In the past ten years, the South-East and North-East geopolitical zones, more than other geopolitical zones, have been sites of experiments on insecurity and militia reign. Either terrorists, kidnappers, or militias were testing the will of the government to see how long it would take for a determined state to take charge, or it was just a playground of absurdity. The result is known. Political leadership and the elite failed the people irredeemably. Admittedly, insecurity on a national scale abhors partitioning. The factors at play in a place may owe their origins to factors emanating from a totally different region, but there is good reason to focus on the two zones.

In the two zones, the persistent violence had three distinct features: first, the impunity with which Boko Haram and its affiliates, and unknown gunmen have been allowed to operate; second, the helplessness of the residents; and third, the seeming indifference of the political elite. These defining features fuel existential anger among the people.

Somehow, lately, it appears governors from both regions have found their mojo and courage to rise to the challenge, and that deserves examination and commendation. The source of this new energy and focus is unknown. One thing is clear: the federal government has done its best to redeem the situation, but its best is not good enough. The federal government just did not know how to deal with the situation beyond a military-centric option, and the military deserves commendation for the successes they have recorded so far. Both regions have never been safe places for residents and businesses.

The connection between concrete development and the decimation of militia-led insecurity and related complications has long been established as a theoretical and practical fact. This has been lacking over the years in both regions. Save for a few cases, there has been a substantial disconnect between the people’s development aspirations and the area’s government. Actual development, especially education, helps fight violence, terrorism, and its like. Lately, we have begun to see development programs in a handful of states in both regions, which impacts insecurity in the area.

Besides, the people, too, are beginning to resist the domination of their areas by these non-state actors. Community leaders are now more involved in intelligence gathering. The locals have started organising themselves into quasi-security formations and are beginning to be the first resistance point even before the organised formal security apparatus of the state is involved. This calls for more synergy between the informal and formal security structures and systems in these areas for better operations.

Also, the people’s sensitisation to the fact that these non-state actors purportedly fighting for unknown causes are not doing so for the collective interest of the locals. Instead, the locals in their various communities are the casualties of the needless violence and murderous orgies meted out on them. This new consciousness must be harnessed efficiently to the advantage of the communities. The fight against insecurity is becoming local, and interestingly, the public sphere and media framing the conflicts as banditry and criminality rather than a fight for freedom, self-determination, or religious zealotry is helping matters. I sincerely think that even the perpetrators recognise the impact of this new approach and have turned to symbols of the state for their attacks to legitimise their acts as actions against the state when they are not.

There is a temptation to believe that the insecurity in the northeast and southeast is a scam and a cash cow for interested parties due to its persistence and nature. Additionally, there is a general belief that the security establishment deployed to secure the southeast has found collaboration with criminals and conflict merchants to exploit the separatist agitation. In the northeast, we also find that Sahelian jihadist insurgency had been increased by socioeconomic pressures from the most impoverished states in the nation.

The southeast represents a false agitation for self-determination, whereas the northeast’s insurgency is neither ideological nor religious. Both cases involve ordinary criminals acting as agitators and religious zealots. The criminal colonisation of both regions for an extended period is horrible and disastrous. The political and traditional establishments of both geopolitical zones, led by the governors and National Assembly members, must band together, seek support from wherever possible, and bring this tragedy, which is economically strangulating and socially demoralising, to a stop. Tomorrow is too late.

Recent attacks have shown the ruthlessness of these criminals and demonstrated unequivocally the need for exorcising this evil madness from our communities. A pattern is beginning to emerge: shoot-and-run attacks on soft targets and targeting military/police personnel to instill fear in the people. Unknown gunmen, who were said to have been enforcing the sit-at-home directive of the proscribed Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), on May 21st opened fire on a military checkpoint in Obikabia junction in Aba, killing five soldiers. The response of the state government was decisive. The least we expected from the federal security apparatus was to fish out these culprits and use them to demonstrate the new vigor of fighting criminality posing as agitators. We seem to have lost this opportunity to prove a point. This applies to the recent twin bombing in Gwoza, Borno state.

In Ebonyi state a few weeks ago, gunmen invaded Ishieke Divisional Police Headquarters and started firing sporadic shots. They killed and maimed people, although the report shows that five of the gunmen were killed. Hours before the attack in Ebonyi, gunmen wreaked havoc in Okigwe Local Government Area of Imo State where they killed six people. A few days later, gunmen killed two police operatives and injured two others in Aba, the commercial hub of Abia state. Between 22 and 26 May 2024, a non-state armed group attacked communities in Gujba local government area in Yobe State. The incident displaced 732 households and resulted in three fatalities and 12 injuries. Among the affected were 2,720 children, 1,038 women, and 976 men. These incidences are ongoing, and the casualties are increasing daily. There is a need to quickly optimise the power of collaborative strategy between the federal security apparatus, emerging regional architecture, state governments, and communities.

On the issue of historical injustices, especially in the southeast, unfortunately, the FGN since 2015 has not addressed the grievances; they just looked away. However, the elite of the southeast have realized that there is a need to change their strategy. One of the manifestations of this change in strategy is the resolution by South-East Governors, supported by members of the National Assembly from the zone, to approach the president to release Nnamdi Kanu. Governors of the South-East had earlier resolved to fight insecurity decisively in the region, individually and collectively, in partnership with the federal government of Nigeria and other stakeholders. Though the details of how they intend to fight insecurity are scanty, at least they have found their voice.

As Chief Security Officers of their respective states, governors must demonstrate significant commitment to confronting perpetrators of violence and resolving core causes of insecurity in their states and, by extension, the geopolitical zone. The sign that governors appreciate the enormity of the challenge is there. The next logical step is to confront the monster from its root. The battle is not just kinetic in nature. It is a battle to win the hearts and minds of people, both the perpetrators and their victims. The perpetrators of these heinous crimes are often community members and are known to the local people.

The ideological prism which has held many people hostage to support the call for Islamic militancy or Biafra romanticism resonates with people who are disenchanted or dissatisfied with the existing system. This is rooted in deep-seated anger against a system they feel is holding them hostage and from perceived development. I am sure that when we put good governance and leadership that brings dividends of democracy such as economic and infrastructural development, social justice, and the rule of law, the level of agitation will reduce, and people will have little reason to want to upturn the system.

It is time the states addressed the interconnected concerns such as unemployment, poverty, bad governance, injustices, resource competitiveness, and the development of an inclusive society. Effective governance at the state and grassroots levels is critical to resolving the issue of extreme violence and criminality. Regional cooperation among states and between states and the center is beginning to bear fruit, albeit only in terms of psychological effect and public perception.

We must all work together, irrespective of geopolitical zones, to create a better future for the affected communities, states, and regions. Conflicts have their place in the agitation for change. However, as we see in these and other regions, permanent conflict will only reduce the affected areas to barbarism and put them further away from modernity.

“The parliament is supreme in the United Kingdom; in Nigeria, the president is the supremo before whom nothing existed and after whom nothing will. The heroes of the past didn’t bargain for this when they were fighting for independence for Nigeria and for democracy. We lost it, and it is sad. How easy is it now for our leper to pick up his slipped needle? (The Yoruba say abéré bó l’ówó adétè, ó d’ète). The British gave us a system designed to make it easy for us to live in peace, punish insults and reward good behaviour. They gave us a constitutional arrangement which allowed us to engage and to throw out our husbands when they went mad. We messed it up within five years of independence. In 1979, after 13 years in the wilderness of the military, we went for the most expensive of the systems in the books – presidential democracy. It may have worked in all other places, but, here, it has steadily evolved into a most fiendish monarchy – a kábíyèsí system where the legislature and the judiciary are the king’s phlegm eaters”.

The parliament is supreme in the United Kingdom; in Nigeria, the president is the supremo before whom nothing existed and after whom nothing will. The heroes of the past didn’t bargain for this when they were fighting for independence for Nigeria and for democracy. We lost it, and it is sad. How easy is it now for our leper to pick up his slipped needle? (The Yoruba say abéré bó l’ówó adétè, ó d’ète). The British gave us a system designed to make it easy for us to live in peace, punish insults and reward good behaviour. They gave us a constitutional arrangement which allowed us to engage and to throw out our husbands when they went mad. We messed it up within five years of independence. In 1979, after 13 years in the wilderness of the military, we went for the most expensive of the systems in the books – presidential democracy. It may have worked in all other places, but, here, it has steadily evolved into a most fiendish monarchy – a kábíyèsí system where the legislature and the judiciary are the king’s phlegm eaters.

Number 10, Downing Street has been home to Britain’s prime ministers since 1735 AD. Why would a hugely popular new prime minister move into a 289-year-old mansion without spending good pounds on it to buff it up to today’s taste? Keir Starmer, the new British prime minister, moved into that official residence soon after he was appointed last Friday. There was neither a renovation of the building nor a sanctification of the rooms by clerics and priests. Red candles, white tapers were not lit; neither was turari (incense) assigned a role.

“I’ll teach you differences,” Shakespeare wrote in King Lear. He also wrote about “sweet fool” and “bitter fool” and how they are not the same. Britain used the last election to teach us the difference between good and bad; sanity and madness. The British held their elections on Thursday, declaring neither a public holiday nor a restriction of movements. Schools opened, businesses flourished, votes were cast and counted, results were announced without shots fired and machetes wielded. There was no election tribunal, no lawyer to hire and no judge to bribe. Those who lost simply agreed they lost, offered thanks for past favours and apologies for failing their people. Wearing regrets as lapels, the defeated went quietly into the night counting their loss under the dim light of their mourning moon.

You would think that the British who always hailed the way we elected our leaders would copy our ways. This past weekend, the teacher didn’t do the nonsense they taught their students. Their dog refused to follow our monkey to do what locusts do to grain farms. They chose those they wanted as leaders without our usual fireworks and water cannons. For the winner, it was straight from the polling booth to the Government House; there was no interlude, no respite, no recess. There was even no transition committee; neither was there a budget for new furniture and new cars for the prime minister’s family. The Prime Minister took over almost immediately after the sun set for the man whose party lost in spectacular detail. Ministers were appointed the same day and portfolios assigned them on the spot, leaving us to wonder why the haste. We didn’t hear of the parliament grilling the appointees and asking them to sing ‘God save the King’ – their national anthem. Was the head of government even sworn in? Who did?

There is nothing they do in the husband’s bedroom that does not happen in the concubine’s bedchamber. We have rats here that eat vital documents and get presidents sick. The British have over there too. But the PM’s residence in London has a simple solution to the problem: a mouser, a celebrity cat is in firm control of the rodent issues there. The cat’s name is Larry; for the past 13 years, it has been helping heads of government in that country to fix what our cowardly presidents run away from here. We’ve not heard that Labour’s Starmer aims at sacking the cat from the residence because the conservatives took it there.

Since his appointment on Friday last week, Starmer, with his family, has settled in properly in 10 Downing Street.

Our own President Muhammadu Buhari moved into our Presidential Villa late in June 2015 – three weeks after he was sworn in. The old man needed to be sure that the residence was properly fumigated of the sacked party and be rid of rodents and cockroaches – visible and invisible. Despite all his carefulness, impudent rats still ran the ramrod General out of the building and out of the country. He was away in London for months suffering from what could be anything. He came back and, again, got run out of the office part of the building by the same rats. We forget things here. Seven years ago (August 2017), one of Buhari’s spokespersons announced (with uncommon sensation) that rodents had damaged furniture and air conditioning fittings in the president’s “official” office while he was in London receiving treatment. The gentleman said our leader wouldn’t, therefore, be seen working in the president’s office until the damage was undone. And that was it. The big boss stayed off work until the rats accepted his sacrifice and said he should come in.

In his own case, President Bola Tinubu has been more attentive to details. The Yoruba man is well acquainted with the functional relationship between the rolling eyes of the crab and its delicate head. He was sworn in on May 29, 2023, made a rash of careless policy pronouncements but was careful about where he would be accommodated. Unlike Starmer who rushed into the PM’s mansion like a hungry cat, Tinubu rushed nothing and overlooked nothing. Sixty-three days after he took over power, a reluctant Tinubu gingerly detoured into a villa building called the Glass House on Sunday, July 31, 2023. It was there he hibernated until the main residence begged him to come and occupy it. Perhaps because he is the Capone, we have not heard stories about ratty encounters in the nation’s most secure edifice.

In his inaugural speech, Starmer spoke of “the gap between the sacrifices made by the people” and “the service they receive from politicians.” He said when this grew “big,” the heart of the nation became infested with “weariness”. He spoke about that and about the “draining away of the hope, the spirit, the belief in a better future.” That is today’s Nigeria. To hope here is to be stupid – if not downright silly. Starmer could be speaking about this Nigeria where those who preach sacrifice overeat and belch, and the people hunger and yawn.

‘Equal distribution of pain’ is the title of a piece written by good old Nosa Igiebor in the January 13, 1986 issue of Newswatch magazine. It was his panting analysis of the 1986 budget of this country which required “Nigerians to live with less of everything.” Today is a degeneration of what was bad with us yesterday. Here, now, we not only roll in the mud of a regime of unequal distribution of pain; we are daily left to live with less of nothing.

A very senior professor sent to me a text two weeks ago: “Olagunju, I was granted permanent residency in the US in 2017. I have not taken it up. Most of my friends and colleagues believe I’m stupid. I keep hoping against hope that things cannot get worse here. I had my first offer of appointment after PhD in the UK in 1988. I declined because I didn’t apply. My supervisor was asked to source for a good candidate. He called me and told me of the offer. It was a guaranteed position. Instead, I chose to return to Nigeria. My friend, an Englishman who is now a professor at … University told me I was making a mistake returning to Nigeria. I said he was wrong. I did not realise he is the grandson of Nostradamus.” My prof is not the only one who now agrees that things can always get worse here.

The parliament is supreme in the United Kingdom; in Nigeria, the president is the supremo before whom nothing existed and after whom nothing will. The heroes of the past didn’t bargain for this when they were fighting for independence for Nigeria and for democracy. We lost it, and it is sad. How easy is it now for our leper to pick up his slipped needle? (The Yoruba say abéré bó l’ówó adétè, ó d’ète). The British gave us a system designed to make it easy for us to live in peace, punish insults and reward good behaviour. They gave us a constitutional arrangement which allowed us to engage and to throw out our husbands when they went mad. We messed it up within five years of independence. In 1979, after 13 years in the wilderness of the military, we went for the most expensive of the systems in the books – presidential democracy. It may have worked in all other places, but, here, it has steadily evolved into a most fiendish monarchy – a kábíyèsí system where the legislature and the judiciary are the king’s phlegm eaters.

In the opening lines of his ‘Two Thousand Seasons’, Ghanaian writer, Ayi Kwei Armah, warns our spring water to stop “flowing to the desert.” He says “there is no regeneration” where it flows. It is there in the Bible (and in the Quran) that the Lord restored Job’s fortunes only after he changed his course and did as he ought to do. “In fact, the Lord gave him twice as much as before” – Job: 42:10. The afflicted got reprieve because he cooperated with his Maker. Here, we cling to what will never work and pray for increased blessings. When we talk about restructuring of Nigeria, it is because we want Nigeria to regain what it lost to unitary presidentialism. We saw how simple the UK elections were last week. There was no movement of ballots across constituencies. The man who emerged as prime minister contested for votes only in his Holborn and St Pancras constituency. It was exactly like that with the December 1959 election which ushered us into independence in 1960. Prime Minister Abubakar Tafawa Balewa did not have to break the bank to contest that election. His constituency was his Tafawa Balewa locality.

For 99 years (1861 – 1960), the British were officially here working hard on their broth of strange ingredients. With the magical deft and expertise of the enchanter, they came up with an arrangement that should work for the happiness of all. They gave each region a constitution and the country itself a super constitution. And, so, Nigeria started on a note of globally expressed optimism. At the British House of Lords on Thursday 28 July, 1960, while debating the bill that granted Nigeria independence, the then Earl of Swinton said “Nigeria has proved how diverse peoples can combine in successful union while maintaining their own individuality.” Indeed, the whole House – and the other one, the House of Commons – hailed our negotiated federalism and expressed confidence in our commitment to constitutional parliamentary democracy.

But, in less than six quick years of that constitutional arrangement, we tore it and plunged ourselves down beyond ground zero. Today, the country is centralized – unitarized – and atrophied. The central government owns and controls everything with an imperial presidency summoning governors to its presence for daily obeisance.

“It is easy to go down into Hell,” Virgil, Roman poet (70 BC – 19 BC), warned. He added that “night and day, the gates of dark Death stand wide; but to climb back again, to retrace one’s steps to the upper air – there’s the rub, the task.” We have a very complex structural issue which we have not managed well. We continually subvert our federalism because it is suicidally sweet to do so. But how long will the leaky titanic remain afloat? The way to regeneration is for our river to stop flowing towards the desert of unitarism. Nigeria is not irredeemable if it chooses redemption. Britain has as much complicated structure; but it is a delicate balance well managed. We read of a kingdom of four countries – England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – and the kingdom is paradoxically a working democracy. We saw it last week.

Will democracy ever work for Nigeria? Or, will Nigeria ever allow democracy to work for Nigerians? Multi-genre performer, Tar Ukoh, was engaged at the Eagle Square in Abuja on 29 May, 1999 for the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo. Everyone around him exuded joy at the dawn of that new day. They were sure the exit of the military after so many years meant the good times had come. Tar Ukoh was asked by The New York Times how he felt about Nigeria’s brand new democracy. He cautiously told the American newspaper that he feared that the joy of that moment might be misplaced or short lived. The New York Times still has the report of that encounter on its website. The man said: “I hope this event is not a re-awakening of illusions of freedom, or a Eureka, like we had during independence in my youth.” Tar Ukoh, who was 46 years old at that time, concluded that “having returned to civilian rule, we now have to fight for democracy.” Nothing can be truer than his fears and his conclusion. The “fight for democracy” entered its 25th year this year. It is still on. But, the battle will be lost unless we ‘borrow’ ourselves sense and go back to “the way.”

The federal government has categorised all electricity companies, including the Generation and Distribution Companies (GenCos and DisCos), as those exempted from the payment of Withholding Tax in the country.

This was contained in the new Withholding Tax regulation document signed by the Minister of Finance, Wale Edun, a copy of which was seen by our reporter.

The new Withholding Tax regulation was proposed by the Tax and Fiscal Policy Committee led by Taiwo Oyedele and took effect from July 1, 2024.

According to the document, the electricity and gas companies are categorised as “manufacturing” and “production” and therefore exempted from Withholding Tax.

According to the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Withholding Tax (WHT) serves as a prepayment of Income Tax deducted at rates between 5 and 10 per cent depending on transaction.

Withholding Tax was introduced into Nigeria’s tax system in 1977 as an advance payment of Income Tax on specified transactions.

However, Oyedele said the tax system provided the government with a steady revenue stream and helped curb tax evasion, but that the regime had expanded over time, becoming increasingly complex and burdensome.

He said the complexity led to ambiguities regarding compliance, eligible transactions, applicable rates and the timing of remittance.

Ahead of the 2025 governorship election in Anambra State, the All Progressives Congress, APC, walks a tightrope.

Anambra has an unwritten zoning arrangement for the governorship position, which rotates between the three senatorial zones in the state.

The arrangement became more pronounced in 2012 during the twilight of the administration of then governor, Mr Peter Obi.

Obi had insisted on the then ruling party, All Progressives Grand Alliance (APGA) producing a candidate from Anambra North as a way to make for balance, after Mbadinuju from the South had finished a four-year-term, and himself from the central senatorial zone finished eight years term.

Before then, Ngige who held sway for three years was also from central.

This prompted Obi to insist on the North, which is perceived as a minority zone in the state, to produce the next governor on the basis of equity, as it was believed that if the contest was declared open to all zones, they may never be able to have a shot at the position.

Obiano’s emergence from the North then sealed the zoning agreement and left it standing.

As Prof Chukwuma Soludo rounds off his first tenure, the clamour for governorship has heightened.

But contrary to claims of zoning, the APC seems to want to scuttle the arrangement, by insisting on throwing open the contest to all interested.

In June, a group of elders from the party under the aegis of All Progressives Congress (APC) Elders Forum, led by Chief Innocent Obi, met and reinforced the Anambra zoning formula.

The group said that if the APC would upstage the ruling party in the 2025 governorship election, it must field a southern candidate in line with the zoning agreement.

Obi said: “For me, an agreement is an agreement whether written or not. There’s a system already at work in Anambra State. Anybody who denies that is not saying the truth. As elders, we should say it the way it is.

“An arrangement is on the ground. During the 2022 election, the party that pretended that zoning is nonsense suffered for it. They suffered because someone who contested under their platform did not come from where that post should go.

“Whatever decision our party comes up with, the elders must go with them because we’re under them.

“The elders will be pleased if the candidate comes from the South. If you ask me, the South has done four years and the South has four extra years.”

There have been various positions on the matter too.

A chieftain of the party, Mr Pope Amaefuna in a recent opinion piece insisted that any attempt by the party not to field a candidate from the South, and a popular one at that, would cost the party victory.

He said: “The politics of Anambra State has enjoyed relative stability, equity and fairness, thanks to the adoption of the zoning principle.

“Major political parties acknowledged the power rotation formula as reflected by the choice of candidates paraded in Anambra elections in the past decade.

“In reality, APC can no longer afford to continue playing opposition politics in Anambra State and all hands must be on deck to ensure a power shift in the 2025 governorship election.

“Considering the disposition of the Anambra electorate, if the APC makes the mistake of failing to field a strong and popular candidate from Anambra South in favour of parading a candidate from any other zone, then it is safe to kiss the governorship aspirations of the party goodbye as the move would truncate the remaining four years tenure of Anambra South.

“The implication is that a new candidate from any other zone might tentatively lay claims to an eight year tenure instead of four and that is the last thing any right thinking Anambra wants at this epoch.

“Very importantly, the proponents and advocates of no zoning should be wary of what they preach as they risk swallowing their own vomit.”

“Considering the political culture of Anambra State today, any party that does not abide by the zoning formula adopted by stakeholders in rotation of the governorship seat of the state stands no chance of winning the forthcoming guber poll and historical indices support this position.

“Any APC member who is currently crusading for no zoning has been compromised and commissioned to work against the party and such a character should be considered an enemy of the party who are actively working against the party interests,” Amaefuna stated.

Meanwhile, another group within the party, under the aegis of APC Progressives Media in a press release argued that the zoning arguments were aimed at misleading the Anambra APC into falling into a political trap designed to annihilate the party’s gubernatorial chances in 2025.

The group said: “After careful examination, we have confirmed that the authors of these articles are unknown to the Anambra APC and are neither card-carrying members of the party nor affiliated with it in any way. Therefore, we can understand their ignorance about the traditions of the APC in Anambra State.

“The APC in Anambra State has no history of zoning the gubernatorial election.

“Instead, every candidate who has contested under the umbrella of the APC since its formation has done so on the strength of their popularity and acceptance within the party fold and that of the voting public.

“For instance, in 2013, when the APGA zoned its candidate to Anambra North, the APC chose its candidate from Anambra Central, with aspirants from all zones contesting in the primaries.

“Similarly, in 2017, the APC candidate won based on his popularity within the party and not due to zoning. Aspirants from all political zones contested in that primary, just like in 2013 and 2021.”

In what looked like support for the Progressives Media, the APC, Anambra State Chapter, says the party is not in for any zoning arrangement.

In a release signed by the party’s State Publicity Secretary, Dr. Valentine Iyke-Oliobi, the party dismissed those clamouring for zoning.

It brushed aside both the elders forum and Amaefuna who had previously spoken in favour of zoning, describing them as unknown to the party.

It said: “The Anambra State Chapter of the All Progressives Congress (APC) wants to categorically state that our party has no zoning arrangements whatsoever.

“Also, APC as a party was not involved in any agreement with any political party or parties as regards to zoning as being falsely peddled by the group in their publications.

“The APC has always provided a level playing field for all governorship aspirants under the platform of the party to participate irrespective of their Senatorial zones.

“This practice has not changed. We, therefore, call on well meaning members of our party to disregard the said publication insinuating any existing zoning arrangement by the APC.”

As the back and forth on zoning continues, political analysts have predicted that the party may shoot itself in the leg by attempting to scuttle the existing zoning arrangement that has run smoothly.

Mr Chijioke Eze, a political Analyst said: “I have read the press release by both the party and the Progressives Media, and I feel compelled to say that APC in Anambra cannot be doing the same thing all over again, and expect a different result.

“They keep saying the contest has always been free to all, and each time they run, they always lose, and every four years they come back again with the same formula.

“I think it is either the party with the change mantra is not ready to change, or they are not desirous of producing a governor here.”

Also, another respondent, Dr Justin Ogoo Nwankwo said Anambra South is the beautiful bride in the 2025 governorship election in the state, and that APC must shun rhetorics and keep their eyes on equity and capacity.

Nwankwo argued that if APC must perform creditably in the election, it must field a candidate from the southern zone who can battle Soludo, and also ensure to pick a popular candidate who has the capacity to upstage the current governor.

“The fact is that the APC as a party has not won the governorship election in the state before, but evidence and data available suggest that with the right choice and strategy, the party can win Anambra State Governorship election.

“It is therefore very urgent to remind Ndi Anambra from this point of departure and especially members of our great party, APC that as a party, the APC is not rejected in Anambra State.

“This is a party that with the right motivation and balance, has always done well in gubernatorial elections.

“It is rather, the lack of circumspect by some party leaders or of the basic principles of power sharing by the stakeholders that continually places the fate of the party in oblivion.

“We therefore call for APC Anambra to project two key indicators heading into the most important election in the life of the party, which are Equity and Capacity,” he added.

So far, two members of the party have indicated their interests in vying for the ticket.

They include Senator Andy Ubah, a serving senator of the party who hails from Anambra South, and Mr Paul Chukwuma, a former National Auditor of the party from Anambra North zone.

[DailyPost]

 During Nigeria’s First and Second Republics, not many people had faith in the country ’s judiciary. To start with, court cases dragged on for too long; making it practically impossible for litigants to enjoy the fruits of judicial victories. In other cases, many criminals were set free on account of some technicalities couched in Latin that ordinary people never understood. Part of the assignments of some transition bodies set up during military rule was to educate Nigerians on the dangers of extra- judicial activities. But if the truth must be told, it has been quite difficult to persuade politicians to follow the ser- mons on the rule of law which seem to provide inconsequential efficacy.

Years ago, there were Nigerian politicians who had no patience for a long wait to take a seat in parliament when they could have been returned unopposed even before voting by merely organising thugs to kill their opponents. However, political assassinations have reduced considerably since 1999 but they have been replaced by a new design by which the judiciary is used to win cases, especially election petitions. The danger is that those who are unable to command what it takes to manipulate the judiciary may, as time goes on, be forced to return to such evils as assassinations while proclaiming that their ambition is not worth the blood of fellow citizens. If this must be prevented from recurring, there is no better time than now to stop our judges who speak in tongues while on duty.

In Nigeria today, every court judgment or judicial pronouncement is often subjected to multiple interpretations by the different parties in a case. This usually happens when two or more courts with coordinate jurisdiction give contradicting rulings on the same case. Another aspect is when some courts grant daily ex parte orders despite the repeated caution of the Chief Justice of the Federation against such behaviour. At the same time, there is the issue of jurisdiction which should ordinarily not be difficult to ascertain; yet, many courts hear and determine several cases where the law states clearly that they have no jurisdiction. When that happens, all we hear is that those adversely affected should go on appeal. But can the judiciary not stop it from happening at all?

If a layman does not know the court which has jurisdiction to hear his case, are his lawyers and the judge to whose court the case was assigned also ignorant of the law? This question and some others that many of my readers have asked me in the last one month and which I obviously have no answers for are raised in this piece in the hope that someone can help me out. The first set of questions I received had to do with the reinstatement of Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II of Kano. Whereas the federal court presided over by Justice Abdullahi Liman nullified the reinstatement of the Emir, a state high court, presided over by Justice Aminu Adamu Aliyu, issued a restraining order preventing the police, the DSS and the military from forcibly re- moving Sanusi 11.

What explains why both a state and a federal high court located in the same city were both hearing the same case is the issue of jurisdiction which is essentially one of the mysteries of our legal system. It is only a court that can de- termine whether it has juris- diction over a case or not de- spite what the law says. Those who believe that Justice Liman had no jurisdiction argued that the case of Emirship being a chieftaincy mat- ter ought to be a state affair. But then, Jurisdiction in Nigeria is more than mathematics hence the pro-federal judge claimed that those dis- placed by the new Kano chieftaincy law were bothered about their fundamen- tal human rights which they think explains the interest of the federal judge.

The only other persons who understand the issue of jurisdiction between the state and federal courts are our lawmakers who in their own self- interest ensured that the federal high courts were so empowered especially in political matters. While the rest of us are bothered that there is some confusion in the system, our legislators are comfortable. This is because once a federal legislator sees the need to institute a case, it is the federal high court that first occurs to him because it can be difficult getting justice from a state high court which a state governor has control over. In other words, confusion in our courts was deliberately planted by politicians hence judgments in those courts are always communicated in such a way that they can be interpreted to suit any party’s position.

If applied to the lingering case between the executive and the legislature in Rivers State, it is easy to see every party interpreting last week’s judgment of the Court of Ap- peal on the fate of majority of the lawmakers as it suits them. The decision of the court which was in favour of the Amaewhule-led legislators said nothing about the real subject in contention. Instead, it nullified the previous contrary order on the grounds that the state high court which earlier determined the case had no jurisdiction. But the real issue of whether or not speaker Amaewhule and his colleagues had lost their seats for decamping to another party is yet to be resolved.

Also last week, an Abuja federal high court presided over by Justice Inyang Ekwogave a judgment concerning the Edo PDP governorship primaries that everyone is still busy debating. The real order made by the court was that certain lawfully elected delegates must not be excluded from the party’s primaries scheduled for February 22, 2024. How does anyone understand such an order to be carried out concerning an election that had already been conducted some 5 months ago? What would the court have lost if it had declined to make such an academic order which had been overtaken by events? While some people would have appreciated the need to penalise a careless political party, there is doubt if such an intention would have made sense considering the position of the law on internal matters of a political party

If it is true as some critics have argued that the litigants being delegates and not aspirants ought not to have been allowed to bring up such a case, what public good was served in dealing with the case at all? Talking about the public good what exactly are our courts enjoying in the unending litigations that distract governance? The judiciary as an arm of government cannot be exculpated from blame if it does not work together with other arms of government to assist Nigeria to attain good governance that can improve the living standards of the people. For example, it is clear that asking parties to maintain status quo is severally interpreted to suit each person’s wish. If so, of what use is a jargon if all those to whom it is addressed, do not have same meaning for it?

Considering the level of confusion that the term status quo has been causing in society by those who are exploiting it, is it not time for judges to clearly spell out the true position they want par- ties to maintain? No one needs to be a professional communicator to recognise the defect in using a term that is subject to more than one meaning. In other words, engaging in effective communication can easily enhance the prospects of relevant actors in the justice delivery system attaining greater professional competence. As it is today in Nigeria, it is difficult to make the average citizen to comprehend the rationale for certain judgments even if translated into local dialects of the people. The real problem is that there is too much of working to the answer especially when compared with other cases with similar facts.

The trend whereby Nigerian court judgments are never self-explicit is worrisome as the trend continues to adversely affect the image of our judiciary that was in times past internationally respected. Painfully, majority of our judges who have continued to perform well are watching helplessly as a few of their colleagues are holding high an inglorious emblem on behalf of all. If per chance any law enforcement agency invades judges’ home again in search of different currencies, no one should be surprised if it elicits public applause across the nation.

The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) has asked INTERPOL in three North African countries of Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria to watch-list former Kogi State Governor Yahaya Bello, it was learnt at the weekend

It was further learnt that the decision by the EFCC was based on credible intelligence.

Other countries where the ex-governor is put on the watch-list are Egypt, Libya and Sudan. 

Sources in the anti-graft agency said many option are on the table in dealing with the Bello situation, which include but not limited to storming the Kogi State Government House in Lokoja, where the ex-governor is believed to be hiding.

The watch-list was activated ahead of the July 17th expected appearance of the former governor before a Federal High Court in Abuja.

Bello is facing a 19-count charge for alleged money laundering, breach of trust and misappropriation of public funds  of about N80.2billion.

Although the ex-governor has denied the allegation, he has consistently failed to appear before the trial Judge, Justice Emeka Nwite on June 13th and June 27th.

At the last hearing, he filed an application for the transfer of his trial to the Federal High Court, Lokoja.

Speaking in the situation, the EFCC source said: “Ahead of the next hearing of the case, EFCC has activated many options, including taking a concrete action to watch-list Bello in North Africa.

“We are aware of a botched  exit to Morocco via Cameroon. We are determined to stop him from going on exile.

“From Singapore, the EFCC Executive Chairman, Mr. Ola Olukoyede was in Tunisia where he delivered a paper at a session on illicit financial flows. Thereafter, he had a meeting with all the Heads of INTERPOL in North Africa on the intelligence on the ex-governor.

“He formally asked INTERPOL to place  Bello on Red Alert in all North African countries and it was accepted.

“The watch-list has taken immediate effect. He will be arrested in any part of North Africa.

“We took this step because we are suspecting that he had been bidding time not to be available for arraignment.

“We expect Bello to be in court to prove his innocence. EFCC has to do its work to avoid bad precedent.”

At the last hearing, Bello’s lawyer, Adeola Adedipe (SAN), applied to withdraw his appearance for his client.

But Adedipe drew the court’s attention to an application before the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court for the transfer of charge no: FHC/ABJ/CR/98/2024 to the Federal High Court, Lokoja.

He said the application was pursuant to Section 45 of the Federal High Court Establishment Act.

[TheNation]

JUNE 2024. Festivity was in the air. Professors and students, staff and high class visitors were in attendance. The highlight was a first class dinner. Africa’s book factory, Professor Toyin Falola, flew into the country to deliver the farewell lecture. It was all in honour of Professor Abd-Rasheed Na’Allah, out-going Vice Chancellor of the University of Abuja, UNIABUJA. But, trust spoilers.

They are never far away from festivities. As the wining and dining went on with fine speeches seeing off the VC at month end, students of the university were lamenting the N500 daily they pay to charge their cell phones. It was the second week the university had been plunged into darkness. It was not that the university is new to power outages, but this particular one had lengthened to pay farewell to Professor Na’Allah.

 UNIABUJA claims it is “the model University in Nigeria (and) a pride of Nigerians and in the provision of higher education”. I am amazed it achieved these and attained such lofty heights while enveloped in darkness.

UNIABUJA students are quite measured: they can live under any condition. But not so the students of the University of Benin, UNIBEN. Confronted with the same circumstances, they took to the streets, blocking the busy Benin-Ore Highway to protest weeks of electricity cut. The students were two weeks away from their examinations, yet had no electricity to study after lectures. They demanded a 24-hour electricity supply. The authorities could not meet the demand, so they shut down the university.

While professors in other countries are professing and advancing the frontiers of knowledge, their counterparts in the Ahmadu Bello University, ABU, are lamenting the lack of electricity to do basic work. So, 40 of them signed a petition last week asking the Visitor, President Bola Tinubu, to intervene given the centrality of electricity supply to the operations of the university. They stated what appears to be the obvious. That a university with an average total annual budgetary overhead grant of N150 million, cannot pay an electricity bill of N3.6 billion. The egg heads calculated that if the bill were to be transferred to the 50,000 students of the institution, charges would need to be hiked by over 500 per cent.

The professors suggested alternatives. Government could pay for the cost of electricity as part of its overhead grant or, use its 49 per cent shareholding in the electricity companies to direct them to supply universities uninterrupted power supply in exchange for tax credits. A third suggestion is to mandate the electricity companies to introduce a dedicated social tariff band with rates the universities can afford.

The government’s response is uncertain, but I assume that the university still has many moons to go: producing first class materials without the benefit of electricity supply. Is it for nothing our national anthem proclaims ‘Nigeria, we hail thee’?

The University College Hospital, Ibadan, founded in 1952, is the pioneer teaching hospital in the country. Its 1,000 beds makes it one of the biggest hospitals in the country.

The legendary UCH proclaims, like Ozymandias: “We are the flagship tertiary healthcare institution in Nigeria, offering world-class Training, Research and Services.” It even has a Department of Nuclear Medicine, that branch involved in the use of radioactive substances in the diagnosis and treatment of diseases, including nuclear imaging. Short of witchcraft, how can the UCH perform all these, including blood storage and endless operations, with power outages and even conscious power disconnections? The Ibadan Electricity Distribution Company had for several days, disconnected UCH from the electricity system for owing N400 million.

Six years ago, the College of Medicine, University of Lagos, Idi-Araba decided to check power cuts by imposing an N11,000 electricity levy on each student. When the students refused to pay, the tertiary health institution reduced power supply to four hours daily. But mass protests led the authorities to seek other ways of reducing the power outages.

The first generation University of Nigeria, UNN, was by 2018 producing about 10,000 first degree graduates and 3,000 higher degrees. But its power outages were between 48 and 120 hours weekly. Sometimes, power cuts lasted a whole week. So, small or micro generators began to pollute the campus.

The Federal University Kashere, FUK, Gombe State is in an area with sweltering temperatures. So, the authorities supply the hostels two hours of electricity daily. The students in most cases pay commercial centres to charge their phones and laptops.

But these power cuts to universities, lasting weeks at a stretch, is like child’s play when compared to the case of the Kaduna State University, KASU. The Academic Staff Union of Universities, ASUU, branch Chairperson, Peter Adamu, who made a diagnostic analysis, said the situation, like advancing cancer, had gone from intermittent and epileptic to a total blackout. It became so bad that the Kafanchan campus had no electricity supply for over seven months! Adamu described the atmosphere in the university: “There is a feeling of pessimism, hopelessness, despair, despondency and dissent premonition that if the management of the university did not redouble their efforts, the end to this ugly situation might not be palatable.”

The miracle is that KASU, which is like a patient on life support, is still breathing and giving birth to new graduates and post- graduates!

Power failures, I must say, is not just a disease of public universities, the private ones also suffer it. For instance, the students of the American University of Nigeria, AUN, on April 24, 2024 staged peaceful demonstrations against persistent power cuts. To assuage the students anger, school authorities gave an assurance of a minimum five-hour power supply daily until public power supply is restored. They also shifted the commencement of examinations and, agreed to halt regular teaching to give the students more time to study.

Anybody who does not believe academics, staff and students can perform miracles, should visit Nigerian universities.

Electricity is central to the operation of universities, polytechnics and technical institutions. It is necessary for the running or functioning of equipment. It is fundamental to learning, industrialisation and development. So, running tertiary institutions with little, epileptic or no electricity, is nothing short of the miraculous . But it is not a lesson other institutions outside Nigeria want to learn from or experiment.

Do our universities deserve what they are getting having failed to find solutions to the country’s problems, including electricity generation and distribution? Or, does the country deserve the universities it has for not providing even the most basic needs like electricity? On the other hand, do they deserve themselves? But this is no time to trade blames. Rather, it is the time to put our hands on the plough and let there be light.

A former National Vice Chairman of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Salihu Lukman, has accused the ruling party of failing to deliver its campaign promises to Nigerians.

According to Lukman, the failure of the APC has surpassed that of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which was ousted in 2015.

Recall that former President, Goodluck Jonathan of the PDP lost the 2015 presidential election to Muhammadu Buhari and has continued to govern the country.

However, amid the numerous challenges facing the country at the moment, Lukman, in a press release handed to journalists in Abuja on Sunday, expressed concern over the current state of affairs in the country.

The former Director General of the Progressives Governors Forum (PGF) criticized the APC for failing to fulfil its promise of leading the fight against corruption, instead allowing corruption to thrive and endorsing the concept of ‘state capture’ across various levels.

“What were the failings of the PDP? The failings of the PDP are reflected in the same way today’s challenges are manifesting. If the truth is to be told, whatever the failings of the PDP in 2015, it was less grievous than what it has become under APC in 2024,” Lukman noted in the press release.

He said: “What is the future of democracy in Nigeria? Is there any prospect that it can produce leaders who are responsive to national challenges? Being responsive is basically about ensuring that public expenditures are oriented to tackle challenges facing citizens. What are the challenges facing Nigerians today? Poverty, unemployment, insecurity, drugs and substance abuse, millions of out-of-school children in the North, etc. Not to mention the additional problems of inflation and the crash of the value of incomes, especially in the last year under the leadership of President Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu.

“Although some officials of the government of President Asiwaju Tinubu have attempted to explain the current hardship Nigerians are facing with reference to the bad economy inherited from the previous administration of former President Muhammadu Buhari, the reality is that both are APC Governments. If anything, APC became very popular in Nigeria on account of the failings of the PDP. What were the failings of the PDP? The failings of the PDP are reflected in the same way today’s challenges are manifesting. If the truth is to be told, whatever the failings of the PDP in 2015, it was less grievous than what it has become under APC in 2024.

“No doubt, former President Buhari had his problems as a leader. However, whatever was estimated to be his failure should be the shared responsibility of APC leaders in varying degrees, including President Asiwaju Tinubu. No leader of APC should attempt to distance himself/herself from the failure of the Buhari era, certainly, not President Asiwaju Tinubu. In one way or the other, APC leaders, without exception, are ‘beneficiaries’ of the Buhari era, just as some of them could claim to be victims. On balance however, APC leaders benefited more from the Buhari era than being victims. At least electorally, former President Buhari made it possible for APC to defeat the PDP. Without former President Buhari, the defeat of the PDP in 2015 would have been almost impossible, and by extension, arguably, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for President Asiwaju Tinubu to become President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

“Unfortunately, having defeated the PDP in 2015, the APC failed to produce the needed collective leadership required to manage the machinery of governments produced by the party at all levels. Gradually, APC succeeded in turning democracy on its head. Instead of producing democratic leaders, elected leaders increasingly became emperors and overlords. State machinery became captured and privatised to almost exclusively only serve the interests of elected representatives.”

[NaijaNews]

Chelsea, on Sunday, announced that academy graduate, Michael Golding, has completed a permanent transfer to Premier League club Leicester City.

The Blues disclosed this in a statement on their website.

“We wish Michael the best of luck in the next chapter of his career and thank him for all his efforts during his time as Blue,” Chelsea’s statement partly read.

Golding joined Chelsea as an Under-12 and represented the youth teams.

His performances for Chelsea also earned him international recognition between the Under-15 and Under-18 age groups.

He captained the England side that competed in the Under-17 European Championship in the summer of 2023 and later that year played three times at the Under-17 World Cup.

Golding recently featured for England Under-18s.

[DailyPost]

WHAT you are about to read was written by me and was published in The PUNCH edition of Monday, July 7, 1998; which is 26 years ago, the very day the winner of the June 12, 1993 presidential election, Basorun MKO Abiola, died in incarceration in Abuja. I must have scribbled the piece a day or two before Abiola’s death; it is titled “Abiola: Coming home empty-handed?” Enjoy it:

Once again, we are living in interesting times! Events are happening in rapid successions. Last week as Nigerians feverishly debated the way forward, all manner of rumour was agog. Kites of various colours, sizes and shapes were flown. When former President Ibrahim Babangida, the greatest disaster to have befallen this country, visited General Olusegun Obasanjo, recently released from jail on trumped-up charges, tongues were set wagging. A few days later when Obasanjo told journalists he was not available for anything except where he was (Ota farm), not a few people tried to add up the equation. Did IBB go to Ota with any proposal for Obasanjo’s consideration? Softly, softly, Aremu! Once bitten, twice shy!

If this suggestion by the New Millennium is silly, its reasons for tipping Obasanjo shows a willingness to distort contemporary history. According to the group, Obasanjo is acceptable “to both the June 12 protagonists and antagonists alike…” Lies! Obasanjo was not acceptable to June 12 protagonists in 1993; he will be more stridently opposed by them today if he falls for this New Millennium deceit. Space constraints will not allow me to take up the group item by item, but let’s take a look at one of its suggestions for the way forward. We are to “groom credible persons to take over the politics of the Fourth Republic, preferably those with military background, so as to achieve stability in the praxis of politics and democratization” What a gratuitous insult!

So there are no credible persons in civil society to be groomed for the democratization project? Only in the armed forces will you find them, serving or retired? Pray, which armed forces are they talking about? The one rubbished by IBB and laid waste by Abacha? The Millennium people wouldn’t end their treatise until they had taught the press its job: “Very important, journalists should be responsible and re-orientate themselves towards the truth. It has been said that journalism is the first rough draft of history. This duty is onerous” That is right, but if I may ask, what is the truth of our situation? Isn’t it that a man won an election but has been prevented from assuming his mandate? Isn’t it the cause of all the subterfuge, rigmarole, somersault, beating about the bush, speaking from both sides of the mouth, inconsistencies, confusion, the way forward, the way backward, stepping aside, illegal ING, brutal dictatorship, Viagra and the ‘last supper’, Abdulsalami Abubakar, etc. Yet, this group of Nigerians gleefully announced that they are ‘committed to a new Nigeria’! I am not surprised, though! Two organizations that I know which mouth the same ‘New Nigeria’ slogan – one, a bank; the other, a newspaper, are both not doing well at all!

If one can excuse a faceless group (like the New Millennium Collective), what does one make of Tony Lloyd, deputy foreign affairs minister of Britain, and Koffi Annan, United Nations Secretary-General? The two, together with Nigeria’s Emeka Anyaoku, the Commonwealth’s Secretary-General, were in the country last week to help us seek ‘the way forward’. Of the three, only Anyaoku proved his calling. For Lloyd, some are suggesting that his comments on June 12 are a confirmation of the rumoured ‘agreement’ between the British Empire and the Sokoto Caliphate that only Northerners would forever rule over Nigeria. Says (one-time Senegalese president) Leopold Sedar Senghor in his poem titled ‘Pain’: Lord, God, forgive white Europe! But there is a recent precedent that should have guided the international community on Abiola’s case.

In April 1985, Nelson Mandela, the world’s then most famous prisoner (of conscience), found himself in the same position that Chief MKO Abiola (at the moment one of the world’s most famous prisoners of conscience), finds himself today. The racist regime of PW Botha had offered to release Mandela from Pollsmoor prison on stringent conditions. Mandela demanded to consult with his comrades in the ANC and with the people of South Africa. The racist regime refused.  Unfolding events in this country (Nigeria) today bear striking resemblance to those in racist South Africa in 1985, except in one very significant sense. Mandela, incarcerated under white minority rulers, enjoyed more freedom than Abiola, who was detained under black majority rule. Mandela was met in prison by his lawyer and wife, Winnie, and was able to send out messages from prison, later read to the people by his daughter, Zindzi, stating why he was refusing conditional release. In 1998, Abiola, held by his own (Black) people, was not allowed visits by his wives. He is not allowed to consult with his comrades; neither has he a statement to be read to the people by his daughter. In short, Abiola is treated worse in a free, independent Black-ruled Nigeria than Mandela was treated under the racist, white minority apartheid regime of Botha. And to think that the UN Secretary-General could be a party to this charade!

When I compare the two situations – a free Nigeria under self-rule and a racist South Africa under white minority rule, I feel like crying! I reproduce here, today, in an abridged form, the statement by Mandela as read to the people of South Africa by his daughter, Zindzi. It goes thus: ‘On Friday, my mother and our attorney saw my father at Pollsmoor prison to obtain his answer to Botha’s offer of conditional release. The prison authorities attempted to stop this statement from being made but he (Mandela) would have none of this and made it clear that he would make the statement to you, the people. Strangers like Bethell from England and Professor Dash from the United States have in recent weeks been authorised to see my father without restriction; yet, Pretoria cannot allow you, the people, to hear what he has to say directly. He should be here himself to tell you what he thinks of this statement by Botha.  He is not allowed to do so. My father and his comrades wish to make this statement to you, the people, first. They are clear that they are accountable to you and to you alone. And that you should hear their views directly and not through others. My father says: I am surprised at the conditions that the government wants to impose on me. I am not a violent man. I cherish my own freedom dearly but I care even more for your own freedom. Too many have died since I went to prison. Too many have suffered for the love of freedom. I owe it to their widows, to their orphans, to their mothers and to their fathers who have grieved and wept for them. Not only have I suffered during these long, lonely, wasted years, I am not less life-loving than you are. But I cannot sell my birthright nor am I prepared to sell the birthright of the people to be free. I am in prison as the representative of the people…Only free men can negotiate. Prisoners cannot enter into contracts. My father says: I cannot and will not give any undertaking at a time when I and you are not free. Your freedom and mine cannot be separated. I will return!”

If Nigeria were as liberal as racist South Africa where political prisoners like Mandela, Walter Sisulu and others could spend nearly three decades in prison and still come out of it sane and sound, I would have encouraged Abiola to persevere and reject out of hand any offer of conditional release; but from what I have seen of recently-released detainees like Chief Frank Kokori, Dr. Beko Ransome-Kuti, General Olusegun Obasanjo and the recent photographs of (a thoroughly emaciated) Abiola himself as released by the Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chief Emeka Anyaoku, Chief Abiola should say whatever they want him to say, sign whatever they want him to sign, even allow himself to be videotaped by Aso Villa video experts – just anything – to regain his freedom. Concerning his mandate, leave that for God and the people to determine! Leave all those who seek to bury the truth to contend with God. Let those who want to build the ‘new Nigeria’ of their dream contend with Thomas Hobbes when he said, ‘When men build on false grounds, the more they build, the greater is the ruin’…

The most reasonable and enduring way forward for Nigeria is not to impose an unjust peace, a diktat, on Abiola and the army of June 12 loyalists. But if the powers-that-be insist that they must have a diktat, I will advise Abiola to take it and go home. The ultimate loser will be Nigeria”

When The PUNCH chairman, Chief Ajibola Ogunshola, read the piece in the early parts of the day, he wrote this comment on top of the page and sent it to the MD/Editor-in-Chief, Ademola Osinubi: “MD, the weight of his argument is totally contrary to his conclusion. It is curious. Please bring these my remarks to Bola’s attention. 7/7/97” I was the Deputy Editor-in-Chief at the time. For those in the know, the chairman’s language was coded. Bolawole must have compromised on June 12! But before the end of the day, when news of Abiola’s death broke, Chief Ogunshola rushed down from his  Lagos Island office to the PUNCH office at Kudeti to ask me questions. But it’s too late! I was a Foreign Affairs correspondent for many years and kept my sources, usually impeccable, even after I became editor. So much more to say about those years of the jackals!

On this day, the 26th anniversary of Abiola’s death, may his blood and the sacrifice of other martyrs continue to water Nigeria’s tree of liberty!