FIFA awards Malaysia three 3-0 losses for allegedly fielding ineligible players

fifa-logoInternational Federation of Association Football (FIFA) has dealt Malaysia a major setback, penalising the country with three  3-0 defeats and a fine for allegedly fielding ineligible players, the Football Association of Malaysia (FAM) confirmed on Wednesday.

This marks the latest twist in an ongoing eligibility controversies in preparation for the 2026 world cup tournament.

Matches that were previously recorded as friendly wins against Palestine and Singapore, as well as a home draw with Cape Verde earlier this year, have all been overturned, the FAM said.

The sanctions follow FIFA’s suspension of seven foreign-born Malaysian national team players after investigations revealed they submitted falsified documents claiming Malaysian ancestry.

FAM, which had already been fined $440,000 in the unfolding scandal, has now been hit with an additional $12,500 penalty. According to a FIFA disciplinary committee meeting held last Friday, “Malaysia is declared to have lost 3-0 in all three matches,” the FAM stated.

The investigation began after FIFA received a complaint following Malaysia’s 4-0 victory over Vietnam in June during an Asian Cup qualifier, in which two of the seven implicated players scored.

FIFA’s probe concluded that Hector Hevel, Jon Irazabal, Gabriel Palmero, Facundo Garces, Rodrigo Holgado, Imanol Machuca, and Joao Brandao Figueiredo did not have a parent or grandparent born in Malaysia, a requirement for national team eligibility.

Following the ruling, FAM maintains it did nothing wrong and confirmed it will appeal the decision at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

(LLB. Photo: AFP)

Nigerian Senator, Ireti Kingibe to formally join ADC Thursday

Senator Ireti Kingibe to officially join ADC Thursday

Nigerian Senator, Ireti Kingibe, representing the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Senatorial District at the national assembly, will formally register as a member of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) on Thursday, December 18.

Kingibe announced her defection from the Labour Party (LP) to the ADC in July, ahead of the 2027 general election, describing the move as a deliberate decision to be marked with “fanfare.”

A statement from Kingibe’s senior special assistant on media, Kennedy Mbele, said the registration will take place at the ADC national headquarters in Wuse, Abuja, starting at 10 a.m., formally confirming her exit from the LP and entry into the ADC.

Senior ADC officials, candidates for the February 21 FCT area council elections, party supporters, and members of the press have been scheduled to attend.

“Kingibe’s bold step of joining ADC makes her the only serving senator in the new but vibrant opposition party,” the statement said, adding that her experience and credentials are “an invaluable asset in any political space across the globe.”

NMDPRA CEO Farouk Ahmed resigns

NMDPRA

Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Mr. Farouk Ahmed, has resigned.

Likewise, his counterpart at the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission (NUPRC), Mr. Gbenga Komolafe, has stepped down.

Both officials were appointed in 2021 by former President Muhammadu Buhari after the enactment of the Petroleum Industry Act.

As a result of this development, President Bola Tinubu has asked the Nigerian Senate to confirm new nominated chief executives for the two agencies.

Tinubu’s request was contained in separate letters to the Nigerian Senate on Wednesday.

The President’s Special Adviser on Information and Strategy, Bayo Onanuga announced this in a statement.

As indicated by the statement, Tinubu “has written to the Senate, requesting expedited confirmation of Oritsemeyiwa Amanorisewo Eyesan as CEO of NUPRC and Engineer Saidu Aliyu Mohammed as CEO of NMDPRA.”

The statement showed that Eyesan, an economist and oil industry veteran, spent nearly 33 years at the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and its subsidiaries.

She retired in 2024 as Executive Vice President, Upstream, and previously served as Group General Manager, Corporate Planning and Strategy.

Mohammed, a chemical engineer and former Managing Director of the Kaduna Refining and Petrochemical Company and the Nigerian Gas Company, has also served on several energy sector boards.

He recently emerged as an independent non-executive director at Seplat Energy.

“The two nominees are seasoned professionals in the oil and gas industry,” the statement noted.

Ahmed’s resignation comes amid a high-profile conflict with Africa’s richest businessman, Aliko Dangote, which drew national attention in December 2025.

The dispute arose from Dangote’s allegations that Ahmed and his family were living above their legitimate means, citing millions of dollars allegedly spent on overseas schooling for his four children.

Dangote had petitioned the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to investigate and prosecute Ahmed for abuse of office and corrupt enrichment, sparking a nationwide debate over regulatory oversight in Nigeria’s petroleum sector.

The NMDPRA chief dismissed Dangote’s claims as “wild and spurious,” insisting that he would rather defend himself before a formal investigative body than engage in a Breitbart-like war.

The conflict, which traces its roots to 2024 when Ahmed criticised domestic refinery output—including Dangote’s refinery—prompted intervention by the House of Representatives, which summoned both parties to avoid destabilising the sector.

Nigerians are eagerly awaiting the ICPC report arising from the Dangote’s petition against Ahmed.

(Photo: NMDPRA)

Nigeria petitions FIFA against DR Congo’s players’ eligibility status, Super Eagles may still qualify for W’Cup

SUPER EAGLES

Football federation of the Democratic Republic of Congo (FECOFA) has strongly warned Nigeria and the Super Eagles against qualifying for the 2026 World Cup through what it described as “backdoor”.

The football body was reacting to the recent petition by the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) to FIFA protesting the eligibility of some of their fielded players in the recent play-off clash that led to a 4–3 penalty shoot-out victory in Morocco, a result that ended the Super Eagles’ hopes of progressing to the FIFA intercontinental play-off.

Congolese players’ eligibility status as obtained on the FIFA website. Credit: DR Congo Football Federation/X

The Congolese side has since been handed a bye into the final of the intercontinental play-off tournament, where they are scheduled to face the winner of the semi-final between New Caledonia and Jamaica.

Reports suggest that between six and nine DR Congo players who switched national allegiance may not have fully complied with the eligibility requirements under Congolese law before representing the country.

While FIFA reportedly cleared the players on the basis that they possessed valid DR Congo passports, it is alleged that they failed to formally renounce their previous citizenships, contrary to the Central African nation’s constitution, which does not permit dual nationality.

However, in a post shared on the national team’s official X account on Wednesday, DR Congo dismissed the allegations and accused Nigeria of attempting to overturn the result through administrative means.

Aaron Wan-Bissaka during accreditation. Credit: DR Congo Football Federation/X

“If you can’t win on the pitch, don’t try to win from the back door. The World Cup must be played with dignity and confidence — not with legal tricks. Bring it on,” the post read.

In another post, the football body situated in Central Africa also shared pictures showing when a few of their players who switched nationality, including Aaron Wan-Bissaka, met with the President of the country, Felix Tshisekedi.

The picture shared from FIFA’s website under the title, “Change of Association platform,” revealed some of their key players switching nationality from their previous countries to Congo, with dates of when the decision was finalised.

Recall that on Monday, Nigeria’s officials confirmed that they had submitted a petition to FIFA to look into the eligibility of the players fielded by Congo.

“NFF has done the needful,” a member of the federation’s executive board told PUNCH Online.

“Their constitution does not allow dual citizenship, and about six to nine players had that status during the play-off. That is the loophole we are exploring. Our lawyers must have submitted the relevant documents to FIFA as well.”

NFF General Secretary, Dr Mohammed Sanusi, also confirmed that the NFF has faulted the players’ switch.

“We’re waiting. The Congolese rules say you cannot have dual citizenship or nationality,” Sanusi said. “Wan-Bissaka has a European passport; some of them have French passports, others Dutch passports. The rules are very clear, and we have submitted our petition.

“FIFA rules say once you have a passport of your country, you’re eligible, and that is why they were cleared,” Sanusi explained. “But our concern is that FIFA was deceived into clearing them. It is not FIFA’s responsibility to enforce Congo’s domestic regulations; FIFA acts based on what is submitted to it. What we are saying is that the process was fraudulent.”

The development has boosted Nigeria’s hope of qualifying for the 2026 World Cup. The country had been condemned to missing back-to-back World Cups after failing to qualify for the 2022 edition in Qatar as well.

So, if the NFF’s petition to FIFA sails through, Nigeria may still qualify to participate in the 2026 world cup tournament.

DR Congo, meanwhile, has appeared at the FIFA World Cup on one occasion in 1974 when they were known as Zaire.

(Punch)

 

Supreme Court, Rivers And The State of Emergency, By Reuben Abati

Yesterday, December 15, the Supreme Court of Nigeria struck out the suit filed by 11 Governors of states controlled by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) challenging the emergency rule imposed on Rivers State by President Bola Ah-med Tinubu on March 18, 2025. The suit: AG Adamawa & 10 Ors vs. AG Federation and the National Assembly, was dated March 20, 2025, and filed on April 8. In March, President Tinubu relying on Section 305 which affirms the powers of the President to declare a state of emergency, went a step further to suspend all democratic structures in Rivers and then appointed Air Vice Marshall Ibok Ette Ibas (rtd) as sole administrator in that state for six months. The sole administrator’s tenure expired by September 18, and all suspended persons have been reinstated. Almost nine months after, and three clear months after the suspension was lifted, the Supreme Court has now finally delivered judgement in the matter. The Supreme Court heard the parties on 21 October and reserved judgment. More than a month later, their Lordships have now de-livered judgment.

It was a split decision of 6 – 1 with six of the jurists upholding the preliminary objections of the respondents in the matter. Justice Mohammed Idris who de-livered the leading majority judgement dismissed the suit as incompetent on two grounds viz (a) that the plaintiffs – the 11 PDP Governors failed to estab-lish any cause of action, a dispute between them and the Federation, to activate the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – more or less as if they were acting as busy bodies and (b) that even if jurisdiction could be established, the suit would still have failed.  Jurisdiction is everything in our judicial system. It establishes the legal authority of a court to hear a case, and it can be invoked at any stage in a legal proceeding. It is indeed “the life-blood of adjudica-tion.”  The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court – inherent and appellate- is de-fined in Sections 232 and 233 but the problem with our judiciary is that many of our judges evade a particular matter of concern, on this technical basis, even when it is in public interest to treat every case on its merit on the basis of the facts.

It is perhaps for this latter reason that the Supreme Court in this matter acted rightly to respond to the substantive issue raised by the 11 Governors. They had asked the Supreme Court to determine “whether upon a proper construction and interpretation of the provisions of Sections 1(2),  5(2), 176, 180, 188 and 305 of the 1999 Constitution, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend or in any manner whatsoever interfere with the offices of a governor and the deputy governor of any of the component 36 states of the Federation of Nigeria and replace same with his own unelected nominee as a sole administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a proclamation of a state of emergency in any of the states of the Federation, particularly in any of the states?” They wanted the Supreme Court to declare the suspension of demo-cratic structures in Rivers State, and the appointment of Ibok Ette Ibas thereby “unconstitutional, and unlawful.” The respondents, the AGF and the National Assembly disagreed on the grounds that the President acted in the best interest of Rivers state and that he only suspended the gladiators in power, he did not remove them. The case was heard and determined by Justices John Inyang Okoro, Chioma Nwosu-Iheme, Haruna Simon Tsanmmani, Obande Festus Ogbuinya, Stephen Jonah Adah, Habeeb Adewale Abiru and Mohammed Ba-ba Idris. Their Lordships held that Section 305 empowers the President to de-clare a state of emergency to prevent a breakdown of law and order or a de-scent into chaos and anarchy in any part of the Federation and that he can adopt extraordinary measures, and that the Constitution entrusts him with dis-cretion in this regard.

In reporting the judgement yesterday, most Nigerian media outlets gave the impression that their Lordships had decided that the President can suspend democratic structures and remove elected officials but only for a limited peri-od.  If they were to do so, that would have amounted to dressing up the situa-tion in Rivers state with a cloak of legality which would be a very scary devel-opment indeed. But a quick review of the leading judgement, which has been in circulation since yesterday does not indicate anywhere in the rather short judgement, a summary of it really, where their Lordships made any such direct affirmation.  To do so would have been a nod to dictatorship. Where the con-fusion arises from may be in the declaration   “… that emergency powers are not governed by a rigid formula. The constitutionally permissible response de-pends on the magnitude of the threat, the functionality of state institutions, and the necessity of intervention to restore constitutional order”. Or that the Presi-dent is granted a scope of discretion in the determination of the extraordinary measures on which the law is intentionally silent. Section 305 (3) is very clear about the circumstances under which the President of Nigeria can declare a state of emergency, and certainly there is a reference to “extraordinary measures” to restore peace and security and to avert danger in Section 305 (3) (c and d) but nowhere does this entire section of the 1999 Constitution confer unfettered powers on the President.  “.. The President’s discretion under Sec-tion 305 is not “unfettered”, the judgment said.

The entire spirit of the submission was to explain the law as it is and offer an interpretation of Section 305.  It was further determined that “On the whole, a proclamation of a state of emergency is constitutionally valid where it is issued under Section 305 of the1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), approved by not less than two-thirds majority of all the members of each House of the National Assembly in accordance with their Standing Orders, and implemented through measures that are temporary, proportionate, and directed at restoring constitutional order. The exercise of such powers re-mains subject to judicial review to prevent arbitrariness or abuse.”

However, there was a voice of dissent – the minority judgement of Justice Obande Ogbuinya. But given the mischievous analysis of the majority judge-ment that we have seen, even before most persons had seen and read it, it is enough to say that a proper reading of the minority view will also be necessary. This may perhaps be another case whereby a dissenting judgement attracts more public interest and discussion. The majority would always have their way, but we have also had situations in the past when dissenting judgements sounded more compelling and realistic as in the case of Sunday Jackson v. The State (per Helen Ogunwumiju, JSC).

It seems to me that the Supreme Court’s decision with regard to the scope and extent of Section 305 with regard to presidential powers is historic, but it could also be controversial in certain respects. There is still, for example, a major contention about the Rivers situation. There was a series of protests in the state by youths, elders and ordinary people that their state was not in any state of imminent danger or chaos to warrant the suspension of democracy. Many be-lieved that the major problem was politics: made more complex than ordinarily by the political machinations of a former Governor, now Minister, Nyesom Wike and his local allies to overwhelm Governor Sim Fubara and capture Riv-ers State for President Bola Ahmed Tinubu and the ruling party, the APC.  It turned out to be a convoluted plot that has now been resolved with Sim Fubara joining the APC and pleading allegiance to President Tinubu and Nyesom Wike personally and to the APC as a party. Ibok Ette Ibas who served as sole administrator for six months has refused to give any account to the Rivers peo-ple as demanded; instead he has been rewarded with an ambassadorial ap-pointment. The majority judgement of the Supreme Court overlooks this signif-icant sub-text to the crisis in Rivers State. The same 1999 Constitution defines how a state Governor or a Deputy can be removed from office (section 188) and how a state House of Assembly can be dissolved (Section 105), not by any other means. Does the President’s discretion override this? It is axiomatic that sections of the law should not be read in isolation but as a whole. In retrospect, Rivers was about the politics of territorialism and the ambitions of the ruling party. The lead judgement of the Supreme Court would seem to have endorsed not just the President’s actions, but also the removal of the elected representa-tives of the people by Presidential fiat, and the appointment of a sole adminis-trator who for good measure is even a retired military officer! This, on the grounds that “emergencies are inherently situational, varying in scope, intensity and threat”?  What exactly does that mean?

The timelines in this case also show just how slowly the wheel of justice in Ni-geria grinds, even at the apex court. Their Lordships took so many months, just to talk about lack of jurisdiction and to interpret Section 305! They have not done substantial justice. They have just spoken the law. When they finally spoke, the original plaintiffs had mostly left the PDP. Delta state, the fifth plaintiff, was the first to formally withdraw from the case, the moment Gover-nor Sheriff Oborevwori defected from the PDP to the APC. Before judgment was delivered, other states in the suit like Enugu, Akwa Ibom, Taraba and Osun had also moved from the PDP to the APC. The Osun State Governor defected from the PDP to the Accord Party. Even the affected state, Rivers, is now an APC state. The six-months fatwa on Rivers state had also lapsed. Even if the Supreme Court had ruled in favour of the plaintiffs, the expected gain had been dissipated. Who is left in the PDP barn to claim victory?

What remains is academic: the interpretation of the law. Those who may be suggesting that in exercising his discretion now articulated by the Supreme Court, the President can act like a monarch, a headmaster of the Federation whose discretion is supreme should be reminded again that the apex court has not said so. This is not India. This is not Pakistan. The President’s action is subject to a check by the National Assembly, with the expectation that Nige-ria’s National Assembly will discharge its responsibilities competently. The only danger is that a Nigerian President can on the basis of this judgement over-stretch his implied discretion, and exercise the flexibility read into Section 305, to the point of autocracy. This is where the problem lies. Our judges must learn to speak with clarity and certainty. It is important that they do not speak with both besides of the mouth. They must not speak in a manner that compels the public to think that they have kolanuts in their mouth. A Supreme Court judgment that lends itself to ambiguous interpretation can only confuse the pub-lic, and look like an attempt at a cover up to serve political interest. This is the more urgent reason why civil society and public interest lawyers should speak up and demand further clarifications from the Supreme Court if need be, hop-ing that our judiciary would learn to act expeditiously, and not intervene when its wisdom has been rendered academic and technical after the fact.  Each time that is the case, we would perhaps say in desperation, along with Mr. Bumble in Charles Dickens’ Oliver Twist that “the law is an ass – a (n) idiot…”

Credit: Reuben Abati

I struggled with masturbation, started smoking at 13 ―Actress Tonto Dikeh reveals (Videos)

 Tonto Dikeh

Nigerian star actress, singer, songwriter, and humanitarian, Tonto Charity Dikeh, simply known as Tonto Dikeh, has publicly shared what she described as her deliverance from smoking, alcohol addiction, masturbation, and long-standing anger issues during a Sunday service at Streams of Joy International Church.

Tonto gave the testimony during the New Season Prophetic Prayers and Declarations service, led by the church’s founder, Pastor Jerry Eze, according to a video shared by DCLImagery on YouTube on Sunday.

Addressing the congregation, the actress recounted that she began smoking at the age of 13 and struggled for years with alcohol and masturbation, which she said only ended through divine intervention.

“I smoked since I was 13. God healed me from masturbation, too. I have known myself to have sexual intercourse in the dream ever since I was a child,” she said.

She explained that her appearance at the altar was both an act of thanksgiving and a public testimony, adding that she initially considered withdrawing due to concerns about her image.

“The devil tried to tell me that I was supposed to protect my image. But I told myself, what image? The God that gave me the image is the same God that can take it away,” she said.

Tonto further stated that after attending the Ghana Prayer Conference, she noticed a significant change in what she described as years of spiritual oppression.

“I realised that the weak man who held me captive all my years in my dream ran away,” she said, describing the moment as a turning point in her spiritual life.

The actress also spoke about struggling with what she called “demonic anger,” which she said had negatively affected her relationships and personal life.

“An anger that destroyed my life. Everybody had to feel it. But praying with NSPPD, God took all of those away and gave me peace,” she said.

According to Tonto, the peace she now experiences is something she had never known before.

“I am 40 years old, and I can tell you I have never known peace until now. I am living in it,” she said.

She disclosed that her smoking habit lasted about 27 years and began after early exposure at home, using her experience to caution parents against exposing children to harmful habits.

“I started smoking because my dad was a smoker. Something as little as that habit can inhabit the lives of your children,” she said.

Tonto added that after praying for divine help, she no longer has urges for cigarettes or alcohol.

“My body does not ask for it. My body is repelling it. Today, it is broken,” the actress said.

During the service, Pastor Eze prayed for Tonto, declaring that “the body of sin is broken” and describing her as “a voice in her generation.”

Tonto also shared photos from the church on her Instagram page, captioning them: “A living testimony of mercy. One God spared, restored, and commissioned.”

Watch her videos below:

(Videos: Tonto Dikeh, NSPPD, Flip, Youtube, Instagram)

Actress Regina Daniels laments over custody of her kids as she made a video call to them (Video)

Single mother defends herself against accusations

Nigerian actress, Regina Daniels has revealed how much she misses her children and she accused her estranged husband of using the custody of her sons to fight her.

The actress shared a video showing her speaking to her sons during a video call.

She stated that she has not been able to talk to her kids since mid November,  after she left her marriage and accused husband Ned Nwoko of domestic violence.

She accused Ned of devising different tactics to keep the kids away from her.

She then warned him that she will come for her kids.

She wrote in the caption:  “People may believe that I am happy, but no mother can be at peace while separated from her children. I chose not to allow that pain to define or imprison me, which is why it took time for me to walk away.

“The repeated public exposure of my children, reflects a troubling and deliberate pursuit of negative attention by their father. It is implausible that a public figure, particularly one with legislative experience would be unaware that posting our children publicly in this time would inevitably attract media scrutiny.

“These actions make it reasonable to question whether his behavior is motivated by public engagement rather than parental responsibility. I decided to stay off the matter to avoid causing more nuisance on this media space but clearly this man keeps acting like a baby. Meaning it’s now safe to call this one term senator a content creator one.

“The last time I spoke to my kids was mid November. Ned dismissed all my nannies, pressured them into making false statements accusing me of violence and alcohol abuse in front of the children, and has since filed for full custody, despite already having the children in his care.

“I am left to wonder whether I am truly such a threat that I am being challenged so aggressively.

“I may be young, but I am such a mum, I enjoy being a mum and I miss being a mum. Its so crazy if their father thinks I won’t come for my children. I will definitely see my kids soon!”

See her video below:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DSTP_VADPZ5/

 

10 most developed African countries in 2025

10 safest countries in the world in 2025

Development in Africa doesn’t move in leaps; it is a back-and-forth progress; it inches forward, sometimes slips back, then steadies again. Yet in 2025, several countries stand out for doing more things right than wrong with better healthcare access, stronger education outcomes, functional infrastructure, and relatively higher living standards.

Based on Business Insider Africa’s 2025 report, which draws heavily from the UN Human Development Index (HDI), Tribune Online takes a look at the most developed African countries this year:

1. Seychelles

Seychelles does not just lead Africa; it dominates the development conversation.

With the continent’s highest Human Development Index (HDI), the island nation benefits from long life expectancy, universal healthcare access, and strong public institutions. Tourism fuels the economy, but smart governance keeps services running smoothly.

For a country with fewer than 100,000 people, its development model punches well above its weight.

2. Mauritius

Mauritius is proof that stability compounds over time. Ensuring strong institutions, diversified income streams, and a reliable education system that keep it near the top year after year. The country balances tourism, finance, manufacturing, and ICT with relative ease. In 2025, it remains one of Africa’s clearest development success stories.

3. Algeria

Algeria’s ranking reflects scale, resources, and long-term public investment. Its oil and gas revenues continue to support education, healthcare, and infrastructure. While youth unemployment and reform pressures persist, Algeria’s HDI still places it firmly among Africa’s development leaders.

4. Tunisia

Tunisia’s development strength lies in its people, maintaining high literacy rates, strong healthcare access, and urban infrastructure, which keep it competitive despite recent economic stress. Even through political uncertainty, past investments in human capital continue to pay dividends in 2025, and the country remains steadfast.

5. Egypt

Egypt’s presence on this list is driven by momentum and magnitude. The country has large-scale infrastructure projects, expanded healthcare coverage, and education reforms that have gradually lifted development indicators. As one of Africa’s biggest populations, even modest improvements translate into massive social impact.

6. South Africa

South Africa remains Africa’s most industrialised economy, and it shows in headlines. The country’s advanced financial markets, transport networks, and manufacturing capacity anchor its development ranking. That said, inequality and unemployment still blunt progress. In 2025, South Africa will be developed, but unevenly so.

7. Gabon

Gabon often flies under the radar, yet its numbers tell a different story: controlling high urbanisation, relatively strong healthcare access, and oil revenues support living standards above much of the continent. The challenge ahead is diversification, but in terms of development metrics, Gabon holds its ground.

8. Botswana

Botswana’s story is one of discipline and patience in Africa. With decades of political stability, prudent economic management, and steady investment in education, the country has created a solid development foundation. It is not flashy, but it works, and 2025 proves that consistency still counts.

9. Libya

Libya’s inclusion reflects recovery, not perfection. After years of conflict, rebuilding efforts in health, education, and basic services have improved its development indicators. Also, oil wealth helps, but progress remains fragile. Still, by HDI standards, Libya makes the top ten.

10. Morocco

Fortunately, Morocco rounds out the list through long-term planning. With heavy investment in transport infrastructure, renewable energy, and industrial zones, living standards in the country have gradually improved. Education and healthcare access continue to improve, placing Morocco among Africa’s development frontrunners in 2025.

Meanwhile, the most developed African countries were not ranked by chance. Each followed a different path, some through resource management, and others through institutional stability or human-capital investment.

(Nigerian Tribune)

Trying time for Obi Cubana as he faces eviction from Abuja property, after Court order

Obi Cubana begins 50th birthday countdown | The Guardian Nigeria News -  Nigeria and World News

Billionaire businessman Obinna Iyiegbu, popularly known as Obi Cubana, is currently facing a challenging time, as shown in a video making the rounds on the internet.

Court sheriffs, on Tuesday, December 9, 2025, reportedly executed an eviction order at Plot 81, Ademola Adetokunbo Crescent, Wuse II, Abuja, the building that formerly housed the popular Cubana Lounge.

After a court judgment, the property was handed over to another businessman, Collins Onwuzulike.

In the new video circulating on the internet, people were seen removing items including chairs, sofas, tables, and other valuables belonging to Obi Cubana from the building.

These items were stacked outside the building, while some of the decorations were being taken down from inside the lounge.

The squabble that the popular business mogul, who marked his birthday a few months ago, is battling dates back to July 2025, when the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Gwagwalada, ruled that the proprietor of SEMC Investment Ltd., Onwuzulike, was the legitimate owner of the property.

Going by court documents, Onwuzulike reportedly purchased the property from Reverend Chidiebere Amakaeze for ₦2 billion, supported by a Power of Attorney and Deed of Assignment executed with effect from May 1, 2024.

The court, in its judgment, noted that despite completing the purchase and executing the transfer , the buyer had been unable to take possession of the building.

Justice J.A. Aina therefore ordered the defendants to immediately vacate the premises and directed the Inspector General of Police and other security agencies to assist the rightful owner in taking possession of same.

Possession process was however delayed after another group claiming interest in the property secured a temporary restraining order from the FCT High Court, Bwari, Abuja.

That restraining order has now expired, paving the way for Tuesday’s eviction enforcement.

With the successful execution of the eviction, the keys to the building were formally handed over to Onwuzulike’s lawyer, signalling complete possession of the property after months of legal battles.

After Court Action on the lounge, leading to a reported losses of about N800 million by Obi Cubana, the building may be demolished.

The businessman’s landlord had been in a land tussle on the property for quite a while, and he was later evicted from the property.

Report on part of the amount the Nigerian billionaire businessman, Obi Cubana reportedly lost after the court took action on his lounge in Abuja has surfaced online.

This is not an interesting time for the embattled businessman who has been facing eviction challenges on the property he rented in Abuja for one of his many businesses.

Senators Akpabio and Natasha: The Unwilling ‘Twins’

Godswill Obot Akpabio, born 1962, now Senate President, and Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, born 1979, share December 9 like unwilling twins; one leads the red chamber, the other fights to keep her seat in it.

Their connection should have stayed a harmless trivia nugget. Instead, it became the punchline nobody dared tell aloud. Or maybe a few within the Chamber.

And this is because of the dark history between these two. Natasha alleges the trouble started when she rejected late-night overtures at the Senate President’s residence; words about “enjoying a whole lot” if she played nice. Akpabio calls the story fiction.

The Senate chamber itself turned into a stage. A rearranged seat, a sharp exchange, and Akpabio’s unfortunate “nightclub” remark, later apologised for, yet remembered by everyone.

Suspension followed: six months without pay or voice, handed down by colleagues who laughed when Akpabio once noted their shared birthday.

Lawsuits rained, with ordinary people wondering exactly how senators run their lives based on outsider influence rather than a firm talk on a garden bench. But Natasha wanted N100 billion for damaged reputation; Akpabio’s wife demanded N250 billion for wounded feelings; the Senate President counters with his own N200 billion claim.

Next, Natasha carried the fight to Geneva, pleading political persecution before the Inter-Parliamentary Union. Akpabio stayed home, gavel in hand, waiting for her to return.

And that is the Akpabio–Natasha story at a glance.

Millions of Nigerians now know December 9 as the day two powerful people, born 17 years apart, celebrate by suing each other into the next lifetime. For this, the average and informed Nigerian chimes that may their cakes be sweet, their lawyers sweeter, and their shared date forever the most expensive coincidence in Nigerian history.

(Thisday)

On Nigeria’s Adventure to Benin Republic, By Simon Kolawole

You should have seen my face when news broke last Sunday that some soldiers had announced the overthrow of President Patrice Talon of the Republic of Benin. Apart from the fact that as a Nigerian, I still have some PTSD from the military era, Benin has been one of the more stable democracies in West Africa — howsoever defined — and I could not understand why the military would terminate 34 years of civil rule just like that. Moreover, I have been reading some encouraging reports about the progress being made by Talon, who has managed to focus on developing a world-standard public service and building quality infrastructure in the francophone country of 13.7 million people.

As Winston Churchill, the former UK prime minister, once said, “Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” I would adapt those words thus: for all its glaring shortcomings, the worst form of democracy is better than the best form of military rule. I recall an argument I had with a major general a few years ago. He was complaining about a news story in our newspaper and I exchanged hot words with him. After the whole drama, I shook my head and said to myself: “Lucky you — if this were to be under military rule, you would not sleep at home tonight and your whereabouts may never be known again.”

There seems to be a coup contagion in West Africa. Mali, after some promising years of practising democracy along with its failings, got entangled with military dictatorship in 2021. Burkina Faso fell to Captain Ibrahim Traore in 2022. The Republic of Niger was captured by Gen Abdourahamane Tchiani in 2023. These three countries exited the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and formed the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), announcing that they were discarding the “colonial” influence of France. Russia is their new colonial master. Good luck to them. In other news, Guinea-Bissau dramatically went back to military rule after its November 2025 presential election.

As it turned out, the coup in Benin failed, with the Nigerian military playing an important role in dislodging the plotters. In 1997, the Nigerian military also intervened to help restore democracy in Sierra Leone. Major Johnny Paul Koroma had overthrown President Ahmad Tejan Kabbah but ECOWAS swiftly condemned the coup and directed the Nigerian-led ECOWAS Monitoring Group (ECOMOG) to restore order, which it did in February/March 1998, reinstating Kabbah to office. The Economist of London wrote a sarcastic leader, saying Nigeria was exporting what it did not have. The dramatic irony was that Nigeria itself was under military rule, led by the inimitable Gen Sani Abacha.

I was so relieved when the Benin coup was foiled. Having another suspected Russia-backed military government next door to us presented a nightmare scenario. The coup leaders pointed to the jihadists’ attacks in the northern part of Benin as one of the reasons for the coup (in April 2025, al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists killed 54 Beninese soldiers on the border with Burkina Faso). They accused Talon of doing nothing to end the insurgency, but those who are familiar with military antics know that coup plotters often ride on public sentiments when they want to seize power by saying what the people want to hear. What happens next is none of their business and you cannot question them.

For those who may not know, before the US helped to oust Colonel Muammar Gaddaffi as the Libyan leader in 2011, he was building a massive army made up of young Africans. After his fall, Libya descended into a civil war and anarchy took full control, with no functioning government in place. One major result was the transformation of Libya into a human trafficking hub, but the little-talked-about consequence was the looting of Libyan armoury by the newly trained fighters, who became ready tools for al-Qaeda and Islamic State. One outcome was the strengthening of Boko Haram in Nigeria, who became better armed and launched a reinvigorated war against the Nigerian state.

Post-Gaddaffi, Boko Haram was no longer a ragtag army of suicide bombers and hit-and-run jihadists. They became reinforced, got better equipped and had better-trained militants, who moved the terrorist war from hit-and-run to full insurgency, presenting a new set of problems to the Nigerian military. But Nigeria was not the only battleground. In 2012, Tuareg rebels, who had been reinforced by an influx of battle-hardened and well-armed militants from the Libyan war, began to destabilise Mali, leading to a series of coups and counter-coups. Today, and under military dictatorship, most of Mali has been captured by the Jama’at Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin (JNIM), an al-Qaeda franchise.

As I write this, Bamako, the Malian capital, has been under siege by JNIM for weeks and experts project that it is a matter of time before it falls. That would make Mali the first African country to come under the control of either al-Qaeda or Islamic State. Mali, by the way, is a Muslim-majority country. Burkina Faso, also under military rule, has been the centre of the most vicious terrorist attacks in the world. It currently occupies the first position in the Global Terrorism Index (GTI), making it the most terrorised country in the world. Niger is also under strain and is ranked No 5, one step above Nigeria. May I remind us that Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger are all under military rule.

Mali, ironically, was making significant progress against JNIM with the help of France. After France exited and Russia stepped in, the situation has been deteriorating. It should not be a surprise: different militaries have different strengths and experiences. Russia is a newcomer to Africa, although it is expanding its influence with the allegiance of Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso. If Benin had joined the ranks, it would have been significant. That is a further step to encircling Nigeria. During the hunger protests of 2024, Russian flags were flown freely in parts of northern Nigeria, leading to speculation that there might be a Russian agenda playing out in Africa’s most populous country.

Those who understand the dynamics of regional politics would not be surprised that Nigeria quickly acted in self-interest by helping to quash the Benin coup. But those who are eternally cynical about Nigeria — mostly because of politics — will predictably question the country’s action. Some said it was an “invasion”, a clear misunderstanding of the concept. Invasion is not when a democratically elected government voluntarily asks for external help to restore constitutional order. I was pretty amused that those who celebrated the threat by US President Donald Trump to invade Nigeria and “liberate” Christians from “genocide” are against Nigeria’s “invasion” of Benin to liberate democracy.

I hear people ask: so, Nigeria can deploy aerial power to dislodge coup plotters in Benin when it has refused to deploy the same might to fight bandits and insurgents on its own territory? This is classic selective perception. A simple Google search will reveal that we have consistently been conducting aerial missions against bandits and insurgents. It is absolutely false to say we have not been bombing them. Conducting a one-day operation against coup plotters in a military barracks in Cotonou, the capital city of Benin, is not of the same scale as bombing bandits and insurgents in locations spread across northern Nigeria which are probably five times the size of the entire Republic of Benin.

What then is the outcome of all our military efforts against bandits and insurgents? I am as frustrated as most Nigerians are, especially as our leaders are not giving priority to where it should be, more so as we hear of the corruption that is making things all the more difficult and seemingly intractable. But I am not as sceptical as to say we are not making any progress. Boko Haram insurgency has been largely contained to parts of Borno state. They have never been able to take over Maiduguri despite all their efforts. When we think that Bamako, the capital of Mali, is on the verge of falling to JNIM, then maybe we should stop downplaying the gallantry of our soldiers and quit demoralising them.

War against insurgency is not the easiest thing in the world, as some people try to make it look. The US is reputed to be the global military leader but after spending 20 years in Afghanistan, it ran away and practically handed the country back to the Taliban forces it had been fighting. For the record, the US spent over $2.3 trillion and lost 2,400 soldiers fighting insurgency in Afghanistan, yet it did not win. This is for those who think fighting insurgents is the same thing as quelling a riot or killing armed robbers. Some commentators make it look like the bandits and insurgents are gathered inside one building and all we need to do is drop a bomb and they will all be dead. This is not Netflix, I’m afraid.

We must take a deep breath and apply reason once in a while. I do not subscribe to the notion that everything done by the government is wrong. Even a broken clock is correct twice a day. Being on top of developments in our neighbourhood is in our strategic interest. Some big countries even install neighbouring governments so that they can sleep in peace. The Sahel is being devastated mostly because of what happened in neighbouring Libya in 2011. Some aspects of the banditry plaguing northern Nigeria stemmed from developments in our neighbouring countries. We can bomb coup plotters in Cotonou as well as bandits in Kebbi. Yes, we can walk and chew gum at the same time.

AND FOUR OTHER THINGS…

BUMPY BUDGETING

Does President Bola Tinubu have a nonchalant attitude (I initially wanted to say “disdain”) for budgeting? Years after we managed to normalise the January-December cycle under President Buhari, Tinubu has not behaved in a way to suggest he cares about this very important aspect of governance. Under him, there was a time when we were running up to four budgets simultaneously. I don’t even know how many we currently run. Budget performance reports are so rare. By now, federal lawmakers should be processing the 2026 budget, but the prerequisite medium-term expenditure framework (MTEF) just found its way to their chambers on Thursday. Befuddling.

RIP PDP?

I pride myself on not having sympathy for any political party, but the decimation of the PDP is really sad, the truth be told. As of May 29, 2003, the party controlled 16 of the 17 southern states. Today, it controls only one. How are the mighty fallen! PDP’s exit from power in 2015 created a leadership vacuum in its ranks and accelerated its decline as members started jumping ship, but it was not as bad as it is today. I believe the exodus stems from governors and lawmakers being afraid their faction may be rejected by the courts and their re-election bids truncated. The APC is believed to be stoking the fire just to weaken opposition, but something tells me the story has not ended yet. Watching.

IJ AT 60

Ms Ijeoma Nwogwugwu, former editor of THISDAY, is 60 today. What a year 1965 turned out to be for Nigerian journalism. The roll call includes Mr Olusegun Adeniyi, Dr Reuben Abati, Mr Seye Kehinde, publisher of City People, and Mr Dipo Kehinde, publisher of Newsmakers. Senior citizens all! Nwogwugwu is someone I always use to inspire young female journalists. “What beat would you like to cover?” I would ask them during recruitment. The answer was almost always “entertainment” — as if women had been barred from the other specialities. I would say: “Do you know Ijeoma? She is one of the finest in financial journalism. Don’t limit yourself.” This has unlocked many talents. Model.

NO COMMENT

I get called all sorts for my views. Some call me “ronu” because I did not join their IReV movement. Some call me “Afonja” because I did not say President Buhari was “Jibril Al Sudani”. Some even say I am a “Fulani slave” because of my takes on “true” federalism. Ladies and gentlemen, here is the latest one: Mallam Nasir el-Rufai has posted an article on his X handle labelling TheCable as a “Yoruba paper” being used by the “Yoruba EFCC” to hound Mr Abubakar Malami over the Abacha Loot. In fact, we broke the story in 2017 when Buhari was in power. Now that I am fully celebrating the foiling of the Benin coup, what is the next blackmail? That I am French toast? Hahahaha.

Credit: Simon Kolawole

Nigerian Supreme Court sided with Tinubu’s power to declare state of emergency to suspend elected officials

Supreme-Court

In a split decision, the Nigerian Supreme Court, on Monday, affirmed the constitutional power of the President to declare a state of emergency in any state to prevent a breakdown of law and order or a descent into chaos and anarchy.

The plaintiffs were the Attorneys-General of PDP-controlled states, while the defendants were the Federal Government and the National Assembly.

The apex court upheld the President’s authority under the Constitution to proclaim a state of emergency, and that during such a period, the President may suspend elected officials, provided any such suspension is for a limited duration.

Justice Mohammed Idris, while delivering the lead majority judgment of six to one, held that Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution empowers the President to adopt extraordinary measures to restore normalcy where a state of emergency has been declared.

He noted that the provision does not specify the exact nature of those extraordinary measures, thereby vesting the President with discretion on how to act in such circumstances.

The majority judgement cited the apex court decisions in the declaration of emergencies in 2004 and 2006 in Plateau and Ekiti states, respectively, and that of 2013 in Borno, Adamawa, and Yobe states, to show that emergency powers were not governed by a rigid formula.

It added that the constitutionally permissible response depended on the magnitude of the threat, the functionality of state institutions, and the necessity of intervention to restore constitutional order.

The judgment was delivered in a suit instituted by states governed by the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), challenging the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State by President Bola Tinubu, during which elected state officials were suspended for six months. The Supreme Court had reserved judgment in the matter in October.

The suit marked SC/CV/329/2025, was filed by the Attorneys-General of Adamawa, Enugu, Osun, Oyo, Bauchi, Akwa Ibom, Plateau, Delta, Taraba, Zamfara, and Bayelsa states.

The suit, was predicated on eight grounds. The plaintiffs asked the Supreme Court to determine whether the President has the constitutional authority to suspend a democratically elected government in a state and whether the procedure adopted in declaring a state of emergency in Rivers State contravened the 1999 Constitution.

Among other reliefs, the plaintiffs urged the court to determine “whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 5(2), 176, 180, 188, and 305 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria can lawfully suspend, or in any manner whatsoever interfere with, the offices of a Governor and the Deputy Governor of any of the 36 component States of the Federation and replace them with his unelected nominee as a Sole Administrator, under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in any of the Plaintiffs’ States.”

They also asked “whether, upon a proper construction and interpretation of Sections 1(2), 4(6), 11(4) & (5), 90, 105, and 305 of the Constitution, the President can lawfully suspend the House of Assembly of any of the 36 States under the guise of, or pursuant to, a Proclamation of a State of Emergency in such States.”

While this case was pending, some of the said PDP governors represented by their Attorneys General as plaintiffs/Claimants have now defected to the president’s party, the APC, and the court didn’t say much on that.

In the earlier part of the judgment, Justice Idris upheld the preliminary objections raised by the defendants—the Attorney-General of the Federation and the National Assembly—against the competence of the suit.

He held that the plaintiffs failed to establish any cause of action capable of activating the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

In the six-to-one majority decision, the court agreed that the plaintiffs did not demonstrate the existence of an actionable dispute between them and the Federation to warrant the exercise of the court’s original jurisdiction.

Consequently, Justice Idris struck out the suit for want of jurisdiction. He nevertheless proceeded to consider the substantive issues and dismissed the case on the merits.

But, in his minority judgment, Justice Obande Ogbuinya dissented, holding that the suit succeeded in part.

Justice Ogbuinya held that the President has the power to declare a state of emergency, but held that such power cannot be used to suspend elected state officials, including governors, deputy governors, and members of state legislatures.

Lessons from Brazil and South Africa, By abiodun KOMOLAFE

The best way to view the Nigerian nation is that it stands at a critical juncture. The central question is how to transform it from its current state into the country it ought to be: one of the world’s top 12 economies, with a low poverty rate and a growing, sustainable middle class.

In this context, the actions and decisions of the current government are particularly significant. The present government has made a very good start. While this is a contentious statement, it is the stark and honest reality. Without a painful fiscal rebalancing of the economy, Nigeria would have been a basket case by today, seeking a bailout from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Therefore, the Bola Tinubu-led government deserves credit for averting what could have been a humiliating disaster and betrayal of the high hopes of independence.

In the span of just a few days, two events have occurred that helped to illuminate Nigeria’s current dilemma. The president’s state visit to Brazil, for instance, is significant not because it was unusual, but because the destination itself holds a deeper meaning.

Beyond the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding, Brazil’s experience should serve as a roadmap for the present government. During his first term in office, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva presided over a period where, according to figures from international organizations like the World Bank, approximately 40 million Brazilians were lifted out of poverty. This is an amazing feat for any democracy!

During his eight-year tenure, Lula da Silva never controlled the National Assembly and was consistently forced to negotiate legislation clause by clause. In spite of this, he pulled millions out of poverty, expanded the middle class, and unleashed Brazil’s hidden potential. This is a feat the Nigerian government should examine closely.

There is a lot to learn from Brazil. For example, the country used its homegrown school feeding programme not only to benefit schoolchildren but also to transform itself into a major agricultural powerhouse that exports semi- and fully-processed goods. This success was so significant that one of the articles of impeachment against Dilma Rousseff, Lula da Silva’s successor, was that Brazil had failed to meet its soybean export target to China.

In revamping its homegrown school feeding programme, Nigeria should have paid special attention to the similar programme engineered by Lula da Silva. The laudable recapitalization of the Bank of Agriculture (BOA) should provide a launching pad for revitalizing this programme and modernizing Nigeria’s entire agricultural value chain. This would lay the necessary foundation for the agro-allied sector to contribute at least 60% of Nigeria’s foreign exchange earnings by 2032.

Another key lesson from Brazil is the success of its respected development bank, Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (BNDES). As The Economist once highlighted, it’s the world’s largest development bank, providing loans for major infrastructure projects with terms of up to 34 years. To learn from its success, a team from BOA should have been part of the delegation to build long-term relationships and hold detailed discussions with BNDES management.

Brazil and Nigeria, both developing nations, show divergent paths. Brazil’s diversified economy and stronger social systems have resulted in a GDP five times Nigeria’s and a much higher life expectancy. Nigeria’s economy, however, is crippled by its heavy dependence on oil, creating a “rentier state” where political elites control wealth instead of fostering a productive, broad-based economy. This has led to a profound disconnect between the nation’s immense resources and its citizens welfare.

The story of Nigeria and Brazil is an age-old joke that often makes its rounds. As the tale goes, Nigeria and Brazil arrived at the gates of heaven at the same time. Brazil’s representative began to complain to Saint Peter: “Why did you bless Nigeria with such an abundance of mineral resources, a fertile land, and beautiful landscapes, yet we were given so little?” Saint Peter smiled and simply asked Brazil to look at the kind of leaders Nigeria had.

This joke speaks to a powerful truth: a nation may be blessed with all the good things in life, but without capable and visionary leadership to show the way, all those blessings can amount to nothing. When you look at Nigeria’s case, had it been led by true statesmen like Obafemi Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello and Michael Okpara, our story might have been entirely different.

Nigeria’s primary challenge is economic. Until the root causes of poverty are addressed, the myriad of political and security issues cannot be vanquished. This is the critical task facing the Tinubu administration. It must demonstrate the leadership and skills required to propel the nation forward, while citizens must cultivate the civic virtue to demand no less. Drawing from Brazil’s experience offers valuable lessons, and it is hoped these were thoroughly absorbed.

A second issue is the powerful speech given by Julius Sello Malema of the South Africa’s Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF). The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) showed great foresight and guts by inviting the firebrand to speak.

Malema was absolutely correct: the future of sub-Saharan Africa should be built upon a working partnership between post-apartheid South Africa and a resurgent Nigeria. This offers a clear, visible way out of the African dilemma, with the two forces working in tandem to realize the laudable objectives of the African Continental Free Trade Area.

South Africa and Nigeria have a historical duty to spearhead an African renaissance. However, Nigeria must first step up by emulating the independence and resilience of South Africa’s fine and effective institutions. To achieve substantial development, Nigeria must undergo an “institutional revolution.” Without strong institutions, no country can achieve sustainable progress. Even authoritarian regimes rely on professionalized and effective state institutions as the primary drivers of success.

The Nigerian dilemma can be solved by emulating the interwoven linkage between professionalized state institutions and their performance, a model clearly demonstrated by Singapore since 1965. This means all state institutions – including Customs, Immigration, and the internal security network – must be professionalized and made truly independent.

For instance, there is a marked difference in professionalism, independence and effectiveness between Nigeria’s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and its British equivalent, the Serious Fraud Office, as well as with their counterparts in Brazil and Malaysia. Without a paradigm shift, our foundations will remain weak and we’ll continue to struggle.

The bitter truth is that Brazil and South Africa are not just outperforming Nigeria, they are not in the same league. While the two are in the Premier League, Nigeria is in the 10th Division. Tragically, the country has been led by a “seventh eleven”, a team of uninspiring leaders.

Who would have wanted to travel to Singapore in 1965? Didn’t Lee Kuan Yew beat Nigeria at its own game in 1965? Now, the standard of living in Singapore is higher than in most states in the US, and two of its universities are among the world’s top 100. Meanwhile, where is the University of Ibadan, Nigeria’s premier university?

While Brazil (218 million) and South Africa (63 million) are full members of BRICS – and Brazil even holds a seat at the influential G20 table – Nigeria, with its whopping 230 million people, is still waiting for its invitation to the big leagues. Evidently, a massive population is just a fun fact, not a prerequisite for geopolitical power.

Who knew a country actually had to get its act together to join the grown-ups’ table? It seems the bar is set absurdly high: functional governance, economic stability, and maybe even a hint of political maturity.

May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!

*KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419 – SMS only)

Things are not beyond repair, tackle indiscipline frontally ―Obasanjo tells Turaki-led PDP

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has called on the National Working Committee (NWC) of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) led by its National Chairman, Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, SAN, to remain steadfast in their mission, stating that ‘things are not beyond repair’ for the party.

Obasanjo told the PDP leaders led by Turaki on Saturday during a visit by the PDP National Working Committee (NWC), to his residence in Abeokuta, Ogun State capital.

According to a statement shared on the party’s X page, Obasanjo offered his counsel and praised the current leadership’s efforts to stabilise and reposition the party.

He commended all the steps taken by the NWC, urging them to remain steadfast in their mission and instill discipline in the Party, saying that “anybody who wants to belong to a political party must adhere strictly to its rules and regulations”

“Things are not beyond repair. Soldier on…You are doing very well,” Chief Obasanjo stated, encouraging the committee to continue their work with diligence and tact”.

Obasanjo stressed the importance of a strong, focused opposition in any democracy, charging the NWC to ensure that the interest of the nation remains paramount.

He emphasised that the current challenges facing the nation require all political actors to play constructive roles, putting the country’s interest first. While offering his wealth of experience and political insights, Obasanjo affirmed his readiness to provide guidance when necessary to the party’s leadership.

The former President stressed that the way and manner the Federal Government is going, they can’t take Nigeria anywhere good.

Responding to the former President’s encouraging words, the Party’s National Chairman,  Kabiru Tanimu Turaki, SAN, expressed profound gratitude on behalf of the entire NWC.

“Your continued support and wisdom mean a great deal to us, Sir,” Turaki said.

“Your advice and great counsel are always very helpful, and we will rely on them as we work tirelessly to rebuild and unify our party. We came here specifically to tap into your experience and benefit from your invaluable perspective on both the party’s future and the state of our nation.”

The Turaki-led executive of PDP was elected at the party’s national conference held at Ibadan, Oyo State in November.

 

Benin Republic: Consequences of making opposition politics impossible, By Jibrin Ibrahim

Jibrin Ibrahim (@JibrinIbrahim17) / Twitter

Nigeria’s decisive intervention in helping to stop the coup in Benin Republic was a good commitment to saving democracy for the country, and, maybe more important, for us. I have always taken sides with the argument that Africa’s only option in consolidating democratic rule is to do so without recourse to the military, who are incapable, by their very nature, of deepening democracy and civic culture. Of course, the argument getting louder and louder is that so many so-called democratic regimes in Africa are themselves undermining democratic processes, institutions and culture in their countries. This is true, but the solution lies not in the military but in citizens’ learning to impose their will on the regimes responsible for democratic backsliding on the continent. My argument today, however, is that I wish Nigeria and ECOWAS had intervened earlier when the President of Benin, Patrice Talon, was emptying the country’s democracy of its content. Once again, the military’s attempt to intervene was because democratic regression has been engineered by a sitting democratic regime.

The Benin event occurred just over a week after the coup in Guinea-Bissau. The irony could not be deeper. The Bissau coup was organised by former President Umaru Cissoko Embalo himself, who decided to refuse to accept the election result, which showed clearly that he had lost. He was unwilling to hand over power to the legitimate victor of the presidential election, so he chose to engineer a theatrical coup d’état, calling on his faction of the army to takeover power in a coup he announced himself. After the coup, there was astonishment around the world, as Embalo was holding press conferences and trying to convince the world that a “real” coup had occurred against him. Having performed his skit, he took a flight undisturbed by the military to Senegal, then on to Morocco, and then the Republic of Congo.

Benin played a key role in the return of democracy to West Africa in 1989/1990 by inventing the Sovereign National Conference, a new social contract for the reconstruction of state and society. Benin was the first Francophone African country to start a peaceful democratisation process in the early 1990s. Hitherto, the country had been ruled since 1972 by General Mathieu Kerekou, who after putting to an end a cycle of chronic instability, proclaimed Marxist-Leninist principles as the state ideological policy, right from 1974. He convened a National Conference for all stakeholders to sit down and address the country’s problems in February 1990, under the chairmanship of the Catholic cleric, Mgr Isidore de Souza. The first decision of the 500 delegates invited to the Conference, however, was to declare its independence from the government project and proclaim the sovereign character of its decisions over the party-state.

The National Conference in Benin took its inspiration from the “Etats Generaux” that accompanied the French Revolution of 1789 and it immediately galvanised Francophone West Africa. The autocracies in Niger, Togo, Cote d’Ivoire and Mali all crumbled, as they were forced to accept National Conferences that dissolved their existing power structures and crafted new multiparty democracies. The National Conferences were manifestations of historic moments in which the agency of democratic forces became sufficiently strong to destabilise well established authoritarian regimes. The central objective of the National Conferences was clear – to dismantle the authoritarian state machine and broaden citizen participation in the political system, while making public affairs accessible to all components of the nation. Since then, the tides have turned and successive administrations in much of West Africa have engaged on the path of democratic regression and recreated the authoritarian state.

Last Sunday, 7 December, early in the morning, the coup attempts in Benin started with an attack on the residence of President Patrice Talon, and then an announcement on national television by a military group, of the overthrow of the president. Had the coup succeeded, it would have been the sixth in the region in a few years. Why would the military seek to intervene and break the democratic order just four months before a presidential election, in a context in which President Talon would not be contesting, and his party had already nominated someone else to contest for the presidency? Note also that the President is considered by many as engaging in good governance and developing the country.

The reality on the ground is that President Patrice Talon has jailed all his political rivals or sent them into exile. He is the sole embodiment of political and economic power in the country. He has used or, rather, abused the judicial system to ensure that opposition party candidates are banned from participating in the electoral process and his desire determines all political outcomes in the country.  He has invented a “new Beninese democracy,” in which the imperative of economic development requires setting aside democratic principles and the rule of law. The new Constitution adopted by the National Assembly on 15 November embodied an alarming concept of a “political truce” that will “stabilise” the country by imposing an extension of tenure for the president, from five to seven years.

The main opposition party, Les Democrats, which was banned from earlier elections has already been banned from next year’s presidential polls. All parties seeking to contest in elections have to get signed support from current elected officials, so the political reality is that no opposition candidates can participate in Benin’s “democracy”. By making opposition politics impossible, President Patrice Talon opened the doors to the military to propose yet another “corrective regime.” Nigeria and ECOWAS watched while President Talon emptied democracy of its content in Benin Republic. Lessons must be learnt in West Africa. Democratic consolidation requires the maintenance of a level playing ground for elections that is bolstered by the rule of law and a justice system that applies the same law to all. What needs to happen is for citizens in Benin to mobilise themselves and insist on their right to vote for candidates of their choice, rather than those imposed by President Talon.

Credit: Jibrin Ibrahim

Turaki, Wabara, PDP leaders, former govs, Obasanjo in closed-door meeting (Photos)

Leadership of a faction of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), led by its chairman Alhaji Taminu Turaki, SAN, held a closed-door meeting with former President Olusegun Obasanjo.

Turaki, alongside former chairman of the Board of Trustee (BoT), Adolphus Wabara; former governors of Niger and Plateau States, Alhaji Muazu Babangida and Sen Jonah Jang; and other senior party leaders, arrived at the former president’s residence within the Olusegun Obasanjo Presidential Library, Abeokuta, Ogun State, Nigeria, at about 11:38am on Saturday.

They subsequently proceeded for a closed-door meeting with Obasanjo.

Details of the discussions are still sketchy at this time.

Photos on arrival:

1001202389

 

 

 

 

Nigeria cannot borrow into prosperity ―Peter Obi lambastes Tinubu for excessive borrowing

I'm being threatened for rejecting mind-blowing offers - Peter Obi - Daily Post Nigeria

Former Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate, Peter Obi, has voiced serious concerns over the Nigerian federal government’s frequent borrowing, warning that it raises significant questions about the state of governance in the country.

Obi said the Bola Tinubu presidency is sending conflicting signals by telling citizens that the government has surpassed its 2025 revenue target since August and still engaging in massive borrowing of funds.

Instead of constant borrowing that is not tied to any developmental efforts, Obi urged the government to encourage the production, export, and creation of value, while building strong institutions that ensure accountability and the efficient use of public funds.

Obi maintained that Nigeria cannot borrow its way into prosperity.

On his X handle, Obi wrote: “Today, Nigerians woke up again to the troubling news that the Federal Government is planning to borrow about ₦20 trillion in new loans to finance the 2026 budget. This is at a time when debt servicing alone is projected to gulp nearly half of our national revenue, and when our borrowing requirement has surged by over 72%.

“At a time when Nigerians are struggling under unprecedented hardship, insecurity, and unemployment, we must ask the most important and logical questions: Where is the revenue from 2025?

“How can we be discussing trillions in new borrowing for 2026 when we are still implementing the 2024 budget? One is genuinely worried. This suggests, very clearly, that the 2025 budget is still untouched and unimplemented.

“So, where are all the revenues that accrued in 2025, even when we were told that we had surpassed the revenue targets since August?

“It is time for us to stop this fiscal rascality, especially with uncontrolled and unexplained borrowing that is not being invested in the productive sectors of our nation, but instead ends up in consumption.

“We cannot keep mortgaging the future of our children through thoughtless borrowing. We cannot continue this way.

“For years, I have consistently maintained that Nigeria cannot borrow its way into prosperity. Nations do not develop by consuming more than they produce. They develop by producing, exporting, and creating value, while building strong institutions that ensure accountability and efficient use of public funds.

“We cannot tell Nigerians that revenue is increasing while simultaneously increasing borrowing to ridiculous historic levels. Governance must be built on transparency, not propaganda.

“We cannot build a new Nigeria on the foundation of misleading figures, rising debts, shrinking production, and continuous hardship. Our nation must move forward.

“A New Nigeria is POssible. -PO.“

We’re worried about Peter Obi, Atiku over 2027 presidential ticket ―ADC Admits

African Democratic Congress (ADC) has voiced out its concern over what it called the growing “conundrum” involving former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and former Anambra State Governor, Peter Obi ahead of the 2027 presidential election.

The party’s National Publicity Secretary, Bolaji Abdullahi, made the statement on Friday while speaking on Arise Television’s Morning Show, noting that the issue, though not the “greatest threat to democracy,” remains a significant challenge the party must address.

Abdullahi said: “I may not describe the situation in such superlative terms to say that it’s the greatest threat to democracy at the moment. But is it a conundrum? Yes. Is it a challenge? Yes. Is it something we are concerned about? Yes.

“We have also tried to maintain that it’s not just about Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi. Nobody in the ADC at this time is having conversation about who the presidential candidates will be. So we have so much work to do – to establish our presence, real presence; to be in a position to contest election in all the 36 states of the Federation and FCT.

“So this has preoccupied us in the last couple of months, but we know that is an issue we have to deal with. The most important thing is at this time, when we get to that point, we try to engineer consensus – a consensus, which is an option for us, but if we are not able to do a consensus, then we’ll possibly just open it up for everyone to contest.

“And it’s not just about Atiku and Peter Obi, there are other people who are also interested in contesting the presidential race. You know, so we have to make allowance for that. It’s not a central case between Atiku and Peter Obi.

“I agree with you it’s an option. But there are also other options that we are looking at, even within the other political parties that we are also having conversation about how to build a formidable coalition to see what is possible.”

Nigerian Supreme Court upholds Maryam Sanda’s death penalty

Court dismisses Maryam Sanda’s no-case submission, discharges her mum, brother

Nigerian Supreme Court has on Friday upheld the death sentence imposed on Maryam Sanda, daughter-in-law of a former National Chairman of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), over the killing of her husband, Bilyamin Bello.

Maryam was convicted on January 27, 2020, by an Abuja High Court, and was subsequently sentenced to death by hanging after finding her guilty of fatally stabbing Bello, her husband at their Maitama home in 2017.

She had spent about six years and eight months at the Suleja Correctional Centre before President Bola Tinubu granted her clemency, reducing the sentence to 12 years’ imprisonment.

However, in a split decision of four to one, a five-member panel of the apex court on Friday reinstated the original death sentence.

The court dismissed her appeal in its entirety, ruling that she failed to show any error in the concurrent findings of the lower courts.

Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Moore Adumein held that the prosecution proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt and that the Court of Appeal was right to affirm the conviction.

Attorney-General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, had earlier on defended her inclusion in the presidential pardon, saying it was granted “on compassionate grounds and in the best interest of the children,” adding that her record of “good conduct, new lifestyle, model behaviour and remorsefulness” formed part of the justification.

The Supreme Court, however, faulted Tinubu’s intervention, ruling that it was inappropriate for the Executive to grant clemency in a homicide case while an appeal was still pending.

Going by this decision, the death sentence earlier handed down by the trial court, and the court of appeal stands even though there is still a warrant to be signed by someone, and the person may decide to review this position again.

Benin: Between military claws and bloody talons of President Talon, By Owei Lakemfa

Image result for owei lakemfa

Early morning Sunday, December 7, 2025, while many Beninois slept, hoping to go to church, mosque and traditional places of worship at dawn, some members of their armed forces fanned out. Led by Lieutenant Colonel Paschal Tigri, they planned to bring the people under their claws. At 05:00 they attacked the Presidential Palace and then retreated to the national broadcaster, the SRTB where they announced the removal of Patrice Talon, President of the French vassal state. The rebels accusations against Talon include imposition of harsh economic measures on the people such as increased taxes and cuts in healthcare. Others include clamping down on the opposition and deteriorating security situation.

The issue is not the truth in these allegations which are verifiable, but whether the truth justifies a coup by men from the barracks that may not be different from dictatorial Talon. However, what is clear to me is that if democracy implies the people exercising their free will to decide through the ballot box, the leadership of their country, then Benin is not a democracy. Therefore, countries like Nigeria taking part in direct combat against the Beninois rebels were not doing so to defend democracy as there is no democracy in that country to defend. Therefore, nations like Nigeria sending combatants to fight on the side of Talon were merely wasting their resources and putting their troops needlessly in harm’s way.

While as a Nigerian, I was reassured that the Nigerian military has the capacity to act swiftly and decisively in an emergency situation, I would have loved these to be displayed within our borders where bandits and terrorists hold sway over swaths of our territory, rather than exhibit it in Benin Republic to keep a halfpenny dictator in power.

Talon’s regime is so intolerant of opposition that in the two-month period of March and April 2020, he detained over 100 opposition politicians and activists.

He had won re-election mainly by banning opposition candidates. As a follow up, he had sent some to jail. One of them, Recya Madougou, a former Justice Minister, was picked up in 2021, a few weeks before the general elections, accused of trying to disrupt the elections and “destabilise” the country. A special court on terrorism and economic crimes called CRIET which Talon had established, sentenced her to 20 years imprisonment for “complicity in terrorist acts”.

The terror court had also sent another opposition presidential candidate, Professor Joel Aivo who had been held for eight months, to ten years imprisonment for treason. Aivo, before sentence, told the judge: “It is not for criminal justice to arbitrate on political differences. I have decided to give myself to this country. You are also children of this country. Do as you will with me.”

Some opposition figures had fled the country to escape the talons of Talon. Even a judge of the CRIET special court had also fled before the re-election, claiming the court was political.

In 2024, Talon put two of his friends, Oliver Boko, a businessman and Oswald Homesky, former Sports Minister, on trial for an alleged plot to overthrow the government. They were sentenced to 20 years imprisonment each, jointly fined $95 million and, each also fined $6.8 million.

In August 2024, Steve Amoussou, an online critic of Talon was arrested for allegedly inciting rebellion. Talon is likely to take advantage of this coup attempt to jail or eliminate more opposition figures.

As for the scheduled April 12, 2026 presidential election, with Talon on rampage, opposition leaders either disqualified, in prison or on the run, the stage is set for the coronation of his hand-picked successor, the Minister of State for Finance and Cooperation, 49-year-old Romuald Wadagni.

Amongst those who have sent troops to ‘defend democracy’ in Benin is the rogue 83-year-old President Alasssane Dramane Ouattara of Cote d’Ivoire. He has been in office since 2010. So, he is in his fourth term in office when the constitutional limit is two terms. But Ouattara does not seem to be in a hurry to leave office soon as he is the main point man of France, a country that began its colonialisation and exploitation of Africa with its invasion of Algeria in 1830. This week, 195 years later, France is still in charge of West Africa, coordinating the armed forces of the region led by Nigeria in their intervention in Benin Republic.

In the wake of the attempted coup, French President Emmanuel Macron boasted that he called  Presidents Talon, Bola Ahmed Tinubu of Nigeria and Julius Maada Bio of Sierra Leone to coordinate a joint response. Bio, a veteran coup plotter who played central roles in the 1992 and 1999 coups in his country which made him Deputy Head of State and then Head of State, is the current Chairperson of the Economic Community of West African States, ECOWAS.

There is also Ghana whose leadership has transformed the legendary Black Star of Africa into a United States military base while also vigorously undermining Africa by carrying out the dictates of foreign powers like expelling our African brothers and sisters from Western Sahara.

France revealed it gave logistical support to the African troops, provided surveillance and shared intelligence with Nigeria which led the air and ground intervention in Benin Republic.

France also sent in its special forces from Cote d’Ivoire to support the Nigerian and ECOWAS intervention forces. The Head of the Benin Republican Guard, Dieudonne Djimon Tevoedre, however, claimed the interventionist French forces were mainly “used for mopping up operations”.

The new France-Nigeria-ECOWAS military alliance in the region is likely to increase the antagonism with the anti-French Alliance of Sahel States, AES. The AES made up of Niger, Mali and Burkina Faso have always accused Nigeria and countries like Cote d’Ivoire of being mere stooges of France and imperialism.

The Tinubu administration, having helped to rescue Talon, has a duty to ensure he safely exits the Benin presidency without further endangering democracy. Secondly, it has the duty to ensure political opposition in Nigeria is not stifled like Talon is doing in Benin Republic. Thirdly, it has the duty to protect the continent from despots. It needs to explain to Nigerians why our troops were so speedily deployed to Benin while the coup plotters in Guinea-Bissau are allowed to consolidate. I would have preferred we pressurise the plotters in Bissau to allow the electoral commission formally announce the election results and swear in the new president, than expend resources shoring up Talon.

In all these, how do we wake up the African Union, AU? I admit this will be an herculean task because one of the most difficult things is to try to wake up a person who is not sleeping.

Credit: Owei Lakemfa