It is indisputable that the people of Nigeria were not involved in the processes that led to the enactment and imposition of all the constitutions and other laws that were promulgated by the British colonial regime. Thus, the Lugard Constitution of 1914, Clifford Constitution of 1922, Richards Constitution of 1946, Macpherson Constitution of 1951, and Lyttleton Constitution of 1954 were enacted in London and imposed on Nigerians. But in order to protect the interests of the British Government and its allies at the end of colonialism, the Independence Constitution of 1960 was negotiated between the departing British colonial regime and the nationalist politicians.

Even the much-celebrated Republican Constitution of 1963 was a mere amendment of the Independence Constitution because it protected the interest of the indigenous ruling elite. Hence, the amendment of the Constitution carried out by the first set of parliamentarians was rather cosmetic. Specifically, the president replaced the British Monarch as Head of Government while the Supreme Court of Nigeria replaced the British Privy Council and became the final Court of Appeal.

However, the Nigeria Police Force, the armed forces, and other instruments of oppression established by the colonial regime were left intact to protect the interests of the indigenous ruling class while the post-colonial economy was left in the firm grip of imperialism. The anti-people’s colonial ordinances, which legitimized the exploitation of Nigeria by the British government, were adopted and reenacted as Acts of the Nigerian Parliament. No doubt, the 1963 Constitution recognized the relative autonomy of the Eastern, Western, and Northern regions as each of the regions had its own constitution and managed its own affairs within the neocolonial economic structure. In 1964, the Midwest region was carved out of western Nigeria to weaken the region as the northern and eastern regions were not split.

The manipulation of the courts and security forces by the ruling party aggravated the election violence that broke out in the western region in 1964 and the brutal killing of Igbo people in the north. Thus, the subversion of democracy and abuse of power by the chief operators of the 1963 Constitution led to a total breakdown of law and order in the country. It was under the pretext of restoring law and order that a group of young army officers led by Major Kaduna Nzeogwu seized power on January 15, 1966.

The coup plotters killed the civilian Prime Minister, Mr. Tafawa Balewa, two regional heads of government, Messrs Samuel Akintola and Ahmadu Bello, and some military officers.

The national and regional constitutions were suspended while political parties, trade unions, and ethnic organizations were proscribed. The coup plotters were overpowered and arrested by senior officers who appointed Major General Johnson Thomas Umanakwe Aguiyi-Ironsi as the Head of State. A unification decree was promulgated to abolish regional institutions and the federal system of government. There was a counter-coup in July 1966, which led to the brutal murder of the military ruler, General Aguiyi-Ironsi, and the military governor of western Nigeria, Col. Adekunle Fajuyi.

The new Head of State, Lt. Col Yakubu Gowon, failed in resolving the political crisis. The military oligarchy ruled by decrees signed by the Head of State. Even though the military dictators claimed to have set up the Federal Military Government, it was a unitary government in every material particular. In other words, both Ironsi’s unification decree and Gowon’s supremacy decree were six of one and half a dozen of the other.

In 1967, the four regions were split into twelve states while military governors were appointed by the Supreme Military Council to govern them. The governors ruled the states by edicts. Regional institutions, including universities, radio, and television stations, were nationalized by the Federal Military Government. In 1975, the Murtala Mohammed military regime appointed a group of 49 persons to draft a new Constitution for the Second Republic. The Committee was headed by the late Chief Rotimi Williams SAN. At the end of the assignment, the committee produced two reports: the majority report prepared by 47 members and the minority report prepared by two members, namely the late Dr. Bala Usman and Dr. Segun Osoba. Since the minority report advocated for a socialist state, the Olusegun Obasanjo regime rejected it and forwarded the majority report of the Rotimi Williams group for the consideration of the constituent assembly led by Justice Udo Udoma.

Even though Chief Obafemi Awolowo declined to serve on the Constitution Drafting Committee, he lauded the body for recommending the entrenchment of chapter two in the Constitution. For him, the fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy largely reflected the ideas canvassed by him in his book titled “People’s Republic,” published in 1966. However, upon the submission of the Draft Constitution by the constituent assembly to the regime, General Obasanjo single-handedly amended it and inserted therein four statutes, i.e., (a) the National Youth Service Corps Decree 1993; (b) the Public Complaints Commission Act; (c) the National Security Agencies Act; and (d) the Land Use Act. Even though these laws were not part of the Constitution, the purpose of entrenching them in the Constitution was to ensure that they could only be amended like other provisions of the Constitution.

Thereafter, General Obasanjo enacted the Constitution (Promulgation) Decree No 104 of 1979. Thus, the Second Republic was operated under Decree 104 of 1979, otherwise called the 1979 Constitution.

When the military sacked the civilian government again in December 1983, the 1979 Constitution was suspended. As part of the preparation for the restoration of civil rule, the 1989 Constitution was written by a Constituent Assembly led by Justice Anthony Aniagolu under the Ibrahim Babangida military junta. But, due to the annulment of the election won by Bashorun MKO Abiola, the 1989 Constitution never came into force. As General Babangida was forced to step aside, his plan to metamorphose from a military dictator to a civilian president failed to materialize. The plan of his successor and comrade in arms, General Sani Abacha, to have himself elected as a civilian president also failed. Hence, his 1995 Constitution did not see the light of day.

The last military ruler, General Abdulsalami Abubakar, repealed the suspended 1979 Constitution and imposed the 1999 Constitution on the nation via the Constitution (Promulgation) Decree No 24 of 1999. The committee that drafted the 1999 Constitution was headed by a famous jurist, the late Justice Niki Tobi. Even though the 1999 Constitution was not prepared by a constituent assembly, it is a replica of the 1979 Constitution in every material particular.

It is on record that the late Chief Rotimi Williams SAN once described the 1999 Constitution as a fraudulent document for telling a lie about itself. As far as Chief Williams was concerned, the Constitution was imposed on Nigerians, though the preamble stated that it was made, enacted, and given to the Nigerian people. In the same vein, Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN has insisted that the Constitution is a fake document. With respect, the Constitution is neither fraudulent nor fake as its authors are well known. Indeed, in several judgments delivered by the Supreme Court and other courts since 1999, the Constitution has been described as the grundnorm of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Since the Constitution protects the interests of the ruling class, the National Assembly and the Houses of Assembly of the 36 states of the Federation have resorted to regular amendment of some provisions of the document. The said amendments have also received judicial imprimatur. To that extent, it is not legally correct to say that the Constitution is fraudulent or fake.

In making a strong case for a new Constitution that will reflect the democratic wishes of the Nigerian people, it ought to be pointed out that there are some provisions of the 1999 Constitution that cannot be wished away. They include chapter two (sections 13-24), culled from the 1979 Constitution, which contains the fundamental objectives and directive principles of state policy. Despite its limitations and contradictions, the chapter provides for participatory democracy, adequate security and welfare for the people, adequate housing, employment, and payment of unemployment benefit for unemployed people, payment of a national living minimum wage and pension, right to education at all levels, and right to health.

In particular, section 16 of the Constitution provides that the resources of the nation shall be controlled by the government and be equitably distributed among the people and that the commonwealth shall not be concentrated in the hands of a few people or a group. The provisions constitute the core of the socioeconomic rights of the Nigerian people. Even though the provisions are made non-justiciable, several laws have been enacted by the National Assembly to actualize certain provisions of chapter two of the Constitution. In a number of public interest cases, the courts have upheld the rights of Nigerian people under such welfare laws. It is interesting to note that the members of the 2014 National Conference unanimously recommended that the fundamental objectives and directive principles be made justiciable in the Constitution.

Under the defunct military junta, the central military government took over the control of the national economy. By fiat, the principle of derivation was jettisoned while the states were run as extensions of the central military government. The 1999 Constitution has challenged the absolute control of the central government in the management of the national economy. To that extent, no constitutional arrangement can jettison section 162 of the Constitution, which states that “the principle of derivation shall be constantly reflected in any approved formula as being not less than thirteen per cent of the revenue accruing to the Federation Account directly from any natural resources.”

This is unlike section 140 of the 1963 Constitution which merely provided derivation of “a sum equal to fifty per cent of (a) the proceeds of any royalty received by the Federation in respect of any minerals extracted in that Region; and (b) any mining rents derived by the Federation during that year from within that Region.” The point that I am struggling to make is that the 13 percent derivation from revenue in section 162 of the 1999 Constitution is much higher than the 50 percent derivation from royalties and rents in the 1963 Constitution. Furthermore, the states that are entitled to the 13 percent derivation are equally entitled to a share in the monthly statutory allocations distributed to the three tiers of government by the Federation Account Allocation Committee.

The campaigners for restructuring have argued that the development of the regions before military rule was based on the 50 percent derivation applicable under the 1963 Constitution. This is misleading as the development of the regions was based on the huge revenue derived from agricultural products like cocoa, cotton, and palm oil. Agriculture, which was the mainstay of the economy, got a boost from the regional commodity boards which protected the interest of farmers. But the boards were abolished in the late 1990s as part of the conditionalities of the Structural Adjustment Programme. Unaware that the Commodities Board Act has not been repealed, Vice President Shetima recently announced that the federal government would soon set up a new National Commodity Board.

Even though President Buhari was opposed to restructuring, the devolution of powers recorded under his regime has been the most profound since 1999. Items like electricity, railways, and prisons which were in the exclusive legislative lists have been transferred to the concurrent legislative list. The implication is that states have been empowered to legislate in these areas for the overall development of the country. The financial autonomy of the state legislature and judiciary has also been restored by another constitutional amendment. No doubt, solid minerals are in the exclusive legislative list. But state governments and individuals are given licenses to mine them and pay royalties to the Federation Account.

Before then, licenses for oil blocks were awarded to a few registered corporate bodies and state governments which were required to pay signature bonuses and royalties to the Federation Account. The trend is going to continue as the Bola Tinubu administration has already awarded many oil blocks and granted licenses for solid minerals. Plans have also been concluded to amend the Constitution to pave the way for the establishment of state police in response to the worsening security crisis plaguing the nation.

It is pertinent to note that the main disputed area among the political class is whether the Constitution should provide for a presidential or parliamentary system of government or whether the country should have strong regional governments and a weak center. A fresh agitation has also arisen in the Niger Delta region for resource control in view of the decision of the federal government to allow state governments and private companies to mine solid minerals and pay rents to the Federation Account. In other words, the oil and gas producing communities have demanded to control the resources and pay rents to the Federation Account.

In view of the foregoing, it is crystal clear that the members of the political class have resolved not to discard or throw away the 1999 Constitution because it protects their class interests. This explains the regular amendments of the Constitution by every session of the National Assembly and houses of assembly of the states. In fact, each house of the 10th National Assembly has set up a constitution review committee for the purpose of further amending the Constitution. It is expected that the review will lead to another alteration of the Constitution.

No doubt, the country needs a new and popular Constitution prepared by the accredited representatives of workers, women, youths, physically challenged people, and other interest groups. But a new Constitution that is democratic, inclusive, and transparent can only emerge from the struggle of the Nigerian people. Therefore, it is indubitably clear that without a revolution to herald a new legal order, no new constitution will emerge in Nigeria.

SCRIPTURE says “Where no counsel is, the people fall: But in the multitude of counsellors there is safety” Nigeria is in such dire straits that its affairs can no longer be left solely to those in the corridors of power. Either they are short of ideas or the problem is just beyond them. I do not want to believe we have found ourselves, again, in the same bind that made one-time military dictator, Ibrahim Babangida, to exclaim that Nigeria’s economy defies solution. So, all hands must be on deck. Solutions must be proffered right, left, and centre. Usually, those in government are deaf to the cries of “ordinary” people. What to do, then, is to keep crying, like biblical Blind Bartimaeus, never getting weary and never allowing naysayers shut us up; confident that, if we faint not, we shall one day reap.

If everyone else gives up, writers should not. Our duty is sacred – to inform; to educate; to entertain; and to hold the feet of those in power to the fire. We are watchdogs. We are the conscience of the nation. The country’s grundnorm – its Constitution – obligates us to hold the government accountable to the people. In a situation such as we find ourselves in Nigeria today, where the three arms of government – the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary – have miserably let the people down, I dare to say that writers remain not just the last but the only hope of the common man. Read Hamsik Dusan’s “Writers against rulers” and marvel at the heroic struggle of writers and intellectuals against official repression on the eve of the Czech uprising in the late 1960s. We can do no less here in our own country.

 It starts with everyone getting involved, bringing to mind Odumegwu Emeka Ojukwu’s “Because I am involved”, which was his own perception of the Nigerian political vortex and what he considered as solutions. You may or may not agree. Critics must never give up, even when it appears they are sounding like a cracked record. They should also not just criticize but also proffer solutions – whether right or wrong. This is where I differ from my comrade, classmate and course mate at Great Ife, Wale Olajire Ajao, whose piece “The role of the public space in a democracy” is cerebral and engaging as usual but his position that critics need not make suggestions does not sit pretty with me.

Hear him: “Supporters of the government often say that those who criticize the government should come out with alternative views or suggestions for the government to consider. But the rules of the public space do not include making suggestions to the government. In other words, a critic who does not have suggestions for the government has not violated the rules of the public space just because he has not made suggestions to the government. In fact, his duty is not to make suggestions. His duty is to criticize. If someone has made destructive criticism, those media officers of the government or those who are supporting the government have to exercise their right to reply and disapprove of all the facts in the destructive criticism. No more, no less”.

I beg to differ for the simple reason that criticism becomes an end in itself and not a means to an end! Welcome, anarchy! There must be a purpose to every action. If the rules of the public space do not include making suggestions, we should quickly amend them to do so! I will publish Wale’s treatise at a later date and we shall be able to discuss it fully. Today, however, my attention goes to another cerebral and passionate commentator, Timothy (Tim) Akano, because of the urgency of the matter he addressed – the savagery of the country’s economic situation and the cauldron of repressed anger in the land. Tim and I, in company with others, had, time and time, laboured for long hours around the same table rubbing minds as we discussed the country’s problems and trying to fashion out solutions. Now, Tim appears to have shouted “Euruka!” with his “Getting Nigeria’s elephant to the dance floor” Permit me to edit it, and to also pass comments, as we get along.

Hear him: “ “Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance?” This is the title of Louis V. Gerstner memoir. The “miracle-manager with a magic wand” who midwifed IBM’s historic turnaround that begot IBM 2.0 in the 1990s. By 1993, before Louis’s appointment as the new CEO, IBM, the company that revolutionized the technology world, was on its way to extinction. It was projected to lose over $16 billion that year alone. IBM’s fate of dissolving into a confederation of autonomous corporations was signed and sealed but not yet delivered. This situation was similar to Nigeria’s fate on the eve of May 29th, 2023 when President Bola Ahmed Tinubu collected the leadership baton.

“IBM, which was incorporated on June 16th, 1911, three years before Nigeria’s amalgamation in January 1914, was a victim of its lumbering size, an insular corporate culture, and insensitivity to modernization, even in the face of the irreversible wind of change blowing over the PC market it had helped invent. The birth of IBM 2.0 was not an accident or luck; its extraordinary second coming was a byproduct of audacious, hairy visioning and strong political will. Louis paid the full price through the strength of his character for the prize he later won as one of the greatest turnaround CEOs and heroes of the 21st century. He carried out wholesale restructuring of IBM, rebuilt the leadership team, and gave the workforce a renewed sense of purpose. He led by example, ran a lean management, and made accountability, prudence, and innovation his priorities.

“Promptly, IBM’s dry bones heard the word of Louis; new breath entered into IBM, and the dry bones became whole. It roared back to life, became stronger, bigger, and better. Louis streamlined the company’s product portfolio and carefully defined the kind of parties IBM would attend, which were only those where IBM had both comparative and competitive advantages. On May 1st, 2006, IBM sold off the hen that laid the golden eggs, i.e., IBM’s PC hardware business units (equivalent to Nigeria’s NNPC), to Lenovo, a Chinese company, because the hen had since become barren in IBM’s cage…

“IBM and Nigeria share several things in common. Aside from being age mates, both are “ELEPHANTS” in their own right, two conspicuously consequential entities with untold potentials. IBM is to the global corporate world what Nigeria is to the Black race. However, while IBM 2.0 has turned the corner since the 1990s, Nigeria has remained static in the same corner for 40 years as a spectator in a sorry state, a fragile, fractured, fragmenting federation, always failing and fumbling at the edge of every fundamental turning point, perpetually on the brink with no voice, no vote, no veto, no victory!

“The best-run countries in the world operate like the GLOBAL500 corporations. They are target-driven, sharply focused on the BOTTOM LINE which, for corporations, means profit, and for nations, it means PEOPLE. Similarly, smart nations feature only in a few parties where they have natural endowments, skills, and resources to out-compete other nations.

“Norway is one of the smartest nations on earth. With only 7.5 billion barrels of oil reserves, she is accountable for over 2% of global oil consumption. Norway has sharpened her skills in oil business management. Conversely, Nigeria’s oil numbers don’t add up: with over 30 billion barrels, she is accountable for a mere 0.4% of global oil consumption, sitting in the 37th position despite having the 10th largest oil reserves globally. NNPC has made a profit only twice in 40 years, according to its GMD, whereas Norway’s savings of $1.62 trillion is the world’s largest sovereign wealth asset, built from her oil profit, holding on average 1.5% of all the world’s listed companies’ stocks. This translates to over $295,000 per Norwegian citizen. Nigeria has a comparative advantage in crude oil reserves but has zero competitive advantage in production and oil business management.

“South Korea is another smart nation, focusing on dominating steel manufacturing (POSCO being the world’s 7th largest steelmaker), car manufacturing, shipbuilding (Hyundai is the global number one shipbuilder), and electronics. South Korea is the world’s second-largest producer of semiconductors, which represents her main export, and textile. Just five areas of focus.

“The question is: where does Nigeria have both competitive and comparative advantages vis-à-vis other nations? Or, put differently, which five problems are we solving or can we solve for the world better than any other nation?

“Nigerians knew things were bad on 29th May, 2023 when President Muhammadu Buhari handed over to Tinubu. Nigerians knew that the treasury was emptied by President Buhari’s administration, which was why the mind-boggling revelations that came out from the CBN audit report by Jim Obasi did not come as a surprise to many. (By the way, where is the report, and what is the government going to do with Obasi’s findings and recommendations?)… But things are getting worse. The hurt, hunger, and haemorrhaging are on an astronomical ascendancy… Leaders need to act cautiously whenever despondency descends on a nation because, when hope is lost, the people become as wild and dangerous as a pride of hungry lions…

“The seven demons wearing new ranks of a 4-star general today are: devaluation, stagflation, financialization, de-industrialization, dehumanization, insecurity, and corruption. Call it a perfect storm! A situation where food inflation is now in excess by 40%; currency devaluation is in excess by 100% in an import-dependent economy; unemployment is going through the roof; a 300% increase in electricity in “Band A” where manufacturers belong; a bank interest rate on loans of about 40%; surging insecurity with random kidnapping for ransom; financialization with banks being the only ones declaring profits at a time of massive factory closures, coupled with unbridled corruption, is nothing short of a perfect storm.”

What is to be done? Tim made 12 suggestions: 1. Food security 2. Power supply 24/7. 3. Re-industrialization. 4. Farewell to poverty 5. Re-inventing education 6. Ending medical tourism. 7. Reducing the cost of governance and dismantling corruption 8. Achieving peaceful co-existence and security 9. Re-working the Federal Executive Council 10. Focusing on Entertainment as a business because we hold comparative advantage there 11. Launching a Nigeria Rebirth project (moral. cultural and social rebirth) 12. Restructure the country’s superstructure because the current political structure is not working.

I doubt if anyone can de-list any of Tim’s panaceas to the country’s woes. Interestingly, however, I find about 80 percent of the persons he recommended to President Tinubu to help effect the much-needed turnaround disagreeable! I think that is where the problem starts: Building the team that will build the country.

The city of Aba in Abia State has been engulfed in tension following a series of reprisal actions by soldiers in response to the killing of five of their colleagues at Obikabia Junction, Ogbor Hill, on Thursday, May 30.

The deceased soldiers were ambushed by unknown gunmen who also set ablaze two military vans and their checkpoint.

In the days following the attack, soldiers conducted extensive raids across Aba, targeting motorists and residents in what appeared to be a quest for retribution.

These operations have significantly heightened fear among the populace, with many preferring to stay indoors to avoid potential arrest or assault.

The atmosphere of fear was exacerbated by the presence of military helicopters patrolling the skies over Aba, observed continuously three days post-incident.

Despite Governor Alex Otti’s reassurances to innocent citizens that they can continue their daily activities without fear, the palpable tension has led to a shutdown of nightlife and a slow return to normalcy in the city.

Businesses, particularly in the Ogbor Hill vicinity where the initial attack occurred, have been slow to reopen, with proprietors and patrons wary of further military action.

Reports from Sunday Vanguard indicate that even local churches in the Obikabia area have suspended activities due to fears of military intrusion.

The economic impact of the military’s forceful response is considerable. A restaurant owner, identified as Mama Uche, reported losses exceeding ₦200,000 as perishable goods spoiled after she was forced to flee her establishment.

Similarly, a trader from Cemetery Market missed a significant supply contract due to the abrupt market closure and reported military blockades on the Abia-Rivers boundary.

Recreational spots and hotels have also felt the brunt of the military’s heavy-handedness, with reports of soldiers storming hotel premises, conducting room searches, and detaining guests and staff.

Some detainees have been released after profiling, yet others remain in custody without clear charges.

A laundry operator in one of the new hotels along Ukaegbu Road said soldiers invaded their hotel at about 2am, ransacked rooms and arrested all lodgers and staff members.

He said: “Soldiers invaded our hotel around 2am, ransacked all the rooms and arrested all lodgers and members of staff.

“We were moved to a military camp in Aba where some people were screened and released.

“But some are still being detained. Since the invasion of the hotel by the soldiers, guests no longer visit for lodging and relaxation.

“At the moment, people are afraid, no business because there is fear everywhere.

“We pray that the situation will soon return to normal for business to start booming again.”

[NaijaNews]

Let me state upfront that I was not one of the people excited about Nigeria’s change to the old national anthem. When,  in 1978, the military, in a rather whimsical manner, replaced that national anthem with the one that we used till last month, they did not offer any plausible explanations. And there is none either for its reintroduction on May 29, except, perhaps, to shake the ground as another mark of President Tinubu’s 1st anniversary in office. 

In any case, none of the two is particularly inspiring and only a few people have bothered to attach any deep philosophical undertone to them.

National anthems speak to the soul. It inspires nations and her citizens. It is a country’s plainsong, a chorale for the leaders and the led. It is the spiritual awakener, the potent hymn for war and the calming melody for peace. For us here, it may not be anything more than a part of a national ritual, a song for occasions that announce the leaders while the people sing along the wordings that hold no meaning to them.

So, for the sake of it, one must ask where the old anthem trumps the new in those ennobling aspects that so endeared it back into our hearts. My guess is that it is in the first stanza that urges unity and tolerance in one country clogged by so many nationalities: 

though tribe and tongue may differ,

in brotherhood we stand…

The two lines are enough to bring it back, if indeed we stand together as brothers in spite of our tribal differences. Sadly, we don’t, thanks to a leadership that has over the years drawn lines of hate against the people based on their tribes and their tongues. Thanks to them, the cleavages between the various tribes have become so accentuated that among them, distrust and mutual suspicion have become standard practice. 

The old, now new, national anthem “Nigeria, We Hail Thee” was adopted as our national anthem at Independence on October 1, 1960 and in spite of its tokunbo origin, many would say that the lyrics written by Lillian Jean Williams, a British, tried to capture the nation’s expectations of the time. It was fit for purpose in the sixties when we struggled with nationhood. It was fit for purpose as we struggled to rebuild the nation from the ruins of the civil war of 1966-1970. 

Just when we thought the war had ended and the rebuilding had started, the anthem that spoke about brotherhood was rested in 1978 as if to allow the military that held sway at the time, to recall the good old battlefront tactics that saw only friends and enemies and not much to do with cohesion. Now, as the switch has elicited among Nigerians, all manner of comments and  expectations of old, the question to ask is: is that anthem still fit for purpose?

Nigerians are more divided now than they were in 1978 when it was shelved. Ethnic hatred, especially against citizens of the South-East, for instance, has become more or less, a state policy. The country is stuck in the mire of corruption and official nepotism where the leader favours his tribe over and above others in the allocation of the resources of the state.

I must confess my likeness for the German national anthem, ‘Deutschlandlied’, which has been in existence since 1922. The lyrics are as inspiring as the accompanying music adapted from the 1797 classical composition by Joseph Haydn. Even if you’re unable to translate the wordings to English to fully understand their meaning, somehow  your bristles still get to stand when the words combine with the sounds. A beautiful way to start the day and the perfect way to end it.

If the reinstated national anthem sounds good in the first stanza, it sounds even better in the second where it extols the people to hand to the future generations, a banner without stain. But, there are obvious stains on our banner of nationhood. Today, Nigeria’s banner flutters in the hazy wind with all manner of stains in all shades of colours: the red; the orange; the yellow; the green; the blue; the intra and the violet, all depicting different dimensions of absurdity, nepotism, injustice, inequality and official corruption. 

 We have over the years promoted hate and thought our children to cut corners to achieve greatness. We have created inequality among the citizens and allowed some people to climb the ladder on the backs of their fellow Nigerians. We have promoted a system that rewards ineptitude and evil and permitted the ruling class to brazenly lord it over the hapless common man.

If indeed the country is retracing its steps from the years of injustice, corruption and hatred against one another, it is possible to find inspiration in the reinstated anthem. But we must return to that path of rectitude by consciously withdrawing from the hideous path we had walked. A nation on a process of rebirth should not shy away from facing its history with courage and redress those unjust acts and obnoxious policies that divide the people and foster hatred.

If indeed it is desirous of cleaning the stains on its banner, it must go beyond the perfunctory act of reintroducing an old anthem. Only then would the anthem’s wordings make any meaning, and only then would God grant that one request for Nigeria’s greatness that the last stanza begs.

Sheddy Ozoene is the Vice President (East) of the Nigerian Guild of Editors. 

“This house must not fall”, I wrote in my column of January 1, 2014, published in Daily Trust to mark 100 years of the amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates of Nigeria. I have always believed that if we run an inclusive system which allows all parts to retain their cultural identity and achieve their potentials while also identifying with a larger unifying umbrella, then we have a chance to strengthen the house that Frederick Luggard built.

The least one would expect is that all parts of the country would subscribe to the same set of general values — e.g. responsible parenthood, compulsory primary/secondary education, girl child education, equality of citizenship and acceptance of the supremacy of the constitution. If we aspire to be one country in deed and truth, then we generally shouldn’t have any problem subscribing to those values.

North/South

But we hardly agree about anything. Most times, it is possible to correctly predict the ‘southern position’ on an issue and the ‘northern position’. This is in spite of the fact that there is no such thing as a Southern Nigerian political structure, nor is there one for the North. Both areas have fiercely independent minority groups who resent being lumped together with the majority as if they were mere appendages.

However, the political elite on both sides pretend to speak for the totality of the people in their geographical area. Thus, one man will stand up and say, “The North will not tolerate this”, or his counterpart in the South will make a similar boast. So, while the elite play their games, there is hardly a national consensus on anything.

In the raging debate over the best way to restructure the country, the ‘southern’ position (generally) is that Nigeria cannot make progress without dismantling the present system and designing a new mode of governance agreed upon by all the ethnic nationalities in the country while the general ‘northern’ position is to retain the status quo which, all agree, is skewed in favour of the North.

Normally, both sets of self-appointed leaders would have been expected to arrange a formal meeting where they can share and interrogate each other’s ideas and the rationale for such. But, in these climes, it appears that political points of view are cast in concrete. That is what makes many Naijamaniac patriots fear that Luggard’s house may not endure after all. Multicultural countries that have attained nationhood did not get to that point by decreeing unity. They negotiated it in a spirit of give-and-take. The cry for restructuring cannot be stopped by decreeing compliance with unitarism.

Leo Tolstoy captures the scenario beautifully: “I sit on a man’s back choking him and making him carry me, and yet assure myself and others that I am sorry for him and wish to lighten his load by all means possible… except by getting off his back!”

Why The Fear?

Some people have asked: Are political leaders in the ‘North’ afraid of restructuring? An outspoken member of that privileged group, Senator Shehu Sani did not shy away from answering the question. He listed four reasons: (i) “The North see it (restructuring) as a South-West agenda. (ii) They fear that it’s only about control of oil resources. (iii) The fear of loss of political patronage, territory and economic privileges. (iv) Opportunism and lack of political will and courage by the past and present governments.”

It is going to be difficult to coexist, I think, if some states of the federation have not yet domesticated the Child Rights Act. So far, 34 of the 36 States of the Federation have fully domesticated the Child Rights Act, which deals with issues of child abuse, child labour, and forced marriage, among others. If children from a non-compliant state whose children are abandoned to roam the streets are ‘exported’ in thousands to a state which values the rights of children, would that be our fair idea of unity?

Recently, there was an outcry against the spectacle of weather-beaten and scantily clad street urchins literally germinating out of alleyways and streets and spilling into the Lagos-Badagry expressway in the Okokomaiko axis of Lagos. Many residents took to the social media to decry the unprecedented increase in the population of the children and appeal to the state government to clear the public space of the distressing sight.

Actually, the incidence of child beggars in Lagos can’t be described as entirely new. For many years, beggars, mainly from the northern states of the country and some from Niger, Chad and other countries in the Sahel region, have made Lagos their destination of choice in their quest for alms. The adults carry their children in tow and sometimes use them to blackmail or embarrass passersby.

What has made Lagos residents uneasy is the sudden upsurge in the population of those children — and they are crying out as they did last year. The Punch newspaper investigated the outcry and reported that the child beggars, aged between six and 15, had become a menace in areas such as Okokomaiko, Agege, LASU-Iyana Iba, Alaba Rago, Oshodi, Berger, Seven-Up and Ikeja, among others.

They could be seen harassing passersby. They stain people’s clothes and sometimes pilfer. One female commuter who lived around the old Toll Gate area complained that, “There are usually about 50 beggars on the pedestrian bridge. These beggars are always in a queue, like a gathering of soldier ants,” she said. “It is difficult to judge who is filthier between them and their nursing mother counterparts begging for alms with their babies”.

Whatever, anybody says in trying to rationalise this scandalous state of affairs where mere children are transported to urban centres to seek alms instead of being in school, decent members of society will continue to insist that the innocence and future of children should not be destroyed through the tolerance of irresponsible parenthood. It is no longer fashionable to hide behind religion in justifying the mass production of children without any plans of rearing them to responsible adulthood.

Advancing Democracy

Democracy Day 2024 comes up this week. Without doubt, the issue of restructuring and its many features— such as the establishment of state police, fiscal reorganisation and unbundling of the centre— will take on added energy as Nigerians from all walks of life make their feelings known. Prominent politicians all over the country are also likely to seize the opportunity to outline their ideas.

Already, there is a bill at the national assembly seeking to ban open grazing of animals so as to prevent the destruction of farmlands which often leads to conflict. Kano State under former Governor Ganduje was one of the earliest builders of ranches during the Buhari era. Katsina state under Governor Masari also announced a similar plan. Other states should emulate them. As Masari himself said, “The issue of animals wandering endlessly without control, grazing without properly mapped grazing routes should be over.”

Opposition leader and former Vice-President Atiku Abubakar x-rayed the cold shoulder given to the issue of restructuring by the northern elite: “Our current constitution does indeed concentrate too much power and resources at the centre… At some point our leaders and representatives will come together, discuss and work out a framework for restructuring our federation… The restructuring that I have been calling for involves changes to the allocation of powers, responsibilities and resources among the states or zones and between them and the federal government. It is clear to me that the resistance against restructuring is based on

three interrelated factors, namely dependency, fear and mistrust.”

With President Tinubu— reputed to be a champion of restructuring— in the saddle, it is hoped that concrete steps will be taken to reinvent the house that Luggard built and make it an enduring edifice. That will be the ultimate legacy. Happy Democracy Day 2024!

The Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM) has cautioned Nigerian citizens travelling through Switzerland regarding the possession of laser pointers at their airports, a statement issued on Friday by Gabriel Odu of Media, Public Relations and Protocols Unit of NIDCOM said.

This advisory follows the recent detention of Dr. Andrew Etsetowaghan at Geneva Airport for carrying a presentation pointer in his hand luggage after the pointers had been banned in Switzerland since June 1, 2019 of which he was not aware

Hon. Abike Dabiri-Erewa, Chairman/CEO NiDCOM, noted that many immigrants might be unaware of this regulation and urged Nigerian travelers to exercise caution to avoid similar incidents.

Dr. Etsetowaghan, a public health expert and Project Director at the Centre for Clinical Care and Clinical Research Nigeria, was detained on May 25, 2024, after attending a United States Department meeting in Geneva.

Dr. Etsetowaghan , who was part of an official delegation ,recounted his ordeal saying  “Upon going through security at Geneva Airport, I was informed that my presentation pointer was not allowed in Switzerland.

“I was detained, had my belongings and documents seized, and was subjected to several hours of interrogation and solitary confinement in a cell.

“Despite my compliance, the treatment I received was inhumane, including limited access to bathroom facilities and being forced to sign documents in French under duress.”

He called for measures to prevent such incidents in the future and urged a review of the procedures and better awareness of the banned items to ensure travelers are well-informed.

Reacting to the incident, NiDCOM emphasized the importance of raising awareness about such prohibited items in Switzerland Airports and urged Swiss authorities to enhance their communication on such regulations, describing Etseowaghan’s ordeal as “avoidable”.

[Leadership]

African Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) welterweight contender Don Madge is optimistic of emerging victorious over Nieman Gracie, a former Bellator fighter with a strong grappling background, in the upcoming Professional Fighters League (PFL) fight scheduled for June 28, 2024 in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, United States (U.S).

He also expressed excitement over the imminent launch of PFL Africa, which he described as a game-changer for African Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) fighters.

In a Zoom interview with select reporters in Lagos, Nigeria, he said he expects a serious fight with Nieman who he described as a very experienced opponent, adding however that his focus is on how to counter the strategy of Nieman.

“I expect a tough fight. Nieman is a very experienced opponent, and I anticipate he’ll try to take the fight to the ground. My preparation has been focused on countering that strategy,” he said.

As he braces for the contest, he also expressed delight about the upcoming launch of PFL Africa. “This is an amazing opportunity for African fighters. Breaking into the global MMA scene has always been difficult, especially coming from Africa. PFL coming in and giving fighters a platform to showcase their skills is incredible. African MMA is finally getting the recognition it deserves and I’m thankful to PFL for being a leader in developing the sport on the continent.”

[TheNation]

Organised Labour on Saturday tackled the state governors, accusing them of acting in bad faith towards the new minimum wage negotiations ongoing in the country.

Recall that the governors under the aegis of the Nigeria Governors Forum rejected the proposed N60,000 minimum wage for Nigerian workers.

In a statement issued on Friday by the Director of Media and Public Affairs for NGF, Halimah Ahmed, the governors said the proposed minimum wage was too high and not sustainable.

The governors said if the N60,000 minimum wage is adopted, many states would allocate their entire Federal Account Allocation Committee funds to salaries, leaving no resources for development projects.

However reacting on Saturday, the Organised Labour faulted the NGF’s position, saying every part of the new minimum wage agreement should be implemented and any of the state governors who can’t pay it should resign.

Speaking with Sunday PUNCH, Deputy National President of the Trade Union Congress, Tommy Etim, said, “There is no minimum wage. Every segment of it should be implemented. For the governors, we have said it very clearly. If you cannot pay minimum wage, please resign because you were voted for governance not for only infrastructure.”

“If you build the entire infrastructure and the people are not living to use it, who will use it? When they were campaigning did they tell us that? They didn’t tell us that. They make use of the poor to get to the top and when they get there, they start thinking outside the box. All the money they spent in electioneering campaigns, if they applied that to build infrastructure, to develop the revenue generation that would have solved some socio-economic challenges in their domain,” Etim said.

Describing the NGF statement as a recipe for industrial unrest, he said, “In this same country, the governors said that N30,000 was too much for governors to pay but it is in the same country that a governor emerged with over N80bn. What an irony! We cannot jump processes. We will also look at it together. Labour will be meeting. We are giving Mr President the benefit of the doubt to work the talk. The end will justify the means.”

Also reacting in a statement signed by its Head of Public Affairs, Benson Upah, the Nigerian Labour Congress said, “We do believe the Governors have acted in bad faith. It is unheard of for such a statement to be issued to the world in the middle of an on-going negotiation. It is certainly in bad taste.

“As for the veracity of their claim, nothing can be further from the truth as FAAC allocations have since moved from N700bn to N1.2tn, making the governments extremely rich at the expense of the people.

“All that the governors need to do to be able to pay a reasonable national minimum wage (not even the N60,000) is cut on the high cost of governance, minimise corruption as well as prioritise the welfare of workers.”

[Punch]

The Nigerian Senate elevated its leadership profile in the country last week when it opted to pass the second reading of a bill which seeks to ban open grazing and establish ranches for herders in the country. The bill was passed by a clear majority of the senators when their President, Godswill Akpabio, put it to vote. All well-meaning citizens ought to commend the senate on the development which no doubt represents the first major pan-Nigeria attempt to address the interminable conflict between farmers and herders in the country. A few legislators who spoke against the bill were able to fulfil the democratic precept that although the majority must have its way, the minority must also have its say.

It makes ample sense to imagine that this is solution-time for the problem as the present administration positions itself to fill governance gaps which its predecessor neglected to accomplish from 2015 to 2023.The anti-open grazing policy ought to be at the front burner of issues requiring the attention of Tinubu’s government because of the capacity of the subject to massively disrupt national integration. Government needs to be sensitive to the ease with which the centrifugal factors of heterogeneous societies can dismember Nigeria. Never again should our politicians play politics with boiling issues such as ethnicity and religion. No one should support or oppose a destructive issue such as open grazing just to satisfy the emotions of their constituents.

Legislators have a primary responsibility to be on the same page with their constituents, but they must also be ready to give way where the contending perspectives may not be in the overall interest of society. Thus, political leaders should not stand rigidly behind primordial issues just to please their local segment of citizens. Instead, leaders must be flexible enough to embrace a broader perspective when it is appropriate. During the political campaigns leading to the Second Republic, Alhaji Shehu Shagari originally a senatorial aspirant decided to, in line with the choice of his constituents, publicly support population as a basis for revenue allocation; but when destiny pushed him to become a presidential candidate, he became an astute advocate for derivation because the entire nation had become his constituency. 

It is patently wrong for leaders to use freedom of movement in our constitution to support open grazing without remembering that the freedom granted by the constitution does not extend to the discretion to commit crime. Every freedom is expected to be enjoyed responsibly without disrupting the freedom of other people. Accordingly, herders or any other group can move freely nationwide but cannot in the process destroy other people’s businesses. More importantly, every citizen must realize that the same constitution validates any law which curtails freedom in the interest of the general public. Indeed, Section 45 of the Nigerian Constitution 1999 specifically provides that a law can validly curtail any person’s freedom “for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

What this suggests is that there comes a time where certain groups may lose their freedom for the general good. For those of us in the media and communication sector, the law of defamation effectively stops us from defaming any person on the ground that we have freedom of speech. Unfortunately, no one in Nigeria is more discriminated against than media professionals because even when they publish the truth about leaders, they are arrested by law enforcement agencies and detained without trial. Yet, Section 22 of our constitution mandates the media to make government accountable to the people. In line with the current anti-open grazing posture, the senate should emulate Malawi, Ghana and others to enact laws stopping agencies of government from undue harassment of media professionals in Nigeria.

A major reason we expect our legislators to be more dynamic in deploying the instrumentality of law to correct several abuses is because much is expected from whom much is given. With all the allowances that our legislators allegedly commandeer, they must be forthcoming in using law to develop our democracy. An APC Senator, Titus Zam, Benue (North-West) who moved the discussions on the anti-open grazing bill accepted this much when he said:”the Senate cannot afford to look on while the country burns into ashes as a result of violent clashes between sedentary farmers and nomadic herders.”Zam insists that to do otherwise would amount to abdication of statutory and leadership responsibilities by legislators who are prime stakeholders in the Nigeria project and elected representatives of the people. 

Certainly, the adverse effects of open grazing far outweigh its benefits. Cattle rearing does not only degrade the environment, it also depletes the soil and forests, just as it pollutes clean water. It provokes clashes with other groups, disrupts agriculture and displaces farmers thereby contributing largely to food insecurity. But the most serious effect as earlier stated is the daily killings of citizens which no one has been able to halt for an entire decade. The need to call attention to the situation is more understood when it is realized that for several centuries, cattle herders and other farmers had lived peacefully in the same communities. History even records circumstances where herders voluntarily compensated farmers whose crops were destroyed by their cattle making it obvious that regulation of the subject is overdue.

The way forward is to endeavour to comprehend how other countries have handled the subject which has overwhelmed Nigeria. Here, we must return to the sermon of best practices and global realities which our nation often conveniently ignores. We cannot continue to talk about old grazing routes the way our politicians who cherish election rigging hang-on to analogue electoral processes. The popular view is that cattle ranching can drastically reduce the negative effects of open grazing yet, no one seems ready to embrace it. In 2019, Nigeria launched a ten-year National Livestock Transformation Plan that can help to stop the indiscriminate movement of cattle and reduce the nation’s existential herder-farmer conflict. The plan like some other public policies died on arrival with many people arguing against government’s involvement in the subject which they categorized as essentially a private enterprise.

If the truth must be told, the lack of political will to sustain the plan is an error of judgment. Government cannot pretend that its interest was really dissuaded by the private enterprise criticism. Politicians who always support open grazing should not restrict their support to mere talks, they should help to organize herders to embrace the system and lobby governments and private donors to see to the realization of ranching.  But then, how can our government that subsidizes pilgrimages and occasionally aids private airlines as well as failed banks not do same for ranching? It can however not be a burden for the federal government alone. States with many herders should be more forthcoming on the subject. 

It is obvious that the real problem is not land but funds and structures that can sustain the business. Government needs to intervene even if it is in the form of loans. To prevent further conflicts between ranchers and wolves and create a conducive environment for peace, the United States government spent huge sums in 2023, to help ranchers in locations such as Colorado to “put up fences, remove carcasses from landscapes and hire range riders to watch herds more closely.”Every government ought to secure its nation from all types of challenges especially those of intractable nature. This is why we praise the positive take-off stance of the anti-open grazing bill in Nigeria and the progress so far recorded which shows it is a popular bill.

The senate should keep up the momentum and ensure that the debate does not become that of “they versus us” where one group opposes whatever the other appears to support. The few law-makers who spoke against the bill must not see themselves as losers because the real significance of their contribution lies in their desire to canvass the other dimension of the subject. But more importantly, it is time for our legislators to articulate a robust solution for a problem that has refused to go. If they fail to seize the golden opportunity to make history, they will end up in boring sessions everyday observing a minute silence for the dead; and thereby engaging in legislation by condolence.  

By the time you are reading this on Saturday morning, Nigeria would have played the match that would mark Finidi George’s real baptism into the world of Nigerian football.

The long-awaited confrontation between Bafana Bafana of South Africa and the Super Eagles of Nigeria after AFCON 2023 would have been settled on the Uyo Township Stadium ground last night. I hope that the Super Eagles won because no explanation would be acceptable for not winning. That is the lot of coaches – the moment they are hired, their records of success and of failure start to count. Finidi George’s cannot be an exception. No excuses for failure are acceptable.

This morning, the outcome of the match would be front-page, setting the foundation for the relationship between Finidi George and the Nigerian sports media. I am still baffled that in this 21st Century, drawing from history, developments in the world, and the place of the African on earth, there could still be many Nigerian sportswriters that think that indigenous coaches lack the capacity to manage the country’s senior national team despite the abysmal showings of the third-rated, unknown, overrated and overpaid foreign coaches that come and fail to deliver or add any substance to the country’s football.

So, Finidi carries a new banner with responsibility to justify the confidence many of us have reposed in qualified, knowledgeable and experienced Nigerian coaches drawn from amongst ex-internationals (as is the practice everywhere else in the world outside Africa) to take charge of Nigeria’s senior national football team.

This first match is a litmus test and provides an early indication of how rough or smooth Finidi’s romance with the Super Eagles will be for the next few years.

I sincerely hope that as you are reading this, the Super Eagles have managed to secure a win in Uyo and eased the difficult passage to the 2026 World Cup.

I do not envy Finidi at all. He is sitting on a time bomb even if I firmly believe that he deserves his new position and should be given the chance to garner the needed experience, by winning and losing matches whilst becoming a better coach, and kick-start an era when Nigerians will accept to sink or swim with their indigenous coaches.

For some unfathomable reason, for the first time, on the eve of yesterday’s crucially important football match that will determine Nigeria’s as well as Finidi’s fate, my crystal ball is blank. I saw nothing! I could not foretell how the pendulum of fate would swing.

So, I get into the mode of prayer. I pray that the Eagles win, somehow, anyhow.

I pray that Finidi finds a way, somehow, to defeat the South Africans with a ‘new’ team that should provide an indication of the new Super Eagles under him.

I listened to Finidi in several interviews. He talked glowingly about his time under Jose Paseiro, and gives the man plenty of credit. I hope he is only being diplomatic. My humble advice is that he leaves Paseiro completely alone. He should not make Paseiro’s era and ‘success’ at AFCON the barometer, or model, or foundation for his own team. The truth is that,  Paseiro, even during his best moments at AFCON 2023, was never convincing.

The Super Eagles were not brilliant. They were lucky. Their performance left 6 Nigerians dead, from anxiety and tension generated by the hypertension-laden style of the team.

Nigeria was fortunate, riding on the back of, with plenty of luck. She survived and got away with it till the final match.

Finidi should approach this assignment with a slate full of his own ideas born of his knowledge, vast experience and deep understanding of Nigerian football and Nigerian footballers. Their effective deployment will make defeating African teams more routine.

The return of Ndidi – a stronger Eagles!

The good news is that Nigeria’s midfield ‘giant’ is back in the ‘new’ team. I believe that his absence was badly felt and could have made a big difference to the Eagles’ final game at AFCON 2023, Wilfred Ndidi, is back.

In Finidi’s ‘new’ team, I believe that Ndidi will close up some of the weakness and porosity in Nigeria’s defence, by providing an additional layer of cover for towering Semiu, a very vulnerable player in the centre of Nigeria’s defense line. Semiu is only very effective in aerial battles. On the ball he often looks lost, not knowing what to do with it.

In the absence of team leader, William Troost Ekong, Ndidi must rise to the occasion to strengthen the Nigerian defence, link the defence and attack, and also launch fresh attacks.

Eagles attack…. without Osimhen

Nigeria parades a formidable frontline led by ‘born-again’ Ademola Lookman.

This strength on paper must translate into action on the field of play. In the absence of Osimhen, Finidi may have been presented with the opportunity to adopt a new strategy for scoring goals outside of the long balls hauled upfront to a lone Victor Osimhen scrummaging for a goal.

The front line of Nigeria is made up of players who do best when they have the freedom to express themselves on the ball, dribbling past opponents with speed and panache, and creating goal-scoring chances all the time.

Hauling all balls to Victor Osimhen up front did not work well during AFCON and must be changed to allow for front runners run at the South African defence all night, and create ceaseless wahala for them

So, I hope the Eagles won last night.

I also wish the team and Finidi George the best of luck going forward.

Bereavement in the Green Eagles

The past week was littered with sad news.

Two of our colleagues in the Green Eagles of the mid-1970s passed on, days apart.

‘Hard man’ and supreme left-back for Vasco Dagama, Rangers International and the Green Eagles, Harrison Mecha died.

A few days later, stylish player, tall, handsome and elegant mid-field player for Rangers International and the Green Eagles, Stanley Okoronkwo, embarked on the inevitable journey of no-return.

Both news were numbing, sad reminders again of the briefness of life, and our mortality.

Meanwhile, writing tributes has become more painful and difficult for me with the deaths of an increasing number of players of my generation and even younger.

I am drawn again to dust up my intention many years ago to sue the federal government and demand a welfare policy for retired athletes as well as some ‘reparation’ for retired athletes who pay with a life of poor health, poverty and early death for the ‘sacrifices’ they made in ignorance whilst representing Nigeria in their youth. We played without fully grasping the health and social implications and consequences, until at the evening of life, we are confronted with the devastating reality.

The statistics are frightening.

Almost two thirds of the football players that represented Nigeria and won the Gold medal at the Second All-Africa Games in 1973, are dead. Most of them before turning 60!

Almost half of the team that won the Africa Cup of Nations for Nigeria in 1980 are also dead, most before turning 60.

With the recent deaths of Mecha and Stanley, I am reminded that more than half of the players that won the Africa Cup Winners Cup with Rangers International FC in 1977 have passed on. And that those still alive are mostly suffering the pain of debilitating arthritis, and other ailments directly related to health conditions that derived from their playing football without proper guidance and information by experts in the field, to enable them be prepared for the consequences in the evening of their lives. Something must be done.

Death is turn-by-turn, and inevitable.

Yet, we mourn the exit of Harrison Mecha and Stanley Okoronkwo from the earthly theatre. I wish them peace on their journey back home to Our Creator.