Perhaps unknown to most Nigerians, the Nigerian government hosted its political opposition in the hallowed chambers of the Federal Executive Council last Wednesday. It was a unique opportunity to hear an opposition perspective on the current state of the nation right in the executive chambers of Aso Villa. This was in a week when Mr. Dinuba was out touring in China after sneakily authorizing a cruel increase of petrol pump prices over and above the wildest imagination. The opposition flag and message were carried by an unusual mascot: American tech billionaire and philanthropist, Mr. Bill Gates.

Escorted by Nigeria’s leading money mascot, Aliko Dangote, Bill Gates got an opportunity to literally gate crash into the Executive Council Chambers at Aso Villa where he had the rare opportunity of lecturing the entire Federal Government including Vice President Kassim Shettima and ministers. A lecture on basic development challenges ended up as an unscheduled talk on the inconvenient truths of the present times in Nigeria.

What was auspicious is not so much the presence of the two money merchants. It was rather the message that Mr. Gates had to deliver at the Aso Rock Council chambers that should interest us. Forget the fact that America’s own money men do not get to casually walk into council meetings at the White House to lecture anybody about anything. It is not usual for Gates, Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos or Warren Buffet to hike a ride and gate crash into a White House Council meeting to talk about anything. If indeed they have to make a Congressional appearance on any subject, they have to be invited by the relevant committee leadership and answer specific questions. But this is Nigeria. All anyone needs to qualify to lecture an entire Nigerian government is a trove of cash and influence either as a refinery owner or a rich technology billionaire turned philanthropist.

In any event, both Dangote and Bill Gates are familiar sights in Nigeria’s power precincts. Dangote is constantly on hand in all meetings that have to do with running a successful economy especially on matters that concern cement and petrol. Bill Gates similarly shows up ever so often in Abuja and Lagos to talk about Guinea worms or his over $2.8 billion spend on charity, especially primary healthcare, in and around Nigeria.

What is important is the message that Mr. Gates had for his unlikely audience in Abuja. I am sure that most of those there gathered must have been uneasy in their padded seats as the man delved deeper into the substance of his subject. Mr. Gates told them unkind and uncomfortable truths. His contentions were in two major areas of Nigeria’s contemporary economic and social situation: government spending priorities and tax performance.

Mr. Gates told our government people what they probably already know but dare not openly admit in the corridors of power. All is not well in the economy. Nigeria’s economy has stagnated in the last 15 years. The revenue to GDP ratio has worsened over the same period. For the first time, our debt exceeded 50% of GDP. Our government is now the third most indebted in the world with debts still climbing.

That is not all. Nigeria now has the second highest rate of food insecurity in the world with hunger ravaging more than half of the populace. Access to primary healthcare remains a mirage while out of school population has just approached 20 million. Given his preoccupation with primary healthcare in his Africa wide philanthropy projects under the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, he is shocked about the average annual spend of N3,000 per citizen in Nigeria. It is of course his contention that what Nigeria needs now is attention to the basic components of development like primary healthcare, basic education and poverty alleviation.

Implicit in his elaborate presentation is an excoriating critique of the current trend and direction of priority of the Tinubu government. Implicit in Bill Gates’ well timed lecture is an outright condemnation of Mr. Tinubu’s emphasis on wasteful and luxurious government spending. Mr. Gates says it without naming it.

Nigeria ought to be sending more kids to school away from the streets, buying more medicines and medicaments for health centres and hospitals in remote places, assisting basic enterprises so that common people can find resources to meet their basic needs. Nigeria ought to be sending more hands to the farms to produce the food now urgently needed to feed millions of the hungry.

Our priority ought not to be presidential yatchs, fleets of luxury SUVs, new presidential jets, mansions and expensive junkets to literally all corners of the globe to attend inconsequential gatherings that have nothing to do with the welfare of the common Nigerian. In the latter respect, the intrinsic value of Mr. Bill Gates’s lecture to our Council of Ministers is actually in the eloquent silences of the message. He told us what we ought to prioritize and left our ministers to conclude on the wrong priorities of the government they are serving.

Within the present Nigerian political space, there exists a dialect that belongs alongside Mr. Gates’ preoccupations. In fact, Mr. Gates’s rhetoric corresponds to the outlines of the contention of the mainstream political opposition. Mr. Peter Obi of the Labour Party and Atiku Abubakar of the Peoples Democratic Party are more less saying the same things as Mr. Gates but not in aid of a philanthropic end. Indeed, the basic developmental logic of Mr. Peter Obi since after the 2023 presidential election corresponds to the kernel of Mr. Bill Gates major argument. Of course, Mr. Gates was not out on a political campaign. He was merely marketing his philanthropy. But his philanthropy is essentially a humanistic development agenda. It takes its departure from a human development perspective. Its broad contention is that Africa’s future depends on its ability to harness its resources to actualize its present human resources in the things that matter and will uplift the majority of Africans.

It has been the consistent position of Mr. Peter Obi, presidential candidate of the Labour Party in the last presidential election, that what Nigeria needs is a basic developmental strategy, not a grandiose pretentious display.  Mr. Obi has consistently harped on the need to prioritize basic development issues of primary healthcare, poverty alleviation and education. In accordance, he has taken the Tinubu government to task on its wasteful priorities of luxury, white elephant projects and highways that lead nowhere in particular.

As a way of addressing the paucity of revenue in relation to GDP, Mr. Gates used his speaking opportunity to critique Nigeria’s tax performance. In his view, Nigeria is collecting less tax than it should. Literally, Nigerians are not being taxed enough.  Or, better still, the Nigerian tax administration system is not sufficiently effective to collect all that is due to the government. The latter is more true than the former. Predictably, ordinary Nigerians who have been at the receiving end of all manner of multiple and incidental taxes have jumped on Mr. Gates on the social media to question his temerity to talk about taxation in Nigeria.

Perhaps Mr. Bill Gates does not understand the massive implicit taxation regime under which Nigerians have lived for decades. In Nigeria, the same people who pay monthly income tax, annual business tax and several other incidental taxes are also subject to several implicit taxes. Government for the provision of water, electricity, security etc taxes people. Yet, nearly every Nigerian provides his own water borehole, private electricity generator, private security guard etc. These are all services that the government taxes and levies people but does not provide any services.

On the surface, ordinary Nigerians contend that Mr. Gates cannot talk about personal income tax in Nigeria where the government taxes people without discharging the reciprocal obligation of providing social and other services. In Nigeria, we have governments at both federal state and local government levels that levy a multitude of taxes, charges, levies and tariffs without delivering the corresponding services and infrastructure.

Nigerians are unhappy that Mr. Gates would come from the United States, a country where governments account for every dollar of tax payers’ money by way of services to the people.  Yet, it would seem that Mr. Gates is more concerned about corporate and institutional taxes than personal income taxes which has little loopholes for tax avoidance since these taxes are direct charges on monthly incomes at source.

Mr. Gates of course admits the ineffectiveness of government services in Nigeria but still insists that the Nigerian government needs to find the resources to fill the gap between its current obligations and what it needs to maintain the semblance of a functioning nation state.

So far, there have been no signs from government circles that the oppositional essence of Mr. Bill Gates’s visit and address to the Federal Executive Council struck any chords within government circles. Instead, what has lingered is the war of nerves between Mr. Dangote and the NNPCL over what killer pump prices to charge Nigerians for gasoline. Implicit in that price war is yet another unstated petroleum tax whose incidence falls almost uniformly on every Nigerian who has cause to stop by the gas station in order to keep moving.

Mr. Bill Gates has delivered his message and returned to America. It was a message about a more viable alternative development strategy. I doubt that the political import has yet dawned on the Nigerian ruling class who were the immediate audience. The Nigerian opposition will keep up the Bill Gates message but they are not likely to receive the claps and ovation that Bill Gates got in Aso Rock last Wednesday. What a pity?

In Nigeria, as in many parts of the world, there is a pervasive belief among politicians and leaders that they can evade the consequences of their actions. Many corrupt leaders and bad politicians operate under the illusion that they will go unpunished, confident that their wealth, power, and influence will shield them from justice. However, this belief is rooted in a dangerous misunderstanding. It is a lie to think that they can escape divine retribution because, as the Bible consistently shows, God rules over the affairs of men. Leaders may enjoy temporary immunity from accountability, but history and scripture prove that no one escapes the judgment of God.

The Bible is clear on one foundational truth: God governs the world, including the rise and fall of leaders. Daniel 4:17 reminds us, "The Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He will." This verse makes it abundantly clear that no leader is beyond the reach of God's will, and none can rule without divine oversight. Leaders may think they are untouchable, but their reign is allowed by God for reasons only He knows, and they are ultimately accountable to Him.

In Nigeria, the failure to acknowledge God’s supreme rule is at the heart of many leadership crises. Politicians amass wealth through corrupt practices, impoverishing the masses while living lavishly. Some believe they are immune to any form of accountability, both from the people and from God. But this mindset is a gross misunderstanding of the workings of divine justice. Proverbs 16:4 says, "The Lord has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble." Leaders may rule corruptly for a time, but they are unwittingly fulfilling a purpose that will culminate in their reckoning.

A closer look at the Bible offers examples of leaders who believed they could escape judgment, only to face the inevitable consequences of their actions. Take the story of King Nebuchadnezzar, a powerful ruler who thought he was invincible. He became prideful and believed his kingdom was built by his own might. God swiftly humbled him, making him live like an animal in the wilderness until he acknowledged that "the Most High is sovereign over all kingdoms on earth" (Daniel 4:25). Nebuchadnezzar learned the hard way that no leader is above God's rule.

Similarly, in the New Testament, King Herod Agrippa, puffed up by pride, accepted praise from the people who claimed his voice was that of a god and not a man. Acts 12:23 recounts his downfall: "Immediately, an angel of the Lord struck him down, because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died." Herod’s arrogance led to his swift and humiliating demise, proving once again that God rules overall and no leader can escape His judgment.

Leaders today, particularly those in Nigeria, should take heed of these lessons. The belief that they can go unpunished for corrupt governance and the oppression of their people is a grave misconception. It is true that some may seem to thrive in their corruption for years, even decades, but the wheels of divine justice turn in God’s timing, not ours.

Psalm 37:1-2 offers encouragement to those who feel disheartened by the apparent success of corrupt leaders: "Do not fret because of those who are evil or be envious of those who do wrong; for like the grass they will soon wither, like green plants they will soon die away." Though justice may seem delayed, it is inevitable.

In Nigeria, where leaders frequently enrich themselves while leaving the people in poverty, the temptation to believe that corrupt politicians will go unpunished is understandable. But scripture reassures us that no one, no matter how powerful, is beyond divine judgment. Even if their downfall is not immediate, it is certain.

God’s timing often frustrates human expectations. As Ecclesiastes 8:11 notes, "When the sentence for a crime is not quickly carried out, people's hearts are filled with schemes to do wrong." This is true in Nigeria today, where the slow pace of justice encourages more corruption. But while human justice may falter, God’s justice is sure. No leader can outrun His judgment, though they may prosper for a time.

In fact, God often allows tyrants and corrupt leaders to rise for specific reasons. As seen in the story of Pharaoh in Egypt, God hardened his heart and allowed him to rule oppressively to demonstrate His power through the liberation of the Israelites. But Pharaoh’s end came swiftly and decisively when God’s judgment finally fell upon him (Exodus 14:28). Leaders like Pharaoh may seem invincible for a time, but God’s purpose will always prevail.

To think that any leader who rules with cruelty and impoverishes the people will go unpunished is to deny the sovereign rule of God tantamount to foolhardiness. Scripture offers numerous examples of leaders who thought they could escape divine judgment, only to meet their end in humiliating or tragic ways. Nigerian politicians should take heed: no amount of power, wealth, or influence can shield them from God's justice.

As Psalm 75:7 reminds us, "It is God who judges: He brings one down, he exalts another." The belief that corrupt leadership can persist without consequence is a dangerous and false notion. While the people may suffer under bad leadership for a time, justice, whether divine or through the course of history, will eventually prevail. Leaders, particularly those in Nigeria, would do well to remember that they rule not by their own might, but by the grace of God, and they are ultimately accountable to Him.

It took me less than one hour into President Bola Tinubu’s administration to spot a giant red flag. His famous words at the inauguration, “subsidy is gone”, instantly set off an alarm in my head. In my article on it, ‘Why (Most) Nigerians Oppose Subsidy Removal’ (June 4, 2023), I wrote: “With all of Tinubu’s experience in government, I thought a presidential pronouncement on such a very sensitive and emotive topic could have been better managed.” My worry, on hearing his declaration, was that it lacked strategic thinking and it was going to create chaos everywhere as there would be panic buying. Little did I know that chaos was going to be the core administrative model of his government.

To start with, President Muhammadu Buhari budgeted for petrol subsidy for only the first half of the year. It went without saying that from July 2023, subsidy would be gone — unless his successor decided to retain it. Why, then, was Tinubu in a hurry to announce the death of subsidy one full month ahead of schedule? The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Ltd, aka NNPCL, quickly issued a statement to “clarify” that the announcement would take effect from July, but it was a waste of time. That would only lead to hoarding and hardship. A couple of days later, NNPCL announced a new price of N488/litre in Lagos, up from N185. In other parts of Nigeria, it was as high as N557.

When Tinubu made the ill-advised Eagle Square declaration, the price of crude oil was $75/barrel and the FX rate was N463/$. In June 2023, when the pump price of petrol was adjusted, I understand that the base assumption was an exchange rate of N600/$ — thereby creating some wriggle room in case of depreciation of the naira. Two weeks later, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) decided to float the naira in its “willing buyer willing seller” policy which — as overly optimistic projections go — was supposed to stimulate the inflow of billions of dollars into the economy, undercut the black market and stabilise the naira around N650/$ at most. The poorly managed float ended up killing the naira.

In July 2023, the theory and practical of floating parted ways as the naira started spinning out of control, hitting N800/$. The Tinubu administration reacted by increasing petrol price to about N600. Thereafter, the naira went fully naked in the FX market, crossing the N1,000/$ mark in September 2023 and racing towards N2,000/$. To make matters worse, oil went up to $93/barrel. However, petrol price remained unchanged. Shockingly, the government and NNPCL insisted there was no subsidy. By the end of August 2024, the FX rate was about N1,600/$ and oil was close to $80/barrel, but petrol remained N617. Amazingly, NNPCL kept saying there was no subsidy, just “a shortfall”.

Alhaji Umar Ajiya, the chief financial officer (CFO) of the NNPCL, added some comedy to the tragedy, saying: “What has been happening is that we have been importing PMS, which has been landing at a specific cost price, and the government tells us to sell it at half price. So, the difference between the landing price and that half price is a shortfall.” Ajiya was only doing what NNPCL historically does: pulling the wool over our eyes. Now that NNPCL has adjusted petrol price to around N855/litre, we are still being told government does not fix the prices, that the market has been “fully” deregulated and it is the market forces that are at work, or at play — a barefaced lie that will go unpunished.

Before the latest price hike, NNPC was buying petrol at N1,200 and selling at N600. To cover the “PMS shortfall” from January to July 2024 alone, NNPC forked out N4.2 trillion. By December 2024, we will have spent about N8 trillion on “PMS shortfall” for this year alone — money that should have otherwise been shared by the federating units. Even if we (expectedly) steal or waste 50 percent of it, there will still be some N4 trillion left to spend on education, roads, health, water, etc. As our forefathers would say, “at all at all na him bad pass”. That is, half a loaf is better than none. The reality is that we have been subsidising petrol consumption since most probably August last year.

Nigerians have been very patient with Tinubu but it appears he does not appreciate this. He would do well to come clean on this subsidy issue. The starting point is the need for conceptual clarity. What exactly is he trying to do? Is he increasing petrol price to reduce the subsidy bill? Or is he trying to generate more revenue from the sale of petrol? When he says “subsidy is gone”, is he deregulating the pricing so that any marketer can buy petrol and sell at a price that covers the cost and provides a profit margin — as the case has been with diesel for decades? Or is he just making a political statement for the cameras? Until we know what he is doing, we cannot have a meaningful debate.

Secondly, it is very clear that there was no preparation for this policy. There was a lack of proper thinking — and this should be surprising for someone who said what he wanted in his life was to be president. You would think he had developed a solid blueprint over the years, but the impression I keep getting from the day he was sworn in till now is that he has been doing things on an ad-hoc basis. For a major issue like the pricing of petrol, you would have expected scenario painting. If the cost of petrol per litre is x, are we going to sell at x plus profit? Or are we going to modulate the price? Where will funding come from? Floating the naira after removing the subsidy was so reckless.

Thirdly, the lack of transparency in the whole game is so irritating. Why is Tinubu playing games? While NNPCL and Senator Heineken Lokpobiri, minister of state for petroleum, were busy playing with words on the latest petrol price hike and saying it was all about market forces, Tinubu was saying in faraway China that the increase was because he had to take “hard decisions” for the sake of Nigeria’s development. Don’t they have a WhatsApp group where they can co-ordinate what they tell Nigerians? In any case, “subsidy scam” was one of the catch phrases the APC used to oust the PDP in 2015. Buhari famously asked: “Who is subsidising whom?” It is now an albatross around APC’s neck.

On assuming power and seeing the reality of subsidy in 2015, the first APC administration resorted to semantic sophistication, preferring to call it “cost under recovery” — as if that would solve any problem. They belatedly ended the denial by finally calling a spade a spade. The second APC administration, headed by Tinubu, has rebranded subsidy as “shortfall”. Subsidy denial amounts to lying to your doctor about your illness. Obviously, the denial is also an ego thing. Tinubu, who reputably tamed the Atlantic Ocean, is also celebrated as having slain the subsidy dragon, thereby doing what Napoleon — and all previous Nigerian leaders — could not do. So why burst his bubble?

I know that petrol has been regarded as the most important product in Nigeria and issues around its pricing are tricky. Diesel pricing is free of government control and we have moved on with our lives. Same for kerosene and Jet-A fuel. The labour unions have never called a strike over diesel price, even though a large chunk of inter-state transport is by luxury buses which run on diesel. Most goods — foodstuffs, equipment, etc — are moved across the country by trucks and trailers running on diesel. Medium to large-scale businesses run on diesel. All these impact on the cost of living. Diesel was N700 when Tinubu came in and is now N1,300 or thereabout, but there are no calls for strike.

Why always petrol? I asked a senior friend last week and he reasoned that it was because it is one product that affects the life of every Nigerian. Really? More than the prices of garri, rice, yam, maize, tomato and beans? I have never heard that anybody went on strike because of rising prices of yam or rice. Does that mean Nigerians consider petrol to be more important than food? I don’t think so. My conclusion, which may be tenuous, is that we think, rightly or wrongly, that petrol is “government property”. Therefore, government should take sole responsibility for the pricing in the interest of Nigerians, whether or not it can afford the bill. We classify petrol as a socio-political commodity.

Early 2023, when petrol was N185 in Lagos, I told a filling station attendant that I had just returned from Ghana where a litre was about N700. He replied: “But their government is doing something for them. Fuel subsidy is the only thing we enjoy in Nigeria.” His sense was that Ghana was spending the revenue from petrol on its citizens. I wanted to explain to him that the Ghanaian government does not sell petrol, that it is purely the business of private companies, but courage failed me. Petrol price in Ghana is determined like the price of yam: how much did I buy it? How much did I transport it? How much will I sell to make a margin? We have been unable to achieve this in Nigeria since 1986.

I don’t know who brought up this idea that with Dangote Refinery, petrol would be cheap because it is locally refined. How? The major cost input is crude oil. If crude oil goes for $80/barrel, products cannot be cheap — except we subsidise the crude. A benefit of local refining is the elimination of shipping cost, which does not amount to much. Shipping is the cheapest form of cargo transport across the globe. The biggest benefit of local refining is that we would conserve the FX we spend on fuel imports. The downside, though, is that if we sell crude in naira, we will lose the opportunity to earn FX from oil exports and that could further hurt the naira. Every policy comes with a trade-off.

In the final analysis, whatever we do with petrol subsidy, there will be repercussions. We remove it, Nigerians will suffer but the treasury will suffer less. We retain it, Nigerians will suffer less but the treasury will suffer more. Know that, know peace. It is for the government to weigh its options. But this administration has been disingenuous. They should come out and tell us the truth with their chest. They should lay bare their thinking. Do you want to treat petrol as a socio-political commodity? Do they want to truly deregulate? Why play games? In 2024 — over 180 years after education came to Nigeria — we are still being treated as a colony of ignoramuses. It is what it is.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

GUTTER POLITICS

If you have been following the campaigns in Edo state ahead of the 2024 governorship election, you would be forgiven for thinking the most important issues are marital status and child-bearing. The PDP went on a campaign of taunting two of the leading candidates for being single or unmarried, while Senator Adams Oshiomhole (APC) went completely into the gutter by saying the incumbent governor and his wife are childless. How low can Nigerian politicians go in the struggle for power which, more often than not, is for the ultimate goal of personal aggrandisement and not the progress of the society? Unfortunately, their supporters will defend (or try to justify) the nonsense. Tasteless.

HATE SPACE

Canadian police authorities have arrested a 46-year-old Nigerian woman who allegedly made a hate speech — to the extent of vowing to poison the meals of people from some ethnic groups. The cyber space is full of hate speech but while Western countries are arresting and prosecuting the perpetrators, Nigerian authorities appear to be more interested in fighting personal battles for politicians and other VIPs over “cyber stalking” and “defamation”. They must also crack down on those cowards stoking ethnic and religious hate on social media. These characters think they can post whatever they like and go scot-free. They are a clear and present danger to this society. Action.

CYBER CRIMINALS

Other forms of cybercrime that are not taken seriously in Nigeria are sextortion and revenge porn. Two Nigerian brothers have just been sentenced to 17 and a half years in prison by a US court for sextortion. Samuel and Samson Ogoshi, 24 and 21 years old respectively, lured Jordan DeMay, a young American boy, to send them nude pictures, pretending to be a girl. They then threatened to spread the images except he sent them money. The boy sent all he could and threatened to kill himself, to which the criminals said he should go ahead. DeMay committed suicide immediately. It’s good Nigerian authorities helped with investigation but they need to be doing more at home. Tragic.

NO COMMENT

Prof. Tahir Mamman, minister of education, recently tried to get JAMB to bar students less than 18 years old from writing the UTME. After the uproar, Dr. Tanko Sununu, his minister of state, has come out to “clarify” the matter. “People just pick up some remarks the minister made, misinterpreted the statements to imply that age restriction has been placed for WAEC and NECO examinations,” he said. “What we have been mentioning was the entry age for university — candidates sitting for the UTME.” That is, you can write the senior school exam if you like but you can’t write the UTME until you are 18. The glaring difference between six and half a dozen. What a clarification! Wonderful.

Todsy, the Super Eagles of Nigeria play against the Cheetahs of Benin Republic in one of the group qualification matches for the African Cup of Nations 2015.

The match will be played on home ground in Uyo, the only venue approved by FIFA as suitable for Nigeria’s Grade A international football matches. That speaks volumes.

Uyo is a venue with excellent facilities but that holds mixed fortunes for the national team. The beautiful modern city in the heart of Nigeria’s remaining rainforest area has hosted as many matches that have been lost as have also been won. It is a home ground that does not play out as one. Gone are the days when the home ground of the national team was described as ‘an abbatoir’ where visiting teams are ‘slaughtered’ on the hallowed turf of the ‘main-bowl’.

The Uyo Township Stadium is seen these days, particularly by visiting teams, as a neutral ground where they can come and stretch the patience of fanatical Nigerian fans. They do not fear coming there to play anymore. The myth of Nigeria’s invincibility at home has been broken, so, winning for the Super Eagles has become psychologically more difficult.

So, as they line out today, for the first time ever, Nigerians lack the usual confidence that their beloved Super Eagles will trounce the Cheetahs, a team that was Nigeria’s whipping boy for all the decades since football between both nations began. It used to be unthinkable that Nigeria could ever lose a football match to Benin Republic. If things were done correctly by Nigerian football administrators, both teams should never belong to the same planet of football. Haba.

Even today, the Cheetahs parade Nigerian players that fail to make the cut of the third-eleven of the Nigerian national team, yet they only have to stroll across the border at Seme, simply and easily change their nationality, and start to play for Benin Republic. These are some of the players that now constitute a real threat to the Super Eagles. This Saturday, they are coming, led by an aggrieved foreign coach, to attempt to terminate Nigeria’s shaky march to Morocco 2025.

The Cheetahs have become a real threat to Nigeria’s ambitions.

The Cheetahs are led by a man with an axe to grind with Nigeria. Gernot Rohr, a German, handled the Super Eagles longer than any coach since Clemens Westerhof in Nigeria’s football history.

At the end of his last contract, for not winning anything and for his team not being convincingly impressive. His contract was not renewed. He left angrily. A segment of the Nigerian media, particularly one suspiciously benefitting from his generosity or presence, somehow, supported and promoted his re-engagement by the Nigerian Football Federation and failed. Meanwhile, the NFF were under pressure from the people to win anything, even pako (wood), but they failed to do so. Reason prevailed, however, and Gernot Rohr was asked to leave. Since then, Rohr has been on a revenge mission.

The elements must have been enjoying the drama and stretched it further with the present plot where a once-rejected coach lies in the other path of Nigeria’s qualification.

He has won Round One on neutral ground in Abidjan, Cote D’Ivoire in a humiliating and convincing defeat of the former ‘giant’ of African football, a team that has diminished in stature and reputation and become vulnerable on home ground, threatened by all teams now, small or big, in African football.

Some analysts credit former minnows in Africa football with developing their football and earning their new place as worthy challengers on the continent. My truth, however, is that it is Nigeria’s decline at all levels of development (excluding female football), and a reflection of the state of the country itself.

The Super Eagles have lost the stronger feathers in their wings!

AFCON 2023, for a period of one month, showed glimpses of interesting possibilities and potential for greatness, but since then, the team has returned to their flightless nature of the past decade.

So, as the match today approaches, sadly, Nigerians are not brimming with their usual confidence. And that includes me. That’s why, also, the build-up to the match has been ‘humble’ and uninspiring. Expectations have been limited. This is reflected even in the team’s build up.

Without a coach until one week ago, the composition of the Super Eagles, as team of players, has not changed significantly from the team that inspired Nigerians at AFCON 2023, and dampened their spirit since then.

More or less, the same set of players are back in it. Captain William Troost-Ekong has fully recovered from a major injury and surgery, but has not played for the national team since February.

Africa’s current Player of the Year, Victor Osimhen, did not play the last set of matches with the Super Eaglesincluding the one against Benin Republic. His state of mind will be a big factor in his performance. It may either weigh him down, or be a source of challenge to prove that his absence was a factor in Nigeria’s loss. He has also been embroiled in several controversies, all of them psychologically dampening. These include his spat with the last coach of the Super Eagles, Finidi George, issues with his coach at Napoli, and issues around his end-of-season transfer saga, a very poor advertisement for his management, and a huge distraction for any meaningful preparation for this match in Uyo.

Victor is the last player to arrive at the Uyo camp with only 24 hours to train with the team for the first time since February. To start him in the line-up will even be a big gamble for coach Eguavoen who is handling the team without earning the right to do so.

Until a few days ago, the team did not have a preferred coach. In fact the team has not had a permanent coach since the team’s relative success at AFCON in February. In the period after then till now, there have been 3 different unsuccessful coaches that handled the team, including the man now saddled once again to do so on a temporary basis for the next two matches over a period of one week.

I feel sorry for Augustine Eguavoen. He is making his 4th appearance at the helm. Yet, he fails till now to secure the people’s confidence. He could neither negotiate nor reject an assignment that is laden with ‘poison’.

Should he ‘fail’ again, he would surely carry the can of responsibility. Should he succeed, his employers are already searching for a foreign successor. So, he has little motivation beyond self to deliver victory.

Finally, he is saddled with assistants that are untested ‘rookies’ in international football. How will the megastars in Super Eagles relate with these local handlers without their level of exposure and experience in playing or even coaching?

That’s the setting for the match this weekend in Uyo.

For once, I shall join in the night vigil for the Super Eagles.

I hope that, somehow, they find the motivation, inspiration and good fortune to inject some rhythm into their game, play with patience, be clinical in front of goal when the rare chances come their way, and win this match for all Nigerians.

Victory will provide a launch pad for hope and better performances ahead for the rest of their campaigns for qualification for AFCON 2025, and the FIFA 2026 World Cup.

I wish the Super Eagles the best of luck today.

Nigeria, Africa’s most populous nation, is no stranger to the struggles between governance and the expectations of the masses. As democratic practices have evolved over the years, so too has the discourse around governance, transparency, and accountability. A recurring theme in the political landscape is the growing chorus of criticism directed at those in power, often dismissed as “wailers” by government sympathizers. However, a deeper look at the situation reveals that this so-called wailing is rooted in concerns over misgovernance, rather than an outright opposition to democracy itself.

Since Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999, the country has witnessed fluctuating fortunes in governance. Promises of development, economic prosperity, and improved welfare for citizens have often been sidelined by pervasive corruption, poor policy implementation, and a lack of accountability from political leaders. Over time, these issues have resulted in widening inequality, high unemployment rates, an economic downturn, and a growing sense of disenfranchisement among ordinary Nigerians.

Democracy in its true form is meant to serve the people, ensuring that their voices are heard and their needs met. Unfortunately, many Nigerian politicians seem to have misinterpreted democracy as a system that allows them to pursue personal interests at the expense of the people they swore to serve. This disconnect between the government and the governed is the crux of the widespread dissatisfaction, and it is here that the term “wailers” comes into play.

In Nigeria’s political lexicon, the term “wailers” has been used to mock and diminish critics of the government. Those who speak out against poor governance, failed promises, or questionable policies are often lumped together and ridiculed as wailers by the ruling party’s loyalists. But who are these so-called wailers?

Wailers, in reality, represent a cross-section of concerned Nigerians who refuse to stay silent in the face of misgovernance. They are the voices demanding accountability, transparency, and good governance. Far from being a nuisance, their outcry is essential to keeping democracy alive. In a functioning democracy, dissent and critique are vital in holding leaders accountable. Wailing, as it is condescendingly termed, is simply an expression of frustration that the democratic promises of good governance are not being fulfilled.

The irony of the situation is that the government, which should be responsive to the needs of the people, often deflects legitimate criticism by labeling it as mere noise-making. Misgovernance, under the guise of democratic leadership, has unfortunately become a recurring theme in Nigeria’s governance cycle. When policies fail, the economy tanks, or social services crumble, the government points fingers at external factors or past administrations, conveniently ignoring the systemic issues within their own ranks.

By dismissing legitimate concerns as wailing, the government and its supporters misunderstand the true essence of democracy. In a democracy, the people are sovereign, and their cries should be taken seriously, not mocked. The wailers are not enemies of the state; they are citizens fighting for the democratic values that the government itself should champion.

One of the greatest threats to democracy is silence in the face of injustice. If Nigerians stop wailing, if they cease to express their dissatisfaction with the state of affairs, it would signify the death of democratic engagement. The very fabric of democracy is woven with threads of dialogue, debate, and, yes, even dissent. When citizens are too afraid or too disillusioned to speak out, misgovernance flourishes unchecked.

The current state of Nigeria demands active citizen participation. The wailers, far from being misguided or obstructionist, are crucial to Nigeria’s democratic project. They are the individuals who dare to ask the hard questions, who refuse to accept mediocrity, and who push for a better Nigeria. Silencing these voices only perpetuates the cycle of misgovernance that has plagued the country for far too long.

For Nigeria’s democracy to truly work there must be a shift in how criticism is viewed. Instead of dismissing critics as wailers, the government must engage in constructive dialogue. There needs to be a space for civil discourse where the concerns of the people are addressed, rather than dismissed.

Without a doubt, democracy thrives when there is an ongoing conversation between the rulers and the ruled. This conversation should be respectful, transparent, and aimed at improving governance. The current trend of labeling dissenters as wailers only deepens the divide between the government and the people. Nigeria cannot afford such division, especially at a time when the country faces numerous socio-economic challenges.

The misunderstanding of the wailers in Nigeria is symptomatic of a larger issue: the disconnect between the government’s perception of democracy and the realities of misgovernance. As long as legitimate concerns are mocked and ignored, misgovernance will continue to thrive. It is time to reframe the narrative around dissent and to understand that those who speak out are not wailers but advocates for a better, more just and more democratic Nigeria.

In the end, misgovernance and democracy are at odds with each other. The wailers, far from being a nuisance, are a crucial part of the democratic process, fighting for the very values that Nigeria’s democracy is supposed to uphold. Their voices must not only be heard but respected as part of the nation’s quest for genuine progress.

The age-old adage, “The pen is mightier than the sword,” encapsulates a profound truth about the influence of ideas and communication in shaping societies. While the sword represents brute force and violence, the pen symbolizes intellect, creativity, and the power of words. It is against the foregoing backdrop that this writer is in this context exploring how the written word has historically triumphed over physical might, influencing change, inspiring movements, and fostering understanding.

Throughout history, humanity has witnessed numerous instances where the written word has led to significant societal transformations. Consider the impact of influential texts such as Thomas Paine’s “Common Sense”, which galvanized the American colonies towards independence. Paine’s persuasive arguments and eloquent prose inspired a revolution, demonstrating that ideas can mobilize people far more effectively than weapons.

Similarly, the abolitionist writings of Frederick Douglass and Harriet Beecher Stowe played crucial roles in the fight against slavery. Their words not only raised awareness but also humanized the plight of enslaved individuals, swaying public opinion and ultimately contributing to the abolition movement. These examples illustrate that while swords can conquer territories, it is the pen that can conquer hearts and minds.

Literature and journalism have long served as powerful tools for social change. Novels like George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” and Harper Lee’s “To Kill a Mockingbird” have sparked critical conversations about governance, justice, and morality. These works challenge readers to reflect on their values and the world around them, often leading to a greater awareness of social injustices.

In the realm of journalism, investigative reporting has exposed corruption and abuse of power, holding leaders accountable. The Watergate scandal, uncovered by journalists Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein, is a prime example of how the pen can dismantle political tyranny. Their relentless pursuit of truth through writing ultimately led to the resignation of President Nixon, showcasing the pen’s ability to effect change where force fails.

In today’s world, where freedom of speech is increasingly threatened and governance often fails to serve the people, opinion articles have emerged as a powerful tool for holding those in power accountable. These pieces are more than just personal expressions; they act as intellectual protests against bad governance, exposing leadership failures, challenging unjust policies, and giving a voice to the silenced.

One of the key roles of opinion articles is fostering accountability in governance. In countries where institutions are weak and corruption is rampant, governments often operate with impunity. Opinion writers step in to fill this void by shedding light on failures that would otherwise go unnoticed. Whether it’s economic mismanagement, poor infrastructure, or widespread corruption, these articles serve as the public’s eyes and ears, calling out inefficiencies and demanding corrective action.

Politicians often try to shape narratives through public relations and spin, but opinion articles counter this with reasoned analysis and evidence. When governance fails, whether in economic policy, handling insecurity, or providing basic services, opinion writers expose these gaps, offering an alternative discourse that challenges official propaganda. By cutting through political spin, these pieces become a form of protest, providing a clearer picture of reality.

The phrase “speaking truth to power” finds its purest expression in opinion writing. Unlike objective news reporting, which must remain neutral, opinion articles allow writers to take a stance, critique leadership, and challenge the status quo. This freedom is essential in environments where bad governance thrives on public silence or institutional complicity. Through carefully crafted arguments, opinion writers hold leaders accountable for their actions and decisions, putting them under public scrutiny.

Tough questions, such as why public funds are mismanaged or why citizens lack basic services like healthcare and education, are posed by opinion writers. By asking these questions, they place pressure on those in power. Without these inquiries, governance would go unchecked, allowing corruption and inefficiency to flourish. Opinion articles become a thorn in the side of complacent leaders, forcing them to confront uncomfortable truths.

In places where political protest is banned or restricted, opinion writing becomes a form of silent civil disobedience. The pen becomes a powerful weapon against bad governance, allowing writers to express dissatisfaction without the risks associated with public demonstrations. Many journalists and opinion writers have faced persecution for their work because their words can influence public opinion and destabilize oppressive regimes. The silent protest embedded in these articles can be as effective as large-scale demonstrations, often sparking larger conversations about human rights abuses or financial scandals.

One of the most potent aspects of opinion articles is their ability to amplify the voices of the marginalized and disenfranchised, those most affected by bad governance. Opinion writers give these individuals a platform, highlighting their struggles and exposing the inequalities that stem from poor leadership. When government policies fail to address citizens’ basic needs, such as access to clean water, affordable housing, or functional healthcare, opinion articles act as advocacy pieces. They bring the plight of ordinary citizens into public view and pressurize governments to act.

In some cases, these articles have the power to shape public opinion and even influence policy. By providing well-researched, thoughtful analysis, opinion writers spark debates that go beyond the newspaper pages. Public opinion is a powerful force in any democracy, and well-informed citizens can demand better leadership. Historically, opinion pieces have driven policy changes by exposing governmental neglect or advocating for reforms. When written by respected voices, they carry authority, compelling policymakers to respond and often triggering reforms.

As new forms of communication, like social media, the role of opinion writing remains critical in protesting bad governance. While social media may ignite conversations, opinion articles provide the depth, structure, and insight needed for lasting change. In an increasingly complex world grappling with issues like economic inequality, climate change, and pandemics, incisive criticism through opinion writing is more urgent than ever. These articles remind those in power that their actions are being closely watched and judged by a critical public.

In today’s digital age, the power of the pen has evolved but remains just as potent. Social media platforms allow individuals to share their thoughts and mobilize support for various causes. Movements like #BlackLivesMatter,#MeToo, #EndBadGovernance and #EndSARS gained momentum through the written word, demonstrating how online discourse can challenge systemic injustices and promote social change.

However, this new landscape also presents challenges. Misinformation can spread rapidly, and the written word can be weaponized to incite division and hatred. Therefore, it is crucial for individuals to wield their pens responsibly, ensuring that their words contribute to constructive dialogue rather than conflict.

In fact, the phrase “The pen is mightier than the sword” serves as a reminder of the enduring power of words. While swords may achieve temporary victories, it is the ideas and narratives shaped by the pen that leave a lasting impact on humanity. As we navigate an increasingly complex world, let us remember to harness the power of our words to inspire, educate, and unite rather than divide. In doing so, we can continue to illustrate the profound truth that the pen, indeed, holds greater power than the sword.

Tinubu’s coldblooded statement on his reforms is not dissimilar from the image provoked by the award-winning photographer, Kevin Carter. Aged 33, Carter’s highly-rated photo appeared in the New York Times of March 26, 1993. It was the photo of a famine-stricken Sudanese boy. Initially thought to be a girl, his name was later found out to be Kong Nyong. The boy had collapsed of intense hunger and lay on his face in the hot desert sun of Sudan. He had an empty food bowl hidden beside his face like an Almajiri. A beaded necklace of his Sudanese nationality jutted out of his feeble neck. He was said to be on his way to Ayod, the United Nations ration centre in Sudan, which was about a half-kilometre away. As he walked languidly down the coarse road of the desert, all of a sudden, Kong’s hungry strength failed him.

Less than a meter from the collapsed boy was the unnerving figure of a vulture eyeing the gaunt boy and awaiting his eventual death, so that it could commence his devouring. Carter, on a United Nations photography assignment, according to him, took diverse photographs of the “interesting scene” of the collapsed boy and hurriedly left the scene. The photo went mega viral. Although, entitled ‘The Struggling Girl’, it won the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography in 1994, Carter committed suicide four months after, on July 27, 1994. He poisoned himself with carbon monoxide. Carter had been reportedly taunted by the world and haunted by what people perceived as his inhuman treatment of the dying boy. A caller on a radio programme, who asked what Carter did to help Kong after taking the “interesting” picture of the young boy, was shocked at his curt reply of, “I had a plane to catch.” Carter had earlier confessed to his friend that, “I see all this, and all I can think of is Megan,” his young daughter. The radio caller’s stinging retort was the clincher. It led to an emotional turmoil that eventually led to Carter’s breakdown and suicide. The radio caller had told him pointedly: “On that field were two vultures – you and the cadaver-eating bird!”

Nigeria is at the juncture where three footpaths meet. It is a critical intersection that troubles the stranger newly come to town. Speaking directly to the dilemma of a stranger at a loss on which of the three intersections to follow, Yoruba aptly named the juncture Ìkóríta méta tíí dààmú àlejò. There seems to be no need for pretext any longer. Efunsetan is Prof Akinwumi Ishola’s dramatization of the exploits of Efunsetan Aniwura, the powerful matriarch and pre-eminent slave merchant of Ibadan in the 19^th century. At that intersection when she finds out that her slave had been impregnated by a fellow slave, Efunsetan burst out into a scornful laughter. I paraphrase her hysterics: “The wild wind has blown and the naked rump of the hen is free to be beheld by all!”

It is same for Nigerians. The duo of those who aided and abetted the current runners of Nigeria into office, and those who didn’t, have come to same intersection. Bishop Mathew Hassan-Kukah drew the grim picture succinctly, in a recent beautifully arresting imagery. “A girl was asked, ‘which party are you, APC, LP or PDP?,’ she said: ‘I am hungry’”.

In literature, at the final part of a play, film, or narrative, when a natural resolution and the final strands of a plot are tied together, with knotty matters straightened, a denouement is said to have been achieved. Here, Yoruba conjure the allegory of the dead (Ení kú) and the lost (pèlú eni t’ó sonù) who have finally met each other. Today in Nigeria, hunger and pain have united us all. Our brains seem to have reset. If you watch viral videos of regrets and recounts about the Tinubu misadventure that litter the social media today, you will agree that the dead and the lost have indeed found their mutual level. At this critical stage, ownership of the clothing regalia found on the Egungun masquerade can no longer be denied. It belongs to the Egungun. No one can deny that the last fifteen fatal months of the Nigerian life have been an experience in weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth. Moving forward is as challenging as back-pedalling. Nigeria is in dire straits. The Nigerian birds have refused to chirp as is their wont. Our rats now mutter foreign tongues. The government in power will seem to have exhausted all the talismanic magic wands in its pouch. Lies (iró) have failed liars and falsehood (èké) has broken the spines of its spinners.

In 1925 Abeokuta, the Alake, paramount ruler of Egbaland, Oba Sir Ladapo Ademola, was trapped inside a puddle of falsehood… until a denouement came. The Oba arrived his own Ìkóríta Méta without bargaining for it, trapped in a puddle of lies and mischief. Writer, radio broadcaster and educationist, Isaac Oluwole Delano, collated the king’s dilemma in a 1955-published book he entitled Aiye D’aiye Oyinbo (This world has morphed into the Whiteman’s). The story gained such huge traction in the Abeokuta area that it was nicknamed the Faripo Incident.

Faripo was a notorious convicted criminal. One morning, as warders conducted their rounds, findings revealed that Faripo had escaped from the Egba Native Administration Prison. There was pandemonium. Blame game began. The story whooshed from one home to the other with baffling speed of lightning, until it encircled the land. In no long a time, grapevine fingered Oba Ademola as one behind Faripo’s disappearance. Permutations were based on alleged past financial malfeasances of Oba Ademola as a prince in Lagos. In 1890, very hardworking Prince Ademola was head printer of Horatius Jackson’s Weekly Record newspaper and played a leading role between Lagos and his hometown Abeokuta in negotiating the passage of railway through Egbaland. The year 1920 was specifically fingered as the year Prince Ademola engaged in the less-than-straight financial transactions. Thus, the disappearance of Faripo was put to the pre-monarchy association between the convicted criminal and the king. According to the rumour, while in prison, Faripo had threatened to spill the beans. The above was a perfect foundation for the allegation that Oba Ademola secured the services of fellow prisoners to murder Faripo in prison and carefully put away his corpse.

Faripo’s disappearance caused immense tension in Abeokuta and environ. Even the Resident and District Officer were not immune from the spinning lie. The two officers then ordered police investigation. In the process, a corpse, assumed to be Faripo’s, was exhumed. Even Faripo’s mother identified the remains as her son’s. At this time, the lie had taken a full weight of truth. Oba Ademola, the major suspect, was about to be investigated. Then, all of a sudden, Faripo was reported found in Oyo town. A few days later, Faripo himself appeared in Abeokuta. Then the police cornered all who made false statements regarding the alleged murder. Oba Adedapo survived his traducers, made up of liars and merchants of falsehood.

A lot of talks have been generated over the sincerity or otherwise of this government in the last fifteen months. Without making a mountain out of a molehill of the issue, the truth is, governments, all over the world, tell lies. If you listen to the narratives from former President Donald Trump, he accuses the Joe Biden administration of lying to the people. It is also vice versa from Biden. Governments have so many reasons to engage in falsehoods. These falsehoods can sometimes be helpful. They range from ones in defence of national security to national integrity. However, when falsehood becomes a defining governmental character, then something is awesomely wrong.

Since its establishment, the NNPC has been an opaque corporation. A 1995 Working paper with the title ‘NNPC and Nigeria’s Oil Patronage Ecosystem’ had this unflattering word about the corporation: “Any attempt to analyze NNPC… must first confront the question of what it really is. Despite its formal organization as a vertically-integrated oil company, NNPC is neither a real commercial entity nor a meaningful oil operator.  It lacks control over the revenue it generates and thus is unable to set its own strategy.  It relies on other firms to perform essentially all of the most complex functions that are hallmarks of operating oil companies.  Yet unlike some NOCs it also fails to fit the profile of a government agency: Its portfolio of activities is too diverse, incoherent, and beyond the reach of government control for it to function as a government policymaking instrument.”

Irregularities in financial operations and non-conformity with statutory laws have been the NNPC’s abiding operational philosophy. Governments upon governments have capitalized on the opacity of its operations to fleece the people. It begins with the fact that Nigerians don’t know the amount of crude oil their country processes in a day, nor the amount of fuel they consume. You could hide an elephant inside the purse of the NNPC and remove foreign currencies of similar size.  Perhaps, the most phenomenally distressing has been this regime of fuel subsidy. It has since made emergency billionaires of laggards and is continuous till today. Nigeria has been fleeced of trillions of Naira all in the name of regulating the prices of this precious commodity.

Those who invested hope in this government believed, upon being sworn in, that it would dissemble the ancient incubus of corruption that has festered untamed in the NNPC. Only God knows where they got that illogic. Can Beelzeebub fight Beelzeebub since a house divided against itself falleth? They didn’t have to wait too long for the quashing of their hope. Some have even said that the foundation upon which this government is built is falsehood. Take for instance the subsidy regime pronounced by the president on May 29, 2023. Mountainous lies were told to give that lie a life. Government had begun making huge savings from subsidy, we were told. Economists however told us that it was incongruous that government wouldn’t be paying subsidy when the Naira to a dollar’s incestuous relationship is this abiding. At a time, the exchange rate went as high as N1,900, with government purchasing processed petrol in dollar. Recently, that adulterous relationship went burst and, as Efunsetan cried, “The wild wind (then blew) and the naked rump of the hen is free to be beheld by all!”

As it is often said, tonnes of lies are needed to defend a single strand of falsehood. It is same here. NNPC has gone into a binge of falsehoods ever since. When Reuters alleged that the corporation owed its oil suppliers to the tune of $6.8b, NNPC promptly and vehemently denied the claim. To shore up that lie, in August, NNPC announced via what it claimed was its audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2023, that its revenue from crude oil sales in 2023 had jumped up to N14.07 trillion, an increase of 298.7 percent. This was against the N3.52 trillion earned in 2022. Shortly after, in admitting that it was indeed owing oil suppliers the sum of $6b, NNPC painted a scenario of national insolvency.

In its relationship with the Dangote Refinery, NNPC has extended its serial falsehoods. This it does in its communication with Nigerians on what actually is the subsisting deal between the two. The most laughable scenario we are left to grapple with is that of a private refinery and national oil giant, the NNPC, exchanging liability of responsibility to fix fuel price as cavalierly as beer mugs are exchanged in shebeens. Trillions of Naira have been spent to make the four Nigerian refinery corpses walk, to no avail. It is either the Tinubu presidency infected NNPC with its lie virus or NNPC cleverly learnt the lying body language of Aso Rock. Or, both. The buck of this falsehood regime however stops at the table of the president. He is perceived as either abetting the lies or doesn’t see anything wrong with it.

The trust deficit between Nigerians and their president is as a thick fog. The people believe he has exported the “Eko for show opacity” to the federal. A government that wanted to disconnect from the rank corruption in NNPC won’t have the president as minister of petroleum. Its first hammer, according to projections, would land heavily on Mele Kyari and his oil-sucking bug directors. There was no hammer and no head for it to land on. The president compounded the equation by appointing his old warhorse ally as chair of board, a man whose recency of knowledge of the oil industry is as fossilized as prehistoric remains. Rumour also circulates that every liter of petrol bought in Nigeria is a goat tethered for sacrifice by the grove of Bourdilllon. The corruption broth is finally cooked.

Now, Nigeria is on her knees, totally castrated by a binge of falsehoods and Nigerian rulers’ illicit thirst to make money at the expense of Nigeria and Nigerians. Roiling angers are the mask worn by Nigerians as they walk long hours on the street to their destinations. Nigerians are dying in droves and fat cats are still talking about policies. You could feel the thickness of hopelessness hanging in the Nigerian sky. Yet, the president talks unfeelingly like a compassionless surgeon who just had a job to do – yank some goddamn flesh off the navel. I have analyzed President Tinubu’s China speech severally in less than 24 hours. He talked about a reform that is painful but which would yield results. Results to who, and for whom? To skeletons or cadavers in the mortuary? The president seems to have snatched the trophy of heartlessness from Ibrahim Babangida and his MAMSER, SAP excruciating policies. We should have known that Tinubu learnt the art from the Prince of Niger.

Deploying the image of Kevin Carter and his award-winning photography, dying Nigerians are Kong Nyong, battered by hunger and long hours at fuel stations. Hungry vultures are biding their time to feast on our carcasses. Our president has a reform to carry out. And, like Kevin, has “a flight to catch”.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s visit to China has been portrayed as a significant move towards shaping the future of Nigeria's economy. One of the key takeaways from the trip is that the hard decisions his government has so far taken since May 29, 2023, such as subsidy removal which he literarily announced on the day of his inauguration as president by saying “Subsidy is gone”, and currency devaluation on assumption of office, are intended for the greater good of the country. These measures are positioned as critical steps toward revamping Nigeria’s financial stability, creating long-term benefits, and promoting sustainable development.

To buttress the foregoing viewpoint, it is explanatory to recall that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu in Beijing said he was ready to take the hard decisions to move the nation forward, adding that it is not always easy for a leader to have a national consensus on issues.

However, while these tough choices are being enforced, it is essential that the leadership also takes on the responsibility of tightening their own belts. Nigerian citizens are being asked to make sacrifices, even as they face the brunt of the current economic hardship, with inflation skyrocketing and daily essentials becoming increasingly unaffordable. If the Tinubu government is serious about reviving the country’s economy, it must ensure that those at the top lead by example.

The reason for urging Nigerian political leaders to lead by example cannot be farfetched as it is unarguable that in times of national austerity that nothing could be more counterproductive than government officials maintaining an extravagant lifestyle, while the masses are called to endure economic hardship. For Nigerians to buy into the narrative that these tough measures are truly for their benefit, they need to see evidence of leaders walking the talk.

In fact, austerity should not only be reserved for the common man. The Nigerian populace deserves to see their leaders experience some of the same sacrifices they are being asked to make. This could mean cutting down on lavish government spending, reducing the perks enjoyed by public officials, and reining in the ostentatious lifestyle often flaunted by those in power.

During Tinubu's China visit, he would have observed how that country’s leadership, particularly during critical periods of reform, embraced austerity measures themselves. Chinese leaders exhibited a sense of shared sacrifice with their citizens, which helped strengthen public trust in the government’s vision. Nigeria’s leaders should take a page from this playbook.

In fact, the need for public officials to show solidarity in times of hardship cannot be overstated. Nigerians are keen observers, and they recognize when their leaders are out of touch with the realities on the ground. A government that is seen as disconnected from the people’s struggles is more likely to face public backlash and skepticism.

If Tinubu and his administration are genuine in their quest to revamp the economy, they must commit to belt-tightening across all levels of leadership. Therefore, government can demonstrate few practical steps in that direction by reducing its convoy. The sight of long, luxury convoys accompanying politicians has become synonymous with excess and privilege. A reduction in such displays would signal that the government is serious about cutting waste.

Trimming the salaries and benefits of politicians and public officeholders in Nigeria is no doubt a step towards cutting cost of governance. A significant reduction in these perks, along with transparent disclosure of earnings, would show a willingness to share in the sacrifices being demanded of ordinary Nigerians.

Also, there is the need for the limitation of foreign trips and luxury spending. Given the foregoing backdrop, it is not a misnomer to suggest that frequent foreign travels, especially for non-essential reasons, must be curbed. While international relations are important, unnecessary trips at taxpayers’ expense in times of economic hardship send the wrong message.

In fact, Nigerian political leaders must lead by example. This can be done by demonstrating an austere lifestyle in times of economic turmoil, just as presently being experienced.  In the face of Nigeria's ongoing economic challenges, one fundamental question remains unanswered: Are our political leaders truly in touch with the reality of the hardship facing the masses? While millions of ordinary Nigerians grapple with skyrocketing inflation, unemployment, and the ever-increasing cost of living, it seems as though the nation’s leadership class is insulated from the economic turmoil gripping the country. This disconnection raises an urgent need for political leaders to lead by example through the demonstration of an austere lifestyle.

Without any scintilla of hyperbole, Nigeria is facing one of its toughest economic periods in recent history. According to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS), inflation reached an all-time high in 2023, with prices of food, fuel, and essential services becoming unaffordable for many. The removal of fuel subsidies has worsened the situation, leaving citizens with the daunting task of navigating these harsh economic realities with little relief in sight. Yet, despite these difficult conditions, political leaders continue to live lives of opulence, funded by taxpayers who are barely surviving.

From fleets of luxury cars to extravagant overseas trips and ostentatious personal expenses, Nigeria’s political elite has shown little sign of embracing an austere lifestyle that reflects the harsh times. The public sees these extravagant expenditures and wonders how leaders can convincingly address the economic crisis while being so far removed from the struggles of the average citizen.

Extravagant spending by the presidency under Tinubu's administration has sparked widespread criticism in a country already grappling with economic hardships. Amid rising inflation and poverty, reports of lavish expenditures by the presidential office have fueled public discontent. Critics argue that the president’s office, along with other government bodies, has indulged in excessive spending on non-essential projects and luxuries, diverting funds from critical areas like education, healthcare, and infrastructure. This comes at a time when most Nigerians are struggling to afford basic necessities, leading to heightened frustration.

One glaring example of this extravagance is the budget allocated for the presidential fleet, security, and renovation of government buildings. Despite promises of austerity and responsible governance, the administration has continued to allocate significant funds to maintain the lifestyles of top officials. This includes multi-billion naira contracts for refurbishing presidential residences and excessive travel expenses for international trips, which have raised questions about priorities and the tone it sets for public office holders. Such practices contrast sharply with the administration's narrative of economic recovery and fiscal discipline.

The impact of these extravagant expenses extends beyond mere optics. It undermines public trust in the government’s ability to manage resources prudently and to empathize with the plight of ordinary citizens. While the presidency has defended these expenditures as necessary for governance, many Nigerians view them as out of touch with the economic reality on the ground. With increasing calls for transparency and accountability, the administration faces pressure to reconsider its spending habits to avoid further alienating an already disillusioned populace.

In times of economic downturn, a true leader should not only acknowledge the crisis but also take visible and meaningful steps to share in the sacrifices of the people. To restore public trust, Nigerian political leaders must demonstrate that they are willing to tighten their belts just like the citizens they serve. This can be done in several practical ways. 

The reason for the foregoing cannot be farfetched when political leaders visibly adopt an austere lifestyle; it sends a powerful message to citizens: we are in this together. It shows that leadership is not about privilege but about service, and that even the highest offices in the land are not exempted from the sacrifices required to rebuild the economy. This could lead to increased public confidence and a renewed sense of unity in overcoming the nation’s economic challenges.

Moreover, demonstrating austerity at the top can inspire better management of resources across all sectors of society. If leaders embrace frugality and accountability, it could encourage public institutions and private businesses to follow suit, leading to a more responsible and efficient use of national resources.

Nigeria’s economic crisis demands much more than rhetoric and promises. It requires real leadership that is empathetic and connected to the struggles of the masses. Political leaders can no longer afford to live in luxury while millions of Nigerians suffer. Leading by example through an austere lifestyle is not only a symbolic gesture but a necessary step towards bridging the growing gap between the leaders and the led. The time has come for our leaders to show that they are ready to make the same sacrifices they expect from the people, and in doing so, they will be better equipped to steer the nation towards economic recovery.

The attention of the NNPC Ltd has been drawn to a press release by the Muslim Rights Concern, MURIC, which claims that the Dangote Refinery Limited (DRL) is being undermined by actions of the Nigerian

National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd). Specifically, MURIC asserts that recent changes to the pump price of Premium Motor Spirit (PMS) will prevent the Dangote Refinery from offering lower

prices and that NNPC Ltd has become the sole offtaker of all products from the refinery.

To set the records straight, NNPC Ltd wishes to further state as follows:

1. The pricing of petroleum products from any refinery, including the Dangote Refinery Ltd (DRL), is determined by global market forces.

          The recent changes in PMS prices have no impact on the DRL or any other domestic refinery's access to the Nigerian market. In fact, if current prices are perceived as high, it presents an ideal                      opportunity

           for the refinery to sell its products at lower prices in the Nigerian market.

2. Furthermore, we emphasize that there is no guarantee of lower prices associated with domestic refining compared to any global parity pricing framework, as confirmed by the DRL. The NNPC Ltd will only fully offtake PMS from the DRL if the market prices of PMS are higher than the pump prices in Nigeria. The DRL and any other domestic refinery are free to sell directly to any marketer on a willing buyer, willing seller basis, which is the current practice for all fully deregulated products. NNPC Ltd has no desire or intention to become the distributor for any entity in a free market environment, and therefore, the notion of becoming a sole offtaker does not arise.

3. The NNPC Ltd cannot undermine a business in which it holds a billion dollar stake. 4. As an advocacy group for fair and just treatment, MURIC should have verified the facts before making statements that are entirely flawed and has the potential to incite ordinary Nigerians against the NNPC Ltd.

Olufemi Soneye

Chief Corporate Communications Officer

NNPC Ltd