OTHERS' VIEWS

OTHERS' VIEWS

Nigeria, this Thursday, May 29, 2025,  marks its 26th anniversary ending brutal military rule, and embarking on the road to democracy.  I am reminded, on this occasion, of three political figures who contributed to this situation.

President  Bola  Ahmed Tinubu emerged into  national consciousness in 1992  when he was elected the Senator representing the Lagos West Constituency.  The following year when the June 12 presidential election, won by Chief Moshood Kashimawo Abiola, was annulled by the Babangida junta, he became one of the major advocates of de-annulment.  He was like Abiola, a good social  mixer  and seemed to have friends in high places. Also, when shortly after the Abacha coup and the head of the junta needed to meet Abiola for secret discussions, they each had a witness: Abacha had General Oladipo Diya  who was his  Deputy, while Abiola had Tinubu. Abiola and Tinubu were populists and shared Abiola’s  political agenda: “Hope ’93, Farewell To Poverty: How to make Nigeria a better place for all.”  

When six years later, he ran for gubernatorial election in Lagos State, Tinubu seemed to have dusted up that manifesto. At his inauguration as Governor, he promised  Lagosians  a better life and assured them of “a good economic programme that will eradicate poverty and provide employment for the jobless…” Equally, Rauf  Aregbesola, when, in 2007, he ran for the gubernatorial election in Osun State,  unfolded a similar programme.  His  Six-Point Agenda promised to promote functional education, banish poverty, banish unemployment, restore healthy living, banish hunger and, enhance communal peace and progress.

When the Abacha regime cracked  down on pro-democracy activists, Tinubu went into exile in 1994 and returned in 1998 after the dictator’s death. Abiola had died in detention under controversial circumstances on July 7, 1998. On his return from exile, Tinubu ran for the gubernatorial election of Lagos State  in January 1999 and won. The Director  of his campaign team, the Bola Ahmed Tinubu Campaign Organisation, BATCO,    was Aregbesola. The latter had ran for the House of Representatives in 1992 while  Tinubu ran  for Senate in the same Lagos West area. Tinubu had won  while Aregbesola lost, but that campaign  had brought them together.  When in 2003, Tinubu ran for re-election, Aregbesola was, again, the Director of his campaign team that ensured victory.

After Tinubu’s  1999 victory as governor,  his team penned down Aregbesola as Senior Special Adviser  to the Lagos State House of Assembly. But when  the list of the  new cabinet  in the state was announced on radio, Aregbesola was amongst the commissioners named.  Apparently, Tinubu had put  his foot down, insisting that the former should be in his new cabinet.  Aregbesola was named Commissioner for Works  and Infrastructure.  He spent eight years during which the salutary work of the Ministry in executing huge  road construction  and building  massive public works,  was one of the undeniable achievements of the Tinubu administration. This partly  led to the contested claims that: “Tinubu built Lagos”.

Aregbesola’s  demonstrable competence, knowledge and commitment were so  visible in his first four years as Commissioner, that Governor Bisi Akande  of Osun State approached Tinubu to allow Aregesola become his running mate in his 2003 bid for re- election.  Aregbesola did not want to cut short his  service in Lagos State and, clearly, Tinubu  still needed the services of the latter, not just in his cabinet but also for his re-election for a second term. Besides, Tinubu’s    re-election promised to be quite tough because he had openly  confronted the dictatorial tendencies of President Olusegun Obasanjo.

For instance, following  clashes between the police and a militant ethnic group,  the Oodua People’s Congress, OPC,    Obasanjo    on January 13, 2000, wrote Tinubu a letter threatening to impose emergency rule on Lagos State. Obasanjo told Tinubu: “When either by utterance, action or indeed inaction, a Chief Executive shows a loss of control in the maintenance of law and order in his state, it becomes incumbent on the Federal Government to take appropriate action to arrest the situation, usually in the form of the imposition of a State of Emergency.   “Mr. Governor, I regret that I have not seen any action on your part in the recent past to suggest that you are in control of the security situation in Lagos State. On the contrary there is evidence of increasing disorder, loss of lives and property and a general sense of fear among the citizens of Lagos State. This is an intolerable situation.”

Tinubu had responded, blaming the Obasanjo administration for the insecurity.  The latter, he wrote, ran a Police which was  “undermanned, ill-equipped, poorly motivated and demoralised”.  He advised it to either live up to its responsibilities or “allow for the necessary constitutional amendment to allow the states to bear their own cross”. Also, Tinubu had rejected the overt directives of Yoruba leaders that the six states in Western Nigeria, including Lagos State, should back the 2003 re-election bid  of President Obasanjo. The states had been  run by the opposition Alliance for Democracy, AD.  Clearly, the Presidency was displeased by Tinubu’s opposition and he knew he had an uphill task in his hands. So, Akande’s  request that Aregbesola became  his running mate in Osun State could not be met.  

As it turned out,  in the South-West, only Tinubu was returned in the gubernatorial election as his  five other colleagues, fell to the onslaught of  Obasanjo’s    Peoples Democratic Party, PDP.   Once he became the Governor of  Osun State, Aregbesola    displayed    the spirit  of Tinubu’s  relatively outstanding performance in Lagos. When at the expiration of his tenure in Osun State, he returned to Lagos, his  GRA Ikeja home was called “Second Bourdillion” in reference to his closeness to Tinubu who lived on Bourdillion Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.  It was an indication that some saw Aregbesola as Tinubu’s deputy in politics, at least in  the politics of  South-Western Nigeria.

Tinubu was carrying on the populist vision of Abiola and Aregbesola was helping to realise that vision. But politically, the three politicians had some divergent positions. Abiola  was a populist of the Right, Tinubu was Centre Right,  while Aregbesola  was Left.  Abiola was very close to the military top brass.  Tinubu did not wholly embrace military rule but worked closely with Abiola for the birth  of the Abacha  military regime. In contrast,  Aregbesola distanced himself from the military. Given his role in the 1978 student uprising against military rule, he disliked the latter.  He,  like many in the Left, viewed the military  as political usurpers. So, while Abiola and Tinubu might have had some confidence that the military would agree to disengage and willingly return to the barracks, Aregbesola thought the Generals had a hidden agenda. All three have played  major roles in the contemporary politics of the country.

 

The conferment of an honorary doctorate degree on the wife of the Anambra State Governor, Mrs. Nonye Soludo, during the combined 11th to 15th convocation ceremonies of Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu University (COOU), was more than a ceremonial highlight—it reflected the Soludo administration’s people-centered development model that integrates health, education, and community empowerment.

Held at the university’s Igbariam campus, the event marked a historic milestone in the life of the institution, as it celebrated 25 years of academic excellence. Dignitaries, faculty members, students, alumni, and state officials gathered to honour graduating students and reflect on the evolution of the university over the years.

In his address, Anambra State Governor, Prof. Chukwuma Charles Soludo, CFR, used the occasion to reflect on the transformation of COOU since his assumption of office. “The university is far different from what it used to be since my last time here,” he noted, emphasizing that government alone cannot fast-track development. Instead, he advocated for strong partnerships with the private sector and local communities to drive innovation and growth.

Governor Soludo paid tribute to the founder of the university, the late Governor Dr. Chinwoke Mbadinuju, noting that his legacy must not go unnoticed. “Late Dr. Mbadinuju is not celebrated enough here. We must find something significant to immortalize him,” the governor stressed. He also extended commendations to other past leaders and stakeholders who have contributed to the university’s development, affirming, “I celebrate all men of goodwill who love and believe in education as the bridge to the future.”

The Acting Vice Chancellor, Prof. Kate Omenugha expressed pride in the university's stable and uninterrupted academic calendar over the past several years. “We are proud to combine five years of academic success into this celebration,” she remarked. “This stable academic calendar is a legacy we intend to sustain as we move forward.” Prof. Omenugha also lauded Governor Soludo for his numerous contributions to the university community and welcomed continued partnerships to enhance educational opportunities. “We appreciate the governor for his unwavering commitment to our institution,” she said.

Also speaking at the event, the Pro-Chancellor of COOU, Prof. Chidi Odinkalu emphasized the university’s commitment to community engagement and progressive ideas. “We have celebrated our heritage this week, and we intend to forge a vibrant future for this university,” he said, describing the university community as a place where differing views can coexist in a spirit of mutual respect. "I encourage everyone to join in and actively participate in this journey,” he added.

The Commissioner for Education, Prof. Ngozi Chuma-Udeh echoed these sentiments, applauding the governor’s prioritization of education as a foundational pillar for progress in Anambra State. “Governor Soludo’s government remains unwavering in its mission to elevate education in our state,” she affirmed.

The highlight of the day, however, was the conferment of an honorary doctorate degree in science and food nutrition to Mrs. Nonye Soludo, in recognition of her outstanding contributions to health and nutrition, particularly through her flagship initiative, Healthy Living with Nonye Soludo. The programme, which promotes nutrition education, clean eating, and wellness advocacy across communities in the state, has become a grassroots movement, aligning perfectly with her husband’s development vision.

In her remarks, the Governor’s wife expressed deep appreciation for the honour bestowed on her by the university. “This honour belongs to every caregiver, every woman working daily to raise healthy families. I thank the university and our people for supporting our journey,” she said. Her award also signals the university’s recognition of wellness advocacy as a critical aspect of educational and human development.

The event drew an impressive crowd of dignitaries, including Deputy Governor, Dr. Onyekachukwu Ibezim; Speaker of the State House of Assembly, Rt. Hon. Somtochukwu Udeze; House of Representatives member representing Ihiala, Dr. Paschal Agbodike; traditional rulers, and other high-ranking officials.

As COOU celebrates a quarter century of academic excellence, the Soludo administration’s multi-sectoral investment in human capital—spanning education, health, and youth development—continues to redefine governance in Anambra. Mrs. Soludo’s award, while honorary in form, carries the weight of real impact, offering a powerful statement that in Anambra State, development starts with the people.

As a reporter, writer, editorialist and columnist, I love good books and I have invested in a lot of them. So, when I see good books on any subjects, I buy anywhere I go. I have bought a lot through big brothers abroad and now the Amazon. That is how so many bookstores including ‘Glendora’ ‘Readers Are Leaders’ bookshops have somewhat made me ‘richer’, anyway. I will collect my long- patronage discount from them anytime soon.

And so I have just looked into the seeds of our times and I have seen another good book in the works by one of Nigeria’s finest and most significant academics in Nigeria’s mainstream civil service, Dr. Goke Adegoroye. He retired as a federal permanent secretary in 2010 and on the day of retirement, he presented his first book, titled, ‘Beyond Yours Faithfully’. In 2015, he also presented his second book in two volumes. Yours sincerely wrote the Afterword for the first two books.

The new book titled, ‘Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs’ will be unveiled on June 4, 2025 in the nation’s capital, Abuja. I can tell you for free, the book smacks of “a good newspaper, which, Arthur Miller says, “is a nation talking to itself”. Wait for it.

And here is the thing, public officers and public servants will find the book useful for master class on ‘How to and how not to run a country’s civil service. Besides, the book will be good for public officers who would like to remember Nigeria as it used to be. What is more, it is a rich resource on rewriting manifestos for a new Nigeria where mediocrity and docility nurtured by corruption will no longer be tolerated. Wait for it. Let’s peep into the book through some excerpts below from the author’s preface and dedication:

Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs’, chronicles this leadership journey across five decades—from the 1970s to the present—covering my academic training, environmental work in the 1980s and 1990s, leadership in public administration in the 2000s, and my continued advocacy in retirement. 
 
Leadership remains the single important determinant in management and governance. It reflects vision, courage, and the capacity to steer an organization towards achieving its goals. Its scope spans managing resources, developing future leaders, overseeing change management, decision-making, communication, team building, and crisis response. 

Sadly, public perception of leadership within  the Nigerian civil service has been one of steady decline—marked by  eroding competence, weakened capacity and diminishing professionalism. The present is widely seen as a pale shadow of a more illustrious past, hence the persistent nostalgia for what are often termed the “glorious years” of the Nigerian civil service. Those years are associated with revered figures such as Simeon Adebo, Jerome Udoji, Sule Katagum, Abdul Aziz Attah, Ibrahim Damcida, Philip Asiodu, Allison Ayida—stalwarts of the pre-and immediate post-independence era. Their legacies, characterised by outstanding contributions to the development of the civil service have become benchmarks. Yet, the oft-repeated adulation of that era serves not only as a lament but as a critique of the subsequent generations of leadership and their capacity—or lack thereof—for mentorship and succession planning. 

In recent times, and in the absence of structured documentation, the narrative of the civil service has been shaped largely by the personal experiences of officers whose achievements, though notable, often reflect an ego-driven record of service. These tales—frequently amplified by the ego of the narrators and of their era’s leadership—tend to highlight luck rather than systemic merit. Conversely, in quieter tones, we encounter the anguish of devoted and honest officers, who, despite their commitment and patriotism, found themselves victims of a system that rewarded self-preservation over merit.  These individuals were often severely shortchanged by the very institutions they served with their heart and soul. 

Furthermore, the manipulation of public service rules by those in leadership, often to protect themselves, has impeded reform implementation. These conflicting realities present an opportunity for introspection, particularly for those of us who have walked the corridors of civil service leadership.  Our reflections must contribute to forging  a new path—one  anchored on justice, fairness, and most crucially, integrity.

Contrary to the perception of the civil service as a cult, its inner workings are not as secretive as presumed. Much of what happens within is common knowledge among civil servants, passed around in trusted circles and, increasingly, disseminated via social media.  Platforms such as WhatsApp now host these stories—some told in self-adulation by actors who, during their time, were part of the problem. These narratives, rich with potential insights, are often relegated to informal discourse and risk being lost to time or reduced to myth. If the civil service is to muster the courage to act with integrity, it must begin with regular, open, transparent and objective documentation of leadership conduct. By being confronted with accurate portrayals of their actions, today’s leaders —Permanent Secretaries and Heads of the Civil Service—may better align with integrity, knowing that their records will one day come under public scrutiny. In this regard, I draw inspiration from the extensive documentation of President Olusegun Obasanjo’s public service years in his memoirs, Not My Will (1990) and My Watch (2014), which detail his engagements with military peers, cabinet members and the civil service leaderships.

Leadership at the top tiers  —Heads of Service, Permanent Secretaries, and Civil Service Commission officials— is unique. These roles are not merely administrative; they are custodial. They are responsible for institutional renewal, the grooming of successors, and the general health of the service. The experiences and cases discussed in this book highlight both what works and what does not—and why. At the heart of these challenges are the screening and preparation of directorate-level officers, the methods for appointing them into leadership positions, and the quality of those who have held such offices since 1999. 

I have been fortunate to serve in diverse roles across the public sector: from academia to environmental management, from the Presidency to being the inaugural Director General and later Permanent Secretary of the Bureau of Public Service Reforms (BPSR). I also served in the Manpower Development Office (MDO) in the Office of the Head of the Civil Service of the Federation (OHCSF); as well as in the Ministries of Education; Tourism, Culture and National Orientation; Interior; and finally the Federal Capital Territory Administration (FCTA) where I retired. Guided by the biblical charge “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and glorify your Father which is in heaven”, I anchored my service on a commitment to integrity as the foundation for leadership. 

My journey began in 1975 as a Graduate Assistant at the University of Ife (now Obafemi Awolowo University). Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs chronicles this leadership journey across five decades—from the 1970s to the present—covering my academic training, environmental work in the 1980s and 1990s, leadership in public administration in the 2000s, and my continued advocacy in retirement. 

Leadership is neither a straight path nor an easy sail. It is a continuous learning process—marked by growth, resilience, betrayal, and eventually, triumph. The leader must perform, inspire, endure, and ultimately prevail.

This book is the story of a 50-year journey through career and advocacy, offering lessons from the vantage point of one who has both observed and influenced leadership at the top. I write as a scientist using the civil service ecosystem as my laboratory—measuring real-time outcomes of policy and personnel decisions while those involved are still alive and the impacts are still observable. I write also in protest—against the entrenched culture of sycophancy in the service,  where narratives are twisted to please incumbents or vilify rivals. And I write with objectivity—choosing to observe as an outsider with insider knowledge, resisting the temptation to rely solely on personal interviews, knowing that others may someday present their side in their own memoirs. 

For Nigeria to achieve the greatness we envision, the civil service must become both the target and the tool for restoring good governance—provided elected leaders are willing to apply the necessary political will. My hope is that this book will offer practitioners and scholars of public administration the insight needed to interrogate the system more and develop solutions that will bring real transformation. 

To those whose names appear in these pages or whose interactions with me are cited—who may feel aggrieved— I tender a sincere apology.  My intention is not to cast aspersions but to use these cases illustratively, to provide learning material for today’s and tomorrow’s leaders. These events occurred during our shared stewardship. Their inclusion is a form of patriotic duty, for once we reach the apex of our careers, it is the least we owe the system we claim to love—especially if we are genuine about improving it. Indeed, these cases already exist in public memory and records as part of the broader narrative of our time in service.  

This book is a natural sequel to Restoring Good Governance in Nigeria: Volume 1 The Civil Service Pathway and Volume 2 Leadership and Political Will (published in 2015). It not only complements those volumes but elevates the discussion on leadership effectiveness a decade on. That my advocacy on the importance of integrity in the human resources management processes— appointment, promotion and discipline—and on the need for central government coordination still fails to move administrations to act is, in itself, a major justification for this work.

As with the previous volumes, Leadership in the Nigerian Civil Service: Five decades of lessons in performance, encounters and triumphs is written in simple free flowing prose, to ensure accessibility to practitioners, policymakers, and everyday citizens invested in Nigerian bureaucracy. It is a provocation—intended to stir the conscience of those who have wielded administrative power. It is a lesson in human relations, leadership and mentorship. It is a call for integrity in public service and a challenge to management training institutions to rethink their role in restoring public confidence.  

Will integrity in civil service leadership catalyse the emergence of good governance in Nigeria? Only time—and the choices of our political leaders—will tell…

Dedication
This book is dedicated to my country Nigeria with abiding faith in her manifest destiny and the potentials that leadership integrity in political office and the civil service holds for good governance; and to the coming generations of Nigerian civil servants, in the hope that the lives of those on the stage today may inspire you to dedicate yourselves to serve Nigeria in truth and in deed.

 
What hunters see in the forest is enough to make children of men without balls blind. An ethnographic study of hunters in a wild called Ìgbẹ Alágogo conducted by a scholar at the University of Ibadan, Ayo Adeduntan, gave birth to the narrative.  Ọláníyì Ọládèj̣ọ Yáwóọ̣ré had gone hunting one day and came face to face with a deer breastfeeding her young. Stupefied by this weird sight, an unusual dizziness pounced upon the hunter. But “an animal is pursuing me” is a disgraceful song that must never be sung by a man born to hunt. Yáwóọ̣ré quickly picked himself up and fought back with a dose of potent Ọfọ (incantation), one of the priceless assets he inherited from his father: “The ladybird beetle does not suffer from sight impairment…”

Hunter dipped his hand into his cloak and brought out a phial, the content of which he then used to wipe his face. Now he can see! Now that he could see, he had very little difficulty making sumptuous meat of the deer. At home, hunter skinned his game and hung its hide to dry in the open. This is where the story starts to be sweet like a soup of deer meat.

The second day, a mysterious woman visited Yáwóọ̣ré and a conversation ensued. The mysterious woman then told the hunter: “I know you killed a deer. But you did because we wanted you to. Now, why do you show off with its skin? Why did you spread it out, pegged to the ground outside? You sure want to show the whole world that you it was that killed the animal. Were you the one who actually killed the animal or we gave it to you? Don’t you know spreading out the hide in the open that way is exposing our clothing to the mundane world?” Yawoore got the message. He made amends.

At the APC Renewed Hope Agenda Summit held at the State House last Thursday, Tinubu was Yáwóọ̣ré, the ostentatious hunter. The sniper had just killed a sacred deer with a marksman’s dexterity. Like the hunter, it was time for Tinubu to gloat. Trust our president, he was at his best turf. Armed with his ancient Cockney, the president, who had just killed an elephantine game, said “nothing (is) wrong with a one party state.” He asked his people to “wipe them clean.” You would think he was talking about a bowl of pounded yam accompanied by a plate of ram meat.

 

I looked at his face. The whole world was like a colony of ants before the president. APC, he boasted, was “one party ruling and carrying on with the aspirations of Nigerians,” in what actually came in an incoherent waffle. “You don’t expect people to remain in a sinking ship without a life jacket. I am happy with what we have accomplished and expecting more people to come; that’s the game.”

Yáwóọ̣ré then told the Old Woman, “Old one, it was Ògún (the god of iron) that killed it.” The mysterious woman would not have that claim and promptly interjected. “Not Ògún, we allowed you to kill it.” Sobered, the hunter accepted his guilt, soberly retorting that, “I did not know that it (the skin) is your cloth.” Yáwóọ̣ré then reported the encounter to Ọlaifa Adigun, the Olúòdẹ, head of hunters, proceeded home and removed the deer skin. His open advertisement of conquest against the unseen forces was going to be his nemesis. The hunter must have known that, to dare Witches by counting their nine-finger arm in their presence had repercussions. It would have been a declaration of war against women Yoruba call Ẹlẹyẹ.

Unlike Yáwóọ̣ré, on Thursday, Tinubu was not sober. He had similarly spread a sacred deer hide in the open to dry. He was even unconscionable. In what appeared an account of his 730 days in office as the Nigerian president, Tinubu gloated about what he called his government’s economic reforms. Echoing Bongos Ikwue’s line in his evergreen track, ‘True Love,’ the president hid behind the ancient wisdom of “Nothing good comes easy” in life to justify the people’s suffering under his government. He maintained that, “sometimes, only hard decisions can make things easy in the future.” Leading an administration which, while campaigning for Nigerians’ votes in 2023, carried the heftiest baggage of anticipated elasticity of corruption, Tinubu’s testimony on Thursday of fighting corruption in 730 days was the imponderous, “You could see EFCC recover over seven hundred and fifty-something houses from one person”. He also claimed that life had become better and the future assured for the people of Nigeria. But, is it?

 

At that State House gathering, a picture was raised for all to see. It was that of Tinubu and his coterie of palace jesters, having written a national qualification examination, marking their own scripts and awarding themselves pass marks. Take the National Security Adviser (NSA) Nuhu Ribadu for example. Ribadu regaled Nigerians with statistics of a Nigerian security Eldorado under Tinubu. A few days earlier, Babagana Zulum, governor of Borno State, had punctured his deceptively inflated balloon. Persuaded that Ribadu’s fawning statistics of securing Nigeria was an embarrassing fallacy that cannot save his people, Zulum asked Borno to look heavenwards for salvation. He declared last Monday for fasting to seek God’s intervention. Zulum also alleged that some military officers and politicians were informants and collaborators for Boko Haram terrorists and the Islamic State’s West Africa Province (ISWAP) terrorists. Many of them are contractors who feed on the blood of the people. This came on the heels of another revelation by the Chief Whip of the Senate, Mohammed Tahir Monguno who, last Wednesday, disclosed that 63 residents of two communities in Borno North were killed in a clash between Boko Haram insurgents and ISWAP insurgents. So, what was Ribadu blabbing about?

Like one watching a surreal film, then slid Secretary to the Government of the Federation (SGF), George Akume, unto the stage. Borrowing from Godswill Akpabio who asked a female legislator if she thought the parliament was a nightclub, I was tempted to ask if everyone at the State House that Thursday was drunk. Akume’s words sounded bombastic, high sounding but lacking grounding in reality. “Mr President’s leadership reminds us of the legendary Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore — the man whose foresight, discipline, and tenacity transformed a small nation into a global model of prosperity and order. This is the quality of leadership Nigeria is privileged to have today,” Akume waffled shamelessly. I had to race for my book of history. Were there two Yews? Did Akume truly liken this same Tinubu to the father of modern Singapore or he was on a junket of figures of speech? The Yew of Singapore transformed his country from a struggling port city into about the most prosperous and efficient worldwide. His countrymen were not recorded to have died in droves during this period. I have heard of the words, ‘bootlicking,’ ‘sycophancy’ and ‘grovelling before power’ before now but I had never felt its coarse texture as this. Akume brought its feel and colour to me vividly.

Then entered Akpabio, a major cast at the State House circus. In the last two years as Nigeria’s Senate President, Godswill will seem to have triumphed more in wordplay and legislative buffoonery than lawmaking. Like one primed to play in an orchestra, Akpabio was at it again last Thursday. He lauded what he called “Tinubu’s political sagacity,” submitting that “Nigerians are grassroots people, they are very excited” basing this on “the fact that even the members of the national assembly and senators said they have never had it this good.” Why won’t they, legislators who now collect N1billion and N2billion for constituency projects? After this stellar buffoonery, Akpabio now mimicked the same uncritical legislative showmanship for which the Nigerian parliament has a notorious renown. He then “move(d), and let it be moved, that not only President Bola Ahmed Tinubu will be a sole candidate for the presidency in 2027, but he will also be a sole candidate for the whole Nigerian population.” That is a recipe for disaster.

 

Nigerians will know that Akpabio doesn’t disappoint. He didn’t last Thursday. He is a known serial groveler by the feet of power. In 2015 as Chairman of PDP Governors’ Forum and governor of Akwa-Ibom State, this same Akpabio, on July 15, 2024, announced his endorsement of Goodluck Jonathan and projected victory for him in 2015. He preceded his endorsement with same longish hogwash as this. Like they do at the bioscope, everything for Akpabio is in the superlatives, garnished with theatrics. Both collided at that State House event, as he said, “other political parties have been turned into shreds.. and (he saw) the umbrella of the PDP (with) over 100 holes” and “everything in the south-south has collapsed for you (Tinubu)… same thing that is happening in the nation.”

I am sure Mr. President enjoyed the circus. But I know he is too steeped in the waters of Nigerian politics not to know that the likes of Akume, Akpabio and Uzodinma were merely playing the politics of the stomach and recycling the usual Nigeria’s tree-falls-bird-flies politics. Persuaded that the president, while growing up like every Yoruba child, must have heard the story of the great Elephant in the hands of destructive fawners, let me recall it here. Represented as a character with power, majesty and acclaim, the mammoth-sized beast was the untouchable king of the jungle whose humongous size was a huge bother to other animals. Several efforts were made to oust his prowess, to no avail. So, a plot was hatched using his majesty as his destruction. Tortoise, a clever and serpentine animal, was procured to do the hatchet job. Tortoise resolved that, given Elephant’s size and height, violence would not bring him to his hilt but a seemingly innocuous strategy of deception, praise-singing and boot-licking.

One day, Tortoise then went into the cave of the Almighty Elephant. His message was that, all animals had purposed to make him King of all Animals in the jungle. Elephant was to come to the palace adorned in the full regalia of a King. Prior to the day, Tortoise dug a very deep hole that could occupy Elephant’s mammoth size by the palace. It was decorated with a beautiful wool carpet worthy of a king’s royal feet, complete with an ornamented chair just at the edge of the royal carpet. Encircling the carpet, Akume, Akpabio, Abdullahi Ganduje, Uzodinma and all their tribe of Hallelujah Boys clapped and hailed the new King. He was dressed in flowery royal robe. As he walked majestically towards the royal carpet, they cheered the Elephant on, shouting “a o m’erin j’oba, eweku ewele.” In turn, fascinated by the splendor and cheers, Elephant walked majestically until he fell into the ditch and unto his death.

 

We are the only ones who can tell our Elephant the naked truth. If the president can look out through the windows, he will see how Nigerians deride him. Not because of his tribe but because he has allowed himself to be captive of unrealistic statistics. Yes, apart from the Ibrahim Babangida military government, there doesn’t seem to be any other government that has midwifed policies as much as the present administration. The reality however is that those policies fall face flat on their faces, without corresponding positive effect on the people. Nigerians are hurting; they have been since May, 2023. Halfway through his first term, I stand to be corrected, Tinubu is the most hated Nigerian today.

Rather than the PDP being a faulty aircraft and passengers stranded with no life-jacket, Nigerians under Tinubu are the ones marooned in the cloudy sky of Tinubu administration’s malfunctioning leadership. They have no life-jacket. It is simply because they are not better of than they were almost two years ago. Electricity tariffs keep castrating the people. Cost of fuel is prohibitive. Nigerians are dying because they cannot afford drugs. Insecurity is sending hundreds of Nigerians to their deaths. Joblessness has become a pestilence while our young ones still find it a comparatively better succour to perish in the Mediterranean. In the last two years of being in office, the president, his family and political lackeys have quadrupled their wealth and comfort, at the expense of the Nigerian state. Like Yáwóọ̣ré, they now flauntingly spread the sacred deer’s skin in the glare of the public.

Only last week, one of Akpabio’s lackeys and trusted lickspittle, Onyekachi Nwebonyi, Senator representing Ebonyi North, canvassed the demolition of houses contiguous to the Abuja airport. He claimed they were unsightly for the FCT status, would scare off investors and, whenever he was in the air and saw the slums, he probably felt like puking in a lavatory. The senator’s call is a total clone of the theme of Aminata Sow Fall’s The Beggars’ Strike. Set in the Senegalese capital, Dakar, the elite called for action against what they termed ‘human detritus’ noticeable all over Dakar. This was a term for beggars who must be got rid of for driving away tourists. While Mour Ndiaye and his assistant, Keba Dabo, succeed in carting the beggars away, when Ndiaye desires to become vice president of Senegal and needs to give alms to beggars for spiritual advantage as prescribed by the Marabout, he finds the beggars unavailable for his bid.

 

Forget Tinubu and his cohorts’ misleading doublespeak, the prospect of a de facto one-party state is possible. This is so especially when you realize that funny legislative characters like Akpabio are Tinubu’s consorts. While Akpabio won’t have any qualms about licking the president’s spittle and stamping APC as Nigeria’s constitutionally recognized sole party and Tinubu, sole candidate, in exchange for a life tenancy in the senate, Nigerians will make this impossible. A de jure one-party state is however possible. Its prospect is ripe in an APC where all Nigerian forces and absolute powers are fusing inside one party under Tinubu’s “sweep them clean” triumphalism. In a de jure one-party state, other parties would exist but the APC and the president will certainly be so lawlessly authoritarian that they would criminalize public smile.

Yes, as Tinubu said, “freedom of movement and association is not a criminally punishable, (sic).” However, with this gale of defection sweeping all and sundry inside his party’s pouch, it may be a recipe for tyranny of the majority. By either hook or crook, the president has killed the sacred deer. His audacity of choosing to spread the deer skin for all to see may eventually court the disaffection of the Old One, the Nigerian people. Now our own Ndiaye in Fall’s satiric novel, when Tinubu needs Nigerians, the beggars he treats with such conceit, he may not find them. Again, like the urchin who cursed the Iroko tree and persistently looked backwards in fear of immediate repercussion, does the president think the Oluwere ghormid resident inside the bowel of the Iroko strikes with immediacy?

Marte, the headquarters of the eponymous Local Government Area (LGA) on the western floodplains of the Lake Chad in Borno State, north-east Nigeria, has been a site of lingering contest between Nigerian troops on the one hand and Islamist insurgents of Boko Haram on the other for over one decade. At 3,154 km2, Marte LGA is just a little under the size of all of Lagos state. 

For a while between 2014 and 2015, Boko Haram reportedly bivouacked in Marte on its way to its more permanent operational headquarters in the Sambissa Forest. For much of 2015, control of the town exchanged hands in succession between the Nigerian Army and Boko Haram. Around May 2015, Boko Haram reportedly took back the city from the Nigerian troops who had held it for three months from February of the same year. 

For the most part, Nigeria has controlled Marte thereafter with the exception of a brief duration in 2021, when the Islamic State West Africa Province (ISWAP) temporarily visited havoc upon a military base in Marte. 

 

All that appears to have changed recently. Around Monday, 12 May 2025, Islamist insurgents reportedly attacked the Forward Operating Base of the 153rd Task Force Battalion in Marte, resulting in considerable carnage. Sources familiar with the early morning attack reported that “over 10 soldiers were killed and hundreds of personnel deserted. The (terrorists) burnt down armoured tanks and made away with arms and ammunition.” The beleaguered governor of Borno State, Babagana Zulum, has been left appealing to his ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) to ensure that Marte does not fall back into the hands of Boko Haram and its allies.

 

In the same week that they attacked Marte, the insurgents also attacked the 3rd Battalion base in Rann, in Kala Balge district, killing at least five soldiers and leaving at least four others reportedly injured. The intensity and scope of the attacks by Boko Haram in Borno State in the past six months led the state governor to raise an alarm last April, suggesting that the country was “losing ground” in the fight against Islamist terror. 

National Security Adviser (NSA), Nuhu Ribadu, a retired assistant inspector-general of the Nigeria Police Force, who has run for and is credibly rumoured to retain ambitions for another tilt at the presidency, ostensibly failed to get the governor’s memorandum. Addressing the National Summit, so-called, of the APC, the NSA claimed to have killed 13,543 Boko Haram elements in the first two years of the administration and recovered over 11,000 arms from them. He notably did not mention the haul of arms the insurgents have been busy harvesting from Nigerian military formations. Over the same period, he claimed, “124,408 Boko Haram fighters and their families” also surrendered.

It is unfortunate that the ruling party has chosen to make national security a party political matter. It is even more tragic that the wannabe political opposition has allowed them to get away with it. The result is a vacuum of leadership in the security sector filled and fed with an atrocious body count of Nigerian casualties whose death and suffering barely register on the priorities of the people supposed to protect the country, its people and communities. 

 

The central problem is a failure of strategy. To understand this, it is necessary to explain that the presidency is many jobs in one. A president is – among other things – party leader, chief marketer of the country, head of government, and commander-in-chief of the armed forces. Every one of these roles of the president can be delegated except the last. As commander-in-chief, the president sets the security strategy. 

For over 50 years, Nigeria’s national security strategy docked onto the neighbourhood of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS). There was good reason for that. The country’s northern boundaries feed into the southern rim of the Sahel. With Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger to its north as founding members of ECOWAS, the country could count solidly on friendly neighbours as buffers against the historical brutalities of Sahelian violence. 

This understanding was at the heart of the transformation of the ECOWAS from an economic integration arrangement envisioned at its foundation in 1975 into a collective security arrangement in 1981. For much of the period since then, this arrangement held together. 

However, following the military coup in Niger Republic in July 2023, the country lost its marbles and decided to bite its nose in order to spite its sovereign face. On behalf of ECOWAS, President Tinubu committed the blunder of threatening to invade another member of the ECOWAS collective security arrangement. He alone knows what he was thinking.

 

The hubris of President Tinubu’s handling of the coup crisis in Nigeria is inexplicable. With a landmass of over 1.267 million km2, Niger Republic constituted about 22% of the 5.8 million km2  of the landmass of ECOWAS. The idea of an invasion of the country in order to militarily restore the ousted administration of President Mohamed Bazoum was always worse than bluster; it was plainly unviable.

In invoking war against Niger on behalf of ECOWAS, President Tinubu managed in one stroke to violate the prohibition against the use of force in international law; create the impression that Nigeria’s Sahelian neighbours did not matter; and suggest that France was a more important factor to Nigeria’s neighbourhood strategy than its immediate neighbours.

That much should have been evident to the people who thought up the idea. But the damage was beyond a resort to fantastic bluster, where hard-nosed rationality was needed. The costs have been prohibitive and rising; and the result has been devastating. 

In September 2023, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger created their own collective security arrangement and orbited off into the realm of Russia’s mercenary diplomacy. Since then, the consequences for Nigeria have been stark. In the period since September 2023, and despite the fantasies of NSA Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s internal security situation has disintegrated into mayhem. 

 

In the north-west states of Sokoto and Kebbi, a new terror group, Lakurawa, has taken root. South of Kebbi, in Kwara State, another new terror group, Mahmuda, runs murderously rampant. To the east of Kwara in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, vast swathes of territory and communities in Benue, Nasarawa, and Plateau states are being emptied in intense attacks credited to so-called “foreign herdsmen.”

The politicians are reluctant to acknowledge what is obvious and the soldiers have been trained not to say that their commander-in-chief has left them in an insecurity pickle. But that is exactly what President Tinubu has done with the way he has brought about the transformation of ECOWAS from an integrated security arrangement for the region into a rump of an association of Atlantic West African States (AAWAS). 

 

The evidence is everywhere in the rising casualty count, which NSA Nuhu Ribadu will not acknowledge. According to monitoring coalition, Nigeria Mourns, 4,416 people were killed in atrocities in Nigeria in 2023. In 2024, President Tinubu’s first full year in office, the number rose 21.2% to 5,353, including 308 security personnel. 88.5% of these killings occurred in Northern Nigeria. Another 5,171 were abducted. 

Behind these numbers are people, families, communities, traumas that both Nuhu Ribadu and the ruling APC will not allow Nigerians to see, hear, acknowledge or mourn. They are the experiences of loss and indignity that the dissolute wannabes in the Peoples’ Democratic Party (PDP) and the Labour Party (LP) cannot bring themselves to ask the APC to account for or acknowledge. 

 

On 28 May, the civic Coalition Nigeria Mourns invites all Nigerians wherever they may be to spare a thought for all these victims and their loved ones in a National Day of Mourning (NDoM) “to rage, resist, and demand action from the government” in memory of all who have been killed or violated. A more responsible government would not have waited for a group of unarmed, unelected citizens to remind them.

A lawyer and a teacher, Odinkalu can be reached at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 

Blood-thirsty jackasses are on the prowl in the digital forest of the world wide web. They prey on the gullibility of their captive audience. Nothing sells like bad news, and that is what they have aplenty. Through the instrumentality of various apps otherwise designed for positively creative ends, they bend reality or create something attuned to their depravity to spread fear, horror, hate, and, ultimately set the stage for massacre or ethnic cleansing.

 

Flashback

It is a trend that started about one decade ago but gained primacy around 2018 when the Nigerian police highlighted a case in which incendiary images on Facebook fuelled more than a dozen killings in Plateau State. That part of the country had been on the boil for several months with horrendous killings of farmers and rural folk by marauding bands of militias, some of whom were suspected to be foreigners. Ethnic profiling of the Fulani tribe was rife.

In the midst of the grisly sacking of villages and the attendant loss of lives, some e-jackasses saw an opportunity to escalate things by posting fake photographs of imaginary victims butchered by imaginary Fulani warriors. One picture showed a baby with open machete wounds across his head and jaw. Another showed a man’s skull hacked open. There were pictures of huts burnt to the ground. Other graphic posts showed bloodied corpses dumped in mass graves, and children murdered in their beds.

The e-jackasses who posted the images claimed that there was a massacre underway in the Gashish district of Plateau State in which Fulani Muslims were killing thousands of Christians from the state’s Berom ethnic group. The truth is that there was actually an attack which claimed many Berom lives in that area but the photographs posted on Facebook had nothing to do with that particular incident.

According to the BBC Africa Eye, “Some of the most incendiary images circulating at the time had nothing to do with the violence in Gashish. The image of the baby, which was shared with a call for God to “wipe out the entire generation of the killers of this innocent child”, had first appeared on Facebook months earlier. The video in which the man’s head was cut open did not even come from Nigeria, it was recorded in Congo-Brazzaville nearly a thousand miles away, in 2012.

 

So, what the e-jackasses preyed on was the power of outrage. The aim was to shock the consumers of their fib to such an extent as to become part of an unthinking mob. It was bad enough that some children were killed in the Plateau crisis, but the sense of abominable savagery was heightened when a fake photograph of babies divided into halves with the use of a meat cleaver was shared to millions of Facebook users.

If you didn’t bother to trace the source of the photos, you’d think that they were of the plateau killings. And whereas the extra-legal killing of any human being is condemnable, the deliberate inflammation of passion with the use of fake graphics to activate a mob is totally reprehensible.

Since then, there has been a discernible pattern of revving up tension by internet jackals who dispense journalistic carrion in the name of “Breaking News”. The more horrific the photos, the greater the mileage made by the posts— and the wider the net of victims both of the garbage posts and the ensuing inter-tribal and inter-religious mayhem.

Imaginary Victim

Only recently, a tendentious piece of fake news trended massively on social media alleging that one 22-year-old Zainab Muhammadu who had recently converted to Christianity had been arrested by the Muslim establishment and was due to be tried under the Islamic Sharia law. The combustible story generated nationwide indignation, particularly in the southern parts. Against the background of historic contestations between the two major religious groups, public commentators warned against the opening of another war front that could compound the country’s security situation.

An online news medium had quoted ‘family sources’ as saying that Zainab’s crime was converting to Christianity. According to the report, Zainab’s journey of faith started when she met one Pastor Samuel, a National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) member posted to her area. However, when the authorities discovered her change to Christianity, they ordered her arrest.

According to the story, the trial was to be held the following Friday. Many legal experts and human rights advocates decried the development as a gross violation of a Nigerian citizen’s constitutional right to religious freedom.

One of the religious groups that lapped up the story is the Christian Rights Agenda (CRA) which promptly issued a statement fin which it called on President Bola Tinubu to immediately intervene to save the supposed victim. The body noted that, “In most states of the Northwest and Northeast, government officials, including emirs, engage in massive forceful conversion of Christians, especially women, young and underaged girls, but here they are now trying to murder Miss Mohammed who willingly converted to Christianity.”

The organisation also drew attention to the incidence of terrorism and banditry and how the twin evils had led to the forceful conversion of Christian girls to Islam by the terrorists. They reminded the nation of the well known case of Leah Sharibu who is still being held by the terrorists for refusing to renounce her faith.

Some other Christians also rose in defence of their faith, reminding the nation of the case of Deborah Samuel who was alleged by some of her schoolmates to have committed blasphemy against Islam and was stoned to death and then incinerated in plain sight. Her suspected killers were arrested and charged with bailable offences following which they were eventually acquitted for lack of diligent prosecution.

Bomb Defused

The Zamfara State government was mindful of the time bomb in its hands and moved fast to douse the tension by declaring that the Zainab story was false. The government said it had checked with all relevant authorities and security agencies to verify the authenticity of the story and also confirmed with the Grand Khadi of the Zamfara Sharia Court of Appeal regarding any similar cases. There was no such case before any Shari’a court in Zamfara State.

Sulaiman Idris, the spokesman for Governor Dauda Lawal, said the wide dissemination of the fabricated story exemplified yellow journalism. He urged the relevant security agencies to investigate the source of the “misguided story” which, in his view, was designed “to create significant religious tension” in Zamfara State.

It turned out that the photograph used to illustrate the imaginary victim of religious intolerance was that of an American citizen who lives in Texas, Ms Aliaa Reeves, who has probably never heard of Zamfara State all her life and is certainly not on trial in the state. Her photograph was simply pinched from a social media site and used to illustrate the imaginary victim.

So, if the situation ballooned into an inter-faith conflagration with the usual killings, arson, displacement and human misery, it would all have been in pursuit of a lie!

Why do we do these terrible things to ourselves?

It is time that e-jackasses in news outlets and the social media who enjoy their grisly chortle at the expense of our collective rest of mind, stepped back to rethink their pastime. It’s easy to start a bushfire but when the wind takes over, it may consume the pyromaniac too.

While we were kept busy by the festival of endorsements of President Bola Tinubu’s yet-to-be-declared second term bid along with the flurry of bulletins from the coalition trying to unseat him in 2027, we might have missed the tantrums of Senator Onyekachi Nwaebonyi, the senator representing Ebonyi north. He also happens to be the deputy chief whip of the senate. Nwaebonyi is so disgusted by the sight of poor people living within the vicinity of the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, that he moved a motion on the floor of the senate passionately proposing that the “eyesore” buildings be done away with because it was not good “for the image of Nigeria”. He looked sad and sickened.

To be fair to Nwaebonyi, those were not his exact words. Let me now reproduce his submission more accurately: “If you are descending into the airport, the type of infrastructure within the environs does not represent a good image of Nigeria, and I think that the FCT minister should capture that in his next budget to either relocate the habitats or renew the area, because the buildings in the community are the mirror of the country. As you descend into the Abuja airport, if you consider the view, you will agree with me that it is an eyesore and doesn’t give a good image of the nation. I urge all my colleagues to support this important bill that will transform the country.” And — mind you — he did not flinch!

Some of his colleagues actually thought he was trying to entertain them at the plenary but the senator let it be known that he was dead serious. Senate President Godswill Akpabio, who likes to make light of everything under the sun even when he is holding the gavel, did not really sound impressed. “Senator Nwaebonyi, which part of the airport?” Akpabio asked him. “If you’re coming from the airport, the first place you see on the right is the presidential wing, thereafter you will come across a very beautiful flyover. You’ll now descend towards the road that comes to the airport. When you get to the airport road, you’ll see a road completed with streetlights particularly in the night. Very beautiful.”

Nwaebonyi was not ready to take the bait or beat a retreat. He insisted he was referring to “shanties at the back of the Abuja airport”. Akpabio reminded him that the community “is some people’s village”, lecturing him that the image of the nation does not start from when your airplane is descending. “So, what happens in a place like Akwa Ibom… when you descend, you see water and creeks. So, we should eliminate the creeks in this case?” he asked, rather sarcastically. Akpabio, as obligated by senate rules, put the motion to a voice vote and the “nays” easily had it. But it was such an embarrassment that the conversation took place at all in the “hallowed” chambers of the National Assembly. It was a new low.

I initially hesitated to comment on Nwaebonyi’s antics after reading a well-articulated response by Mr Ugochimereze Chinedu Asuzu, a public affairs analyst, on social media. I believed he had adequately covered the ground with these powerful and poetic words: “And there, in one dismissive sentence, the senator reduced the lives of countless Nigerians to a mere blemish on his senatorial lens. To him, the humble homes around the airport are not evidence of government’s neglect but rather architectural embarrassments that should be hidden from foreign eyes. It’s a familiar trick of the powerful; beautify the road to the palace and forget the beggars by the gates.” What else can I say? What more can I add?

Trust the social media: pictures of what they said were taken of Nwaebonyi’s village soon started circulating. There were plenty eyesores: dilapidated huts and barefooted children and women fetching water from make-shift wells. I don’t believe everything I see on social media, but these damning images were not controverted. Even if they were, I would be surprised if his village is any better. I don’t know much about the history of the 43-year-old senator — whether or not he was born into affluence, and how he eventually made his money — but I would not be surprised if he also went to school barefooted as a kid. It is such a common story in our country that there is nothing strange about it.

But we would be making a big mistake to think Nwaebonyi is alone. He only displayed the mindset of a typical Nigerian “big man” who feels appalled at the sight of the poor. When they see beggars on the road, they are horrified. When they see shacks and shanties, they feel like throwing up. For them, this is an aesthetic embarrassment, an irritation. The lasting solution, as far as they can think, is to get rid of these eyesores. Fling the poor away from the public eye as far as possible so that they will not be seen in the city again. The regular Nigerian big man lacks the capacity, or the empathy, to see that poor people are a product of poverty, and that you cannot get rid of the poor until you address poverty.

Nwaebonyi is a typical “NwaGovernment” — the special breed of Nigerians who feed at the expense of the public treasury. Even their toothpick is paid for from the public purse. The moment they join government — either elected or appointed — and begin to enjoy the naira rain, their goggles become darkened. They begin to chase the less fortunate off the road with siren-booming 4WDs. Those who used to take night bus will now be flying in the sky, either commercial or private. All they can now see are rotten roofs. They cannot understand why such should exist, more so in the cities. As Ras Kimono sang, “See them flying ’pon the sky/While I and I walk ’pon the land/Still dem want I and I dead.”

The “NwaGovernment” class consists of people whom Chinua Achebe, the inimitable novelist and proverbist, reminded that “those whose kernels were cracked by benevolent spirit should not forget to be humble.” Humility is not their thing. They are gods. They cannot comprehend that fingers are not equal. They cannot understand that no human being wants to wear rags or live in shanties — just that their kernels have not been cracked by the benevolent spirit. With people like Nwaebonyi in power, the poor will not even be lucky to have kernels. They will be made to disappear from sight. That is why we demolish shanties without providing social housing or addressing the root cause of homelessness.

Nwaebonyi is also like those “NwaNigeria” who care more about how outsiders perceive them rather than who they really are. Many Nigerians love the outward appearance. They wear beautiful attires to parties but their houses are untidy. The senator was talking about a “good image of the nation”. Exactly. If those poor villagers can be relocated or their shanties whitewashed to look presentable to foreigners flying into Nigeria, Nwaebonyi, “NwaGovernment” and “NwaNigeria” will be greatly relieved and satisfied. It will attract the legendary foreign investors. The relocated people may continue to drink from the well and the whitewashed houses may continue to stink of penury. Problem solved.

My biggest worry, over which I have written a lot in the last few weeks, is the quality of thinking in government: in policymaking and lawmaking. Is this really the best Nigeria has to offer? I don’t know if the lack of rigour is getting worse or not, but every day I keep seeing evidence that we don’t know what we are doing. The Nwaebonyi misadventure is just a case in point. Same week, a bill was being considered by the house of reps to make voting compulsory for every eligible Nigerian. According to the promoters, this is because that is what is done in Australia. How much research goes into the preparation of these bills? How much critical thinking is applied before they are tabled for debate?

You would expect that the promoters of the bill would have taken the time to ask Nigerians why they register to vote but fail to turn up on the day. From even a random sampling, I discovered that many Nigerians find the entire process too tedious, too cumbersome and too time-consuming. This is to say nothing about the physical stress on the voting day, or the usual technological hitches, or the threat of violence under the watchful eyes of the security agencies. This is aside the fact that the votes may not count at the end of it all with the rigging and other forms of manipulation. But you know the solution? Just make a law, impose a six-month jail term and all the voters will rush to the polling units. Simple!

I can go on and on listing various policies and laws that are so poorly thought out, laws that mean nothing and achieve nothing. Someone says the best way to make a useless law is to make a law that cannot be enforced. We need more intelligent reasoning in government. Come to think of it, Nwaebonyi could have made a case for the beautification of the surroundings of the airports without using condescending words like “shanties” and “eyesore”.  But he is just like many lawmakers who propose bills or move motions or raise their hands to talk before thinking through. This is absolutely disturbing. Many lawmakers make things worse with the kind of ideas they promote. It is an “ear sore”.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

MURDER IN IBADAN

Kehinde Alade, a teenager, was killed last week by a stray bullet in Ibadan, Oyo state. “Stray bullet” is not the right expression, as the policeman deliberately discharged the weapon to stop Kehinde’s father, Odunayo, from getting away with a traffic offence of driving against one way. Alade said he did not stop for the police because he didn’t want his twin sons to be late for WASSCE paper. Trying to justify the murder, Mr Adesagba Adekoya, chairman of the Oyo State Traffic Management Authority (OYRTMA), dug in, saying Alade was a “recalcitrant and obstinate traffic offender”. Please make me understand: is any traffic offence punishable by shooting or killing? In what world? Unbelievable.

ZANY ZULUM

Professor Babagana Zulum, governor of Borno state, amazes me at times. He does not behave like someone who understands that his public utterances as a leader must show some responsibility. Hear him: “The army does not have the necessary equipment on ground to fight the insurgency.” What is the public supposed to do with that information? Why can’t he tell the authorities directly? He even divulged security information to the media, saying: “A few days ago, I visited the chief of army staff. He said he is looking for about 32 drones and he would end the insurgency.” Ouch! Expect the usual suspects to rejoice at this statement and declare that “after all, he is only speaking the truth”. Careless.

IT’S ALL POLITICS

There has been a rash of endorsements of President Tinubu for a second term in office, although he has not officially told us he wants to run. In the midst of the excruciating economic pains affecting poor Nigerians as a result of necessary and inevitable reforms, the preoccupation of the political elite is the politics of 2027 — less than two years into a four-year term. They are in a maddening struggle to outdo one another in the endorsement contest, after leading opposition figures kicked off the game with the coalition threat. I have said this again and again: nothing excites Nigerians like politics. We were born to play politics. We derive our ultimate pleasure from political permutations and punditry. Priorities.

NO COMMENT

Mr Callistus Okafor, factional chairman of the Labour Party (LP), has poured more petrol to his party’s furnace by announcing his exit from the third force of 2023. “My own faction, we met, and we said that this is the time. I hereby announce to Nigerians, based on the decision as a team in the Labour Party, the five million Nigerians who are under my control, today pull out from LP to team WaZoBia Nigeria,” he said, adding: “Peter Obi, when he came to the party, he supported (Julius) Abure, who has become his archenemy today.” Wait, five million members? From where to where? I know freedom of speech is constitutionally guaranteed, but I don’t know about freedom to fabricate figures. Hahahaha.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The problem has remained intractable till today.

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

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

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

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

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

A few reports will help.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

ARMY’S RESPONSE NOT REASSURING

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

GOV ZULUM CONNECTION IN NEW ASSAULT ON BORNO

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A battalion consists of up to 1, 000 soldiers.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Where is the proof that fasting will end insecurity?

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

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

CONSEQUENCES OF ZULUM’S AMNESTY

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

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

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

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

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

WAY FORWARD – ADVICE TO FG

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are they doing now?

Many are probably back in Boko Haram ranks.