The undeniable truth is that 99% of Nigeria's current challenges stem from General Muhammadu Buhari's presidency, marked by the highest levels of incompetence and recklessness, resulting in eight years of devastation. The consequences of his actions are what we are now experiencing. Tinubu's confused tenure exacerbated matters by adding fuel to Buhari's already consuming fire, unlike what an Obi presidency could have achieved in alleviating them by extinguishing the flames. Is it appropriate for Buhari to roam freely amidst the catastrophic damage he inflicted upon this nation?

Meanwhile, let's refrain from solely blaming Nigerians from all regions for mistakenly voting for Tinubu. The reality is that Nigerians transcended religion and ethnicity to vote for Obi, only to be deceived by the same heartless individuals—Buhari and INEC chief, Prof. Yakubu Mohammed.

Another institution equally culpable alongside Buhari is the judiciary. Let judicial officers stop this annoying pretense as if they live in another world. How can reasonable men unreasonably search for self-evident truths and even bury them under the weight of technicality when found? I assert this with the utmost sense of responsibility.

Not a few defenders of neoliberalism have criticised the judgment of the Federal High Court in the case of Femi Falana SAN v Attorney-General of the Federation for directing the Federal Government to fix the prices of essential commodities in the country. The criticism of the judgment is anchored on the claim that Nigeria is a capitalist country. It is surprising that such critics are not aware that the leading capitalist countries in the world regularly subsidise energy and gas and regulate the prices of certain goods and services.

According to Hugh Rockoff, governments in the United States "have fixed the price of gasoline, the rent on apartments in New York City, and the wage of unskilled labour, to name a few. At times, governments go beyond fixing specific prices and try to control the general level of prices, as was done in the United States during both world wars and the Korean War, and by the Nixon administration from 1971 to 1973."

Sometime in October last year, in response to the growing demand for rent control in the United Kingdom, the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan recently said that: “Londoners re-elected me on a manifesto pledge to push for the powers to control rents and I will not stop advocating for this lifeline on their behalf. I am delivering on my promise to build a better, fairer, and more prosperous London by building more affordable homes in the capital and providing vital support to Londoners through the cost-of-living crisis. It’s about time the government did the same.”

Notwithstanding that Nigeria operates a so-called free market economy, several laws have imposed a duty on the Federal Government and State Governments to regulate the prices of fuel, tickets for train and domestic air travels, schools fees paid in government colleges and tuition in tertiary institutions, water rates, electricity tariffs, telecom call rates, tolling fees paid by road users, land use charge, fees for land documentation, rents paid by tenants and wages paid to workers. The Federal Government has just set up a Wages Review Panel to recommend the minimum wage payable by the public and private sectors in the country.

It is common knowledge that the federal government fixes duties on goods imported into the country. In particular, the Nigeria Customs Service is legally obligated to collect such duties. However, the Government has decreed that import duties shalll not be paid in respect of certain goods and products, including all basic foods items, medical and pharmaceutical products, books and educational materials, baby products, fertilizer, locally produced agricultural and veterinary medicine, farming machinery and farming transportation equipment, plant and machinery imported for use in the export processing zone.

Some private companies that are required to pay import duties running to several trillions of Naira are also granted duty waivers by the federal government. In the last 5 years of the Buhari administration, they gave duty waivers of N17 trillion to a few "captains of industry.". Similarly, the Tinubu administration has extended such facilities to not less than 34 companies. It is submitted that the federal government is duty bound to prevent the beneficiaries of such humongous duty waivers from fixing the prices of the goods without regulation.

The Central Bank of Nigeria is legally mandated to fix the exchange rate of the Naira visavis other currencies. But contrary to the letter and spirit of the Central Bank Act, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has continued to devalue the Naira through dollarisation. The CBN has also floated the currency to allow market forces to fix the exchange of the Naira. But, the various circulars recently issued by the CBN, in the past couple of weeks, have confirmed that the federal government can no longer afford to allow market forces alone to fix the exchange rate of the Naira without regulation.

It is interesting to note that the services provided by a number of professional bodies are fixed and controlled by law. For instance, any lawyer who fails to pay the annual practising fees shall be denied audience in courts. The Stamp and Seal (purchased from the Nigerian Bar Association) shall be affixed to all documents, including court processes prepared by lawyers. In addition, the 2023 Legal Practitioners Remuneration Order has fixed the professional fees charged by legal practitioners. Any lawyer who fails to comply with the Remuneration Order shall be sanctioned by the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee.

Therefore, the Order of the Federal High Court which has directed the Federal Government to control the prices of essential commodities in Nigeria is in accordance with section 16 (1)(b) of the Constitution which has imposed a legal obligation on the Government to control "the national economy in such manner as to secure the maximum welfare, freedom and happiness of every citizen on the basis of social justice and equality of status and opportunity."

Last week, Vice President Kashim Shettima announced the plan of the Bola Tinubu administration to set up a Commodity Board which will be given the mandate to assess and regulate food prices, as well as maintain a strategic food reserve for stabilising prices of crucial grains and other food items. That’s the way to go if the poor in the society are to “breathe” as the implementation of the reforms embarked upon by the Tinubu administration gather pace.

The plan is in accordance with the Fifth Alteration to the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 which stipulates that the Government shall direct its policy towards ensuring the right to food and food security for the people. It is also a revival of the Commodity Boards that were abolished as part of the conditionalities of the World Bank-inspired Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) that was imposed on Nigeria in 1986 by the General Ibrahim Babangida regime.

This is a welcome development as the official announcement comes after the federal high court in Lagos ordered the federal government to fix the prices of essential goods within seven days. It is however pertinent to note that notwithstanding that the Attorney-General of the Federation has filed an appeal against the judgment, the federal government and some state Governments have been compelled to halt the moves by landlords and traders to fix the prices of goods in defiance of relevant laws.

Hence, on February 16, 2024, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) temporarily sealed off a popular shopping mall, Sahad Stores in Abuja for persistently displaying lower prices on shelves and charging higher prices. The Commission exercised its powers under Section 18(f) of the FCCPC Act. Even though the shopping mall has since been reopened based on the undertaking of the owner to stop further involvement in “misleading” or “deceptive” pricing practices, the FCCPC has demonstrated its resolve to protect consumers from wanton manipulation of prices by traders.

In the same vein, the Lagos State Government has warned that it would start penalizing house owners found guilty of renting out their apartments at exorbitant fees. This disclosure was contained in a statement issued by the Commissioner for Housing, Mr. Moruf Akinderu-Fatai, who stated that the government would wield a big stick on allottees who engaged in sharp practices. Mr. Akinderu-Fatai said that residents of various state housing schemes have filed complaints about the high rent being charged by homeowners, adding that the state government would not hesitate to withdraw allocation from culpable home owners.

A few days ago, a bag of cement was sold for as much as N13, 000 in many parts of the country. But based on public outcry, the federal government and major cement manufacturers have jointly resolved to peg the price of 50kg bag of cement at between ₦7,000 and ₦8,000 depending on the location nationwide. The Minister of Works, Sen. David Umahi made this known to newsmen after a protracted meeting with major cement manufacturers in the country on February 19, 2024. The meeting was convened at the instance of President Bola Tinubu.

In view of the rising cost of living in Nigeria as a result of the religious implementation of neoliberal policies dictated by the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, the Nigerian people should mount pressure on the Federal Government and State Governments to invest in massive production of food and other goods. Meanwhile, the skyrocketing duties and tariffs imposed on essential commodities that are imported into the country should be substantially reduced so as to make them cheap and affordable in line with the terms of the judgment of the Federal High Court.

In fact, what you are about to read is a two-pronged response to a two-pronged attack on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu by two notable Northern leaders. The attack by the Sultan of Sokoto was responded to by the Yoruba Nation activist, Chief Sunday Adeyemo aka Sunday Igboho, while the second attack by the Emir of Kano was responded to by Tunde Rahman, one of Tinubu’s presidential aides. Let’s take them one after the other: Sultan/Igboho first; then Emir of Kano/Rahman after that, both as they were reported in the media.

“Insecurity, poverty can’t be tackled overnight", Igboho tells the Sultan of Sokoto. Mr. Adeyemo maintained that the blame of bad economy, perennial insecurity problem, food inflation, unemployment and youth restiveness should not be heaped on Tinubu's administration, which is just about eight months old.

“Yoruba nation activist, Sunday Adeyemo, popularly known as Sunday Igboho, on Thursday, took on the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammad Sa’ad Abubakar, contending that the nation’s twin challenges of insecurity and poverty cannot be resolved overnight.

“He emphasized that relevant stakeholders in governance, economy, security and other critical sectors should be committed to finding ways round the insecurity challenge and socioeconomic obstacles for Nigeria to achieve peace and steady development.

“In a statement he personally signed, in reaction to the position of Mr. Abubakar on the prevalent hardship and spate of insecurity in some parts of the country, Mr. Adeyemo stressed that President Bola Tinubu’s administration should be allowed to work out solutions capable of addressing the situation.

"Recall that Mr. Abubakar, who is also the chairman, Northern Traditional Rulers’ Council, had, during the sixth executive meeting of the council in Arewa House, Kaduna (last week) Wednesday, declared that Nigeria is sitting on a keg of gunpowder due to poverty, hardship and ravaging insecurity bedeviling the nation.

"(While) Mr. Adeyemo posited that the Sultan’s position on the current state of the nation was not out of place (he) maintained that the blame of bad economy, perennial insecurity problem, food inflation, unemployment and youth restiveness should not be heaped on Tinubu’s administration, which is just about eight months old".

According to Igboho's statement, “it is important for our leaders at all levels, be it religious or traditional, to demonstrate commitment to bringing solutions to the table at this crucial point in our history. Our problems as a nation are foundational.

“Nigeria had been in a precarious state in terms of bad governance, poor economy, terrorism, insecurity, irresponsive leadership for decades. I believe that the Federal Government is not unconcerned about the plight of the people and has taken steps to remedy the situation.”

"Mr. Adeyemo noted that while the nation could not gloss over the incessant attacks by rampaging herdsmen on farmlands, most especially during the immediate past regime of former President Muhammadu Buhari, thus forcing thousands of farmers to abandon farm settlements, it is thoughtful to say that the effect of farmers/herders’ clash, leading to killings (and the) destruction of farms, has been devastating on food production and agriculture value chain.

“This worrisome development has been one of the major causes of food insecurity and increase in prices of food items and commodities. We need to allow the incumbent administration to explore all measures being deployed to address inflation, foreign exchange issues, exorbitant foodstuff prices, which will soon yield results.

“The recent decision by the government to deploy troops for the protection of farmers against herders’ attacks, which are negatively affecting harvest and food productivity, will further boost the confidence of peasant farmers and agric. entrepreneurs to return to the farm. Also, the plan to set up the National Commodity Board will checkmate escalating food inflation,” the statement added.

The Sultan’s statement, though not unexpected, was reckless, provocative and inciting, to say the least. What does he mean that they can no longer restrain their people? For eight years they restrained the same people while Buhari ruined the country irreparably but cannot now restrain the people while Tinubu grapples with the ruins left behind by Buhari! Interestingly, Sunday Adeyemo’s statement, though straight to the point, was measured; it was more of that of a statesman than of an agent provocateur like the Sultan's. Nigerians are no fools!

Titled “Olayemi Cardoso’s dilemma” the second response by Tunde Rahman started by detailing the CBN governor’s antecedents that he said eminently qualified him for his present job before stating the variables that he said would make or mar Cardoso in his new assignment: “But in the wake of the floating of the Naira, some of the variables shaping the value of the national currency, including limited production in the country as a result of insecurity, Nigerians’ high taste for imported products, dwindling exports, poor dollar remittances, humongous school fees of Nigerian students abroad and medical tourism - all of which engendered a strong demand for dollar, far outweighing supply - seem to be clearly beyond his control.

"Until these situations change for the better, no monetary policies by the CBN will work any miracle, hence Cardoso’s predicament. For instance, in his presentation at the sectoral debate organized by the House of Representatives… the CBN governor lamented that the growing number of Nigerian students studying abroad, increasing medical tourism and food imports have led to the depreciation of the Naira against the Dollar. According to him, over the past decade, foreign exchange demand for education and healthcare totaled nearly $40 billion, surpassing the total current foreign exchange reserves of the CBN, while personal travel allowances accounted for a total of $58.7 billion during the same period”

The question here is: Since we know the problems, tell us what we are doing to solve them! I read of efforts to revamp some hospitals; good! But what are we doing to reverse the "japa" of doctors and other medical staff? What are we doing to revamp our institutions of higher learning? What efforts are we making to engage university teachers and implement the MOU entered into with them?

Not done yet, Rahman continued: “Another critical yet intriguing factor but seemingly odd in Cardoso’s reckoning is the perception in some quarters of some of the decisions of the CBN, which the apex bank considers purely administrative, but which some others give strange connotations. One of such is the decision to move some departments of the bank; notably banking supervision, other financial institutions supervision, consumer protection department, and payment system management department from Abuja to Lagos.

" Indeed, until the Emir of Kano, Alhaji Aminu Ado Bayero, spoke on this issue last week, I had reckoned that the imperative of the planned relocation of some CBN departments and the headquarters of the Federal Airport Authority of Nigeria from Abuja to Lagos was evident enough. I had reasoned that the Northern politicians, including Senator Ali Ndume from Borno State, who had moved to bring down the roof over the development, were merely playing politics.

Rahman then quoted the Emir as saying: “We are indeed suspicious on why Mr. President single-handedly relocated key departments of CBN and outright relocation of FAAN to Lagos. We are receiving a series of messages from my subjects, and most of them expressed concern over the relocation of CBN and FAAN to Lagos. President Tinubu should come out clean on this matter and talk to Nigerians in the language they would understand. Do more enlightenment on this matter. I, for one, cannot tell the actual intentions of the government. We should be made to actually understand why the relocation of the CBN and FAAN offices back to Lagos.”

Rahman said many would wonder “why some members of the northern elites are losing their cool, misinterpreting this move and, perhaps inadvertently, heating up the polity on this rather elementary matter. Is their reservation altruistic? Or are they just being sincerely mistaken and reading unnecessary motives into the policy?” While I agree that the Northern leaders' views on this issue is not altruistic but unhelpful, tribal, sectional, selfish and myopic, I disagree with Rahman that more PR by Cardoso would have changed the Northern leaders’ opinion. No amount of PR will! Rahman advised the CBN governor to “be political without being partisan”. I disagree! The CBN governor is not a politician and must resist every insidious effort to turn him into one.

However, I agree with Rahman that “those who are responding negatively to the policy (of moving some offices from Abuja to Lagos) are treating Abuja as if it belongs to the North rather than being the symbol of the entire country as the Federal Capital Territory. In that capacity, as the FCT, Abuja belongs to all and belongs to no one. In the same vein, as the economic capital and nerve center of the country, Lagos is a melting pot where representatives of virtually all ethnic and cultural groups in the country reside and earn a living. There is absolutely nothing that says that the headquarters of all federal agencies must be located in the federal capital even when economic considerations and efficiency dictate otherwise. Some federal agencies reside neither in Abuja nor Lagos at present, and their work goes on unimpeded”.

O yes! If need be, let more FG offices be moved from Abuja to Lagos and other parts of the country. Akinola Aguda, Kayode Esho, Tai Solarin and other Yoruba conscientious and eminent luminaries who thought they were being patriotic when they recommended and or supported the movement of the capital from Lagos to Abuja will squirm in their grave, seeing how the North is appropriating to themselves alone what should belong to all of us equally! Every part of Nigeria is qualified to house any agency of the federal government if we are truly the Federal Republic of Nigeria and not an appendage of the feudal North.

The 181-megawatt Geometric Power plant in the Osisioma Industrial Layout of Aba in Abia State will now be commissioned on Monday, February 26, 2024, according to a statement by the company’s management issued just now.

The plant was originally scheduled for inauguaration on Saturday, February 24, by President Bola Tinubu.

The new date was chosen by The Presidency in Abuja due to what insider sources described as unexpected developments.

The president will commission the 188-MW thermal plant alongside Aba Power Ltd which will take electricity from the new plant and supply to nine of the 17 local governement areas in Abia State.

 Reacting to the decision to postpone the long-awaited commissioning to Monday, an energy consultant in Lagos, Engineer Cliff Eneh who was a senior manager with the defunct National Electric Power of Nigeria (NEPA), after serving as a senior engineer with the Texa Power and Light Corporation in the United States, said this morning: “A 48-hour difference is not significant.

“We are proud of the support the Federal Governemnt has of late been giving to the Geometric Power integrated company, the only group in Nigeria that will generate and distribute its own power; other power firms either generate or distribute but do not get involved in both”.

Described as the biggest investment in the Southeast, Geometric Power has spent some $800 million dollars on its integrated power project, which includes building a 27-kilometre natural gas pipeline from Owaza in Ukwa west LGA in Abia State to the Osisioma Industrial Layout in Aba.

“We have, in addition, installed 150,000 kilometres of cables and wires and installed four new power substations as well as refurbished three others inherited from the defunct Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN”, explained Ben Caven, a former NEPA Executive Director famous for leading Transmission, Generation and Engineering Divisions simulatenously in the former state-owned power utility.

 Caven is now the Managing Director of Geometric Power Ltd.

Patrick Umeh, a former executive with the Los Angeles Water and Light in the United States who later served as Commissioner in-charge of Markets, Market Rates and Competition at the Nigeria Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC), described the tibular poles mounted by Geometric Power in Aba and the environs as “incomparable in Africa.

“Only in cities like Tokyo and San Francisco in California you have facilities of this quality and sizes.

“Much as they are very tall, as all of us can see, the tubular poles here are actually about 10 meters deep.

“In other words, in the unlikely event of a natural disaster like earthquake in Aba or the environs, Aba Power and the Geometric Group will still be able to supply electricity to its numerous customers”.

The Geometric Power Group was founded by Professor Bart Nnaji, a globally respected academic engineer in the United Staetes, who has been Nigeria’s Minister of Science and Technology and later Minister of Power.

Nnaji embarked on the integrated project after then World Bank President James Wolfensohn and then Nigeria’s Finance Minister Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala visted Aba on March 17, 2004, and discovered that the greatest challenge facing both large-scale and medioum-scale industrialists in Aba, reputed to be the centre of indigenous manufacturing in Nigeria, is epileptic power supply.

Both Wolfensohn and Okonjo-Iweala appealed to Nnaji to assist with a power plant dedicated to Aba, following the 22MW Abuja Emergency Power Plant he led a team of Nigerian engineers to build in Abuja from 2000 to 2001 that supplied uninterrupted power to critical places like the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Company, the Central Bank headquarters, the Aso Rock and the entire Central Business District of Abuja.

‘Electricity was rarely available in Aba”, noted Chief Alphonsus Udeigbo, President General of the 22,000-member Aba Landlords Protection and Development Association (ALPANDA), “and when it was available it was so poor that it couldn't power your household appliances, let alone industrial machines”.

The inauguartion of the Geometric Power next Monday, according to Sir Alexander Maduakor, President of the Association of Aba Industrialists, “will mark a new dawn in the country, not just in Aba or Abia State”.

Foundation member of All Progressives Congress (APC), Mr. Osita Okechukwu, has urged the Progressive Governors Forum (PGF) to remove Imo State Governor, His Excellency, Hope Uzodimma as its chairman, before he wrecks our great party.

He made the call while reacting to the shameful bungling of the Edo State Gubernatorial Primary, which Uzodinma chaired.

In a statement in Abuja, Wednesday, the foundation member of APC appealed to the Progressive Governors Forum to as a matter of urgent national importance to remove His Excellency, Hope Uzodinma as chairman for the mismanagement of Edo State Gubernatorial Primary election which regrettably produced three candidates, a sordid scenario not befitting of a progressive party.

Okechukwu wondered why His Excellency Hope Uzodimma who bungled similar assignment in Edo 2020 should be given second assignment and asked how many more malfeasance do we still expect from my big brother, before he is eased out of vital assignments?

He posed critical questions among which are: how can a sane Chairman of APC Governors Forum deliberately breach the extant laws by announcing result with impunity; albeit consigned to the dust bin his elementary knowledge that it is the sole duty of the Returning Officer?

Based on the foregoing, is it appropriate for chairman of Progressive Governors Forum to abandon the more germane issue of advising Mr President alongside with other progressive governors on how best to rescue Nigeria from the dire economic doldrums, thus chasing rat while the house is burning?

“For me it is obvious that Uzodimma seems not understand the demands of his office as Progressive Governors Forum, but chooses to meddle with political assignments, which amounts to chasing rat while the house is on fire.”

Moreover, our party should take serious steps to quickly repair the monumental damage that Governor Hope Uzodimma has done to the image of our national chairman Dr. Abdullahi Umar Ganduje, whom he cajoled into endorsement of his cancelled shambolic primary election,”

When reminded that he was one of the key early supporters of Governor Uzodinma, he agreed and said he had apologised for the grievous error and is warning the Progressive Governors Forum to avoid more grave wreckage as chameleon never changed its antics.

Enumerating the serial misfortune harvested by the Imo State Governor, Okechukwu narrated how APC’s misfortunes started with Anambra State gubernatorial primary election which Uzodimma mangled and metastasised during the party’s Congressional elections in the Southeast zone in 2022, which he pocketed.

He stated: “Then, as if that ugly prelude to 2023 general elections was not enough, Governor Uzodimma generated hatred, rancour, malcontents and alienated APC membership long before Peter Obi’s factor.”

“The summary of Uzodimma’s woeful leadership is the 2023 presidential election results in the Southeast, which posted dismal outcomes:
Abia-8,914 against 85,058 in 2019, Anambra-5,111 against 33,298 in 2019, Ebonyi-42,402 against 90,726 in 2019, Enugu-4,722 against 54,423 in 2019 and Imo-66,406 against 140,463 in 2019.” Okechukwu submitted.

“I like the noise of democracy.” James Buchanan Jr.

The lie that Nigeria is operating a multi-party system of politics or government, with a whopping 18 legally registered political parties (see: INEC, 2023), is daily being perforated by the actual practice of politics (realpolitik, as the Germans call it) in the country; a classic example of appearance being way different from reality.
The body language of Nigerian politicians—and the atmosphere of its political trajectory—has always been tilted in favour of at best a two-party and at worst, a one-party set-up. This could be traced back to the First Republic, during the clash of the alliances between the Nigerian National Alliance (NNA) and the United Progressive Grand Alliance (UPGA), well into the Second Republic when the dominant ruling National Party of Nigeria (NPN) sought to smother into oblivion any voice of dissent or opposition but rather foist on the opposition, the Hobson’s choice of choosing between either entering the Big Tent of the NPN, or facing a well-oiled witch-hunt. This is usually climaxed either in having some opposition actors being hacked to death by the assassin’s axe or being rammed into distant goals (better described as ‘dissenters centres’) from their habitats, on various trumped-up charges. A bad precedent was thus set; and it came to become one which would be so faithfully followed for much of the past sixty-three years, by whichever set of its disciples made a majority in the Government of the day, otherwise called ‘the ruling party’.

DEFECTIONS AND STOMACH INFRASTRUCTURE: THE LINK
The ruling party syndrome (or ‘party spirit’, as George Washington, America’s first and greatest president, once termed it), has continued to plague and foul the Nigerian political space with its corrosive stifling and depletion of opposition or alternative voices, so much so that since the return of democracy in 1999, Nigeria continues to totter precariously on the precipice of one-party politics or government. The situation has got to its worst nadir since the last general elections of 2023. With the spate of defections (or decampments), anti-party activities, and spineless opposition at the federal and state legislature levels of late, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has since emerged the behemoth winner, clawing at the foundations of the nation’s democracy like a leviathan. And its ever-yawning jaws are closing in on the rest of the other seventeen (17) registered political parties. The death of Opposition is nigh and the fate of democracy in Nigeria is benighted against a bleak socio-political one-party future. It makes one wonder what politics Nigeria is really operating. A co-operative for people-oriented service or a trusteeship for egotistic personal vendetta? The reality appears to be a woeful weave of the two. My OZEKPEDIA neologism either coined or rephrased this genre of politics as “Akpu”, or “Edikang ikon”, “tuwo shinkafa”, or politics of “omisaghue and amato”. Ozekpedia has also termed it “come-and-chop”, or “chop-I-chop” politics. Maverick politician ang great achiever, Ayodele Fayose (Peter the Rock), former governor of Ekiti State, once called it “stomach infrastructure” politics. Before Fayose, colourful Nigerians such as Busari Adelakun (Eruobodo) and Lamidi Adelabu had coined “Amala” or “Gbegiri” politics. All refers to the sorry non-ideological stance of Nigerian politicians (sorry, “Politricians” according to OZEKPEDIA) where over 90% of leading lights and major players in the APC today were once the controllers of the PDP (now a mere shadow opposition).

WHAT IS POLITICS?
This simple question of what the essence of politics is all about has agitated great minds for centuries. No definition is quite exhaustive. A few shed some directive light. One was so brief or flippant it acquired a universal notoriety. It is “who gets what, when and how”. This was by Harold Dwight Lasswell, a leading American political Scientist, Communications theorists and Law Professor at Yale University. The question that comes to mind then becomes, “Who gets what?” The answer to this poser could be found in the etymology of the word politics, which is the Greek word ‘politiká’, meaning “affairs of the cities”. Without undue resort to polemics devoid of practicality, it is our submission that power is the search result of politics. So, the question “Who gets what, when and how?” acquires the reply POLITICAL POWER. Now, politics is the ways and means of acquiring political power, which is the power an individual requires to partake in the politics of his country for the formulation and implementation of positive policies directed towards the welfare of the country. A. Appadorai defines politics simply as “the science concerned with the State and of the conditions essential to its existence and development”: see The Substance of Politics (1975) 11th ed., p. 4. Put in homely metaphor, politics is therefore the avenue through which the venue for the consecration of the “affairs of the cities” is routed. And nations have blazed and failed on the effect of their politics!
MULTI OR ONE PARTY- QUO VADIS, NIGERIA?
The looming spectre appears to be a gradual gravitation towards a one-party system of Government. How? Of Nigeria’s 36 States, APC, the ruling party, controls a majority of 20 states. PDP trails behind with 13 states; while the Labour Party (LP), All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and the New Nigeria People’s Part (NNPP) clutches on to one state a piece. For APC to override any decision of the entire Governor’s forum (if we go by two-third majority vote), all it needs to do is to pluck out four governors from PDP, APGA, LP and NNPP. Sikena! Opoo!!
Coming to the National Assembly (NASS), the APC is also dominant. Of the 109 Senators in the Upper Red Chambers of the NASS, APC tops with 60; PDP 37; LP 8; SDP 2; and APGA 1. Two-thirds of 109 Senators is 73.80, for APC to have its way through in the Upper Chamber on matters that requite two-third majority votes, all it needs to do is to lobby and get additional 13 Senators from the other parties – a mere piece of cake, based on the non-ideological “come-and-chop” politrics we presently operate in Nigeria. The same is the story in the 360-member Chambers of the House of Representatives (the Green Chambers).
Is this movement towards a one-party state good for Nigeria? does it allow for plurality of ideas and strong democratic precepts? We shall now look at the gamut of all these.

WHAT ARE POLITICAL PARTIES?
A political party is a vehicle for the attainment of political power. This vehicle usually contains a group of citizens who act together as a political unit and seek to obtain control of the Government or take part in it. Political parties articulate the desires of the masses they represent. They give life to politics, educate the electorate and help in carrying on elections. They may act as watchdogs of Government depending on the system of party politics in practice in the polity.

DIFFERENT TYPES OF PARTY SYSTEM
A party system is the adopted way by which the Government of a country allows political participation through political parties. It is the system of government by political parties in a democratic state. There are various types of party system practised all over the world. The most common are:
(a) One-party system;
(b) Multi-party system.
ONE-PARTY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
As the name implies, in a one-party system of government, the train of political power or politics travels on a monorail. Only one political party is legally eligible to vie for power. All other parties aside the ruling party are banned. Although they may exist in closets; they must remain closeted to all political intents and purposes. It is a case of Either,—no Or! In the world today, countries that practise one-party system of government include Russia, China, Bulgaria, Rumania, Finland, Yugoslavia, North Korea, Cuba, and Czechoslovakia. They are usually Communist countries, with the Communist Party as the one and only recognized political party. A one-party system is characterized by the presence of only one legally recognized political party, absence of an official opposition, absence of opposition parties during elections, limitation in the scope of political education, sameness of the state and the ruling political party and presence of only one political ideology, if any. A one-party system has its advantages and disadvantages. It is to these we now turn.

ADVANTAGES OF A ONE-PARTY SYSTEM
The following are the reasons why a one-party system is preferred by all the countries that practise it. They include:
(a) Political Stability: a one-party system of government is characterized by political stability as there is usually a long-term security of tenure or a life-tenure into the bargain. The incidence of deadly power struggle amongst political parties with the attendant orgy of blood, arson, pains and pangs is removed. Divisive tendencies are eliminated or nipped in the bud.
(b) Speedy Decision-making: Socio-political decisions are reached much more quickly and easily because there are no much nay-sayers in the absolutist system. The decision of the party is always right. And because of this centralized decision-making process, the decisions made are more focused, direct and result-oriented.
(c) Less Expensive: A one-party system is easy to run because it is usually shorn of all the heavy expenditure that is required to run a multi-party government. There are usually fewer avenues for the wasting of scarce national and individual resources.
(d) Ensures National Integration: A one-party system promotes national unity because every step of the government is taken or seen to be taken in the best interest of the nation, not the leaders. Political, cultural, religious, ethnic or tribal fears are allayed, because they are hardly allowed to rear their ugly heads in the first place. There is a reduction or outright absence of sectionalism, favouritism, prebendalism, tribalism or ethnic and religious bigotry.
(e) Ensures continuous Economic Development: In a one-party system, the incidence of tenure-based development as happens in a multi-party system where elections could be easily won by any political party than the ruling party and thus government changed unexpectedly from time to time as happened in Nigeria in 2015, is totally removed or drastically reduced. Here, the government’s security of tenure gives it time to plan and execute developmental programmes on a long-term basis for the benefit of the people.
(f) Useful in Times of National Emergencies: A one-party government is always together and speaks with one voice in times of national emergencies. The interest of the country as represented by the ruling party is always ensured and protected.
(g) In a one-party system of government, no much time is wasted or dissipated in unnecessary media war, criticism, squabbles, and high-powered political propaganda. Every member of the society has a stake or is made to believe they have a stake in the government and works to build rather than pull it down. The usual centripetal and ...

DISADVANTAGES OF A ONE-PARTY-SYSTEM
The following are the reasons why a one-party system should be avoided in favour of more liberal or democratic ones as will be discussed anon. They include:
(a) Prone to Dictatorship: In a one-party system, the ruling party sees itself as the state (L’Etat, c’est moi – I am the state – by Kind Louis XIV of France, 13th April, 1655). It acts and reacts arbitrarily and whimsically without much consideration to external interests, rights or suggestions. Any form of opposition is seen as treasonable, and must be crushed. Tolerance is obfuscated. There is no supremacy of the law but of the leaders. Political debate is stifled and the words of the leader of government become the law of the land.
(b) Breeds unbridled Corruption in Governance: It is said of power that it corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton). A one-party system of government could engender so much corruption as there is no opposition to criticize or speak against it. Nepotism, favouritism, prebendalism, sectionalism, tribalism, and other negative “isms” thrive in this government set-up.
(c) Lack of Accountability: In a one-party system where the government is not answerable to anybody but itself the government acts according to its whims and caprices. There are no checks and balances as the government has a blank cheque to do and undo as it pleases.
(d) Undemocratic: As the government is but a select class of the populace, the vast majority of the people are shut out of participation in the administration of their government. Democracy is stifled and the aspirations of the people asphyxiated.
(e) No Freedom of Choice: In a one-party system, imposition of leadership is the order of the day. The most unpopular, clueless candidate could be imposed on the nation without the opportunity given for his screening. Elections, if any, are conducted as a mere formality to rubber stamp the anointed.
(f) Hinders Development: A one-party system inhibits social development because important governmental policies, programmes and decisions are taken without consulting widely and subjecting same to constructive debate, criticisms and input. The progress of the leader of government is often equated with the progress of the society. Rather than developing the country, the government spends taxpayers’ moneys in stockpiling very costly military hardware which they then use to harass and intimidate the masses of the people in order to maintain their iron grip on power.
(g) Citizens are reckoned as objects of the state and all social freedoms and liberties are crushed and their rights curtailed. Personal growth and innovation are hindered; and there is mutual distrust between the government and the governed.
(h) Breeds civil unrest and culminates in such social vices as armed banditry, kidnapping, armed robbery, insurgency, terrorism and bloody insurrections, revolutions and overthrows. There are usually pent-up grievances, bad blood and sour emotions against the leadership class from the lot of the masses. Peace is enforced; no loyalty is real.
(i) The laws of the land could be amended at any time to serve the needs or ends of the government at the expense of the governed. Tenure elongation and other unconstitutional vices are committed with impunity.
(j) Civil rights are often abrogated. In these political enclaves, citizens exist rather than live. Fear hangs in the air, as the Big Brother might be watching, hearing and seeing!

MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
In his Gettysburg Address, delivered on the afternoon of 19th November, 1863, during the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, 16th president of the United States of America, defined democracy as “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. This definition has come to become the hanger from which to assess liberalism and/or authoritarianism in the enterprise of government or governance. In it is contained all the hallmarks of free, popular and untrammelled participation in governance or the political process, which is effectively achieved through the instrumentality of multiple political parties vying for political power, during periodic elections.
Multi-party system is that system of political participation that encourages the full and adequate participation of the people in politics, nay governance, through political parties or units of their own choosing. Countries that practise multi-party system include Nigeria, South Africa, the UK, the United States of America, Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Tunisia, Ukraine, Turkey, India, Cameroon, Israel, Kenya, Ghana, Rwanda, etc.

ADVANTAGES OF A MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM.
The following are some of the reasons why nations choose the multiple party system.
(a) Full Citizens’ Participation in Governance: The multi-party system encourages citizens from all walks of life to participate in the government of their country and contribute in the overall development of their society.
(b) Encourages Liberalism and Opposition: In a multi-party system, citizens are not gagged or caged; opposition is welcome and the ruling government is kept always on its toes by the timely constructive checks on the activities of Government. In Africa, the opposition is more active in South Africa, where the Economic Freedom Fighters, have held the ruling ANC to accountability since 2013.
(c) Prevents Despotism and Tyranny: The multi-party system does not guarantee a stronghold on government for too long. Periodically, elections are held and positions open to all to contest. Bad leaders are often booted out of office through the ballot and those who are elected into office rule with the constant reminder in their minds that only excellent service can guarantee them security in office.
(d) Allays Fears of the Minority: There are minority groups in every society. In a multi-party system where politics is free for all, minority groups can form themselves into parties, or form alliances with other minorities or parties to participate in governance. These reduce the resentment that festers in a system that restricts or restrains popular participation in governance or the electoral process.
(e) Helps in the Facilitation of Peaceful Change of Government: In a multi-party system of government, the process of changing government is always easy, as elections are held periodically and the electorate votes in the government of their own choosing. This allows for peaceful change of government.
(f) Encourages Voter Participation: Multi-party system ensures voter participation is usually high, because the electorate has the power to elect their leaders and have a strong say in the outcome of the elections that throw up their leaders. They feel valued and this encourages active participation in the electoral process. It makes representation more real and public life more honest.
(g) Breeds a ready alternative force to displace and replace a non-performing government.
(h) Reduces the incidence of corruption in governance: Incidence of corruption is reduced because of the abundance of a watchful civil society community that follows up on the activities and programmes of government officials to make sure that the right thing is done always. Through them, many shady deals have been unearthed, exposed and the affected government officials named and shamed.
(i) Shared Responsibility: In a multi-party system governance, there is a shared responsibility. It is not the exclusive preserve of a few privileged and powerful lot. For this reason, the interest of the common good is put over and above personal considerations. Citizens view the government as their common patrimony and do everything to preserve and improve on it as patriotically as possible.
(j) Openness and transparency in government: In a multi-party system the resentment that festers amongst citizens when their voices are muffled by the ruling class in a one-party system is removed, and citizens express their grievances in more democratic ways instead of resorting to criminality, intrigues, subterfuge, insurrection, sabotage, vandalism, and vicious class struggle.
(k) Fear of the Electorate: The fear of what the electorate would do come next election makes the government to channel governmental presence by way of infrastructural development and provision of vital social amenities to every part of the country.

DISADVANTAGES OF A MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM
The following are some of the reasons why nations choose the multiple party system.
(a) Political Instability as a Result of Party Rivalry: As a result of the multiplicity of parties vying for the ultimate goal of ruling the country, it often degenerates into vicious and unhealthy rivalries amongst the various parties. The aim of politics then only becomes the securing of personal, sectional or partisan benefits rather than carrying out a programme of public policy. In the words of Alexander Pope, party politics becomes “the madness of the many for the gain of the few."
(b) Encourages Division in the Polity: In climes like Africa where religion, tribalism, ethnicity and other primordial consideration inform the formation of political parties, the political parties are always at loggerheads with one another. This often leads to disagreements that invariably degenerates into bloody civil unrests and ethnic cleansing.
(c) Expensive and Corruption Prone: It is very expensive to operate and may engender official corruption. A multi-party system is usually very expensive to operate. Because many political parties are vying for power, they put so much money and other resources into the electioneering, with the hope that all expenses would we recouped once they win and take over government. This system of “investment politics” thus engenders high-octane official corruption and waste of the nation’s resources. In some countries, the cost of running elections are higher than the annual budgets! Many take bank loans and others sell landed properties to contest elections – they invest to reap.
(d) Confusion as to the Choice of credible Leaders: In a multi-party system where the parties are many and the candidates are surplus, the electorate could get confused in the choice that they make. Many factors could lead to this, namely, monetization of the electoral process, vote-buying, bribery, fake promises, lack of a single/national political ideology, and selfish interests.
(e) Leads to Compromise of Political Values: In a multi-party political system, it is may be very difficult for one political party to win election and control the government. In that wise, parties enter into alliances or coalitions to enable them achieve their goals. When such a government borne out of diverse political attitudes, cultures and values band together there is always bound to be clashes and conflicts of interest (centripetal and centrifugal), unhealthy compromises which have very negative impacts on the programmes of the government and the society.
(f) Creates Room for Electoral Malpractices.
(g) Retards national growth and development because of the need for the majority of the parties to agree before critical governmental decisions are made and implemented. And this inter-party consensus may always be difficult to arrive at.
(h) Engenders factional hatred which invariably lead to mutual distrust that defeats the purpose of government, which is the molding of national unity and consensus as well as the conditions essential to the development of the nation.

CONCLUSION
“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter”-
Ecclesiastes 12: 13.
All men desire happiness. States exist for the purpose of bringing about the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens. Government is the instrument the State employs for the actualization of this goal; and political parties are the routes or vehicles to government. Therefore, parties are necessary for the formulation of government and a popular government is the delight of the masses. The success of the State and the respect it gets from the masses of its people is judged by the efforts it makes to give their rights—nay their lives—increasing meaning.
We have exhaustively discussed the system of attaining political power in a democracy with the searchlight beamed across the globe. We have discussed the one-party system and the multi-party system. They have their advantages as well as their disadvantage, duly appraised and objectively construed. Only after one has gone through these two party systems of government with some objectivity would one realize the dilemma one is cut in in choosing one from the other. But the litmus test of “the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens” becomes our barometer (to measure or show the changes that happen in the economy, society or political space whether the system is run on one-partysm or multi-partysm), because the State exists for the sole good of the citizen. On this journey, therefore, the State is the means and the citizen the end.
If democracy is “government of the people, by the people, for the people” for the attainment of the “the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens”, then it should leave wide open the Ark of politics for its multitude to enter in order that they may be rescued from the flood of tyranny of one man or one party calling the shots, for better or for worse.
It is on the basis of the above purpose of the State that this writer prefers the multi-party system, which seeks to accommodate and harmonize different interests and represents the interest of the majority and minority for the good of all; indeed that system which allows all men to join in the roaring chorus of democracy accompanied by the different percussion of its players

The ruling party syndrome (or ‘party spirit’, as George Washington, America’s first and greatest president, once termed it), has continued to plague and foul the Nigerian political space with its corrosive stifling and depletion of opposition or alternative voices, so much so that since the return of democracy in 1999, Nigeria continues to totter precariously on the precipice of one-party politics or government. The situation has got to its worst nadir since the last general elections of 2023. With the spate of defections (or decampments), anti-party activities, and spineless opposition at the federal and state legislature levels of late, the All Progressives Congress (APC) has since emerged the behemoth winner, clawing at the foundations of the nation’s democracy like a leviathan. And its ever-yawning jaws are closing in on the rest of the other seventeen (17) registered political parties. The death of Opposition is nigh and the fate of democracy in Nigeria is benighted against a bleak socio-political one-party future. It makes one wonder what politics Nigeria is really operating. A co-operative for people-oriented service or a trusteeship for egotistic personal vendetta? The reality appears to be a woeful weave of the two. My OZEKPEDIA neologism either coined or rephrased this genre of politics as “Akpu”, or “Edikang ikon”, “tuwo shinkafa”, or politics of “omisaghue and amato”. Ozekpedia has also termed it “come-and-chop”, or “chop-I-chop” politics. Maverick politician ang great achiever, Ayodele Fayose (Peter the Rock), former governor of Ekiti State, once called it “stomach infrastructure” politics. Before Fayose, colourful Nigerians such as Busari Adelakun (Eruobodo) and Lamidi Adelabu had coined “Amala” or “Gbegiri” politics. All refers to the sorry non-ideological stance of Nigerian politicians (sorry, “Politricians” according to OZEKPEDIA) where over 90% of leading lights and major players in the APC today were once the controllers of the PDP (now a mere shadow opposition).

WHAT IS POLITICS?
This simple question of what the essence of politics is all about has agitated great minds for centuries. No definition is quite exhaustive. A few shed some directive light. One was so brief or flippant it acquired a universal notoriety. It is “who gets what, when and how”. This was by Harold Dwight Lasswell, a leading American political Scientist, Communications theorists and Law Professor at Yale University. The question that comes to mind then becomes, “Who gets what?” The answer to this poser could be found in the etymology of the word politics, which is the Greek word ‘politiká’, meaning “affairs of the cities”. Without undue resort to polemics devoid of practicality, it is our submission that power is the search result of politics. So, the question “Who gets what, when and how?” acquires the reply POLITICAL POWER. Now, politics is the ways and means of acquiring political power, which is the power an individual requires to partake in the politics of his country for the formulation and implementation of positive policies directed towards the welfare of the country. A. Appadorai defines politics simply as “the science concerned with the State and of the conditions essential to its existence and development”: see The Substance of Politics (1975) 11th ed., p. 4. Put in homely metaphor, politics is therefore the avenue through which the venue for the consecration of the “affairs of the cities” is routed. And nations have blazed and failed on the effect of their politics!

MULTI OR ONE PARTY- QUO VADIS, NIGERIA?
The looming spectre appears to be a gradual gravitation towards a one-party system of Government. How? Of Nigeria’s 36 States, APC, the ruling party, controls a majority of 20 states. PDP trails behind with 13 states; while the Labour Party (LP), All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) and the New Nigeria People’s Part (NNPP) clutches on to one state a piece. For APC to override any decision of the entire Governor’s forum (if we go by two-third majority vote), all it needs to do is to pluck out four governors from PDP, APGA, LP and NNPP. Sikena! Opoo!!
Coming to the National Assembly (NASS), the APC is also dominant. Of the 109 Senators in the Upper Red Chambers of the NASS, APC tops with 60; PDP 37; LP 8; SDP 2; and APGA 1. Two-thirds of 109 Senators is 73.80, for APC to have its way through in the Upper Chamber on matters that requite two-third majority votes, all it needs to do is to lobby and get additional 13 Senators from the other parties – a mere piece of cake, based on the non-ideological “come-and-chop” politrics we presently operate in Nigeria. The same is the story in the 360-member Chambers of the House of Representatives (the Green Chambers).
Is this movement towards a one-party state good for Nigeria? does it allow for plurality of ideas and strong democratic precepts? We shall now look at the gamut of all these.

WHAT ARE POLITICAL PARTIES?
A political party is a vehicle for the attainment of political power. This vehicle usually contains a group of citizens who act together as a political unit and seek to obtain control of the Government or take part in it. Political parties articulate the desires of the masses they represent. They give life to politics, educate the electorate and help in carrying on elections. They may act as watchdogs of Government depending on the system of party politics in practice in the polity.

DIFFERENT TYPES OF PARTY SYSTEM
A party system is the adopted way by which the Government of a country allows political participation through political parties. It is the system of government by political parties in a democratic state. There are various types of party system practised all over the world. The most common are:
(a) One-party system;
(b) Multi-party system.

ONE-PARTY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
As the name implies, in a one-party system of government, the train of political power or politics travels on a monorail. Only one political party is legally eligible to vie for power. All other parties aside the ruling party are banned. Although they may exist in closets; they must remain closeted to all political intents and purposes. It is a case of Either,—no Or! In the world today, countries that practise one-party system of government include Russia, China, Bulgaria, Rumania, Finland, Yugoslavia, North Korea, Cuba, and Czechoslovakia. They are usually Communist countries, with the Communist Party as the one and only recognized political party. A one-party system is characterized by the presence of only one legally recognized political party, absence of an official opposition, absence of opposition parties during elections, limitation in the scope of political education, sameness of the state and the ruling political party and presence of only one political ideology, if any. A one-party system has its advantages and disadvantages. It is to these we now turn.

ADVANTAGES OF A ONE-PARTY SYSTEM
The following are the reasons why a one-party system is preferred by all the countries that practise it. They include:
(a) Political Stability: a one-party system of government is characterized by political stability as there is usually a long-term security of tenure or a life-tenure into the bargain. The incidence of deadly power struggle amongst political parties with the attendant orgy of blood, arson, pains and pangs is removed. Divisive tendencies are eliminated or nipped in the bud.
(b) Speedy Decision-making: Socio-political decisions are reached much more quickly and easily because there are no much nay-sayers in the absolutist system. The decision of the party is always right. And because of this centralized decision-making process, the decisions made are more focused, direct and result-oriented.
(c) Less Expensive: A one-party system is easy to run because it is usually shorn of all the heavy expenditure that is required to run a multi-party government. There are usually fewer avenues for the wasting of scarce national and individual resources.
(d) Ensures National Integration: A one-party system promotes national unity because every step of the government is taken or seen to be taken in the best interest of the nation, not the leaders. Political, cultural, religious, ethnic or tribal fears are allayed, because they are hardly allowed to rear their ugly heads in the first place. There is a reduction or outright absence of sectionalism, favouritism, prebendalism, tribalism or ethnic and religious bigotry.
(e) Ensures continuous Economic Development: In a one-party system, the incidence of tenure-based development as happens in a multi-party system where elections could be easily won by any political party than the ruling party and thus government changed unexpectedly from time to time as happened in Nigeria in 2015, is totally removed or drastically reduced. Here, the government’s security of tenure gives it time to plan and execute developmental programmes on a long-term basis for the benefit of the people.
(f) Useful in Times of National Emergencies: A one-party government is always together and speaks with one voice in times of national emergencies. The interest of the country as represented by the ruling party is always ensured and protected.
(g) In a one-party system of government, no much time is wasted or dissipated in unnecessary media war, criticism, squabbles, and high-powered political propaganda. Every member of the society has a stake or is made to believe they have a stake in the government and works to build rather than pull it down. The usual centripetal and ...

DISADVANTAGES OF A ONE-PARTY-SYSTEM
The following are the reasons why a one-party system should be avoided in favour of more liberal or democratic ones as will be discussed anon. They include:
(a) Prone to Dictatorship: In a one-party system, the ruling party sees itself as the state (L’Etat, c’est moi – I am the state – by Kind Louis XIV of France, 13th April, 1655). It acts and reacts arbitrarily and whimsically without much consideration to external interests, rights or suggestions. Any form of opposition is seen as treasonable, and must be crushed. Tolerance is obfuscated. There is no supremacy of the law but of the leaders. Political debate is stifled and the words of the leader of government become the law of the land.
(b) Breeds unbridled Corruption in Governance: It is said of power that it corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely (Lord Acton). A one-party system of government could engender so much corruption as there is no opposition to criticize or speak against it. Nepotism, favouritism, prebendalism, sectionalism, tribalism, and other negative “isms” thrive in this government set-up.
(c) Lack of Accountability: In a one-party system where the government is not answerable to anybody but itself the government acts according to its whims and caprices. There are no checks and balances as the government has a blank cheque to do and undo as it pleases.
(d) Undemocratic: As the government is but a select class of the populace, the vast majority of the people are shut out of participation in the administration of their government. Democracy is stifled and the aspirations of the people asphyxiated.
(e) No Freedom of Choice: In a one-party system, imposition of leadership is the order of the day. The most unpopular, clueless candidate could be imposed on the nation without the opportunity given for his screening. Elections, if any, are conducted as a mere formality to rubber stamp the anointed.
(f) Hinders Development: A one-party system inhibits social development because important governmental policies, programmes and decisions are taken without consulting widely and subjecting same to constructive debate, criticisms and input. The progress of the leader of government is often equated with the progress of the society. Rather than developing the country, the government spends taxpayers’ moneys in stockpiling very costly military hardware which they then use to harass and intimidate the masses of the people in order to maintain their iron grip on power.
(g) Citizens are reckoned as objects of the state and all social freedoms and liberties are crushed and their rights curtailed. Personal growth and innovation are hindered; and there is mutual distrust between the government and the governed.
(h) Breeds civil unrest and culminates in such social vices as armed banditry, kidnapping, armed robbery, insurgency, terrorism and bloody insurrections, revolutions and overthrows. There are usually pent-up grievances, bad blood and sour emotions against the leadership class from the lot of the masses. Peace is enforced; no loyalty is real.
(i) The laws of the land could be amended at any time to serve the needs or ends of the government at the expense of the governed. Tenure elongation and other unconstitutional vices are committed with impunity.
(j) Civil rights are often abrogated. In these political enclaves, citizens exist rather than live. Fear hangs in the air, as the Big Brother might be watching, hearing and seeing!

MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT
In his Gettysburg Address, delivered on the afternoon of 19th November, 1863, during the American Civil War, Abraham Lincoln, 16th president of the United States of America, defined democracy as “government of the people, by the people, for the people”. This definition has come to become the hanger from which to assess liberalism and/or authoritarianism in the enterprise of government or governance. In it is contained all the hallmarks of free, popular and untrammelled participation in governance or the political process, which is effectively achieved through the instrumentality of multiple political parties vying for political power, during periodic elections.
Multi-party system is that system of political participation that encourages the full and adequate participation of the people in politics, nay governance, through political parties or units of their own choosing. Countries that practise multi-party system include Nigeria, South Africa, the UK, the United States of America, Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Tunisia, Ukraine, Turkey, India, Cameroon, Israel, Kenya, Ghana, Rwanda, etc.

ADVANTAGES OF A MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM.
The following are some of the reasons why nations choose the multiple party system.
(a) Full Citizens’ Participation in Governance: The multi-party system encourages citizens from all walks of life to participate in the government of their country and contribute in the overall development of their society.
(b) Encourages Liberalism and Opposition: In a multi-party system, citizens are not gagged or caged; opposition is welcome and the ruling government is kept always on its toes by the timely constructive checks on the activities of Government. In Africa, the opposition is more active in South Africa, where the Economic Freedom Fighters, have held the ruling ANC to accountability since 2013.
(c) Prevents Despotism and Tyranny: The multi-party system does not guarantee a stronghold on government for too long. Periodically, elections are held and positions open to all to contest. Bad leaders are often booted out of office through the ballot and those who are elected into office rule with the constant reminder in their minds that only excellent service can guarantee them security in office.
(d) Allays Fears of the Minority: There are minority groups in every society. In a multi-party system where politics is free for all, minority groups can form themselves into parties, or form alliances with other minorities or parties to participate in governance. These reduce the resentment that festers in a system that restricts or restrains popular participation in governance or the electoral process.
(e) Helps in the Facilitation of Peaceful Change of Government: In a multi-party system of government, the process of changing government is always easy, as elections are held periodically and the electorate votes in the government of their own choosing. This allows for peaceful change of government.
(f) Encourages Voter Participation: Multi-party system ensures voter participation is usually high, because the electorate has the power to elect their leaders and have a strong say in the outcome of the elections that throw up their leaders. They feel valued and this encourages active participation in the electoral process. It makes representation more real and public life more honest.
(g) Breeds a ready alternative force to displace and replace a non-performing government.
(h) Reduces the incidence of corruption in governance: Incidence of corruption is reduced because of the abundance of a watchful civil society community that follows up on the activities and programmes of government officials to make sure that the right thing is done always. Through them, many shady deals have been unearthed, exposed and the affected government officials named and shamed.
(i) Shared Responsibility: In a multi-party system governance, there is a shared responsibility. It is not the exclusive preserve of a few privileged and powerful lot. For this reason, the interest of the common good is put over and above personal considerations. Citizens view the government as their common patrimony and do everything to preserve and improve on it as patriotically as possible.
(j) Openness and transparency in government: In a multi-party system the resentment that festers amongst citizens when their voices are muffled by the ruling class in a one-party system is removed, and citizens express their grievances in more democratic ways instead of resorting to criminality, intrigues, subterfuge, insurrection, sabotage, vandalism, and vicious class struggle.
(k) Fear of the Electorate: The fear of what the electorate would do come next election makes the government to channel governmental presence by way of infrastructural development and provision of vital social amenities to every part of the country.

DISADVANTAGES OF A MULTI-PARTY SYSTEM
The following are some of the reasons why nations choose the multiple party system.
(a) Political Instability as a Result of Party Rivalry: As a result of the multiplicity of parties vying for the ultimate goal of ruling the country, it often degenerates into vicious and unhealthy rivalries amongst the various parties. The aim of politics then only becomes the securing of personal, sectional or partisan benefits rather than carrying out a programme of public policy. In the words of Alexander Pope, party politics becomes “the madness of the many for the gain of the few."
(b) Encourages Division in the Polity: In climes like Africa where religion, tribalism, ethnicity and other primordial consideration inform the formation of political parties, the political parties are always at loggerheads with one another. This often leads to disagreements that invariably degenerates into bloody civil unrests and ethnic cleansing.
(c) Expensive and Corruption Prone: It is very expensive to operate and may engender official corruption. A multi-party system is usually very expensive to operate. Because many political parties are vying for power, they put so much money and other resources into the electioneering, with the hope that all expenses would we recouped once they win and take over government. This system of “investment politics” thus engenders high-octane official corruption and waste of the nation’s resources. In some countries, the cost of running elections are higher than the annual budgets! Many take bank loans and others sell landed properties to contest elections – they invest to reap.
(d) Confusion as to the Choice of credible Leaders: In a multi-party system where the parties are many and the candidates are surplus, the electorate could get confused in the choice that they make. Many factors could lead to this, namely, monetization of the electoral process, vote-buying, bribery, fake promises, lack of a single/national political ideology, and selfish interests.
(e) Leads to Compromise of Political Values: In a multi-party political system, it is may be very difficult for one political party to win election and control the government. In that wise, parties enter into alliances or coalitions to enable them achieve their goals. When such a government borne out of diverse political attitudes, cultures and values band together there is always bound to be clashes and conflicts of interest (centripetal and centrifugal), unhealthy compromises which have very negative impacts on the programmes of the government and the society.
(f) Creates Room for Electoral Malpractices.
(g) Retards national growth and development because of the need for the majority of the parties to agree before critical governmental decisions are made and implemented. And this inter-party consensus may always be difficult to arrive at.
(h) Engenders factional hatred which invariably lead to mutual distrust that defeats the purpose of government, which is the molding of national unity and consensus as well as the conditions essential to the development of the nation.

CONCLUSION
“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter”-
Ecclesiastes 12: 13.
All men desire happiness. States exist for the purpose of bringing about the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens. Government is the instrument the State employs for the actualization of this goal; and political parties are the routes or vehicles to government. Therefore, parties are necessary for the formulation of government and a popular government is the delight of the masses. The success of the State and the respect it gets from the masses of its people is judged by the efforts it makes to give their rights—nay their lives—increasing meaning.
We have exhaustively discussed the system of attaining political power in a democracy with the searchlight beamed across the globe. We have discussed the one-party system and the multi-party system. They have their advantages as well as their disadvantage, duly appraised and objectively construed. Only after one has gone through these two party systems of government with some objectivity would one realize the dilemma one is cut in in choosing one from the other. But the litmus test of “the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens” becomes our barometer (to measure or show the changes that happen in the economy, society or political space whether the system is run on one-partysm or multi-partysm), because the State exists for the sole good of the citizen. On this journey, therefore, the State is the means and the citizen the end.
If democracy is “government of the people, by the people, for the people” for the attainment of the “the greatest happiness of the greatest number of its citizens”, then it should leave wide open the Ark of politics for its multitude to enter in order that they may be rescued from the flood of tyranny of one man or one party calling the shots, for better or for worse.
It is on the basis of the above purpose of the State that this writer prefers the multi-party system, which seeks to accommodate and harmonize different interests and represents the interest of the majority and minority for the good of all; indeed that system which allows all men to join in the roaring chorus of democracy accompanied by the different percussion of its players

President Bola Tinubu has approved the appointment of Ms. Hafsat Abubakar Bakari to serve as the Director/Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU), pending her confirmation by the Senate.

Ms. Bakari is a lawyer and financial intelligence expert with years of experience in anti-money laundering, counter-terrorism financing, and counter-proliferation financing (AML/CFT/CPF).

Before her appointment as the Chief Executive Officer of the NFIU, she served as Deputy Director at the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit, and was at different times the Head of the General Services Unit; Head of the Strategy and Reorientation Unit, and Head of the Board Secretariat of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

The President anticipates that Ms. Bakari will bring her wealth of experience and expertise to full discharge in this critical role, especially in view of his administration's war against illicit financial flows and other sharp practices currently prevalent in segments of the nation's foreign exchange markets.

Chief Ajuri Ngelale

Special Adviser to the President

(Media & Publicity)

February 20, 2024

Premium Motor Spirit (PMS), popularly known as fuel or petrol, is currently sold at N1000 per litre in some parts of the country.

Naija News understands that the black market is taking advantage of the recent strike actions by tanker drivers, resulting in a significant increase in the price of petrol.

Journalists inspecting the development observed on Wednesday morning that many filling stations owned by the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria in Lagos State, Ogun State, and surrounding areas were closed.

Also, long queues were observed at stations owned by the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and the Major Energy Marketers Association of Nigeria.

While the black market is selling petrol at N1000 per litre, MEMAN stations such as Eterna, NorthWest, TotalEnergies, Mobil, Capital Oil, Enyo, Conoil, ForteOil, MRS, and others are offering varying prices ranging from N599 to N615 per litre, according to Channels Television.

As a result, more vehicles are flocking to MEMAN stations as consumers search for the stations with the most affordable prices.

Currently, most IPMAN stations are closed due to low product supply. The few stations that have products available are selling petrol for no less than N650 per litre.

Speaking on the development, Chairman Satellite Depot, IPMAN Lagos State, told journalists on Wednesday morning that NNPCL no longer supplies its members with products.

“NNPCL no longer give us products despite the fact that the pipeline in our area has been repaired. We don’t know why they stopped using the pipeline to supply us with products.

“Maybe they fear vandalism. We now rely on private depots who sell to us at an ex-depot price of between N620/N622 per litre. By the time we take the products to our stations, the landing cost will be around N630 or more, depending on the distance from the depot to our stations.

“Some people are selling around N650. It would have been cheaper if we bought directly from NNPCL at around N555 per litre,” he said.

Naija News reports that following strike actions, due to operational challenges faced by members of the National Association of Road Transport Owners and the Petroleum Tanker Drivers, the drivers decided to end the strike on Tuesday.

This decision came after a meeting with the Minister of State Petroleum Resources (Oil), Heineken Lokpobiri, oil marketers, and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA).

NARTO National President, Othman Yusuf, instructed members to promptly resume petroleum loading activities following a meeting in Abuja.

Minister of budget and economic planning, Atiku Bagudu, has urged Nigerians to remain hopeful and keep faith with the government claiming that President Bola Tinubu’s policies aimed at transforming the nation are already bearing fruits and delivering results.

Bagudu, a former governor of Kebbi State, spoke at a national policy summit themed “Activating the Policies and Promises in the Renewed Hope Agenda” organised by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu (P-BAT) Academics and Professionals in Abuja.

He said that Nigerians have a reason to be optimistic because they have found a leader in Tinubu who had succeeded before in a leadership capacity by transforming Lagos from what it used to be through inclusive leadership.

“Today, there is a cry for inclusion across the country and we have a leader who believes in inclusion and has practised it in Lagos by creating a state that worked for all, carrying everyone along and allowing them to excel,” he said.

The convener and national coordinator of P-BAT Academics and Professionals, Prof Yemi Oke, informed that P-BAT Academics and Professionals is a group of academics, intellectuals and intellectually minded professionals, whose aim is to volunteer its time, efforts and resources to support President Bola Tinubu.

Oke noted that the group’s views and suggestions have been implemented by some agencies and ministries of government.

He said, “Ahead of this Summit, we organized ‘Pre-Conferences’ and ‘Mini-Summits’ along the 8-point agenda of the Tinubu administration. Those Pre-Conferences and Mini-Summits gave us the opportunity to push out some of our views as ‘Policy Advisors’.

“We are happy to report that a lot of our views and suggestions in those ‘Policy Advisories’ are being implemented by some of the agencies and ministries of government,” he said.

In the same vein, spokesperson of the group, Mrs Mary Ikoku, said: “Nigeria is not absolved from what is happening globally.”

While calling for calm amid hardships caused by the ongoing economic reforms, she said “in the UK you see people who can’t even warm up their homes, they can’t warm themselves from the cold, and that is a country where you could say they don’t have a lot of poor people. They don’t have the multidimensional poverty that you can say Nigeria is trying to work its way out of.”

“Other countries are struggling. We need to give this government time. With the support that people like these academics and professionals are doing, more people should actually do what this group is doing to support the country,” she added.

A retired police commissioner and chieftain of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in Edo State, Chief Osato Iredia, has said by his action, Senator Adams Oshiomhole (APC, Edo North) is setting the stage for the ruling Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to produce Godwin Obaseki’s successor.

He alleged that the lawmaker, who served as governor of the state for eight years, is working behind the scene to make PDP favoured aspirant Asuen Ighodalo to win the governorship election in the September 2024.

He told newsmen in Abuja yesterday that there was a bond among Oshiomhole, Obaseki and Ighodalo to govern the state one after the other.

In a statement he issued after the press conference, which was released to LEADERSHIP, the APC leader in Oredo local government area, said he was not surprised about the development.

He said Oshiomhole was imposing an unpopular candidate in the person of Dennis Idahosa from Edo South, on the party at this time, when it was not justifiable.

He added that Oshiomhole’s idea was to present a weaker APC governorship candidate against PDP’s Asuen Ighodalo so that the later could win the election easily.

“If Governor Obaseki had not left the APC, Asuen who is the governorship aspirant of PDP would have been the candidate of APC. Remember how Obaseki left APC? He left with their Lagos friends to PDP.”

Iredia called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the leadership of APC to disregard the Governor Hope Uzodinma result that declared Hon Idahosa as the governorship candidate of APC if the party was serious about winning the September election.

Iredia said, “Oshiomhole from Edo north, Obaseki from Edo South and Ighodalo from Edo Central want to complete the circle in 2024 as they planned it many years ago.

“The people of Edo State across the three senatorial districts are in consonance with zoning except for Oshiomhole who kept encouraging aspirants from across the state to join the race.”

“The only way the party can win the governorship election in September is to adhere to the APC primaries that produced Senator Monday Okpebholo from Edo Central,” he said.