The politics of 2027 is now fully upon us and has even become the only game in town. It is what explains the sustained surge in open and disguised political activities right from the beginning of 2025. It is the driving force behind the moves and the counter-moves by the leading political actors. It is, simultaneously, the aminating spirit behind the feverish quest for an opposition coalition and the unceasing wave of defections to and hasty endorsements within the ruling party.

The 2027 electioneering period has been brought forward, informally and regrettably, by more than a year. Politicking, the all-consuming passion of Nigerian politicians and the always excitable segments of the populace, has crowded out all else. And even this far out, the line has been drawn: all things being equal, the next presidential race is likely to be between President Bola Tinubu, verbally anointed on Thursday as the sole presidential aspirant of the All Progressives Congress (APC), and whoever emerges as the candidate of whatever party is adopted as the unified opposition platform for the next general election. A further caveat is appropriate here: things are not always equal in politics—almost always, there is an X factor, some dramatic twist.  

Nevertheless, it appears we are set for another tantalising electoral contest. It may end up as a battle royale or as an anti-climax. As expected, leaders of the two groups are convinced they have a clear path to victory. But it has been demonstrated time and again that politics is anything but a science. In politics, anything is possible, especially when there is substantial amount of time and complex dynamics at play. There is a possibility that the opposition, if they get and keep their act together, might muster an upset, as we witnessed in the 2015 presidential election. There is also a possibility that the incumbent, if it sustains its totalising momentum, may manage not just to limp over the line but to completely steamroll the opposition.

There is also a possibility that either of the parties may win or lose not solely on the basis of its own acumen but on account of what the opposing party does or does not do. Even when you control for the usual games that most of our politicians play to different extent, Party A may win simply because Party B refuses to rise to the occasion. At this fuzzy but exciting point of the race, nothing is guaranteed. Our electoral history has shown, even if to different degrees of statistical significance, that an incumbent and a coalition candidate can win or lose. So, those getting over themselves about a predictable outcome based on the current state of play need to calm down a bit. The only certainty, now and eventually, is that only one winner will emerge. Both (or all) camps cannot win.

The consensus among the clear-eyed members of the opposition camp is that President Tinubu is vulnerable but formidable. They are right on both counts. The degree may vary, but every Nigerian president who has stood for re-election since we embraced the presidential system in 1979 has been vulnerable. President Shehu Shagari was in 1983; President Olusegun Obasanjo was in 2003; President Goodluck Jonathan was in 2015; and President Muhammadu Buhari was in 2019. The reason is simple: elections are usually a referendum on the incumbent and most incumbents struggle in their first terms.

But Tinubu’s vulnerability is in a special class: he got elected in the first instance with a low margin (36.61% of the votes comparable only to Shagari’s 33.77% in 1979); Tinubu is widely perceived to have alienated the key actors and the zones that helped him to secure the needed numbers in 2023; and Tinubu’s signature reforms have unleashed the worst cost-of-living crisis in decades. His vulnerability differs in that it touches the vast majority of Nigerians where it matters most: in their pockets and their stomachs.

But the opposition is also right in seeing Tinubu as a formidable proposition—he is even more formidable now than when they first encountered him as a candidate in 2023. All incumbent presidents should be seen as formidable, until they are not. Incumbency confers many unearned advantages especially through untrammelled access to state resources and assets. This is more so in developing countries where almost everything revolves around the state and especially in a place like Nigeria where the central philosophy of politics is patronage. Tinubu, the first machine-politician to occupy the presidency, will definitely not be shy in pressing state apparatuses and the power of patronage to his advantage.

This is why the move for a coalition of parties and personalities makes eminent sense. To stand any chance against a vulnerable but formidable Tinubu, the leading opposition parties would need to band together. And from all indications, the African Democratic Congress (ADC), not the Social Democratic Party (SDP), is the favoured vehicle. Agreeing to a united platform on time is also good for the opposition. This was the path taken in 2012/2013 by APC, the only opposition coalition to have caused an upset in our presidential history. ADC hopes to be the next APC. Maybe. Maybe not.

Forming a coalition does not necessarily guarantee victory. Opposition parties have always tried to come together to enhance their electoral chances against the dominant, favoured or ruling party. They do this under different arrangements, mostly through alliances and mass migrations but sometimes through mergers. The arrangements sometimes hold but most times do not. The only time we didn’t see the move for a coalition of opposition parties was at a time when there was no need for such: during the stillborn Third Republic when the military decreed two political parties.

At the dawn of the current republic in 1999, the Alliance for Democracy (AD) and the All People’s Party (APP) worked out a quaint arrangement to pose a credible challenge to the favoured Peoples Democratic Party (PDP). Chief Olu Falae, AD’s candidate, flew the flag of APP and had Alhaji Umaru Shinkafi of APP as running mate. Two parties banded against one, but the alliance still fell short. In the presidential poll, PDP secured victory in 27 states plus FCT, leaving the AD-APP alliance with only nine states (though the two parties had won the governorship elections in 14 states earlier—eight by APP and six by AD). So, while having a coalition is a necessary first step when up against a formidable candidate, it is neither enough nor the end goal. The end goal is having a winning coalition.

(As a quick aside, what we are witnessing is a potential battle of coalitions on both sides—the opposition banding together and the ruling party enhancing its size by swallowing the opposition. In this my coalition-is-bigger-than-yours face-off, both sides are angling and hoping for a winning coalition. There are those who contend that the election will be decided by the people not the politicians. True. But what this hopeful contention misses is that there is a reason our politicians put a lot of store on political structures: they are, until tested and overturned, the surest path to assembling a winning coalition.)

The opposition parties have some hurdles to scale to turn their emerging coalition into a winning coalition. The first hurdle is ensuring that the coalition does not fracture. It is an open secret that at least two of those holding the talks are priming to run for presidency: Alhaji Atiku Abubakar and Mr. Peter Obi. Will either of them stay in the coalition if he does not or stand a chance of emerging or if he does not emerge as the presidential flagbearer? If whoever loses out opts to run on the platform of another party, then we are back to a three-way horserace which is likely to advantage the incumbent.

It has been mooted that the two could run together in the coalition party, as they did in 2019, with Atiku as the candidate and Obi as the running mate. This is an interesting proposition, underlaid with two assumptions. One, that Obi has an incentive to run as someone’s running mate. And two, that if he agrees to subsuming his interest in running at the top of the ticket, both personalities would retain the votes they secured separately in the 2023 presidential polls. Politics, Nigerian politics, does not necessarily yield to such neat arithmetic. This may be the definition of a non sequitur: assuming that all the northerners who voted for Atiku in 2023 (in heed of the your-own-is-your-own slogan) and the other northerners who currently believe their zones have been sidelined will all line up behind him to do just one term or that the bloc votes that Obi received as the candidate of the Labour Party (LP) in 2023 will be transferred to a ticket on which he is a running mate. But then in politics nothing is impossible.    

The next hurdle for the coalition will be how it handles the unwritten agreement about the rotation of power between the north and the south. In this wise, the coalition’s best shot will be to present a southerner who can do only one term so that the south can complete its two terms and the presidency returns to the north in the next electoral cycle. One approach will be to zone the presidency of the coalition to the south and ensure that the eventual candidate signs a public undertaking. But this is not likely to work, as it will always be difficult to stop an incumbent president from seeking for re-election. The other option is to go for a southerner who can serve only four years because he is term-barred. That naturally leads to President Jonathan. Though Jonathan has been speaking in proverbs lately, but it is doubtful that he has the stomach to take on an incumbent.

The last hurdle for the coalition will be selling itself creditably. It is not enough to assume that Nigerians all want Tinubu out or that they would vote for anyone but the incumbent. It is also not enough to assume that having all those who ran against Tinubu in 2023 in the same tent would automatically translate to an aggregation of the opposition votes of 2023 in 2027. Elections, our elections, do not lend themselves to such neat or automatic aggregation.  Equally, it is not enough to think the only way Tinubu can win is to steal or buy the votes.

They have to make a compelling case about what they stand for, not just who they stand against. That case would not be made by just railing against the incumbent or threatening regional veto or going on ad nauseum about the supposed death of democracy or the danger of a one-party state. Neither will that case be made by claiming a faux sainthood or by coming across as just a coalition of the disgruntled and the displaced who want to use Nigerians to exact a revenge for them. They need to differentiate themselves by showing that they have an alternative vision of politics, that they are offering a different approach to governance and they are likely to do things remarkably differently in the same circumstances. And the task of differentiation will be harder if the hardship in the land begins to ease. There might be a sizeable number of Nigerians ready to give Tinubu another chance or just be willing to wait out another four years instead of betting on another person.

These are not insurmountable hurdles. More than what the incumbent does, how the opposition handles these hurdles will go a long way to determine whether a second upset is probable or a coronation is inevitable. This doesn’t mean Tinubu is a passive player or that he would surrender all the cards to the opposition. It also does not mean that Tinubu is home and dry, even with all the showy endorsements and the cards stacked against the opposition. He has a lot of work to do to stand a credible chance himself. Incumbency, as he will know by now, is not all advantages. It is equally a burden. He has more work to do than welcoming or seducing migrants from the other parties. He still has plenty work to do in the plenty time remaining. But the opposition is in a position to make it easier or harder for him. At this moment, the ball is with the opposition but in its half of the pitch. It can keep the ball, be overpowered to lose it or gift it. We will keep a close eye on this prematurely flagged-off game.

Instead of dissipating energy on how to turn Nigeria into a one-party state, politicians have been told to focus attention on arresting the worsening poverty among Nigerians.

They were also advised to put their energy into containing the security challenges and other problems confronting the country.

These admonitions came from senior lawyers and political scholars who weighed in on the concern about Nigeria becoming a one-party state, noting that as much as it’s not illegal, such a scenario was not feasible.

They argued that the peculiarities and nature of our political class will make a one-party system untenable, adding that the Constitution guarantees freedom of association.

In exclusive interviews with LEADERSHIP Sunday, they, however, expressed concern about the quality of politics in Nigeria, adding that idealism, which ought to drive the political system, is dead.

They blamed the leadership of the National Assembly for condoning the level of defections witnessed at the legislature.

Leaders of opposition parties in the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP) had accused the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) of causing rifts within their folds in order to make Nigeria a one-party state.

This accusation followed mass defections from opposition parties into the ruling APC, largely on the grounds of internal rifts in their previous platforms.

Some media reports indicate that no fewer than 300 opposition figures had dumped the PDP and other platforms for the APC since 2023.

While most of the political migrations have taken place in the federal and state legislature, the collapse of PDP structures into APC in Delta State, led by Governor Sheriff Oborevwori, is the highest profile defection yet.

Akwa Ibom State Governor Umo Eno is expected to join the APC soon, and speculations of more high-profile defections to the ruling party are rife.

However, the APC national chairman, Dr Abdullahi Ganduje’s recent favourable disposition to a one-party state arrangement has earned him some criticism.

President Bola Tinubu, at a recent party event, said one party system was not suitable for a democracy; but in another breath he said more defectors were welcome to the ruling party, arguing that the freedom of association was guaranteed in the constitution.
Nigeria currently runs a multi-party system with 18 registered political parties.

One-Party State Legal But Difficult To Achieve – SANs, Others

Prominent Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Dr. Ahmed Raji, has said the possibility of Nigeria becoming a one-party state is not illegal but may be difficult to achieve.

Raji and other lawyers, who spoke with LEADERSHIP Sunday, said freedom of association for every citizen is guaranteed in the Constitution.

According to them, it is highly welcome if a one-party state brings development to the country.
Raji explained that if someone does not find anything attractive at a party, he is free to move to another one.

He said, “The freedom of association is a key fundamental right recognised under the 1999 constitution. If it is the desire of all Nigerians to be in one party in exercise of their right to associate, so be it.

“It is legal, and in cases where there is only one candidate contesting for a position, the constitution has prescribed a required threshold. Therefore, the scenario is legal and within the contemplation of the Constitution. But is it feasible in our circumstances?

“It may be a bit difficult to achieve in a country like ours having regards to her peculiarities and nature of our political class.

“People have the freedom of association. They can move to another party, if they don’t have anything attractive in other parties.

“The 1999 Constitution already anticipated it. Where you have one candidate, there is a number of votes you must get to be declared winner. It is within the right of the people to associate with any political party of their choice.”

Another senior advocate, Abdul Balogun, who agreed with Raji that Nigeria’s becoming a one-party state may be difficult to achieve, said the political elite should focus on addressing the abject poverty in the land.

“We can’t be talking about the country becoming a one-party state because there is no strong and credible opposition in place.

“Nigerians are crying and dying of hunger, the politicians are not bothered because all they care about is the country becoming a one-party state.”

Similarly, another lawyer, Barrister Oghenovo Otemu, said a one-party state is welcome if it brings about development in the country.

While he noted that defections by politicians do not make the country a one-party state, he said, “Nigeria is not practising a one-party state and even if we are practising a one-party state, it’s not a big deal. China is a one-party state.

“There are people who are in APC who are defecting to other parties. There are people who are in PDP who are also defecting to other parties, so the country is not being turned into a one-party state.”

He blamed Senate President Godswill Akpabio, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Hon Tajudeen Abbas and the leaderships of state assemblies for allowing defected lawmakers to remain in the National Assembly.

He said it was the duty of the leadership of federal and state assemblies to declare the seats of defected lawmakers vacant to fast-track the cases against the defectors in court.

“The way the law is couched, when a lawmaker defects, it is the duty of the Senate President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Speaker, State House of Assembly to declare the seats of such lawmakers vacant.

“Most of the defections are being made to the political party of the presiding officers responsible for declaring the seats vacant.

“If I’m defecting to your side in the National Assembly, for example, I don’t expect you to declare my seat vacant. It will not be politically correct to do so for the presiding officers.”

One-party State Would Require Legislation – Saliu

Meanwhile, the president of the Nigeria Political Scientists Association (NPSA), Prof. Hassan Saliu, has allayed the fear of Nigerians about the country drifting into a one-party state.
He said that a one-party state is a legal attainment, noting that there is no law in place yet to say every Nigerian should belong to the APC.

“If you recall in the past, when we had one-party state in Tanzania and all these places, they came through the legal process. And now there is no law before the National Assembly to say everybody must be in APC. But rather, we are seeing a tendency where one party is increasingly becoming dominant,” Saliu added.

Saliu said the politicians were defecting mainly for personal gains.

“The idealism behind politics, which is for development, is no longer fashionable in Nigeria. Every politician you see looks at his pocket. So, and since every business you put your money into, you expect some profits, therefore politicians keep on dancing around in order to satisfy their personal gain. There is no ideology propelling political activity in Nigeria.

Is there any difference between APC and PDP, or any difference between Labour Party and SDP? In terms of ideology, they seem to look alike.

“I was just reading a post where a member was saying that under the Second Republic, people knew what UPN stood for: free education and free health. NPN stood for housing for all and stuff like that. But now we don’t seem to have any of such tendencies. What you see is that a man can become a PDP man in the evening but tomorrow morning he’s in APC. There is no conversion process,” he said.

Nigeria too sophisticated for one-party rule – Pearse

Former lecturer at the University of Lagos and renowned public affairs analyst Dr Adetokunbo Pearse has described Nigeria’s political system as too sophisticated and dynamic for a one-party system.

The political scientist told LEADERSHIP Sunday that, ‘’All the pronouncements and the shenanigans and the tricks being played by President Bola Tinubu is intended to lead to one-party state; that is what he wants. However, the PDP is a formidable political party[L1] ; that it is not equal to APC does not mean the party is not strong.

‘’If you look at the National Assembly spread, the party has about 40 per cent and APC has about 58 per cent. In the House of Reps where APC has about 198 members, PDP has 108 members; unfortunately, Labour party has only 28 members and New Nigeria People’s Party (NNPP) has one or two members, that is why people think APC is so dominant.”

He said while APC is a strong political party right now, PDP is a very close second and Labour Party a distant third.

Pearse added that while PDP governors and elected members are joining APC, its members are not.

He cited a recent video where former Delta State governor, Senator Patrick Okowa, was booed by his people for joining the APC.

‘’They told Okowa they were not going with him, and they are going to stay in the PDP, and told him if he wants to join APC he should go alone. Some governors and individuals are going to APC, it does not mean members of the PDP are going into APC, let’s get that straight.”

He further said the coalition will also cause defections into their fold when they evolve into a political party.

‘’We can never have a one-party system; this is a very dynamic country, with a lot of people, a lot of contacts, nationally, internationally, a lot of intelligentsia. 2027 is a different ball game.”

He noted that a one-party system will lead to outright dictatorship and “a monopoly, where you don’t have a voice to voice your opinion.”

‘’In every direction it kills the country, that is why we don’t want it. Don’t forget this is a multi-ethnic, multi religious, multi-cultural nation of people. For us to have one party, it is going to lead to disaster,” he said.

One-party system fear not real – Dr Tavershima

Weighing in on the subject, a lecturer in the department of political science, Federal University of Kashere, Gombe State, Dr Terna Vincent Tavershima, has stated that the fear of one-party rule is not real.

He said it’s a creation of people who are not comfortable with the movement of political stalwarts from their parties to the major parties.

“We practise a multi-party system in this country and the constitution guarantees everybody the freedom of association and freedom of expression. To that extent, people are allowed to pitch tents with political parties that they feel will guarantee their interests at a material time. The fear of a one-party state is not tenable in Nigeria,” he said.

According to him, for a one-party rule to manifest, it has to be the only registered party like in China, where only one party was formally registered and recognised by the law of a country.

“What people are doing now is defecting to the APC to secure a second term in office, in the case of the governors, senators and House of Representatives members, who feel threatened that they might not get the ticket of their political parties that are housing them for now.”

Ruling party should brace for challenges – Dr Okeke

A political science lecturer at the Nnamdi Azikiwe University Awka, Dr Christian Okeke, also agreed that a one-party state is not feasible in such a complex and heterogeneous entity as Nigeria.

He, however, said there is nothing extraordinary in the present polity that the country has not passed through before.

“My belief is that the next general election will be shaped ultimately and remarkably by several factors that will give the ruling party some sleepless nights regardless of any mass exodus into it.

“To that extent, the goodwill it seems to be enjoying at the moment is something that it should not rejoice over but reflect upon.”

He nonetheless said the most important factor needed in deciding who wins or loses in 2027 is the electoral commission’s neutrality.

“The National Assembly must step in with stringent laws that criminalise electoral offences and guarantee the desired future for our elections. The commission must be forced to become a credible umpire,” Okeke said.

2027 politics has killed governance – Dr Garuba

Political scientist, Dr Dauda Garuba, considers the mass defections as the beginning of some of the dynamics towards the 2027 general election.

Garuba, who is also the director, Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD, West Africa), however said he was concerned that the politics of 2027 started too early and had relegated governance to the background.

“For me, this is the very earliest time since the return of democracy that people started talking of a second term just after one year. Even as I talk, it’s not up to two years of the present administration. I am worried about it due to the fact that governance is not on the table anymore, let alone the citizens in whose interest governance should work,” he said.

Saraki’s reconciliation team races to halt PDP’s bleeding

Meanwhile, the reconciliation committee led by former Senate President Abubakar Bukola Saraki is racing against time to stop the haemorrhaging of PDP members. This comes as the party prepares for the much anticipated National Executive Committee (NEC) meeting on Tuesday.

Saraki team met with Enugu State Governor Peter Mbah on Friday.

The Saraki committee was set up at an expanded meeting of PDP governors, their predecessors, and the party leadership to reconcile clashing interests over the national secretary position so that the party’s much-elusive National Executive Committee (NEC) could hold next Tuesday.

The deputy national secretary, Setonji was asked to act as national secretary, pending the resolution of the matter.

The South East zone had threatened to dump the party if its nominee for the contentious national secretary position was not accepted by the party.

The threat followed insinuations that the Saraki committee had backed the return of Senator Samuel Anyanwu as PDP national secretary, while he was rejected by the PDP leaders in the South East.

Last week, the PDP South East caucus resubmitted Hon Sunday Ude-Okoye’s name for the position, which was zoned to the region.

It was learnt that Saraki’s visit to Governor Mbah was to assuage the concern of South East leaders that the committee had already taken a position which favours Anyanwu’s return.

However, a party source confided in LEADERSHIP Sunday that the intervention of Saraki’s team “might be instrumental to the holding of NEC but not ultimately resolving the large crisis of confidence within the party which revolves around zoning, the next leadership of party, and the expulsion of anti-party elements within its fold.”

Meanwhile, Anyanwu, who enjoys the backing of a bloc loyal to the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) minister, Nyesom Wike, has insisted he remains the PDP national secretary.

LEADERSHIP Sunday learnt that some of his supporters are gearing up to storm the NEC meeting venue, Wadata Plaza, to protest for Anyanwu to be recognised as national secretary.

I’m Not APC Proxy – Damagum

Meanwhile, the acting national chairman of the PDP, Ambassador Iliya Damagum, has dismissed allegations that he is an APC stooge.

Earlier in the year, critics alleged that Damagum secretly met with President Tinubu in London, framing a spin that he failed to address the internal crisis within PDP, which led to its weakened state as a leading opposition ahead of 2027.

But in an interview with BBC Hausa Service aired on Saturday and monitored by our correspondent in Bauchi, Damagum said, “I will never forgive those accusing me of working for APC. I never held a meeting with President Tinubu.”

He emphasised his unflinching loyalty and commitment to the PDP.

“I joined PDP in 1999. I have never defected to any political party since then. If I want to join the APC, I would have done that during Buhari’s tenure but I didn’t,” he insisted.

Commenting on the allegation that his close cordial relationship with FCT minister, Nyesom Wike, reflects his incompetence to lead the party, Damagum said, “They know and have interacted with Wike before I do.”

“My only crime is that I refused to allow his opponents within the party to antagonise him.”

The acting national chairman expressed concern over the rate of defection from the PDP, insisting that the party leadership is working to mend the divisions within its ranks and halt more members from dumping the party.

The Nigerian National Assembly, NASS, has passed for second reading, a bill which seeks to compel registered voters to compulsory cast their votes during elections. The goal of the bill is to bring to an end, low voter turn-out in Nigerian elections. The posture on its face value appears valid because of the total 93.47 million registered voters, in the country, only 24.9 million persons voted in the last presidential and National Assembly elections- a figure which represents a meagre 26.72 percent voter turnout, the lowest since the return to democracy in 1999. It is however interesting to note that our law makers think that coercion rather than voter education is a better approach to the subject. But then, they have made no effort to persuade anyone on it.

I disagree with the legislators because they should have started by convening a public hearing onthe factors that are dissuading voters from participating in voting day events. To move straight to making a law to compel citizens to vote which contradicts the constitutional provisions on freedom of speech, movement and association suggests that our law makers think they can make just any law no matter how obnoxious meaning that they only represent themselves and not the people. Before reviewing the arguments already canvassed by lawyers against the move, I am convinced that the issue at stake is not justabout law.Without any law 34.74 percent of voters participated in the 2019 elections. Why did it drop to 26.72 percent in 2023? Can law alone account it?

Those who claim to represent the people ought to know the basic grievances of the same people without much ado. It is therefore unfortunate that the current legislators think that our people are so docile that as the imperialist did during colonial rule, the average black man needs to be whipped to submission. There are Nigerians who are yet to get their voters card since 2015. If each legislator had gone to INEC to know his constituents who have any such constraint and assisted them to overcome it, such voters would not only have become ambassadors of the need to vote, the action would have reflected what it takes to appropriately represent a people. The same is true of voters whose cards had worn out that have to go through a mountain of administrative bureaucracy to regain a clean card.

Perhaps, the most important administrative issue with our elections is the so-calledlow voter turnout. The real problem everyone is pretending not to see is the existence of a bloated register. In the 70s some experts suggested that the total number of registered voters in Nigeria is less than half of the announced figure. On November 5, 2018, INEC said it had removed over 300,000 names from its voter register. Then, in 2022, INEC chair, Yakubu Mahmood said”nearly 45 per cent of completed registrations nationwide were invalid, rising to as high as 60 per cent or more in some states, and that this infraction happened in all the states of the federation.”This revelation speaks for itself.

With such a figure is it possible for elections not to have a low turn-out against the backdrop of a bloated register? What has INEC done to the call by Auwal Musa Rafsanjani the Chairman, Transition Monitoring Group (TMG) that officials found wanting in the registration of underage persons be sanctioned? If our legislators are truly desirous of resolving the problems of low turn-out, it should have been more concerned with strengthening INEC’sposition on the need to make a law for the establishment of elections offences tribunal that would deter all types of election malpractices. That is the way forward rather than the decision to make a law that compels everyone to vote. To make matters worse, no effort has been made to create a convenient environment for voting. For example, many voters still have to walk long distances to their voting centresto vote.

The role which political leaders have continued to play in fabricating bloated voters register for the nation is most unfortunate. What they do is to target non-existent figures and work towards them. In 2019, in the Northwest alone, women and youth leaders of the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) rose from their meeting to strategize on how to deliver victory to the party in the zone, saying that, they will mobilize 15 million votes for the then President Muhammadu Buhari during the 2019 elections. In 2015, President Goodluck Jonathan’s admirers and ministers went from one stadium to another in different parts of the country counting the number of votes their members would cast. In both cases, the estimated figures of votes were higher than the number of voters in the INEC register. Why will we not have low voter turn out when the bench mark is fictitious? 

If we leave the issue of logic to law, there are more dissenting and articulate voices. First, is the Nigerian Bar Association which has come out forcefully against the proposed bill seeking to amend the Electoral Act 2022 to make voting compulsory for all eligible Nigerians. In a strongly-worded statement, NBA President Mazi Afam Osigwe, SAN, described the bill which prescribes fines of up to N100.000 or jail terms for citizens who fail to vote as “an unconstitutional affront to civil liberties”warning that the move violates constitutional freedoms and undermines democracy.According to Osigwe democracy is not sustained by coercion, rather it “thrives on consent, participation, and trust. The moment citizens are forced to vote under the threat of imprisonment, the entire essence of free and fair elections collapses.”

On his part, human rights activist, Femi Falana SAN argued that the proposed amendment was “an unnecessary and dangerous distraction” from the real challenges facing Nigeria’s democracy. Falana argues that compulsory voting is not enough adding that criminalizing voter abstention violates fundamental human rights and misdiagnoses the problem of electoral apathy. He therefore called on the law makers to desist from fixing democracy by criminalizing dissent or forcing participation through fear of punishment. What the lawyers have said makes a lot of sense because if the real issue of voter apathy is to be pursued, government needs to examine why people are not voting.Instead of penalizing non-voters, government should address the root causes of voter apathy, including electoral violence, vote-buying, and weak electoral institutions.

We must begin from the basics of mass mobilization which indicates that citizen engagement must be inspired. It can’t be forced. The revamped National Orientation Agency NOA which has an office in every local government area should be commissioned to deploy its weekly mood of the nation report towards the identification of issues raised by the people on what voting means to them. NOA being an agency mandated to deal with citizen engagement should then proceed to design relevant strategies for value reorientation to tackle observed complaints. When it comes to electoral violence, NOA should get the buy-in of the law enforcement agencies on how the people can be enlightened on new approaches to the subject.

The question of the autonomy of the election management board is a major one. For some time now, it has become an open secret that the ruling party nominates its members to serve at the Independent National Electoral Commission as election managers especially resident electoral commissioners. Apart from the fact that it is illogical for a member of the competing teams in a game to serve as referee, it also offends our constitution which states that INEC officials must not have been involved in partisanship. Why those appointing their party members cannot see the futility of the act is shocking. During its days in power, the Peoples Democratic Party PDP did same but listened to public opinion and recalled such politicians from office. APC does not seem to be persuaded on that.

The controversial bill which is the subject of today’s article is particularly significant because it is sponsored by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Abbas Tajudeen. It is important to appeal to him as a leader not to allow himself to be remembered as one who introduced coercive laws into Nigeria’s democracy. With his strong academic background as the first doctorate degree holder to be elected to the office of Speaker, he has every opportunity to write his name in gold; a feat that cannot be achieved if he remains associated with authoritarianism. There is no better time than now to bow to public opinion and drop the detestable compulsory voting law in a country where democracy is yet to be institutionalized. 

“Telling the truth and accepting the truth has been our major problem in Nigeria. Some people will never tell you the truth when you are in power; and honestly, many of us in power also do not want to hear the truth” – Professor Babagana Zulum, Governor of Borno State, 2021.

Insecurity has been politicised for too long for our own good.

Borno was under the Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, when Boko Haram first intruded on our national life. So, the Yar’Adua/Jonathan governments treated it with kid gloves until the kidnap of all the girls in a school in Chibok opened our eyes, as well as those of the world, to the extent of the problem.

The problem has remained intractable till today.

The change from PDP to the All Progressives Congress, APC, in 2015, has actually made the situation worse for everyone in Nigeria.

Buhari relied more on denial, falsehood and propaganda rather than any serious effort to check the menace.

His spokesmen frequently informed us about how Boko Haram had been decimated – invariably contrary to the evidence.

The situation with official reports has not improved much even now.

Meanwhile, it is becoming increasingly clear that insecurity, at least in Borno State, is a lot worse than what Nigerians had been led to believe.

A few reports will help.

‘Boko Haram raids 2 military formations in Borno, kills 5 soldiers, injures 6.’

‘Soldiers flee after Boko Haram raid on Borno base…’

‘How B/Haram killed 90 farmers in Borno in 5 months’ – Recent reports, May, 2025.

There was an attack on May 12, 2025, on the 153 Task Force Battalion in Marte LGA.

During that engagement, insurgents killed and captured Nigerian soldiers, looted the armoury and destroyed what they could not carry away.

Earlier in May, an attack on the 27 Task Force Brigade, located at Buni Yadi, also led to the killing of soldiers and destruction of military assets.

In what might appear like an alliance of forces, Boko Haram and ISWAP forces have been reported by survivors of carrying out joint attacks.

From all indications, it would appear that the area around Lake Chad had been effectively captured by insurgents who have blown up bridges and planted explosives on highways to prevent the Nigerian Army from mounting any counter-offensive at the moment.

ARMY’S RESPONSE NOT REASSURING

“We have no choice but to contain insecurity, but, if we don’t, at some point, we may not have a country to live in” – Chief of Army Staff, General Oluyede.

Apart from stating the obvious, the COAS had made an earlier revelation in which he talked about “fire from the Sahel region [which] will consume Nigeria – if urgent steps are not taken.” Who will or should take the urgent steps was left unsaid.

For that matter, the steps need to be taken were not also mentioned.

But, the Defence Headquarters had declared that the mayhem in Plateau and Benue states are being perpetrated by foreign Fulani herdsmen.

The Minister of Defence, Mohammed Badaru, had been deflecting widespread perception that insurgents now possess superior fire power than Nigerian forces – in a clear demonstration that those who hold the keys to our ultimate survival don’t want to hear the truth. Several retired officers have pointed out the technological gap.

“We are living in a world of high tech warfare”, said one of them while implying that the Nigerian forces might be lagging behind insurgents – irrespective of whether they are foreigners or home-grown.

One concerning matter that the FG, the armed forces, the National Security Adviser and the National Assembly had ignored is the fate of the 300, 000, or was it 30,000, repentant Boko Haram killers Governor Zulum unilaterally returned to their homes – or so he claimed.

GOV ZULUM CONNECTION IN NEW ASSAULT ON BORNO

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions” – Saint Bernard of Clairvaux, Cistercian Abbot in the 12th century. Because Zulum might not want to hear the truth, this article is directed at the officers and entities which can hold him responsible for the total breakdown of security which has occurred in Borno State. The governor has, in the recent past, announced the release of 300,000 (or 30,000) “repentant” Boko Haram terrorists as one of his outstanding achievements in office in the last six years.

Nobody in Nigerian history has ever admitted to undermining the security of the entire nation to that extent before; and, remarkably, neither President Buhari nor President Tinubu had ever addressed the issues raised by this terrifying admission.

Zulum should have been stopped before he had done the damage now unfolding.

From information available to me, he is not a professor on any subject relating to warfare, armed forces strategic studies, insurgents or treatment of captured enemy soldiers or those who surrendered.

Obviously, he had never heard that deception is part of war – symbolised by The Trojan Horse.

He certainly has not read that “every time you negotiate with a terrorist, you become their accomplice” (VANGUARD BOOK OF QUOTATIONS, VBQ, p 244). Perhaps, if he had asked somebody to conduct the slightest research on terror and appeasement, he might have come across a statement by one of the greatest terrorists in history, Adolf Hitler, 1899-1945, who declared, “You don’t fight terror with appeasement; you fight terror with terror.”  

If Zulum had read all those statements, and considered them, he would not have embarked on his mission to unilaterally proclaim 300, 000 (or 30, 000) hardened killers “repentant” – for several reasons.

A battalion consists of up to 1, 000 soldiers.

So, Zulum, in effect, released 300 (or 30) battalions of battle-tested and battle-hardened soldiers into the community; without the slightest assurance that they would not regroup; become informants to their colleagues still in active service; and, above all, actively undermine the efforts of security forces – including vigilantes and military intelligence staff in mufti.

Even if only 15, 000 of those ill-advisedly released by Zulum became turn coats, that still means that 15 battalions of the most dangerous people on earth have been unleashed, not only on Borno State, but on Nigeria as a whole.

Is there any wonder why Borno and adjourning states are on fire?

Zulum calls for fasting to end insecurity – VANGUARD, May 18, 2025

Readers of Sunday VANGUARD, last week, might have read the report on page 5, about Governor Zulum asking for prayers to end insecurity in Borno State in particular and Nigeria in general.

The report would have qualified to receive the Joke of the Year award – if it was not tragic and cynical.

Over 180 million Nigerians, including millions in Borno State, are already starving and badly malnourished, so much so that Nigeria now holds the title for malnourished children in Africa – ahead of war torn Sudan.

Are those walking skeletons and corpses supposed to fast also in order to end the insecurity started and promoted by bigwigs who have weaponised religion for private gain? Why not simply ask them to commit mass suicide like lemmings? 

More to the point, how many of the elite will fast; and what will be the penalty if they don’t?

Where is the proof that fasting will end insecurity?

Where has it ever brought it to an end – when 30 or 300 battalions of hardened criminals have been let loose by the state’s Chief Security Officer?

The call is akin to a man who set his father’s house in the desert on fire and who then asked the community to fast and pray for rain!!! As Queen Victoria would say after listening to some court jesters, “We are not amused.” 

CONSEQUENCES OF ZULUM’S AMNESTY

“Wisdom in people consists in the anticipation of consequences” – Norman Cousins, 1915-1990.

Having helped Boko Haram to plant battalions in every community in Borno State, Professor Zulum, intelligent but not wise, had a message for the FG. ‘Zulum begs FG not to allow Marte fall’ – (VANGUARD, May19, 2025).

One simple question which Zulum must answer is this: What would he expect the repentant Boko Haram hoodlums released to Marte do now that their former colleagues have invaded the place?

Certainly, they would find it difficult not to rejoin them – especially when reports indicate that some soldiers have deserted their duty posts in Marte.

And, they will rejoin with latest information about the security infrastructure mounted to protect the place.

WAY FORWARD – ADVICE TO FG

“Sometimes taking a step backwards might be the best way forward”. 

That was the observation of a US military commander during the Second World War.

President Tinubu, the National Security Adviser, Chiefs of Staff of Army and Air Force, the Inspector General of Police and the Director-General, DSS, should invite Zulum and ask him to do two things.

One, produce the list of the people he granted unilateral amnesty.

Two, locate them; so everybody can verify if they remain repentant.

Chances are, more than half of them would have vanished.

What are they doing now?

Many are probably back in Boko Haram ranks. 

Tinubu hasn’t done half of his term. But he already thinks he is entitled to a second and perhaps more terms. The obsequious lackeys he has surrounded himself won’t let him catch a moment for sober reflection,  a glimpse of reality. They seem bent on making him the Oba of Nigeria, unaccountable to no one but his whims and caprices. They are gradually conscripting the entire political class into the Tinubu bandwagon. And emboldened by the relentless flattery, Tinubu is now unfurling his disdain for democracy. 

Tinubu had promised a trillion-dollar economy. He has done nothing to give the people a stable power supply and resuscitate dying industries. Rural farmers have been conveniently sidelined. The food security program, it appears, has been outsourced to India and others. The government now proudly talks about food importation like it requires some genius. Tinubu had promised surplus agbado and told the masses to reject him if he didn’t provide power in his first term. But halfway into that term, Tinubu is no longer bothered about how the masses feel. He listens to his fawning aides and grovelling political hustlers in the corridors of power. His preoccupation is political conquests. Tinubu is not troubled by the perception of naked presumptuous. Politicians do not like to make people feel they are being taken for granted. Not Tinubu. He is perhaps too astute a politician to be hindered by mere optics and conventions. Since he controls many instruments of coercion and persuasion, once he wins or forces all the politicians over to his side, nothing else will matter. 

The last time a president tried to win an election by being the sole candidate was in 1998. Abacha, the military dictator, had formed five parties. The leadership of all the parties were programmed, prodded or paid to project Abacha as a messiah. Before Abacha died, all five parties had adopted him as their presidential candidate. All genuine potential presidential contenders were either in exile, hiding or in utter prohibitive contempt of Abacha’s Charade.  

Ironically, Tinubu of NADECO is now being compared to Abacha, who was once touted as the very anti-Christ of democracy. Tinubu has barely completed half of his first term. Still, the governors of the major opposition parties, mimicking Daniel Kanu, the very emblem of youthful political opportunism and savage obsequiousness of the Abacha years, are earnestly yearning for Tinubu. Unlike the Abacha ecumenical worshipers, these 2025 senior yesmen are willing not just to organise million-man marches on the streets of Uyo, Asaba, Portharcourt and Enugu, but they are also dismantling the main opposition parties and carrying the beams to Tinubu. 

Perhaps, Abacha was more mindful of the ugly appearance of a one-party dominant system. So, he created a farcical multiparty system, which Bola Ige termed the five fingers of a leprous hand, to prosecute his transition to a life presidency. On his part, Tinubu, who was in the opposition for 15 of the 26 years of the current multiparty democratic dispensation perhaps prefers a clenched fist.  In less than two years of his assumption of power,  major opposition figures and elder statesmen have blamed him for masterminding a slow and steady liquidation of the opposition parties to instigate a deluge into the ruling party to create a one-party dominant state. 

At the recent summit of the ruling party, the senate president called on lawmakers from all parties to join hands with the lawmakers from the ruling party to install Tinubu as the only presidential candidate for the country. He said Tinubu had overachieved. Akpabio’s flippancy is remarkable. Many political observers think he clowns a bit too much. However, that brazen call in May 2025 to make Tinubu the sole candidate for the presidential election in 2027 was not another act of buffoonery. It is perhaps the denouement of the clandestine democracy destabilization plot to which the opposition has alluded. Moles, they said, had been used to seed and nurture intractable crises in the opposition parties to make them unviable platforms. The law enforcement, they argue, is being used to intimidate and coerce the dispirited opposition to seek refuge at the president’s feet. And possibly what is left of the opposition will be dragged by the herd effect, greed and cowardice into the president’s temple. Now, Akpabio has cleared all the doubts. 

The desperation to make Tinubu the Oba of Nigeria and make any future presidential election redundant has exposed many politicians and institutions to ridicule. But our constitution and laws are also bearing the brunt. Electoral campaigns are subject to strict regulations. It’s irresponsible to start another bout of campaigns so early in a term. Starting campaigns for the 2027 elections in 2025 is illegal. But Tinubu is above the law. His posters decorate the major highways in Abuja. He alone can paste campaign posters now. Perhaps he isn’t just above the law; he is now too important, too indispensable to be subjected to electoral laws. In the fullness of time, he might become the law. The defecting legislators know the law. Their seats ought to have been declared vacant. However, the architects of the Tinubu Forever  Project understood their mission and did their spade work before dawn. The Supreme Court in an awkward interpretation of the law on defection in February 2025,  decided that courts could no longer remedy a deliberate refusal by the head of any legislature to obey the law and declare the seat of defecting lawmaker vacant. In effect, the law on defection now has to be rewritten to cure the intended mischief. When the Supreme Court determines the case filed by eleven states against  Tinubu, who on a whim suspended democracy in Rivers State, we might discover if section 305 of the constitution also has to be rewritten. 

But rewriting laws only yields benefits where there is a virile opposition, strong institutions, independent judiciary, legislative checks and balances, and good faith. If the National Assembly is now a department in the presidency, the lawmakers will only rewrite ambiguous laws to make them less ambiguous and make the president more powerful or make the laws more ambiguous to allow the president room for greater arbitrariness.

Tinubu knows this country needs a virile opposition. He knows his focus on political conquests rather than transformative leadership that nurtures freedom and protects the opposition will hinder the country in the long run. But it appears Tinubu is negligent of history and unmindful of posterity. The gloating man servants in the Tinubu temple won’t remember a certain  Daniel Kanu. Tinubu wants to become a  Mandela by behaving like Adedibu. Without a virile and competent opposition, Tinubu will invariably become a despot. And when he becomes one, many senior members of the Tinubu Forever Choir will go into exile. Because absolute power doesn’t just corrupt, it breeds rampant paranoia. 

A compulsory voting bill is said to have passed the second reading stage at the National Assembly. The aim of the bill is to compel every Nigerian of voting age to vote during elections; failure of which punitive measures would be taken against violators. The youths form the majority of Nigeria's population and, tell me, how many of these GenZ or Alpha generations are interested in voting - even in the country itself! As per the Electoral Act 2010, the voting age in Nigeria is 18 years. So, the "catchment area" of the proposed law, so to say, are the youths. Get ready, then, for #ENDCOMPULSORYVOTINGNOW campaign, probably in the same fashion as #ENDSARSNOW campaign!

If the bill becomes law - though its journey in that regard is still long and tortuous - anyone of voting age who fails or refuses to vote will be liable to whatever penalty is stipulated by the law. Elementary Civics describes voting as a civic responsibility or duty which a good, responsible, and responsive citizen is expected to discharge enthusiastically and without compulsion. That being the case, why do we need a law to compel observance? Some will argue that this is because not all citizens are good and not all are aware of the importance of their discharging this onerous responsibility, especially in a country where illiteracy is rife and political education is low.

There are other reasons why citizens may consciously - and as a deliberate political action - choose not to vote. Indeed, political apathy, rather than being apolitical, may, in fact, qualify as one of the highest and most informed forms of political action. We shall soon return to this.

The reason why a compulsory voting bill may be tenable these days is because we operate what is known as universal adult suffrage; meaning that everyone - male or female, serf or freeborn, wise or foolish- has the vote. It was not so in times past. Through the ages nobility, property rights, gender, nationality, residency, age, tax and income requirements, educational qualifications, among others, were the qualifications that determined who possessed the rights to vote and be voted for. In Nigeria, for example, while women in the south gained voting rights in 1954, their northern counterparts did not gain theirs until the Second Republic in 1979.

The current struggle is for the Diaspora Nigerians to be able to vote, a right long enjoyed by over 110 countries, not less than 23 of them being African. It is an embarrassment that the self-proclaimed “Giant of Africa” is yet to attain this milestone. Extending the vote to Nigerians in the Diaspora appears a more feasible project than the wild goose chase of compelling Nigerians of voting age to vote, willy-nilly. How many millions of such Nigerians do we know exist? And how do we enforce the law? If we have found it practically impossible to enforce the law against election malpractice - selling and buying of votes, election rigging and thuggery, falsification of election results, etc - which usually involve a lesser number of people who can be easily identified and apprehended, how do we go about arresting and penalying people who can simply stay in the comfort of their homes and shun the voting centres?

All over the world, it is not everyone who registers to vote in an election that turns out to vote. And this, if you may care to know, is in exercise of their fundamental human rights of freedom of movement (to go or not go to a polling station) as well as freedom of association (to associate or not associate with a political party or group)! The level of voter participation on election day varies from place to place.

Voter participation is a barometer employed to gauge the health of the political system. The higher the level of voter participation, the healthier the country’s political system and vice-versa. Where voter turnout is massive and a candidate in an election polls a commanding number of votes, he/she is said to be popular and his/her government is likely to enjoy the support and confidence of the people.

The popularity of candidates in an election and or of governments is, however, not static. A popular candidate or government today may become unpopular tomorrow or over time. In the case of former United States President Joe Biden, his health issues, which came stubbornly to the fore during his lacklustre debate performance against then challender Donald Trump, caused his popularity rating to dip abysmally, prompting him to eventually quit the presidential race.

On the other hand Trump, whose popularity soared, leading him to win the election with a landslide, had since seen his popularity rating drop as a result of controversial policies that have alienated a chunk of his support base. In Nigeria, former President Muhammadu Buhari rode into the presidency on the crest of huge popularity but left as one of the most derided Nigerian leaders ever, as a result of incompetent and ineffective leadership.

So many factors account for political apathy; such that law alone cannot cure the malaise. Let us now take a look at the various segments of eligible voters who do not vote: the first set are the ignorant. These ones do not know that it is their duty or right to vote. They do not also know the advantages involved and the grave dangers to themselves and the polity of their indifference. Literacy and political education, not law, is what this group of eligible voters need.

The second set are those who are willing to vote but circumstances beyond their control, such as insecurity and economic hardship, constrain them. What this group needs is not a law compelling them but policies that will remove the roadblocks on their way to the polling station.

The third set are those who want to vote but the bureaucracy, rep-tape and corruption of INEC and other agencies involved in the electoral process would not let them. They registered but could not collect their Permanent Voter’s Card. Getting to the polling station, the card reader or whatever would not let them cast their vote. What is needed here, again, is not a law compelling voting but for the authorities concerned to organise a seamless electoral process.

Another group of voters who keep a safe distance from the polling station are those who fear for their life because of the activities of political thugs who constitute themselves into laws unto themselves. Most of the time, even the presence of law enforcement agents does not deter those roughnecks and their sponsors.

Do votes count in Nigeria? There are lots of Nigerians who believe that going to vote is a waste of precious time and energy. Elections are mindlessly rigged. Results are falsified. The winners as well as losers are known well before votes are cast. And the voter is powerless - from the polling booth right to the highest court of the land. So, why waste your time - and risk your life - for nothing? Will the compulsory voting law excise that cancer?

From experience, many Nigerians have come to the conclusion that all the politicians are the same - liars, pretenders, looters, wicked and selfish people - who are going into office to feather their own nests and not serve the interest of the people. So, why help them; why give them the stamp of legitimacy of saying they were elected into office?

There is another group who does not believe in the political system in operation. This group wants a return to the parliamentary system of government. To them, the present presidential system is too expensive, too wasteful, and too brazenly corrupt: Change it or else they wont come out to vote!

Another group of Nigerians believe that what the country needs before any election is restructuring. Without that, they believe you are only putting the cart before the horse.

Of course, then, there are Nigerians who have lost all confidence in Nigeria as a country. They want the country dismembered. Their battle cry is: To your tents, O Israel! The Biafrans want Biafra. The Yoruba want Oodua or Yoruba Nation, etc. No law promulgated by the National Assembly will move those ones to line up to vote for what they derogatorily call the Lugardian (ill-fated) experiment (which, as far as they are concerned, expired in 2014, the 100th anniversary of Frederick Lugard's amalgamation of southern and northern British protectorates ofNigeria).

Finally, the proponents of the proposed compulsory voting law appear to erroneously think that voter apathy is non-voting; it is not! Voter apathy is one of the many options available to eligible voters: they can decide to vote for this or that party or candidate. They can get to the polling booth - in the event that they are forced to - and void their vote. They can also stay clear of the polling booth and the entire political process - in which case they are voting against the system as a whole. Each and every one of these voting options have far-reaching political implications.

While the intentions of the promoters of the compulsory voting law may be altruistic, their one-medicine-cures-all proposition will fall flat on its face on the field of play, even if it scales through in the hallowed chambers of the National Assembly and the President assents to it.

FEEDBACK

JAMB: They want to kill CBT before it reaches SSCE!

Let’s not play dumb! Just a few days after the Minister of Education went on air to announce that WAEC and NECO will go CBT by November, JAMB, the poster child of successful CBT exams in Africa, suddenly had its biggest technical failure in over a decade. Call it coincidence. I call it coordinated. Because what you just witnessed might not be a crash. It might be a warning!

Let’s break it down: The Minister announced CBT expansion and the system failed immediately after! The Education Minister said it clearly: “JAMB conducts its exams using a computer-based testing system. They’ve implemented strong security measures and, as a result, fraud or cheating has been nearly eliminated.” Translation? No more miracle centers. No more leaked question papers. No more impersonation networks. No more “special arrangements.” It was a bold move toward sanitizing Nigeria’s broken education system.

But barely a week later: JAMB goes dark. System failure. National headlines. Mass panic. The very exam body they were using as a reference point publicly collapsed! Too perfect. Too fast. Too suspicious. Miracle centers are not ready to die. Understand this: Exam malpractice is not just cheating. It’s an economy. An entire shadowy industry is built around it.

Now imagine NECO and WAEC switching to CBT: You just killed a billion-naira black market! Do you really think they’ll sit and clap? No. They’ll sabotage the blueprint—before it scales through. And JAMB was the target. So what’s the fastest way to stop the government from replicating JAMB’s model? Make JAMB look unreliable.

Let’s not be naïve... There are powerful people whose entire revenue streams depend on keeping education corrupt. They will fight reforms like their life depends on it. Because, for many of them, their life does, in fact, depend on it. - O. M. O. Oludoye.

It was quite a show at the Oval office in the White House a few days ago when South African President Cyril Ramaphosa met with American President Donald J. Trump to discuss bilateral issues and world affairs. 

It began with Trump's unsubstantiated and frankly asinine allegation that the white Boers of South Africa are being subjected to mass murder, ethnic cleansing and genocide. 

This is not only false but also painfully absurd. 

Sadly it did not stop there. Trump went on to assert that Julius Malema, the inspirational charismatic and colourful M.P. and leader and founder of the South African Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), is a hate-filled black supremacist and racist and a cold-blooded murderer and ruthless terrorist whose intention it is to kill every white person in South Africa. 

Needless to say these allegations are baseless and false. The Americans are attempting to give a dog a bad name in order to hang it. It is nothing but yet another well-crafted but unsubstantiated mendacity. 

Even though Malema is very vocal and highly controversial he does not strike me as a hater of whites but rather as a hater of injustice, oppression, persecution and institutional racism. 

He is a man with a social conscience who speaks for the poor, the weak, the vulnerable and the oppressed and who has constituted himself into a major thorn in the flesh of the political establishment and the ruling elites in South Africa both white and black. 

He is very eloquent, well-informed, well-read and quick off the mark and these qualities, coupled with his obvious courage and strength, make him a formidable adversary which every person of class, rank or privilege in his country has every reason to be wary of. 

He also speaks a good deal of sense and his passion for truth, justice and equity for the black majority population of South Africa and commitment to the emancipation of the African continent from the forces of imperialism and neo-colonialism cannot be denied. 

To millions of South Africans Malema is a deeply courageous, insightful and profound man and possibly the greatest post-Mandela hero and rising star that their nation has ever known. 

To add to this millions of Africans (including Nigerians and Zimbabweans) who live in South Africa regard him as a loyal and trusted friend who has always spoken up for them and sought to protect them from the rabid xenophobia that most black South Africans suffer from and who has a strong and commendable Nkrumaist Pan-African vision.   

For Trump and his White House to attempt to disparage such a man that brings so much to the table and that has done so much to restore the self-respect and dignity of black South Africans and Africans all over the world simply because he sang an old outdated, pre-independence, apartheied-era, anti-Boer war song at his political party rally is uncharitable and unkind. 

To turn down the lights of the Oval office, watch a film on him on television for four good minutes and make him the centre of discussion at a bilateral meeting between the Presidents of two of the most respected nations on earth only proves the fact that he is no longer only an African phenomenon but also a global brand and a rallying point for blacks from all over the world. 

To that extent Trump has inadvertently elevated his profile rather than diminish it. 

Like in the case of the Biblical Joseph, what Trump meant for evil, God meant for good. 

Yet perhaps the most shameful thing that Trump did on that day was not what he attempted to do to Malema but rather the following. 

He presented a picture to Ramaphosa and his delegation of what was purportedly "1000 white South African graves with white crosses on them of white South African farmers" that were supposedly "dispossessed of their land by black terrorists" and "murdered in cold blood". 

Contrary to the American Presidents assertions it was later confirmed that the picture was NOT of the graves of white farmers in South Africa but rather of a burial ground in a completely different country called Congo! 

One wonders how the President of the most powerful nation on earth could make such an egregious and monumental blunder and indulge in such deceit and doublepeak all in an attempt to humiliate the South African President. 

Sadly it didn't stop there. Trump literally ambushed Ramaphosa, lectured him, bullied him, spoke down to him, accused his Government and people of heinous crimes, kept interrupting him when he attempted to speak, mocked his role as a peacemaker in the Ukraine/Russia conflict and sought to utterly humiliate him. 

To behave in this unacceptable manner and indulge in such mendacious falsehood is below any President let alone the most powerful one in the world. 

I see the hand of Elon Musk, who himself is a South African and who has not hidden his contempt and disdain for the ANC-led South African Government and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanhayu, whose Government has been accused by South Africa of genocide and indeed taken to the International Court of Justice and to the International Criminal Court both at the Hague, in all this.

Both must have thoroughly enjoyed the spectacle! 

Yet the truth is that even if his predominately white right-wing MAGA base in America may have been excited and thrilled by his proverbial lynching and carpeting of a helpless and whimpering black President at the Oval office it has also alienated a lot of black and particularly African Trumpers like yours truly who have always refused to regard Trump as a racist but rather as a man who was specially chosen, prepared, raised and anointed by God to destroy the American Deep State, to terminate the Godless agenda of the globalists, to stop the wars of the world, to put God at the centre of affairs when it comes to politics and governance, to re-establish and re-instill the Christian virtues and values that America was built on, to break the back of the unholy, Luciferean trinity and anti-Christ philosophy of Obama, Clinton and Biden in world affairs and American politics. 

I sincerely hope that we do not end up regretting our support for him but if he continues in this way that support shall undoubtedly dwindle. 

Why do I day this? Consider the following. 

First it was "let us grab Greenland, Canada, Mexico, the Panama Canal, the Suez Canal and rename the Gulf of Persia", then it was "let us turn Gaza into an American Riviera", then it was "let us wage a tariff war against the nations of the world", then it was "let us alienate and abandon our European allies", then it was "let us provoke China", then it was "let us go to the three richest nations in the Middle East and compel their Kings to invest trillions of dollars in America and even give us a new presidentiel jet", then it was "let us bring the little African leader who leads a country with the largest and most properous economy on his continent to the Oval office, humiliate him before the world and bully him into leaving our white brothers in South Africa alone" and the latest is "let us stop foreign students from attending Harvard University because the authorities of that school have refused to bring to an end the pro-Palestinian demonstrations that are taking place on campus".  

These actions are increasingly troubling and whether we have hitherto admired, loved and prayed for Trump or not we cannot support a confirmed bully and racist. That would be ungodly. 

We cannot support a man that finds it difficult to empathise with the suffering of others or that is fast losing his humanity. That would be incorrigible. 

Trump needs to retrace his steps, divest himself of these glaring and obvious symptoms of meglomania, obsessive vanity and extreeme narcissim and get real. 

God did not deliver him from the hands of his enemies and make him President to do this sort of nonsense but rather to make America great again and to make the world a better and safer place. If he fails to do this God will leave him, remove him and replace him with another. 

Back to the episode at the White House. 

Cyril Ramaphosa's responses to the grilling were equally embarrassing and frankly disappointing. 

Most western commentators have described his disposition, body language and reaction as "weak", "cowardly" and "cringeworthy" and I am constrained to concur. 

No President should bow and tremble before another no matter how rich and powerful the latter may be. 

In the African context Nelson Mandela would not have done so and neither would Murtala Mohammed, Olusegun Obasanjo, Jerry Rawlings, Thomas Sankara, Ahmed Ben Bella, Muammar Ghadafi, Patrice Lumumba, Gamal Nasser, Sani Abacha, Ibrahim Babangida, Kwame Nkrumah, Muhammadu Buhari, Robert Mugabe, Samora Machel or Ibrahim Traore. 

This ritual of inviting foreign leaders to the Oval office like King Hussein of Jordan (who literally had to bow and lick Trumps posterior), President Vlodomer Zelensky of Ukraine (who was insulted, rubbished, humiliated and finally thrown out) and now Cyril Ramaphosa (who was forced to watch an embarrassing scene about his country on television) and belittling and denigrating them must stop. 

The humiliation of the South African President particularly was painful for me to watch because of the frightful history of his country and the terrible atrocities and apartheid system that the white Afrikaaner Boers subjected the black Africans to for hundreds of years. 

They went through all that and now they have to suffer this in the hands of yet another white man. 

This same white minority that oppressed and enslaved them in their own land for hundreds of years control 80% of the economy and own 90% of the land in their country today despite the fact that they only constitute 8% of the population. 

These are the people that Trump is claiming are being subjected to genocide and is offering asylum in America. 

These are people that in the main and in the past have regarded black Africans as being "no better than animals". 

These are people that practised apartheid and that described black people as the biblical "hewers of the wood and drawers of the water". 

These are the people that once regarded a black man as being a quarter of a human being and that not only refused to have legal inter racial sex or marriages but compelled black people to live in shanty towns that were little better than concentration camps and subjected them to pass laws much in the sane way as the Israelis are subjecting the Palestinians to such inhumanity and degradation today. 

If a Nigerian leader had been treated like this at the Oval office and I was in the room believe me all hell would have broken loose and Trump, his VP, his Ministers, his team and the American White House Press Corps would not only have got more than they dished out and bargained for but they would have been given a curt history lesson about the past and present atrocities of their nation and a thorough and precise lecture about the matter at hand. 

I am a Trump supporter but in all matters my nation and continent must come first. 

I despise the way he bullied Ramaphosa and I hope and pray that if he or any other foreign leader tries this with any Nigerian leader that I am in the room.

The days of talking down to African Presidents are long over. 

More importantly the days of cowardly, weak, subservient, spineless, grovelling, corrupt, compromised and ignorant African lichspittles and

quislings who call themselves leaders but who lack self-esteem, self-respect and pride in their people and who have no shame or dignity, who are hopelessly compromised, who have no knowledge of world affairs or world history, who are pawns of the neo-colonialists and imperialists and who have sold their soul and destiny of their nation to the western powers are long over. 

This fact can be confirmed by what can best be described as the "Traore spirit" that is blowing into all the nooks and corners of our continent today. 

As much as I love and support Trump his attitude and policy on Africa and Gaza leaves much to be desired. 

He needs to do better and he must understand that the Palestinians and the Africans, though facing challenges, are far more resilient than his people ever were and come from a far older and greater civilisation than his country ever did. 

We may not have their money and power but we have God. 

Their time is now but tomorrow belongs to us. That God that put them up there and established their hegemony and empire shall remember us. 

We too shall rise and at that time all men shall say that the rejected stone has become the corner stone, that the Lord uses the foolish things of this world to confound the wisdom of the wise and that in truth all things are possible with God. 

(Chief Femi Fani-Kayode is the Sadaukin Shinkafi, the Wakilin Doka Potiskum, a former Minister of Aviation and a former Minister of Culture and Tourism)

Mohamed Salah has been voted Premier League player of the season for the second time after inspiring Liverpool’s march to a record-equalling 20th English title.

Salah earned the prize after scoring 28 league goals — five more than anyone else — and producing 18 assists for Liverpool so far this term.

Heading into Sunday’s final game against FA Cup winners Crystal Palace, the 32-year-old Egyptian superstar is two assists off the single-season record held by Thierry Henry and Kevin De Bruyne.

This award is decided after votes from the public are combined with those from a panel of football experts. He also won it in the 2017-18 campaign.

He has broken the run of Manchester City players winning the award for the past four seasons.

Salah’s teammate Virgil van Dijk was the last non-City player to win the award in 2018/19.

Van Dijk — who like Salah signed a new contract with Liverpool earlier in the campaign — was one of the players Salah beat in the voting.

The others were Liverpool midfielder Ryan Gravenberch, Arsenal’s Declan Rice, Nottingham Forest’s Morgan Gibbs-White, Newcastle striker Alexander Isak, Brentford talisman Bryan Mbeumo, and Chris Wood of Nottingham Forest.

Earlier this month, Salah was named the Football Writers’ Association player of the year, securing almost 90 percent of the votes, marking the biggest winning margin this century.

AFP