The brouhaha is a symptom of the deeper problems of Nigeria’s political economy. It demonstrates how the Nigerian state and its government has failed to create a real economy that works for all Nigerians by lifting millions from poverty to prosperity, but instead has promoted vested interests of various kinds in the name of the “private sector” and “business.” Dangote is far less the issue, in reality, than is the Nigerian government and its track record.

Amidst the controversies over Aliko Dangote’s massive refinery and the stand-off between him and the Nigerian government, let’s not lose sight of the real issues. The brouhaha is a symptom of the deeper problems of Nigeria’s political economy. It demonstrates how the Nigerian state and its government has failed to create a real economy that works for all Nigerians by lifting millions from poverty to prosperity, but instead has promoted vested interests of various kinds in the name of the “private sector” and “business.” Dangote is far less the issue, in reality, than is the Nigerian government and its track record. Because whatever anyone accuses Dangote of, assuming that those allegations were even to be true in the first place, could not be so if the Nigerian government was awake to its responsibilities. This is an opportunity to return to the fundamental questions about our economy, and seek solutions.

Can we? Will we? It would surprise me if the Dangote refinery saga – in which Dangote alleges an intent within the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation, oil regulators, and the international oil companies to sabotage his refinery by refusing to supply it with crude oil, while the government oil regulators accuse Dangote of seeking to monopolise the oil refining market, in violation of the national oil company’s pre-existing contractual obligations with other customers — results in any real solutions to the fundamental problems of economic governance in Nigeria. These challenges, as is evident, are corruption and rent-seeking, incompetence, and intellectual emptiness when it comes to economic management. This last issue of intellectual vapidity in the management of Nigeria’s economy has been pronounced and dominant over the past 10 years. These factors are the real reasons 133 million Nigerians live in multidimensional poverty. And that figure is certainly outdated because it was established well before the cost of living crisis that has pushed tens of millions more into poverty in the past year since President Bola Tinubu’s administration entered into office.

We love drama in Nigeria – effervescent controversies that appear as if they will bring down the roof on the house but only serve, ultimately, as part of a daily diet of distractions from addressing the underlying challenges of the Nigerian state. They keep our tongues wagging over chilled bottles of beer, wine or in WhatsApp chat groups populated by millions who increasingly can afford neither beer nor wine. The Federal Government and the NNPC – the “prize” public corporation of Nigeria’s political economy – have for years allowed our national refineries to lie defunct, despite the billions of dollars allocated over decades for the repairs and rehabilitation of the same refineries. Now, they turn around to accuse Dangote of monopolistic tendencies after he built one of the largest refineries in the world in Lagos. If that allegation is remotely true, who has allowed it? Where has the government been? Where is the serious thinking, policy and its implementation, and the political will for Nigeria and its citizens to achieve real prosperity? I respect Dangote’s grit and achievements, and his refinery certainly has important potential implications for the Nigerian economy. But, let’s get it straight: Dangote’s wealth is personal to him. It hasn’t made Nigerians broadly rich on any significant scale. Moreover, the question is pertinent: Is that his responsibility?

Who will take us seriously when our business environment, despite its potential, is evidently awash with political and other risks, and the “market” is increasingly impoverished? In any case, foreign investment is no magic wand for our economic problems if the essential conditions of infrastructure, in particular electricity, and skilled human capital are absent.

The controversy over the Dangote Refinery is a national and global embarrassment for our country. It shows us up to the world as unserious at a time our public officials traverse the world seeking “foreign investment.” Who will take us seriously when our business environment, despite its potential, is evidently awash with political and other risks, and the “market” is increasingly impoverished? In any case, foreign investment is no magic wand for our economic problems if the essential conditions of infrastructure, in particular electricity, and skilled human capital are absent.

The heart of the matter is that a succession of Nigerian governments, including the current one, have been unable to do either of two things. Thay have failed to stimulate, through effective economic policy, a set of strategic oligopolies across sectors, under which smaller businesses and supply chains connected to such giant corporations can thrive, creating a successful national economy as in South Korea. Even such oligopolies ought to be subject to “close marking,” so they understand that they are strategic agents of the national economic interest, not that they have put the government in their pocket – as Daewoo’s founder in South Korea discovered when he was jailed for 10 years, for embezzlement and accounting fraud in 2006. Neither has the government, on the other hand, been able to facilitate a truly competitive, level playing field for business in Nigeria, so that wealth creation can be more democratic.

This is a deeply unfortunate outcome of what passes for governance, including its economic aspect, in Nigeria. Capitalism and free markets have faced criticisms, most of them valid. It is an undisputed fact, however, and one supported by historical evidence, that for all its weaknesses, capitalism remains the greatest creator of wealth that the world has seen. It is what helped China – after it abandoned economic socialism – lift 700 million people from poverty into the middle class in 40 years. It is what has lifted millions from poverty into a comfortable life in Brazil, South Korea, Malaysia, and Vietnam. This is because the capitalist system accords most with the basic human instinct to strive and thrive.

…for capitalism to be transformative of broad societies, certain conditions are necessary. Else, what happens, as in the case in Nigeria and most African countries, is the wealth of a tiny few but the poverty of the many. In order words capitalism, to have been successful for any country – socialism having certifiably failed – must create the wealth of nations and not simply that of a small elite. This is the whole argument about inclusive, broad based growth versus mere GDP growth…

But for capitalism to be transformative of broad societies, certain conditions are necessary. Else, what happens, as in the case in Nigeria and most African countries, is the wealth of a tiny few but the poverty of the many. In order words capitalism, to have been successful for any country – socialism having certifiably failed – must create the wealth of nations and not simply that of a small elite. This is the whole argument about inclusive, broad based growth versus mere GDP growth, which economic thinking in Nigeria and much of Africa erroneously worships.To achieve this outcome, we need a competent state – a government that has a deep philosophical understanding of the kinds of capitalism – entrepreneurial, welfarist, crony, or “state” a la the Chinese model – and makes conscious choices between these models or combinations of them.

Such a government must understand the right balance between the role of the state and that of the market. The state cannot be the market. No market can thrive and create wealth without the steady, measured hand of a competent – but not overbearing – state. And the government must understand, and apply that understanding to policy, the fundamental conditions for capitalist success. These are: full property rights, an innovation ecosystem that pipes useful inventions into the market, and across-the-board access to capital.

Finally, the economy cannot prosper without an enabled business environment. This condition includes a secure environment, infrastructure, especially electricity, avoidance of multiple taxation, efficient port and customs, respect for contracts and the rule of law, keeping a lid on corruption, and ensuring a level playing field that avoids distortionary monopolies through effective competition policy. Microsoft and Google are major tech corporations. But they are not allowed to run their competitors out of town. In 2023, the United States government successfully brought antitrust cases against both corporations for violations of competition law in the American market. That’s how capable states function to regulate their markets and give everyone a fair chance.

Kingsley Moghalu, a former deputy governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, is the chairman of Africa Private Sector Summit (APSS).

Not too many judicial interventions have been, and will ever be as consequential as the July 11, 2024, Supreme Court ruling on the Local Government (LG) autonomy litigation, filed in May 2024, by the nation’s Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Mr. Lateef Fagbemi, SAN. In a write-up it, widely published in both the traditional and social media in Nigeria, I made an attempt to alert the nation to the profound implications of one scenario vis a vis the much-awaited judgement. Specifically, the Punch online newspaper, in its May 31 edition, published the piece, titled, “That LGA Autonomy Litigation.” Nigerian Tribune online, also did the same, on June 1. The argument made in that piece can be summarized in this form. The litigation had the potential of toppling the apple cart vis a vis Nigeria’s outlook on federalism; as it would move the country further in the direction of centralization, consistent with a unitary model of government. It was a thinly veiled attempt to undermine the State governments, while strengthening the central government, thereby moving the country further away from the goals of devolution of powers to the States, which are the federating units in Nigeria’s evolving federal system. If the position of the Federal Government was affirmed by the Court, it would, in practical terms, mean that the average State and its LGAs, in most probability, would begin to work at cross purposes. That is, the State would drive in one direction, while the LGAs, which it was supposed to superintend under the Constitution, would drive in another; and this would be the very recipe for major governance crises. The paper called on the President to get the Attorney-General to back off from the litigation process; and concluded thus, “The consequences attendant upon getting a ruling favourable to the Federal Government at the Supreme Court are too grave to be contemplated. We must stand up for a federal, and against a unitary Nigeria.” A number of newspaper editorials, which came up later, evidently drew from the arguments made in the article.

The Judgement

The Supreme Court judgement has since been given; and it is totally in agreement with the Attorney-General’s position. Asserting that its right to adjudicate on relations between the central and State governments was unlimited, the Court proclaimed unequivocally that “the justice of the case demands that the Local Government (LG) allocations should henceforth be paid directly to LG accounts”; and that Governors shall neither exercise the power to dissolve elected LGAs, nor interfere in how the later were run. It is obvious in this regard that the judgement, in its key elements, has confirmed our worst fears. This is the point to which this piece is directed. Having researched on, and taught courses on Federalism, and Comparative Political Economy, to both undergraduate and graduate students, in Nigeria and elsewhere, for years, it behoves me to, once again, share my thoughts on the wider implications of the Supreme Court judgement, on Nigeria’s governance structure going forward; and this in as simple a manner as possible.

I have followed keenly, the various analyses on the subject. One thing that is clear therefrom is that most commentators do not seem to understand the real meaning of the ruling, and its implications for jurisprudence, and governance in the country. They marginalize the ahistorical nature of the ruling, and the inevitable consequences thereof, on the organization of relations between the spatial constituencies that make up the nation. While there could be momentary, or short-term (political) advantages going the way of the litigants, as well as transient LG practitioners, my concern is that these critical stakeholders may not be fully acquainted with the wide-ranging implications of the judgement for federalism and good governance in Nigeria, in spite of their advertised commitment to these twin concepts. On air, and in print, we got a whole lot of verbiage from pundits, whose analyses are largely driven by banal populism, and predicated upon emotions, rather than rational inferences. But we must transcend this emotion-laden analyses, and make yet another attempt to clarify the issues. In doing this, I try to highlight the implications of the judgement; discuss the probable follow-up actions expected of the protagonists of the LGA autonomy initiative; and draw attention to the (hidden) consequences for governance in Nigeria. I had availed myself of the opportunity to do this at a webinar a day or so after the judgement, which video clip, I understand is already in circulation.

Implications, In Seven Chapters

In the first instance, it is evident that the 11 July judgment is completely at variance with the principle of federalism, to which Nigeria pledges commitment, and by which the country is named, as Federal Republic of Nigeria. While admitting of some minor variations, the position is clear in federalism literature that a federation speaks to “The method of dividing powers so that the general and regional governments are each within a sphere co-ordinate and independent.” This is how K. C. Wheare, regarded as the father of federalist thought, described it, in his seminal work, The Federal Government, first published in 1963. Same goes for the founding fathers of US federalism, whose treatises on the subject were published as The Federalist Papers, described by the US Library of Congress as “a series of 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison between October 1787 and May 1788,” directed at persuading New Yorkers “to ratify the proposed federal Constitution, … drafted in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787.” While the contextual specificities of these sources are not in doubt, all being essentially informed by the nature of the American experience, they nevertheless represent the critical starting point in any informed discussion of federalism. Significantly, they all agree that federalism is about division of governmental powers between a central government, and the federating units. None imagined the concept, ‘federating units,’ to go beyond its ordinary meaning; and thus, none suggested that municipalities and LGAs could in any way qualify to be referenced as ‘federating units.’ This is why no constitution, including the American, ventures to mention by name, counties, municipalities, or LGs, as the case may be. The federating units, 16 of them in Germany, are called ‘Landers.’ In the Swiss federal system, they are ‘cantons,’ and of course, States, in both Nigeria and the US, among others. In none of these is any suggestion made that the municipalities are anything near federating units; because they are not.

In the Swiss federal system, there are actually about 2,300 of these municipalities, so small that they are basically governed via referenda, in a manner reminiscent of the era of direct democracy. But the federalist foundation of the Swiss system is underscored, first, by the principle of subsidiarity, to wit, that no power exercisable by a lower level of government is allowed a higher level; and secondly, that membership of the executive branch at the central government level is made up of representatives of the federating units, the ‘cantons,’ the headship (presidency) of which is rotated every two years, from one ‘canton’ to the other. This puts in bold relief one of the more critical anomalies in the Nigerian 1999 Constitution (as amended), which involves listing of some 774 LGAs. Even so, the Constitution did not make the mistake of asserting that the LGAs were federating units. Rather, it says, in Section 2(2), that “Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of States and a Federal Capital Territory.” That is why the governance structure of the LGAs is not only located within the rubrics of the State, but indeed, made a subsidiary of same, throughout the document. The Supreme Court judgement in reference here has simply made nonsense of this principle, and surreptitiously proclaimed the LGAs, to all intents and purposes, as federating units. This is not appropriate.

Secondly, the idea underscoring the clamour for LGA autonomy, and direct transference of LG share of the Federation Account to them directly, is ahistorical. It denies the fact that prior 1999, when LGs got their funds directly from the Federation Account, many of them, especially the more cosmopolitan and populous ones, which also paraded more staff, and a broader range of infrastructural challenges, found it practically impossible to survive. They were not paying their primary school teachers, and owed their administrative workforce several months of salaries. To then imagine that we feel that sending monies to the LGAs directly is all that is required to advance the cause of good governance, is some convoluted thought that denies the fact of history. Indeed, the whole idea of State Joint LG Account Committee was an initiative put in place to address this problem.

Thirdly, it is evident that the judgement of the Supreme Court is completely at variance with provisions of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) on this subject of revenue allocation. In Section 162 (6), the document makes it explicit that “Each State shall maintain a special account to be called State Joint Local Government Account into which shall be paid all allocations to the local government councils of the State from the Federation Account and from the Government of the State.” And in Sub-section 8, it drills down on the matter by stating unequivocally that “The amount standing to the credit of local government councils of a State shall be distributed among the local government councils of that State on such terms and in such manner as may be prescribed by the House of Assembly of the State.” Whence, therefore, in the face of these unambiguous provisions, did the Supreme Court find the basis of its ruling, to the effect that funds from the Federation Account begin to go directly, and outside of the rubrics of the State, to the LGAs? There is none.

What the Supreme Court has done is simply to yank off a clear provision of the Constitution, and replace it with something completely foreign to it. To imagine that some lawyers, some of them quite senior, would endorse this type of dangerous precedent simply because of animus against the governors, is quite difficult to internalise. For, what the Supreme Court has done in the instant case is akin to waking up one day, and on the basis of a nondescript litigation, ruling that the tenure of Governors and the President is no longer four years in the first instance, as provided for in the Constitution, but now – by judicial fiat – 10 or more years! Nobody needs the say-so of any pundit to appreciate that this is a very dangerous scenario; yet, it is something many ordinarily enlightened people are celebrating.  This is the danger in relation to how the Supreme Court may want to begin to exercise what the Court referenced as its “unlimited powers” to pronounce on issues between States and the Federal Government. It thus, technically, treats cavalierly, the very first section of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Section 1(1), which states in clear terms, that “This Constitution is supreme and its provisions shall have binding force on the authorities and persons throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria.”

Fourthly, in relation to land, I am persuaded that many Nigerians who are quick to applaud the ruling are completely ignorant of the profound implications of same for the Land Use Act, and our extant land holding patterns generally. Under the current dispensation, State Governors hold all non-urban lands in trust for the citizens in a fiducial form of relationship. This is what has made it possible for State Governments to stave off the intrusiveness, nay, shenanigans of some overbearing federal governments in the recent past, by simply refusing to allocate lands for some very controversial programmes that were highly steeped in exclusivity. Under the emerging dispensation, in which the Federal Government is inputting itself into the scheme as the potentate and, to all intents and purpose, manager of the LGAs, it is going to be like a piece of cake for any overbearing federal government to access land via the LGAs, which are constitutionally placed in charge of non-urban (rural) lands, howsoever defined. Hitherto, the LGAs would not venture out of line to do this, given that they operated within the boundaries of the provisions made by the State House of Assembly. With the Supreme Court judgement, not anymore!

Fifthly, I make bold to assert that what the Supreme Court has done, perhaps unwittingly, is to drill down on injustice and inequity, underlying the creation of LGAs, and indeed, States, perpetrated when Nigeria was under military rule. There are no objective and unimpeachable criteria for the number of LGAs created. The creation was simply done on the basis of the whims and caprices of the military generals that bestrode these climes like a colossus in those years. Two examples that I cite are Osun/Ondo States, and Lagos/Kano States. Whereas Osun and Ondo States have comparable land mass at 14,875 square kilometres and 15,500 square kilometres respectively, and populations of 4.4 million and 5.3 million respectively in 2022, Osun was gifted 30 LGAs, while Ondo has only 18. Lagos and Kano States started off in 1967 with 20 LGAs each. Many years later, in 1991, Jigawa was excised out of Kano, but between them today, both States have 71 LGAs, while Lagos retains its original 20, which anomaly then Governor Bola Tinubu tried to correct by creating 57 LGAs. His effort was shot down by the Supreme Court then, making him to invent the concept of Local Council Development Authorities (LCDA). Significantly, the LCDA initiative has now practically become otiose given that monies are now to pass directly, only to the constitutionally recognised LGAs, which remain just 20 for Lagos State. Meanwhile, number of LGAs in each State is not just one of the bases for sharing revenue from the Federation Account, it also determines the number of seats (representation) in the House of Representatives! My conviction that this could not have been the intention of the President informed my call in the article referenced above that, “President Bola Tinubu, who himself as Lagos Governor, fought this inequity on the status and place of LGAs in our federation, shouldn’t be the one doing this. Rather, he should look at the obstacles that made his attempts at creating new LGAs in Lagos to flounder, and push for the necessary constitutional amendments to take care of the obstacles.”

Methinks rather than seeking to consolidate this arrant confusion, nay injustice, what the Supreme Court should have done was to leave things as they were, pending when the country would be able to find its way around this structural anomaly, which is one of the factors fuelling anger and instability in the system. This, by the way, is one of the bases for the restructuring advocacy, which seeks to move Nigeria further in the direction of federalism, through substantial devolution of powers to the federating units, i.e., the States.

Sixthly, considering that the LG system, just like the presidency and the State governments too, is not peopled entirely by saints, what guarantees do we have that if the Governors were corrupt in the manner in which they tended to manage public funds, that the elected and appointive staffers of the LG system are going to be any different? What structures of control and accountability have we emplaced to ensure that rather than having to deal with 36 theatres of (mis)management of public funds, we are now having a motley of 774 to deal with? None of the pundits trumpeting support for this unusual judgement has weighed in on this primary question well enough.

Seventhly, what the Supreme Court has forced down the nation’s throat by its 11 July judgement, is akin to what Decree 34 of 1966, established. In one fell swoop, that Decree threw out Nigeria’s regional structure, substituting for it what, to all intents and purposes, amounted to a unitary structure. Thus, if in 1966, Decree 34, sent regionalism packing, the Supreme Court judgement of 11 July has now completely flushed the residue of federalism in Nigeria down the drain! The task the military junta under Major-General JTU Aguiyi-Ironsi began, is what the Supreme Court has now completed and consolidated. But it is difficult to imagine that this is the direction in which a President Tinubu would go, given that he was in the vanguard of the advocacy for devolution of powers to the States in order to enable Nigeria have a credible chance of autochthonous development. In practical terms, the ruling has now made nonsense of those long years of advertised commitment to restructuring and devolution of powers. For, if anything, given that the new Federal Government will now practically superintend the LGs, Nigeria has moved almost completely away from, and can now, at best, only exist on the fringes of federalism. Meanwhile, the argument has been made variously that considering that the Nigerian society is itself thoroughly federal in nature, the only workable constitution with which it can be successfully governed is a federal one. The failure to accept this reality – which is already demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt, both in theory and praxis, is what has continued to make the country’s governance system basically dysfunctional.

The only silver lining in the Supreme Court judgement relates to its ruling on the sacrosanctity of democratic structures at the LGA level. On this, I had argued in my earlier piece, that “The only things that should be of concern, and on which attention should be focused, are first, that governance at the LGA level be by elected leaders, only; and secondly, how to prevent State Governors from wantonly dismissing elected LGA leaders and substituting for them, caretaker committees.” My position was substantially informed by Section 7(1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), which proclaims that “The system of local government by democratically elected local government councils is under this Constitution guaranteed ….” The Court should, therefore, have limited itself to the subject of democratic governance at the LGA level, proclaiming as it did that funds may not be accruing to any LG that is not governed by elected officials, for as long as that lasted. This would have been consistent with the Constitution, which at any event, has indicated in Section 14(1) that “The Federal Republic of Nigeria shall be a State based on the principles of democracy and social justice.”

After the over-centralisation of about thirty years of rule by brass hats had contributed hugely to the country’s persistent underdevelopment, a civilian president ought not to be foisting increased federal power on the country. The urgent first steps are: (i) immediate review of the distorted revenue allocation formula inherited from the military in 1999 by assigning 65 per cent to subnational governments and 35 per cent to the central government…

The announcement of the imminent establishment of a Federal Ministry of Livestock Development raises two important questions. First, is creating a 49th federal ministry consistent with the advertised objective of the Tinubu administration to reduce the cost of governance through the Oronsaye Committee Report Implementation Committee? Second, is an enhanced role for the Federal Government in livestock development consistent with reducing its functions as promised in president Tinubu’s 80-page manifesto that was released in 2022? 

While the seriousness and urgency of tackling livestock-related problems in the country are unquestionable, the solution is NOT in creating a federal ministry. After highlighting the terrible consequences of farmers/herders’ conflicts – “over 60,000 deaths across 22 states since 2001” – the PUNCH editorial of 15 July proffered an eminently sensible remedy: “The solution lies in commercial cattle ranches, which must be the prerogative of the states (subnational governments) and private investors…The government should limit itself to technical and financial interventions to support settled ranchers.” The contrary plea in the editorial of THE NATION on 23 July – “Creation of Ministry of Livestock Development should be given a chance” – is wrong-headed. 

After the over-centralisation of about thirty years of rule by brass hats had contributed hugely to the country’s persistent underdevelopment, a civilian president ought not to be foisting increased federal power on the country. The urgent first steps are: (i) immediate review of the distorted revenue allocation formula inherited from the military in 1999 by assigning 65 per cent to subnational governments and 35 per cent to the central government; and (ii) significant reduction in the central government’s legislative list that will be consistent with the new revenue allocation formula, similar to the provisions in 1954 and 1963 constitutions. Then, at a stroke, an over powerful and overreaching central government that is funding the establishment of Development Commissions for geopolitical zones and the creation of a new federal ministry will become history.  

Ladipo Adamolekun writes from Fairfax, Virginia, United States of America.

Another #EndSARS protest is building up but this time, in a different guise. While the nation is still nursing the old wounds, some forces have once again, taken over the social media, vigorously mobilising our vibrant youths to take to the streets, once again, to vent their anger over the hardship of the economy under the banner of #Endbadgovernance protests.

As already widely publicised, the planned protests will begin simultaneously across the 36 states of the federation from 1 August till 10th of the month. That implies that the economy that they are complaining about as being in a bad shape will then face total paralysis for good ten days. That will definitely, amount to throwing the baby away with the bath water! This in my opinion, should not be at this critical moment when all hands must be on deck to build a much stronger and virile nation. Otherwise, the socio-economic consequences of the planned protests will be too grave for all of us to bear.

In a democracy, protected rights such as peaceful protests are lawful means of showing public discontent against any government action or policy that is perceived to be undesirable. It is also a potent weapon to shape government policies particularly, when all other options, including dialogue have failed.

To be sure, there is nothing wrong in organising a peaceful protest and civil disobedience, like the Indian independence activist and father of nonviolence peaceful resistance movement for social and economic justice, Mahatma Ghandi did decades ago, or the non-violent resistance and civil disobedience movement led by Dr Martin Luther King Jr. Beyond belief, peaceful protests in Nigeria are often hijacked by undesirable elements, snowball into uprising against the state and infringe upon the rights of other innocent citizens from going about their lawful businesses. That’s crossing the borders of protected rights.

Those who know me will admit that as a student activist and youth, there was hardly any protest in Nigeria in the 80s and 90s (be it labour or students) that I didn’t participate in either in planning or organizing. I remember the “Ango-Must-Go” Protests of 1986 which was the culmination of Professor Ango Abdullahi’s mishandling of students’ affairs at Ahmadu Bello University Zaria and the “Anti-SAP Protests” of 1989 which was one of the most famous student-led anti-government protests that occurred throughout Nigeria between May and June 1989 etc. As a pro-democracy activist and lawyer, I also belonged to what Professor Sylvester Odion-Akhaine, the then Secretary of the Campaign for Democracy (CD), recently referred to in his letter to President Tinubu as the “engine room of CD” during the dark days of the protests against the annulment of June 12, 1993 Presidential election by General Ibrahim Babangida. As a member of the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO) that became the symbol for the actualisation of the June 12, 1993 Presidential election results won by Chief MKO Abiola and mass resistance against the repressive regime of General Sani Abacha, I was once forced out of the country.

Hence, I know the importance of good government and I fully understand the inalienable right of the people to assemble peacefully, engage in Constitutionally protected protests and petition the government without fear of persecution or prosecution if they think a policy is not working or they want something to change. That is settled.

The socio-economic situation in Nigeria today may be unsavoury but it is without doubt, a consequence of many years of inept leadership, malfeasance policies, and bad governance which the current administration is trying hard to reverse. In doing so, the President is proactive and responsive to the public and making sure that the government is able to provide the necessary resources to support the people and cushion the effects of the current economic situation. Above all, he is not pretending to be all-knowing: he is listening, he’s engaging and he’s always ready for dialogue that can promote national unity and economic development.

Undoubtedly, the new reform policy initiatives introduced by President Bola Tinubu to re-shape and revitalize the economy have brought about some untold hardships on the populace and we all feel the pains. However, these are temporary sacrifices we all have to endure to rescue the nation from rent-seekers and ubiquitous powerful cabals who have held down the economy for so long.

Already, there are positive indices showing that the Tinubu’s administration is on the right track. For example, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in its latest report, projected that Nigeria will have a 3.1 GDP growth rate in 2024 due to reforms being implemented by the Tinubu administration. This is one of the best projections for an economy that had hitherto suffered prolonged haemorrhage under the successive governments. If the government eventually succeeds in stopping the economy from further bleeding, and it will, we will all be better for it. The future of our youths and coming generations will also be safeguarded and guaranteed.

Be that as it may, the revenue generation capacity of the Federal Government has shored up significantly since President Tinubu assumed the mantle of leadership. Available records show that state governments have received far more federal allocations than they did under the immediate past administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari. So much is the difference that states like Nasarawa and Anambra now get 100 percent and 70 per cent more respectively.

Naysayers can go and verify this from the appropriate quarters leveraging the Freedom of Information Bill. Figures don’t lie. Although the overall effect of this improvement might not have reflected that much in the quality of life of ordinary people, there is hope in the horizon that better days are coming.

Arguably, the challenge of food security in the country remains daunting despite the various measures adopted by the administration to address the hardship.

The purchasing power of income earners is dwindling amidst high inflation as well as fluctuation in the value of the naira. The shortage in the supply of food is partly due to the combination of weather and insecurity which had festered in some parts of the country under the successive governments. On the other hand, climate change is a global phenomenon affecting all economies both developed and underdeveloped.

As for the security concern, without shifting blame, the present government is frontally confronting the situation with all seriousness and commitment it deserves. However, all of us must understand that the task of protecting lives and property is not the sole responsibility of the government alone. It is our collective responsibility to deal with the menace of banditry, insurgency, kidnapping and ransom-taking which have made it difficult for farmers to go to their farms. Those who perpetrate these heinous crimes are no spirits. They are human beings like us. And they live in our communities.

While the fight against insecurity is still ongoing, the government has responded to the public outcry over the high rate of inflation by introducing a new policy directive that has approved the removal of tariff on some imported food items including rice, beans, and wheat for a period of five months as part of the ongoing fiscal measures to cushion the negative impact of the surging food prices nationwide. In no time, all the tensions arising from the current food crisis will naturally fizzle out. Once there is an improvement in supply chains, the prices of essential commodities will naturally drop. The directive is also expected to reduce food importers’ demand for forex. In 2023, Nigeria spent $2.13 billion to import food items from foreign countries.

Beyond the ad hoc solution, there are other long-term policy measures the Federal Government has adopted to guarantee sustainable food self-sufficiency at affordable prices for the teeming populace. These include, among others, the declaration of a state of emergency on food security and the National Agriculture Growth Scheme-Agro-pocket, where millions of farmers are supported with training on Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), certified inputs such as improved seedlings and organic and inorganic fertilisers as well as irrigation equipment at highly subsidised prices to enhance productivity and higher incomes to farmers.

In addition to these, the Federal Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security has also put together the first-ever Harmonised Extension Manual and National Agricultural Extension Policy, focusing on the effective dissemination and deployment of agricultural innovations/technologies to end-users using appropriate extension methods. The policy initiative aims to provide a pragmatic, effective, and efficient demand-driven pluralistic, ICT-enabled, and market-oriented extension service to all stakeholders including youths, women, and people with special needs to optimally use resources to promote sustainable agriculture and socio-economic development of the country.

As a demonstration of his commitment to an improvement in the well-being of the citizens, President Tinubu has also approved the take-off of the first phase of the Consumer Credit Scheme to enhance quality of lives by accessing goods and services upfront, paying responsibly over time. Consumer credit serves as the lifeblood of modern economies, enabling citizens to purchase crucial items, such as homes, vehicles, education, healthcare, and other essentials necessary for the fulfillment of their aspirations.

While all these are ongoing, some forces are bent on bringing down the roof to achieve their selfish agenda. As they did in the prelude to the #EndSARS protest, they are gradually regrouping to plunge the nation, yet again, into another round of crisis. They are vigorously leveling the discontent amongst the youths, focusing on the downside of the twin policy of fuel subsidy removal and foreign exchange rate unification.

By implementing the two policies, tough as they are, Tinubu is not reinventing the wheel. It is a policy successive government had long campaigned for but lacked the political willpower to implement. In the run-up to the last general elections, all the presidential candidates subscribed and campaigned for it. None spoke against it until now when President Tinubu decided to take the bullet for our economic growth by taking the bulls by the horns. Those stoking the ember of crisis should therefore, have a rethink and set aside their agenda in the overall interest of the country.

Elections have come and gone. This is a time to reunite for the onerous task of nation-building. No single individual can do it all alone. Doing otherwise will lead us to nowhere. Rather, it will take us back and disrupt the trajectory of economic growth the IMF has predicted for this year.

At this delicate time, the nation can ill afford an unwarranted protest. Of course, there may be some genuine reasons for people to air their grievances. These could be channelled to the appropriate authorities through dialogue and constructive engagement. Tinubu is a listening president who is always ready for dialogue and always willing to accept responsibility for his actions. As a genuine democrat himself, he believes in dialogue as a means of resolving issues. Let us give him time to nurture his policies to fruition.

For our teeming youths, who are often used as willing tool and cannon folders, this is the best opportunity for them to achieve what they want to be. President Tinubu is not only youth-friendly, he is also prepared to implement policies that will guarantee an assured future for the younger generation. This, he has demonstrated through the inauguration of student loan scheme as part of his administration’s efforts to combat poverty through education.

Coming under the Nigerian Education Loan Fund (NELFUND), he has released N32 billion out of the N60 billion budgeted for the programme ready for disbursement. The programme aims to empower Nigerian youths by providing fair, transparent funding and removing financial barriers to educational opportunities. This is no small feat. No government has ever done anything close to that in our nation’s contemporary history.

According to the Executive Secretary of NELFUND, Mr Akintunde Sawyer, since the portal opened on 25 May, no less than 164,000 students have registered, with 103,000 applying for loans. In terms of what the administration has in stock for the youths, this is just the tip of the iceberg. All that is required for the youths to make the best use of the present situation is patience, support, and understanding.

No one gains anything from crisis. Yes, nothing is wrong with peaceful protest but everything is wrong with its destructive outcome. As experience has shown, hoodlums will ultimately hijack the process and unleash terror on innocent citizens. The 2020 #EndSARS protest is still fresh in our memories. To date, the Lagos State government is still counting the losses. The replacement cost of government buildings, transport buses, and other properties destroyed during the protest has been put at N1 trillion, while the overall cost to private businesses has been estimated to be several billion of US dollars.

While it may be difficult to estimate the exact loss, based on the significant contribution of Lagos State to the total Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the country (approximately 30 per cent) and as over 50 per cent of non-oil industrial capacity, the impact of the crisis has been quite enormous. According to Greenwich Bank, the social unrest impacted negatively on direct investment in the country for the remaining part of the 2020 fiscal year. A total shutdown each day cost Lagos alone as centre of the civil unrest about N54 billion.

In the same way, should there be any protest now, there will be a manifest fall in the real GDP, resulting in rapid economic contraction for the rest of 2024. In the worst-case scenario, there will be disruptions in the supply chain, rising inflation, and a widening fiscal deficit as the government grapples with funding infrastructure. In the end, the innocent good people of Nigeria will be the losers for it. Let’s choose peace over chaos and give peace a chance. Beyond protests, dialogue is the ultimate weapon of peace.

Kayode Oladele, a lawyer and former legislator, writes from Abuja.

Tunji Bello has officially assumed his role as the Executive Vice Chairman/ Chief Executive Officer of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) today.

The Senate had on Tuesday confirmed the appointment of Bello Olatunji as Chief Executive Officer/Executive Vice Chairman of the FCCPC.

President Bola Tinubu in June approved the appointment of Bello as the new FCCPC Boss after removing Babatunde Irukera in January 2024.

Bello’s confirmation followed consideration of the report of the Senate Committee on Trade and Investment presented by Suleiman Sadiq, the Senator representing Kwara North during plenary on Tuesday.

The President expects that the new Chief Executive Officer of the agency will ensure the holistic realization of the Commission’s mandate of protecting and promoting the interest and welfare of Nigerian consumers, and ensuring the adoption of measures to guarantee the safety and quality of goods and services.

Bello, a lawyer, administrator, and renowned journalist is the former secretary to the Lagos State Government and holds a Master’s degree in International Law and Diplomacy from the University of Lagos. He studied Law at the same university and was called to the Nigerian Bar in 2002.

Bello began his career in journalism at the Concord Newspapers in 1985 and held the positions of Group Political Editor; Sunday Concord Editor, and Editor, National Concord.

He is a winner of the US Alfred Friendly Press Fellowship and was appointed the Chairman, Editorial Board of THISDAY Newspapers in 2001.

He also served as Commissioner for Environment under various administrations in Lagos State.

Bello brings a wealth of experience to the FCCPC, and we are confident he will be a strong advocate for fair competition and consumer protection in Nigeria.

He was welcomed to the Commission by Adamu Abdullahi, Executive Commissioner Operations, and Kola Alabi, Executive Commissioner, Corporate Services.

Abdullahi served as the Commission’s chief executive in an acting capacity until Bello resumed.

Before settling into his office, Bello went round the Commission to familiarize himself with the staff.

[BuinessDay]

There is nothing wrong with a peaceful demonstration and a lawful legitimate protest.

What is unacceptable is a premeditated attempt by a group of faceless individuals who are on the payroll of subversive elements to destabilise the country and incite people to violence and carnage.

That is what this so-called #nationwidestrike that they have labelled as the #endbadgovernanceprotest is all about.

Worse still there is a covert and subterranean attempt to provoke the security forces to open mutiny and rebellion against constituted authority and thereby truncuate our democracy.

Those that are behind it are attempting to take advantage of the undoubtedly enormous economic challenges in the land to create panic, fear, chaos and mass unrest with a view to provoking anarchy, mayhem and armed insurrection.

This is unacceptable and no responsible Government will sit back and allow it to happen.

I urge those that are behind this surreptitious, subterranean and sinister subterfuge to have a rethink and not spark off a reaction from the security forces that they will later regret.

We do not want or need a nationwide #endsars-like round of protests and neither can we afford the attendant violence, strife, division, damage to property and bloodshed that comes with it.

The way forward is to put off the protest, exercise patience, enter dialogue with the Federal Government and express our collective concerns in a lawful, restrained, responsible and legitimate manner.

Anything outside of that will be dangerous and counter-productive.

(FFK)

Former Nigeria international, Victor Ikpeba has heaped plaudits on the Super Falcons despite the team’s defeat to Brazil.

Gabi Nunez’s first half goal separated both teams on the night.

The Super Falcons put up a spirited display and were denied by Brazil goalkeeper Lorena thrice in the opening 25 minutes.

Ikpeba commended the players for giving everything against the Brazilians.

“You just must commend the girls, they gave everything, they played with their heart, with determination, with passion,” saluted 1997 African Footballer of the Year Ikpeba.

“They had their moments in the first half, but unfortunately they didn’t make the most of them.

They probably lacked the quality in attack, but they have everything to be proud of.

“The Super Eagles must learn from how they fight for each other.”

Randy Waldrum’s side will take on Spain in their second Group C game in Nantes on Sunday

[DailyPost]

The economy is growing faster and government’s financial position becoming better as ongoing reforms continue to address fundamental pillars for sustainable development.

Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Mr. Wale Edun, yesterday gave a full overview of the national economic data, with significant improvements in fiscal and monetary positions. 

Speaking at the newly introduced quarterly media briefing yesterday in Abuja, Edun highlighted that the economy grew faster in the first quarter of 2024 compared to 2023.

According to him, economic activity in the first quarter of 2024 was not only faster than first quarter of 2023, but it was also the second fastest first-quarter growth in the last six years.

He noted that the economic growth was broad-based across several sectors including agriculture, industries and services, with agricultural growth recovering from negative in the first quarter of 2023 to a modest growth in the first quarter of 2024.

He pointed out that the industrial sector grew seven times faster in first quarter 2024 than in first quarter 2023.

He attributed this positive economic performance to the government’s well-coordinated fiscal and monetary policies.

Edun explained that aggregate federal government revenue in the first half of 2024 was more than double of the corresponding period in 2023.

He attributed the revenue growth to the reconfiguration and improvement in government finances, with oil revenue as a percentage of gross revenue increasing from 11 per cent in the first half of 2023 to 30 per cent in the first half of 2024.

The finance minister also highlighted the strong performance of non-oil revenue, which not only surpassed the revenue in the first half of 2023 but was also 30 per cent above the 2024 budget target, without any increases in taxes.

He emphasised the government’s commitment to further improving revenue through increased oil production and sales, as well as enhancing the fiscal policy landscape to attract more investment into the sector.

He pointed out that Nigeria’s debt burden has reduced in dollar terms, and the government’s fiscal deficit has improved, as the country’s economic reforms continue to yield positive results.

“Our debt has fallen in dollar terms from $108 billion to $91 billion. Not only that, the government has diligently serviced all its loans and obligations with no recourse to ways and means financing. The government has met all its obligations,” Edun said.

He noted that the government is not relying on ways and means borrowing, which can be inflationary, and has paid back the previous N7.3 trillion obligation within a year of President Bola Tinubu’s administration.

He highlighted the improving debt service-to-revenue ratio, which has declined from 97 per cent in the first half of 2023 to 68 per cent in 2024, indicating the government’s strong position in managing its debt obligations.

On the budget, Edun said that the 2024 budget deficit has moved in the right direction, with a target of 4.1 per cent of GDP, an improvement from the 6.1 per cent deficit recorded in 2023.

“On an annualized basis, we are at 4.4 per cent, so you can see we are effectively very, very close to the budgetary target,” Edun said.

He noted government’s efforts to attract foreign inflows, including the implementation of the national single window project, which is expected to generate $2.7 billion per annum in economic benefits.

He added that the government’s accelerated stabilisation and advancement plan has already attracted $500 million in investment in the gas sector, with $7 billion more on the sidelines waiting to come in.

According to him, to address the high cost of living, the government has implemented several initiatives and interventions, including a strategic input programme to increase the supply of food, a pivot to Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fuel for mass transit vehicles, and providing lower-cost financing for the manufacturing industry and production.

He expressed optimism that inflation, despite being “quite sticky at the moment,” will moderate soon due to the government’s commitments and actions.

“Clearly, as part of the reform program, on the monetary side, monetary policy has been tightened. CBN has been proactive in adjusting the monetary policy rate to address inflation head-on, which is in line with its legal mandate,” Edun said.

Addressing the concerns about social unrest, Edun acknowledged the right to protest and freedom of speech in a democracy, but urged Nigerians to give the government more time to push through the necessary reforms that have come at a cost.

He emphasized the government’s plans to provide long-term, low-interest mortgages to ordinary Nigerians to help alleviate the high cost of living.

[TheNation]

EXPRESSION of shock and incredulity were reactions from a number of persons and organisations across the world who were invited to the International Conference for the Eradication of Colonialism. The general question that followed was: “Are there still colonies in the world?” Indeed, there are 61 territories and peoples who list themselves as colonies or what the United Nations, UN, classify as Non-Self Governing Territories.

However, the UN officially recognises only 17 such territories. These are American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, French Polynesia, Gibraltar, Guam, Montserrat, New Caledonia, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Tokelau, Turks and Caicos Islands, United States Virgin Islands and Western Sahara.  The 17th territory is called Falkland Islands by Britain and, Malvinas, by Argentina.

The world body said these are “territories whose people have not yet attained a full measure of self-government”. It also states that since its 1945 establishment, “… more than 80 former colonies comprising some 750 million people have gained independence”, increasing its original 51 Member-States to 193. So its desire is to extricate more peoples from colonialism.

The UN does not list Puerto Rico, a territory with a 2021 population of 3.264 million people as a Non-Self Governing Territory. It however made public the June 20, 2022 decision of its 29-Member UN Special Committee on Decolonisation. The UN body stated that it reaffirmed “ the inalienable right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence and calling again upon the United States to assume its responsibility to promote a process to those ends.” It also stated that it supports “a process enabling the Puerto Rican people to take decisions in a sovereign manner, to address their urgent economic and social needs, including unemployment, marginalisation, insolvency and poverty and… urged the United States Government to complete the return of all lands occupied by its military forces in the territory to the people of Puerto Rico.”

The ever growing challenges in the world, including endless wars, dictatorship, ideological contestations, hunger, insecurity and climate change, have combined to relegate the issue of continued colonialism to the background. This has been so much that many have actually forgotten that there are still colonies and peoples who want to be free.

But the colonised have not forgotten. The countries administering them have not. So has not the UN which has a new 2030 deadline to rid the earth of this human scourge. However, the challenge of the UN is that after 64 years of fighting colonialism, it seems to have become battle-weary. Its deadlines are becoming mere dates on the calendar, and increasingly, the colonised feel abandoned and forgotten. Also, the powerful countries that run these territories do not seem to be in a hurry to change the circumstances of the territories.

But the issue will not go away and the territories erupt like active volcanoes. The latest eruption was on May 13, 2024 when mass protests and violent confrontations broke out in New Caledonia which is administered by France. Located in the Pacific, officially, ten persons were killed, more than 300 injured and over 1,520 arrested. France declared a state of emergency in the colony, blocked the social media and poured in its military. But the unrest went on for about ten weeks. In those weeks, over one billion Euro damage was incurred. Nine hundred businesses, 200 houses, 600 vehicles and 85 per cent of grocery network, were destroyed.

In order to help remake the world and end colonialism, the African Think Tank, the Society for International Relations Awareness, SIRA, decided to hold an International Conference to Eradicate Colonialism. The Conference, holding in Abuja, the Nigerian capital, from August 12-13 at the Top Rank Hotel, Utako, aims to bring all actors together, work out modalities that can assist the UN in its quest to finish the task of decolonising the earth and, making the world a liveable place for all humans irrespective of size, colour, belief or might.

SIRA said the conference, with the theme: ‘The Forgotten Peoples: International Conference to Decolonize the World’, is also in furtherance of the UN General Assembly’s “Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”(General Assembly Resolution 1514 (XV) of 14th December, 1960). This Declaration acknowledges that “all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory”. It also solemnly proclaims “the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations”.

SIRA stated that representatives of Non-Self-Governing Territories have been invited to state their case, while countries administering and superintending these territories, including the United States, United Kingdom, France, Morocco and Indonesia have been invited to make statements at the conference. Also, representatives of social organisations, human rights, peace and development movements have been invited.

The conference Chair is Ibrahim Gambari, former UNESCO President, ex-Nigeria Foreign Affairs Minister, last Chair of the UN Special Committee Against Apartheid and, erstwhile UN Special Envoy on Cyprus, Zimbabwe and Myanmar.

The Opening Address is to be delivered by Oscar Lopez Riveria, Leader of the Puerto Rico Independence Movement who spent 38 years in prison.

The Keynote Address is to be delivered by Ambassador Oubi Bachir, Representative of the POLISARIO Liberation Movement in Switzerland and to the UN and International Organisations in Geneva. He is also the former Dean of the Diplomatic Corps in Nigeria.

Speakers include Alfredo Miranda, Ambassador of Mexico in Nigeria; Senator Shehu Sani and Dr Olushola John Magbadelo, the Lead Director, Centre for African and Asian Studies who speaks on ‘The Imminent Dangers Of Re-colonization Of Post-Colonial African States’. Dr Tamuno Clinton Jaja is to examine the ‘Trial and Deportation of King Jaja of Opobo by colonial Britain’.

International Human Rights Lawyer and former President of the West Africa Bar Association, Mr Femi Falana, will be speaking on the legal implications of continued colonialism in the world.

SIRA states that its objectives are to build consensus around a Programme of Action: “Apart from making declarations, how far and how well has the UN itself been undertaking its assignment to ensure that the territories reach the stage of full independence? What concrete steps would the administering powers be required to take to ensure that these territories become fully and truly independent? What must the rest of the international community do to ensure and assist the attainment of full independence for these non-self-governing territories?”

Humanity needs to move forward by eradicating colonialism. If the quite complex decolonisation process in Apartheid South Africa could be negotiated, so can the processes in other colonies. As the President of SIRA, I welcome lovers of freedom to the Abuja 2024 Conference.

The title of this piece should not be strange to those who avidly follow my reflections on religion, African theology and its role in my spiritual maturation. In my estimation, Dr Stephen Lawani plays a significant role—as one of the many critical interlocutors on matters religious and spiritual in Nigeria and beyond. I am very pleased to be able to keep paying homage to someone whose spiritual commitment has never been in doubt; someone who embodies the purity of the search for spiritual enlightenment. It is also delightful to celebrate Dr Lawani’s octogenarian arrival. Being eighty only tells me that I now have to contend with the spiritual and existential wisdom of a man who never stops learning, and who never stops searching for meaning. 

The trajectory of Dr Lawani’s unraveling is beautiful. It is that of a man who Providence gave a hint of the path to enlightenment, and he caught the break and flowed with it. Being a librarian is not considered to be lucrative in Nigeria. A fortuitous appointment to library services as a secondary school boy at Christ School, Ekiti led to not only the abandonment of a future as a theoretical chemist, but a “lukewarm” choice in librarianship after a first degree in Chemistry. Dr. Lawani most likely would not have known that deciding to be a librarian would eventually open up a purposeful pathway through life in ways that opened several fundamental portals that humans get to peep through when they are as blessed as Dr Lawani. From librarianship to a doctorate in library and information science to a distinguished career at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA) and the World Bank, Washington D.C., and then on to a lifetime recognition as a foundational bibliometrician and an author of significant renown. And then on to many other great things. 

When retirement happened in 2006, Dr Lawani was ready, but definitely not tired, to take up things he considered of “lasting value.” And what could be more of value than spirituality and the search for meaning about God and existence, especially existence in a deeply divided and deeply dysfunctional country like Nigeria? It takes fundamental courage to write about God; indeed, to set out to articulate conceptions and debunk misconceptions about God comes from a place of earnest spiritual boldness. This is because “God” is a concept that excites paradoxical effects and emotions. On the one hand, it is a loaded word that is buried under multiple layers of philosophical assumptions, theological reinventions, eschatological anxieties, religious differentiation and socio-cultural interpretations. And yet, the idea is all the more complicated because it references the mysterious, the unknown, the mystical or the ineffable. Second, history is littered with the tales and horrors of many battles fought in the name of God, or many who have died defending the integrity of the idea of the Almighty. 

There is no other author I know in Nigeria who has invested time, energies, emotion and conviction in the urgency of articulating the critical intersection between spirituality, enlightenment and God. All the religions that speak about God as the supreme being also considers God to be a mystery, “an eternal mystery” as Stephen Lampe (Dr Lawani’s pseudonym) says in his 2014 brilliant book, Thinking about God. And he was courageous enough to plunge into this mystery of God with a determination that is meant to unravel pathways for humans to live meaningful and purposeful lives that will not only help them come to a deeper sense of who they are and why they are alive, but would also impact their relationship with others according to the spiritual laws of justice. Lampe is right, as he argues in the book, that misconceptions about God in a plural society like Nigeria has grave consequences. And we need not look farther than the very divisive role religion has played in deepening the postcolonial predicaments in Nigeria. But Stephen Lampe is theoretically and theologically relentless; there is a further conclusion that follows correcting the misconceptions about God. If there are wrong conceptions about God, it implies that there must be a right one. And it is that right conception that is the focus of Lampe. Since he is coming from the Grail Message theological perspective, we need not look further for where that right conception could be found. And in his latest theological offering—The Spirit of Truth brings the Everlasting Testament—Stephen Lampe presses home his most fundamental conclusion: the right conception of God presented by the Grail Message is encoded in an “everlasting testament” that encompasses and ultimately transcends Christianity, Judaism and Islam. 

This everlasting testament is the result of a “progressive revelation” of the Spirit of Truth, mentioned in the Bible, that is now emerging as the third phase of a spiritual chronology. The first phase he calls the age of the Father (corresponding to the Old Testament). The second phase is the age of the Son (the New Testament). The last and final age is that of the Spirit of Truth that clarifies, sums and transcends the other ages. And this new revelation conjoins the divine justice of the old testament and the divine love of the new testament with the divine purity of the Spirit of truth into a final blueprint of divine perfection.   

Three significant points keep bringing me back to Stephen Lampe. The first is his commitment to a rational understanding of spirituality. This derives essentially from the core method by which the writer of In the Light of Truth: The Grail Message, Abd-ru-shin, offers the message to the world—via a rational acceptance rather than a proselytizing compulsion; its theological claims must be reflected upon and logically accepted. The second is his insistence that Nigeria’s problems are essentially spiritual. From this perspective, it is therefore easy to see what religious fundamentalism, mobilization and ignorance have done to further fragment Nigeria, and still be able to argue, as Stephen Lampe does, that the religious is different from the spiritual. And that as humans, we are first spiritual beings whose attempt at creating a good tradition of governance can become successful only if we reject wrong theologies and spiritualities, and focus on what he calls “the primordial laws of creation.” There is a lot for me to accept in this understanding of the relationship between religion, spirituality and the predicament of, say, the Nigerian state and its citizens. I am a Christian and I hold strongly the claim that God rules in the affairs of humans.  

And this brings me to the third reason that Stephen Lampe keeps drawing me back to his theological arguments. This reason draws on the two previous ones: it is the intellectual undercurrent of my own commitment to Christianity. When I started my journey into Christianity, it was more intellectual than emotional. In other words, I am more of an intellectually-minded Christian whose faith is rooted more in the knowledge and experience of the faithfulness of God. My experiences in secondary school reinforces the basis of my intellectual inquiry into Christianity, especially in relations to human mystical experiences. And this is centered around the questions: How can we know Christ outside of his historical manifestations? How can Christians come into an intimate union with Christ? How does knowing Christ mediate my life and temporality as a Nigerian living in a postcolonial context of underdevelopment, fear and poverty? 

My response to Christianity as a source of spiritual enlightenment therefore parallels Stephen Lampe’s continual probing of spiritualities for the right understanding of God. In my search for spiritual enlightenment, I was forced to confront the dilemma opened up by a sense of spiritual puritanism that Christianity preaches and the open-mindedness that derives from the spiritual possibilities inherent in non-Christian practices, like the Ifa corpus. And this is why I find Stephen Lampe even more intriguing. In both Thinking About God and The Spirit of Truth brings the Everlasting Testament, the thesis that Stephen Lampe builds ultimately inserts the Grail Message itself into the absolutist and binary thinking of other Abrahamic religions. It is this same absolutism that I struggled against while keeping agnosticism at bay in my search for spiritual understanding and enlightenment. And the unseemly solution I found to resolve my spiritual puritanism and intellectual open-mindedness, what I am certain will fall short of Dr Lawani’s enlightenment framework, is to hold on to my faith in Christianity while deeply and respectfully relating with other religious and spiritual formations without undermining their validity as established conceptions about God and belief systems. 

This “solution” certainly requires serious theological finetuning. I have always been suspicious of theological absolutism on the basis that God cannot be summed by just one religious’ framework. And my suspicion of such absolutism is even more enhanced given the entanglement of religions in Nigeria’s national project. How can Nigeria achieve a civic nationalist space if religions eschew open-minded and ecumenical relationship with one another? How can the Grail Message step into the breach as a spiritual panacea to Nigeria’s myriad postcolonial predicaments if it excludes other religious and spiritual forms as “false”? I know I am posing formidable queries to an even more formidable octogenarian whose many more years in search of spiritual enlightenment I can always count on to sharpen my own understanding of the place and role of God in human affairs.