With Senate Clearance yesterday, Lt Gen Oluyede has become the substantive Chief of Army Staff (COAS). He is, by all accounts, a thoroughbred professional soldier with no political flavorings. Confident in a very unobtrusive sort of way, sober, focused, methodical and not given to undue ceremonies and fripperies, the new COAS was once described by a peer of his to my hearing, years back, as someone who does not get involved in anything that is unnecessary. He is completely beholden to his professional calling and ocupies himself with it.

He is now heading an army that is overstretched and taking on what should ordinarily not be its business – such as deradicalization programmes and much more.  The soldiers we see on the road all over the country today have no business being there. The longer they are out there, performing policing duties and without strict professional military drills and supervision, the more “demobilized” they would be; from the standpoint of military discipline, grooming and readiness for combat.

The implication of the foregoing is that the new COAS is walking into an environment that is roundly beset with many asymmetrical security challenges that are partly contrived and partly avoidable. Imagine what the nation would have been like today if we had consistently enjoyed effective and responsible civilian leadership over the decay. The bulk of what our men in uniform are facing today simply won’t be there.

The more we look at some of the security problems facing many states of the federation today, the more we feel constrained to say that they are traceable to the antics of an out-of-touch leadership elite. The notion of leadership elite meant here goes beyond the purely political. It cuts across the political, business, traditional and religious leaders. They all seem to be working together, but apparently without intending it, to create an environment with unprecedented records of grinding poverty and unemployment.

The twin facts of poverty and unemployment have poured unto the national political and sociocultural landscape a massive population of unemployed, underemployed and also “unemployable” people. Many in the latter category are not unemployable by choice, no! They are unemployable either because they hold certificates they cannot defend, are morally so damaged that they cannot be trusted with responsibility or they simply have no skills and must be “retooled’ for them to be useful either to themselves or to the wider society.

Just think of the collapse of the educational system, particularly the dearth of vocational education for those who are not interested in pursuing an academic life and career. One of the questions we may wish to ask here today is this: “Would we be where we are today, in terms of national security challenges, if there had been serious and well thought out National Planning that is guided by strategic National Development Plans?

We have had, and still do have, “Episodic and Regime self-flagellation Plans and Programmes”. With these have come the reprehensible personalization of national resources by those charged with managing the resources on behalf of the people. Ethnic chauvinism and religious bigotry are easily recruited as major drivers of all the wrong things that are fueling insecurity in the country. And it would seem that the right lessons are still not being learnt

We see this every day and everywhere.  We have also had more than enough retreats, and summits, wherein we have wasted much of our time and national resources talking about the causes of insecurity, as if we do not know where it is all coming from. Conveners of the summits, conferences and retreats will always go out of their way to quote various authorities on the subject and then tell us about the effects of insecurity on the economy or the welfare of the people.

Well, we are the people. We know the effects. We cannot safely walk the streets without fear of one misfortune or the other. So, we know. So does the military and sundry security agencies. Yet, the business of talking takes over from the business of problem solving and some people even brag that they have been talking.

That’s why the Sultan of Sokoto said, at one such event about two years ago, that we had had enough of conferences and retreats on national security. Part of what could be inferred from the Sultan’s statement was that the Nigerian public is yet to fully apprise itself of the need for a holistic understanding of national security, as well as the specific roles assigned in principle and in fact to the military, particularly the Nigerian army, and the citizenry.

We can all see that, today, the Nigerian Army is the public scapegoat in all matters of national security, simply because it is the most visible symbol of the state wherever you look. That is why Oluyede needs, and must work with, a comprehensive facts-based overview of all dimensions of the current asymmetrical security challenges facing the Nigerian Army and as an Institution of State.

Banditry and insurgency are not inventions from outer space. Every bandit or insurgent has a local address. Intelligence about such an address can only mostly come from a cooperative civilian population.

That is why holistic perspective on the imperatives of a “whole of society approach to national security” demands of everyone a sense of responsibility towards those professionally charged with protecting the nation and the rest of us. We need informed linkages between political decisions and actions, the reflexes of the various strata of the elite and other less obtrusive stakeholders, in order to really address the security challenges in different parts of the country.

The people must fully appreciate the issues at the core of our national security challenges. This includes a clear understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the key actors, as well as the dysfunctionalities that would inevitably arise whenever there is lack of synergy in the national security activity chain.

Intelligence gathering at community and other levels rests more on the willingness of the communities concerned to cooperate and collaborate, than it does on the military and security professionals deployed to various localities. Some of the challenges with tracing the whereabouts, and hideouts, of bandits and insurgents lies in the fact that this role of intelligence support from various localities is being observed in the breach.

Once this role is observed in the breach, with some communities and community leaders even nurturing, and facilitating, the very security threat the army is trying to deal with, the problems will only fester and get worse. As it stands today, the Nigerian Army is the public face of the war against banditry and insecurity. It has also become the people’s “Whipping Boy” for everything wrong with the safety of lives and property in Nigeria today.

We need to think seriously about some overlooked aspects of the security challenges facing the nation. They include the wrong attitudes of the civil populace towards the military and security agencies, conspiracy with embedded targets in communities, refusal to support security operations with local intelligence, the targeting of military personnel for hostile civilian attention, deliberate misrepresentation of the activities and achievements of the Nigerian Army through fake news, misinformation and disinformation, among others.

The new COAS is coming on board at a time that the nation desperately needs simple and implementable solutions, around the deeper motions of personal, community and environmental security that we have since abandoned. He is also coming on board to sustain the gains made by his predecessor, to ensure that the wrong idea that it is purely the job of the military, and the security agencies, to secure us, is summarily retired.

The civilian populace is not meant to just sit down and do nothing but watch the military “doing their job of securing us”. Communities which do not report the presence of strangers, suspicious characters, or even suspicious activities, to Institutions of State that exist to protect them only further endanger themselves and complicate our national security challenges.  

Undermining the nation’s efforts at improving security comes in the form of Attitudinal, or Orientational Asymmetry. It is a distortion, and disruption, of the right attitude every citizen should adopt in his response to the nation’s security personnel and problems. It is also one of the greatest asymmetrical security challenges facing Nigeria today.

Unless we approach national security issues with a proper sense of history, we might end up mistaking hysteria for substance. The citizen’s duty in the national security ecosystem must be reaffirmed, for everyone to identify with, understand and carry out his role in the national security ecosystem.

The new COAS is familiar with retreats, conferences and summits. He does not need to organize another one now, since these often offer mostly descriptive, and sometimes purely “lamentational”, submissions. Their detailed descriptions of the problems and the generalized recommendations without any clear implementation strategies are all too familiar.

The solutions to our current national security problems do not lie in the declaration of a State of emergency on national security, either. No verbal declaration of a state of emergency can make uncooperative communities to suddenly become cooperative. To urge anyone to declare a state of emergency will not dramatically raise the morale of officers and soldiers who are overstretched. Neither will it remove the fact that the job of our men in uniform is further complicated by the missteps of a civilian ruling elite that has created a massive pool of impoverished, unemployed, underemployed and unemployable youths with the wrong social skills.

The ongoing civil/military relations efforts should be ramped up, because the military needs the independent perspectives that would arise from such engagement. Ditto for the new programs for middle level officers and soldiers. It will all help improve the quality of soldiering, as well as public understanding of the roles, and achievements, of the Nigerian Army in the ongoing efforts to protect and secure the Nigerian State.

For this to happen, we need an overarching perspective that is focused on a “whole of society approach”. This is a critical success factor that we should focus on and press for, as Lt Gen Oluyede comes on board.

Pacts include diverse financial, technical assistance programmes worth over €300m 

•President upbeat Nigeria’s economic reform’ll impact Africa positively 

•Macron optimistic Tinubu will transform Nigeria’s economy like he did as Lagos Gov

President Bola Tinubu and his French counterpart, Emmanuel Macron have signed two agreements that will ensure a partnership on the development of critical infrastructure and the long-term sustenance of agriculture and food security.

The partnership agreements, according to a statement by the Adviser to the President on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga, were signed at an economic forum attended by businessmen, captains of industry, governors, and some top government officials of both countries at the Palais des Elysée in Paris, France, during President Tinubu’s state visit.

Nigeria’s Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr. Wale Edun, and Mr. Armand signed the Letter of Intent.

According to the document: “The two countries affirmed their commitment to work together on investment and development of critical infrastructure, healthcare transportation, agricultural value chain, renewable energy, and human capital development, through diverse financial and technical assistance programmes, of over Euros 300m spread across all geopolitical zones in the country.

“The two countries committed to forge a strategic relationship in project implementation and enhance mutual trade and cross border services by removing fiscal barriers while protecting labour rights.” 

Minister of Finance, Edun, and Chief Executive Officer of the French Development Agency (AFD), Mr. Remi Rioux, signed another Letter of Intent to support the Renewed Hope Agenda reforms designed to stimulate and strengthen the economy.

“The Declaration”, the document stated, “ set out the enduring relationship between the AFD and the FRN, and the AFD’s continuing commitment to support the socio-economic growth of Nigeria through financing sustainable projects in urban infrastructure development, transportation network, housing infrastructure, human capital development through improved education specifically in STEM, agriculture, food security and healthcare.

“The AFD reaffirmed its commitment to long-term support of the Renewed Hope Agenda of Mr. President on energy access and transition, sustainable agriculture and food security by financing the improvement of agro-logistic hubs. Importantly, the AFD committed to supporting the real sector by providing capital from MSME in high-impact sectors.

“The Federal Republic of Nigeria also affirmed its support for the projects financed by the AFD and committed to ensure that the implementation of the projects are expedited efficiently.”

The two Presidents had earlier in Paris, the French capital witnessed the signing of the agreement by the United Bank for Africa (UBA) Group Chairman Tony Elumelu and  Mr. Antoine Armand, the French Minister of Economy, Finance and Industry for the bank to commence operations in Paris.

Zenith Bank also inaugurated its services in the country during the visit.

Meanwhile, Tinubu once more assured Nigerians that the ongoing reforms in Nigeria would improve Africa’s economic prospects.

Speaking Thursday night at the State Dinner organised by the French government for him at Palais des Elysée in Paris, the President said: “Regarding Nigeria’s economy, as you have said, we have embarked on a very strong reform, and there is no looking back. It is in the interest of the entire continent that we don’t continue in the past. We must brace up for the future with commitment and optimism. And with the courage of our founding fathers.

“President Macron, all your efforts about Africa, I promise you shall not be in vain,” he stated.

President Tinubu while noting that the future remained bright for better relations with France emphasised that he was glad to be leading Nigeria during the trying times of the nation.

His words: “It is a good time for all of us. I cannot be prouder than I am to be President of Nigeria at this challenging time. I have people who are very clearly inspired, who are determined to change the course of Africa by changing the rot of the past, blending a future that our children and grandchildren can hold, and be open, and be proud.”

The President also lauded the amicable relations with French President Emmanuel Macron, appreciating his interest in Africa.

He also expressed confidence that Macron’s goodwill would foster stronger bilateral ties, benefiting the entire continent.

The Nigerian leader encouraged both Nigerian and French citizens to uphold the cordial relationship shared by their nations.

First Lady, Senator Oluremi Tinubu accompanied the President to the dinner, along with top Nigerian government officials, businessmen, and the Director-General of the World Trade Organisation, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala.

“It is a great honour for me to be here. And it’s been a great day because you have arranged a great reception.

“Appreciating that you have a good knowledge of Nigeria is not enough. Your warmth, your commitment, and your foresight in Africa are remarkable.

“You stirred my excitement and caught my attention as a leader. Thank you.

“France went through a lot to put freedom, democracy and commitment together. Your effort is very inspiring for us to work together. We have no choice but to build a continent that connects, resonates for its people, and cares about the people and development,” President Tinubu said.

He thanked the French leader and his wife, Brigitte, for the State Visit and the three-day reception.

“In addition to the economic prospects and what you mean to Europe, to America and the African continent, there is a good prospect that you will not forget who we are. You open your doors for investment for our friends and brothers here. I could see Aliko Dangote, Aig Imoukhuede, and Tony Elumelu here. You have memories of your friends in Nigeria.  You asked for Mike Adenuga earlier today. Thank you,” he added.

In his remarks, President Macron acknowledged Nigeria’s leadership in Africa, recognising its role as a ‘big brother’ to the continent.

He praised Nigerians for their resilience and intellect, mentioning Nobel Laureate Prof. Wole Soyinka and musician Femi Kuti as global figures.

“Nigeria is a formidable country with talented young people. Many Nigerians are exceptional in their chosen careers.

“You conquered military rule and took your liberty. President Tinubu transformed the economy in Lagos, and now you are on a mission to transform the country,” he stressed.

Macron noted that French investors have long been active in Nigeria, particularly in oil, gas, construction, and food security.

[Thisday]

THIS week, as I refueled my car, I couldn’t help but be struck by the sharp contrast between petrol prices here in Metro Atlanta and in Nigeria.

In Metro Atlanta, fuel prices hover at $2.70 per gallon, which is equivalent to around 67 cents per liter.  (Four liters make up a gallon.) Translating this into naira reveals a stark discrepancy. At the current exchange rate of 1,647 naira to the dollar, a gallon of petrol in Atlanta equates to approximately 5,200 naira or 1,102 naira per liter. That’s astonishingly cheaper than Nigeria’s prevailing rate of around 1,300 naira per liter.

This disparity grows even more troubling in light of the wildly differential minimum wage standards between Nigeria and the United States. In the United States, the federal minimum wage is $7.25 per hour, which amounts to roughly $1,200 a month. Converted into naira, this comes to nearly 1,974,000 (one million, nine hundred and seventy-four thousand) naira.

Note that almost no one earns the minimum wage. Even the lowest remunerated workers here earn above the minimum wage. For example, my 16-year-old daughter who works at an entertainment restaurant chain on weekends earns $13 an hour.

Meanwhile, the federal minimum wage in Nigeria is a piddling 70,000 naira, or around $42.55. In other words, Nigerians with a minimum wage of 70,000 per month pay a higher rate at the pump than Atlantans with a minimum wage of 1.9 million naira per month.

When one presents these figures, defenders of past and present Nigerian regimes— and clueless, stonyhearted neoliberal evangelists— often argue that it’s fruitless to compare Nigeria with the United States, the world’s largest economy.

Yet, it’s worth noting that the U.S. does not indulge in the luxuries afforded to Nigeria’s ruling political elites. For instance, while American presidents pay for their own meals, including the meals of their guests, Nigeria allocates billions for the upkeep of its first families.

Such contrasts illustrate not merely economic differences but also the broader question of public accountability and fiscal priorities.

In much of the developed world, government subsidies for fuel are deemed vital, particularly where public transport systems are not robust. In the U.S., for example, state governments sometimes provide targeted subsidies to cushion residents from high fuel prices.

The lower fuel prices in America are facilitated by state subsidies aimed at counterbalancing a lack of comprehensive public transit options, as is the case in Western Europe.

For instance, the governor of Georgia, Governor Brian Kemp, recently decided to suspend fuel taxes in Georgia following Hurricane Helene, which temporarily reduced petrol prices to around $2.50 per gallon. This is typical all over the United States.

The Center for Investigative Reporting found that the true cost of petrol in the United States is $15 per gallon, that is, $3.75 per liter. Converted into naira, that would amount to 24,648.90 naira per gallon or 6,162.23 naira per liter. But the average pump price of petrol in the United States is $3.16 per gallon.

(Gas prices can vary greatly within each state, with Texas having the lowest price of $2.669 per gallon and California the highest price at $4.68 per gallon. Note that California’s minimum wage is almost twice the federal minimum wage at $16.00 an hour.)

Americans don’t pay the actual cost of petrol because their state governments spend billions to subsidize their petrol consumption. According to the IMF, which has demonized fuel subsidies in the developing world, compelled governments to remove subsidies, and recruited scorn-worthy traitors to brainwash poor people into accepting that subsidies are bad for them, the United States spent $757 billion in fossil fuel subsidies in 2022 alone.

Globally, the IMF said, “subsidies surged to a record $7 trillion [in 2022] as governments supported consumers and businesses during the global spike in energy prices caused by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the economic recovery from the pandemic.” That represents 7 percent of global GDP.

U.S. state governments spent a significant sum on fuel subsidies, largely as part of measures to alleviate the impact of elevated energy costs. These measures included gas tax holidays, direct consumer grants, and discounts, aiming to shield residents from the global surge in fuel prices following supply disruptions caused by international events like the Ukraine crisis.

These interventions illustrate the fiscal lengths governments are willing to go to stabilize fuel costs for their citizens amid economic challenges.

Countries as diverse as Egypt and Indonesia have similarly leveraged fuel subsidies to maintain price stability, alleviate poverty, and stimulate their economies. These examples illuminate a fundamental principle that subsidies, when properly managed, can serve as powerful tools to bridge income disparities and invigorate economic growth.

But not Nigeria. Nigerians face relentless economic strain despite residing in an oil-producing nation. It’s a country where, somehow, people have been persuaded by a sophisticated mob of well-compensated spin doctors that exorbitant fuel prices are an unavoidable reality to which they must resign themselves.

For a resource-rich nation, which is also among the poorest globally, this is a bitter, disconcerting irony.

Those who denounce subsidies as inefficacious or detrimental often betray a limited understanding of their societal role, or worse, they may advocate for policies that consolidate wealth at the top.

In societies grappling with inequality, subsidies can mean the difference between bare survival and a modest but dignified life for millions.

To disparage such measures, particularly in a nation with profound economic inequalities, is to endorse a vision of society that is untenably divided—and to invite criticism that should rightly be directed not only toward them but, if you’ll pardon the expression, toward the legacy of those who espouse such values.

It is a grave irony, and a deeply unjust one, that the people of Nigeria — a nation abundantly blessed with oil wealth — must endure petrol prices that surpass those of Atlanta, a city in one of the world’s richest nations. This, while the average Nigerian subsists on a minimum wage of approximately $45 a month, a pittance that could scarcely fill a tank, let alone sustain a family.

The removal of petrol subsidies is not merely an economic policy; it is a sentence handed down to the already struggling, forcing countless Nigerians to choose between transportation, sustenance, and survival. The ripple effects are evident in unchecked inflation spirals, faltering businesses, and tragic loss of lives in the wake of avoidable hardship.

To govern is to protect, to prioritize the well-being of the many over the convenience of the few. To abandon subsidies under the guise of fiscal responsibility while the vulnerable teeter on the edge of despair is neither responsible nor just. It is, instead, an abdication of moral duty.

President Tinubu should restore the subsidies, not as a concession, but as an obligation to the people he is obligated to serve. To do so is not to admit defeat but to affirm humanity, to wield governance as a tool of compassion rather than austerity.

After all, what use is a nation’s wealth if it is not deployed in the service of its citizens? Let Nigeria’s oil be a blessing once more, not a bitter reminder of inequalities entrenched and lives disregarded.

A former Minister of Aviation, Osita Chidoka, has announced his resignation from the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Chidoka, who was also the Corps Marshal of the Federal Road Safety Corps (FRSC), disclosed this during his appearance on Channels Television’s Politics Today on Friday.

He said he is leaving politics to focus on his non-profitable organisation, Athena Centre to join hands with other Nigerians who are interested in reforming the political system in Nigeria.

“Earlier today, I sent a letter to my ward in Anambra State resigning officially from the PDP. I am leaving the PDP, I am leaving politic for some time, I am focusing on the Athena Centre,” Chidoka said on the programme.

“I will work in concert with other Nigerians who want us to reform the political system to bring evidence-based governance and to support it. So, effective today, I am no longer a member of the Peoples Democratic Party.”

‘Edo election compromised’

Athena Centre founded by Chidoka conducted a review of the recently concluded governorship election in Edo State where the All Progressives Congress (APC) candidate, Monday Okpebholo, was declared winner by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), defeating closest challenger, Asue Ighodalo of the PDP.

The Athena Centre indicted INEC, stating that the election was compromised.

According to Chidoka, who presented the Centre’s findings on the Edo State election, there was substantial evidence of systemic rigging.

“The evidence of systemic rigging observed in this election is so substantial that we cannot call the results.

“The evidence of systemic rigging is so substantial that we think that this election should not be allowed to stand. If this stands, then there is no election in 2027.”

He said he is shocked that an institution like INEC will put its reputation at stake for the purpose of an election.

The former minister alleged that there was lack of transparency in the election and discrepancies in voter accreditation.

He also alleged incidences of overvoting, manipulation at ward collation centres and that the BVAS accreditation record was not transmitted to INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV).

He stated that 153 polling units were not accounted for which means there were no results from those polling units.

He concluded that the Edo State election cannot be deemed credible because it failed to meet basic integrity standard due to substantial interference in the electoral process by the umpire.

[Channels]

Barely weeks into his tenure as the governor of Edo State, Monday Okpebholo finds himself at the center of an unrelenting storm of political distractions. These challenges are primarily emanating from the camp of his predecessor, Godwin Obaseki, and his loyalists. While political transitions often involve disagreements, the incessant nature of these attacks risks undermining Okpebholo’s administration before it gains full momentum. For the sake of the people of Edo State, it is imperative that this trend ends so the new governor can focus on fulfilling his mandate.

For instance, the Edo State chapter of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) recently leveled serious allegations against Governor Okpebholo. At a press conference, Dr. Anthony Aziegbemi, the caretaker chairman of the PDP in Edo State, accused Okpebholo of squandering over ₦30 billion supposedly left behind by the Godwin Obaseki administration within 14 days of taking office. The funds, he claimed, were used to compensate political “godfathers” who facilitated Okpebholo’s electoral victory.

Additionally, Aziegbemi alleged that Okpebholo had procured ₦5 billion worth of vehicles without following due process and was attempting to justify ₦2 billion as inauguration costs. He also criticized the APC-led administration for failing to pay November salaries on time, a deviation from the prompt payments that characterized the Obaseki era.

While these accusations are concerning, they have not been substantiated with concrete evidence. The Edo State government, through Fred Itua, Chief Press Secretary to Governor Okpebholo, has strongly denied these claims, labeling them as baseless propaganda intended to tarnish the new administration. Itua also stated that the government was committed to exposing the alleged rot left behind by Obaseki’s administration, setting the stage for a clash of narratives.

In response to the allegations, Governor Okpebholo announced the formation of a 14-member State Assets Verification Committee. The committee was tasked with reviewing the handover process and ensuring transparency in the management of state resources. While this move might seem like a logical step toward accountability, it has been met with sharp criticism from Obaseki’s camp.

Crusoe Osagie, media aide to Godwin Obaseki, dismissed the probes as a “circus of meaningless theatrics,” accusing Okpebholo of using them as a smokescreen to distract from his lack of preparedness for governance. Osagie argued that Okpebholo’s focus on investigations rather than delivering tangible results was indicative of an administration that had no clear developmental agenda.

Osagie further touted Obaseki’s achievements, including the creation of Edo State’s first-ever asset register, and accused Okpebholo of attempting to rewrite the narrative surrounding the transition process. He went on to suggest that the probes were motivated by the interests of Okpebholo’s alleged political godfathers, who were seeking revenge for being denied access to state resources during Obaseki’s tenure.

It is evident that the ongoing squabbles between the camps of Obaseki and Okpebholo are less about governance and more about political dominance. Obaseki, who defected to the PDP after a fallout with the All Progressives Congress (APC), spent much of his second term battling political adversaries. His administration, while praised in some quarters for reforms, was also criticized for alienating key stakeholders.

Okpebholo’s emergence as governor under the APC banner signaled a return to power for the party in Edo State. However, rather than accepting this reality, Obaseki’s loyalists seem intent on undermining the new administration. By focusing on unsubstantiated allegations and dismissing every move made by the governor, they risk creating an atmosphere of perpetual instability in the state.

Lost in this political tug-of-war are the people of Edo State, who stand to lose the most from these distractions. Edo citizens elected Okpebholo with the hope that he would address pressing issues such as unemployment, poor infrastructure, and economic stagnation. Every minute spent on political mudslinging and counter-allegations is a minute lost in addressing these challenges.

It is essential for both parties to remember that governance is about serving the people, not settling political scores. The PDP and Obaseki’s camp must understand that their time in power has ended and allow the new administration to focus on its agenda. Similarly, Governor Okpebholo must rise above the noise and concentrate on delivering the promises that got him elected.

While the probes initiated by Okpebholo’s administration are essential for ensuring accountability, they must not become the centerpiece of his tenure. Governance should prioritize development, not endless investigations. The governor must strike a balance between holding the previous administration accountable and driving forward his vision for Edo State.

If Obaseki’s administration was as transparent as it claims, then the probes should not pose a threat. Instead of resisting them, Obaseki’s loyalists should cooperate with the process to prove their innocence. At the same time, Okpebholo must ensure that the investigations are thorough, fair, and devoid of political vendettas.

For Edo State to move forward, both the ruling and opposition parties must prioritize the state’s development over their personal or political interests. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it must be based on facts and presented responsibly. Opposition for opposition’s sake benefits no one, least of all the citizens of Edo State.

Governor Okpebholo, on his part, must remain focused on governance. Key areas that require immediate attention include the prompt payment of salaries, improvement of public infrastructure, and creating a conducive environment for economic growth. By delivering tangible results, he can win the trust of Edo people and silence his critics.

Edo State cannot afford to be trapped in a cycle of political vendettas. The time has come for all stakeholders to set aside their differences and work toward a common goal: the progress and prosperity of Edo State. Obaseki’s loyalists must recognize that their time in power is over and allow the new administration to function without unnecessary interference.

As for Governor Okpebholo, his mandate is clear. The people of Edo State have placed their trust in him to deliver meaningful development and address the challenges facing the state. It is up to him to prove that their trust was not misplaced.

The distractions must end. Let Monday Okpebholo work.

It is not an exaggeration to opine that Senator Jimoh Ibrahim’s recent remarks on Nigeria’s borrowing strategy during an interview on Channels TV have sparked heated debate. The billionaire-turned-politician advocated for the country to take on substantial loans of at least $50 billion to address infrastructure deficits and economic stagnation. While he passionately defended his stance, likening it to Dubai’s $168 billion infrastructure-driven transformation, this proposal is worrisome for many Nigerians already grappling with the crushing effects of excessive borrowing.

Senator Ibrahim’s argument, though seemingly bold, raises critical questions about Nigeria’s debt culture, the track record of managing borrowed funds, and the implications for future generations. Before we plunge headlong into further debt, it is essential to critically analyze the senator’s suggestions and the broader implications of his proposals.

Comparing Nigeria’s borrowing needs to Dubai’s experience is flawed. Dubai’s debt-fueled development was guided by visionary leadership, meticulous planning, and stringent accountability. It was also supported by a relatively small population and a thriving tourism sector capable of generating substantial revenue to service its debts.

Nigeria, on the other hand, faces systemic challenges, including widespread corruption, lack of accountability, and a history of mismanaging borrowed funds. Despite decades of loans from institutions like the World Bank and IMF, critical sectors like health, education, and infrastructure remain in disarray. Senator Ibrahim’s suggestion of borrowing $50 billion is akin to pouring water into a leaking bucket unless these systemic issues are first addressed.

As of now, Nigeria’s debt profile is already staggering, with external debts exceeding $40 billion. Servicing this debt consumes a significant portion of the nation’s revenue, leaving little room for developmental projects. The recently approved $2.2 billion loan, which Ibrahim dismisses as “insignificant,” adds to this burden. If we were to follow his advice and borrow $50 billion or more, future generations would inherit a mountain of debt, with little guarantee of corresponding economic returns.

Senator Ibrahim’s assertion that loans will be used exclusively for transformative infrastructure projects is, unfortunately, hard to believe. Nigeria’s history is littered with instances of poorly executed or abandoned projects despite hefty loans. The Ajaokuta Steel Plant, for instance, consumed billions of dollars over decades but has yet to deliver on its promise.

Without stringent safeguards, transparency, and accountability, there is no assurance that new loans will be used effectively. The senator’s call for legislative oversight and penalties for fund mismanagement is laudable, but Nigeria’s weak institutions and the politicization of oversight functions make such measures difficult to implement in practice.

Given the foregoing backdrop, it is germane to opine in this context that Nigeria should begin to look towards alternatives to Borrowing.   Rather than saddling the nation with more debt, Nigeria should prioritize harnessing its vast resources to generate revenue. The country boasts abundant natural resources, a large and youthful population, and untapped sectors like agriculture, technology, and renewable energy.

In fact, there is the need to expand revenue generation. Therefore, the government should focus on diversifying its revenue streams beyond crude oil. By investing in agriculture, manufacturing, and technology, Nigeria can create jobs and boost exports.

In a similar vein, there is the need to cut wasteful spending. This is as a significant portion of the nation’s revenue is lost to corruption, inefficiency, and excessive government spending. Reducing wasteful expenditures and plugging revenue leaks can free up funds for critical projects.

Also, instead of borrowing, the government should explore Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) to fund infrastructure projects. PPPs have proven effective in many countries and can provide the necessary expertise and funding without burdening the nation with debt.

Also in a similar vein, Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) should be encouraged. In fact, creating a conducive business environment can attract foreign investors, who can fund infrastructure projects and drive economic growth.

It is crucial to reflect on Nigeria’s borrowing history before embarking on another borrowing spree. The Structural Adjustment Program (SAP) of the 1980s, introduced under heavy borrowing conditions, left a legacy of economic hardship. The same pattern has repeated itself with recent loans, intended for development but diverted or mismanaged, leaving the masses worse off.

At this juncture, it is expedient to say a word to Senator Jimoh Ibrahim.  Oga Jimoh, while your intentions may be good, your proposal ignores the harsh realities of Nigeria’s economic and governance challenges. Borrowing “good money” is not a panacea; it is a recipe for chronic dependency if not paired with robust economic reforms and strict accountability measures.

Your comparison of Nigeria to Dubai overlooks the unique circumstances that made Dubai’s borrowing strategy successful. Nigeria cannot afford to gamble its future on a debt-driven model without first fixing its systemic issues.

Moreover, your suggestion that Nigeria negotiate debt forgiveness after accumulating more debt raises ethical and practical concerns. The global financial system is not a charity, and such an approach risks tarnishing the nation’s reputation and creditworthiness.

Nigeria’s path to economic prosperity lies not in reckless borrowing but in prudent financial management, strategic investments, and leveraging its immense human and natural resources. While infrastructure development is critical, it must be achieved sustainably without mortgaging the future.

Oga Jimoh, Nigeria does not need lessons in becoming a chronic debtor. What it needs are leaders who can think innovatively, act decisively, and prioritize the long-term well-being of the nation over short-term gains. The solutions to our economic challenges lie within us, not in the coffers of foreign creditors.

As Christmas 2024 approaches, many are filled with anxiety instead of anticipation. The economic challenges gripping the nation have left many wondering how they will celebrate the holiday. Rising prices, shrinking incomes, and increasing responsibilities create a perfect storm of worry. But in times like these, we are reminded of a profound truth: worrying achieves nothing.

Corrie ten Boom captured this beautifully when she said, “Worry does not empty tomorrow of its sorrow; it empties today of its strength.” Worry magnifies our challenges and blinds us to the blessings already at hand. For Christians, Christmas is more than a celebration; it is a reminder of God’s love and provision through the gift of Christ. This season, let us focus on faith, not fear, trusting in the One who has always been faithful.

Worry is as old as humanity, yet it remains as ineffective as ever. It thrives on uncertainty, exaggerating potential problems while robbing us of peace and joy. During the festive season, worry often centers on material needs: gifts, decorations, and elaborate meals.

However, worrying about what we cannot control serves no purpose. The Bible speaks clearly about the futility of worry. In Matthew 6:27, Jesus asks, “Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?” The answer is obvious. Worry changes nothing about tomorrow; it only steals the joy and strength needed for today.

This year has been marked by economic challenges, and the Christmas season may feel like an added burden rather than a time of celebration. Families are questioning how to afford the festivities, and the thought of disappointing loved ones is causing anxiety.

But Christmas is not about material abundance; it is about the abundance of God’s love. The story of Christ’s birth in a humble manger is a powerful reminder that simplicity and faith are at the heart of the season. When we strip away the commercial trappings, we find that the true essence of Christmas is peace, hope, and joy, gifts that cannot be purchased.

At this juncture, it is not out of place to recall what the Bible says about Worry.  In fact, the Bible offers timeless wisdom on dealing with anxiety, particularly during challenging times. Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount is a treasure trove of guidance. In Matthew 6:25–34, He instructs us not to worry about what we will eat, drink, or wear. Instead, He calls us to trust in God’s provision, pointing to the birds of the air and the lilies of the field as examples of His care.

Jesus’ message is simple yet profound: “Do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own” (Matthew 6:34). This call to live one day at a time is especially relevant during the holiday season.

“Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God; and the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and minds through Christ Jesus.”

While it is wise to plan for Christmas and be mindful of our financial situation, there is a difference between realistic concern and restless anxiety. Concern is rooted in the present, prompting us to take practical steps. Anxiety, however, is fixated on the future, dwelling on uncertainties and worst-case scenarios.

This distinction is crucial. Concern leads to action, budgeting, simplifying plans, or seeking creative ways to celebrate. Anxiety, on the other hand, leads to paralysis, robbing us of joy and productivity.

The Bible calls us to focus on today. God has placed us in the present moment, with the resources and opportunities needed for this day. The past is closed, and the future is under God’s control. Our role is to trust Him and steward the present wisely.

As we prepare for Christmas 2024, let us anchor our hearts in God’s promises. He has assured us of His faithfulness, even in the hardest times.

Against the backdrop of the foregoing view, consider these verses:  “Call upon Me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you shall glorify Me” (Psalm 50:15), “Cast your burden on the Lord, and He shall sustain you; He shall never permit the righteous to be moved” (Psalm 55:22),   and “Casting all your care upon Him, for He cares for you” (1 Peter 5:7).

These words remind us that God is not indifferent to our struggles. He sees, He cares, and He provides.

At this juncture, it is expedient to in this context familiarize you with practical steps to celebrate the oncoming Christmas without worry.

The first step is to simplify your celebration. This can be achieved by focusing on the meaning of Christmas, rather than material expectations. This is as simple acts of love and togetherness often create the most memorable moments.

In a similar vein, it expedient to set a realistic budget.  Plan within your means. Homemade gifts, shared meals, and creative decorations can be just as meaningful as expensive alternatives.

Not to be neglected is to pray about your needs. This can always be done by bringing your concerns to God in prayer, as well as trusting Him to provide what you need, and be open to seeing His provision in unexpected ways.

In a similar vein, prayerfully cultivate the attitude of gratitude. Reflect on the blessings you already have, from family and friends to health and faith. The reason for adopting the attitude of gratitude cannot be farfetched as it shifts our focus from lack to abundance.

Another step to take is to focus on giving. This is as true joy comes from giving, not receiving. Look for ways to bless others, even if it is through small gestures like a heartfelt note or a simple meal shared.

In fact, the true essence of Christmas is not found in lavish feasts or expensive gifts. It is found in the celebration of God’s greatest gift: the birth of Jesus Christ. The angels who announced His birth did not proclaim wealth or prosperity; they proclaimed peace and goodwill to all.

This season, let us return to the simplicity and wonder of that first Christmas. Whether we have much or little, we can find joy in God’s presence and the love we share with others.

Why worry about how 2024 Christmas will be celebrated when there is God? Worrying will not lower prices or increase income, but faith will sustain us through the challenges.  Remember the six words that can transform your mindset this season:  “Worry about nothing; pray about everything.”

As we prepare for the festivities, let us hold onto the peace that comes from trusting God. With Him, we have all we need to celebrate Christmas, not in material abundance, but in the richness of His love and grace.

It is no more news to announce that the Bola Tinubu-led Nigerian government recently sent a delegation to India to assess the safety and viability of Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) as an alternative fuel. However, this initiative has sparked controversy, not because of its purpose but due to the curious composition of the team sent for the task. Among those chosen were comedians and skit makers, including “Ola of Lagos” and Basketmouth. This decision has left not a few Nigerians questioning the seriousness of the government’s intentions and the direction of the country’s energy policy.

In a nation grappling with escalating transportation costs and the aftermath of subsidy removal, this choice of delegation has drawn ire across social media. Critics argue that by sidelining engineers, researchers, and experts in favor of entertainers, the government has undermined public trust in the credibility of its CNG policy.

India’s journey with CNG adoption offers a Masterclass in how to transition to alternative energy sources. Faced with alarming air pollution levels and an over-reliance on imported petroleum, India methodically introduced CNG as a sustainable alternative. This was achieved through a structured approach that cut across expert-driven implementation, infrastructure development, and public engagement.

To put explanatorily put the foregoing view, it is expedient to recall that India engaged engineers, environmental scientists, and energy policy specialists to spearhead its CNG rollout, even as research institutions conducted rigorous safety tests, ensuring public confidence in the new fuel.

Analyzed from the perspective of infrastructure development, before mandating CNG use, India invested heavily in pipelines, refueling stations, and vehicle conversion kits. This infrastructure minimized disruption for drivers and ensured accessibility.

Not only that, India embarked on robust and well-coordinated public engagement as all authorities in the country were compelled to conduct awareness campaigns, educating the populace on the benefits of CNG, even as incentives for vehicle conversions further boosted public acceptance.

Today, cities like Delhi boast extensive CNG networks that have reduced air pollution, saved costs, and set a benchmark for energy transitions.

Given the foregoing narrative, it is not out of place to opine that Nigeria’s CNG rollout: A Comedy of Errors?

In contrast, Nigeria’s approach has been marked by poor planning and, as critics argue, misplaced priorities. The decision to send comedians and skit makers to India for a safety assessment typifies a broader trend of trivializing critical policy issues.

As gathered from a news story titled, “Nigerians Kick As FG Sends Comedians, Skitmakers To India To Assess CNG Safety” dated, Thursday, 28 November 2024, and published on Reuben Abati news blog, social media erupted with reactions to the delegation, many of which were scathing. A user, @ourfavoriteonlinedoc, lamented, “They didn’t send professors of engineering. They didn’t send PhD researchers or MSc students from our best universities. They sent Ola of Lagos, who will come back just to roll on the floor and scream, ‘Put CNG in your car; you will love it.’ What a shame.”

Another user, @Arikeade, questioned the government’s preference for content creators over professionals, while @frankobaressi called the delegation emblematic of a leadership culture that defies logic. “This is what happens when touts handle the affairs of this nation,” he remarked.

In fact, the risks of neglecting expertise is costly. The uproar is not without basis. CNG, while celebrated for its affordability and environmental benefits, is not without risks. In Nigeria, concerns about the safety of CNG vehicles have grown following reported explosions. These incidents underscore the need for a meticulous safety assessment conducted by engineers and energy specialists, not entertainers.

Moreover, the optics of the government’s decision to send skit makers instead of technical experts weaken public confidence. Citizens question whether their leaders are genuinely committed to solving the country’s energy challenges or are merely staging another political performance.

However, irrespective of the uproar which the initiative has generated, particularly on social media platforms, the role of skit makers in national discourse cannot be pooh-poohed.

To be fair, skit makers and content creators hold significant influence in shaping public opinion, especially among younger demographics. Their inclusion in promotional campaigns could serve to popularize CNG adoption. However, sending them as the primary assessors of safety and quality raises serious questions about priorities and competence.

In fact, there is a clear distinction between leveraging influencers for public sensitization and tasking them with responsibilities that demand technical expertise. Nigeria’s decision to turn these roles into a show of comedy reflects a lack of strategic planning that could undermine the credibility of its CNG initiative.

Without a doubt, it is expedient we learn from India as it would unarguably serve as pathways for Nigeria.  In fact, if Nigeria hopes to replicate India’s success with CNG, it must prioritize expertise and infrastructure development, and it can be achieved by engaging professionals.

To the end of the foregoing, the government should involve engineers, energy specialists, and safety experts to conduct comprehensive assessments of CNG infrastructure and technology. Their findings will form the backbone of a credible rollout strategy.

In a similar vein, there is the need for Investment in Infrastructure. Without adequate pipelines, refueling stations, and conversion kits, the promise of affordable CNG will remain hollow. Nigeria must prioritize these investments to ensure accessibility for drivers nationwide.

Also, public awareness and incentives should not be ignored. Like India, Nigeria should conduct awareness campaigns highlighting the benefits and safety of CNG, even as offering subsidies for vehicle conversions could also encourage adoption.

Given the foregoing, it is expedient to note that skit makers and influencers can play a valuable role in educating the public, but their involvement should be limited to outreach efforts, not technical assessments.

In fact, the backlash against the government’s choice of delegation reflects broader frustrations with Nigeria’s governance. For many citizens, the decision symbolizes a pattern of misplaced priorities and disregard for expertise.

Also, the transition to CNG holds immense potential to reduce transportation costs, curb pollution, and diversify Nigeria’s energy portfolio. However, realizing this potential requires leadership that values competence over theatrics.

Without a doubt, Nigeria stands at a crossroads. The decision to send comedians and skit makers to assess CNG safety may be a moment of levity, but it also underscores the critical need for a paradigm shift in governance. To build a sustainable energy future, Nigeria must learn from India’s playbook: prioritize expertise, invest in infrastructure, and engage the public meaningfully.

Until then, the joke may very well be on us, a nation that has yet to decide whether it is serious about progress or content to laugh at its own missteps.

Balthazar Ebang Engonga, the nephew of Equatorial Guinea’s long-serving President Teodoro Obiang, has been acquitted by the country’s Supreme Court after facing a high-profile case involving intimate videos that made waves, both locally and internationally. The court’s ruling, which dismissed all charges against Mr. Engonga, was grounded on the lack of evidence to support the allegations, as well as the assertion that all parties involved in the videos were consenting adults.

This case first attracted attention after compromising footage of Mr. Engonga surfaced online, sparking a media frenzy. The court’s ruling brought clarity to the situation, stating that medical tests confirmed there was no transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, further cementing Engonga’s claim of innocence. However, beyond the acquittal, the case has brought to light broader issues surrounding privacy, consent, accountability, and the implications of the digital era on personal and professional lives.

The release of intimate videos of public figures is a frequent topic of discussion in today’s digital world, where personal lives are often exposed without permission. The leak of videos involving Mr. Engonga was no different, attracting significant media coverage and public attention. The nature of the videos was compromising, and the shockwaves reverberated far beyond Equatorial Guinea, drawing international scrutiny. As the videos spread on various platforms, they became a spectacle, fueling gossip and speculation about the private lives of the individuals involved.

Despite the sensationalism of the situation, Mr. Engonga has maintained that the individuals shown in the videos were consenting adults. The Supreme Court, in its judgment, supported this assertion, and the ruling emphasized the lack of any evidence to suggest non-consensual behavior. Medical tests were also conducted, which proved that there were no sexually transmitted diseases involved in the case, further supporting Mr. Engonga’s defense.

However, the public’s reaction to the videos did not stop at the question of consent. In an unexpected twist, several married men whose wives appeared in the footage expressed gratitude to Mr. Engonga. These men explained that the videos had revealed hidden aspects of their marital lives, prompting some to seek divorce. This development is a stark reflection of the complexities of modern relationships and the role that privacy, trust, and transparency play in marriage.

For many, the case became more than just a scandal involving a public figure, it became a symbol of the digital age’s power to expose even the most intimate corners of our lives. The internet, which has the potential to connect and inform, can also serve as a tool for destruction, often without regard for the emotional consequences.

In response to the leak, Mr. Engonga has vowed to take legal action against those responsible for disseminating the videos. He described the leak as a serious violation of his privacy, one that has caused significant emotional distress to his family. His wife, in particular, was deeply affected by the ordeal, as were many of the other people featured in the footage. The emotional toll that such an invasion of privacy takes on individuals is often underestimated. In Mr. Engonga’s case, it not only impacted his personal life but also his professional reputation and the public’s perception of him.

The issue of privacy in the digital age is complex, as the boundaries between public and private life are increasingly blurred. While public figures often have their personal lives scrutinized, the leak of private content without consent raises ethical questions. Who owns the right to one’s personal data, and what happens when that data is shared without permission? The actions of those who leaked the videos, and the subsequent viral spread of the footage, pose critical questions about accountability and the ethics of digital content sharing.

In many ways, this case highlights the difficulty of navigating the online space, where personal information is often treated as currency and privacy is viewed as a luxury. As social media platforms and online spaces become more pervasive, the consequences of sharing intimate content without consent are far-reaching. The damage done to individuals’ lives is not just legal but deeply personal, affecting their families, relationships, and mental well-being.

Before the scandal, Mr. Engonga was known for his role as the head of the National Financial Investigation Agency (ANIF) in Equatorial Guinea. In this capacity, he worked to combat financial crimes such as money laundering and illicit financial flows. He was seen as a key figure in the fight against corruption, particularly in a country where transparency and accountability in government finances have long been concerns.

However, after his arrest on October 25, 2024, allegations surfaced that he had embezzled substantial amounts of state funds, hiding them in offshore accounts. These allegations added an additional layer of complexity to an already controversial case. Despite being publicly accused of financial crimes, Mr. Engonga has not yet addressed these charges in public, leaving much to be speculated about the true nature of the case. His arrest brought him into the crosshairs of both his critics and supporters, leading to questions about his professional conduct and the personal scandal that followed.

The combination of his work in law enforcement and his personal indiscretions has raised eyebrows, particularly given the increasing attention on corruption within the government. His arrest and the subsequent revelations about his private life have cast a shadow on his professional reputation, forcing people to question the integrity of individuals in positions of power.

After his arrest, Mr. Engonga was imprisoned in Malabo’s infamous Black Beach prison, a facility notorious for its harsh conditions and its treatment of political opponents. Black Beach prison has long been associated with human rights abuses, with numerous reports documenting the mistreatment of detainees, particularly those viewed as enemies of the government. The prison has become a symbol of the oppressive nature of the country’s justice system, which has drawn international condemnation over the years.

For Mr. Engonga, his imprisonment in Malabo’s infamous Black Beach prison was a traumatic experience that only added to the already complicated nature of his case. The brutal conditions of the prison have been documented in multiple reports, with former detainees recounting instances of physical abuse, torture, and inadequate medical care. The prison has become a focal point in discussions about the government’s treatment of those it deems a threat, further fueling skepticism about the fairness of the country’s legal system.

One of the most striking aspects of this case is how technology, particularly the internet and social media, has played a central role in the unfolding drama. The leak of the intimate videos and their subsequent virality on social platforms demonstrated the immense power that digital content holds. While technology has made information more accessible and communication more instantaneous, it has also raised ethical questions about the sharing of private content without consent.

The ease with which personal videos and photos can be shared in the digital era has led to an explosion of online content, much of which is not intended for public consumption. The unintended consequences of this are vast, and they often include emotional distress, reputational damage, and legal ramifications for those involved. The sharing of intimate content, whether for revenge, profit, or entertainment, has become an all-too-common occurrence, and the impact it has on the lives of those affected cannot be underestimated.

As a society, we must reckon with the ethics of digital content sharing and its consequences. While freedom of speech and access to information are fundamental rights, they should not come at the expense of an individual’s right to privacy and dignity. The case of Balthazar Ebang Engonga serves as a stark reminder of how quickly personal information can be weaponized, and how the digital world can invade our private spaces in ways that are both harmful and irreversible.

This case highlights several critical issues surrounding consent, privacy, and accountability in the digital age. It also underscores the need for stronger legal frameworks to protect individuals in an era where the boundaries between the private and public spheres are increasingly difficult to define. In particular, it calls attention to the dangers of sharing intimate content online and the emotional toll that such invasions of privacy can have on those involved.

The actions of those responsible for leaking the videos, coupled with the wider public reaction, show how digital media can reshape our understanding of consent and accountability. As the world becomes more connected through the internet, it is essential that we address the ethical and legal implications of digital content sharing. The case of Mr. Engonga is a poignant reminder of the power of technology in modern society, and the importance of respecting privacy in an increasingly transparent world.

This incident may have concluded with an acquittal, but the broader questions it raises about consent, privacy, and accountability in the digital age are far from settled. As we continue to navigate the complexities of the online world, it is vital that we remain vigilant in safeguarding the rights and dignity of individuals, both in their personal and professional lives.

When news broke that the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) had published a list of 9,532 alleged land title defaulters, including heavyweights like former Nigerian Head of State Ibrahim Babangida (IBB), it did not take long for discussions to circle around the interplay of power, influence, and the game of land politics in Nigeria. The inclusion of IBB, one of Nigeria’s most astute political figures, in a list of debtors owing ₦152 million for a plot in Asokoro, sent shockwaves through the political corridors of Abuja, raising one intriguing question: “Shey Wike think say e go fit dribble Maradona?”

This line of inquiry, coming from a colleague in the office, plays on a larger political conversation, whether Barrister Nyesom Wike, former Governor of Rivers State, and currently the minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), known for his political sharpness, could truly outmaneuver IBB, who, in his heyday, earned the moniker “Maradona” for his political sagacity. IBB’s deft maneuvers on the political field were legendary, and as the news of his alleged debt circulated, it was easy to see how the dynamics of power and influence in Nigeria’s political landscape could be at play in this seemingly mundane land dispute.

Ibrahim Babangida, Nigeria’s military ruler from 1985 to 1993, is no stranger to political intrigue. His tenure, marked by both controversy and skillful maneuvering, set the stage for him to be a political kingmaker long after his time in office. Known for his ability to play rival factions against each other, IBB’s name has remained synonymous with political power broking in Nigeria. It is not an overstatement to suggest that IBB’s influence still looms large, especially in the corridors of power where alliances and rivalries are constantly shifting.

So, when the FCTA named IBB among the defaulters for a ₦152 million debt on land in Asokoro, the first thought might be: Is this an attempt to bring down a figure as influential as Maradona? The FCTA’s move to expose such a prominent figure is unusual, considering the history of political protection and patronage that surrounds Nigeria’s elite. Land, particularly in Abuja, is not just a matter of real estate; it is a symbol of power, status, and influence.

What makes this more interesting is the timing. Governor Wike, a man known for his combative political style and ability to challenge the status quo, has been rising in political prominence. His recent activities, especially his push for reforms and changes in political alignments, seem to coincide with this new wave of land titling scrutiny. Could this be a subtle way for Wike to assert his dominance over Nigeria’s power structures? Could he be trying to check Maradona’s seemingly untouchable status, leveraging this land debt to his advantage?

Governor Nyesom Wike is a seasoned political player, particularly in the volatile world of Nigerian state politics. His reputation for being direct, tough, and unyielding in his approach has earned him both admirers and enemies. Wike’s penchant for challenging entrenched political interests has made him a figure to watch, especially as he moves into the national political stage with an eye on greater influence.

The ongoing tussle between Wike and some political elites has been brewing for some time. Wike’s influence is undeniable, particularly in the Niger Delta region, but his recent moves show a man eager to expand his national reach. His confrontations with federal government policies, his vocal support for opposition parties, and his strategic positioning in the aftermath of the 2023 elections all point to his desire to reshape the political order. In that light, the question of whether Wike could “dribble” IBB, who is, after all, the man who has maneuvered around Nigeria’s political landscape for decades, is both timely and intriguing.

Wike’s confrontational style may suggest that he is testing the waters with his political rivals. The publication of IBB’s alleged land debt could be part of a larger strategy of political positioning, one where Wike seeks to challenge the perceived invincibility of the old guard. By targeting landholders like IBB, Wike might be sending a subtle message that no one is above scrutiny, not even Nigeria’s most seasoned political players.

Land in Nigeria is more than just property, it is a symbol of wealth, power, and influence. The recent naming of top political figures as defaulters by the FCTA signals that land title disputes, especially in the capital, are closely tied to the intricate webs of Nigerian politics. As Abuja has grown into the heart of Nigeria’s political and administrative activities, land ownership in the city has become a marker of one’s proximity to power. A plot of land in Asokoro, for example, is not just real estate; it is literarily a seat at the table of political elites.

For IBB, who once held absolute power in Nigeria, land ownership in Abuja is a status symbol, something that reflects both his past political dominance and ongoing influence. However, the fact that his name appeared on the list of defaulters raises questions. Could it be that there is a larger political maneuver behind it? Perhaps the timing is not coincidental; perhaps it is an attempt to chip away at his legacy and influence.

The question that lingers is whether Wike, with his recent political endeavors, can truly outplay IBB in this game of political chess. IBB’s reputation as a master of realpolitik suggests that any move against him is unlikely to go unnoticed. Maradona’s ability to navigate Nigeria’s complex political terrain is well-documented; his alliances and machinations are often subtle, yet highly effective.

If  Wike indeed sees this as an opportunity to undermine IBB’s influence, it would not be the first time he has taken on formidable political figures. Wike has consistently demonstrated an ability to rally public opinion and apply pressure in ways that force even the most established players to reconsider their strategies. However, challenging IBB is no small feat. The former Head of State is known for his networks, his ability to play the long game, and his capacity to keep his political cards close to his chest.

The fact that prominent figures like IBB are part of the FCTA’s land defaulter list suggests that no one is immune from scrutiny, no matter how powerful. But whether this move will diminish IBB’s stature or simply fuel his political survival instincts remains to be seen.

The unfolding land title dispute in the Federal Capital Territory is more than just a case of defaulters and overdue payments. It is a reflection of the larger struggle for power in Nigerian politics. Wike, known for his combative and strategic nature, may very well be attempting to make a move against one of Nigeria’s most skilled powerbrokers. However, IBB’s decades of political experience, combined with his vast network, suggest that he will not go down without a fight.

As the FCTA’s ultimatum looms, the game of political maneuvering continues, and the outcome remains uncertain. One thing is clear: in Nigerian politics, nothing is as it seems, and every move is part of a larger chess game where only the most astute players can survive. Will Wike be able to outmaneuver Maradona? Time will tell. But in Nigerian politics, as in the world of football, anything is possible.