reality. When others hesitated, he moved. When others saw obstacles, he saw opportunities. He truly believed in Nigeria and Africa.

“He was a builder of men and businesses, turning visions into reality. His absence is deeply felt in Lagos State, as there are projects today that would have progressed faster if he were still with us. Herbert made my work easier by mobilising partners and funding for state projects."

Speaking earlier, President Bola Tinubu, who was represented by the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Mr. Wale Edun, said Wigwe’s impact was not confined to the “boardroom and balance sheet.”

President Tinubu, in his tribute delivered by Edun, described the late Wigwe as more than just a banker but a builder of dreams and institutions.

“Herbert embodied vision, excellence, and generosity. He was deeply committed to uplifting society. His impact was felt in the lives he touched, opportunities he created, and hopes he inspired,” he said.

President Emmanuel Macron also praised Wigwe as an exceptional entrepreneur and a friend of France.

“He made significant contributions as Chairman of the Nigeria-France Business Council, strengthening the bilateral relationship and friendship between France and Nigeria,” he noted.

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo highlighted Wigwe’s resilience and dedication to partnership, noting that "despite his success, he remained accessible and committed to nurturing relationships. He understood that true leadership involves building both institutions and people. His legacy is a testament to what Africans can achieve through vision, determination, and collaboration."

SIGNED

GBOYEGA AKOSILE

SPECIAL ADVISER - MEDIA AND PUBLICITY

The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Ondo State chapter, has expressed concern over the silence of Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa on the alleged padding of the 2025 budget.

The party pointed out that the 2025 budget contains some scandalous items in the office of the Commissioner for Finance. 

Speaking via a statement by its Publicity Secretary, Kennedy Peretei, the party insisted that the people of the state deserve explanation on the ₦11.5 billion allocated to the Ministry of Finance as security vote.

They insisted that ₦250 million as “Honorarium and sitting Allowance in the Ministry of Finance” and the procurement of SUV worth ₦230 million for Commissioner of Finance is insensitive.

Peretei subsequently called for the sack of the Financial Commissioner over the development, stressing that the funds belong to the people of Ondo State.

He said, “The Ondo State 2025 Appropriation Act contains some scandalous items in the office of the Commissioner for Finance that have been the subject of public agitation in the last two weeks.

“The Lucky Aiyedatiwa government has maintained such a deafening silence and complicity that are making tongues wag, if indeed there is more to it that meets the eye.

“The N11.5B Security Vote in the Ministry of Finance captured in the 2025 Approved Budget has not been explained to the people of the State, in spite of the public outcry.

“The provision of N250M as Honorarium and Sitting Allowance in the Ministry of Finance is another padded item in the budget for the enjoyment and pleasure of the Commissioner.

“Perhaps, the most insensitive of the items is the procurement of 1 No Toyota Prado SUV Jeep for the Honorable Commissioner for Finance at a princely sum of N230M.

“In view of the above approved Budgetary allocations, the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, Ondo State Chapter believes that Mrs Isaac Omowunmi, the Ondo State Commissioner for Finance must be sacked immediately, for criminally abusing her office. Her claim of being a UK trained Accountant falls flat on its back, if all she can do is to fleece the people’s Treasury. The supposed Gatekeeper of our Treasury.

“If Governor Lucky Aiyedatiwa fails to relieve the Commissioner of her duties, having failed the people of the Sunshine State, steps will be taken to prove that, what is at stake is the people’s funds.”

[NaijaNews]

The Opposition Coalition has said no Supreme Court judgement had been delivered against the Governor of Rivers State, Siminalayi Fubara and the Speaker, Oko Jumbo as it was being made believe by some disgruntled elements.

Clarifying today’s Court verdict, the opposition lawmakers also said contrary insinuations and rumour churned out in certain quarters, Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Oko Jumbo is still in charge and control of the Rivers state House of Assembly.

The Opposition lawmakers, Coalition through its Spokesperson, Ikenga Ugochinyere said, it was rather in favour of Governor Fubara as it was predicated on his withdrawal of the appeal through his lead counsel, Yusuf Ali SAN.

According to him, Fubara did not lose any case at the Supreme Court, he withdrew his appeal over the 2024 budget which was already spent, executed.

Ugochinyere noted that no Court has ruled anything in favour of Pro Wike Sacked lawmakers, stressing that the Governor withdrew his appeal on the 2024 budget due to the fact that the 2024 budget has expired and the Supreme Court struck it out.

The federal lawmaker, assured Nigerians, particularly Rivers State people, that Victor Oko Jumbo is still an authentic speaker and nothing can change that, urging them to disregard the political propaganda peddled by some sour losers who are not still being delusional.

Ugochinyere tasked the media on truthful reportage by verifying facts before reporting legal issues.

He urged Governor Siminalayi Fubara to remain focused on delivering good governance to the people of Rivers State and ignore political shenanigans.

He said; “Today the Supreme Court ruled on the Appeal over the 2024 budget voluntarily withdrawn by Gov Fubara because 2024 budget cycle have ended and no need Wasting time discussing a budget that have been fully spent and implemented.

“The sacked, disgruntled Martin Amaewhule and the Pro-Wike group are jubiliating, out of ignorance of what informed the decision of the apex court. For their information and others who care, the Supreme Court judgement was sequel to the withdrawal of the appeal by Governor Fubara through his lead counsel, Yusuf Ali SAN. Governor Fubara in the notice for withdrawal of the case, informed a 3-man panel of Justices of the Court that events have overtaken his suit.

“For those who don’t know such events as mentioned by His Excellency, Governor Fubara include inter-alia that the 2024 budget for instance, has been fully executed and exhausted with 2025 Appropriation in effect, hence the case is statute-barred.

“Also, Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Hon. Oko Jumbo is still in charge and control of the legislature in the South-south state as the pro-Wike sacked lawmakers and their gang leader, Amaewhule remained removed from office.”

[Dailypost]

On Thursday, during the plenary session at the house of representatives, Benjamin Kalu, deputy speaker and chairman of the constitution review committee, said the lower legislative chamber received proposals for the creation of 31 new states.

The 10th national assembly is currently in the process of amending the 1999 constitution and has received several proposals, including that of state creation.

A constitutional amendment is a formal modification to the text of the written constitution of a nation to correct or revise its original content to suit the interests of the people of that nation.

The Nigerian constitution makes provisions for amendment when there is a need to do so. The requirements for amendment of the constitution differ depending on the section in question.

The requirements for the amendment of most sections of the constitution involve two-thirds of members of the senate, and house of representatives voting in support of such an amendment and 24 houses of assembly supporting such an amendment.

However, some sections of the constitution, which deal with the creation of a new state, local government, or boundary adjustments, require additional conditions.

Here is the process for passing a constitutional amendment bill and the additional conditions for state creation.

WHAT IS THE PROCESS OF AMENDING THE CONSTITUTION? 

There are several processes involved in amending the constitution.

First, proposals to amend the constitution are submitted to the national assembly as bills. While these bills can originate from citizens, they must pass through lawmakers.

The bills will be sent to the respective (senate and house of representatives) rules and business committees where they are scheduled on the order paper.

The full titles would be read out for the first reading at the bills’ presentation, which signifies the start of the legislative process.

The bills will then be read the second time and the general principles debated during plenary, after which they are referred to the committee on constitutional amendment.

The bills will be reviewed by the committee, and in many cases, public hearings are organised to enable stakeholders to make contributions.

The committee will subsequently decide which proposed amendments to adopt or reject. Afterwards, the reports on the bills are submitted before the house and adopted.

The lawmakers will vote on each specific item on the bills. Here, the proposals to amend the constitution are presented in the form of clauses.

Each house (senate and house of reresentatives) will then use e-voting (not the voice vote) to vote in favour or against the bill.

Advertisement

When e-voting is not available, the house can go into division. This way, the speaker calls each lawmaker to say whether he or she agrees with the bill or not. This is to meet the requirements of section 9(2) of the constitution which outlines the procedure for altering the provisions of the constitution.

This is done to ensure that the total number of senators or house of representatives members in attendance did not fall below the minimum number of two-thirds required to pass a constitutional amendment bill.

The votes are then collated and counted.

It is important to note that for a bill to scale through, it must be concurred by both the senate and house of representatives. This implies that the constitutionally required number of each chamber must have voted in support of the bill.

After that, the bills are transmitted to the state houses of assembly by the clerk of the national assembly for their concurrence.

According to the aforementioned sections 9(2), two-thirds of all the state assemblies need to approve the bills — that is 24 states will be required for each amendment to be approved.

When two-thirds of the state assemblies approve each clause by simple majority, everything returns to the national assembly.

According to section 58 of the constitution, bills require the president’s assent.

WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE CREATION?

For amendments proposing the creation of a new state, the constitution demands stringent conditions that must be fulfilled before the process explained above applies.

Section 8(1) states as follows: An act of the national assembly for the purpose of creating a new state shall only be passed if:

“(a) a request, supported by at least two-thirds majority of members (representing the area demanding the creation of the new State) in each of the following, namely;

“(i) the Senate and the House of Representatives,

“(ii) the House of Assembly in respect of the area, and

“(iii) the local government councils in respect of the area are received by the National Assembly;

“(b) a proposal for the creation of the State is thereafter approved in a referendum by at least two-thirds majority of the people of the area where the demand for creation of the State originated;

“(c) the result of the referendum is then approved by a simple majority of all the States of the Federation supported by a simple majority of members of the Houses of Assembly; and

“(d) the proposal is approved by a resolution passed by a two-thirds majority of members of each House of the National Assembly.”

No state has been created since Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999.

During the Thursday plenary, Kalu said the “proposals should be re-submitted in strict adherence” to the requirement of section 8 of the constitution and must reach the committee by March 5.

[TheCable]