“No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.” – Gideon J. Tucker

A Governor Bola Tinubu of Lagos would not vacate his seat for anyone appointed illegally from Abuja – or from anywhere. If the heavens wanted to fall, he would ask them to fall. He would not go hide somewhere in his wife’s handbag, and from the safety of his ghetto be issuing gutless press releases. If Abuja insisted on his suspension, he would mobilise the law and lawyers for eruptions of seismic proportions. He would ask the Supreme Court to determine whether the president could sack or suspend elected governors, appoint caretaker governors and take over the role of state Houses of Assembly. He would ask the apex court to reconcile this case with its earlier verdict which outlawed caretaker governments for one of our tiers of government. He would put everything he had into the mix; he would count the teeth of the tiger in Abuja. But Rivers is not Lagos, and Siminalayi Fubara is not Bola Ahmed Tinubu. The difference between both is the difference between courage and cowardice.

Until Saturday when he spoke on the Rivers State problem, ex-President Goodluck Jonathan walked the terrace of power with utmost carefulness. He avoided speaking truth to power the way the barefooted avoids walking a floor of broken glass. But on Saturday, he came out of his zone of reticence, and dared the dark, dangerous sherds of impunity. Jonathan spoke following President Bola Tinubu’s deployment of a Supreme Court judgment to meddle with and seize control of the nuts and bolts of our federation. In a fit of daring, calculative move for political advantage, Tinubu suspended democracy on a floor of the structure. And days after the act, without a whim of resistance, he got legislative approval for the mess. He left no one in doubt that all the powers and principalities of this realm are with him and that they work for him.

The three arms of government in Nigeria have become a triangular cult of iniquity. If the executive is after you, the other two quickly join in the clobbering. Jonathan identified the spring head of the problem. He saw: “a clear abuse of office, clear abuse of power, clear abuse of privileges, cutting across the three arms of government — from the executive through the parliament and to the judiciary.” Now, when those three institutions of democracy become citadels of abuse, what remains and what is next for us?

Yesterday, 23 March, 2025, was the 92nd anniversary of the enactment of Germany’s Enabling Act which gave Adolf Hitler the power to make laws without parliamentary approval.

Nazi Germany had a parliament known as the Reichstag. The decay and destruction of that institution started in very innocuous bits, very small. It took off by saying yes to everything the leader did or took before it. The parliament members, incrementally, thought the leader deserved not their check, but their cheeks. Reichstag began its descent and quickened its suicide by enacting laws without any real debate or opposition. Then it took many other self-destruct steps; the climax came on 23 March, 1933, when Reichstag passed the historic Enabling Act transferring its powers and functions to the head of the executive.

In this Rivers matter, the Supreme Court cast the foundation, the president laid the blocks, the legislature roofed the edifice of an emerging autocracy. Jonathan spoke on the executive dictating judgments to judges. He described Nigeria as a country where “government functionaries can dictate to judges what judgment they will give.” That was a huge one. We expect a reaction or denial from the judiciary now or never. The ex-president also spoke on the operatives of the three branches of government not giving a damn as the country burned. He said they were feigning sleep while a flood of badness swept through the land. What he spoke on was the treachery of the judiciary and the perfidy of the legislature, both of which act as palace courtiers, and as whores of benefit who have surrendered their functions, power and glory to the president.

Checks and balances. How often do we ask what they are and why they are at the core of this democracy? Destruction of checks and balances creates excesses that take rest of mind away from the society. Absolute power creates all the antonyms of peace and stability. It makes the nation the ultimate sick man on a roller coaster. It was exactly so for Hitler and his Germany. The Nazi leader, on 23 March, 1933, got the powers to make laws. The ease with which he got it made him think it was time for further consolidation. Thus, on 7 April, 1933, the leader put officials of his political party in charge of all local governments. On 14 July, 1933, Reichstag became a one-party parliament. January 1934, the ruling party took over all state governments. On 19 August, 1934, the leader announced himself president, chancellor and head of the army. The Fuhrer was born!

Our National Assembly would act Reichstag if it had not done so already. It spent the whole of last weekend denying taking bribes to approve the president’s illegal suspension of democracy in Rivers State. Our multi party Senate has 109 members; the House of Representatives has 360, elected from various parties. Yet, on a very critical day last week, members of the parliament collapsed their structures into a single party; they endorsed illegality with a single voice. The president suspended democracy, appointed and swore in a viceroy to serve as governor. He declared a state of emergency without parliament’s prior approval. He usurped the powers of the legislators and the legislators endorsed the usurpation without following the law. They used voice votes to announce that he was right!

Treachery has no other definition. What does it cost a leader to be told the truth? President Bola Tinubu himself called for truth two weeks ago. He told Catholic Bishops who paid him a visit that they should tell him the truth whenever he was missing the way: “I’m here open to you, ready to listen…I won’t shut my door,” he said. But he made that request to the wrong audience. The right audience for that demand is the National Assembly, a conglomerate of dank agents. They are his enemy. He also acts his own enemy, redacting his own records of resistance and activism.

Abuse of any power will happen where there are no checks. With the help of the legislature and the judiciary, Prime Minister Balewa abused the emergency law of his time. Olusegun Obasanjo did same. And, despite all the political and legal repercussions of what Balewa and Obasanjo did, Tinubu learnt nothing and has also done it. He now sits back, watches and smiles as we fret.

The president and all who cheer him would remember that this presidential democracy is not our creation. We copied it from America. And if they agree that we copied this system from the US, have they ever found out why an American president has never tried to suspend or remove a state governor under any pretext, including under emergencies which are provided for under their own laws? It is because US governors are not boys of the president, and both sides know this to be legally and historically correct.

Where the law is allowed to work, there are always consequences for aberrant behaviour. Whatever is happening in Donald Trump’s America today, the fact is that the US Congress had historically managed to contain the excesses of presidents who thought they were king. I cite an example:

President Andrew Johnson took over as US president following the 1865 assassination of Abraham Lincoln. But Johnson does not enjoy as much favours of history as Lincoln does. Why?
President Johnson ran into problems because of his Kabiyesi stance on procedural and constitutional issues. On August 5, 1867, Johnson asked Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton to resign because the secretary disagreed with him over Reconstruction plans. The man refused to resign. The president gave him a week of grace, the man remained recalcitrant; then the president suspended him on August 12 without the approval of the Congress.

Four months after that act (December 12), the president submitted his reasons for suspending Secretary Stanton to the Senate. On January 13, 1868, Senate refused to approve Johnson’s suspension of Stanton. The following day, the man who had been acting as Interim Secretary of War, Ulysses S. Grant, informed President Johnson that in view of Senate’s decision, he was vacating his post for the rightful owner, Stanton. He left.

Stubborn President Johnson, on February 21, 1868 in gross violation of the Tenure of Office Act, formally removed Stanton and gave the control of the War Department to General Lorenzo Thomas. With the law behind him, sacked Stanton glared down President Johnson’s decision. For the next two months, he stayed put, he slept and woke up (holed up) in his cabinet office, barricading himself in there.

The US Congress watched with consternation as the president usurped its powers. It saw what the president did as a blatant violation of the Tenure of Office Act. It proceeded to commence an impeachment process against the Commander-in-Chief. On February 24, 1868, the House of Representatives voted 126-47 to impeach Johnson.
On March 5, 1868, the Senate began its impeachment trial with Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase presiding. On May 16, 1868, the Senate voted 35-19 to convict President Johnson. The figure was, however, one vote short of the necessary two-third majority to get the man sacked. On May 26, 1868, the Senate gave the president a reprieve, it voted to acquit the president on two of the charges. It then adjourned and never voted on the remaining eight articles of impeachment.

Johnson escaped sack but the damage had been done. It was effectively the ‘end’ of Johnson as president. He never recovered.

On 11 July, 2024, Nigeria’s Supreme Court declared that state governors had no power to sack elected local government chairmen and councilors and constitute caretaker committees to run the local governments. The court further declared that a local government council was only recognisable with a democratically elected government.
“A democratically elected local government is sacrosanct and non-negotiable,’’ the apex court declared.
The Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, who was the plaintiff in that case saluted the Supreme Court for delivering justice. He said the judgment had effectively ended the practice of governors replacing democracy with autocracy by wantonly sacking elected council bosses and replacing them with unelected caretaker committees.
On Wednesday, 19 March, 2025, the same Fagbemi addressed a press conference in Abuja endorsing President Bola Tinubu’s appointment of a caretaker governor for Rivers State and the suspension of democratic structures there. “A lawyer’s truth is not the truth” (David Henry Thoreau).

Fagbemi is supposed to know (and he knows) that there is nothing like ‘suspension’ of governor or ‘suspension’ of the legislature in our constitution which governs all other laws and everything about our democracy. But he went further to threaten other governors with the fate of Fubara. He hinted them not to dare dare his boss: “It is Rivers State’s turn today, it can be anybody’s turn tomorrow, let the signal be clearly sent to those who want to foment trouble, who want to make the practice of democracy and the enjoyment of dividends of democracy a mirage to think twice.” In other words, when you slaughter a goat in the presence of another goat, the living will be sober; it will behave well.

But wait. If the emergency rule is declared by the president over the whole country, will he appoint himself sole administrator and suspend the National Assembly? Or who rules?

To Nigeria’s chief law officer, under an emergency rule, the president can become the electorate deciding who governs and who ceases to govern. He can also be the people of any or all the states; voters in INEC registers would become Shakespeare’s “blocks, stones …worse than senseless things.”

From the courts to the president’s office to the office of the Attorney-General, to the parliament, we could see the futility in hoping for acting right and talking straight. An incestuous triangle of the three arms or what David Wyatt called a “tyrannizing unity” of the powers, reigns.
Their ways remind us of a favourite passage in Jonathan Swift’s ‘Gulliver’s Travels’: “You have clearly proved that ignorance, idleness, and vice are the proper ingredients for qualifying a legislator. That laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied by those whose interest and abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them.”

Emergency rule started in Rome around the 3rd century BC. The Romans used the law to create what they called ‘office of the dictator’ to solve specific public (safety) problems. They had two main categories of such. The first they named the dictatura rei gerundae causa (dictatorship for getting things done). The second was dictatura seditionis sedandae causa (dictatorship for suppressing civil insurrection). The Romans did not, however, create the emergency rules and laws for free roamers to exploit. They limited the dictators’ term to six months. They also struggled to contain abuse of their powers. But, apparently because of abuses such as we saw last week in Nigeria, the Roman senate took direct control of resolving crises. It replaced the office of dictator with what was called ‘Ultimate Decree of the Senate’ (senatus consultum ultimum). The present controversy presents us an opportunity to also rethink our emergency law and everything connected with it.

Strong, uncontrollable leaders always put their nations in trouble. Keeping quiet, excusing their excesses or enabling their illegality put everyone in danger. Where big men reign above the law and below decency, people pay for what they did not buy. Italian dictator, Benito Mussolini was created and nurtured by a culture of acquisence. His appointment as Prime Minister in 1922 was approved despite his party holding only 35 seats out of 535 in the parliament. With intimidation and harassment of voters, his party pushed up its figure to 374 seats in the April 1924 election. In January 1925, Mussolini, right inside the parliament, declared himself dictator. The legislators heard him and applauded him. They proceeded to grant him more powers. They passed laws that dissolved opposition parties and shut down free press. Mussolini dismantled democratic institutions that won’t let him breathe and emit fire. He got the constitutionally recognised Chamber of Deputies, Italy’s equivalent of our House of Representatives, replaced by something called the Chamber of Fasces and Corporations, a body controlled by his Fascist Party. He made the parliament in his image transforming it for his use in outlawing the opposition and the law.

The National Assembly that sat last week in Abuja may go that way unless Kabiyesi, our president, does not want it to.

Cynics see Nigeria through a lens of perpetual distrust, convinced that every effort is doomed to drown in the same murky waters of past failures. They’ll tell you, “Na who dey push wheelbarrow full of sand dey build skyscraper?”—mocking ambition as naivety. But their skepticism, though rooted in the scars of unmet promises, often overlooks the quiet revolutions: the techpreneur in Lagos coding solutions, the teacher in Kano rebuilding minds brick by brick. I am no cynic. I choose to see the cracks not as proof of collapse but as spaces where new foundations can be laid. Nigeria is a patient, not a corpse—and healing demands more than folded arms.

Critics dissect with scalpels, slicing through policies and programs to ask, “Wetin be the koko?” Their questions are necessary—like the hawk-eyed auntie at the market who inspects each yam tuber for rot. But critique without creation is a symphony without rhythm; it diagnoses the fever but brews no tonic. Yes, LazyJos’ low turnout exposes gaps—between intent and access, hope and hustle. Yet, while critics tally flaws, I’d rather roll up my sleeves and recalibrate. Nigeria’s blueprint is being redrawn in real time; even imperfect strokes add to the canvas.

Complainants wield grievances like a Fuji anthem on repeat: “This country no balance!” Their frustration is valid—fueled by blackouts, inflation, and roads smoother on Twitter than in reality. But complaint, when it becomes a lifestyle, dims the fire to innovate. The youth chasing clout over grants? It’s survival, yes, but also a cry for reinvention. I refuse to drown in lament. Nigeria’s story isn’t a Nollywood tragedy on loop; it’s a palm wine tap—slow, sticky, but yielding sweetness for those patient enough to cup their hands.

I am none of these—but a cautiously optimistic architect. Nigeria works because we make it work: patch here, weld there, eyes on a horizon beyond today’s chaos. Is it grueling? Kai! But as the proverb goes, “The river that forgets its source will dry.” My quota? To keep digging wells, even if some only come to fetch water when the rain fails. The dance continues—Shaku Shaku steps on cracked pavements, but the music? E get as e be. We dey try.

So, when I take on certain subject matters, it is out of love for my country—Nigeria is often described as one of the most religious countries in the world. From the bustling cities to the quiet villages, churches and mosques dot the landscape, and religious slogans adorn buses, shops, and even business logos. Yet, beneath this outward display of faith lies a paradox: a nation deeply devoted to religion but seemingly disconnected from spirituality and moral values. Let me explore Nigeria’s allure to religion at the expense of spirituality, the role of religious individuals in governance and corruption, and how the erosion of values—values erodium—has become a pressing concern amid religious fervor.

Nigeria’s religious landscape is dominated by Christianity and Islam, with a significant number of adherents to traditional African religions. On the surface, this religious devotion appears to be a source of unity and moral guidance. However, the reality is more complex. While Nigerians are quick to identify as “religious,” there is often a disconnect between their faith and their actions.

Religion has become more about outward expressions—attending services, wearing religious attire, or displaying religious symbols—than about inner transformation or spiritual growth.

This focus on religion over spirituality has created a society where people can quote scriptures or recite prayers but fail to live out the core values of their faith: honesty, compassion, justice, and integrity. Spirituality, which emphasizes a personal connection with the divine and a commitment to ethical living, is often overshadowed by the performative aspects of religion. As a result, Nigeria’s religious devotion has not translated into a more just, equitable, or morally upright society.

One of the most glaring contradictions in Nigeria is the prevalence of corruption and bad governance among individuals who identify as deeply religious.

Politicians, business leaders, and public officials often attend religious services, donate generously to religious causes, and publicly proclaim their faith. Yet, many of these same individuals are implicated in corruption, embezzlement, and other forms of misconduct.

This raises important questions: How can a nation so devoted to religion struggle with such high levels of corruption? Why does faith not translate into ethical leadership? The answer lies in the superficiality of Nigeria’s religious culture. For many, religion is a tool for social validation or a means to gain divine favor, rather than a guide for moral living. This disconnect between faith and action has allowed corruption to thrive, even among those who claim to be religious.

Moreover, religious leaders are not exempt from this critique. Some have been accused of exploiting their congregations for financial gain, aligning with corrupt politicians, or remaining silent in the face of injustice. This complicity undermines the moral authority of religion and contributes to the erosion of societal values.

Nigeria’s history is marred by religious conflicts, often fueled by political and economic interests. From the Sharia law controversies in the North to the sectarian violence in the Middle Belt, religion has been a flashpoint for division and violence. While these conflicts are often framed as religious, they are frequently driven by deeper issues such as resource control, political power, and ethnic identity.

Politicians and elites have exploited religious differences to manipulate public opinion, secure votes, or divert attention from their failures. This manipulation has deepened divisions and eroded trust among Nigeria’s diverse religious communities. Instead of fostering unity and understanding, religion has become a weapon for perpetuating conflict and maintaining the status quo.

Amid Nigeria’s religious fervor, there is a growing concern about the erosion of values—values erodium. Traditional African values such as honesty, community, respect for elders, and hard work are increasingly being replaced by materialism, greed, and a “get-rich-quick” mentality.

This decline in moral values is evident in various aspects of Nigerian society—From petty bribery to large-scale embezzlement, corruption has become normalized, even among those who claim to be religious. Rising levels of crime, including kidnapping, fraud, and cybercrime, reflect a society where moral boundaries are blurred. The breakdown of family structures and community ties has led to a loss of social cohesion and mutual support. The emphasis on certificates over character has created a generation that prioritizes success over integrity.

The erosion of values is particularly troubling in a nation that prides itself on its religious identity. If religion is meant to guide moral behavior, why are values declining? The answer lies in the gap between religious profession and spiritual practice. Without a genuine commitment to spirituality and ethical living, religion becomes an empty shell, incapable of addressing the moral challenges facing society.

To address the challenges of values erodium, Nigeria must move beyond superficial religiosity and embrace a deeper, more transformative spirituality. This requires that religious leaders and institutions prioritize moral education and hold their members accountable for ethical behavior. Nigerians must demand integrity from their leaders, regardless of their religious affiliations. Reconnecting with the positive aspects of traditional African values can also provide a moral foundation for modern society. And our education systems should emphasize critical thinking and moral reasoning, equipping young people to navigate ethical challenges.

Nigeria’s allure to religion is undeniable, but its disconnect from spirituality and moral values is a cause for concern. The prevalence of corruption, religious conflicts, and the erosion of values—values erodium—reveals the limitations of a faith that is performative rather than transformative. For Nigeria to realize its potential, it must move beyond religious devotion and embrace a spirituality that fosters ethical living, unity, and justice. Only then can the nation truly reflect the values it so passionately professes—May Nigeria win!

*Prince Charles Dickson PhD is the Team Lead at The Tattaaunawa Roundtable Initiative (TRICentre)
Alternate Mail: pcdbooks@yahoo.com

President Nnamdi Azikiwe was certain that the 1964 federal elections were a farce and should not produce a legitimate government. By hook and by crook, Abubakar Tafawa Balewa’s Nigerian National Alliance (NNA) party got (about) 200 of its candidates elected into a parliament of 312/313 members. The winners wrote the election results and gave themselves plaques of victory. They damned the consequences..

The law empowered the ceremonial president to appoint as the prime minister “the person most likely to command a majority in the lower House.” But President Azikiwe, who led a counter alliance of parties (UPGA), knew Balewa’s ‘majority’ was a product of fraud. He was determined not to allow Balewa and his people to profit from their larceny. He quietly vowed that Balewa would not come back as prime minister.

Now, if Balewa wouldn’t be called to form the government, who and what would fill the void? Zik’s think tank asked him to appoint a caretaker federal government with him assuming executive powers. He liked that. He thought the constitution gave him the power to do it, and he would do it, and he was about doing it.

But, to successfully do that he realized that he needed the backing of the security forces. President Azikiwe invited the heads of the Army, the Navy and the Police to a meeting. He reminded them that he was their Commander-in-Chief, and that their allegiance should be with him. The officers exchanged glances. The head of the police pointed at the constitution: the prime minister was his boss. That of the navy told the president that under the relevant Acts, he took orders from the parliament which had enacted Acts that created the army and the navy councils. Those councils, he told Zik, were the bosses. The head of the army, Major-General Sir Welby-Everard, a Briton, had no time for the inanities of that moment. He knew operational orders could only get to him from the Prime Minister but did not bother to tell Zik. He just saluted the president and left Azikiwe with his plans in tatters. What else was left for the president to do? He turned to the labour movement which promised to back him with street protests.

As Zik was plotting, Balewa’s party was plotting too. It was a North versus South Game of Thrones. The cast wore those colours. Balewa’s advisers said with his party having officially won a majority of the seats, he automatically remained prime minister with or without the president’s endorsement. And who said Azikiwe himself was not vulnerable? They called his attention to a clause in the 1963 constitution which empowered him to sack Zik as president. The clause stated that the office of the President became vacant if “the President is absent from Nigeria or is, in the opinion of the Prime Minister, unable to perform the functions of his office by reason of his illness.” But was Zik ill? Someone asked, and someone responded that he was. Did Azikiwe not recently announce that he stayed back longer than usual in Nsukka, his hometown, where he went for Christmas, because he wasn’t feeling fine? That was all that was needed by Balewa’s kitchen cabinet to prove that the president was ill and incapable of performing the functions of his office.

So, late on the night of 3 January, 1965, it was decided by Balewa’s people that the clause be activated in full. “But, it remains one leg: the president is not absent from the country, and must be absent.” One of the plotters reminded the others. They needed to get him outside the country first. How would they do that? That should not be difficult to do. A genius among them whispered a solution: Anyone who strayed beyond the nation’s land and sea borders had left the country. They had the police and the armed forces on their side. There is a “Nigerian Navy frigate anchored just opposite State House (in Marina, Lagos);” put ‘sick’ Zik in that boat and get him “removed outside the three-mile limit so that he would be both ill and ‘absent from Nigeria.’” Audacious!

Did the Balewa people carry out the plot? They didn’t have to. The plotters themselves deliberately leaked the plot to Zik, and with that leak, they got him sufficiently frightened so much that “shortly after 1 a.m. on Monday morning (January 4), the State House issued a bulletin that “the President had benefitted from his rest, following the strain of the Yuletide season, and that he was fit to resume his normal engagements.” Zik surrendered. He announced the end to the stalemate, asked Balewa to form the government, and Nigeria began its journey of fate to January 15, 1966. You can read all the above in J. P. Mackintosh’s ‘The Struggle for Power in Nigeria’ published in 1965. There are six pages of the intrigues there.

We do not learn, and we should learn – at least from our own history and experiences. The First Republic took off in turbulence, cruised and crashed in turbulence. But it didn’t just crash without some cockpit drama like the above. Note the extent both sides planned to go in their determination to rule Nigeria. That was 60 years ago. Today, the tap root of demons has reached the crust of the earth. Nothing scares or frightens anyone again. The next election is two clear years away, yet it suffocates as if it is holding this moment. The name for what we feel is desperation.

In 2027, they will seek to write the results. When you marry a man bigger than you can carry, you endure him. We hear that very often now – in universities, in newsrooms and at motor parks. People speak the language of surrender; they lament the futility of contesting against the president in 2027. They point at the mock exam in Lagos, the dress rehearsal in Osun, the warning shots in Rivers, the emirate injunction in Kano, the strategic posting of police chiefs to states of interest. The noise in town is no longer of wars and rumours of wars. The song is of tomorrow as the day of battle, the next the victor’s dance. “They will write their victory.” And you wonder who the ‘they’ that would “write the results” are. INEC, or who? Foot soldiers of the president are not hiding matters. They boast of his reelection two clear years before the polls. They may be right. What can his enemies and all the unhappy do? The old man has all the ingredients needed to cook what he wants cooked.

Last week, Nasir el-Rufai, man of small chassis, very big engine, ported out of the president’s party. Regime supporters laughed at his folly. Was that a dummy he sold to Tinubu’s party? If it was, that is a familiar terrain to the president, master of subterfuge. Or could it be that the tempestuous Kaduna man just walked into an ambush? If I were him, I would ask if the new haven was actually not one of Tinubu’s other rooms. But the former governor is angry, and bitter. And if you combine anger with ‘beef’, you won’t see what is clearly visible. The ex-Gov has been active, doing Mark Anthony, rousing the rabble. Regime people say he deserves this Yoruba drum called bàtá, and they would give him. When a Tinubu voter heard what El Rufai did, he laughed and sneered: “Òjò á pa bàtá, á pa janwon janwon etí è.” When an enemy is seen fretting and kicking and threatening as El-Rufai is doing, my people would simply sing for him Majek Fashek. They would send down the rain and get his bàtá drum and all its small, noisy gongs thoroughly drenched.

Whatever El Rufai is doing, he is not a lone wolf. The whole country knows that the North is not smiling at all. The Muhammadu Buhari people, complete with their Mallams and marabouts, even with their sermons, are said to have moved their cattle to new pastures. The General himself has abandoned sleep in provincial Daura; he recently relocated to Kaduna, capital of the North. Watch the skies over Bayajidda II’s North-West and North-East. The former president may not be a darling of the elites of the North, but he is the commander of the over 20 million street kids there. A simple, innocent walk to the mosque one critical Friday afternoon will rekindle their candle – father and children.

What does it mean to write the results of an election years before they are held? In December 2017, Muhammadu Buhari paid a two-day official visit to Kano. He was just two and a half years in power. At the end of that visit, Buhari promised to overwhelm whoever opposed his reelection in 2019. “I will win,” he vowed. Again, in August 2018, Buhari repeated the vow in Daura, his hometown. He said he would win no matter what anyone did: “For those who are discerning, those who have ears and eyes they will see, hear and understand. Those who don’t understand are entitled to their assumptions.” The Election Day eventually came on 23 February, 2019 and the man voted for himself in Daura. He was thereafter asked by a reporter if he would congratulate the winner if he lost the election. The General looked at the audacity (and possible idiocy) of the reporter and responded: “I will congratulate myself; I am going to be the winner.” And super-efficient INEC said he won, although the voting and the votes were very inelegant.

Asking a Buhari in 2019 if he would congratulate his victorious opponent truly sounded stupid. He would dictate how many votes he wanted. Suggesting that Tinubu may have electoral problems in 2027 will sound even stupider. He may not have Buhari’s Almajirai but he has money and all the appurtenances of power. He would look at himself and tell himself: I had no power, no authority in 2023, yet I overran them. Now that I have all – man and material – under my foot, who will dare glare down my tiger’s visage? If asked the same question which that reporter asked Buhari, I am sure Tinubu’s answer will be exactly what Buhari said: “I will congratulate myself; I am going to be the winner.” And he is working hard at it, meeting this group today, moving against that group tomorrow.

Two years to 2027 elections, we read of plots and counter-plots; movements and coalitions against Bola Tinubu. Watch him; the law respects him at all times. Tinubu did not become president by merely wishing it. What his enemies desire is the head of an elephant. They need more than tender, untoughened necks to carry the load. Whoever wants to enjoy as Adegboro does at Ojaaba, Ibadan, must be ready to do what the man did at Oyingbo market in Lagos – he was a beast of burden. Tinubu climbed mountains, crushed rocks and fell trees to get to where he is. I recommend his model to those plotting his defeat.

The man is consistent and deliberate. At a book launch in Lagos in 2018, he launched his philosophy of politics with a declaration that: “power is not served a la carte. You have to struggle for power.”

He is consistent. In December 2022, Tinubu in London told his supporters that “political power is not going to be served in a restaurant. It is not served a la carte. At all costs, fight for it, grab it, snatch it and run with it.”

On Wednesday 25 January, 2023, Tinubu was in Abeokuta where he fed our politics with a potent brew of poisonous proverbs and incantations; imprecations and curses. The theatrics of that outing was the focus of my column of 30 January, 2023. If you don’t mind, I can reproduce parts of my report of that esoteric outing the way I saw it.

Listen to Tinubu: “If you want to eat palm kernel, put a stone on the ground; put a palm nut on it, take another stone and smash it on the palm nut. The nut will be cracked and the kernel will come out. You can see that it is not easy to get palm kernel to eat.” The Yoruba who watched how he strung his words together and the histrionics while saying what I translated above would say I have not done enough justice to how he said it. They should just forgive me.

The man spoke with so much courage. He staked his all for what he wanted…And, like Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar, he was (and is) more than one person; he is not an ‘I’ but a ‘we’ with an intelligence superior to his enemies’. Listen to him: “We are too smart. We are brilliant. We are courageous. We are sharp. This is a superior revolution and when I tell you, you know what I mean. You know me. We are going there to win.” And he wrapped up everything with the defiant refrain: “A maa d’ìbò, a maa wo’lé (we will vote, we will win)”. I have not heard any of his would-be challengers coming out half this forcefully.

Our fathers have several other ways of saying what Tinubu said with that imagery of force and devotion. They say also that a palm seed that would become palm oil must have a taste of fire. They also say that the man who would eat honey nestled deep inside a rock would not pity his axe. I think I heard that too that day from Tinubu.

The man employed the imagery of palm nuts and two unfriendly, conspiring stones to describe his engagement with the last election. I do not think he has changed a bit from his hardline position on power and its politics. Watch his steps and steppings. Elections are a palm nut-cracking process; only the diligent profits from it.

Cracking palm nuts is a very deep Yoruba way of coding wars and snatching victory from the jaws of hard labour. They say Ojúbòrò kó ni a fi ngba omo l’ówó èkùró (You don’t snatch the kernel from the palm nut by being gentlemanly). Tinubu’s imagery of one stone down, one stone up and a stubborn palm nut between them reinforces the Area Boy character of politics. His enemies need to be so schooled too.

The Abeokuta outing was not just about stones and palm nuts. Tinubu went spiritual. He publicly ordered his war bard, Wasiu Ayinde alias K1, to sing spell against his enemies. He bellowed: “K1, bèrè ìlù; ìlù òtè (start to beat drums, drums of war/intrigue/rebellion); pèlú àyájó nlá; àyájó nlá ni kóo gbé lé won l’órí (Seal it with a heavy, strong spell, place it on their heads). What Tinubu asked of his Wasiu Ayinde was invocatory; he asked for an invocation, a summoning of the elemental principalities to come and fight his foes. He did that that time and it worked for him. He will do it again.

If you plan to do heist in elections, work to have some popularity in your constituency. Rigging won’t work where more than 70 percent loathe you. But, can’t somebody win without stealing? I do not think it is too late for Tinubu to be born again and win clean and clear. Someone, however, said he is too powerful to see how naked he is. Everyone around him holds his magical hem which makes them become wealthy and powerful. It is therefore suicidal to tell the king that he is unclad. They are not showing him the narrowing (narrowed) pathway to a happy 2027. And it is there in plain sight: His APC is shrinking and wearing the sunken eyes of his closet Action Congress. The North appears off; the South-East and the South-South are aloof. His South-West thinks he has been using the bread of Lagos to lap up the Yoruba stew. In his geography book, Lagos is Yorubaland. And that is costly.

Is it too late for him? Two years have enough months to kill the pain of poverty in the land, to be fair to all, to contest and win a reelection. But does that not appear too tortuous and expensive a route to take, especially if you are the custodian of all monies and powers in the land? Only the unwise get hungry and thirsty in seasons of fasting. Why plant crops when you can simply conjure cash, get rich and buy the throne? We saw all these not once, not twice before. It is cheaper, faster and safer. The consequences? People without power are the ones who bother about consequences.

As the three-man Election Petitions Tribunal (EPT) reserved judgment in the petitions against the declaration of Senator Monday Okpebholo of the All Progressives Congress (APC) as winner of the September 21, 2024, governorship election in Edo State, we’re reminded, as per Muhammad JSC, in Olonade vs Sowemimo (2014) LPELR-22914(SC), 27 – in explaining the meaning of the standard of proof in civil cases, (and) the balance of probabilities – that:
  “The court decides which side’s evidence is heavier, not by the number of witnesses called by either party or on the basis of the one being oral and the other being documentary, but by the quality or probative value of the evidence be it oral and/or documentary.”
  Were the parties to the electoral dispute, especially the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), whose candidate, Dr Asue Ighodalo, came second at the poll, able to meet the Supreme Court benchmark referenced by Justice Muhammad? The people of Edo State and Nigerians in general wait anxiously and expectantly for the tribunal to answer that poser in its crucial judicial pronouncement.
  While Dr Ighodalo and the PDP are the 1st and 2nd Petitioners, accordingly; the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Governor Okpebholo and the APC are the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Respondents, respectively, with the disputants representated by many election petition-tested Senior Advocates of Nigeria (SANs) and junior legal practitioners.
  On Monday, March 3, 2025, Justices Wilfred Kpochi (Chairman), A.B. Yusuf and A.A. Adewole, presided over the tribunal’s concluding proceeding for adoption of the final written addresses by parties to the dispute, which centres on the petition marked, EPT/ED/GOV/02/2024, filed by Ighodalo and the PDP.
  The tribunal, which sits at the National Judicial Institute (NJI), Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, granted the Respondents 15 minutes each to defend their final written addresses, while the Petitioners were given 30 minutes to argue their case “in what became a heated legal battle.” Thereafter, the tribunal reserved judgment to a future date to be communicated to the Petitioners and Respondents.
  The following quotes summarise the presentations of counsel for the Respondents and Petitioners, and how the tribunal arrived at the adoption of the final written addresses:

• Chief Kanu Agabi (SAN), INEC’s Counsel:
  “The petitioners are asking to be declared winners despite simultaneously arguing that the election was invalid — two conflicting positions… Your Lordships cannot declare the petitioners as winners of the election on the grounds of their arguments that it is invalid… “Your Lordships cannot annul the election because that is not a relief that they (petitioners) sought.
  “The case of the petitioners was founded on analyses undertaken by consultants… The petitioners have not pleaded alternative results on the basis of which they can be declared the winners… The petitioners have not tendered the results they challenged… The ground of non-compliance raised by petitioners is not accompanied by consequential reliefs.
  “The number of polling unit agents (five) the petitioners called as witnesses represented a negligible number of the polling units (765) the petitioners challenged from the entire polling units (4,519) in Edo State… The polling unit agents all signed the result sheets, a clear sign that the election was organised in accordance with the law… The witnesses did not distinguish between what they heard and what they saw… They failed to prove over-voting.
  “The petition is incompetent, as it does not seek the annulment of the entire election. The grounds (for the petition) are inconsistent with one another and inconsistent with themselves. It renders them defective. On the basis of these, I urge My Lordships to dismiss the petition.”

• Dr Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN), Governor Okpebholo’s Counsel:
  “The Supreme Court has ruled that proving over-voting requires the Bimodal Verification Authentication System (BVAS) machines. Since the petitioners failed to present BVAS data, their claim of over-voting was unsubstantiated… The petitioners had not provided crucial evidence such as Form EC25D, which records ballot paper serial numbers… Instead, they relied on Form EC25B, which merely documents the quantity of election materials received and returned.
  “The petitioners tendered sensitive material exhibits with missing parts, contrary to the serial numbers they carry for identification, and tendering BVAS machines without opening any of them to prove their allegation of over-voting… Even with the polling unit records presented by the petitioners, Okpebholo still has a clear lead… This petition is a mere academic exercise. It is frivolous, baseless, unwarranted, irritating, and lacking in merit. I urge My Lords to dismiss it.”

• Chief Emmanuel Ukala (SAN), APC’s Counsel:
  “As per Supreme Court rulings, proving non-compliance requires detailed evidence from polling unit to polling unit, ward to ward, and local government to local government… The petitioners simply dumped documents on the tribunal, instead of proving them, after calling only five polling unit agents out of over 4,000 polling units in Edo State, and calling no single presiding officer for their hearsay evidence… (Citing Ucha vs Elechi and Baba vs INEC, as the position of the law in spite of Section 137 of the Electoral Act, Ukala said)… It is clear that the case of the petitioners was not proven. I urge My Lordships to dismiss the petition.”

• Mr Ken Mozia (SAN), PDP/Ighodalo’s Counsel:
  “Of the 4,519 polling units in Edo State, irregularities were identified in 765 — enough to invalidate the election results… The PDP, in its petition, only challenged 765 polling units with complaints of multiple incidents of over-voting, non-serialisation of ballots, and incorrect computation of results, which altered the victory of Dr. Asue Ighodalo.
  “The 2nd respondent (INEC) failed to tender any alternative result sheet nor plead any alternative forms EC25B to challenge or contradict PDP’s CTC documentary evidence of rigging across the disputed 765 polling units in the State… All the documents we tendered were duly certified by INEC, and they were admitted without objection by the maker (INEC).
  “The Supreme Court decisions in Uzodinma vs Ihedioha; Kennedy vs INEC; Johnson vs INEC; and Lawal vs Matawalle, etc., established that there must be prior recording of sensitive election materials in forms EC25B, which INEC failed to comply with in some polling units.
  “The law does not require petitioners to challenge results in every polling unit or submit alternative results… All tendered documents were certified by INEC and admitted without objection… Polling unit agents need not testify, as the disputed collation occurred at ward and local government collation centres, where polling unit agents were not present.
  “The petitioners disagreed with collation at ward and local government levels… I plead with the tribunal to holistically consider the petition on several grounds for cumulative effects… Isolating grounds and submitting that such grounds, when taken alone, will not have the cumulative effects that were prayed, and adopting that it is academic, is not true.
  “The iRev results that the petitioners have tendered, no party had impugned the results… The Supreme Court in Austin vs INEC, Kennedy vs INEC and Isah & Another vs INEC & Others, has affirmed that results uploaded to INEC’s IReV portal are credible… We urge My Lordships to grant this petition.”
  PDP/Ighodalo and five other political parties (six initially but one withdrew midway) have queried the declaration by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) that Okpebholo (APC, Edo Central) won the election, with 291,667 votes (about 51.1%) to defeat Ighodalo, a Lagos-based Lawyer and business tycoon, who polled 247,274 votes (about 43.3%).
  Specifically, PDP/Ighodalo filed petitions at the tribunal, alleging, among others, multiple incidents of over-voting, non-serialisation of electoral materials and INEC’s suppression, falsification and alteration of results across 765 polling units in Edo State, which reportedly deprived Ighodalo victory and the governorship.
  The tribunal, which began its pre-hearing on January 13, and the hearing proper on January 24, 2025, in Benin City, Edo State capital city, relocated sitting to the FCT, Abuja, on January 28 over alleged security threats posed by armed political thugs.
  During the proceedings, PDP/Ighodalo presented 19 of 99 witnesses to testify for them, and they spoke to their statements on oath, and the evidence presented as a true reflection of the poll in favour of the Petitioners, and called for justice to be done. The Petitioners closed their case on February 3.
  While the 1st Respondent (INEC) didn’t present any of the five witnesses it’d pledged, and closed its case on February 6; and the 2nd Respondent (Okpebholo) called one of his six witnesses and closed his case on February 10; the 3rd Respondent (APC) called four of 28 witnesses to testify for it before closing its defence on February 13.
  Prior to ending the hearing, a mild drama ensued, as a counsel for the Respondents (INEC, Okpebholo and APC), Chief Ferdinard Orbih (SAN), explained APC’s closure of its defence without calling the pledged 24 additional witnesses, even as he expressed confidence in the strong legal defence mounted for the poll victory of Governor Okpebholo.
  Orbih said: “Yesterday (Wednesday, February 13), we promised that we will exchange our schedule of documents today in order to make for a seamless presentation of our witness testimony. My Lord, I am sorry to say the documents we were expecting did not arrive.
  “However, we have done a further comprehensive review of the evidence led by the petitioners, the evidence received from the petitioners under cross-examination, the evidence led so far by the respondents in this tribunal, the documentary evidence before this tribunal…
  “My Lord, we have also considered that time is of (the) essence. The judicial time of this honourable tribunal is precious. My Lord, taking all the enumerated factors into serious consideration, we are happy at this stage to close the 3rd respondent’s case as it pleases Your Lordship.”
  Responding to Respondents’ application to close their case, Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN) for the Petitioners, noted, with a jab, the surprising “abandonment” of the 3rd Respondent’s scheduled 28 witnesses after calling just four of them.
  “My learned counsel has just addressed the court. I’m actually not quite sure about the state of those documents. I can only say ‘he who fights and runs away, lives to fight another day.’ So, we have no objection,” Oyeyipo said.
  But Orbih replied Oyeyipo’s poking: “My Lord, I’m still on the point of fact. When they (Petitioners) scheduled 99 witnesses and presented only 19, we didn’t accuse them of running away. They have no business with how we conduct our case. We remain here. We are not running away.”
  With no objections from the other Respondents (INEC and Okpebholo), Justice Kpochi – despite pleadings by the Respondents and Plaintiffs for more days to prepare their written addresses – stood his ground and closed the defence of the 3rd Respondent (APC).
  The judge, however, acceded to seven days for the Respondents, five days for the Petitioners and extra three days each to file their written addresses, which began counting on Friday, February 14, and adjourned the tribunal to Monday, March 3, for the adoption of the final written addresses. That ritual was concluded, as scheduled, and the tribunal adjourned for judgment on a date to be communicated to the Respondents and Petitioners.
  To witness the final legal fireworks were chieftains of the Edo State chapters of the PDP and APC. Among the PDP topshots were the party candidate, Dr Ighodalo, the Edo Chairman, Dr Anthony Aziegbemin, former Senator Clifford Odia (Edo Central), and Rt Hon. Friday Itulah, former Speaker of the Edo Assembly and ex-Member of the House of Representatives.
  On the APC side were former Edo State Governor and Senator for Edo North, Comrade Adams Oshiomhole, former Deputy Governor Philip Shaibu, and twice Governorship Candidate, Pastor Osagie Ize-Iyamu.
  Adetunji Oyeyipo (SAN); Ken Mozia (SAN); Abiodun Owonikoko (SAN); Rotimi Oguneso (SAN); Larry Selekowei (SAN); A. T. Kehinde (SAN); A. K. Ajibade (SAN); Oluwole Iyamu (SAN); Oluseyi Jolaawo (SAN) and others pleaded the Petitioners’ case.
  Kanu Agabi (SAN); A. M. Aliu (SAN); E. M. Inuwa (SAN); Alhassan Umar (SAN); M. T. Abubakar (SAN); and others appeared for the 1st Respondent, INEC. 
  Dr. Onyechi Ikpeazu (SAN); Chief Offiong E. Offiong (SAN); Festus Kayode (SAN); Tobechukwu Nweke; Dr. Ike Chude; Edward Ireluwe; Lydia Oluwakemi; Linda Chuba-Ikpeazu and others appeared for the 2nd Respondent, Okpebholo.
  Emmanuel Ukala (SAN); E. C. Denwigwe (SAN); Chief Ferdinand Orbih (SAN); J. O. Asoluka (SAN); Echezona Etiaba (SAN); Henry Bello (SAN) and others represented the 3rd Respondent, the APC.
  As the political fate of Governor Monday Okpebholo and Dr Asue Ighodalo rests in the hands of the tribunal, may the judges dispense justice with the wisdom of Solomon and the firmness of Daniel, according to the dictates of the electoral laws and the probative value of the evidence adduced by the parties to the dispute!
  (Credit: Sebastine Ebhuomhan, award-winning journalist from Edo State, reporting for Popular News (March 3); Theconclaveng (March 3, 2025); The National Update (March 3, 2025); and The Standard Gazette (March 4, 2025).

* Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos and can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon. Tel: 08033078357

The National Theatre of Nigeria, an iconic edifice and cultural landmark, was conceived as the heart of artistic expression and national identity. Since its establishment in 1976, it has served as a symbol of Nigeria’s artistic vibrancy, hosting landmark performances, festivals, and exhibitions that celebrated the nation’s rich cultural heritage. However, the refusal of the Bankers’ Committee and the Nigerian government to reopen the theatre to the public has led to a severe cultural and artistic drought, stifling creativity, limiting artistic opportunities, and crippling an entire industry that relies on the existence of such a space.

A Betrayal of Culture and the Arts

The decision to keep the National Theatre closed to artists and the public is a glaring contradiction of its original purpose. When the Bankers’ Committee took over its renovation under the Creative Industries Initiative, the promise was clear: to revamp the structure and reinvigorate Nigeria’s creative economy. However, what was supposed to be a revitalization project has instead become a systematic exclusion of the very people the theatre was built for. Rather than being a space where Nigerian artists, actors, musicians, and creatives can gather, collaborate, and showcase their talents, the theatre has become a restricted zone, accessible only to select individuals and events.

This exclusion is not only detrimental but also insulting to the cultural sector, which has long suffered from governmental neglect. The arts, by their very nature, require space to breathe, grow, and thrive. The denial of access to such an important cultural landmark is akin to locking away a nation’s soul. Without open access, the National Theatre ceases to function as a national institution; instead, it becomes an elitist property controlled by financial interests with no direct stake in the artistic community.

The Devastating Consequences on the Cultural Sector

The creative economy in Nigeria, particularly the performing arts, is already facing infrastructural challenges. With very few performance spaces, artists are left scrambling for venues, often resorting to inadequate, expensive, or inappropriate locations. The National Theatre was meant to be a sanctuary—a space where new works could be developed, talents nurtured, and audiences engaged. Its continued closure has resulted in:

1. Loss of Performance Spaces – Without access to the theatre, major productions that require a standard performance hall are left without options. This affects stage plays, musical performances, dance recitals, and even film screenings that could benefit from a world-class venue.
2. Economic Impact on Artists and Cultural Workers – The creative industry employs thousands of Nigerians, from playwrights and directors to stagehands and technicians. The absence of a functioning National Theatre means fewer jobs, fewer productions, and an overall decline in economic activity within the sector.
3. Erosion of Cultural Identity – Nigeria’s artistic legacy is built on storytelling, performance, and shared cultural experiences. By keeping the National Theatre closed, the government and financial institutions are actively contributing to the erasure of this identity, forcing artists to seek alternatives that do not fully honor their craft.
4. A Decline in Audience Engagement – One of the key functions of the theatre is to serve as a bridge between artists and the public. If the public is denied access to performances, exhibitions, and cultural events, there is a gradual disconnect between the people and their cultural expressions. This weakens the appreciation and sustainability of the arts in Nigeria.
5. International Disrepute – Nigeria, as the cultural powerhouse of Africa, should have a thriving national theatre that attracts international collaborations and festivals. Instead, the closure paints a picture of a nation that does not value its artistic sector, pushing away potential investors, sponsors, and global partnerships.

The Way Forward: Reclaiming the National Theatre

It is unacceptable that a public institution meant for artistic development is kept away from the very people it was built to serve. The Bankers’ Committee and the government must immediately take the following steps:

• Reopen the National Theatre to the Public – Access should not be restricted. The theatre must function as an open and inclusive space where artists can rehearse, perform, and engage audiences.

• Establish an Independent Cultural Management Body – The administration of the theatre should not be left in the hands of financial institutions. A board comprising artists, cultural professionals, and government representatives should oversee its operation to ensure that it remains dedicated to the creative community.

• Implement a Clear Artistic Policy – The government should articulate a policy that guarantees regular programming of plays, concerts, exhibitions, and other cultural events at the theatre. This policy should encourage inclusivity and affordability.

• Develop Additional Cultural Infrastructure – Beyond reopening the National Theatre, the government must invest in other creative spaces across the country to decentralize artistic opportunities and ensure that culture thrives at all levels.

Conclusion

A National Theatre that is not open to the people is a contradiction. The continued refusal to grant artists and cultural workers access to the theatre is a betrayal of Nigeria’s creative spirit. If the government and the Bankers’ Committee are serious about fostering a thriving creative economy, they must prioritize access, inclusivity, and artistic expression. The National Theatre is not just a building; it is the heartbeat of Nigeria’s cultural identity. Keeping it closed is not only stifling the arts but also silencing a generation of creative voices that deserve to be heard.

Adeniran Makinde, fta.

Former British statesman, Labour Party politician and twice Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (1964 to 1970 and 1974 to 1976) James Harold Wilson (1916-1995), stated that: “A week is a long time in politics,” which, in today’s world of social media, is being updated to, “A day in politics is a lifetime.”
Thus, ahead of the February 2027 General Election in Nigeria, “a day in politics is like a lifetime” in which anything – the anticipated and the unexpected – could happen in the political arena, with one politician already predicting the poll outcome, and embarking on a warpath to hinder those on his radar even up to 2031.
But how many political combats can former Kaduna State Governor and ex-Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Abuja, Mallam Nasir el-Rufai win till Election Day in 2027 and beyond? How many of the politicians posturing for elective offices will grace his “enemy list”? Will he ultimately compromise and reconcile with his “enemies”?
Controversial and outspoken el-Rufai has a grievance, which’s that President Bola Tinubu, who promised him a ministerial portfolio didn’t deliver, but was actually the one who didn’t want him in his government.
To el-Rufai, it’s Tinubu – and not the Senate over alleged security concerns – who gave the order for his ministerial rejection in 2023. He recalled that proposing to name him for the power ministry, the president had told him, “Let’s join hands to defeat the electricity mafia,” adding that he accepted to serve because of that challenge.
In his extensive and no-holds-barred interview on Arise TV on February 24, 2025, el-Rufai said: “The president begged me publicly to come and serve in his government.
“After two months of negotiations, we finally agreed that he would nominate me as minister. I think along the line, the president changed his mind. Please, don’t believe the story that the NASS (National Assembly) rejected me; it has nothing to do with this. The president didn’t want me in his cabinet.”
Rhetorically, el-Rufai queried: “What was the security issue? I had been the Governor for eight years in one of the most difficult States in the country. Where is the (security) report? What about other ministers who are far less qualified and have huge controversies around them that scaled through because the president made a call?”
If the President, as el-Rufai claimed, “made a call” to the Senate on behalf of some nominees, why didn’t Tinubu do likewise for el-Rufai, who most Nigerians were sure would be the first to be cleared by the Senate, owing to how Tinubu publicly cajoled him to be part of his cabinet.
Nigerians were elated over speculations that el-Rufai would be named the Minister of Power due to his antecedents as Minister of the FCT, which he sanitised in line with the territory’s Master Plan.
And they can’t forget that iconic video of Tinubu and el-Rufai walking almost hand-in-hand when then-President-elect visited Kaduna State, and pleaded with el-Rufai to be part of his government, even as el-Rufai stated he wanted to take leave from public service.
But alas, el-Rufai’s screening by the Senate ended in controversy, with claims that the Department of State Services (DSS) had issues with his clearance, and that the Kaduna Senators didn’t suppot his nomination – a main criterion for a nominee’s approval by the Senate.
Barring any undercurrents, Tinubu owes el-Rufai a reciprocal gesture for a yeoman’s job of fighting for the Presidency to rotate to Southern Nigeria in 2023. El-Rufai thrust his chest out in support of the zoning, at least under the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC), which benefited Tinubu!
If, indeed, Tinubu hadn’t a hand in el-Rufai’s rejection by the Senate, why didn’t he carve out another appointment for him in government, which doesn’t require Senate clearance? That he didn’t do so is food for thought, as el-Rufai’s only scratched the surface, and Tinubu remains taciturn about what went wrong along the way!
El-Rufai also spoke about how he and the Kaduna chapter of the APC endorsed Tinubu among the aspirants for President in 2023, saying: “I don’t know if I will support Tinubu in 2027. I will evaluate the situation at the time and I will consult widely. When I supported President Tinubu before the primaries, it was a decision that the leaders of APC took in Kaduna. Who do we support?
“We succeeded in ensuring that power goes to the South, and we know that all the Northern candidates (then-Kogi State Governor) Yahaya Bello, and (then-Senate President) Ahmad Lawan will go nowhere.
“Among the southerners, who do we support? They know those that are my friends. Tinubu was not my friend. I was never close to him. (In spite their political association of over a decade, from 2012 to 2023 – pre-formation of the APC, and through the campaigns and conduct of the 2015, 2019 and 2023 General Elections).
“But the consensus of the APC in Kaduna was that we should support Bola Tinubu because he is the one that is more likely to win. Politicians make these calculations. In 2027, I am going to consult the same people. We are going to take the same decision, which candidate to support and in which party!”
El-Rufai admitted he might not possess the same clout in 2027 as in 2023, to determine who and from which region the APC candidate will emerge. “Now, I am a private citizen. I am not sure I would be in the APC 2027, so I cannot answer that question (about his support for a Southern candidate). Now in 2027, I will not be a governor, so I will not have the sort of clout that I had in 2023,” he said.
Going haywire, el-Rufai boasts of rallying like-minded Nigerians, to upstage Tinubu in 2027. He’s created an “enemy list” that so far contains Tinubu; the National Security Adviser (NSA), Mallam Nuhu Ribadu; and Kaduna State Governor Uba Sani, who el-Rufai “anointed” to succeed him in 2023.
El-Rufai’s tackling Tinubu from the angle of performance of his administration barely two years in the saddle. And he’s given the President and his team the thumbs down, as one of the reasons he may not endorse him for re-election in 2027.
In his Arise TV interview, el-Rufai asked if Tinubu has performed averagely to contemplate running for a second term, saying, “As a private citizen, I can afford to be reckless and say, ‘You know what? We gave the southerners their chance. They gave us Tinubu; has he done well? If he hasn’t done well by 2027, let’s vote him out'” (and vote in a northerner).
El-Rufai talked about a “Project to destroy el-Rufai,” allegedly motivated by Mallam Ribadu’s purported ambition to succeed Tinubu in 2031, even as he accused Governor Sani of working with Ribadu, and levelling corruption allegations against him, to destroy his image.
“This project… is Nuhu Ribadu’s conception. He is the architect and builder of that project. He is the one working with Uba Sani to implement it. So far, it has been frustrating for them,” el-Rufai said.
Denying el-Rufai’s claim, Ribadu, in a post on X platform on February 24, stated: “If my silence wouldn’t be misconstrued as consent, I would have ignored him. I am too preoccupied with my current assignment to engage in a media fight with Nasir el-Rufai or anyone else.
“Despite the incessant baiting and attacks, I have never spoken ill of Nasir on record anywhere. This is out of respect for our past association and our respective families. I will not start today. I, however, urge the public to disregard El-Rufai’s statements against me.”
On the claim by el-Rufai that he’s planning a 2031 presidential bid, Ribadu stated: “For the avoidance of doubt, I want to put it on record that I have never discussed running for president in 2031 with anybody.
“All my focus and energy are geared completely towards the advancement of Nigeria and the success of President Tinubu’s administration. I therefore ask Nasir el-Rufai to allow me to face my onerous national assignment, just as I do not bother myself with his own affairs.”
El-Rufai, like some topshots, boycotted the APC first caucus meeting under Tinubu’s headship on February 25, stating: “Unfortunately, I won’t attend the APC national caucus meeting, because I will be on my way to Cairo where I spend most of my time. I didn’t get adequate notice.
“The constitution of our party requests 21 days or I think 14 days’ notice for this kind of national organ meeting. I don’t think that notice was given. If it was given, I don’t think I’d received such an invitation. I’ve my plans, and I am leaving tomorrow (February 25). Many of my friends will attend and they will give me updates. I don’t think I will miss anything. Ramadan is starting. I’ve made my own plans, too.”
Anyway, el-Rufai said he’s been vocal about his grievances with the APC and its leadership, especially his earlier declaration that, “he’d not left the APC, but it’s the APC that’d left him.”
“When the party meets, I think I’ve shouted loud and clear. So, we’ll wait and see what the party will do about it. I don’t have to be there. I’m not the only member of the party that’s unhappy” (about APC’s alleged deviation from its core progressive principles and values).
It wasn’t all gloom and doom about President Tinubu and his economic policies, and reported lopsided appointments that favour the Yoruba. “I support some of his (Tinubu’s) policies; most of the economic policies are the right orthodox policies, but the sequencing is wrong and the quality of the people implementing the reforms leaves much to be desired” el-Rufai said.
“President Tinubu is appointing his own boys, not because they’re Yoruba, and most of his appointments do not reasonably cover the Southwest. People should stop confusing the two; the appointments are not balanced, but it’s not a Yoruba thing. Please, don’t punish the Yoruba.”
Despite hobnobbing with and chaperoning former Vice President and ex-presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Alhaji Atiku Abubakar, across the power bases in the country, el-Rufai ruled out joining the PDP, but may find another platform “to pursue the progressive values he believes in if he can’t find them in the APC.”
“(But) one thing I can say for sure is that PDP is not a party I will go to, ever. I thought about it and decided long ago, and nothing has changed; in fact, if anything, the PDP has gotten worse,” he said.
With friends like Mallam el-Rufai, President Tinubu, Mallam Ribadu and Governor Sani don’t need enemies! Who’ll be next to appear on el-Rufai’s “enemy list” as he proceeds apace towards his 2027 goal of removing Tinubu and the APC from power? The political arena is pregnant with anxiety and anticipation! (END)

• Mr Ezomon, Journalist and Media Consultant, writes from Lagos and can be reached on X, Threads, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp @EhichioyaEzomon.

In an age where financial systems are rapidly evolving, developing countries like Nigeria find themselves at a critical crossroads. Burdened by crippling national debts, stagnating economic growth, and inflationary pressures, these nations are increasingly looking for innovative solutions to break the cycle of dependency and rebuild their economies. One such promising avenue is CRYPTONOMICS, which is the intersection of cryptocurrency and economic policy.

By harnessing the transformative power of decentralized finance (DeFi), blockchain technology, and digital currencies, developing nations can shift from traditional, debt-laden growth models to one that is sustainable, transparent, and inclusive. While the potential is immense, realizing it requires a strategic, multifaceted approach. This article explores how Nigeria, along with other developing nations, can capitalize on cryptonomics to reduce debt burdens, foster economic development, and pave the way toward a more resilient future.

The Current Debt Crisis: A Global Concern

Developing nations, particularly those in sub-Saharan Africa, are facing a debt crisis of alarming proportions. Nigeria’s national debt, for example, has skyrocketed over the past decade, now surpassing $100 billion. While debt financing may initially seem like a viable option for funding infrastructure and development projects, it has placed these countries in a precarious position, with large portions of national revenues devoted to servicing interest payments.

Coupled with inflation, political instability, and inadequate fiscal management, these debts constrain economic growth and exacerbate income inequality. Traditional financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank often offer loans with stringent conditions, such as austerity measures, which can stifle long-term growth.

The Promise of Cryptonomics

Cryptonomics, a term that blends cryptocurrency with economics, holds the potential to offer developing countries an alternative financial ecosystem that bypasses traditional, centralized financial systems. Here’s how it can help:

1. Debt Reduction through Digital Asset Monetization

One of the most powerful tools at the disposal of developing nations is the creation and monetization of digital assets. Cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, or even national digital currencies (Central Bank Digital Currencies, or CBDCs) offer the possibility to generate new forms of wealth, independent of the traditional fiat system. By adopting blockchain technology, governments can tokenize national assets, such as natural resources, real estate, and even intellectual property. These tokenized assets can be sold or traded in global markets, generating new revenue streams to pay down national debt.

Nigeria, for example, could explore the tokenization of its vast oil reserves, creating a digital commodity that attracts foreign investors. These digital assets could potentially reduce reliance on external borrowing, offering an alternative revenue stream for debt servicing and development projects.

2. Decentralized Finance (DeFi) for Inclusive Financial Services

Traditional banking systems in developing countries often leave large portions of the population underserved, particularly in rural and remote areas. Cryptocurrencies and decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms can address this by offering inclusive financial services, such as lending, borrowing, and saving, without the need for intermediaries.

In countries like Nigeria, where financial inclusion remains a major challenge, DeFi provides a potential solution. With DeFi protocols, citizens can access credit markets, even if they lack a formal credit history or a traditional bank account. By embracing these technologies, governments can foster an entrepreneurial ecosystem that empowers small businesses and individuals to access capital, thus stimulating local economies and reducing dependency on foreign loans.

3. Currency Stabilization and Inflation Control

One of the major drawbacks of many developing countries is the volatility of their local currencies. Inflation erodes purchasing power, while the value of the national currency can fluctuate wildly due to poor monetary policies. In contrast, stablecoins (cryptocurrencies pegged to stable assets like the U.S. dollar) offer an opportunity for economic stabilization.

A government could issue a national stablecoin, backed by the country’s reserves or an equivalent of its export revenue, as a way to preserve value and stabilize the domestic economy. This currency could be used for everyday transactions, creating a more stable financial environment for citizens and businesses alike. Additionally, national stablecoins could facilitate cross-border trade, reducing reliance on foreign currency and improving the balance of payments.

4. Improved Transparency and Reduced Corruption

Blockchain technology’s transparency and immutability features can be pivotal in addressing corruption, which often hampers economic development in developing countries. By recording all government transactions on a public blockchain, governments can ensure that public funds are used efficiently and transparently.

Nigeria, for instance, could implement blockchain for managing public procurement, tracking social welfare distribution, or monitoring the flow of development funds. With a clear, publicly accessible ledger, the room for fraudulent activities decreases significantly, thereby attracting both domestic and international investors who are often wary of corruption in developing economies.

5. Attracting Foreign Investment Through Crypto-Friendly Policies

Countries that proactively adopt crypto-friendly policies can position themselves as hubs for blockchain innovation and cryptocurrency investment. By establishing favorable regulations and creating conducive environments for crypto businesses, governments can attract foreign investment and promote job creation in the blockchain sector.

Nigeria’s government, for example, could introduce tax incentives for blockchain startups, legal frameworks that promote crypto business activities, and educational programs that build a skilled workforce capable of leading the crypto revolution. By tapping into the global blockchain community, these countries could diversify their economies away from overreliance on traditional industries, such as oil, which are often subject to volatile global markets.

Cryptonomics: A Pathway to Sustainable Economic Development

To realize the potential of cryptonomics, developing countries like Nigeria must follow a carefully crafted pathway:

1. Develop Regulatory Frameworks: Governments need to create clear, balanced regulations for the crypto sector that protect investors while fostering innovation. This would require collaboration with international regulatory bodies, private industry, and blockchain developers.
2. Establish Blockchain Infrastructure: Invest in the technological infrastructure necessary to support blockchain and crypto-based projects, including robust internet access, secure digital wallets, and mobile-based platforms for financial inclusion.
3. Educate and Train the Workforce: Governments must invest in education and training programs to build a skilled workforce capable of developing and managing blockchain solutions. This will help reduce the digital divide and ensure local ownership of emerging technologies.
4. Engage with Global Crypto Networks: Building international partnerships with blockchain firms, crypto exchanges, and investment funds will ensure that developing countries are integrated into the global crypto economy.
5. Adopt Cryptocurrency for Government Services: Governments should experiment with using cryptocurrencies for everyday services, such as tax collection, salary payments, and social benefits, to familiarize citizens with digital currencies and encourage adoption.

Conclusion: A New Dawn for Economic Independence

Cryptonomics offers a beacon of hope for countries like Nigeria and other developing nations trapped in the vicious cycle of debt and economic stagnation. By leveraging the power of digital currencies, blockchain technology, and decentralized finance, these countries can build a more resilient, inclusive, and sustainable economic future. However, the journey is not without its challenges. The path to success requires clear regulatory frameworks, technological investments, and a concerted effort to educate citizens and businesses alike.

If developing countries embrace cryptonomics thoughtfully and strategically, they can overcome their debt crises, foster innovation, and ultimately create a thriving, sustainable economic ecosystem that stands independent of the traditional financial systems that have long held them captive. It’s time to embrace the future of finance and unlock new possibilities for growth.

*Dr. Jude Dike is a college professor and host of a popular weekly podcast in Calgary, Canada. He graduated from Delta State University, Abraka, with a Bachelors degree in Economics. He later earned a Masters degree in Oil & Gas Economics from the University of Dundee, Scotland, and a doctorate degree in Economics from the University of Stirling, Scotland. He previously worked with the World Bank and Nigeria’s National Assembly

Vergangenheitsbewältigung (German: [fɛɐ̯ˈɡaŋənhaɪtsbəˌvɛltɪɡʊŋ], “struggle of overcoming the past” or “work of coping with the past”) is a German compound noun describing processes that, since the later 20th century, have become key in the study of post-1945 German literature, society, and culture. (“Overcoming the past”) is generally associated with Germany’s process of coming to terms with the history of National Socialism and the Holocaust.

Diego Maradona’s “Hand of God,” a moment of audacious deception and divine attribution, remains etched in the collective memory of football. It’s a story that transcended the boundaries of a simple sporting event, becoming a cultural touchstone, a symbol of cunning and controversy. The replay, the analysis, the debate – all contributed to the solidification of this moment into a piece of history, albeit a contested one. In Nigeria, we yearn for such clarity, such a tangible, debated, and ultimately understood narrative of our past.

Our historical landscape is cotton woven with threads of omission, selective memory, and a profound reluctance to confront the more painful chapters of our national story.

The systematic removal of history from secondary school curricula, a decision that effectively severed a generation from its roots, speaks volumes about our discomfort with our past. This deliberate erasure has created a void, a chasm where a shared understanding of our nation’s journey should reside.

The prioritization of foreign empires, like the Songhai, over the intricate and complex story of Nigerian history further compounds this issue. While these external narratives offer valuable perspectives, they cannot replace the fundamental need to understand our internal dynamics, our struggles, and our triumphs. The absence of a comprehensive exploration of the “Nigerian empire,” whatever form it may have taken, leaves a critical gap in our understanding of our own identity.

The Biafran War, a brutal and deeply divisive conflict, stands as a stark example of our reluctance to confront our past. The persistent refusal to commission a televised narrative, a project that could have served as a powerful tool for healing and reconciliation, underscores our collective unease. The parallels with “Hotel Rwanda” and “Sometimes in April,” films that dared to confront the horrors of genocide, are undeniable. By shying away from our painful truths, we perpetuate a cycle of misunderstanding and mistrust.

The Jos September 21 crisis, a more recent but equally devastating event, suffers from a similar lack of comprehensive documentation and public discourse. The absence of a clear, accessible narrative leaves the wounds of this tragedy festering, hindering the process of healing and reconciliation. Without a shared understanding of these events, we are condemned to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Equally troubling are the unresolved controversies that loom like specters over Nigeria’s political history. The 1986 assassination of Dele Giwa, founder of Newswatch magazine, via a letter bomb remains a festering wound. Despite evidence implicating state actors, the case languishes in obscurity, buried under layers of official obfuscation. Similarly, the 2001 murder of Bola Ige, then-Attorney General and Minister of Justice, remains shrouded in mystery. The unanswered question of who killed Bola Ige has become a metaphor for the culture of impunity that haunts Nigeria’s corridors of power. These are not mere cold cases; they are testaments to a state’s refusal to confront its shadows.

This opacity extends beyond individual tragedies. The Nigerian state’s insistence on classifying vast swathes of historical records—often under the guise of “national security”—denies citizens access to their own story. While democracies like the United States declassify documents after set periods, Nigeria’s archives remain locked, fueling speculation and conspiracy. What truths lie hidden in files marked confidential? What role did the state play in pivotal moments like the annulment of June 12 or the fuel subsidy protests? By clinging to secrecy, the state reduces history to a weapon, wielded to control narratives rather than enlighten the public.

Compounding this is the relegation of national discourse to the realm of myth and rumor. Without official records, history becomes a battleground of competing anecdotes. Was MKO Abiola’s death natural or engineered? What truly transpired during the Dimka coup? In the absence of facts, hearsay thrives. The danger is not merely academic; it erodes trust in institutions and fractures collective memory. When history is negotiable, manipulated by those in power, or concocted in the echo chambers of social media, society loses its anchor. A nation cannot mature when its past is a puzzle with missing pieces, assembled by guesswork and bias.

The silence of key figures, particularly those who played pivotal roles in shaping our nation’s destiny, exacerbates the problem. General Gowon, a man who stood at the helm of the nation during a tumultuous period, remains silent, his war memoirs unwritten. His perspective, his insights, and his reflections are invaluable, yet they remain locked away, depriving us of a crucial piece of our historical puzzle.

The recent launch of IBB’s autobiography, while a welcome addition to the sparse collection of personal narratives, underscores the challenges we face. In a nation starved of historical context, such accounts become not just personal reflections but de facto historical records. However, these accounts, by their very nature, are subjective, offering a single perspective on complex events. They cannot replace the rigorous, objective analysis of professional historians and the wealth of information contained in well-maintained archives.

Unlike nations with robust archival systems and transparent processes for declassifying historical documents, we rely heavily on “tales by moonlight,” anecdotal fragments that, while valuable, lack the rigor and objectivity of structured historical analysis. This reliance on oral traditions and personal accounts blurs the lines between public relations and historical record, allowing narratives to be shaped by personal agendas rather than a pursuit of truth.

The power of literature, as evidenced by Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart,” lies in its ability to illuminate the human experience and offer insights into the past. However, literature alone cannot replace the foundational role of history. History is not constructed logically; it happens, it is recorded, and it is taught. Without that foundation, we are left with fragments, interpretations, and the ever-present danger of repeating the mistakes of the past.

We must reclaim our history. We must demand comprehensive education, open archives, and honest narratives. We must encourage those who shaped our nation to share their stories, not as PR exercises but as contributions to a collective understanding.

Only then can we move forward, not as a nation adrift, but as a people grounded in the truth of our shared journey. Only then can we ensure that the “Hand of God” of our past does not become a tool for manipulation but a lesson for a more informed and united future. We need to create a culture where history is valued, debated, and understood, not suppressed or manipulated.

This means investing in historical research, supporting archival institutions, and fostering a spirit of open dialogue about our past. It means ensuring that our children are taught the full, unvarnished truth about their nation’s history, both the triumphs and the tragedies. Only then can we build a future where the lessons of the past guide us toward a more just and equitable society.

I would end by stating painfully that we are in a coffin, where young Nigerians exhibit a profound disconnection from their historical heritage and cultural roots, reflecting a broader societal shift away from the collective memory and traditions that once defined their identity. This detachment not only undermines their sense of belonging but also diminishes their understanding of the cultural, social, and historical narratives that have shaped the nation. In an era dominated by globalization and digital modernity, the erosion of this connection to the past poses significant challenges to the preservation of Nigeria’s rich cultural legacy and the cultivation of a cohesive national identity. Do we remain in the coffin or resurrect—Only time will tell.

*Prince Charles Dickson PhD is Team Lead at
The Tattaaunawa Roundtable Initiative (TRICentre)
https://tattaaunawa.org/
Alternate Mail: pcdbooks@yahoo.com

This Biblical passage usually gets one entangled and pondering on who exactly in time or ages past, now and maybe in the future could truly be regarded or referred to as full of wisdom as such a “World Leader”.

Leadership in any form and in any sphere of human space both at micro and mega levels of existence connotes the glittering outlook in the saying, by their fruits you shall know them.

Since wisdom in the likehood of light which cannot be kept under the bushel, a leader with depth of Divine wisdom is that whose wisdom in light, life and Love so shines before man, whose good work multiplies in different arrays of human life to such an extent everyone keeps glorifying such a great personage.

The question then is has humanity been so blessed with such a universally accepted and acceptable personage in time past, till date and in the future ?

The primordial tradition and religion from which certain world renowned personages and avatars had been traced, accepted and popularized the universality of claims about their Divine origins vary in interpretations and / or misinterpretations.

For me, such Divinely ordained Prophets,h Messengers and Men of God still deserve every sane minded member of same Humanity to still appreciate their various interventions in the affairs of Man within their ambits of space and time orderings.

Pharaoh Amenhetop iv, Akhenaten, Buddha, Zoroaster, Moses, Jesus, Mohammed and those other personages after them have sipped from the wisdom of the Divine, got spiritualized and reflected the Divine glories in their lives for their disciples and humanity to draw from and share with others till the world comes to an end if there is an end one day.

For so long a time, as humanity continues to multiply in places that are occupied by peoples, categorized in colors and races, the configurations of such into geo cultural, geo-economics and geopolitical interest groups decimate what was once a wisdom to put humanity sane and same beings now constitute the polar elements of division, discrimination and the attendant miseries everywhere.

From all indications and going by man’s inhumanity to fellowmen so glaring worldwide, there is that impression that though certain parts of the world can lay claim to having economic, cultural and political powers above innumerable geopolitical constituents of the world, nothing seems wise as ordained by God to true leaders but now rulers that don’t lead aright.

Is humanity therefore destined to be lead or only ruled by the today’s world rulers that rule but not forgetting to ruin the lives of humankind.

Is it God, whose God that determines or destined the current world rulers to rule, ruin and exterminate humankind in their series of wars today?

Is God the author of everything happening now, is it our destiny and by the way what is destiny?
Most times we misconstrue God, the Creator of every living being, everywhere as being outside of us and germinating outside of our being.
Does such a God always want us to fumble, fight and die in miseries? Or that if we truly search our minds, our hearts, if we purify our thoughts, words and actions would that same God of our persuasions not reveal to our beings, His kindness, love , peace and evolvement of the rulers and those of us part of humanity being ruled?

Even the issue of destiny, is it individualistic or always collective for only destructive tendencies or could be a stream of consciousness for the individual and entire collective evolution of humankind?

Though there have been prophecies about the last days but ” Man” as the hewers of problems same should be the solution finder when in alignment with the God of one’s,heart and that of the realization for Peace Profound.

Donald Trump, Putin, Zelensky, Macron, Stammer, including our own Bola Ahmed Tinubu all majorly and partly ruling the world today as World Rulers, but inside each and everyone of us is the greatest world in which our individual destiny is richly deposited.

We all need to get deeper into our beings and to seek the God within us against the brandishing of mere religious observances we again misconstrue to set our world on fire and thus make collective destiny full of miseries, calamities and woes.

Matthew 24:7 (NIV) Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be famines and earthquakes in various places.

We are already experiencing this aforementioned Biblical passage and others alike, the question is when will our “World Rulers” graduate to being “World Leaders”?
Let’s see if there can be a slight evolution and evolvement of humankind from the present desperation and dispodence to gaining hope in the current world rulers and their styles of rulership.

Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy, and political greatness and wisdom meet in one, and those commoner natures who pursue either to the exclusion of the other are compelled to stand aside, cities will never have rest from their evils.” – Plato.

The prayer for and to us all is that may the God of our hearts and God of our understanding lead our World Rulers and those of us being ruled to appreciate a common destiny for same Humanity in Light, Life and Love .

In a world where security threats are constantly evolving and societal complexities continue to rise, the demand for innovative and inclusive policing strategies has never been more urgent. National security challenges, social disruptions, and other multi-facetted hindrances in Nigeria require solutions that are both proactive and transformative.

In the field of political science, peace and security studies, and humanitarian studies, scholars have alluded to the nexus between these key concepts and national development in all areas, particularly economic growth. In the words of Ban Ki-Moon, former Secretary General of the UN, “Security and Development are two sides of the same coin. Economic stability fosters peace, and National Security creates the environment for economic prosperity.”
John F. kennedy also posited that “Economic strength and National security are inextricably linked; one cannot thrive without the other.”

Recognizing this need, the Nigeria Police Force, the lead security agency constitutionally saddled with the responsibility of maintaining the internal security of the country, is championing an all-inclusive policing approach that prioritizes full community engagement, inter-agency collaboration, and advanced technology utilization, to promote sectoral equilibrium in effective policing. This aligns seamlessly with the leadership vision of the Inspector-General of Police Kayode Adeolu Egbetokun, Ph.D., NPM, who is committed to building a professional, service-driven, rule-of-law-compliant, and people-friendly police force in Nigeria. IGP Egbetokun doesn’t not limit his vision for all-inclusive policing to Nigeria alone. He has also extended same vision to the west African sub-region and African continent in his capacity as the Chairman of the West African Police Chiefs Committee (WAPCCO). His aim is to ensure that policing not only reinforces internal security but also contributes to national economic recovery, social cohesion, and political stability in line with the renewed hope agenda of the present administration in Nigeria.

Under IGP Egbetokun’s strategic leadership, the Nigeria Police Force has embarked on several bold policy initiatives aimed at strengthening internal security and accelerating national development. It is crystal clear that Nigeria Police efforts in managing herders/famers crises, communal disputes, settling labour disputes across all strata, and promoting social norms and values in Nigeria are far reaching and paying off, in the security architecture and economic growth in Nigeria.

In addition, the individual and institutional capability building strategies of the police force have occasioned a paradigm shift towards enhanced policing via training and retraining of officers in areas of professional conduct and science-driven policing.

One wonders how the IGP has continually snowballed his ideas in this regard to hosting conference and retreat for strategic managers and leadership of the Force, and refresher courses for other senior officers and rank and files, respectively to improve their effectiveness and efficiency in all areas of Policing. These efforts built upon the mindset of the IGP to host the 4th Annual Conference and Retreat for Senior Police Officers which held in Imo State in October 2023 with the theme; Fostering economic prosperity, social integration, and political development through enhanced internal security mechanisms. Continuing this trajectory, the IGP recently hosted the 5th Annual Conference and Retreat for senior Police Officer, held from February 24th to 26th, 2025, in Abeokuta, Ogun State, with the theme; Improving Nigeria’s Internal Security and Economic Prosperity through Inclusive Policing

This landmark event, CARSPO 2025, brought together over 170 high-ranking security professionals, including senior Police Officers from the rank of Commissioner of Police and above, representatives from sister security agencies and distinguished international guests, such as CG Felix Namuhoranye of the Rwanda National Police and IGP Douglas Kanja Kirocho of the Kenyan Police. Over the course of three days, participants engaged in intensive deliberations on pressing issues in modern policing, intelligence sharing, and capacity building for law enforcement agencies. The conference culminated in a series of actionable resolutions designed to enhance the effectiveness and professionalism of the Nigeria Police Force. Some of the key takeaways include strengthening international collaboration with our counterparts from other African countries to combat cross-border crimes; implementing a comprehensive mental health policy backed by research to support officers facing psychological challenges; revamping the Counseling Unit with qualified professionals to address mental health concerns within the force; expanding inclusive recruitment and training programs to ensure a more diverse and well-equipped police force; introducing flexible policy reforms that adapt to emerging security challenges; establishing anti-crime clubs in schools to foster early crime prevention and youth engagement; encouraging officers to embrace risk management strategies that promote safety and resilience in policing; and enhancing specialization and professional development through continuous training tailored to modern security demands.

At the conclusion of the conference, IGP Egbetokun presented certificates of attendance to all participants, including guest speaker CG Felix Namuhoranye of the Rwanda National Police, in recognition of their contributions to the success of the event. IGP Adeolu Egbetokun Ph.D.,NPM reaffirmed the Nigeria Police Force’s firm commitment to leveraging inclusive policing, cutting-edge technology, and international partnerships to improve Nigeria’s internal security and economic well-being. The resolutions adopted at the conference will serve as a roadmap for strengthening law enforcement, fostering public trust, and creating a safer Nigeria.

As the Nigeria Police Force continues to refine and implement forward-thinking policing strategies, Nigeria can look ahead to a future where security is not just a government responsibility but a collective effort that bridges the gap between law enforcement and the communities they serve. Through innovative policies, strategic collaborations, and a commitment to professionalism, the Nigeria Police Force is poised to reshape the country’s security landscape and drive sustainable national development.

The regime of IGP Egbetokun marks the first to have foreign IGPs and security diplomats across the world attend and participate fully in the conference and retreat and engagements of the Nigeria Police Force.His determination in bringing global collaboration, integration, and togetherness in fostering improved security in Nigeria and the African continent as a whole can never be overemphasized. The saying, “putting the right peg in the right hole” is ascertained by the appointment of IGP Kayode Adeolu Egbetokun, a scholar, philosopher, perfectionist and holder of a Ph.D in Peace and Security Studies, a great blessing to policing structure and national values in Nigeria.

*Prince Muyiwa Adejobi, a Public Relations and law enforcement experts, writes from the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, Nigeria
Email: Princemoye@gmail.com