US strikes ISIS, terrorists, militants, and bandits in northwest Nigeria

LIVE: Nigeria confirms US strikes on ISIL targets in its northwest
The United States carried out a strike against Islamic State militants in northwest Nigeria at the request of Nigeria’s government, President Donald Trump and the U.S. military said on Thursday, claiming the group had been targeting Christians in the region.
“Tonight, at my direction as Commander in Chief, the United States launched a powerful and deadly strike against ISIS Terrorist Scum in Northwest Nigeria, who have been targeting and viciously killing, primarily, innocent Christians, at levels not seen for many years, and even Centuries!,” Trump said in a post on Truth Social.
The U.S. military’s Africa Command said the strike was carried out in Sokoto state in coordination with Nigerian authorities and killed multiple ISIS militants.
Nigerian Foreign Minister Yusuf Maitama Tuggar told the British Broadcasting Corp the strike was a “joint operation” targeting “terrorists”, and it “has nothing to do with a particular religion”.
Without naming ISIS specifically, Tuggar said the operation had been planned “for quite some time” and had used intelligence information provided by the Nigerian side. He did not rule out further strikes, adding that this depended on “decisions to be taken by the leadership of the two countries”.
The strike comes after Trump in late October began warning that Christianity faces an “existential threat” in Nigeria and threatened to militarily intervene in the West African country over what he says is its failure to stop violence targeting Christian communities.
Reuters reported on Monday the U.S. had been conducting intelligence-gathering flights over large parts of Nigeria since late November.

‘MORE TO COME’

Nigeria’s foreign ministry said the strike was carried out as part of ongoing security cooperation with the United States, involving intelligence sharing and strategic coordination to target militant groups.
“This has led to precision hits on terrorist targets in Nigeria by air strikes in the North West,” the ministry said in a post on X.
A video posted by the Pentagon showed at least one projectile launched from a warship. A U.S. defense official said the strike targeted multiple militants at known ISIS camps.
U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth thanked the Nigerian government on X for its support and cooperation and added: “More to come…”
Nigeria’s government has said armed groups target both Muslims and Christians, and U.S. claims that Christians face persecution do not represent the complex security situation and ignore efforts to safeguard religious freedom. But it has agreed to work with the U.S. to bolster its forces against militant groups.
The country’s population is split between Muslims living primarily in the north and Christians in the south.
Police said earlier on Thursday a suspected suicide bomber killed at least five people and injured 35 others at a mosque in Nigeria’s northeast, another region troubled by Islamist insurgents.
In a Christmas message posted on X earlier, Nigerian President Bola Tinubu called for peace in his country, “especially between individuals of differing religious beliefs.”
He also said: “I stand committed to doing everything within my power to enshrine religious freedom in Nigeria and to protect Christians, Muslims, and all Nigerians from violence.”
Trump issued his statement on the strike on Christmas Day while he was at his Palm Beach, Florida, Mar-a-Lago Club, where he has been spending the holiday. He had no public events during the day and was last seen by the reporters traveling with him on Wednesday night.
The U.S. military last week launched separate large-scale strikes against dozens of Islamic State targets in Syria, after Trump vowed to hit back in the wake of a suspected ISIS attack on U.S. personnel in the country.
In the same vein, the Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu too has warned Nigeria of his readiness to help the Christians fight those terrorising and killing them in Nigeria.
(Reuters. Photo: Reuters)

Tinubu’s message to Nigerians at Christmas (Full speech)

Nigeria@64: Tinubu's Independence anniversary speech

My Fellow Nigerians,

As we mark this year’s Christmas, may the love of Christ and his message of grace, hope, peace, and goodwill to humanity abide with us all.

Beyond the celebration and festivities of this season, Christmas reminds us to reflect on the significance of Jesus Christ’s birth and his message of salvation as the Prince of Peace.

On this Holy Day, I wish all Christians in Nigeria and around the world a Merry Christmas. I thank God for the opportunity to serve as the leader of our great country, and I pray for peace in our land, especially among individuals of differing religious beliefs.

As your President, I remain committed to doing everything within my power to enshrine religious freedom in Nigeria and to protect all people of different faiths from violence.

As we celebrate the birth of Jesus, let us also reflect on the many contributions that Christians in Nigeria, as followers of Christ, have made and continue to make toward the progress of our country.

The love of Christ and the message of the Gospel have inspired many Christians to care for the vulnerable and less privileged in our society. We honour those who, following the example of Jesus, work tirelessly to promote peace, harmony, and tolerance in their communities.

For those who bring hope and faith in the midst of despair, this season is a reminder that, despite daunting challenges, God is with us.

Since I assumed office in 2023, I have continually reassured Nigerians of our unyielding commitment to safeguarding the security, unity, and stability of our nation.

That commitment remains steadfast under God and the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. All Nigerians have the right to live, worship, and pursue their aspirations in safety and dignity.

No one, regardless of ethnicity or belief, should be made to suffer for professing and practising his faith. The love for God and love for humanity is at the heart of all the great faiths. These shared values must continue to bind us together as one indivisible and resilient people of our blessed country.

Throughout the year, I have had the privilege of engaging with prominent leaders from the two major faiths in the country, particularly amid concerns about religious intolerance and insecurity. We will build on these conversations to strengthen collaboration between government and religious institutions, prevent conflict and promote peaceful coexistence.

As many Nigerians travel to reunite with family and loved ones during this holiday period, I urge all citizens to exercise patience and maintain discipline on the roads.

I wish all travellers a safe journey and a safe return to their destinations.

With confidence in divine providence and our collective strength, we will continue the work of building a greater Nigeria-one that future generations will be proud of.

I wish you all a Merry Christmas and a happy New Year in advance.

 

Bola Ahmed Tinubu, GCFR
President, Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces,
Federal Republic of Nigeria
December 25, 2025

Merry Christmas to Our Readers, Family, Friends, and The World

Jesus meek and gentle, son of God most high, pitying, loving saviour, as we celebrate your birth, may we begin to see the world in the light of the understanding you give us.  As you chose the lowly, the outcasts, and the poor to receive the greatest news the world had ever known, so may we worship you in meekness of heart.  May we also remember our brothers and sisters who are less fortunate than ourselves in this season of giving. Amen.

And to our readers all over the world, may this season bring to you all unmerited favour, peace, joy and more joy, happiness and blessings unspeakable. May God almighty meet all of you at the point of your needs. Amen. MERRY CHRISTMAS.

Churches that don’t celebrate Christmas (Full list)

What is Christmas like for non-Christians? - BBC News

Even though the vast majority of Christian denominations celebrate Christmas on December 25 as the birth of Jesus Christ, a minority do not observe it as a religious holiday.

Below is a list of major Christian groups that officially or traditionally do not celebrate Christmas, based on their doctrines and practices:

 

1. Jehovah’s Witnesses

The most well-known group; they view Christmas as having pagan roots and note that the Bible does not command celebrating Jesus’ birth (or birthdays in general). They stopped observing it in the 1920s after research into its origins.

2. Armstrongite Churches of God (e.g., United Church of God, Living Church of God, Philadelphia Church of God, and other splits from the former Worldwide Church of God). These groups, influenced by Herbert W. Armstrong, reject Christmas due to its alleged pagan origins and lack of biblical mandate. They instead observe Old Testament holy days.

3. Certain Strict Presbyterian Denominations in Scotland (e.g., Free Church of Scotland, Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland, Associated Presbyterian Churches, Free Church of Scotland). These conservative Reformed groups view Christmas as an extra-biblical “Roman Catholic” holiday with no scriptural warrant and historically discouraged or banned its observance.

4. Churches of Christ (Restoration Movement): Many (though not all) congregations do not hold special Christmas services or emphasize the holiday in church, seeing it as unbiblical and treating it as a private cultural matter rather than a religious observance.

5. True Jesus Church

A restorationist group that rejects Christmas for theological reasons, emphasizing only biblically mandated practices.

6. Iglesia ni Cristo

This restorationist church from the Philippines does not celebrate Christmas, viewing it as unbiblical and of pagan origin.

7. Some Independent or Fundamentalist Groups (e.g., certain Independent Baptists, Oneness Pentecostals). Various conservative or fundamentalist congregations reject it on similar grounds of pagan influence or lack of biblical support.

8. Other Notable Mentions

God’s Kingdom Society — Celebrates Jesus’ birth in October instead.

Mountain of Fire and Miracles Ministries (MFM) — Rejects it due to pagan origins.

Deeper Life Bible Church — Leadership has stated they do not celebrate it, viewing it as unbiblical.

Quakers (Religious Society of Friends) — Traditionally view every day as holy and avoid special religious holidays, though individual observance varies.

Photo: BBC

Netanyahu condemns alleged Christian genocide in Nigeria, says it must end now

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu adjusts the headphones during a joint press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz in Jerusalem Sunday, Dec. 7, 2025. (AP Photo/Ariel Schalit, Pool, File)

Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has condemned the alleged Christian genocide in Nigeria, describing it as unacceptable.

In his Christmas message on Wednesday, Netanyahu emphasised that attacks against Christians or members of any religion cannot be tolerated, urging an end to the alleged militant displacement and violence against Christians in Nigeria.

He also highlighted Israel as the only country in the Middle East where Christians can freely practise their faith and celebrate their traditions without fear.

According to him, while Israel’s Christian population continues to grow, the number of Christians in countries such as Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, and areas under the Palestinian Authority has steadily declined due to systematic discrimination.

He cited Bethlehem as an example, noting the Christian population there has dropped from 80% to 20% since the city came under the control of Palestinian Authority.

Netanyahu also drew attention to acts targeting Christian symbols, mentioning that Jerusalem officially distributes Christmas trees annually, while a recent tree in Jenin’s Holy Redeemer Church was reportedly burnt.

He said: “From Jerusalem, I send warm greetings to our Christian friends around the world. I wish you a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. From here, the Holy Land, Israel, the only country in the Middle East where the Christian community is thriving.

“Israel is the only country in the Middle East where Christians can practise their faith with full rights and in total freedom, where Christian pilgrims are embraced with open arms and are so deeply appreciated, where Christians can celebrate proudly their traditions and openly do so without any fear.

“In Jerusalem, the city municipality every year officially distributes Christmas trees. It’s been doing so for two decades. By contrast, a few days ago, in the Palestinian town of Jenin, Palestinians burnt a Christmas tree in the Holy Redeemer Church.

“That’s the difference. Israel stands up for Christians across the region, wherever they face widespread intimidation and persecution.

“While Israel’s Christian population is growing, the Christian population in countless areas across the region has been dwindling due to systematic discrimination and oppression. This has happened in Iraq. It’s happened in Syria.

“It’s happened in Lebanon. It’s happened in Turkey. And it’s happening in the Palestinian Authority.

“The birthplace of Jesus, Bethlehem, used to have 80% Christian population. That’s when we were there. When we left and gave it to the Palestinian Authority, it has since dwindled from 80% to 20%.

“The persecution of Christians or members of any religion cannot and must not be tolerated. And Muslim militant displacement and attacks against Christians in Nigeria, that too must end. And it must end now.

“I’m sending Israel’s Christmas blessings to our Christian friends around the world. And I ask you, know that Israel will always stand with you.”

Photo: AP News

 

Gumi and his terrorists, By Lasisi Olagunju

Balling with Bola Tinubu at 73, By Lasisi Olagunju

During the Kiriji War of the nineteenth century, a grim parable of war came and became a subject of racial slur and morbid joke. An Oyo-Ibadan warrior, disarmed and cornered by an Ijesa fighter, collapsed to the earth and begged for his life. The Ijesa man, scornful of pleas, mocked him with a cruel logic: he threw his machete at the captive and ordered him to beg the blade, not the man. “Ada lo a bè; èmi kó a bè.”

The unarmed warrior rose, took the weapon, and killed his captor. The war taught its lesson: in the theatre of enemies, negotiation, just as begging, is surrendering the weapon that will undo you.

Sheikh Ahmad Abubakar Mahmud Gumi is a trained soldier and a medical doctor. He left the Nigerian army as a captain. Two days ago, Gumi was on Facebook calling on Nigeria to arm the enemy with begging and surrender. He wrote: “They say: negotiation doesn’t work. It’s a lie. It worked with militants in Niger Delta creeks. Rather, it is war that doesn’t work, 16 years we’re still fighting BH (Boko Haram) and 11 years fighting bandits. It’s stupidity doing the same thing and expect different results.”

Imagine if Gumi had remained in the army, and had risen to become a General and Chief of Army Staff, and was asked by his Commander-in-Chief to fight and defeat Boko Haram in the North East, bandits in the North West and kidnappers in Niger, Kogi and Kwara States. What would have become of that Commander-in-Chief and the order he gave?

If you think Gumi would have carried out that order and spare his lord, the president, it means you haven’t been following his consistent advocacy on how to treat terrorists. He wants negotiation with the enemy as the sure way to peace.

He didn’t start today. In a February 2021 interview with the AIT, Gumi came out with a weird suggestion that bandits destroying his North were taught kidnapping by Niger Delta militants: “They learnt kidnapping from MEND (Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta). I do not see any difference. They were the first victims of rustling, their cattle is their oil,” he said.

In a May 2021 BBC report, Gumi was quoted comparing terrorist bandits with coup plotters: “If the country could pardon coup plotters who committed treasonable offences in the era of military administration, the bandits can as well enjoy similar forgiveness even better under democratic rule,” he said.

In that same report of more than four years ago, he said what he has been saying repeatedly recently: “Kidnapping children from school is a lesser evil because in the end, you can negotiate and now bandits are very careful about human lives.”

Nigeria dodged a bullet in Gumi exiting the army before his Iroko became problematic, exacting tributes. How many more Gumis do we have in the officer corps of the Nigerian Army? Imagine him rising to the very top, becoming a General, and making a case for the enemy.

Born in 1960, Ahmad Gumi arrived as son of the late Sheikh Abubakar Mahmud Gumi, one of Northern Nigeria’s most influential and outspoken Islamic scholars, who also served as Grand Khadi of the Shariah Court of Appeal. From anyone from such a lineage you would expect moral clarity, intellectual rigour, and principled leadership. Those are expectations that make today’s Gumi’s public interventions impossible to treat lightly.

Anyone who chose an early formation as Gumi did clearly chose a path that combined science, discipline, and service. The sheikh studied medicine, then enlisted in the Nigeria Defence Academy, and served as a medical officer in the Nigerian Army Medical Corps. Rising to the rank of captain, it is given that his training was to heal and also to understand the brutal arithmetic of conflict. At the NDA, people who know say every cadet was taught that violence against the violent is neither abstract nor negotiable. The soldier-doctor is schooled in a hard truth: forces that threaten life must be subdued decisively, they are not candidates for indulgence and accommodative rhetoric.

Gumi’s academic journey and his present politics are diametrically irreconcilable. After retiring from military service, Gumi relocated to Saudi Arabia where he immersed himself in Islamic scholarship. In Mecca, he earned a PhD in Usul al-Fiqh, the principles that govern Islamic jurisprudence. I do not think people of knowledge would dismiss this credential as casual. My findings tell me that his specialisation, Usul al-Fiqh, “concerns itself with moral reasoning, justice, public interest (maslahah), and the limits of tolerance in the face of disorder.” People of knowledge say his area of Islamic scholarship prioritises justice for the victim, and guiding societies away from chaos. They say his background makes his advocacy for negotiating with terrorists troubling, troublous and self-deconstructing.

It is hard to hear or read Gumi and not see contradiction hardening into failure of his callings: he was trained to protect life and confront mortal threats without illusion. He was also schooled to appreciate the value of justice. He failed spectacularly in all three.

The more we read some people’s lives, the more we see contradiction in starker hues. Where in his religious books, including jurisprudence, did Gumi read sanctifying terror and asking society to wear “soft gloves” when faced with those who murder the innocent and destabilise the society? Should we not tell Gumi that to blur the line between justice and appeasement is to betray both the uniform he once wore and the faith he now invokes? Someone who saw me write this said that in matters of terror it is neither courage nor wisdom to preach accommodation.

How do we tell a soldier, doctor and a PhD that it is suicidal to confuse mercy with surrender? Yet we have to tell him that what he advocates is suicide. We saw it in the Kiriji War story above. The enemy appeased today is the death of tomorrow.

Why is it difficult for Gumi and his supporters to see that Boko Haram, banditry and other criminal gangs in Northern Nigeria are not pursuing the same objectives as the militants of the Niger Delta? Terror organisations destroying the very basis of the existence of Gumi’s society are not misunderstood political movements waiting for a conference table; they are a machinery of horrendous violence who kill and abduct without borders. They are forever dangerous to freedom and to, even religion.

Governments across continents have long understood this danger. Britain’s Margaret Thatcher vowed to never negotiate with the IRA terrorists: “We do not negotiate with terrorists,” she declared. US’s George W. Bush bluntly insisted that: “You’ve got to be strong, not weak. The only way to deal with these people is to bring them to justice. You can’t talk to them. You can’t negotiate with them.” His position echoed the same logic as Thatcher’s. Scholars such as Paul Wilkinson and Walter Laqueur argue that talks with terrorists confer recognition, and recognition, like sunlight to mold, allows terror to spread. As some others observed, terrorism seeks legitimacy more than victory; it longs to be seen as a political equal rather than a criminal aberration. To grant Gumi’s wish is to reward criminals and criminality; defeat and destroy society.

History and scholarship teach that there is a moral grammar to politics, and terrorists deliberately violate it.

Paul Gilbert is a British moral and political philosopher who has been very stellar for his work on terrorism, political violence, war ethics, and the moral limits of negotiation. My reading of his works shows that he has written extensively to draw a very thick line between terrorism and legitimate political struggle. He argues that because terrorism targets civilians, it collapses the moral conditions that make dialogue, compromise, or negotiation intelligible. More directly, it is his position in a 1994 article that by engaging in violence against civilians, terror groups had breached the “conventions of debate required for negotiations”. Another scholar, Jan Narveson, also hold that ‘terrorists’ put themselves in “Hobbes’ state of nature with respect to us” and thus do not deserve a roundtable treatment. “Engaging with terrorists would translate their violence into a legitimate means to be heard and thus lead other groups to engage in similar activities.” That quote, if you don’t mind, you find with other viewpoints in Harmonie Toros’ ‘We Don’t Negotiate with Terrorists!: Legitimacy and Complexity in Terrorist Conflicts’.

In plainer terms, what Gumi professes is equal in criminal foolishness as one bargaining with the arsonist while the house is still burning.

Gumi, soldier, physician and religious scholar, wants Nigeria to turn crime into curriculum. He must stop what he is saying or be asked to stop. In his prescription is quiet injustice to those who choose peaceful paths. The state should stop pretending that it does not know how to tell him that what he preaches is that violence pays.

Some would say that his call is a camouflage for politics. Gumi wants to negotiate with criminal bandits. Negotiate with whom among the disparate leaders of the terrorists? Does this explain why previous peace agreements entered into with bandits by the north failed? In the North, communities organise colourful engagements with those destroying them today; tomorrow they receive death from those who visited yesterday. Yet, one of their leaders say they must keep negotiating. The enemy is right inside their bedroom.

Why would a religious leader seek to make a political class of kidnappers, and elevate terrorists to statesmen? In a normal society, it won’t be difficult to accept that negotiation with terror undermines citizens who pursue change without violence, telling them, after the fact, that bombs speak louder than ballots. Rejecting Gumi and his doctrine of negotiation with terrorists will not be a rejection of peace, it will be a defensive wall against assaults on peace and justice. Anyone who is not a lover of terrorism would know that criminalization, not conversation, is the language the rule of law understands.

People who wage war against society deserve war. To approach the enemy with votaries of appeasement is to strengthen them to do more harm. We must never be forced to misunderstand who the enemy is. Peace, like poetry, has rules; when those rules are shattered by criminal bloodshed, the answer is justice and protection, not glass-clinking at the negotiating table.

In the savannah lived a hyena who seized the riverbank and called himself its lord. When drought came and society was starved of the river’s nourish, other animals sent the tortoise to negotiate access, carrying calabashes of honey and promises of peace. The hyena laughed, took the gifts, and demanded more; each concession tightening his grin. “Talk is cheaper than teeth,” he said, and the river remained closed.

At last the terrorised animals learned what the tortoise had not: the hyena fed on bargaining itself. Each plea taught him the shape of their fear. So the herds moved together, guarded the springs, and starved the hyena of leverage. Access to the river opened again, not because words softened the hyena, but because unity denied him profit. And the forest remembered: when a predator thrives on terror, negotiation becomes its meal.

Credit: Lasisi Olagunju

AFCON 2025: Nigeria narrowly beat Tanzania in its opening match

Nigeria’s Super Eagles narrowly survived a second-half scare to overcome Tanzanian national team in their Africa Cup of Nations 2025 opener on Tuesday as they look to put their World Cup qualifying woes behind them.

A perfect header from Semi Ajayi broke the deadlock between the two teams nine minutes before half-time, the Hull City centre-back finding the target after Nigeria’s strike partnership of Victor Osimhen and Akor Adams saw chances go begging.

Tanzania then drew level after the break through Charles M’Mombwa before Ademola Lookman restored Nigeria’s lead just two minutes later with a monumental strike into the top corner of Tanzania’s net.

Eric Chelle’s side however were able to see out the result in Fes to get their Afcon campaign off to a winning start.
Photo: (AFP via Getty Images)

Is Our Democracy Truly in Danger?, By Simon Kolawole

After reading my article on the failed coup in Benin Republic, a friend sent me a series of chats via WhatsApp. He wrote: “As much as I agree with your piece on military rule, African presidents are shrinking the democratic space in most countries. Even before the coup, most of President Patrice Talon’s opponents were in jail. It is even worse in Tanzania. In Nigeria, opposition is free to operate butthe judiciary is practically dead. When they say ‘go to court’, they know what they are saying. You cripple the opposition. You appropriate the judiciary. The National Assembly is turned to a rubber stamp. The security agencies are clearly an extension of the ruling party’s enforcement team.”

Because I was taking a walk, I sent a one-liner: “My own is: is the military an option?” He replied: “That has always been my confusion: WHAT THEN IS THE OPTION?” I replied in capital letters as well: “MORE DEMOCRACY.” The solution to less democracy is more democracy. Because both of us lived under military rule, I decided to tease him: “Do you prefer Abacha to Tinubu?” He said: “Nooo. But that is not it. I love my freedom and I so much CHERISH democracy. But an average African leader is never ready to play by democratic rules. Honestly, I won’t join in celebrating military takeover. Not at my age (55). But we just have to strengthen this democracy. It is too flawed.” I agree with him in toto.

I found the discussion interesting. I momentarily halted my walk so I could engage more with him. He said: “The critical question is this: why do people cheer when the military takes over?” I said it is because they are gullible. “Citizens celebrated when the military seized power in Burkina Faso and Mali. Are they still celebrating?” I asked, recalling: “We celebrated when the military took over in 1983, didn’t we?” It took us a few years to realise that the problem we were battling with under President Shehu Shagari was not democracy — and military rule was not the solution. We thought life was hard under democracy only to realise sooner than later than “we ain’t seen nothing yet”.

As I continued my walk, I ruminated over the discussion with my friend, whom I met at THISDAY in 1997. We always discuss Nigeria (and football). He is so passionate about this country. He is very critical of the state of the nation, but also fair-minded. He commends what he thinks is right and condemns what he believes is wrong. He is not the type that never sees anything good in Nigeria. He is not a rabble rouser or the typical clout chaser you find on social media. Therefore, when he says he is extremely worried about the fate of democracy in Nigeria, it is not because he is on anybody’s payroll or promoting someone’s agenda. He is genuinely worried that our democracy is falling off.

Off the top of my head, there are certain characteristics I easilyassociate with democracy. One, credible elections. Every eligible citizen must be free to participate in the process, and the conduct must be fair, even if not perfect — perfection, after all, is an ideal. Two, rule of law. No person or institution is above the law, and thecourts must be obeyed. Three, human rights. A citizen has fundamental rights and enjoys the basic freedoms — speech, movement, association, thought, etc — as long as the rights of others are not infringed upon. Four, competitive elections. Citizens must have options at the polls. That is why a multiparty system is a standard measurement of democracy.

For democracy to function properly, some conditions are essential. One, the judiciary must be independent. Justice can only be done when it is not unduly influenced or manipulated. Two, there must be checks and balances, accountability and transparency. The legislature must not be a rubber stamp. The executive arm must be held accountable by all, including the judiciary, the legislature and the citizens who may organise as civil society groups. Three, citizens must cultivate a democratic culture. They must respect other people’s right to choose the parties and candidates they prefer. They must accept the outcomes of elections and judicial processes. Some people are sore losers.

My friend’s greatest concern about our democracy revolves around the mass defection to the All Progressives Congress (APC) and the questionable judgments by the judiciary on political matters. The rate at which politicians, governors in particular, are defecting to the ruling party is menacing. We may end up with over 30 governors in the APC before the presidential election. The Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), which used to be a behemoth, is fast becoming a carcass. The African Democratic Congress (ADC) — which some major opposition figures have adopted as the alternative to the APC and PDP — is yet to test its electoral strength but at least it remains a viable option.

In my opinion, democracy cannot be exciting when almost everybody belongs to one party. The beauty is the variety — the options available to the people and the competition that this should engender. Why then are so many politicians flocking to the APC? It may be linked to my friend’s second fear — that the judiciary has been emasculated. With the PDP crisis, members are unsure of the faction the courts will recognise. That means their candidature in the coming elections may be nullified. The courts have been more than a disinterested party in our democracy; judges are installing governors and lawmakers. Since the APC is crisis-free, it is a safer vehicle for politicians.

Many will argue that the PDP crisis was orchestrated by the APC to create the scenario we have now found ourselves. The chief actor is Chief Nyesom Wike, a PDP member who is also a minister in the APC government. The word on the streets is that it is part of the overall strategy of the ruling party to weaken the opposition. Sadly, nobody can rely on the judiciary to resolve the PDP crisis: the judges seem to always move the goalposts. I have lost count of the number of orders and judgments on the crisis despite a pronouncement by the Supreme Court that intra-party matters should not be adjudicated upon. Many Nigerians have given up on the judiciary and the police, and this is tragic.

However, political parties are merely vehicles to win elections in Nigeria. Defections should not be surprising. The PDP and APC have both benefitted from the lure of incumbency. The PDP that used to be like honey to the ants has become a poison. The APC may go the way of the PDP at some point in the future. When all sorts of politicians with different values congregate on one platform, it is only natural for the alliance to weaken when interests begin to diverge. Many would argue that these defections are not really organic, that it is a game of convenience and survival. An implosion is, thus, inevitable. And as Senator Ali Ndume asked, governors are defecting but what about the voters?

Is our democracy truly in danger because of defections, disputed election outcomes and judicial pronouncements? This is not a concern to be dismissed with a wave of the hand. But the biggest danger, to my mind, is the poor level of civic engagement. Democracy, by nature, has an in-built self-cleansing mechanism that active citizenship can activate. But the wiring of many Nigerians is “all or nothing”: if their candidates don’t win an election or a petition, they want to set the house on fire. Democracy to them is only when things go int their favour. The opposition did this when the PDP was in power: if they won an election, it was credible; if they didn’t, it was the worst election since 1914.

It is poor citizenship to resort to coup-baiting because your candidate lost an election. If you really love military rule, why not relocate to Mali, Niger or Burkina Faso? Why are you rushing to Canada, the US and the UK where democracy has survived its own crises? How many African countries have been developed by military rule? If military dictatorship has not proved to be better, why would you want to ditch an evolving system which you can actively contribute to building? If democracy is shallow, what we need to do is deepen it. Democratisation is a journey. It is our duty as citizens to keep pushing forward, despite our frustrations. It is said that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.

Our democracy is endangered largely because of the dearth of democrats. In the famous words of the late Prof Claude Ake, “You cannot build a democracy without democrats.” Most of our leaders have no regard for democracy. All they want is power, by all means. They must raise their game and make democracy work for the people. That is the best way to counter the coup-baiting. But the people must also police the system energetically and altruistically rather than throw up their hands in surrender. Sadly, the civic space is polarised and poisoned because of partisanship. Statesmanship is scarce. Still, I want to ask: if our democracy is endangered, ismilitary dictatorship a better option?

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

PROMOTION BONANZA

There was widespread objection, both in the military and civilian circles, when it emerged that Col Nurudeen Yusuf, ADC to President Bola Tinubu, was to be decorated as a brigadier-general— less than a year after his last promotion. I cannot see any justification for it. I am happy that the president saw reason and retreated. If this had gone ahead, it could have caused transgenerational damage to the military establishment. Yusuf’s rapid promotion would have been somehow justifiable if he had commanded a theatre that liberated Borno state from terrorists. But you move from lieutenant colonel to colonel and to brigadier in two years just for standing behind the president? Wonderful.

VISA BAN

Finally, we are itching towards a total US visa ban. On Tuesday, Nigeria was added to the list of countries placed on “partial visa restrictions”. Previously, President Donald Trump had unilaterally revoked the reciprocal five-year visa agreement to the applause of some Nigerians. Then the “Christian genocide” campaign was ramped up, and we are now under restrictions. If we finally get a full ban, it will be a big political victory for the campaigners. But, in the meantime, we need to know that it is mostly ordinary Nigerians, including ardent Trump fans, that will be affected by the latest visa restrictions. The A1/A2/A3 visa category for government officials is not affected. Not yet. Absurd.

TAINTED PERMIT

We are back to the issue of “status quo” again. In legal terms, returning to status quo used to mean no party should do anything that will affect the core matter in dispute. But when President Olusegun Obasanjo engineered the illegal removal of Governor Rashidi Ladoja of Oyo state in 2005 and the court said all parties should maintain status quo, the government said the impeachment was the “status quo” that should be maintained. The Supreme Court eventually returned Ladoja to office. Now a court has ruled that status quo should be maintained in the legal tussle over the tinted glass permit. Police authorities have said status quo means the enforcement should continue. Nigeria!

NO COMMENT

The Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) has petitioned FIFA, alleging that DR Congo fielded ineligible players during the World Cup playoffs. The NFF accused Congo of deceiving FIFA into clearing players for its national team despite their status contravening the country’s citizenship laws. Our plan is clear: if we can’t qualify on the ball, we can make it in the boardroom. If we manage to get Congo technically disqualified, we will still have to beat Iraq in the intercontinental playoffs in March 2026 before we can make it to the World Cup proper. I want to suggest that the NFF should start digging for dirt on Iraq in case they also defeat us. We can say they used Iranians, not Iraqis. Hahahaha.

Credit: Simon Kolawole

US stops Nigerians, others from applying for green card, citizenship

FREE Printable US Flags & American Flag color book pages

Trump government has directed the US Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to suspend green card and citizenship applications filed by Nigerians and nationals of many other countries newly added to the expanded US “travel ban,” citing national security concerns and an ongoing review of immigration vetting processes.

A US government official revealed this, the CBS News reported on Thursday.

This was after the executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Tuesday, further restricting entry into the United States for nationals from countries deemed high-risk due to what he described as “demonstrated, persistent, and severe deficiencies in screening, vetting, and information-sharing” that threaten US national security and public safety.

Some countries are subjected to full travel ban while others are partially restricted. Among the 15 additional countries newly subjected to partial restrictions is Nigeria.

Trump had earlier, on October 31, declared Nigeria a “country of particular concern (CPC)” following allegations of a Christian genocide in the country.

The latest suspension expands earlier restrictions announced in June, under which nationals of several countries faced partial limits on immigration processing. In the most recent proclamation, Laos and Sierra Leone — which previously faced partial restrictions — were upgraded to a full entry ban, prompting USCIS to extend the freeze on immigration petitions, including green card and citizenship applications.

Below is the full list of countries reported to be affected by the suspension of green card and citizenship applications:

Countries affected

Full travel ban

  • Burkina Faso

  • Mali

  • Niger

  • South Sudan

  • Syria

  • Laos

  • Sierra Leone

Countries with partial travel restrictions

  • Angola

  • Antigua and Barbuda

  • Benin

  • Côte d’Ivoire

  • Dominica

  • Gabon

  • Gambia

  • Malawi

  • Mauritania

  • Nigeria

  • Senegal

  • Tanzania

  • Tonga

  • Zambia

  • Zimbabwe

Previously affected countries

  • Afghanistan

  • Burundi

  • Chad

  • Cuba

  • Republic of the Congo

  • Equatorial Guinea

  • Eritrea

  • Haiti

  • Iran

  • Libya

  • Myanmar

  • Somalia

  • Sudan

  • Togo

  • Turkmenistan

  • Yemen

  • Venezuela

(Flag image: Designery Signs)

Tinubu departs Abuja for three-state tour aboard an over 20-year-old Boeing 737 Business Jet (Video)

Nigeria@64: Tinubu's Independence anniversary speech

President Bola Tinubu on Saturday departed Abuja for Borno, Bauchi and Lagos aboard an over 20-year-old Boeing 737 Business Jet which had been listed for sale in July but delisted later due to poor buyer interest and lowball offers.

Tinubu left the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, Abuja, at 11:45am, kicking off the multi-state working visit and holiday tour that will see him inaugurate projects in Maiduguri, pay a condolence visit to the late Sheikh Dahiru Bauchi’s family in Bauchi, and mark the Yuletide in Lagos.

See his departing Abuja video below:

Tinubu’s low-grade ambassadors: A disservice to Nigeria!, By Olu Fasan

Toadyish as ever, it supinely rubber-stamped President Bola Tinubu’s tacky list of ambassadorial nominees without as much as a whimper. Last week, following the infamous and shameful “bow and go” practice it has adopted in approving President Tinubu’s political appointees, the Senate waived through his ambassadorial nominees without questioning. The perverse implication of nominating controversial figures, and of clearing them without scrutiny, is that the President and the Senate both believe that anybody, just anybody, however questionable their pedigree, provided they are in the President’s good graces, can represent this country as an ambassador in a foreign land. That’s a disservice to Nigeria!

Being a diplomat is not a run-of-the-mill job; it comes with well-defined attributes, including perceptiveness, integrity and discretion. Thus, any serious country would only send the right people – morally, intellectually and temperamentally – to represent its interests in a foreign country, and to act as the embodiment of the image it wishes to promote abroad. Under the Vienna Convention, ambassadors enjoy diplomatic immunity and are accorded diplomatic niceties as a mark of respect for their countries’ sovereignty. In truth, however, a country is usually as valuable in diplomatic circles and in foreign ministries as the quality of its ambassadors. For instance, if a country has a bad reputation but sends formidable and respected figures overseas as its ambassadors, those diplomats could, to some extent, sway international opinion in the country’s favour. But if that country sends “ambassadors” whose integrity is questionable, whose past is mud-encrusted and mired by moral and ethical deficiencies, those “diplomats” would simply reinforce the country’s bad reputation; instead of re-marketing their country, they would further de-market it.

That’s why no country should be frivolous about the kind of people it sends to represent it abroad. Strangely, someone recently argued that President Tinubu merely exercised his constitutional authority to appoint ambassadors and that, subject to the Senate’s approval, he could send anyone he likes, even his “janitor or mechanic”, to represent Nigeria in any foreign country. But that view implies that being a president means you can treat Nigeria as your personal fiefdom or private enterprise, ruling it arrogantly without accountability and responsiveness to public opinion.

But sovereignty belongs to the people. The elected president is only a custodian of that sovereignty, who exercises it on behalf of the people, and must, in trust, protect its soul and moral values. Thus, when the President nominates anyone to represent Nigeria as an ambassador, he does so on behalf of Nigerians, and the question he must ponder is whether his choices are the best he could possibly make, based on sound judgements; and whether they would serve Nigeria’s best interests.

But for President Tinubu, self-interested political calculations trump everything else. He exercises arbitrary powers with political undercurrents but without consideration of their moral challenges. Apparently, his philosophical standpoint is that there’s no morality in politics, and such amoral, value-free mindset arguably produced the controversial ambassadorial appointees now foisted on Nigeria.

A former diplomat, Ambassador Joe Keshi, reportedly described the ambassadorial list as comprising “the good, the bad and the ugly.” Unfortunately, the bad and the ugly dominated the list, largely intended to reward cronies and hangers-on, and return political favours. But while prebendal presidents always use public offices for patronage politics and political rewards, diplomatic postings for questionable figures should be a definite no-no. For integrity, trustworthiness, self-restraint, discretion and moral courage are some of the hallmarks of ambassadors, career or non-career. Unfortunately, these are not qualities that some of Tinubu’s ambassadors possess.

In defending the controversial ambassadorial list, the presidency cited a “combination of loyalty, national service and strategic competence” for the choices. But unpacking these criteria, one must wonder what qualified some of the appointees that disqualified far more talented, suitable and credible Nigerians. Let’s consider the criteria in turn, vis-à-vis some of President Tinubu’s ambassadors.

Take loyalty. What loyalty test did Reno Omokri pass? He once described Tinubu in unflattering terms and questioned the source of his wealth, only to ingratiate himself with him in power. What about Femi Fani-Kayode? Well, he called Tinubu unprintable names for years, questioning his age, health and stability. However, during the 2023 presidential election, he did a U-turn and plumped for Tinubu. Indeed, he did so with such ferocity that the British High Commission in Nigeria threatened him with a visa ban for his inflammatory and inciting comments. Is that the loyalty test he passed? What about Professor Mahmoud Yakubu, the former chairman of INEC? What loyalty test did he pass to become an ambassador shortly after leaving INEC? Is it the fact that he appallingly bungled the 2023 presidential election? The “loyalty” criterion seemingly favours those willing to fight dirty for Tinubu’s electoral fortunes, motivated by convenience or opportunism. It’s a dog whistle and a recruiting signal for 2027!

What about national service? Well, few Nigerians would agree with Tinubu’s characterisation of the “national service” that qualified Omokri, Fani-Kayode and Professor Yakubu for diplomatic postings. Indeed, what “national service” qualified many of the other ambassadors-designate, including spouses of party chieftains and political jobbers, but disqualified several patently more able and more patriotic Nigerians? Truth is, just as the loyalty criterion is self-serving, the national service test is self-seeking.

Finally, “strategic competence”. What strategic competence qualifies Omokri as a diplomat? Is it his rabid anti-Igbo sentiment, exemplified by the constant stream of anti-Igbo diatribe in his tweets. How would Ambassador Omokri treat Igbos in his country of posting? Is it strategic competence to lack discretion, tolerance and cultural sensitivity, key diplomatic attributes? What about Fani-Kayode? Without a doubt, he is an eloquent communicator. But he’s a maverick and lacks basic diplomatic skills like circumspection. For instance, Fani-Kayode’s anti-American and anti-Western views are well known, frequently expressed in his long tweets. If he’s posted to any Western country, the media there would get under his skin so quickly. And given his very short fuse, he could explode and embarrass Nigeria. Now, is there anyone who would say Professor Yakubu is gifted with strategic competence, when he couldn’t conduct a credible presidential election? Should he, too, be sent to a Western democracy, he could be dogged by questions from Western journalists about his woeful handling of the 2023 presidential election. An obvious distraction from his diplomatic task.

President Tinubu spent nearly two and a half years in office without appointing ambassadors. But after President Trump’s threatened Nigeria with “guns-a-blazing” over alleged Christian genocide, and Nigeria’s inept diplomacy was blamed for Trump’s sabre-rattling, Tinubu rushed out the list of ambassadorial nominees he kept under wraps for months. Sadly, most of the nominees on that list, which the Senate unquestioningly approved, are so tenth-rate and abysmal that Nigeria is worse off diplomatically than when it had no ambassadors, leaving its inept diplomacy far more maladroit. Well, using diplomatic postings so perversely, I would argue, is a betrayal of the national interest!

Credit: Olu Fasan

Nigeria’s Super Eagles name new captain

Wilfred Ndidi named Super Eagles captain

In preparation for the African Cup of Nations tournament, Wilfred Ndidi has been named the new captain of the national team,Super Eagles of Nigeria.

The midfielder takes over the role following William Troost-Ekong’s retirement from international football, signaling a new chapter of leadership for the Nigerian national team.

Ndidi’s new position was confirmed via the Super Eagles’ official X account on Friday.

The Besiktas J.K. star emphasized the importance of teamwork in ensuring a successful captaincy.

“It’s a huge responsibility, but with the help of the players everything will be smooth,

“I have had conversations with a couple of the players to explain our purpose and to seek their support. The staff as well—we are all in this together. We discussed the tasks ahead, and it’s important for us to be on the same page.” Ndidi told Super Eagles media.

 

New national opposition movement emerges in Nigeria, calls for suspension of Tinubu’s new tax law

Unveiling of National opposition movement | Bishop Plus media services |  Facebook

A few days to its planned implementation, the President Bola Tinubu’s proposed tax policies on Wednesday faced fresh opposition as a new opposition movement urged the federal government to halt its implementation or risk mass protests across the country.

The tax policies implementation has been scheduled to take effect as from January 2, 2026.

The group, under the aegis of the National Opposition Movement (NOM), called on the Federal Government to immediately suspend the implementation of the newly introduced tax law, warning that the policy would worsen poverty and deepen economic hardship for millions of Nigerians.

Addressing a press conference at the Shehu Yar’Adua Centre in Abuja, the movement said the proposed tax regime, scheduled to take effect on January 2, 2026, was “not a reform” but an assault on the livelihood of ordinary Nigerians.

The movement claims, “Tinubu administration is preparing to roll out the most punitive and exploitative tax regime in the history of Nigeria.

“There is an urgent need for a platform to engage political actors, national stakeholders, academia, civil society, the media, the political parties themselves, democratic institutions of other nations and all who can contribute to the wellness and sustainability of our democracy. We have created “National Opposition Movement.

“This has become necessary as it is obvious that those who are elected members of the opposition have not shown the courage to take on the issues that affect the country and the well-being of the masses.

“The birth of the movement has become necessary as it is obvious that those who are elected members of the opposition have not shown the courage to take on the issues that affect the country and the well-being of the masses.

“The march has begun. We are extending our hands in partnership and collaboration to all Nigerians desirous of a vibrant opposition as well as transparent, credible democratic and electoral processes.This Movement Shall be Christened,” the movement stated.

The NOM described the timing of the tax law as “cruel and illogical”, stating that it comes on the heels of rising food prices, high transport costs, increasing electricity tariffs and widespread unemployment.

(Photo: Gee Tv)

Why are you so obsessed with me? ―Music diva, Fantana asks newly married star singer Diamond Platnumz (Photos)

Fantana blasts Diamond Platnumz for mentioning her name at Juma Jux concert

Ghanaian singer, Francine Nyanko Koffi, also known as Fantana has slammed Tanzanian superstar, Naseeb Abdul Juma Issack, professionally known as Diamond Platnumz for daring to mention her name at Juma Jux’s Lagos concert.

Firing back at the singer via her Instagram page, Fantana said she understands the Tanzanian artist is obsessed with her, but it’s about time, he gets her name off his mouth.

She also went on to tag his marriage fake, saying you are obsessed with me, I know.

“Please let my name rest @diamondplatnumz. Imagine having a whole concert in Lagos and still mentioning MY NAME! Don’t irritate me this evening!”, she fired.

She continued, “You are so obsessed with me! Leave me alone ooo and face that fake marriage you guys are using for social media with that fake small cheap invisible ring! @diamondplatnumz, you will know more of me! Keep playing!”

Fantana ended her post with a bold warning: “If you like keep playing, I go enter Tanzania sharp!”

See her posts below:

Fantana blasts Diamond Platnumz for mentioning her name at Juma Jux concert

Fantana blasts Diamond Platnumz for mentioning her name at Juma Jux concert

Fantana blasts Diamond Platnumz for mentioning her name at Juma Jux concert

 

 

 

Tinubu presents N58.18 trillion as his proposed Budget for 2026

BREAKING: Tinubu presents N58.18 trillion 2026 Budget

President Bola Tinubu has earmarked the sum of N5.41tn for Security, the single largest allocation in the proposed 2026 budget.

This will be the third consecutive year that defence and security spending has taken priority since the administration began presenting national budgets in November 2023.

Presenting the budget on Friday in Abuja, Tinubu said the 2026 spending framework is intended to deepen recent economic gains, restore investor confidence, and improve the living standards of Nigerians.

Under the proposal, defence and security will receive N5.41tn, ahead of infrastructure, education and health, reaffirming a pattern established in the 2024 and 2025 budgets, where security consistently attracted the highest sectoral funding amid persistent threats from terrorism, banditry and kidnapping.

“Security remains the foundation of development,” the President told lawmakers, stressing that without peace and stability, other sectors of the economy would struggle to thrive.

The Federal Executive Council, had hours earlier, approved the 2026 budget framework at an emergency meeting presided over for the first time by Vice President Kashim Shettima.

The council pegged total expenditure at N58.47tn, with heavy spending pressures from debt service, wages and security obligations.

Tinubu, while breaking down the 2026 proposal, said the security vote would be deployed to modernise the armed forces, strengthen intelligence-driven policing, enhance border surveillance and support joint operations among security agencies.

“We will invest in security with clear accountability for outcomes because security spending must deliver security results,” he said.

The president also announced a major reset of Nigeria’s national security architecture, including the establishment of a new national counter-terrorism doctrine anchored on unified command, intelligence coordination and community stability.

Under the proposed framework, Tinubu declared that all armed groups operating outside state authority—including bandits, militias, kidnappers, armed gangs and violent cult groups—would henceforth be classified as terrorists, along with their financiers, informants and political or community enablers.

Tinubu argued that the tougher classification was necessary to close legal and operational gaps that had allowed violent groups to thrive for years.

Beyond security, the 2026 budget also proposes N3.56tn for infrastructure, N3.52tn for education, and N2.48tn for health.

He acknowledged the pressure on public finances but insisted that prioritising security was unavoidable.

“Without security, investment will not thrive. Without educated and healthy citizens, productivity will not rise. Without infrastructure, jobs and enterprise will not scale,” he said, linking the heavy security allocation to broader development goals.

He urged lawmakers to support the proposal, arguing that the budget was designed to consolidate recent economic gains while restoring public confidence in the state’s ability to protect lives and property.

Nigeria’s House of Reps amends Electoral Act 2022 concerning use of BVAS, real-time electronic transmission of election results, campaign spending limits

Image result for nigeria house of reps logo

In a plenary presided over by the Deputy Speaker, Benjamin Kalu on Thursday, the House of Representatives has approved a significant increase in campaign spending limits for candidates contesting elective offices, and made other amendments to the Electoral Act 2022, aimed at strengthening the credibility, transparency and integrity of Nigeria’s electoral process.

The House endorsed major reforms to the Electoral Act 2022, including provisions that formally recognise the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) as the primary tool for accrediting voters and mandate the real-time electronic transmission of election results.

At the sitting, lawmakers approved a clause requiring presiding officers at polling units to use BVAS or any other technological device prescribed by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to verify and authenticate voters’ details.

The provision further states that where the accreditation technology fails and a replacement device is not deployed, voting at the affected polling unit must be cancelled.

Under the amendment, INEC will be required to conduct a fresh election within 24 hours in such circumstances, provided the commission determines that the failure would substantially affect the final outcome of the election in the constituency concerned.

The House also approved a provision making electronic transmission of election results compulsory. The amendment mandates presiding officers to electronically transmit results from each polling unit to INEC’s Result Viewing Portal (IReV) immediately after the conclusion of voting and counting.

These resolutions and others were adopted on Thursday during a clause-by-clause consideration of the report of the House Committee on Electoral Matters.

Under the approved amendments, the ceiling on campaign expenditure for presidential candidates was raised from ₦5 billion to ₦10 billion.

Governorship candidates will now be allowed to spend up to ₦3 billion, compared to the previous ₦1 billion limit.

For senatorial contests, the spending cap was increased from ₦100 million to ₦500 million, while candidates for the House of Representatives can now spend up to ₦250 million, up from ₦70 million.

The House also raised the campaign spending limits for state House of Assembly candidates from ₦30 million to ₦100 million.

For local government chairmanship elections, the ceiling was similarly increased from ₦30 million to ₦100 million, while councillorship candidates will now be permitted to spend up to ₦10 million, compared to the earlier ₦5 million limit.

In addition, the Reps approved a provision that restricts individual or corporate donations to candidates to a maximum of ₦500 million, in a bid to curb undue influence and excessive monetisation of the electoral process.

There were reports that the House commenced deliberations on the proposed electoral reforms on Wednesday, reviewing several provisions of the existing law and proposing amendments intended to address gaps exposed during recent elections.

 

 

 

 

Bow-and-go: When the Senate ate the intestines of òkété, By Festus Adedayo

Columns

Time and seasons have their indicators. My people have many of such indicators. For instance, when elders gather to feast on the intestines, the entrails of an Òkété, known as the African giant pouched rat, that community is at its autumn.  In Christendom, the fig tree and its leaf are denotatively used to represent the end time. In eschatology, that part of theology concerned with death, judgment and the final destiny of the soul and mankind, Jesus Christ’s parable of the end time told to His disciples is usually referenced. It is their own indicator of elders gathering to eat the entrails of Òkété. Using the branch of the fig tree and its fruits, which my people call ‘èso òpòtó’ as illustration, Christ said that when the fig tree becomes tender, falls ‘and puts forth its leaves’, then you know that human existence, the end, “is nigh”. Except for those imbued with inner eyes, end time is seldom seen. 

Those who know signs of end time, when they behold a ripening banana, are alarmed. These ones put a line of Irish poet, Oscar Wilde, to shame. In his The Picture of Dorian Gray, Wilde had said that those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming. I disagree. Those who see end time when things posture to be bright and beautiful, are actually charming without being corrupt. What do you see when you behold a ripening banana? It will show where you belong. Do you see engaging beauty or decomposing beauty? For the ones who are blinded from the truth, what they see in a ripening banana is a transition into a beautiful, fair-complexioned beauty of a hitherto green lump of fruit. Elders who can see autumn ahead see otherwise, prompting them to say, in Yoruba, “ògèdè ńbàjé e l’ó ńpón.” It translates to mean that while we should be sad that the banana fruit is gradually entering its rottening process, some people are glad that it has ripened into an edible piece of fruit.

Men and women we thought were wisemen, by the virtue of the position they hold, gathered to eat entrails of the Òkété in the Nigerian senate last week. Venue was the Red Chamber of the National Assembly. For those of us who do not queue behind Wilde, when recently, the Nigerian president belatedly released the names of his nominees for ambassadorial positions, we didn’t see wisdom, we saw the fatal hinges of politics making grating noise. 

But we were in for further rude shocks of human beings who got carnal in their pleasures. For once, we began to agree with another of Wilde’s submissions that behind everything exquisite, beautiful and charming things, there exists something tragic. The president’s ambassadorial appointment list appeared charming but it was tragic. It immediately reminded me of how we inverted a line of the Christian hymnal, “All things bright and beautiful, all creatures great and small, all things bright and wonderful, the Lord God made them all”.

The hymn was from the famous opening of a beloved Christian hymnal written by Cecil Frances Alexander, in 1848. Alexander used the hymn to celebrate God’s marvelous creation, divine aesthetic artistry and order. These range from tiny flowers and birds, to majestic mountains, the binary of the rich and poor, and natural creations like sun and wind. Odolaye Aremu, the late Ilorin bard, also broke this God’s artistry down into some tiny granules in his poetic rendition when he lauded God as one who created the rain, famine, winter and hot weather. He did this as he sang, “as’òjò, as’òdá, asè’kàn bí orururuasè’kàn a dàbíi oyé…”

Pardon my insolent digression. I will digress again presently. So, I have taken liberty to inflect Alexander’s hymnal to read, in present day reality of Nigeria, “All things bright and beautiful, all creatures great and small, all things wise and wonderful, Bola Tinubu made them worse.” The ambassadorial list was an example. It consists of many of the very worst of Nigerians. But, do we know that this Nigeria that has become almost a mess of pottage in the hands of Tinubu used to be a great country?

A famous Learned Silk put a call to me last week. He took me on a fascinating but difficult-to-believe journey of Nigeria’s past greatness. Did I know how great Nigeria used to be? He enumerated them all. From Nigeria’s Anglo-Defence pact, the nationalization of the British Petroleum and other foreign companies and corporations in Nigeria under the Indigenization Decree. Under such greatness that Nigeria was enveloped, a Donald Trump would not dare talk down on Nigeria as he did recently. He dared not dare. Nigeria would square up to him. Great Pat Utomi, on a television programme last week,  spoke brilliantly on how Nigeria has become strategically irrelevant in Nigeria and the world. I paraphrase him: If any country of the world wanted to take any decision against any country in Africa, Nigeria was so consequential, was such an octopodal behemoth, that they would pause to think what Nigeria would feel of such action. Today, Nigeria is rated less than a tissue paper in the eyes of even countries of Africa due to its strategic irrelevance. 

Last week, Captain Ibrahim Traore of tiny landlocked Burkina Faso sent Nigeria an ‘àrokò’ of our irrelevance in Africa and even the world. In his estimation, Nigeria is all brown but brawns. In those days when there was no modern means of communication, our forefathers used  àrokò, semiotic objects, to communicate. 

When my people are thoroughly ashamed about a thing, or unable to fathom a turn of things for the worse, they would simply say, “ojú gbà mí tì fún e’. Literally, it reads, I am unspeakably ashamed of and for you. Last week, I was unspeakably ashamed for the figurine figure Almighty Nigeria had become today when Yusuff Tugar, Nigeria’s Foreign Minister, at a press conference with his Benin counterpart, admitted that eleven Nigerian soldiers and Air Force jet are still under the audacious military jackboots of the Burkinabe junta head. How lower can an Òmìnrán – a giant – sink? In seizing Nigeria’s jet and detaining eleven of its soldiers, Burkina Faso’s àrokò was clear and unambiguous. Nigeria is in the hands of a man whose life is all about politics of election and conquest of opposition figures and parties by stealth but zero in strategic military prowess. 

To buttress Utomi and to counterpoise the little jelly power we have become, let me tell you the story of the Olusegun Obasanjo who some regime fawners and data-boy cretins of history take turns to disparage today. In July 2003, an insolent military junta had the temerity to seize power in São Tomé and Príncipe. The democratically elected president, Fradique de Menezes, was yet in Nigeria to attend an economic summit while the cretins, parodying Adewale Ademoyega, struck. Obasanjo didn’t bother to know why they struck. Not only did he condemn the coup, Obasanjo put a call to the leader of the coup plotters and gave them an ultimatum to surrender and hand power back to de Menezes. The plotters complied immediately, eventually signing an agreement to reinstate President Menezes. It was a proud Nigeria which beheld Obasanjo personally accompanying Menezes back to São Tomé and Príncipe. 

Where are my manners! I have digressed incredibly, but I am back. When a man has phallic greed and parades a confetti of harem, my people say under his roof are the mentally deranged, the schizophrenic, the mad, witches, the malevolent, the benevolent and all sorts. That description fits President Tinubu’s ambassadorial list. All things bright and beautiful, Tinubu made them ugly. The list Tinubu sent to the parliament is that ugliness. To truly appreciate what befell Nigeria in that ambassadorial list, try and internalize a Yoruba proverb which says that when a calamity of monstrous dimension befalls a man, lesser indignities begin to clamber him. A list that contains Reno Omokri, Mahmood Yakubu, ex-electoral umpire and some other floating leaves without character shares synonym with the man I referenced above whose harem is populated by a rainbow of afflictions. It is a combination of asymmetric persons, what Yoruba will call an admixture of ‘lúrú’ and ‘sàpà’ as soup ingredients, the result of which is a culinary disaster.

When the list got to the senate, it mutated from a monstrous calamity into frightening indignities that clambered our country. Not that Nigerians expected anything different from the senators. As if Odolaye Aremu read that Wilde’s classic, in an elegy he did for the assassinated Premier of Nigeria’s Western Region, S. L. Akintola, Odolaye sang that when a matter is more grisly in stature than what can be countenanced, so much that even a bitter cry cannot capture the pain felt, we must burst into laughter. “Òrò t’ó bá ju ekún lo, èrín l’a fií rín,” he sang. To demonstrate this, Odolaye burst into laughter himself. Can’t we see, Odolaye asked, how dried lumps of yam called ìpáńkóró, while pounding them with pestle and mortar, have turned this routine kitchen exercise into an onomatopoeia, as the duo make the strange sound of “gba-han-ran, gba-han-ran”? 

To be fair to Godswill Akpabio, his tenth senate did not pioneer the groveling groove that the Nigerian parliament, which we euphemistically call the senate, has become today. Nigeria’s National Asssembly has always been a throb in the people’s veins. In its poetry of self, our parliament is the most unpoetic of all. Yet, we expected some redemptive move from it which, like a flash in the pan, we sometimes get. Take for instance a couple of weeks ago. Nominee for the Minister of Defence portfolio, Christopher Musa, stood before the senate. A Niger State senator, consumed by the obsequious culture which Nigeria’s parliament wears as a lapel, had asked Musa to take a bow. As they say that it is a violent pedigree that will make a man seek a bullet-evading charm called Òkígbé, and that it is only he who is gifted with the metaphysical ability to see the unseen who is afraid all the time, Akpabio was livid. He must be aware that the pot of soup which all of them made ring round, tossing its pound of roasted meats inside their rapacious oesophagus at will, was under serious threat by the rascally Donald Trump. For the very first time, Akpabio was recorded to be on his feet. Venom danced round his lips like a threatened viper. How dare you! He seemed to be telling Musa, the senator. Trump is on our neck and you are asking a nominee for defence portfolio to bow and go!

But not to worry. The vulture seemed to have been sufficiently chased away from the huge gourmet meal that is Nigeria. The senate’s personal meal not looking threatened, it was time for the parliamentarians to return to their vomit. And, man, did the senators gobble this mountainous vomit! At the screening of Tinubu’s 65 career and non-career ambassadorial nominees last week, we expected the men we purportedly elected to humour us. To at least make a pretence to nationhood, that the love of Nigeria was their most prized possession. No, it was not time for base humour. So it was that, from start to finish, it was as if a huge billowing wind gushed from nowhere and exposed the rump of their hen. We saw their narcissim in its nakedness. I pray I don’t kill Oscar Wilde a second time in this piece. In his The decay of Lying, Wilde said while one recognises the poet by his fine lines, a liar can be recognised by his rich rhythmic utterance. Immediately ex-Governor Adams Oshiomhole stood up to speak, Wilde’s was what I saw. I searched Oshiomhole’s mouth meticulously. I couldn’t find a single dot of blood. You can find everything but a sprinkle of lie in the mouth of a liar, so say my people.

Senators know Nigerians love theatre, so at that screening point, they gave our people more than their fill. Between Oshiomhole and Ali Ndume, Nigerians had a mouthful. It was at the point of screening of itinerant Janus, Reno Omokri. Oshiomhole, regarded more for the lyricism in his utterances than the senses therein, first began the outburst. He said he wanted to speak on Omokri “in the public interest”. Then he threw the whole issue to the dogs and the dogs, unable to fathom it, threw it to the swines, and the swines, seeing how filthy and smelly it was, threw it into the sewage. “When I talk, those who have not been governors should listen.” Then Ndume, visibly irritated by such cant, hit back, “You have never dreamed of being a senator when I became one.” I had never seen immodesty advertized as public character as this. 

Then the former governor espoused the theory of pragmatism as justification for Omokri’s reversibility. The brainchild of key figures like Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, and John Dewey, pragmatism is a philosophy which has its roots in 19th century USA. Its thrust is that the meaning, truth and value of ideas can be found in their practical consequences.  I would like to look Oshiomhole in the face and ask him how he could have taken self-service to this absurdly shameless height that he did the memory of a pragmatist like John Dewey such a violent injustice. It was so bad that his bones turned in throbbing pain. Comparing his pragmatist school with the oesophagus pursuits of Omokri was verbal diarrhoea.

The day our legislature started the “bow and go” syndrome, Nigerian parliament began to atrophy. This perfunctory parliamentary approval process has highlighted severe institutional and procedural weaknesses which are now dominant in Nigeria’s legislative and democratic practice. Nigeria’s screening is so bland that it sickens. There have been allegations that huge money is tethered by the feet of the parliament’s mace before screening. 

Yet screening of nominees is at the core of legislative duties. It increases openness and accountability and nourishes democracy. Inappropriate political patronage and kow-towing, the like we saw last Thursday, undermine us. How do Nigerians have a window into the minds of their ambassadors? Why not build scenario questions of contemporary bilateral situations for the nominees to answer, so that we could have a peep into their acuity? Screening also allows nominees to wittingly or unwittingly reveal certain information about themselves. For instance, in 1999, while being grilled by the South African Judicial Commission at the Constitutional Court, Justice Edwin Cameron, a respected judge who was a gay member of the South African high court, self-confessed. The grilling buoyed the commission’s reputation for making non-discriminatory appointments. In the Nigerian senate last week, most of the nominees were simply asked to take a bow and go after introducing themselves. The whole charade was highly pro-forma, perfunctory, and largely a ceremonial pumping of hands. 

Senate Leader, Opeyemi Bamidele’s defence of the cancerous Bow and Go syndrome continued on the trajectory of sophistry that the Nigerian parliament is notorious for. While Akpabio, the week before, threw Bow and Go to the wolves to maul, Opeyemi resurrected it from the jaws of the carnivores and polished it for public amusement. Bamidele said the tradition is reserved for “individuals with established and verifiable records of public service.” Which is absolute bunkum. Why would the senate of Nigeria not be interested in asking Omokri questions, especially as regards Mike Arnold, an American former Mayor’s allegation against him of being a “pathological liar”? 

In a letter addressed to the parliament, Arnold told the parliament that Reno was a “shape-shifting mercenary” who says whatever he is paid to say, which makes him unfit for a diplomatic role.  Not done, he also claimed that Omokri’s nomination “plays into the negative international stereotype of a ‘slick scammer,’ which would de-market Nigeria on the world stage. That is Opeyemi’s “verifiable record of public service”? 

What about the optics of reward-for-a-good-job embedded in a president appointing a man who superintended over his election? That appointment was immoral, adulterous and incestuous. It can be likened to a referee in a UEFA championship being engaged the following season by the winning team as coach. If the appointor was shameless to offer, the appointee must be man enough to say no. To ask Yakubu directly, when is enough really enough for him? This was a man who was executive secretary of TETFUND since  2007, assistant secretary of finance and administration at the 2014 National Conference and who spent ten years as INEC chairman. Must the straw in the feeding bottle of Nigeria be eternally in Mamood Yakubu’s mouth?

We will be dignifying the word ‘circus’ if we say what we saw in the senate last Thursday was one. What we had was people we thought were wisemen gathering to feast on the worthless intestines of an Òkété. An elderly man who eats the intestines of an Òkété is disreputable. Eating it indicates that summertime “is nigh” and it is time to close shop.

Credit: Festus Adedayo

Court bars police, IGP from enforcing tinted glass permit nationwide

Delta State High Court sitting in Orerokpe and presided over by Justice Joe Egu, has restrained the Inspector General of Police (IGP) and the Nigeria Police Force from resuming the enforcement of the tinted glass permit policy nationwide.

Ruling on a motion ex-parte in a suit marked HOR/FHR/M/31/2025 filed by Mr Isreal Joe against the IGP and two others, through his counsel, Kunle Edun, SAN, who led other lawyers, the presiding judge restrained the respondents from resuming the enforcement of the tinted glass permit policy nationwide.

The order was as a result of the announcement by the Nigeria Police of its decision to resume the tinted glass permit enforcement on January 2, 2026.

Aside from the IGP, the court also restrained the Nigeria Police Force and the Commissioner of Police, Delta State Police Command and all the other commands, from resuming the enforcement of the tinted glass permit policy nationwide.

Justice Egwu also barred the police from harassing, arresting, detaining or extorting citizens and motorists on account of the said policy, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.

The case has also reignited a dispute between the Nigeria Police and the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA). The NBA has maintained that the matter remains before the courts and warned that enforcement could constitute contempt.

The association said a suit challenging the constitutionality of the policy had been filed at the Federal High Court, Abuja, and that a judgment had been reserved following the conclusion of hearings.

The NBA further cited a Federal High Court order in Warri directing parties to maintain the status quo pending an interlocutory injunction. The association accused the police of disregarding the rule of law and urged President Bola Tinubu to intervene.

EFCC raid Malami’s Kebbi, Abuja homes and offices

Court rejects Malami’s bail application

Former Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN, has alleged that his offices and residences have been raided by operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission, (EFCC).

Speaking through his office, Malami claimed the alleged raid was because of his recent reference to the Salami report.

A statement issued on Wednesday by his office said operatives of the EFCC conducted coordinated raids on the ex-AGF’s offices and private residences in Abuja and Kebbi state.

The statement signed by Mohammed Bello Doka, Special Assistant on Media to Malami, said the raids occurred immediately after the ex-minister made a public statement referencing Chapter 9 of the Justice Ayo Salami Judicial Commission of Inquiry Report.

According to the statement, the EFCC operatives allegedly targeted documents related to that chapter, without prior notice.

The statement described the action of the EFCC’ as “deeply alarming”, noting that the they amount to intimidation and retaliation, following Malami’s call for the EFCC chairman’s recusal from his ongoing probe due to alleged bias stemming from the Salami Report.

Chapter 9 of the Salami report reportedly contains findings implicating senior EFCC officials, including the current Chairman, Ola Olukoyede, who served as secretary to the panel.

“We hereby place Nigerians and the international community on notice that any harm to our personnel or to Abubakar Malami, SAN, will be solely attributable to this pattern of conduct,” the statement warned.

Dangote, Farouk Ahmed and Nigeria, By Olusegun Adeniyi

The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd) General Manager for Strategic Communications, Ms. Onyi Sunday, insisted I speak at a capacity-building session for members of the media/PR team. So, I was at their headquarters in Abuja last Thursday where a few managers from other departments joined in. During the interactions that followed my presentation, I told them that a lack of transparency and accountability still defines oil sector operations in Nigeria. Of course, there was pushback as the officials attempted to enlighten me on the several industry changes, especially following the enactment of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) of 2021 which led to the introduction of new regulatory and fiscal frameworks.

However, Farouk Ahmed who was until yesterday the Chief Executive Officer of Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), has put a spotlight on the critical sector. The president of Dangote Industries Limited, Alhaji Aliko Dangote, who has had a long-drawn battle with Ahmed, wrote the authorities, calling for a probe of how a public official could allegedly be paying $5 million (that’s more than N7 billion) for his children’s school fees. And after a meeting with President Bola Tinubu yesterday, Ahmed reportedly resigned along with the CEO of the Nigeria Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), Gbenga Komolafe.

Incidentally, shortly before that dramatic resignation, Ahmed had released a statement, expressing eagerness to clear his name on the “wild and spurious allegations made against me and my family and the frenzy it has generated.” Now that he is out of office, the former NMDPRA helmsman can face his accuser. When it comes to damaging allegations like these, whoever asserts must prove. Besides, it is possible to accuse Dangote of sour grapes, especially since he became a ‘whistle blower’ only after his refinery ran into regulatory roadblocks. But this does not detract from the fact that no sector exemplifies the failure of Nigeria more than the oil and gas industry.

For me, here is the key issue: In an era when the United States President Donald Trump has made economic nationalism a cornerstone of his second-term agenda, Nigeria finds itself grappling with a peculiar paradox. We mouth the right rhetoric while undermining the very industrial capacity that could anchor our own economic sovereignty. The specifics of the Dangote Refinery conundrum are well-documented. A $20 billion investment that promises to refine 650,000 barrels of crude oil daily, potentially ending Nigeria’s humiliating dependence on imported refined petroleum products, has faced a gauntlet of regulatory bottlenecks that even the most charitable observer would find curious.

Several questions beg for answers. First, why would a nation that has spent an estimated $25 billion on refinery rehabilitation over two decades with nothing to show for it, appear less than enthusiastic about a functional private sector alternative? Second, what explains the unusual public statements from regulatory officials that appear designed to undermine market confidence in the product of an indigenous company? In most jurisdictions that prioritize industrial development, regulators work quietly with local producers to address concerns. The choice to wage these battles in the public square therefore raises questions about motivation.

The irony of our moment is noteworthy. For decades, we have been exporting crude oil while incurring substantial costs to import petrol and petrochemicals. This heavy dependence on imports has led to a host of economic and social issues, including the closure of numerous local industries, job losses, and a strain on the national currency and foreign reserves. While Nigeria debates whether to support its own industrial champion, the same America that has spent decades lecturing the developing world about free markets, now openly prioritizes domestic production, imposes tariffs to protect local industries, and makes no apology for these policies. The Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act represent hundreds of billions in subsidies for American manufacturing.

Unfortunately, here we are, a nation that imports virtually everything, including toothpicks, potentially undermining an investor who sought to build local capacity in our most strategic industry. Yes, I am aware that the name Dangote divides opinions. And I do not believe that bullying a regulator, as Dangote successfully did by using his might, is fair. But I also believe that this controversy speaks more to fundamental questions about Nigeria’s economic future than the business model of one man. Do we want to create jobs for our teeming youth population or are we content to remain a consumption economy? Should we protect and nurture local investors or conspire to run them out of business?

Whether Farouk Ahmed jumped or he was pushed is irrelevant. The fact remains that he is not out. But there must still be an investigation to clear the air and restore confidence in our institutions. And I am talking about regulatory oversight and not the charge of scandalous school fees for some privileged children, which anti-corruption agencies can easily handle. If there is merit to Dangote’s claims of sabotage, vested interests, or regulatory capture, Nigerians deserve to know. The Chinese did not build their industrial might by undermining their own manufacturers. The Americans didn’t become an economic superpower by frustrating domestic production. Even our smaller African neighbours like Rwanda and Ethiopia have demonstrated that purposeful industrial policy requires a measure of protectionism.

In my column of July 2024 (https://www.thisdaylive.com/index.php/2024/07/11/dangotes-big-bet-on-gasoline/), I highlighted some of the contentious issues between Dangote Refinery and regulatory authorities. But I also argued that there should really be no need for a fight if the primary responsibility of critical stakeholders in the sector is to advance the public good. In the age of Trump, the achievements of businesses owned by citizens must reflect a sense of national pride and a measure of support against foreign competitors.

I do not presume to know the full facts in the fight between Dangote and Farouk Ahmed and will not be surprised if there are things both of them are not telling us. When it comes to powerful men, even matters that originate from ‘The Other Room’ could trigger a lot of hoopla. But this could also be a fight over principle. Perhaps there were legitimate regulatory concerns that justify every action taken by Farouk Ahmed and NMDPRA. Perhaps Dangote’s frustrations misinterpret standard regulatory practice. Perhaps Ahmed was using his regulatory power to sabotage Dangote’s refinery. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between. But there is a point we should never ignore: On this issue, our national interest is also at stake.

Every serious nation makes a choice: build your productive capacity or remain forever dependent. Even if there are differences between Dangote and the regulators, efforts should be made to resolve them. No responsible government should work for the failure of a $20 billion project that adds considerable value to the economy in countless ways.

Seven Years of NFI School 

Last Friday, the Not Forgotten Initiative (NFI) School, established in Asokoro by my wife, to offer free education to indigent children in Kpaduma Hills, marked its 7th anniversary. It has been a remarkable journey of faith with the support of hand-lifters, some of whom I identified on this page five years ago, Amatala and Other ‘Unforgotten’ Children  – THISDAYLIVE. By a remarkable coincidence, the Swedish Ambassador to Nigeria, Her Excellency Anna Westerholm, chose last Friday to visit the school for the reading of a Pidgin edition of Pippi Longstocking—a fictional character created by Swedish author Astrid Lindgren—to the pupils. The ambassador’s visit brought laughter, excitement, and a beautiful cultural exchange that the children will for long remember.

The growth of NFI from 14 pupils and one teacher at inception in December 2018 to 165 children and young adults supported by 13 teachers and six support staff is a powerful testament to what can happen when compassion is matched with discipline and perseverance. But I must specially recognise Waziri and Sandra Adio, Dr Kole Shettima, Ms Koyinsola Olukoya, Mr Folorunsho (Foli) Coker, Mrs Stella Uzo and the late Mr Ferdinand Agu who from Day-One told my wife that she has embarked on something worthwhile and never wavered in their support and encouragement. What began as a modest response to the educational needs of children on Kpaduma Hills has evolved into a structured, accountable institution providing not just education, but also nourishment, safety, emotional support, and dignity to those who would otherwise be excluded. With all these children fed one meal a day, my wife has taught me lessons about how prudent management of scarce resources can go a long way in making a difference in the lives of many people.

Meanwhile, the Swedish Ambassador’s visit and how she interacted with the children, including choosing to sit on the floor, remind us that education is more than classrooms and textbooks; it is also about exposure, affirmation and genuine commitment. As NFI reflects on seven years of impact, we remain deeply grateful to the partners, friends, and supporters whose generosity has sustained this journey. Their unwavering support and belief in the power of education continue to transform lives and build futures—one child at a time. And to Mrs Oluwatosin Adeniyi, all I can say is, Congratulations. Well done!

‘Changing the Narrative’: Lai Mohammed and the Buhari Legacy

(Text of my review of ‘Headlines & Soundbites: Media Moments That Defined an Administration,’ written by the former Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, at the public presentation in Abuja yesterday, 17th December 2025)

With a first degree in French before going on to read Law, Alhaji Lai Mohammed is one of a few members of the Nigeria political elite with a second address. Before politics and government, he was an established lawyer, respected media practitioner and public relations guru. And after he left government, Alhaji Lai refused to hang around. He went back to private practice by joining ‘Ballard Partners,’ a global government relations firm, as Managing Partner for Africa, focusing on public relations and public policy. On a personal note, I have known Alhaji Lai Mohammed since the beginning of the Fourth Republic when he served as the Chief of Staff to then Governor Bola Tinubu of Lagos State who is now the President of Nigeria. Alhaji Lai also happens to be one of the respected elders from my state, Kwara. Although we had no close personal relationship, when he came to my office to ask if I would accept to be the reviewer of his book, I had no choice in the matter. I actually considered it an honour.

In the opening pages of ‘Headlines & Soundbites: Media Moments That Defined an Administration,’ Alhaji Lai made an important declaration: he is a “strong advocate of Africans telling their own stories from their own perspectives.” This commitment to indigenous narration is admirable and necessary. However, as I worked through this 584-page chronicle of his nearly eight-year tenure as Nigeria’s Minister of Information and Culture under the late Buhari who would have been 83 today had he been alive, I was reminded that telling one’s own story is not the same as telling the whole story, and that perspective, no matter how privileged, is not synonymous with objectivity.

This book, ‘Headlines & Soundbites: Media Moments That Defined an Administration,’ is many things at once: historical document, policy defense, and occasionally, an extended rebuttal to both the critics of the Buhari administration and Alhaji Lai Mohammed himself. The structure is ambitious, covering everything from town hall meetings and media tours to the controversial Twitter suspension and the #EndSARS protests. What emerges is a portrait of a minister who saw himself not merely as a government spokesperson, but as a strategic communicator tasked with “changing the narrative”—a phrase that appears repeatedly throughout the text and perhaps reveals more about the administration’s approach to information management than the author intended.

There is undeniable value in the insider account provided by the former minister. His chapters on the government’s communication strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic and the protracted P&ID legal battle offer useful insights into crisis management at the highest levels. The detailed documentation of media tours to territories hitherto controlled by the Boko Haram insurgents and the account of Nigeria’s digital switchover provide important context that was often missing from real-time reporting. Of course, the minister was meticulously careful in choosing what to highlight and what to hold back.

Meanwhile, Alhaji Lai is at his best when he abandons the defensive posture and simply describes the mechanics of government communication. His explanation of the stakeholder engagement process, the rationale behind town hall meetings, and the cultural diplomacy embedded in hosting international conferences are genuinely informative. These sections will prove valuable to students of public administration and political communication. The stories are told with the methodical thoroughness of someone who understands that history will judge his stewardship in government long after the news cycle has moved on.

The chapter on Nigeria’s fight to repatriate stolen artefacts, including the Benin Bronzes, is particularly compelling. Here, Alhaji Lai’s passion transcends his portfolio, and one senses a minister genuinely engaged with issues of cultural identity and historical justice. Similarly, his account of the National Theatre’s restoration hints at what might have been achieved if the ministry had focused less on crisis management and more on its substantive cultural mandate. But it is in Alhaji Lai Mohammed’s treatment of the most controversial episodes of his tenure that the book both fascinates and frustrates.

The Twitter suspension, which he insists was misunderstood, receives extensive treatment. He provides the government’s rationale, documents the negotiations that preceded the platform’s restoration, and argues that the concerns by the Buhari administration about social media regulation were legitimate. Unfortunately, the chapter reads less like historical documentation and more like a legal brief, comprehensive, certainly, but selective in its engagement with opposing viewpoints.

The confrontation with CNN over its #EndSARS coverage is similarly presented as a victory for truth over “skewed and poorly sourced reporting.” As a journalist, I disagree with this summation. Alhaji Lai may well have legitimate grievances about the international media’s coverage of Nigerian events. However, the righteousness with which he dismisses CNN’s journalism sits uncomfortably alongside his own acknowledgment that government communication must be “tempered by transparency”—a phrase he uses in reference to the Bring Back Our Girls campaign.

This brings us to another troubling aspect of the book: Chapter Fourteen, titled “#ENDSARS: A Massacre without Bodies.” That title alone demands scrutiny. Alhaji Lai devotes an entire chapter to arguing against what he characterizes as the myth of a massacre at Lekki Tollgate on 20th October 2020. He may believe he is correcting the record, but framing that unfortunate episode “a massacre without bodies” ignores the grief of families who lost loved ones during those protests, regardless of the specific number or precise circumstances. The judicial panel of inquiry set up by the Lagos State Government documented deaths and injuries. To reduce this complex tragedy to a semantic argument about the definition of “massacre” is to miss the forest for the trees. As the late Dele Giwa reminded us, “One life taken in cold blood is as gruesome as millions lost in a pogrom.”

Right from the introduction, Alhaji Lai Mohammed acknowledges that one motivation for writing the book was “to dispel a number of misconceptions.” This is a worthy goal. But throughout the book, there is a troubling conflation between “misconceptions” and “disagreements.” When Nigerians questioned the Twitter suspension, were they all simply misinformed? When activists criticized the government’s response to #EndSARS, were they all perpetuating falsehoods? When journalists challenged official narratives about security operations, were they invariably biased?

To be fair, Alhaji Lai Mohammed does not shy away from documenting the challenges he faced. He acknowledges operating in a difficult environment, dealing with an opposition determined to undermine the administration, and managing a president who was often reluctant to engage with the media. Given my own experience in another life, I can understand these challenges. But my concern is that there is a lack of willingness to concede that some of the administration’s communication failures were self-inflicted.

In his tribute to Buhari (Chapter One), Alhaji Lai describes the late president as a “friend, mentor and boss,” and throughout the book, this loyalty to the administration he served is on full display. This loyalty is admirable in its consistency. But it also limits the utility of the book as a historical document. Therefore, while future researchers will find valuable raw material here—press statements, timelines, policy documents—they will need to triangulate Alhaji Lai Mohammed’s account with other sources to arrive at a fuller picture.

Chapter nine titled, ‘Before the Ballot: Inside Buhari Administration’s Scorecard Strategy’, according to the author, was necessitated by the need to counter the narrative of the opposition before the 2023 general election with a media offensive that featured prominent officials. One of them is Abubakar Malami, SAN, who was then the Attorney General and Justice Minister. No fewer than 16 quotes of Malami, splashed over eight pages, are featured in the book where he highlighted the achievements of the Buhari administration, especially in the fight against corruption. One of the quotes from Malami reads: “The EFCC could only succeed in securing 103 convictions before the advent of the current administration. However, with the implementation of the National Anti-corruption Strategy, the EFCC has secured about 3,000 convictions.”

The last time I heard from Malami, he was writing an epistle from EFCC detention, throwing the same allegation that those ‘about 3000 people convicted people’ under the Buhari administration he served were also throwing at the time. A case of whatever goes around comes around.

Before I take my seat, let me commend Alhaji Lai Mohammed for this book. ‘Headlines & Soundbites’ is an important book, though not always in the ways its author intended. It is important because insider accounts matter, especially from someone who occupied a critical position for as long as Alhaji Lai did. It is important because it documents, in granular detail, the mechanics of government communication in 21st-century Nigeria. And it is important because it reveals, perhaps inadvertently, the deep disconnect between the Buhari administration’s self-image and its public perception.

Alhaji Lai Mohammed writes that he believes this account “will form part of Nigeria’s contemporary history, at least from my vantage point.” He is right. But vantage points, by definition, offer limited views. They show us what was visible from a particular position at a particular time, but they also hide what lay beyond the sight line.

Let me also express a personal disappointment. As the founding National Publicity Secretary of the All Progressives Congress (APC) whose candidate, the late Muhammadu Buhari, went on to defeat then incumbent President Goodluck Jonathan, Alhaji Lai Mohammed played a crucial role in the months leading to that election in 2015. But there is nothing about that episode in this book. There is also no reflection to contrast the role of a government critic which he was under Jonathan and information manager that he became under Buhari. It would have been helpful had the author given us a peep into whether the view of the road remains the same after moving from the passenger’s side to the driver’s seat. That, for me, is where the narrative should have started. But while this book is not what I was expecting, it is nonetheless still an interesting read.

At the end, the book’s greatest contribution may be unintentional: it provides an unvarnished look at how the Buhari administration saw itself and its critics. The worldview that emerges is one in which the government was perpetually misunderstood, consistently undermined by enemies both domestic and foreign, and forced to combat a relentless torrent of “fake news” and “misinformation.” There is some truth to this picture, since every government faces hostile coverage and unfair criticism. But the completeness with which Alhaji Lai Mohammed adopts this victim narrative suggests a troubling inability to distinguish between unfair attacks and legitimate criticism.

However, whatever may be our misgivings about the Buhari administration, ‘Headlines & Soundbites: Media Moments That Defined an Administration,’ offers glimpses into what happened in that era. But this is Alhaji Lai Mohammed’s story, told from his perspective. It deserves to be read and engaged with seriously. But it should not be mistaken for the definitive account of the Buhari administration’s relationship with truth, transparency, and the Nigerian people. That story is still being written, and it will require many more perspectives, including from the journalists Alhaji Lai Mohammed sparred with, the activists he dismissed, and the ordinary Nigerians who lived through those eight years with rather different experiences than the one documented in these pages.

To students of political communication, government media strategy, and contemporary Nigerian history, ‘Headlines & Soundbites’ is a book I will strongly recommend. Just remember to read it critically, with full awareness that in the contest between headlines and truth, soundbites and substance, the former too often prevailed during the years this book chronicled. Whether Alhaji Lai Mohammed recognizes this irony is unclear. What is clear is that he has given us a comprehensive record of how power sees itself and that alone makes the book worth the effort.

Credit: Olusegun Adeniyi