The Nigerian political landscape is often fraught with controversy, intrigue, and speculation, especially when significant changes occur in government positions. The recent removal of Hon. Uju-Kennedy Ohaneye as the Minister of Women Affairs has sparked considerable debate across the nation. Some argue that she was dropped because of her non-conformist stance on various national issues, while others believe it was due to her perceived non-performance in office. The question on everyone’s lips is: Was Ohaneye dropped for being a non-conformist or a non-performer?

Ohaneye, a vibrant politician and lawyer, was among the few women nominated for ministerial positions by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu earlier this year. Her nomination was seen as a symbol of progress, representing the effort to include more women in Nigeria’s decision-making corridors. With her impressive background in law and public service, many Nigerians were optimistic about what she would bring to the table. However, her time in office was abruptly cut short, leaving the public puzzled about the reasons behind her dismissal.

From the onset of her appointment, Ohaneye was seen as a bold and assertive figure, unafraid to challenge the status quo. Her outspoken nature and willingness to speak truth to power earned her both admiration and criticism. In a political climate where conformity is often rewarded and dissent suppressed, Ohaneye’s refusal to play along with traditional political norms likely rubbed many of her colleagues the wrong way.

One of the key instances where Ohaneye displayed her non-conformist attitude was her stance on the subsidy removal policy. As many politicians within the ruling party rallied around the government’s decision to remove fuel subsidies, Ohaneye publicly questioned the timing and implementation of the policy. She argued that while subsidy removal might be a necessary step, the government had not put in place adequate measures to cushion the impact on the poor and vulnerable. This position placed her at odds with the pro-subsidy removal camp within the administration, which may have contributed to her being sidelined.

Ohaneye also took a firm stand on the need for comprehensive electoral reforms. She was one of the few ministers who openly advocated for the implementation of recommendations made by civil society groups for free and fair elections. While some saw this as a principled stance, others within her party felt that she was too critical of a system that had put them in power. In a country where political loyalty is often prioritized over principles, her unwillingness to toe the party line could have led to her removal.

While Ohaneye’s non-conformist nature might have raised some eyebrows, it is essential to consider whether her performance as a minister also played a role in her dismissal. Government critics have pointed out that during her time in office, there were several areas where she failed to make a significant impact.

The ministry under her supervision, Ministry of Women Affairs, is no doubt a portfolio that is crucial for addressing the needs and rights of women in Nigeria. Critics argue that during her tenure, there was little to no progress in advancing policies that directly impacted the lives of Nigerian women. Issues like gender-based violence, access to education for the girl-child, and economic empowerment for women were reportedly not given the attention they deserved under her leadership.

Ohaneye also faced criticism for her handling of budgetary allocations. Some reports suggest that there were delays in disbursing funds meant for key programs under her ministry. These delays, according to insiders, hampered the execution of projects that could have had a tangible impact on women’s lives, further cementing the perception that she was not delivering results.

Moreover, there were allegations of poor coordination within her ministry. Staff members reportedly complained about a lack of clear direction, with many initiatives stalling due to indecision at the top. This inefficiency, critics argue, reflected poorly on her managerial capabilities and ultimately contributed to her removal.

Adding fuel to the ongoing debate about Ohaneye’s removal were reports of an unusual reaction within her former ministry. Not long after the news of her dismissal broke, media outlets reported that staff members within the Ministry of Women Affairs were seen celebrating her departure. According to these reports, some staff even described her removal as a relief, hinting that working under her leadership had been challenging.

This reaction raises questions about her relationship with the ministry’s staff. While it is not uncommon for tensions to exist between leadership and subordinates, the fact that her removal was met with open jubilation suggests that her management style may have contributed to discontent within the ministry. The staff’s response has fueled speculation that her leadership approach may have led to inefficiencies and internal friction, potentially justifying her removal on grounds of non-performance.

In Nigerian politics, the performance of a public official is not always the sole determinant of their fate. Power dynamics and political maneuvering often play a significant role. Ohaneye’s fall from grace may also have been the result of political calculations within the ruling party.

It is worth noting that Ohaneye’s appointment was seen by some as an attempt to appease certain interest groups within the political landscape. As a member of the southeast, a region that has historically been marginalized in Nigeria’s power distribution, her inclusion in the cabinet was expected to balance regional representation. However, her removal has led to renewed accusations of marginalization by southeastern leaders, who see this as yet another instance of the region being shortchanged in national appointments.

There is also the possibility that Ohaneye became a victim of factional infighting within the ruling party. Nigeria’s political parties are often divided along various interest groups, with different factions vying for influence and control. It is possible that Ohaneye’s removal was the result of her alignment with a particular faction that found itself on the losing side of an internal power struggle.

Without a doubt, Public opinion on Ohaneye’s removal is divided. Her supporters argue that she was a victim of her non-conformist approach, which did not sit well with the political elite. They view her as a principled leader who was unwilling to compromise her values for political gain. Many Nigerians, especially women’s rights activists, have expressed disappointment over her removal, arguing that she was one of the few female voices in a male-dominated cabinet.

On the other hand, her critics believe that her removal was justified, pointing to her perceived lack of performance in office. They argue that while she may have been vocal on certain issues, her inability to deliver tangible results was ultimately her downfall. The jubilation within the ministry following her removal only adds weight to these claims.

It is likely that Ohaneye’s removal was the result of a combination of factors, including her non-conformist attitude, perceived non-performance, and political maneuvering within the ruling party. In a political system as complex as Nigeria’s, it is rarely one factor that determines the fate of public officials. Instead, it is often a delicate balance of performance, loyalty, and political survival.

In Ohaneye’s case, her boldness and refusal to conform may have alienated her from key figures within the government. At the same time, her critics could point to her lack of results in office as justification for her removal. Ultimately, her dismissal serves as a reminder of the delicate tightrope that public officials in Nigeria must walk, balancing their principles, performance, and political alliances.

Chinyere Ohaneye’s removal as a minister raises important questions about the criteria used to evaluate public officials in Nigeria. Was she dropped because she dared to challenge the status quo, or was it because she failed to deliver on her promises? While the exact reasons may never be fully known, her case highlights the complex interplay of performance, principles, and politics in the Nigerian government.

The jubilation within her former ministry after her removal adds an additional layer to the discussion, suggesting that her leadership style may not have been well-received by those she worked with. Whether her downfall was due to being a non-conformist, a non-performer, or a mix of both, Ohaneye’s case serves as a reflection of the broader issues facing governance and accountability in Nigeria. As the country continues to grapple with political challenges, the case of Ohaneye will likely remain a point of reference in discussions about governance, leadership, and representation.

The news that Akwa Ibom State Government is considering creating a savings account in the 2025 fiscal year to put away money for the rainy is perhaps the most heartwarming report that I have heard this year. According to Gov. Umo Eno, who was speaking at the State Executive Council session, the idea of the savings scheme is to progressively build ‘’compulsory savings for projects that we may not foresee immediately and for the next generation’’. It would be the first time a state government would create a savings plan in Nigeria, and is coming 14 years after the federal government established the Nigerian Sovereign Investment Authority in 2011 to manage the nation’s sovereign wealth fund. The benefits of savings for individuals, households and businesses are well known, but for a government, it ensures long-term financial stability and enhances development. By building reserves, avoiding debt, attracting investment and providing stability to the economy, the state government will be able to meet its obligations and provides for the needs of its citizens over the long term. A savings programme also encourages the government to be frugal, prudent and wise in managing our resources. I commend the governor for this and I encourage him to go ahead with the plan, irrespective of contrary suggestions that he might receive from ‘’stakeholders’’.

 I have been very critical of past administrations in the state for their wastefulness and reckless spending. Previous governors spent billions of our resources to buy houses, cars and expensive gifts for their friends and political associates. They wasted our resources on sponsorships of pilgrimages and leisure trips. Many emirs from the North have benefitted from the reckless generosities of the past. I know of one of our former governors who built a ranch in Kaduna State for his friend from that State. Yes, a big cattle ranch. This same governor also gave a whopping £1 million to the sitting president that time as his own contribution to the president to furnish his new London apartment. The governor had heard that the President had just acquired a new residence in London, and our governor, in his typical outrageousness, felt compelled to make the donation. The President did not ask for it, but he did not decline the offer either. I would have expected that a responsible president would not accept such a gift from a governor! There are many other cases past gubernatorial indiscretions in our state. Other state governors are no less frivolous. Even in these hard times, offensive displays of luxurious lifestyle are going on in the state capitals at the expense of the people. A governor in a poverty-stricken North West has just purchased a 2025 BMW! There seems to be a widely held notion that state governments are not supposed to save money. It’s the reason many governors indulge in flagrant abuses of resources which, in turn, lead to widespread borrowings to fund budget deficits. I ask Gov. Eno not to go on that route. It’s time to turn the page from the thoughtlessness of the past.

 While we are still waiting for the details of Eno’s savings scheme, here are a few suggestions that may be helpful. The scheme should be christened ‘’Akwa Ibom State Wealth Fund’’, backed by law and designed in a somewhat similar fashion as the sovereign wealth Fund of the federal government. It would be funded by the state government and managed by people of integrity and a wealth of experience in finance and investment. It should operate independently of the bureaucracy and be insulated from political interferences. The enabling law should stipulate where the fund could invest and under what conditions it can exit such areas. The law shall also specify the proportion of the fund’s resources that would be held in current and capital assets; and indicate under what conditions the governor may access monies therein to meet difficult and unexpected challenges. There are many investment avenues in the money and capital markets as well as the property subsector that the fund may consider to invest in. So, why can’t every state government take up a long-term savings programme for their people?

A lot of countries, especially the oil-rich nations, have since created wealth funds to save for their future generations. They had long known that crude oil is a diminishing resource. Saudi Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund is worth $925 billion, with its assets jumping by 29% last year – and domestic investment being a major driver. Another oil-rich nation, Norway is renowned for the huge reserves in its wealth fund. It was worth $1.715 trillion in August. A tiny country of less than six million people, Norway provides generous welfare scheme for its people, yet its leaders have been wise and prudent to save for the future. The fund was created in the 1990s by an act of parliament, and today the fund has become one of the world’s largest investors, and to date, it has put money in 8,700 in over 70 countries around the world. The Nigerian Wealth Fund was created with a $1 billion seed capital in 2011. In 2023, it’s grown to $2.3 billion in assets, the third largest in sub Saharan Africa, after Botswana and Angola. I thank President Jonathan for his foresight. If Gov. Umo Eno starts the Akwa Ibom Wealth Fund next year, we can expect its portfolio to grow above N300 billion in the next few decades. Future generations of Akwa Ibom citizens will look back with pride and say: ‘’There was a governor’’!

President Bola Tinubu has restricted Ministers, Ministers of State, and Heads of Agencies of the Federal Government to a maximum of three vehicles in their official convoys.

No additional vehicles will be assigned to them for movement.

The cost-cutting measure was announced today in a statement signed by the President.

In January this year, President Tinubu took significant steps to reduce government expenditure, by reducing his entourage on foreign trips from 50 to 20 officials. For local trips, he reduced it to 25 officials.

He similarly reduced the Vice President’s entourage to five officials on foreign trips and 15 for local trips.

In the directive issued today, President Tinubu also ordered all ministers, ministers of state, and heads of agencies to have at most five security personnel attached to them.

The security team will comprise four police officers and one Department of State Services (DSS) officer.

No additional security personnel will be assigned, he ordered.

President Tinubu instructed the National Security Adviser to engage with the Military, Paramilitary and Security Agencies to determine a suitable reduction in their vehicle and security personnel deployment.

All affected officials are expected to comply with these new measures immediately, underscoring the urgency and seriousness of these changes.

Bayo Onanuga

Special Adviser to the President

(Information & Strategy)

Three – maybe three and a half – stories go to the heart of why Nigeria appears stuck in a rut. And for some strange reason, all of them are rooted mainly in energy and power. 

The first is about a project, the Mambilla Hydroelectric Project. If you live in Nigeria – except you’re the Minister of Power, Adebayo Adelabu – there’s a good chance you would have heard about this project, which is located in Gembu, Taraba State. 

In that case, there’s a chance you might also have heard that the national power grid, more in the news for collapsing than for generating power, collapsed three times last week, plunging most parts of the country into darkness. The Minister of Power is too busy making excuses to notice. 

Mambilla, rolling grid collapse

But he doesn’t have to worry. Others are counting the number of grid collapses for him. In its lead story on October 21, PUNCH reported that the national grid has collapsed 105 times in 10 years despite the government’s $1.4 billion in loans to fix the problem. If we still have the appetite for more loans to waste, the report said an additional $2.9 billion from the World Bank could indulge our irresponsibility. 

But that’s just the beginning of the Mambilla story. I’d be foolish to claim there’s one single Mambilla story. There isn’t. But this is a version from several trusted, ringside sources. Sometime in 2003, President Olusegun Obasanjo visited the Three Gorges Dam, the world’s largest power station in China, with an installed capacity of 22,500 MW. 

He liked what he saw and wanted the company to replicate something on a smaller scale in Mambilla. At the time, it was estimated that the dam would generate an additional 3,050 MW for Nigeria, a chronically underpowered country struggling to generate 2,500MW for over 200 million people. The project was divided into three lots at a contract sum of roughly $6 billion to be delivered in five years.

Sunset on a contract

Since the word “contract” and Nigeria are made for trouble, trouble started. Sunrise Power and Transmission Company, promoted by Leno Adesanya, teamed up with North China Power and China Hydroelectric to make a bid for Mambilla. It seemed, however, that that was not the original plan, which was to have China Three Gorges Corporation, the China state-owned power company that built Three Gorges, build Mambilla.

One thing led to another, and the Minister of Power at the time, Dr. Olu Agunloye, who said he believed he was acting on behalf of the Nigerian government, awarded the contract at $6 billion to Sunrise through “a letter of intent” in 2007. 

Sunrise and its Chinese partners turned up at Mambilla, as did China Three Gorges, based on Obasanjo’s invitation: two significant contractors, two separate invitations, one task, and one divided government. But the government soon changed hands. Obasanjo was out, and President Umaru Yar’Adua was in. 

Sorry, we can’t pay

In 2009, Yar’Adua cancelled the Sunrise contract. Adesanya was furious. He went to Arbitration in Paris and was awarded $400 million for the government’s alleged breach. Meanwhile, China Three Gorges backed off at the first smell of trouble, leaving Nigeria to stew in its misery. 

In 2015, President Muhammadu Buhari came in. Former Attorney General and Minister of Justice Abubakar Malami, doing what he did fantastically well, renegotiated the penalty with Adesanya from $400 million to $200 million. Buhari refused to pay, and as Adesanya headed back to Arbitration, the EFCC dragged him and Agunloye, charging the latter with seven counts of forgery, contract award without approval, disobedience to presidential orders, etc. 

Long story short, 12 years after Mambilla was supposed to have been completed with all its transformative promises in power, rail, roads, infrastructure, and jobs (not to mention the missing N30 billion Obasanjo left in the project account), we’re still in a rut, stewing deeper and deeper in the misery of rolling blackouts and collapsing grids.

Isn’t it possible, for God’s sake – and the sake of the bigger picture – for this government to end the drama around the project and save Baby Mambilla from the stale, disposable bathwater?

Wilbros war

This second story illustrates how such a missed opportunity never ends well. It’s the story of Wilbros, one of the biggest things in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, in its heyday. In 2008/2009, when the ego war between Obasanjo and his former deputy, Atiku Abubakar, was at its peak, the EFCC, never missing a chance to outdo itself, said Wilbros senior officials had paid $6 million in bribes to top members of the ruling People’s Democratic Party (PDP). 

A director of the company pleaded guilty to the charge in a US federal court, and the EFCC pounced. Fair enough, but what was the company, Wilbros, doing, and was it not possible to prosecute the errant directors without destroying the company? At the time of the blowout, Wilbros, a US-Nigerian-based company, was building the West African Gas Pipeline. 

Dream deferred

It was Nigeria’s biggest oil and gas construction company, competing with Saipem and having over 3,000 workers. The gas pipeline was massive. According to the World Bank, completion of the project would have improved the competitiveness of the energy sectors in Ghana, Benin, and Togo by promoting cheaper and environmentally cleaner gas from Nigeria instead of solid and liquid fuels for power generation and other industrial and commercial uses.  

Wilbros was at 80 percent completion of the gas pipeline project when the EFCC struck. The matter dragged and dragged. By 2013, Wilbros’s massive pipeline coating plant was rotting, among other valuable assets worth billions of naira. The company was wrecked by its inability to finish the project, yet nothing emerged from the prosecution of the big names bandied about as suspects, including former GMDs of NNPC. Wilbros sold off its remnant to Ascot, and the rest is history. 

Pan Ocean’s troubled sea

Pan Ocean is the third story. Pan Ocean, an Indigenous oil and gas exploration company, embarked on one of the most audacious projects of its life. Under Dr. Festus Fadeyi, its chairman at the time, the company invested over $500 million in a gas project to feed the Escravos-Lagos Pipeline System and the West African Gas Pipeline. 

It was supposed to have an impact similar to what Wilbros attempted to do. But there was a problem. The chairman, also a significant shareholder in Skye Bank at the time, had allegedly overborrowed from the bank, forcing it to over-leverage. He had reportedly borrowed about N240 billion, over half of the bank’s total debt.

When President Muhammadu Buhari’s government pounced in 2015, some of the funds had found their way into oil mining leases, including OML 98 managed by Pan Ocean, which was among the seven revoked. The critical point is that all asset leases that reverted to NNPCL, ostensibly in the public interest, have served neither the public interest nor those of the original owners. They have become NNPCL’s ATM. 

Mother of them all

The half of the three stories, actually the mother of them all, is the Ajaokuta Steel Company. It’s the story of a wasting N4 trillion asset for another day. It competes with the four state-owned refineries in demonstrating how ego, primordial greed, and monumentally poor judgment could lead to state collapse.

Yet, carefully and thoughtfully managed, these cases could have helped lessen our current misery. 

One man willing to go on the record on this matter, Dan D. Kunle, power and energy expert and professional of over 30 years, told me last week, “It’s an irony that Nigeria is suffering amid these great opportunities when presidential intervention could turn the page and bring this country the relief it needs badly.”

Three stories, one message: Who will bell the cat?

Between 1967 and 1970, Nigeria prosecuted a blood civil war, one of the bloodiest in the annals of modern history. And at the center of that terrible national tragedy is that man of destiny, General Yakubu Gowon, the head of the military administration—the second in the history of Nigeria’s chequered post-independence political history. After the deep euphoria of independence, the 1966 coup and the aftermath of civil war were too disjunctive for a state that was aiming for the status of a key player on the continent and on the globe; a nation state that was supposed to reverse the ills of colonialism and increase the well-being of her citizens. These series of national events were also something that no national leader should be saddled with. And this is because the position General Gowon was meant to defend—upholding the postcolonial status of one Nigeria even in the face of gross national inconsistencies --- one which led to the 1967-70 civil war. But then, who would want to be associated with the dissolution of a state that destiny has called on one to protect? 

General Gowon’s entry into the trajectory of Nigeria’s national project implies that he was called upon to supervise the direction Nigeria would go right from the commencement of nation-building. The responsibility to channel the political development of the Nigerian state was thrusted on his unwilling head, and from a critically debilitating point of extreme disunity. And it is in this sense that we can regard General Yakubu Gowon as the grand personification of the resilient Nigerian spirit. It is very difficult not to believe that Providence had a hand in inscribing Gowon’s life with a very unique purpose that came to finally intersects Nigeria’s. From the face-off with the late General Odimegwu Ojukwu to the crafting of the Aburi Declaration which broke down eventually because of contrasting interpretation of what the accord demands of the federal and Eastern regional governments. The entire trajectory of incidences and events constitute quite an interesting field of study not only for political scientists, but also political psychologists. For instance, what mix of political ego was responsible in tilting the critical situation into a pissing contest between the two national gladiators? 

War is always a terrible business. In the Nigerian case, the variables involved are all too multiple and complex to make any coherent sense. From external business interests to the internal social and ethnic cleavages whose fissiparous tendencies were the primary causes of the conflict. And yet, that war had to be fought, and Gowon had to supervise the looming disintegration of a national project that had barely taken off. If we agree that Providence had thrusted this national destiny on Gowon, we should also know that it is not deterministic. He could have capitulated in following through with the divine responsibility. He did not. He accepted it as God’s will even if he might not have had that spiritual understanding at the time, and he brought Nigeria as far as he could with a mixture of sound and unsound decisions and judgments. Let me highlight just two that speak to how contradictory leadership decisions can sometimes be. 

On October 1, 1970, General Gowon promised to set in place a political and electoral process that will lead to the handing over of the rein of authority to a civil government by October 1, 1976. Unfortunately, the Supreme Military Council was forced to renege on its promise. And the reason was that the political class did not seem ready to take up the great task of moving forward a state that was still reeling from the consequences of the civil war, and the ethnic bitterness that attended it. That decision could be approached from multiple interpretive perspectives. One could ask what gave Gowon the messianic audacity to legislate on the future of Nigeria. After all, the political behavior of Nigerian politicians has not changed since then. Others could point at a key patriotic sensibility that did not want to scuttle the progresses made since the end of the civil war. No one who went through the gruesome war would want to ever have a repeat of it.      

One of the infamous moments of the Gowon administration is the lost opportunity of transforming the public service system in Nigeria through the adoption of the Udoji Commission report and the implementation of its grand managerial paradigm shifting recommendations. The report was initiated as a result of a global managerial revolution that insisted that the old Weberian administration must give way to a new public service that will be flexible, economical, lean, effective and efficient in the achievement of service delivery. The new public service is meant to be modernized and boosted for an output-oriented performance that increase Nigeria’s productive base within a grand architecture of a developmental state – one with a hold on the ‘commanding heights’ of the national economy. Udoji was motivated in its critical assessment of the Nigerian public service by the Fulton Commission Report of 1968 that also took on the British Civil Service and the urgency of its institutional reform. The Udoji Commission was at once inaugurated to deal with the protracted wage and incentives issues that the civil service had been dealing with before independence and which final resolution the Adebo 1971 report passed on to the Udoji Commission for a holistic systemic reconsideration. Unfortunately, the Gowon administration (presumably as concession to the sentiments of his super-permanent secretaries) cling on to the wage components of the Udoji Report and left off the more fundamental dimensions of institutional reform that would have radically improved the capability readiness of the public service system. How could an administration that balked at handing over power to a bunch of unprepared political class not see the significance of preparing the public service system as a condition for national productivity and good governance? Professor Lars Konlind’s perspective on why institutions enter into irredeemable decline, attributed this sense to what happens when an organization shun changes at the peak of its success. Consequently, leaders (political and administrative) develop selective deafness, one which in the Nigeria’s case over-glorifies the ‘I am directed’ Weberian bureaucratic tradition by disregarding the innovations that managerialism portend, one that has earned Nigeria the reputation of the “hesitant reformer”. 

And yet, without being flippant or hagiographic, General Gowon is in my assessment one of the most heroic of Nigerian leaders. He represents a sense of statesmanship that stands in sharp contrast to the intense sense of gratification that characterizes politics today. The trajectory of his statesmanship is significantly defining. To be born before the founding of such a combustible nation as ours, and to have matured to receive a calling to fight a war to elevate an artificial creation of the British colonialist—‘a mere geographical expression’, to quote Chief Obafemi Awolowo—to the status of a state worth preserving, is nothing less than a defining trajectory. When as a nation we were confronted with a “to be or not to be” dilemma in our evolution, General Gowon chose Nigeria. With that choice, General Gowon brought a significant dimension to the importance of the minority ethnic groups in crystallizing the Nigeria Project. That being a clarion call to the majority ethnic groups that Nigeria did not only belong to all of us; it is God’s divine project. 

Despite the faux pas concerning the Udoji Commission Report and its momentous recommendations, the Gowon administration still left an indelible administrative example that replicate the Awolowo-Adebo administrative model in the old western region. The corps of the super-permanent secretaries significantly backstopped the Gowon administration in the policy space that was stampeded during the years of the civil war. I can hypothesize that without that fundamental model as a crucial fulcrum, the civil war would have been worse that it was. And so, as a testament to the possible greatness of the Nigerian state, we already have two versions of the politics-administration model that could be reinvented to stimulate good governance.

Besides, General Yakubu Gowon was not just a normal run-of-the-mill soldier. He was an officer and a gentleman. At a time when the figure of the solider or the image of the Nigerian army has dipped significantly in reputation, Gowon embodied the very essence of military professionalism and reputation for excellence. As a commissioned officer, he was minded about the educational and training extent so much so that he was ready to go the full lengths to prove his thirst for learning to be more and more professional. General Gowon was not content with his prestigious training at Sandhurst, Camberley and Latimer. He just had to eventually undergo the academic rigor of adult education to earn a doctorate degree at the University of Warwick in the United Kingdom. That might have been a personal vision of fulfilment, but it elevated the public perception of what and who an officer should be. With that accomplishment, Officer Gowon became a composite image of a true military professional that is not defined by his brawn or capacity to wield the gun, but by intelligence, intellect and humaneness in a profession defined by its unique masculinity. 

In all, General Yakubu Gowon believes in Nigeria. Only the most wrong-headed critique would not take that as a consequential fact. Indeed, after he had left the corridors of power, General Gowon still holds on to a spiritual responsibility to keep up the Providential imperative that Nigeria is on a divine course to greatness. For being so politically, professionally and spiritually involved in the courses of Nigeria’s nation-building efforts, there is no other way to see General Yakubu Gowon order than as a patriot, and one of Nigeria’s eternal heroes. And there is no other way to cap his many efforts as seeing Nigeria fulfill her divine mandate than to explore his political and nationalist legacies while he is still with us. At ninety, our nonagenarian statesman and general deserves more than national accolades. He deserves to see the Nigeria of is dreams and aspirations.  

All the eight countries that have qualified for the 2024 FIFA U-17 Women’s World Cup quarter-final have been confirmed.

This follows the conclusion of the final group fixtures in the early hours of Thursday morning.

DAILY POST reports that North Korea defeated England 4-0 in their final group game.

Kenya won 2-1 against Mexico, but both teams failed to advance to the knock-out stage after getting the lowest points in their group.

However , the eight countries that have booked their place in the last-8 after the conclusion of the group stage are Nigeria, Poland, United States, North Korea, England, Spain, Ecuador and Japan.

The quarter-final fixtures will commence from Saturday.

[DailyPost]

Members of my generation who lived or spent holidays in Lagos during the late seventies to the nineties remember men whose lives were ruined by gambling. These were people adept at “perming” numbers, even in their sleep, with the assurance they would hit the jackpot the next day. “Koraa dagun lose yi” (the promoter of the gambling house is in trouble this week) was the usual refrain which came with at least “a sure banker.” Yet, for most of these gamblers, it was the story of the fool and his money because their ‘tomorrow’ never came. While that habit was restricted to a few in the past, gambling has now become a serious social problem in Nigeria. And relevant stakeholders are not paying attention. Worse still, school children are increasingly getting hooked on one form of gambling or another. 

Let me be upfront here. I have no problem with adults who gamble. And I am aware of a place in Abuja they call ‘The Great Gambler’ where the movers and shakers of our country gather each weekend to play ‘Kalokalo’ with their loot. But I am concerned when children are introduced to this destructive habit so early in their lives, without any restriction. Section 34 of the National Lottery Act 2005 makes betting illegal for children in Nigeria, as it is in all countries. “Any person who knowingly sells to any person under the age of 18 years any ticket in a lottery operated by a licensee commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than N20,000 or imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or both such fine and imprisonment,” the Act states. But in a milieu where laws are rarely enforced, it is little wonder that across the country today, even primary school children (in uniform) are found in gambling joints during the day.

I am aware that gambling is a huge industry in Nigeria today with several billions of Naira changing hands (including under the table) between and among stakeholders in both the private and public sectors. And it has generated huge employment opportunities. But we must also think about the future of our country and the social dislocation that gambling is causing within our society. With the economic challenge that has made life very difficult for the average Nigerian it is no surprise that many of our people are looking for all manner of ‘miracles’ to survive. It is this desperation that has made gambling all pervasive and the pressure it brings is already accentuating other vices. A joint paper, ‘An Overview of Gambling in Nigeria’ published on the website of the United States National Library of Medicine, and authored by Chinyere Mirian Oguocha, a Nigerian Professor at the Imo State University and Sanju George, an Indian Professor at Rajagiri College of Social Sciences, is quite revealing on this malaise. “In spite of the laws regulating gambling in Nigeria, about 57.2% of school-age children have gambled at least once in their lifetime and 77.6% of these have gambled in the past year, with 58.3% reporting unfettered access to gambling dens,” the duo wrote.

Meanwhile, even when gambling may be advertised as entertainment to deceive the unwary, especially in societies like ours, science has since confirmed it to be a behavioural problem. “Playing a game of chance activates the brain’s reward system, releasing a strong dopamine hit and a feeling of pleasure. The same mechanism is at play whether the person is standing at the roulette table or playing on their phone,” Charlotte Aynsley, an e-safety consultant wrote to affirm what psychiatrists have since discovered. “Psychologists call this effect ‘variable rate reinforcement’. The player, in this case, is rewarded in an unpredictable manner – and the more uncertainty there is, the more dopamine gets released.”

Gambling is considered harmful in numerous ways, including causing financial stress, family dislocations, mental health challenges and domestic violence. In her piece, ‘Game over: the risks of children gambling’, a child psychiatrist, Charlotte Goddard explores associated issues. Referencing statistics from the National Audit Office, she wrote that there are around 55,000 ‘problem’ gamblers aged 11 to 16 in the United Kingdom, with a further 85,000 estimated to be at risk. “A 2019 Gambling Commission survey found 11 percent of 11- to 16-year-olds said they spent their own money on gambling in the past week,” she wrote.

This, of course, is a global problem with young people taking to gambling through internet games without even realising it. “They are not going into bookies,” says Alexa Roseblade, senior programmes manager at GamCare, a charity. “A lot of young people are gambling with friends such as making a bet about who will win a race.” That’s usually how it starts and before they know it, they are hooked. For young people, gambling and gaming are often closely linked, according to Goddard. “Games themselves can encourage behaviour linked to gambling. A game might cost £40 but children are encouraged to spend more money to progress further. There are also issues around ‘loot boxes’, where players are encouraged to buy mystery prizes within a game, without knowing what they will get.”

The issue here is that most countries already recognise the problem. And they are finding both preventive and curative solutions to the challenge. In the UK, for instance, they have NHS’s National Centre for Behavioural Addictions houses, the National Problem Gambling Clinic and the National Centre for Gaming Disorders. There are also parent support groups which aim to help parents set boundaries and communicate more effectively with their children on the danger of gambling. In 2021, the RSHE statutory guidance for schools and education introduced the topic of gambling to the curriculum. But in Nigeria, there are no such interventions, even while many of our young people gamble their future away.

In a society where many people have been conditioned to believe that wealth has no correlation with work, we should not be surprised that young Nigerians are taking to gambling thinking that is the surest route for them to ‘hammer’. The situation is not helped by the economic situation in the country and the dearth of employment opportunities. That has encouraged the proliferation of online sports betting and Cybercafés dedicated to all forms of lottery. But the danger to children should compel action, even though this government is so obsessed with revenue generation. Besides the impact on their performance in school, other tell-tale signs that children might be hooked on gambling include becoming agitated or upset for no apparent reason, withdrawing from family and friends, being secretive about (or always being short of) money etc.

I am delighted that an NGO, ‘Gamble Alert’, has dedicated itself to preventing gambling harm and providing free therapy, emotional support and treatment services for those already addicted. The organisation’s mission is encapsulated in its commitment to creating “a safe haven for individuals harmed by their own gambling or their important others’ gambling to find solace and rediscover their strength.” That ‘Gamble Alert’ focuses on sensitizing young people to the dangers of underage gambling through discussions and educational materials, is commendable. And we need more of such efforts.

In their paper earlier referenced, the duo of Aguocha and George concluded that “There needs to be a wider debate about gambling as a public health issue in Nigeria, involving key stakeholders such as academics, healthcare professionals, policy makers and the gambling industry”. They added: “Positive action is required to minimise gambling-related harm to the people of Nigeria.”

I wholeheartedly concur!

Nigeria and the Challenge of Accountability

(With the theme, ‘Enhancing Accountability: Limiting Vulnerabilities’, the Nigeria Accountability Summit 2024 continues today in Abuja. Below is my keynote speech at the opening session yesterday morning)

I am aware that when you talk about accountability, people think you are referring to money. But accountability is much more than that. For me, nothing illustrates the real essence of accountability better than a story I once shared in my column. Concerned that her son was addicted to eating to much sugar, a mother sought appointment to see the legendary Indian leader, Mahatma Gandhi. When she finally did, with her son in tow, she said: “The whole nation listens to you, please tell my son to stop eating sugar, as it is not good for his health”. Ghandi replied, “I cannot tell him that. But you may bring him back in a few weeks and then I will talk to him.” 

Upset and disappointed, the mother took the boy home. Two weeks later, she came back. This time Gandhi looked directly at the boy and said “Son, you should stop eating sugar. It is not good for your health.” The boy nodded his head and made a solemn commitment to heed the admonition. Puzzled, the boy’s mother asked Ghandi, “Why did you send us away two weeks ago when you could have simply told the boy what you just did?”

That, for me, sums up what accountability is all about.

I am delighted to be here this morning for the Nigeria Accountability Summit (NAS) 2024. I understand that the two-day programme is basically for assessing the progress made in achieving the 8-point agenda of the current administration and related priority areas for government at the subnational levels. I remember that in August 2023, the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister for the Economy, Wale Edun presented the ‘Roadmap for the Economy’, which highlighted eight priority areas for the administration. They are food security, poverty eradication, economic growth and job creation, access to capital, improving security, rule of law and fighting corruption. It is more than one year since that public proclamation, and the jury is now out as to whether anything concrete has been achieved regarding those lofty objectives.

Since I am not familiar with what President Bola Tinubu has done with his 8-point agenda, I would prefer to restrict my brief intervention this morning to the general notion of ‘accountability’ which is of great importance in all aspects of human endeavour. However, I may also say a few words about the promised food security, job creation, rule of law and all that before I take my seat, although I am more interested in the outcome of your overview of the 8-point agenda.

Accountability is a core pillar of good governance and its relevance in one’s personal and public life cannot be overemphasised. Indeed, at the heart of any meaningful development is accountability and it is enshrined in the 1999 Constitution (as amended). Section 15(5) states that: “the state shall abolish all corrupt practices and abuse of power; emphasising the government’s commitment to accountability and transparency.” This is further amplified in Section 16(1): “It is the responsibility of the state to harness the resources of the nation and promote national prosperity and an efficient, dynamic, and self-reliant economy for every citizen.”

There can be no better definition of accountability than the one proffered by this institution. “The concept of accountability is central to discussion related to problems not just in the non-profit and corporate environment but also in the public sector,” quoting from your website. “It is the acknowledgement and assumption of responsibility for action, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance, and implementation within the scope of leadership role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report, explain and answer for resulting consequences.” That for me says it all about why, without accountability, it is impossible to deliver on the public good.

In its ordinary meaning, accountability is an obligation or willingness to accept responsibility for one’s action. It is being held answerable for accomplishing a goal or assignment. It is being self-aware, admitting one’s mistakes and accepting the consequences of one’s actions. Thomas Paine, who authored ‘The Rights of Man’, once wrote that, “a body of men holding themselves accountable to nobody ought not to be trusted by anybody.” The tragedy of Nigeria is that the people and institutions responsible for oversight of public expenditure are themselves not accountable. You find the greatest lawbreakers among our lawmakers. Many of our Judges promote injustice. Let’s not even go to the religious sector where clerics mouth what they neither practice nor believe in.

Some centuries ago, a famous philosopher, Joseph de Maistre famously said: “Every nation gets the government it deserves.” What he meant was that it’s up to the citizens of every nation not only to elect the right leaders, but also to hold them accountable. Unfortunately, Nigerians do not perform this sacred duty; they don’t act as a bulwark against bad leadership. Indeed, a former Minister of Trade and Investment, Mr Olusegun Aganga, said in his book, ‘Reclaiming the Jewel of Africa’ that the average Nigerian citizen “needs to be reminded what it means to be a citizen all over again.” This, of course, is not to suggest that accountability is only for elected officials. For example, citizens should also be accountable for paying tax. Perhaps that is where the problem lies because we live in a country where most shirk this obligation. In countries where the majority of people pay taxes, there is a strong demand for good governance.

Let me now briefly examine a few issues in the 8-point agenda of the Tinubu administration that this session seeks to interrogate. Let’s start with economic growth and food security. Going by the latest World Bank’s ‘Food Security Update Report’, Nigeria is among a few countries that have seen a significant rise in the number of people facing acute food shortages. Year-on-year inflation also surged by 5.98 percent points, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS) which last week released the latest Consumer Price Index report, revealing that the headline inflation rate for September rose to 32.70 percent. You can all draw your own conclusions.

That millions of Nigerians go to bed hungry every night is no longer a subject of debate. But it is naive to believe that the food crisis can be resolved without addressing the underlying security problems. With arable land and a good climate, we can adequately feed ourselves. The challenge is that most farmers have abandoned their farms due to fear of being kidnapped or killed. If the security of these farmers is assured, the prices of commodities in the market will slowly but surely come down. Without decisive action on that front, the hunger crises will only deepen, and fuel social unrest. That said, we must commend the military for the sacrifice they continue to make on behalf of our country as they tackle the security challenge.

In a recent post, former Commandant, Nigerian Naval Engineering College, Sapele, Rear Admiral Michael Johnson (Rtd) said any democracy, whether liberal or conservative, participatory or representative, “that doesn’t embrace the highest standards of accountability coupled with justice, equity, and fairness will ultimately fail,” just as “belt-tightening philosophies without accountability will not make the citizens trust those in government.” I agree with him. Telling Nigerians to sacrifice without government officials’ taking the lead is an exercise in futility. If Tinubu wants to succeed, those who serve under him must prioritise the public good, exercise their duties with integrity, and manage public resources judiciously. Now that there are reports that the president is considering a cabinet reshuffle, it is also important to understand that the cost of governance must be drastically reduced. Having 48 ministers at a time when most Nigerians can barely feed does not make economic sense.

When we talk about how a lack of accountability defines public conduct in Nigeria, the situation is worse at the subnational level. Indeed, as things stand in Nigeria today, as I have had cause to point out on several occasions, accountability diminishes as you move from the centre to the other units: states and local governments. In most of the 36 states, governors behave like emperors with the speakers of their states houses of assembly mere errand boys/girls who serve and could be removed at their pleasure. The logical result is that the promise of good governance embedded in the theory of decentralization is being delivered in the breach.

(NOTE: The so-called cabinet reshuffle was announced yesterday afternoon. Five Ministers were sacked. Seven new Ministers were appointed to replace them. So, instead of reducing the number that was already unprecedented, the president only added more. At the rate he is going, we may soon have 100 Ministers!)

As I take my seat, let me congratulate my Aburo and co-convener of this conference, Olusegun Elemo and other members of the organising team. I look forward to the outcome of your sessions today and tomorrow. For us to develop as a country, there must be oversight at every level of government to check public expenditure. There is also a burden on the people to constantly wield their power to vote in the right people at elections, and to organise civic activities to demand accountability from their leaders. If Nigerians want to be respected in Africa and beyond, there must be accountability at various levels of government and in the society at large. 

• You can follow me on my X (formerly Twitter) handle, @Olusegunverdict and on www.olusegunadeniyi.com   

Apart from commercial banks, which have been running away with astronomical profits, the years 2023 and 2024 have been tumultuous years for businesses in Nigeria, leading some to move from the country. The reasons are not far-fetched. They include the devaluation of the Naira, due to the floating of the exchange rate; repeated hikes in the prices of petroleum products because of the removal of fuel subsidy; and high inflation, resulting from the above developments.

It is understandable, therefore, why the trio of telephone service providers in Nigeria, MTN, Airtel, and Glo, have been suffering major losses in revenue since 2023. Their operation is further complicated by the introduction of value-added tax on tower leases in the 2023 Finance Act and repeated power grid failures, leading to power failure in many parts of the country. Nevertheless, despite these harsh conditions these telephone service providers have continued to make some profit.

Unfortunately, consumers bear the brunt of their losses, which are passed to them in the form of poor services. Telephone calls don’t go through. Messages hang or are not delivered. Images fail to load. Yet, even for such unsuccessful deliveries, you may lose credit or data. The result is the frequency of usages, such as ‘poor’ or ‘no network’; ‘network problem;’ and ‘network failure’ among others. No promotional giveaways, such as ‘20% more data’ or ‘100% awoof credit or data’ could compensate for these inadequacies.

Yet another reason for these problems is oversubscription by the service providers. For example, as many as 1000 users may be subscribed to a service node meant for 500 users. There is also the problem of poor equipment maintenance. For example, someone living near a mast told me that no one had come there to inspect it for over three years! Again, consumers suffer the consequences of such neglect.

These inadequacies are particularly felt in online banking. Bank Apps crash or do not work due to network failure. Of course, commercial banks create other problems for their customers. For example, it sometimes takes hours, even days, for transferred funds to show up in the beneficiary’s account, despite instant debit of the payer’s account. Sometimes, the funds don’t even show up at all and repeated calls to the bank may yield no result until you go to a branch yourself. Worse still, ATM machines are often terribly slow, because most of them are outdated. Besides, only 10 Naira maximum is dispensed in most cases. Moreover, you often pay charges for the number of withdrawals you make.

The problem with network failure in Nigeria is part of a huge structural problem. The telephone service providers seem to be piggybacking on the failure of supervision by appropriate government agencies. It is also possible that, where supervision does take place, sanctions are compromised by corruption. Not a few think that the Bobrisky case and its investigations are similarly compromised.

Yet, there are many questions waiting to be answered by the service providers and the supervising agencies of the government. For example, given the existing capacity of installed equipment, how many subscribers could each provider effectively carry without overload? How extensive is each provider’s 4G coverage? This is an important question because data download often slows down or fails completely whenever coverage drops to 3G or below on any service provider’s network.

The truth is that we may not be able to take part effectively in the digital revolution if telephone service providers continue to perform below average. Yet our participation is critical not just for individual telephone services but also for the benefit of our institutions, especially educational and health institutions. Network connectivity is critical to digital success in these institutions. For example, college students and medical doctors learn a lot these days from online resources.

The above observations have serious implications for the economy. So does frequent power failure. According to available data, there are about 27 grid-connected generating plants currently in operation in the Nigerian Electricity Supply Industry (NESI) with a total installed power generation capacity of about 13,000-15,000 MW and an available capacity of just over 5,000 MW. This is a far cry from the estimated 35,000 MW needed for a population of 250 million people.

By contrast, Brazil, with comparable population, climate, and structure of government, has an installed power generation capacity of 150,000 MW and available capacity of at least 130,000 MW! Yet the government plans to add 6000 MW of capacity every year to satisfy growing demand from an increasing and more prosperous population. That is why the government aims at investing over $100 billion over the next five years on power generation, transmission, and distribution. What is even more interesting about Brazil’s energy structure is its diversification. While Nigeria relies on natural gas and hydropower, Brazil derives its energy from a variety of sources—fossil (oil, coal, and natural gas); and renewable (hydropower, wind, and solar). Brazil did not arrive at this level in one day. It is all a result of careful planning and effective implementation from government to government.

That is why the combination of power and network failures needs urgent attention from the government.

In continuation of his interactions with Nigerians in the Diaspora and in keeping with his avowed determination to lead the search for a new Nigeria, the National leader of the Labour Party, who was the party's Presidential flag bearer in the 2023 election, Mr. Peter Obi, begins a three day, three Cities tour of the United States of America.

A statement from Peter Obi Media Reach, POMR, said that the tour will begin on Thursday the 24th, 25th, and 26th of October 2024 and will be undertaken in the three cities of Houston, TX, Los Angeles, CA, and Atlanta, GA.

The tour will be the last leg of his North America Appreciation visits that had earlier taken him to Toronto, Canada; Boston, MA; New York City, NY; West Orange, N; Cherry,y N; Dallas, TX; Charlotte, NC; and Detroit, MI.

The tour is also to underscore Mr Obi's commitment during the 2023 electioneering to consistently engage the Nigeria Diaspora and interact with them constructively in the nation-building debate for the creation of a new Nigeria.
He also uses the tour to sustain, by example,e a new narrative where, unlike before, politicians only visit the national population when seeking their votes and support but hardly returns after elections to show appreciation.

The tours will be mostly interactive to provide Obi the opportunity to once again, through questions and answers, unveil his mission for a new Nigeria that is Possible and to also react to the unpalatable state of the nation.

The former Anambra State Governor remains ever grateful to Nigerians at home and abroad who continue to show unwavering support and trust in him morally, materially, and financially during the 2023 presidential elections.

Signed
Ibrahim Umar
POMR SPOKESMAN