Dear Justice Binta Nyako,

This is not a legal brief. This is not a media headline. This is not an accusation. This is a letter. A solemn, sober appeal to your spirit, to your integrity, and to the legacy you are still building.

You sit at a crossroads that most public servants will never truly understand—not just between two legal arguments, but between fear and fortitude. Between duty and destiny. Between the convenience of delay and the clarity of conscience.

You are in possession of a case that carries more than legal consequences—it carries national, spiritual, and generational weight. The matter of Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is not only about what happened in the chamber of the Senate. It is about whether a chamber of law will affirm the dignity of truth.

And the question many are quietly asking—some aloud, some within—is this:

What is the worst they can do to you, if you do what is right?

Can they block your elevation to the Supreme Court? Possibly.

Can they transfer you to a quieter, less convenient judicial post? Perhaps.

Can they isolate you from their circles of comfort? Likely.

But at your stage, with your experience, your age, your understanding of life’s deeper currents—is any of that worth more than your conscience?

They may have power for today. But only truth travels into forever.

And robes, titles, appointments—these things do not outlive memory. But justice does.

Justice, real justice, lives beyond buildings and bulletproof gates. It is carried in the mouths of citizens, in the prayers of women who feel unseen, and in the notebooks of students who hope that, one day, the law will protect them too.

They may offer influence. They may offer distance from discomfort. But no one—no matter how connected—can offer you peace with your own name, if your name drifts from the truth.

Remember, Madam Justice, this is not your beginning. This is the phase where every word from your lips, every judgment from your gavel, becomes the story that others will tell when you are no longer there to tell it yourself.

And when your robe is folded away, and your seat becomes someone else’s—what story will be told in your absence? What legacy will outlive the salary, the titles, the ceremonial entrances? Will it be said that you stood, or that you stalled?

There are those who whisper that courage costs too much. But courage, when spent in service of truth, never runs out. It multiplies. It echoes. And it blesses generations to come.

Those who sit in power may change the rules, but they cannot change the records of time. Those who wish to bend your judgment may do so in shadows, but light always finds what shadows try to hide.

What stands before you is not simply a legal argument. It is a national temperature check. Will the judiciary affirm courage, or bow to convenience? Will the Constitution guide judgment, or will unseen hands shape rulings through unseen pressures?

We are not asking you to be political. In fact, we ask the opposite.

We ask you to be judicial.

We ask you to show that law is still sacred in Nigeria. That truth still has a home. That the robe still means something beyond ceremony.

You are no longer just one among many. This case, and what you do with it, may well be the most publicly remembered moment of your judicial career. And it will not be remembered for the technicalities or citations—but for the courage, or the absence of it.

You are a woman whose age grants you freedom from ambition, and whose experience grants you the wisdom to see through all political fog. You carry no need to climb ladders anymore. You are already above them. And from this height, you have one sacred opportunity left: to decide whether you will descend with the crowd—or rise above the noise.

Let them say what they will. Let them plot what they may.

But let it also be said, one day:

That Justice Binta Nyako, in her time, was not moved by fear.

That she did not flinch.

That she remembered what the robe was meant to symbolize.

That she ruled for the law—and not for the loud.

Let it be said not in newspapers, but in homes. In classrooms. In the silence of the mind where all true memory lives.

You are not doing this for Natasha.

You are doing it for your name.

For democracy.

For your Creator.

For Nigeria.

And yes—especially for those unborn daughters who will someday sit where you sit, and will wonder whether the law still bends to truth.

We are watching. Not with anger—but with hearts breaking under the weight of disbelief. With the trembling belief that perhaps—perhaps—this time, justice will not bow. That one judge, one voice, might still resist the tide.

And while we weep and wait, we remember—with grief and expectation—what your fellow justices once declared with courage.

We remember the year 2017. A year when a Federal High Court, unshaken by political heat, declared the suspension of Senator Ali Ndume not only unlawful but a betrayal of the Constitution. That judgment was not about favor. It was about fidelity. That ruling reminded Nigeria that no Senate chamber has the right to suspend a voice elected by the people. The judge that day saw beyond chairs and titles—he saw a constitutional violation bleeding in daylight.

And again, in 2018, it happened. A court stood again. This time in defense of Senator Ovie Omo-Agege. The judgment was firm: this suspension too, like the one before, was a misuse of legislative procedure. It was an overreach. It was unlawful. That court did not care for political winds. It did not pause for party lines. It heard only the voice of the law—and responded without trembling.

Now, we hear the excuse: that Senate internal rules justified defiance of court orders. That they could brush aside a judicial instruction because their Standing Orders allowed it.

But how, Justice Nyako? How can any internal Senate rule ever rise above the Constitution? How can any legislative manual supersede a court order from a constitutional judge? How can Nigeria claim to be a democracy—if its lawmakers obey their own preferences and defy the rule of law?

Justice Nyako, no. This cannot be accepted. Not again. Not now.

You know this. You have lived this. You carry the weight of decades in the legal system. You know that once the judiciary is made to kneel before politics, democracy becomes theatre.

Those rulings in 2017 and 2018 were not accidents. They were the cries of a legal system fighting to stand. They said clearly that legislative chambers are not above the law. They cannot suspend a Senator in darkness and call it order. They cannot hide injustice behind the veil of ‘procedure.’

And now, you have been handed this same flame.

You are not writing the first paragraph—but perhaps the last hope.

When you raise your gavel, raise it in the name of those rulings.

Raise it in defense of the Constitution.

Raise it for the daughters who will one day ask whether courts still had strength in their mother’s time.

Let your ruling say what fear cannot.

Let it whisper into the fabric of our nation: that justice is not an accessory, and law is not a tool of convenience.

Let it be your moment—not for applause—but for legacy.

With prayer. With grief. With tears still falling—because Nigeria is desperate for one judge who reminds the powerful: justice is not a strategy. It is a stand.

This writer does not know any of the individuals involved; the focus is solely on upholding democracy, truth, and justice.

Respectfully,

Did we have mass failure of candidates in the 2025 tertiary institutions’ qualifying examination or a deplorable conduct of the scheme by the JAMB? While it would take time and independent investigation to unravel candidates’ allegation of “wrong result”, the role of JAMB generally, presents another case study in the difficulty of making the Nigerian system work. No, the trouble with Nigeria is not simply a failure of leadership. It goes beyond leadership and indeed beyond political leadership. The judiciary, the legislature, the civil service, security agencies, health sector workers, universities, to mention only a few sides of public service are as dysfunctional and corrupt as various executive arms of government. What seems more characteristic of Nigeria’s public life is the unwillingness to uphold the common good. Personal, narrow and group interests are brought to override the larger societal interest in many decisions and execution of public programmes. Added to the vice of privatisation of policies is the near – absence of work ethics. We routinely chant “international best practices” without corresponding commitment to upholding standards. That is why service delivery is mediocre, bumpy and slow. That is why built infrastructures and facilities deteriorate in no time. As will be seen, JAMB’s controversial outing this year cannot be situated far from this background.

At no other time have we witnessed the barrage of outrage that greeted this year’s entrance exams. While in the last ten years, results for 2020 and 2021 were considered poor, they did not receive the widespread protests nor intensity of criticism trailing the current exercise. JAMB had announced release of the 2025 result on Friday, May 9, with emphasis on the 78 percent below 200 mark score. In 2020, under 200 point score was 79 percent; and climbed to 87 percent the following year 2021. Yet, reactions to those results were not as strong as with this year’s edition. Public response to result of the April 2025 higher institutions’ entry exam was largely dismissive. Significantly, candidates and or their parents rejected the low scores on their slips as incorrect. They did so with such confidence and resolve that could not be ignored. As at Monday, May 12, 2025, about 8400 candidates had reportedly filled the formal complaint form demanding access to their scripts. Typical of Nigerian government agency, JAMB leadership’s initial attitude to the outcry was playing the ostrich and deflecting the heart of the matter. Reacting after seventy – two hours of public outcry over the doubtful results, the Board’s spokesman appeared on Channels television on Monday, to read the stilted official line of candidates’ errors, omissions and challenges with digital demands as the issues. This technical slant featured prominently in a briefing by the Board’s registrar to announce the results on Friday, May 9, 2025. However, as the resolve to take legal steps to compel JAMB to transparently authenticate the disputed results gathered momentum, the Board finally buckled. By Monday afternoon, the JAMB leadership was forced to set aside it’s stereotype of candidate technical inadequacy to pledge a fact – finding review of the examination package.

While we await report of investigation into the doubtful results, it’s necessary to draw attention to other controversial steps by JAMB with hope that corrective action will be taken going forward. There were problems with the much advertised mock UTME test. Some candidates were posted outside their chosen States for the exam. Defending the arrangement, JAMB’s Public Communication Advisor, Fabian Benjamin told journalists that not all computer based centres were available for the mock exam. “If centres for mock in Abuja are filled up and there were available centres in Nassarawa State, candidates will be sent there” Vanguard, April 15, 2025 reported. This still does not absolve the admissions body from responsibility to place candidates where they registered. JAMB conducts two major exams in a calendar year. What does it do with the considerable time at it’s disposal? Is it asking too much to say the Board ought to confirm the availability of needed facilities before commencing sale of registration forms? The crux of the matter is that this oversight, this inconvenient relocation of candidates repeats every year. Where then is the supposed value of the mock exam as mirror towards successful main exam? Conducting hassles – minimal, mock exam which involves a tiny number of candidates, should not continue to be problematic.

Another instance of the Board’s wrong footing is the approved publication for those taking Literature. The novel chosen this year is The Lekki Headmaster by Kabir Alabi Garba. No problem about the literary quality of the work. But the print format of the publication is a big issue. The 63 page book, by standard setting, would run up to 90 pages. The text however, is in font size ten, instead of the preferred twelve point, making the print – run tiny. Additionally it is rendered in single line spacing with the result that the pages are tight. The compression poses problem of readability, a big challenge in an environment where electricity supply is not often assured. Exams by their very nature task the mental and attitudinal faculties of students. Saddling candidates with barely legible texts in the context of a very competitive exam is unhealthy. The selection of a visually deficient title as The Lekki Headmaster reflects poorly on JAMB. The decision calls into question the judgment that approved a publication with potential of unduly tasking candidates. Why didn’t JAMB insist on stress – free, readable specifications for the adopted texts? What was the Board doing all year round that it could not find a suitable, eyes – friendly publication? The impression that follows this scenario is that of a conscious attempt to cut costs. Unfortunately, this would be at the expense of some candidates’ performance. Any situation that tends to put the candidate at disadvantage should be avoided.

JAMB also got it wrong on the timeline for commencement of the exam. The slip admitting candidates for the exam clearly stated that they were to report at the various centres by 6:30am. The Labour Party 2023 presidential candidate, Mr Peter Obi, was therefore right in his indictful intervention on the matter. Obi’s faulting of the time schedule was justified. An official indication that a “compulsory” public event will kick off by 6:30am is invariably a recommendation for those concerned to be on the road much earlier. Ordinarily, that would pass for insensitivity on the part of the organisers. But to prescribe such time schedules under the prevailing insecurity situation in the country and for a programme involving youths and teenagers is reckless and dangerous. What attitude could be more uncaring of responsibility to society? In suggestive admission of the scandalous time fixture, JAMB spokespersons denied the 6: 30am directive, emphasising that the exam proper started at 8am. It was difficult deciding which was more ridiculous; the barefaced lies about not having communicated 6:30am to candidates or 8am exam crap; or the bungled opportunity of candour and apology. It was a low moment for the organisation. Did it not bother the management what candidates who began accreditation by 6:30am and exams by 7.00am would think of these deceptions? What lessons would these manipulations teach them about sense of public service in their country? Again, JAMB wanted to curtail expenditure by shrinking the number of days the exams would run. And again, this was to be achieved at the detriment of quality. The exam dash embarked upon by JAMB would explain the early morning schedules and exploitation of candidates whose computer systems developed problems. There were reportedly no redress if the system hung for thirty minutes or an hour. In effect, the exams in some respect, became a crash programme focused on completing a task rather than upholding set standards.

Mercifully, JAMB’s admission of responsibility for the controversial mass failure came as this essay was about being completed. JAMB Registrar Professor Ishaq Oloyede’s press conference of Wednesday, May 14, 2025, was a display of humanity and humility so rare in Nigeria’s public affairs. His sense of accountability was in sharp contrast to the officialdom of May 9 when the candidates and Nigerians were taken for granted. The regret expressed over result analysis errors came across as sincere and I think most Nigerians would accept the apology. Although some harm has been done, the opportunity of resit for affected candidates should mitigate the extent of loss. What remains is for the JAMB authorities to internalise the lessons surrounding this chain of events in achieving better performance subsequently. And let our public officials, in high and low offices, take inspiration from this hopefully born – again experience to make themselves servants of the people dedicated to the common interest.

Title-winners Paris Saint-Germain still have the Champions League final to look forward to later this month but the Ligue 1 season reaches its climax on Saturday with European places still up for grabs and a quartet of clubs scrapping to avoid relegation.

PSG secured a fourth consecutive domestic title more than a month ago and will collect their trophy following Saturday’s match at home to Auxerre.

Luis Enrique’s side will then turn their thoughts to the French Cup final against Reims on May 24 and the Champions League final against Inter Milan in Munich a week later.

Behind them, Marseille and Monaco clinched podium places, and guaranteed access to next season’s Champions League, with victories last weekend combined with favourable results elsewhere.

That leaves one spot in Europe’s elite club competition to be decided, with four teams — Nice, Lille, Strasbourg and Lyon — still in contention for a place in the third qualifying round of the Champions League.

Nice, who fell short in the Champions League play-offs in 2017, are best-placed to take the remaining spot as they come into their final match at home to Brest in fourth place and with the best goal difference.

A 1-0 win for the Ineos-owned outfit would leave Lille needing to win by six goals, or Strasbourg requiring an eight-goal margin of victory for them to go above Nice.

“I prefer to be slightly above the others in the table than slightly below them,” admitted Nice coach Franck Haise, who took Lens into the Champions League two years ago.

“To get fourth place, which would not be trivial, first of all we need to win. We know that.”

A slip-up would give a real chance to Lille, who finished fourth last season and then came through the qualifying rounds of the Champions League before going on to reach the last 16.

Strasbourg also retain hope of a first campaign in Europe’s elite competition since 1979/80, despite the frustration of seeing a 12-game unbeaten run ended in a 2-1 loss at Angers last weekend.

– Saint-Etienne to survive? –

Lille and Strasbourg are both at home to relegation-threatened opponents, in the shape of Reims and Le Havre respectively.

Lyon, meanwhile, know their chances of taking fourth are extremely slim. They must win at home to Angers and hope the three teams above them all lose, with the consequences of missing out on the huge prize money on offer in the Champions League likely very serious for them.

“First of all, we need to focus on ourselves,” said Lyon coach Paulo Fonseca. “We know it’s going to be very difficult for all the other teams to lose, but we must go out looking to win our match without thinking about the rest.”

The team finishing fifth will go into the Europa League with sixth entering the Conference League, although seventh place will be enough to qualify for Europe provided PSG win the French Cup.

At the bottom, Saint-Etienne gave themselves a lifeline last weekend in their bid to avoid an immediate return to the second tier.

A win at home to Toulouse will see them grab the lifeline of a two-legged play-off against either Dunkerque or Metz to stay in the top flight — provided Le Havre do not win.

Reims and Nantes are also not yet safe from the danger of finishing in the bottom three.

Key stats

4 – Four teams go into the last night of the season with a chance of taking France’s fourth and final qualifying spot for the Champions League

21 – PSG’s Ousmane Dembele has 21 goals and is on course to end the season as Ligue 1’s leading scorer, although Marseille’s Mason Greenwood is just two behind on 19

9- The number of PSG players named in the Ligue 1 team of the season — Lille goalkeeper Lucas Chevalier and Lyon forward Rayan Cherki were the only two from elsewhere to make the select XI

Fixtures on Saturday (kick-offs 1900 GMT)

Lens v Monaco, Lille v Reims, Lyon v Angers, Marseille v Rennes, Nantes v Montpellier, Nice v Brest, Paris Saint-Germain v Auxerre, Saint-Etienne v Toulouse, Strasbourg v Le Havre

[Guardian]

The Managing Director of Sahara Group, Kola Adesina, has expressed strong confidence in President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s bold energy sector reforms.

In an interview for an upcoming State House TV documentary marking the second anniversary of President Tinubu’s administration, Adesina lauded the government’s policies for improving transparency, regulatory consistency, and expanding investment opportunities.

“The most significant shift I have seen—without a doubt—has been the government’s willingness to confront the long-term inefficiencies within the petroleum sector. President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s courage in removing the fuel subsidy and market distortions hasn’t been rivalled in the history of Nigeria,” he said.
In a statement by Presidential spokesman, Bayo Onanuga, Adesina noted that removing subsidies has created a more sustainable energy environment, enabling businesses and policymakers to plan more confidently and clearly.

“The energy sector today is stronger and more sustainable. We can now plan. The macro and micro elements are beginning to work together, and there’s strong potential for long-term benefits.”

From a business standpoint, Adesina said the reforms have unlocked access to fair competition and significantly boosted investor confidence.

“For us, it’s about the free market, open market, and transparency. Nothing beats that. When there’s no clarity or consistency, investment becomes difficult. But now, we know how to price. It’s open to everyone in the market, whether investing or buying, and you know reform is here and guiding every process.”

He commended the Tinubu administration’s progress in critical infrastructure, particularly in the gas and power sectors, where the Sahara Group is active.

“Lately, there’s been significant momentum. We’re seeing more alignment between public policy and private sector expectations. The bottlenecks we faced are giving way to commonsense decisions.

We can predict what’s happening and where the country is headed.”

Adesina further applauded implementing the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), describing it as a game-changer for policy clarity.

“PIA is now easier to relate to—unlike before when policy inconsistencies were the order of the day. Private sector players like us want to invest with the confidence that policy won’t change after we’ve committed scarce resources.”

In the power sector, Adesina welcomed recent efforts by the government to resolve long-standing financial obligations.

“We’ve seen movement on the payment of legacy debts, especially in the power sector. Once the government clears those debts, new investors will come in, and existing ones—like us—will deepen our investments. There’s life in the business again.”

He also highlighted encouraging developments in Nigeria’s energy transition, driven by President Tinubu’s focus on natural gas and climate-conscious solutions.

“Gas-to-power is gaining ground. We love what’s happening. We’ve invested, and we’re ready to invest more. CNG is now the order of the day—the President has made that a focal point. The carbon credit scheme is also expanding.”

He said the Tinubu administration’s efforts in the last two years represent a solid foundation for Nigeria’s future. The current energy landscape is anchored on reliability, accessibility, and affordability.

“We’ve had a very complex situation, and while the road ahead won’t be easy in the short term, things will improve. The foundation has been laid. It’s being worked on and re-engineered to ensure that prosperity can truly be democratised and felt by the last man, at the last mile,” he added.

As this year’s Eid al-Adha approaches, livestock dealers and buyers have expressed concern that rams and other sacrificial animals may become more expensive due to rising cases of rustling in parts of the North West and a recent livestock export ban imposed by the Niger Republic.

Earlier in May, the Nigerien government temporarily banned livestock exports to stabilise domestic prices ahead of the Eid celebrations.

The country’s Ministry of Commerce said the measure was aimed at ensuring sufficient livestock supply during the high-demand season.

In Niger, where over 90 per cent of the population is Muslim, hundreds of thousands of sheep are traditionally slaughtered during Eid al-Adha, which will take place in early June this year.

The ban affects the export of cattle, sheep, goats, and camels.

Niger’s Commerce Minister, Abdoulaye Seydou said the decision to ban the export of livestock was intended “to ensure the regular supply” of animals in local markets in preparation for the celebrations.

He also warned that security agencies have been instructed to enforce the ban strictly and that violators will face decisive action.

It would be recalled that Niger recently imposed a ban on the export of food items to neighbouring countries, including Nigeria.

The latest move is expected to affect neighbouring countries, particularly Nigeria and Ivory Coast, which depend on livestock imports from Niger, especially rams, sheep, and camels.

Nigerian dealers look to Cameroon, Chad as alternatives

Merchants in major livestock markets in Kano and Jigawa states said the ban could cause supply shortages and price hikes in Nigeria during the Eid season.

Malam Abdullahi Abdul, a 65-year-old livestock merchant at the Wudil Livestock Market in Kano who has been in the trade for over 15 years, said the ban would undoubtedly affect the supply of animals to Nigeria.

He said Niger Republic is a key supplier of rams, especially during Eid al-Adha, and the restriction would impact availability at a time when demand peaks.

He noted that, in response, many merchants have begun sourcing livestock from alternative routes, especially from countries like Cameroon and Chad.

“There is every tendency that Nigeria may face a scarcity or high cost of livestock due to the ban by the Niger Republic.

“However, if things go according to our plan, people may not experience a major shortage. We have already sent our people to Cameroon and Chad to bridge the gap.

“The supply should start arriving soon. Still, prices may rise due to foreign exchange differences,” he said.

Another livestock trader, Alhaji Bello Guri, urged the public not to panic, noting that animals have already begun arriving in Nigeria from other countries.

He added that more people now rear their animals ahead of Eid, reducing dependence on market supplies.

“There is no cause for alarm. The ban was announced early enough for merchants to respond and find alternatives. However, what cannot be ruled out is the likelihood of increased prices due to reduced supply and high demand,” he said.

We are in a dilemma – Maigatari merchants

The Maigatari International Livestock Market in Jigawa State, which typically sources animals from both Niger Republic and within Nigeria, is now facing uncertainty following the recent livestock export ban by the Nigerien government.

According to Malam Dauda Babandi Gumel, the market’s local supply primarily comes from Nguru, Garin Alkali, Dapchi, and other parts of Yobe State.

He added that additional livestock is also sourced from various locations across Northern Nigeria, while Niger Republic traditionally supplies animals from areas such as Dingas, Magarya Tsira, and Matarka.

He explained that the ban has disrupted the activities of licensed Nigerian livestock traders who regularly travel to Niger to buy animals in bulk and transport them directly to the Maigatari border cattle market.

He said that with the restriction in place, these traders are now idle, raising concerns over the potential scarcity of livestock ahead of this year’s Eid al-Adha celebrations.

It was also gathered that the market, which operates every Thursday and is typically bustling with livestock, has recently seen a sharp decline in activity.

Due to the Niger Republic’s export ban, the market has been a shadow of its former self, with fewer animals available for trade.

“Though there is still time before the Eid al-Adha celebration, we are hoping for a miracle to turn things around because both buyers and sellers are currently in a dilemma,” Malam Gumel said.

Buyers worry as livestock prices soar

Though livestock prices vary by size, many buyers believe they will be significantly higher this year.

Checks from major livestock markets indicate that a ram that sold for N120,000 last year is now priced between N170,000 and N200,000.

Similarly, bulls that previously sold for N600,000 are now going for between N850,000 and N1 million.

According to Abbas Idris, a resident of Kabuga in Kano, the current market indicators suggest that only a few people may be able to afford the Sallah sacrifice this year.

He said an average ram is now selling between N100,000 and N150,000.

“If prices are already this high weeks before the festival, one can only imagine what they will be like during Sallah,” he said.

Another resident, Alhaji Shehu Sharu, noted that since Islamic teachings allow for collective sacrifice, he has opted to contribute alongside friends.

“Ever since livestock prices surged three years ago, my friends and I have been pooling resources to carry out the sacrifice. At least it’s religiously permissible.

“I plan to do the same this year. Honestly, prices have gone far beyond what an average citizen can afford. A bull that used to cost N600,000 now sells for between N1.5 million and N2 million. That’s outrageous,” he said.

Similarly, Aminu Bukar, another Kano resident, said all signs indicate that livestock prices will remain high this year. He disclosed that he owns a ram currently valued at over N2 million.

“Can you imagine a single ram going for N2 million? It’s madness. The most annoying part is that people are buying.

“I doubt many people will be able to afford the sacrifice this year. We will just have to wait and see. As for me, I haven’t decided yet—I’m watching the market,” he said.

Malam Idris Isma’ila Zango, a father of six and civil servant with the Kano State Teachers Service Board, said the Sallah sacrifice is no longer a viable option for him.

Zango said he recently conducted a market survey at the Tishama Livestock Market in Kano and found that the lowest price for a sacrificial ram was N170,000.

“It’s just not realistic. How can someone earning the minimum wage of N71,000 afford a ram that costs at least N170,000?  I don’t think I will be making the sacrifice this year.

“We have been told the price hike is due to Niger’s export ban, but I think it’s more than that. It’s part of a broader trend in the global economy,” he said.

Experts seek livestock transformation plan implementation

A livestock expert, Dr. Aminu Rimi noted that beyond the Niger ban, factors such as rampant animal rustling and the failure of farmers to adopt modern livestock management techniques are major contributors to the rising cost of livestock.

According to him, the full implementation of the National Livestock Transformation Plan (NLTP) is essential.

He explained that the NLTP offers a strategic framework for modernising livestock production in Nigeria.

He also stressed the need to promote livestock fattening practices as a way to accelerate production and enhance overall output.

Kano-based business analyst, Ibraheem Muazzam said the decision by the Republic of Niger is both calculated and strategic, aimed at sending a message to Nigeria and other African nations.

He explained that the country has been making deliberate economic moves since the military takeover.

He added that many of these decisions are intended to assert Niger’s importance in the region’s economic stability and survival.

 [DailyTrust]

Grammy-nominated singer Davido has revealed that if he hadn’t ventured into music, he would have likely become a journalist.

In a recent interview, the award-winning artist explained that his love for engaging conversations and passion for marketing fuel his promotional efforts.

Davido, who studied marketing and business management, said he enjoys interacting with people, gathering information, and selling his brand.

He attributed his massive following and success to a strong work ethic and consistent self-promotion.

Davido said, “I like promo, I like conversations. A lot of people don’t know that I studied marketing apart from business management. I like to market myself, I love to talk. If I had a podcast, I talk for like three to four days.

“I just feel like it’s part of being an artist. A lot of big artists don’t do press but I do because I can talk. But some people just don’t want to talk. When people meet me, I like to have conversations, I like to know things, I like information. Even at home, I’m also researching. If I wasn’t doing music, I will definitely be in journalism.

“A lot of people in my position would just sit down and let everything work for them. People be asking me why I got the most followers, it’s because I’m working”.

He admires the dedication of successful artists like Beyoncé, noting that they continue to work hard even after achieving great success. 

“I know how hard Beyonce will work with all the money she got”, he added.

[TheNation]

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has said ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo swiftly ended Boko Haram’s activities when the group first emerged during their administration.

Speaking in Abuja on Wednesday during a visit by stakeholders from Kogi East Senatorial District, led by former Kogi State Deputy Governor, Simon Achuba, Atiku attributed the early success against the insurgents to strong political will.

Atiku, in a video shared on his Facebook page from the meeting, said Boko Haram first appeared in Yobe State in 2002, prompting Obasanjo to consult him on how to respond.

Atiku said, “You remember when the Boko Haram started in Yobe? It was actually in 2002. We were in the office. The president sent for me. ‘VP, what do we do about this?’ Then I said, ‘Mr President, let’s call the Service Chiefs and give them a deadline. If they can’t put it down, then they should put down their uniform and go away. We will get some other people.

“And he called the Service Chiefs; I was there, and gave them marching orders, and within a few weeks, they put down the insurgency in Yobe. It never came up again until we left office.”

Atiku blamed the group’s later resurgence on the failure of successive leaders to act decisively.

“So, I will say there’s a lack of political will on the leaders. When they’re killing your citizens, how can you even eat? They’re killing your citizens and you don’t give a damn; that is the greatest irresponsibility by any political leader, anywhere.

“So I hold our leadership responsible for all the insecurity that is going on all over the place,” he added.

Atiku served as Vice President of Nigeria from 1999 to 2007 under President Olusegun Obasanjo, during the Fourth Republic, following the end of military rule.

[Punch]

There is, it seems, no limit to the extent the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, FCCPC, is prepared to go in its dance of shame with MultiChoice Nigeria, owners of DStv and GOtv. This time, it is wheedling the legally unwary by spinning an otherwise straightforward court ruling to wit: While the FCCPC has investigative powers under its establishing Act, it lacks the authority to fix or suspend prices unless specifically delegated by the President through a gazette.

It was an unambiguous, explicit, clear-cut and unequivocal judgement.

Of course, no such presidential instrument as required by law was presented to the court. And there couldn’t have been any because President Bola Tinubu was emphatic in disavowing price control during his first media chat on December 23, 2024. Asked if his government would consider travelling the “price control” route in order to mitigate the prevailing cost-of-living crunch, his answer was emphatic: “I don’t believe in price control. We just continue to supply the market, we work hard to supply the market.”

Justice James Omotoso of the Federal High Court, Abuja echoed the same sentiment last Thursday when he ruled that the FCCPC lacks the power to interfere in the pricing decisions of private companies in a free market economy. He held that under Section 88 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, only the President can regulate prices.

But in affirming MultiChoice’s right to set prices for its goods and services, Justice Omotoso also dismissed the company’s suit against the regulator’s intervention in its recent subscription price hike, a fact that FCCPC is latching on in its dance of shame, spinning the judgement.

Justice Omotoso ruled that MultiChoice’s suit constituted an abuse of court process as a similar case was pending in Lagos, stressing that the firm should have pursued its arguments there. The fact that it failed to do so, the court held, rendered the filing in Abuja inappropriate. Simply put, Justice Omotoso struck out MultiChoice’s suit against the FCCPC only on procedural grounds.

What the Judge didn’t say, however, is the fact that not only is a similar proceeding pending in a Lagos court, indeed, as far back as 2015, two lawyers – Osasuyi Adebayo and Oluyinka Oyeniji – approached a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos to challenge MultiChoice’s right to increase prices and lost, with the court ruling that they were not obliged to use MultiChoice’s services.

That judgement had not been vacated when the FCCPC, in its desperation to ratchet up the pressure, sued MultiChoice and its Managing Director, John Ugbe, in March for allegedly violating regulatory directives, obstructing an ongoing inquiry and engaging in conduct deemed violations of the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018. But the Judge recalled that in 2022, the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, ruled that MultiChoice, a luxury, non-essential commodity provider, has a right to increase its prices while Nigerians have a choice to opt for other Pay TV platforms.

It is this clear-cut ruling that FCCPC is spinning, orchestrating media headlines such as, “Subscription Hike: FCCPC Floors MultiChoice” and “Court affirms Commission’s Power to Investigate Exploitation.” That is a deliberate misinterpretation of the judgement designed to deceive.

Now, what is the issue?

Citing inclement economic climate and surging operational costs, MultiChoice, on March 1, 2025, implemented a less than 25 per cent subscription price hike, which is far less than the inflationary pressures exacerbated by sundry volatilities in the economy. Yet, it is enough to put it in FCCPC’s crosshairs.

To be sure, Nigerians, facing significant economic challenges, are barely surviving and any tariff hike makes it worse. But businesses are not faring any better. Firms that hitherto posted robust balance sheets year-on-year are going bust, literally. Some that could no longer stand the heat fled. In 2023 alone, industry giants, including GSK, Sanofi-Aventis Nigeria Ltd, Unilever Nigeria Plc., Procter & Gamble Nigeria, and Bolt Food, bolted. A company facing higher costs must either pass some of them to consumers or degrade its services or go under. 

Standing between the devil and the deep blue sea, businesses that have decided to weather the storm rather than flee are hiking tariffs to remain afloat. MultiChoice is one of them. But it is not the only one. In January, the Nigerian Communications Commission, NCC, approved a 50 per cent tariff increase for telecommunications operators in Nigeria in order to address rising operational costs and ensure sustainability.

Long before those operators hitched a ride on the price hike wagon, many other companies were already on board with price adjustments in excess of 100 per cent. For instance, in 2024, Nigerian Breweries hiked prices of its products thrice. In 2023, StarTimes raised its rates twice. The first was by 33 per cent in May, while the second was by another 25 per cent in August. Streaming giants, Netflix, also announced a review of its prices with effect from April 1, 2024. Earlier, International Breweries, citing escalating cost of doing business, increased prices across its product portfolio. Another brewing giant, Guinness Nigeria Plc., also announced a new price regime.

Curiously, while these other organisations are given a free pass even with higher percentage hikes, MultiChoice is always singled out for sanction. So, why is it a crime for MultiChoice to charge market-reflective rates for its services when it is not for others?

If protecting consumers is truly FCCPC’s goal, then its enforcement must be consistent and fair. Singling out one player while turning a blind eye to others undermines the very principle of consumer protection. Worse, it erodes trust in the Commission. As Justice Omotosho rightly pointed out, not only is MultiChoice’s right to a fair hearing serially savaged, the Commission’s unholy antics smacks of selective enforcement.

For the avoidance of doubt, Justice Omotoso, in his well-considered judgement, raised many fundamental issues.

The court held, and rightly so, that a pay-tv is not an essential service and consumers can choose to subscribe or not or even switch providers by using free-to-air channels or stream on YouTube. Thus, no one is trapped because the market offers alternatives.

Justice Omotosho equally dismissed FCCPC’s claim that MultiChoice held a dominant market position, calling the argument untenable. For him, Nigeria being a free market economy means service providers such as MultiChoice have the right to set their prices.

More importantly, the Judge harped on a very fundamental issue, which tragically seems to be lost on FCCPC: attempts to fix prices by regulatory bodies could scare off investors and harm an already struggling economy.

MultiChoice has made significant contributions to Nigeria’s economy. From its humble beginnings of about 30 employees, the company presently sustains over 30,000 Nigerian jobs, directly and indirectly. While other companies are closing shop, exiting or downsizing, MultiChoice is still creating value – investing, hiring and stabilising the fragile economies of most families.

So, at a time of historic unemployment, does it make sense to hound one of the few remaining businesses that are standing by the country and its longsuffering people? Besides, more than any other business – public or private – MultiChoice plays a larger-than-life role in promoting the country’s cultures and projecting its soft power.

To be sure, the antagonism and campaign of calumny against MultiChoice is tantamount to success in a difficult business environment becoming a burden? MultiChoice is not a monopoly. It is just the most resilient competitor in a tough market. Not only that, those who talk about monopoly and absence of choice conveniently ignore the fact that the company offers tiered packages from N4,400 to N44,500, which means that there is a bouquet for every pocket and no one is forced to buy what he cannot afford.

It is disingenuous to equate success to monopoly. Truth be told, by sheer dint of hard work, MultiChoice became the dominant actor in the industry because over the years, rather than quitting, it stayed put to build infrastructure, content pipelines, measures that ultimately engendered trust and patronage. Any other company that does same will get the same result. Market dominance is earned, not gifted.

What Justice Omotoso’s ruling exposes is FCCPC’s regulatory overreach in its dealings with MultiChoice with an unambiguous message: it is high time this dance of shame stopped. MultiChoice should be allowed to do its business within the ambit of the law without let or hindrance.