After the bishops recent closed‑door meeting with President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, Cardinal John Onaiyekan made a striking claim: that presidential aides are shielding the President from the true suffering in the country, presenting a false rosy picture, and that Tinubu already appears desperate about winning the 2027 election.

As a writer and observer of governance, I share that concern. A president who controls the instruments of state, commands a united party, and faces a divided opposition has little rational cause for electoral anxiety unless overzealous handlers are manufacturing threats where few exist.

The question therefore deserves to be asked plainly: what exactly is President Bola Ahmed Tinubu afraid of?

The EFCCs freezing of the Osun State Governments accounts barely a week before the governorship election citing a court order later reversed by the President himself was not merely a legal misstep. It was a political signal of ‘over‑sabi’ that familiar Yoruba expression for excessive, misdirected overzealousness gone disastrously wrong. It also raised a question that goes beyond Osuns finances and cuts to the heart of governance in Abuja: are these the deliberate choices of a confident presidency, or the panicked manoeuvres of handlers who have convinced the President that 2027 is a battle he might lose?

Because by any honest reading of Nigerias political landscape, the evidence for such fear is astonishingly thin.

Tinubu enters the 2027 cycle with structural advantages unmatched in recent democratic history.

He controls the executive machinery of the Federal Government with unusual cohesion. The CBN and NRS, custodians of the national treasury and revenue and the full architecture of anti‑corruption agencies operate within a presidency facing no internal rebellion. The security services police, DSS, and the military answer to the Commander‑in‑Chief. INEC operates within a constitutional framework that any well‑resourced incumbent can navigate with relative ease.

Why should he entertain fear? His party, the APC, has absorbed opposition defections at a rate that has reshaped the electoral map. Several governors elected on opposition platforms in 2023 have since crossed over, weakening the institutional backbone of any credible challenge. The PDP, Labour Party, and other formations remain fractured much like 2023, when the split between Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, and Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso arguably delivered the presidency to Tinubu on the platter of gold. Has he forgotten that blessing in disguise?

Tinubu won the 2023 election under conditions far more hostile than anything he faces today. President Muhammadu Buhari was not enthusiastic about his candidacy. Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, Senate President Ahmed Lawan, ministers, and other APC heavyweights were either rivals or reluctant supporters. Yet Tinubu prevailed.

He now enters 2027 with those internal rivals neutralised and with the incumbency advantage he lacked in 2023.
So why are his handlers suddenly desperate even flirting with anti‑democratic impulses?

Should a president who survived 2023s turbulence now need anti‑corruption agencies freezing a states accounts one week before an election to prove loyalty?

Governance under Tinubu is mixed but not devoid of genuine achievements. Abuja, under the politically abrasive but undeniably effective Nyesom Wike, has witnessed accelerated infrastructural development: roads, housing schemes, and urban renewal projects visible to anyone who drives through the city. One may dislike his crude politics, but his performance as minister rivals the El‑Rufai era. Had these and other ministerial achievements been properly documented and consistently communicated, wouldnt they have formed a persuasive counter‑narrative to critics?

The Ministry of Information and National Orientation has also done strategic work in countering the internationally amplified Christian genocide narrative a framing that ignored the Muslim communities devastated by banditry and terrorism in the North‑West and North‑East. Doesnt the lobbying that produced a more balanced posture from Washington including under President Donald Trump reflect a sophistication in foreign‑policy communication that deserves amplification?

The administration has increased military remuneration, strengthening loyalty to civilian command. The foiling of a reported coup attempt further consolidates military alignment with the presidency.Do these achievements justify political panic?

One under‑analysed dimension of Tinubus political arithmetic is the legacy of the MuslimMuslim ticket. The TinubuShettima pairing was controversial in 2023, with critics warning it would alienate Christian voters. Yet, paradoxically after the victory, the administration has appointed Christian technocrats to some of the most economically sensitive ministries and key security portfolios alongside many Yoruba appointees. Whether by design or necessity, hasnt the MuslimMuslim ticket ended up delivering significant Christian representation at the apex of federal governance?

Retaining Shettima for 2027 follows the same logic: consolidate the Muslim North especially the core North that delivered decisive margins while Christian appointments counterbalance the optics. It is a defensible strategy. But doesnt it require sophisticated communication which has not always been forthcoming?

Back to Osun: The real danger. The EFCCs freezing of Osuns accounts days before an election was legally arguable but politically indefensible. The timing made it impossible to interpret as anything other than partisan interference. The President‑ordered reversal after the alleged court order only confirmed what the optics had already declared.

The damage is not to Governor Ademola Adeleke or the opposition party. The damage is to President Tinubu. It invites the central question every overzealous enforcement action provokes: did the President authorise this and other similar actions, including judicial manoeuvres?

If yes, it suggests a president anxious about 2027 despite overwhelming structural advantages or one willing to compromise institutional integrity for marginal electoral gain. If no, it suggests something equally dangerous: that agencies are acting in his name without his knowledge, and that the presidency is unable to control institutions under its authority.

Neither interpretation flatters the presidency. Both are politically corrosive.

Nigeria has seen this pattern before. Weaponising anti‑corruption agencies does not strengthen incumbents. It delegitimises institutions, hardens opposition resolve, generates sympathy for targeted figures, and provides ammunition to international observers already sceptical of Nigerias democratic governance.

Does the arithmetic of intimidation ever favour the intimidator?

Tinubu is not a political novice. He is one of the most strategically sophisticated political minds Nigeria has produced. The Lagos model whatever its imperfections demonstrates his ability to build and sustain political structures over decades.

Which makes the question more urgent: who is advising him that these manoeuvres are necessary? Are they genuinely trying to secure his re‑election?
Or are some exploiting his perceived anxiety for their own selfish interests?

Because the greatest threat to a Tinubu second term is not Atiku Abubakar, Peter Obi, or Kwankwaso. It is the growing perception that a confident presidency is behaving like one that is not.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the author of “MNI Versus MNIPR in NIPSS” on Tackling institutional Bullying. yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post EFCC’s Over-Sabi and 2027 Question: Is Tinubu Being Misled by His Inner Circle? appeared first on YAShuaib.

The fear of Trump is not the beginning of wisdom. But it is time to tread carefully, with clear eyes and a steady hand.

As a child, whenever I refused to eat or take bitter traditional medicine, my mother would threaten to call Werekacithe unstable and aggressive man who lived at the end of our street. The fear alone was enough to make me comply instantly. I simply obeyed anything out of fear.

Years later, I have come to recognise that Werekaci has many faceson social media, in political spaces, and sometimes in the corridors of global power. The psychology remains the same: invoke a frightening name and watch people abandon their better judgment.
It is through this prism that I now view the growing anxiety in certain Nigerian circles over the posture of United States President Donald Trump toward Nigeriaand the implications this anxiety may have for our 2027 general elections.

Recently, after publishing a series of opinion articles challenging the so-called Christian genocide narrative promoted by separatist advocates and ethno-religious agitators, my social media pages were flooded with coordinated hostility. Within less than an hour of one post, more than 500 abusive comments appearedattacking not only me but also my family, culture, faith, region and even my country.

Some thoughtful readers later pointed out that most of the accounts were fake, bots and faceless handles with no real constituency. Since then, I have adopted a simple rule: I welcome criticism from people of reason, but I delete reckless and bad-faith attacks from extremists.

The same psychology of manipulation appears to be shaping parts of the discourse around Nigeria and President Trump, whose derogatory remarks about our country are well-documented. In earlier writings, I addressed several of these claims, particularly his repeated references to protecting Nigerian Christians without acknowledging Muslim victims of violence. What is troubling is that some Nigerians now amplify such narratives for domestic political advantage.

When American forces reportedly launched a strike in Sokoto on the eve of Christmas, Trump quickly addressed a Christian audience, invoking what he claimed he could do. Yet Sokoto is neither the epicentre of terrorism nor a major banditry hotspot in Nigeria. The target appeared deliberately symbolic because of its Islamic heritage.

So far, the Nigerian government has gone to extraordinary lengths to placate Washington. Officials have repeatedly shuttled to the United States, hosted American lawmakers in Nigeria, and spent substantial sums on U.S. lobbying firms. Nigeria has also conceded ground on arms-procurement decisions, facilitated the release of Catholic schoolchildren, and even allowed American troops to operate on its soilan unprecedented development in our history. Yet the so-called Christian-genocide campaign has continued to resurface.

Then, on Wednesday, March 4, 2026, as Muslims were leaving a mosque after breaking their Ramadan fast in Ngoshe, Borno State, terrorists slaughtered the Imam and several worshippers while abducting more than 100 women and children. There was no comparable outcrynot from American lawmakers and certainly not from President Trump. The silence was both deafening and revealing: the tragedy simply did not fit the narrative being promoted. But the truth remains clearMuslim lives, to them, appear not to matter.

Meanwhile, among the most reckless accusations circulating on my posts is the claim that Muslims are complicit in terrorism. I do not dignify such claims with extended debate. Long before Boko Haram became a household name, I had written extensively condemning those who falsely invoke Islam to justify violence. These writings appeared in major Nigerian newspapers.

During the ethno-religious conflicts that spread from Maiduguri to Onitsha in 2006, precisely twenty years ago, one of my articles titled Killing in the Name of the Devil appeared in national newspapers, including The Punch, Leadership, Daily Sun, Vanguard, Financial Standard, Daily Trust, and Daily Champion, among others. The article remains accessible on my blog, yashuaib.com, complete with the publication dates.

Over the years, I have written about Boko Haram, banditry, and the Nigerian states failures in counter-terrorismalways as a proud Northern Muslim guided by the Quranic injunction that states: Fear a tumult which will affect not only those who caused it, but also the innocent among you. (Quran 8:25).

Ironically, when I criticise my own people, some critics cheer me. But the moment I point out similar flaws in theirs, those cheers quickly turn into outrage. I have never been hypocritical on this matter. I do not tolerate bullying whether institutional, political, or digitaland I do not argue with fools.

Northerners, contrary to certain stereotypes, are far more tolerant than the fanatics often portrayed in social media debates. The behaviour of a divisive minority should not be mistaken for the character of the majority.

General Theophilus Danjuma, for instance, is widely respected in the North for championing a united Nigeria where all citizens are equal regardless of faith or ethnicity. Similarly, when Abubakar Badaru, a Muslim from Jigawa, was replaced as Defence Minister by General Christopher Musa, a Christian from Kaduna, mainstream Northern opinionincluding Islamic clericswelcomed the development. This acceptance was particularly strong in Sokoto and Maiduguri, where Musa had previously lived, served with distinction and protected civilian lives, leading to the surrender or neutralisation of thousands of terrorists under his watch.

Following recent global events, some commentators have interpreted the U.S.Israel strikes on Iran as a warning for Northern Nigeria, even urging President Trump to oppose Sharia law and Muslim-Muslim tickets. While the Middle East conflict has been widely condemned by several global powers, these critics continue to frame the issue through a simplistic us versus them narrative.

They also overlook a geopolitical reality: Irans isolation was partly worsened by the silence of several neighbouring Arab Muslim states, who either ignored the attack on a fellow Muslim nationthough a non-Arab oneor appeared aligned with the aggressors. Ironically, the critics also ignore a demographic fact: Iran today has a larger Christian population than Israel.

Some commentators further argue that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu may be cautious about provoking Donald Trump, citing the pressure Washington has exerted on countries such as Iran and Venezuela. They therefore predict a possible political adjustment within the Presidency, including speculation that Trump might urge Tinubu to reconsider the current joint ticket ahead of the 2027 elections.

While it would be unfair to deny Vice President Kashim Shettima the continuity enjoyed by his predecessors, Nigerias political choices must remain sovereign. One point must also be stated plainly: if Shettima must be compelled to sacrifice his position under foreign pressure, President Tinubu should ensure that any adjustment does not deepen the already glaring imbalance in federal appointments.

Today, several key institutions in Nigerias economic and financial system are disproportionately led by individuals from one geopolitical zoneand largely from one religious background. The Ministry of Finance, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS/NRS), PenCom, NDIC, EFCC, NAICOM, AMCON, the Bank of Agriculture, and the Bank of Industry (BOI) are not minor posts. They represent the commanding heights of the national economy.

When leadership of these institutions tilts toward Yorubanisation or Christianisation, it becomes more than a matter of opticsit begins to strain the fragile social contract upon which Nigerias unity rests.

The Igbo, who also feel excluded from sensitive and lucrative positions, must likewise be considered in any recalibration aimed at strengthening national cohesion.

The global communityincluding sections of the American public itselfis increasingly realising that fear of Trump is not the beginning of wisdom. It may well be the beginning of capitulation.

Nigeria must resist the temptation to organise its internal politics around the moods of a foreign leader. We must engage Washington where necessary, push back where appropriate, and above all ensure that our national decisionsincluding decisions about who leads us in 2027are made in Abuja, not in Mar-a-Lago.

Werekaci may be loud. But he does not live here.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the author of An Encounter with the Spymaster. He writes from yashuaib@yashuaib.com.

The post 2027 Elections: The Fear of Trump, Werekaci and Nigerian Politics By YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

I have often emphasised the thin, but important line between journalism and public relations. A journalist thrives on controversy; every confrontation is newsworthy. Public relations, however, demands restraint, maturity, and controlled messaging. It is about protecting integrity, building credibility, and cultivating long-term trust.

Unfortunately, in Nigerias current political landscape, publicity and PR are too often conflated. Publicity is attention-seeking, sometimes negative, driven by sensationalism and external triggers for viral content. PR, in contrast, is a strategic craftmeasured and purposeful, designed to preserve reputation, win allies, and build confidence over time.

This distinction matters because those tasked with managing the image of President Bola Ahmed Tinubu appear to be doing the opposite. Instead of winning hearts, they are creating more enemies. A recent example is that of the presidential Spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, a respected journalist, publisher, and former Managing Director of the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN). In a lengthy press statement, he traded the discipline of public relations for Bolekaja (street-brawling) rhetoric.

Rather than addressing issues involving a former President and a former minister with decorum, Onanuga resorted to abrasive language. In nearly a thousand words, he harshly condemned former President Goodluck Jonathans administration, describing it as one of dismal records of economic mismanagement and corruption. He went further to warn Jonathan against aligning with PDP figures such as former Information Minister, Professor Jerry Gana, dismissing them as selfish opportunists.

This was not public relations; it was black propaganda. And it was unbecoming of a man of Onanugas pedigree. More troubling is his careless reference to Sambo Dasuki, the former National Security Adviser, whose detention for over four years under the Buhari administration has already become a matter of judicial controversy. By invoking Dasuki in a political attack, it serves his interests. Does a President admired for political dexterity truly need aides issuing press statements that inflame rather than reconcile?

A look at the record shows that Onanugas attempt at revisionism falters under scrutiny. Under Jonathan (20102015), Nigerias economy experienced relative stability: the naira hovered around ₦150₦165 to the dollar, GDP growth averaged 67%, and inflation remained within single digits for some years. In fact, in 2014, Nigeria became Africas largest economy after a GDP rebasing.

By comparison, Tinubus government has its own story: the GDP was at 4.23% in Q2 2025, the naira hovered around N1,500 to N1,650, and inflation was 20.12% in August 2025. These are factual and authoritative figures, rather than the result of reckless comparisons or denigration of predecessors.

On the security front, the record is equally clear. In my book, Boko Haram War: An Encounter with the Spymaster, I documented how, in the twilight of Jonathans tenure, dozens of communities across Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe were liberated from Boko Haram under Dasukis watch as NSA. Military press releases and pictorial evidence confirm the recapture of towns such as Bama, Monguno, Gwoza, Michika, and Mubi, as well as the rescue of 234 abductees from Sambisa Forest on April 30, 2015. To ignore these facts is not only misleading but also diminishes credibility.

If a novice fresh from university made such blundersissuing a release that creates adversaries rather than alliesone might excuse it as inexperience. But from a seasoned journalist of Onanugas stature, it is both shocking and disappointing.

Apart from certified public relations practitioners, many non-NIPR members have also imbibed the principles of PRfostering relationships, building bridges, and managing perception with tact. Onanuga should reflect on this and reorient his approach a lot.

Public relations is not about shouting down critics; it is about persuasion, bridge-building, and protecting ones principal from needless controversies. For the image of Bola Ahmed Tinubu, the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, communication should not be reduced to Bolekaja street fights.

Tinubu deserves better. Nigerians deserve better. A presidency that claims to offer renewed hope should not be defined by old-school propaganda and needless quarrels. Onanuga must decide whether he wants to be a publicity merchant or a public relations strategist. He cannot be both.

Suppose he chooses the path of Bolekaja brawls. In that case, he will win applause from the mob but lose credibility where it matters most among those who judge leaders not by the noise they generate, but by the stability and respect they command.

My humble advice to every spokesperson, whether in the public service or private sector, is simple: choose PR over propaganda, strategy over sensationalism, diplomacy over denigration. For in the end, a leaders image is too precious to be squandered on avoidable verbal brawls.

As is often said in public relations, noise fades. But reputations endure.

Yushau A. Shuaib (mapra, mipra) is the author of An Encounter with the Spymaster and Award Winning Crisis Communication Strategies yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Bayo Onanuga: Between Bolakaja Publicity and Public Relations appeared first on YAShuaib.

In school, we are taught that the mediaoften described as the Fourth Estateexists to educate, inform, and serve as a watchdog for society. Yet behind this noble ideal lies a troubling reality: media narratives are frequently shaped by the interests of their proprietors, patrons, and editors. Even on deeply sensitive national issues, editorial direction can be swayed by commercial gain, political allegiance, or ethnic loyalties.

The ongoing Russia- Ukraine war, as I discussed in a recent article, starkly illustrates the hypocrisy and bias in global media coverage. Western outlets routinely suppress narratives sympathetic to President Vladimir Putin, just as some Eastern media demonise President Volodymyr Zelensky. Today, journalistic ethics are too often sacrificed for partisan interests. The once-vaunted integrity of global journalism is steadily eroding, compromised by ideological alignment and the influence of sponsors.

Sadly, the Nigerian media is no exception. Ownership and editorial control increasingly dictate which stories are amplified and mutedparticularly on issues involving ethnoreligious tension and national security.

I have always found it challenging to watch graphic footage of human brutality. The lynching of Deborah Samuel Yakubu, a Christian student accused of blasphemy in Sokoto in May 2022, remains etched in my memory. Her horrific killing received widespread media coverage, with headlines invoking religion and regional identityIslam, the North, and Christianity. In sharp contrast, that same month, Harira Jibril, a pregnant Muslim woman, and her four children were murdered in Anambra, allegedly by IPOB militants. This atrocity received scant media attention and, when reported, conspicuously lacked references to her faith or origin. The disparity reveals deep-rooted biases in our medias treatment of ethnoreligious violence.

A more recent and equally distressing case underscores this troubling trend: the lynching of Northern hunterspredominantly Hausa-speaking Muslimsin Uromi, Edo State, on Thursday, March 28, 2025. The victims, reportedly en route to Kano for Eid al-Fitr celebrations, were travelling in a truck when local vigilantes intercepted them and allegedly found dane guns. This sparked a mob attack. A harrowing video showed the men pleading for mercy as they were beaten and burned alive, while onlookers stood by with chilling indifference.

President Bola Ahmed Tinubu promptly condemned the killings, describing them as shocking and unacceptable, and ordered a thorough investigation and prosecution. He reaffirmed that jungle justice has no place in a civilised society and that all citizens have the right to move freely within the country.

Despite the horror captured on video, most national newspapers downplayed the incident. Shockingly, the atrocity was eclipsed by frivolous matters that received more prominent coverage.

On Saturday, March 29the day after the lynchingI visited the PRNigeria Centre in Abuja to review the major national dailies. To my dismay, front pages were dominated by paid advertorials celebrating President Tinubus 73rd birthday. These glossy tributes, sponsored by political allies and business elites from both the North and Southincluding High Chief Government Tompolo and Senator Abdulaziz Yari Abubakarcompletely overshadowed the tragedy in Uromi.

Newspapers like ThisDay, The Guardian, Vanguard, Saturday Sun, Saturday Telegraph, Leadership Weekend, and even Blueprint Weekend either buried the story deep within their pages or ignored it entirely. Their front pages focused on far less urgent matters: the death of Humphrey Nwosu, political wrangling in Rivers State, forest reserve issues, and women in leadership.

Only four publicationsSaturday Punch, Saturday Tribune, The Nation, and Weekend Trustgave the incident the seeming prominence it deserved, with headlines such as: FG Orders Manhunt as Outrage Trails 16 Edo Travellers Lynching, Tinubu Orders Manhunt for Killers of Hunters in Edo, Edo Killing: Police Arrest 24 as President Orders Manhunt, and How 16 Hunters Were Mobbed, Killed in Uromi.

Yet even these reports by the four newspapers omitted a critical detail: the victims were Northern Muslims. If the roles had been reversedwith Southern Christians lynched in the Norththere is little doubt that ethnic and religious profiling would have been amplified, generating widespread public outrage.

Several factors fuel this persistent media bias, including ownership influence, where proprietors and sponsors shape narratives to align with their interests; lack of diversity, as many newsrooms are dominated by personnel from a single region, leading to skewed perspectives; and commercial priorities, where advertising revenue and political patronage often outweigh the public interestas evident in the prioritisation of birthday tributes over national tragedies.

Such editorial decisions erode public trust in the media and deepen societal divisions. The press should serve as a bridge between Nigerias diverse communities, not a wedge.

It is also a public reality that Northern voices are becoming increasingly marginalised in mainstream media. Southern interests dominate most print, electronic, and online platforms. Northern elites, for their part, have failed to invest meaningfully in media ventures, often underestimating the strategic importance of media in shaping public opinion and promoting regional representation.

This recent episode underscores how media framing can shape national consciousness. When tragedies are filtered through biased lenses, they reinforce dangerous stereotypes and widen Nigerias fragile fault lines.

The Nigerian Press Organisation (NPO), Nigerian Guild of Editors (NGE), and the Guild of Corporate Online Publishers (GOCOP) must urgently address these imbalances. Proactive measuresincluding more inclusive hiring, stricter editorial guidelines, and greater accountabilityare essential. A more balanced media is not just desirable; it is vital for national cohesion.

By acknowledging the current shortcomings and advocating for ethical, sensitive journalism, we can begin to foster mutual understanding and reflect the true diversity of our nation.

As I posted on Facebook, the murder of Northerners in Edo is not only horrifyingit is a national tragedy. As we recently observed both the holy month of Ramadan and Lent, let us pray for peace and justice. But beyond prayers, we must actcollectively and conscientiouslyto prevent future ethnoreligious violence and forestall retaliatory cycles. Let wisdom prevail.

Yushau A. Shuaib
Author of Award-Winning Crisis Communication Strategies
www.YAShuaib.com, yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Media Narrative: Between Tinubus Birthday and the Lynching of Northerners in Uromi by YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

It is both shameful and appalling that despite the prolonged persecution of the Dasuki familyfrom the dethronement of Sultan of Sokoto, Alhaji Ibrahim Dasuki, to the harassment of his offspring under General Sani Abacha, forcing some into exile and the humiliation of Sambo Dasuki under former President Muhammadu Buharia fresh wave of media trials has resurfaced through an investigative report in a U.S. tabloid funded through grants.

The recent report titled “UNCOVERED: Power & Polo”, published by The Post and Courier examines how Aiken, South Carolina, a historic enclave for wealthy horse enthusiasts, has become a destination for international figures with controversial pasts, including those accused of money laundering and corruption.

While such investigative reports may be well-intentioned, their reliance on grants and donations often raises questions about their independence, depth, and objectivity. For instance, the report fixates on Sambo Dasuki, Nigeria’s former National Security Adviser, alleging that his purchase of Green Hill Farms in the early 2000s involved funds channeled through shell companies in the Bahamas and Hong Kong.

Aiken has long been a retreat for the wealthy, dating back to the 19th century when affluent personalities sought refuge from harsh climates and diseases. Its sandy terrain made it ideal for polo, attracting elite families. Today, it remains a hub for international horse lovers, including billionaires from Dubai, Russia, and Nigeria.

However, the narrative took a deliberate turn when the report linked Dasuki to Aiken, stating that he purchased Green Hill Farms in 2002 (23 years ago) for $950,000 in an apparent cash deal, allegedly raising red flags regarding the transaction’s legitimacy. The report also claimed that his wife, Farida, attempted to secure an EB-5 “golden visa” by asserting that the farm would be used for a horse-breeding businessa request allegedly denied due to questions surrounding the source of funds. Nowhere in the report, however, was it stated that Dasuki or his family faced any formal investigation regarding the purchase.

How does a legitimate business transaction from 23 years agonearly a decade before Dasuki was appointed National Security Adviser (NSA)suddenly become breaking news, especially when no U.S. authority is probing it?

What is particularly troubling is the deliberate attempt to link this 2002 transaction to Dasukis 2015 arrest in Nigeria, where he was accused of embezzling $2.1 billion meant to combat Boko Haram. This tenuous connection, spanning over a decade, is misleading and reeks of sensationalism and calculated mischief.

Surprisingly, other media outlets latched onto that angle and further distorted the story, cherry-picking sensational elements to attract readership. The entire report appears to be a rehash of the long-standing persecution of Sambo Dasuki and his family through media trials.

The reports biases are glaring. It uses derogatory language to describe Sultan Ibrahim Dasuki, a respected public figure, distinguished diplomat, and successful businessman who passed away in 2016 at the age of 92. Including the name of the Sultan appears to be an attempt to tarnish his legacy.

It is necessary to highlight that Sultan Ibrahim Dasuki was a multimillionaire industrialist, banker, and philanthropist who played pivotal roles in Nigerias political, religious, and business spheres.

A report from The Los Angeles Times (May 14, 1991) titled “The Sultan of Sokoto Bridges Two Worlds in Nigeria” described him as “a millionaire industrialist and banker.” Educated at Barewa College and Oxford University, he served as a private secretary to Sir Ahmadu Bello, was a Nigerian diplomat in Sudan and Germany, and chaired Nigeria Railways before founding BCCI Nigeria. He held a significant religious role as Secretary-General of the Nigerian Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs. He was also known as a collector of rare cars and a breeder of racing and polo horses.

Additionally, The Los Angeles Times noted how, in the early 1990s, Sultan Dasuki personally funded a $2.5 million modernization of the Sokoto palace. This underscores the established wealth of the Dasuki family. The Dasuki lineage includes politicians, public administrators, and successful businesspeople in telecommunications, real estate, shipping, and oil and gas industries.

Yet, the report deliberately ignores these facts, focusing on unverified allegations. If the investigators lacked the resources to travel to Nigeria, they could have conducted thorough research to provide a balanced perspective. Beyond ethical and quality concerns, the investigation lacked thoroughness, as it relied on hearsay regarding Boko Harams risewhich began about a decade after the alleged farm purchase.

When Dasuki became National Security Adviser in 2012, the Boko Haram insurgency was at its peak, yet Western powers offered little assistance. It is public knowledge that the U.S. and its allies hindered President Goodluck Jonathan’s counterterrorism efforts, refusing to sell arms to Nigeria under the guise of human rights concerns. This lack of support contributed to Jonathan’s political downfall, paving the way for a new government.

Rather than governing effectively, the new administration launched a selective anti-corruption campaign that demonized opposition figures while shielding its own supporters. The so-called Dasukigate scandal became a tool for political persecution, with campaign financiers of the ruling party granted immunity while opposition figures faced relentless prosecution.

The reports limited scope and depth further demonstrate its bias. It fails to address the broader context of Dasukis tenure as NSA. Despite challenges, under Dasukis leadership, the Nigerian military successfully reclaimed more than two dozen towns and communities from Boko Haram. Available records confirm the liberation of numerous cities across Adamawa, Borno, and Yobe States, including Abadam, Askira, Baga, Bama, Bara, Buni Yadi, Damboa, Dikwa, Gamboru-Ngala, Goniri, Gujba, Gulag, Gulani, Gwoza, Hong, Kala Balge, Konduga, Kukawa, Marte, Madagali, Michika, Monguno, Mubi, and Vimtim. Pictorial and video evidence of these military successes, including the rescue of 234 abductees from Sambisa Forest on April 30, 2015, remain publicly available.

While foreign military instructors, often derisively labelled mercenaries, contributed to these victories, the Nigerian militarys achievements were undeniable. Unfortunately, rather than sustaining these gains, the new administration abandoned crucial security agreements, leading to the resurgence of armed banditry and insurgency in the North-West and North-Central regions. Today, once peaceful states, such as Zamfara, Katsina, Sokoto, Kaduna, and Niger, have become epicentres of terrorisma situation far less pronounced under Dasukis leadership.

As the $2.1 billion Dasukigate case remains in court, one can only hope that the Tinubu administration allows the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), under its current chairman, Olanipekun Olukoyede, to expose the corruption of past administrations. If properly investigated, the alleged anti-corruption fight of the previous government will be revealed for what it was: a targeted assault on political opponents while shielding allies from accountability.

The disjointed narrative of The Post and Courier, the U.S. tabloidpresented in the “UNCOVERED: Power & Polo” report, is a disservice to journalism and a blatant attempt to rewrite history. It is high time we moved beyond media trials and focused on facts, fairness, and the pursuit of justice. Like Nigeria’s history, the Dasuki familys legacy deserves to be treated with respect and integrity.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the Author of An Encounter with the Spymaster yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Polo, Politics, and the Dasuki Family appeared first on YAShuaib.

Lasisi Olagunju, an esteemed columnist renowned for his incisive and thought-provoking writing, has long captivated readers with his ability to intertwine Yoruba folktales, historical references, and literary insight. His articles often critically examine Nigerias political and social landscape uniquely. Yet, even admirers like myselfa friend of over two decadesoccasionally find ourselves questioning some of his more provocative viewpoints.

Armed with a First-Class degree in English Studies and a PhD in political communication, Olagunju skillfully employs proverbs and allegorical storytelling to enrich his narratives, often embedding subtle hints that resonate with discerning readers capable of reading between the lines.

However, one area that has at times troubled me during our discussions is his candidand at times excessivecriticism of Northern Nigeria, which often extends to former President Buhari. Olagunju’s thematic collection of essays titled Cowries of Blood offers a poignant glimpse into his perspective on the Arewa region.

In his recent column, In Defence of Nepotism, Olagunju recounts a conversation with a northern friend (he didnt say I am the one) who criticised President Bola Tinubu for nepotistic appointments favouring the Yoruba. Olagunju counters this by asserting that the majority of key security appointments under Tinubu are held by northerners. His analysis appears to be informed by recent data from Sunday Dare, the newly appointed Presidential Adviser on Public Communication and Orientation. This data claims that strategic security roles are predominantly occupied by northerners, thereby challenging allegations of ethnic favouritism toward the Yoruba.

While Olagunju and Dare invoke the term “key and strategic positions” to bolster their arguments, they should note that certain statutory lead agencies hold far more critical operational and mandated significance than others.

For example, Dare’s analysis is not without its flaws. It raises eyebrows when he includes the two Defence Ministers, Muhammad Badaru and Bello Matawalle, as northern heads of agencies responsible for supervising the Army, Navy, and Air Force, yet omits the Minister of Interior, Dr. Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo from the Southwest, who oversees pivotal security agencies such as the Nigeria Security and Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC), Immigration, Prison and the Fire Services as well as the board in charge of recruitments and promotions in those agencies.

Additionally, Dare, a former Minister of Youth and Sports, makes a confusing classification by listing the National Youth Service Corps (NYSC) and the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit (NFIU) as security agencies led by northerners. Haba! This stretch of the concept of security agencies beyond their traditional confines further fuels scepticism regarding the credibility of his claims.

While Dares narrative may appear disingenuous, Olagunju’s assertion that Nigeria is geopolitically divided into three regionsSouth, West, and Northis laughable.

Emerging analyses, such as a recent report by PRNigeria, present a more nuanced view of security leadership distribution across Nigeria’s six geopolitical zones: Northwest, Northeast, Northcentral, Southwest, Southeast, and South-South.

Olagunjus perspectives on nepotism extend beyond mere data analysis. He argues that nepotism, often viewed negatively, can be a pragmatic strategy for leaders navigating Nigeria’s complex ethno-regional landscape. He traces the pattern of regional favouritism in appointments back to previous administrations.

A particularly striking claim from Olagunju posits that former President Olusegun Obasanjo strategically appointed primarily Southern and Northern Christians to sensitive security positions to mitigate perceived threats to his administration.

Olagunju notes, “Obasanjo had three Inspectors-General of Police, and all three were from his western region (Yoruba). His DG SSS from 1999 to 2007 was Colonel Kayode Are, his Abeokuta kinsman. For the army, Obasanjo, a Southern Christian, in eight years, had four gentlemen as his Chief of Army Staff. He started in 1999 with Victor Malu, a Christian from the North; then he moved south and picked Alexander Ogomudia, a Southern minority. After two years, two months, Obasanjo took the position back to the North but did not give it to those who might use it to injure him. He picked Martin Luther Agwai, a Southern Kaduna minority Christian. Three years later, he went south again and selected Andrew Owoye Azazi, another Southern minority. He was clearly deliberate about what he did, mixing his nationalist broth with condiments of small nepotism here a little altruism there. The Obasanjo experience ended almost twenty years ago. This is the age of reason, with an apology to Thomas Paine. The gloves are off.”

However, as Olagunju emphasises this troubling narrative, it raises pertinent questions: Are Northern Muslims seen as potential threats capable of undermining any sitting president? Does this atmosphere of distrust underpin Tinubu’s preference for predominantly Yoruba Christian leadership within critical security agencies?

Despite being a Muslim, President Tinubu has entrusted the most influential security and economic positions predominantly to Yoruba Christians from the Southwest. Notable examples include the Acting Chief of Army Staff, Lt. Gen. Olufemi Oluyode; Inspector General of Police, Kayode Egbetokun; Director General of the DSS, Adeola Ajayi; and EFCC Chairman, Olanipekun Olukayede, who all lead front-line agencies in military, security, intelligence, and anti-corruption efforts.

Similarly, key national economic positions are held by Yoruba Christians from the South-West, such as the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Yemi Cardoso; the powerful Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), Zacch Adedeji; and the Minister of Finance and Coordinating Minister of the Economy, Wale Edun.

Olagunjus analysis deepens when he alludes to the power dynamics within Tinubus administration. He provocatively suggests uncertainty surrounding who truly holds powerwhether it is President Tinubu, his wife Remi Tinubu, an ordained senior pastor in the Redeemed Christian Church of God (RCCG), or even their son and close associates.

This observation leads to a broader concern about the direction of Nigerias democracy. Could this also reflect the agitation of Yoruba Muslims who feel underrepresented in Tinubus administration?

Olagunju further predicts impending leadership changes, particularly regarding the next Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) chairman. He argues that Tinubu’s choice is likely to reflect home-region bias, echoing the missteps of previous leaders. He warns that unlike President Goodluck Jonathanwho appointed a non-regional INEC chairman to his detrimentTinubu will likely prioritize regional loyalty in this critical appointment in 2025.

The implications of nepotism in Nigerias leadership are profound. Every moment a leader prioritizes ethnicity over competence is a moment that edges the nation closer to instability. If certain groups are deemed untrustworthy for critical appointments, how can they, in turn, trust the administration with their votes?

Ultimately, every moment spent fostering nepotism over competence distances Nigeria from effective governance. Leaders must embrace inclusivity and meritocracy to nurture trust and collaboration among all regions and ethnicities. Only then can Nigeria aspire to realise its full potential as a united nation.

Yushau A. Shuaib
www.YAShuaib.com, yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Security Sector: Olagunju, Dare and Nepotism in Appointments appeared first on YAShuaib.

The recent submission of four executive bills to the National Assembly by President Bola Tinubu has sparked intense debate. President Bola Tinubu’s recent submission of four executive tax reform bills to the National Assembly has sparked heated debate. Central to the controversy is Zacch Adedeji, Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), whose clarifications on the reforms have yet to clear the air but intensified discussions.

At first glance, the four bills appear to serve distinct purposes: The Nigeria Tax Bill seeks to harmonise various tax laws to reduce multiplicity; the Nigeria Tax Administration Bill focuses on standardising tax processes and compliance requirements; the Nigeria Revenue Service Bill aims to replace the FIRS Act and establish a National Revenue Service (NRS) to be responsible for collecting both domestic and international revenues; and the Joint Revenue Board Bill will create a framework for resolving revenue conflicts between states and local governments.

A key aspect of these proposals involves replacing the FIRS with the NRS, which would become a central and most powerful revenue service in the history of Nigeria with the task of being the only agency responsible for collecting all government revenues, including those currently managed by other agencies in oil, customs, and port and other sectors. It will be more powerful and influential than the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and Nigeria National Petroleum Company NNPC and others.

Another contentious point is the proposed Value Added Tax (VAT) distribution model. Under the new framework, states receiving VAT collections would retain significant revenue. However, some northern leaders fear this model will disproportionately benefit states where companies are headquartered rather than those where goods and services are consumed.

In a statement from Alhaji Muhammad Inuwa Yahaya, Gombe State’s Governor and Chairman of the Northern Governors Forum, northern governors opposed the proposed derivation-based VAT distribution model, citing concerns that it would disadvantage their states.

They urged National Assembly members to reject any legislation perceived as unfavourable to any region of the country. The communiqu stated: The Forum is concerned by the recent Tax Reform Bill sent to the National Assembly, especially the proposed shift to a derivation-based VAT distribution model, which disadvantages the North.

The governors reaffirmed their commitment to national development while emphasising the need for equity in policy implementation to prevent any geopolitical zone from feeling marginalised.

Consequently, the following day, the National Economic Council (NEC), chaired by Vice President Kashim Shettima, recommended President Tinubu withdraw the Tax Reform Bills from the National Assembly. The NEC convened for its 144th meeting at the State House in Abuja, where state governors and Federal Executive Council members, including Finance Minister Wale Edun and Budget and National Planning Minister Abubakar Bagudu, participated.

Oyo State Governor Seyi Makinde remarked that the council recognised the necessity for further understanding and alignment on the bills, emphasising that more comprehensive consultation would be in the nations best interest.

Despite this recommendation by Nigerian governors and federal cabinet members in NEC, President Tinubu asserted that he would not withdraw the proposed tax reform bills. His spokesperson, Bayo Onanuga, indicated that the president believes the legislative process should continue, allowing room for input and adjustments through public hearings.

Tinubu remains committed to reforming Nigerias tax system. Through these proposed bills, the government aims to streamline tax administration, enhance efficiency, and align with global best practices. The billsthe Nigeria Tax Bill, Nigeria Tax Administration Bill, Nigeria Revenue Service (Establishment) Bill, and Joint Revenue Board Establishment Billseek to unify tax processes, reduce overlapping responsibilities, and simplify compliance for both businesses and individuals.

It is widely believed that Zacch Adedeji, as the Executive Chairman of the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS), is the driving force behind these reform proposals. His educational background, prior positions, and current role have established him as one of the most influential figures in Tinubu’s administration.

Born on January 8, 1978, in Ogbomosho, Oyo State, Adedeji graduated with first-class honors in Accountancy from Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife, where he also obtained his Masters and PhD in the same field. He began his professional journey at Procter & Gamble (P&G) as Corporate Finance Manager for West Africa and later as Finance Leader for SAP Implementation. He also served as Finance Commissioner in Oyo State under Governor Isiaka Ajimobi (20112015). He was appointed Executive Secretary of the National Sugar Development Council (NSDC) by President Muhammadu Buhari before becoming the Executive Chairman of FIRS under President Tinubu.

While his political ambition is fuzzyhaving avoided any major controversysome suspect his positions on tax reform and proposed legislation harbour hidden agendas. In light of these concerns, he proactively engaged with members of the National Assembly following the submission of the bills. He addressed both the Senate Committee on Finance, chaired by Senator Sani Musa, and the House of Representatives Committee, led by Hon. James Faleke.

Adedeji articulated the reforms’ goals, emphasising the need to harmonise existing tax laws, streamline administration, and align Nigerias tax system with global standards. He conveyed that the reforms aim to consolidate disparate tax laws and enhance transparency while improving efficiency in revenue collection. He highlighted that these changes would modernise Nigerias tax system, adapt to the realities of the digital economy, and position the country attractively for investment. He confirmed that no additional taxes would be introduced, aligning with President Tinubu’s commitment to not taxing poverty and inflation.

However, until the full details of the bills are made public, speculation will undoubtedly continue. The discrepancy between President Tinubu’s stance and Vice President Shettima-led NEC’s recommendation only adds to the confusion.

The contradictory stance of FEC and NEC is indeed puzzling, especially considering the All Progressive Congress (APC) controls governance at the national and state levels. A unified and diplomatic approach would have been more effective in addressing the tax reform proposals unless the drama was a deliberate script for political purposes.

As the debate continues, Adedejis true intentions and the broader impact of these reforms on Nigerias economy remain in question. The outcome will undoubtedly shape the nation’s economic trajectory.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the publisher of PRNigeria and Economic Confidential. yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post FEC vs. NEC: What Does Zaccheus Adedeji of FIRS Want? By YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

Its shocking and laughable that ruling parties, which barely secured victories in gubernatorial elections, are now winning local government council elections by landslides.

In some states, even parties that had never won elections are sweeping council seats, often at the behest of influential governors seeking to undermine their political rivals. For instance,Governor Siminalayi Fubara of Rivers State exemplifies how to win elections despite lacking support from traditional power brokers.

The abuse of local government councils by state governors in Nigeria is a pressing concern that threatens the very foundation of our democratic structure. While the Federal Government ensures timely disbursement of funds to all tiers of government through the Federation Account Allocation Committee (FAAC), the reality is that many governors exert undue control over local government resources. This is particularly evident in the misuse of the State Local Government Joint Accounts (SLGJA), which, though intended to streamline funding, often become instruments of financial manipulation at the state level.

Recognising that the Federal Government guarantees each tier of government its statutory allocations, state governors have no legitimate reason to deny local councils their rightful share. This was underscored by the landmark Supreme Court ruling on July 11, 2024, which mandated direct federal allocation for elected councils to curb gubernatorial interference in local government finances.

However, with limited access to local government revenue after the ruling, many governors swiftly orchestrated elections to consolidate control over council positions and finances. The predictable results have seen ruling parties dominate the polls in nearly every state. These so-called victories do little to inspire confidence, as the elected officials often act as mere extensions of gubernatorial power.

The lack of genuine competition is hardly surprising, given that the governor’s appointees manage each State Independent Electoral Commission (SIEC). The recent wave of local elections follows a clear pattern: handpicked candidates of the preferred parties consistently win and easily claim the titles of LG chairpersons and councillors through questionable processes, often coordinated behind the scenes by the governors.

While one might expect an outcry over the shambolic LG elections, only a few voices have raised concerns. The election observation group Yiaga Africa recently highlighted the troubling development and recommended civic education, genuine competition and a transparent electoral process. Unfortunately, the entrenched realities make these ideals’ recommendations almost unattainable.

These actions of some of the governors threaten to undermine the legitimacy of future elections, including gubernatorial and presidential contests. It would not be surprising if President Bola Ahmed Tinubu faced pressure to replicate this manipulative election strategy of governors in the 2027 general elections. The logic is simple: if governors can manipulate elections to their advantage with relative ease, why shouldnt the president do the same at the national level?

Sadly, disobedience to court orders and manipulation of local judges are similarly rampant at the state level, rendering adjudications predictable. For instance, some state-controlled courts of justice, which handle local mattersincluding traditional issues and chieftaincy titlesfunction as extensions of their governors, lacking genuine impartiality and integrity.

The stronghold of governors on local governance is unmistakable, surpassing the President’s influence over state administrations as they wield significant control despite judicial efforts to safeguard local autonomy.”

Meanwhile, under Tinubus federal administration, the Supreme Court has acted as an independent arbiter, often favouring opposition parties. For instance, following the last general elections and rulings of tribunals, the apex court upheld the victories of opposition candidates, including Governor Abba Yusuf of the New Nigerian Peoples Party (NNPP) in Kano, Governor Caleb Mutfwang of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Plateau, and Governor Alex Otti of the Labour Party (LP) in Abia among others.

While the Supreme Court’s mandate for direct funding is a positive step, governors’ continued dominance over local governments is still apparent. Yet, the Federal Government continues the transparent disbursements of statutory allocations to states without interference. Why can’t state governments reciprocate such by ensuring local governments receive their fair share of internally generated revenue (IGR) without also encroaching on their legitimate federal allocations?

The conduct of governors may have set a worrying precedent and questioned their commitment to fiscal federalism and the principles of local governance.

I strongly urge the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Lateef Fagbemi, and the Finance Minister, Mr. Wale Edun, to take decisive action to protect local governments’ administrative and financial rights. They must implement mechanisms to ensure local councils have political autonomy and receive their financial entitlements without the risk of misappropriation by state authorities.

Local governments must be granted full political and economic autonomy to function effectively as the grassroots arm of governance. The future of our democratic governance hinges on the equitable treatment of all tiers of government, ensuring that local councils can genuinely serve their communities with the resources they rightfully deserve.

For Nigerias democracy to thrive, we must hold local elections to a higher standard. Despite its flaws, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) still performs better than SIECs, whose inefficiency and bias are becoming more apparent.

The debate over federalism versus centralisation will undoubtedly arise. However, a balance between federal and state powers is essential. If reforming SIECs proves unfeasible, INEC oversight may be necessary to safeguard democratic governance at the local level.

If citizens remain silent on recent flawed local elections conducted by some state governments, they should equally accept potentially compromised gubernatorial and presidential elections that the federal government could conduct in the future, possibly in 2027. After all, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander.

Yushau A. Shuaib, publisher of PRNigeria and Economic Confidential
yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Shambolic Local Elections: Are Governors Setting ‘Standard’ for Tinubu’s 2027 Re-Election Strategy? By YAShuaib appeared first on YAShuaib.

The recent attempts to forcibly remove the Chairman of the Code of Conduct Tribunal (CCT), Justice Danladi Yakubu Umar, are profoundly troubling and raise serious concerns about the independence of our key democratic institutions.

According to a highly placed source, there is an apparent plot to force Justice Umar to resign or invade his official residence to install a successor. This would be a blatant violation of the constitutional provisions governing the appointment and removal of the CCT Chairman.

One may easily nurse the fear that the raiding of official residences of some judges during the administration of President Muhammadu Buhari could be replayed under the President Bola Tinubu government.

It would be recalled that in October 2016, Nigeria’s judiciary was plunged into crisis as operatives of the Department of State Security Services (DSS) raided the homes of senior judges in Abuja, Port Harcourt, and Gombe, intimidating them and their families.

At least two targeted judges had previously ruled against the DSS, condemning its disobedience to court orders and lawless actions. The situation drew comparisons to the military era and widespread outrage, with the Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) declaring a state of emergency and calling for the release of detained judges.

Those behind the attempt to remove Umar by hook or crook should realise that the 1999 Constitution (as amended) stipulates that the CCT Chairman and Members are appointed by the President upon the recommendation of the National Judicial Council (NJC), which must have received advice from the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC). The recent announcement of Dr. Mainasara Umar Kogo by a Presidential Spokesperson, Ajuri Ngelale, as the new CCT Chairman did not follow this due process.

Furthermore, the Constitution states that the President can only remove the CCT Chairman and Members upon an address supported by a two-thirds majority of each House of the National Assembly (Senate and House of Representatives) and only on the grounds of inability to discharge functions. The incumbent Chairman, Justice Umar, is in his 50s and does not meet the age requirement for mandatory retirement.

Renowned legal experts, such as Professor Mamman Lawan Yusufari, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), have strongly criticised the government’s actions as a clear breach of the Constitution. Yusufari, a former Dean of Faculty Law at Bayero University Kano (BUK), emphasised that the legislature must approve the removal of the CCT Chairman, citing acceptable constitutional grounds such as inability to perform functions or misconduct.

Justice Umar has a reputation for being a courageous and impartial jurist. He has presided over several high-profile cases involving national assembly leadership, governors, top judicial officers, and other public officials. Notably, he discharged and acquitted the then-opposition leader, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu, of false declaration of assets and operation of foreign accounts in 2012 after listening to both sides of lawyers’ arguments and despite facing external pressure to convict him.

It was suspected that Tinubu’s prosecution at the tribunal was a bid to block his presidential ambition because Section 137(1)(e) of the Constitution states that “A person shall not be qualified for election to the office of President if, within a period of less than ten years before the date of the election, he has been convicted and sentenced for an offence involving dishonesty or has been found guilty of contravening the Code of Conduct.”

After the acquittal, Umar publicly admitted that he faced external pressure to convict the former Lagos State Governor during the trial. He said: “I was under immense influence to convict Tinubu, but I defied the pressure and upheld justice. I swear by the Almighty Allah to do justice. External forces did not sway us, and our judgment was based on the law.”

Furthermore, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) cleared Umar of corruption allegations in separate letters dated March 5, 2015, and April 20, 2016. The then Chairman Ibrahim Lamorde signed the first letter during the Jonathan administration, while the then Secretary, Emmanuel Adegboyega, signed the second letter during the Buhari administration when Ibrahim Magu was the acting Chairman.

Resorting to underhanded tactics to forcibly sack Justice Umar would not only be undemocratic, but it could also set a dangerous precedent that could undermine the independence of our key institutions. Unless there is compelling evidence of serious wrongdoing, following established rules or allowing the CCT chair to serve his term is the proper action.

President Tinubu must resist the pressure from any cabal and uphold the rule of law. The citizenry deserve to have confidence in our institutions’ integrity, which can only be achieved through a steadfast commitment to due process and the Constitution. The President and the Attorney General, Lateef Fagbemi, should ensure that Justice Umar is not forced out through undemocratic means.

The Secretary to the Government, George Akume, and the President’s Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila, must ensure that all appointments are thoroughly scrutinised and follow due process before announcements. This is crucial to prevent appointments that may breach the constitution or violate the law, thereby upholding the principles of transparency, accountability, and good governance.

The newly sworn-in Acting Chief Justice of the Federation, Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, hailing from Lagos, bears a significant responsibility to safeguard the independence of the CCT and uphold the integrity of the judiciary as a whole.

It is imperative that she prioritizes the protection of these institutions at all costs, ensuring that they remain free from undue influence and operate in accordance with the principles of justice, fairness, and the rule of law. Any compromise on this front would be a profound disservice to the Nigerian people and a betrayal of our democratic ideals, undermining the very foundationsofournation.

Yushau A. Shuaib is the publisher of PRNigeria
yashuaib@yashuaib.com

The post Danladi Umar: Is Tinubu aware of the plot against CCT Chairman? appeared first on YAShuaib.

The hurriedly declared resolution of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) to deploy troops to restore democracy and reinstate the ousted President Mohamed Bazoum of Niger Republic, after the military takeover of power on the 26th of July, might have been influenced by the need to avoid foreign interventions that could lead to the kinds of destruction and agony evident in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Sudan, and elsewhere.

In its keen and swift desire for a resolution to the crisis, President Bola Tinubu, on behalf of ECOWAS, raised special envoys, comprising former Nigerian leader, General Abdulsalam Abubakar; the Sultan of Sokoto, Muhammad Abubakar III and the president of the ECOWAS Commission, Alieu Touray, to mediate in the unfolding crisis in Niger. Unfortunately, the Nigerien Coup leader, Abdourahmane Tchiani, snubbed the ECOWAS delegation by refusing to receive them, even though he later received the former Emir of Kano, Sanusi Lamido Sanusi. It was quite disheartening that the official delegation was not even given access to leave the airport in Niamey in the endeavour to meet with Tchiani and Bazoum.

It is gratifying that Tinubu subsequently constituted another powerful delegation, comprising top Islamic clerics, to open talks with the junta in Niger, which has now agreed to dialogue with the ECOWAS on the way forward in the country.

The latest action by ECOWAS is possibly to checkmate what appears to be an evolving annual ritual, evident in the past three years, in which military personnel in Francophone countries in the subregion are overthrowing democratically elected leaders. The coup plotters removed Presidents Ibrahim Boubacar Keita of Mali in 2020, Alpha Cond of Guinea in 2021, Roch Marc Christian Kabor of Burkina Faso in 2022 and now President Mohamad Bazoum of Niger in 2023.

The military juntas, led by Colonel Assimi Gota in Mali, Colonel Mamady Doumbouya in Guinea, and Captain Ibrahim Traor in Burkina Faso, were mostly trained by the U.S. In fact, Goita and Doumbouya attended a 2019 US military training exercise in Burkina Faso. Surprisingly after taking over, they also drove away French troops and allegedly invited Russian mercenary forces in as their replacement.

While increasing complaints about poor governance, escalating poverty and insecurity are often cited for the coups, a deeper factor is the geopolitics of resource access and control. This involves foreign interests desires to explore and control the abundant mineral resources of West African nations. Hence, the ascendant tension in Niger and the wider subregion are impelled by the imperialist and economic rivalry between the East and the West.

As it is now, if appropriate steps are not taken to defuse the budding conflict in Niger Republic, the ongoing proxy war between Russia and NATO/USA over Ukraine, can easily creep into West Africa, where diverse groups of mercenaries and Western Special Forces are already stationed across different locations, and with the military bases just waiting for instructions from their commanders for armed actions to break out.

In many instances, military actions and interventions are not only carried out on battlegrounds but they are first activated in the minds of the public through crude propaganda. The conflict in Ukraine, for instance, exposes how the Western media essentially display their extreme biases in reportage, as they engage in psychological warfare, propagating one-sided and selective facts, while censoring counterclaims and obvious facts. Rather than striving for fair, conflict-sensitive, and objective reports towards the promotion of peace, they are advancing a highly inflammatory and pernicious form of war journalism and thereby escalating the crises in the process. This appears to be working to certain ends.

A similar instance of this that we should never forget in a hurry is the conspiracy involving the Western media over the so-called accumulation of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and the democratisation campaign in Libya, which led to the elimination of the leaders of the two mentioned countries, Saddam Hussein and Muammar Ghadafi, and to the death of scores of innocent citizens through the aggression of the allied forces and NATO.

In considering the unfortunate case of poor Ukraine, which has become the battleground for the flexing of muscles between Russian mercenaries and Western (US/NATO) Special Forces with attendant devastation that would take several years, if not decades, to recover from care should be seriously taken so that West Africa does not become next theatre of a proxy war between foreign powers driven by agenda that is far from the liberation of the subregion and larger continent from their debilitating challenges.

Although the Russian government does not have military bases in Africa like US and France that represents NATO do, its presence is strongly felt through the activities of the Wagner Group of armed mercenaries, which executes the governments military cooperation agreements, especially in a number of West African states.

While Wagners fighters are hired by African leaders for regime protection and to consolidate their holds on power, the Group, founded by Yevgeny Prigozhin as a private military company, operates with the permission of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The mercenaries are hired to suppress dissent, guard natural resources, engage in direct combat with adversaries, bolster weak official military forces, and explore newer areas of strategic vulnerability towards rooting out the Wests declining influence in many sensitive spots around the world. Of its numerous engagements, the Wagner Group is more keenly involved in providing security cover for well-laden but remote mineral sites that are often under the constant threat of non-state actors.

Meanwhile, as mercenaries are having their ways in the African region, NATO through the US continues to carry out joint military exercises with other allies and partners in contiguous territorial spaces within the region. For instance, the US Africa Command (USAFRICOM), headquartered in Stuttgart, Germany (another NATO member), is one of the US Department of Defense combatant commands, with a geographic or functional mission that provides for the command and control of military forces for peace and war. It has military bases in select African countries.

In the West African rim of the Sahel, for instance, the United States under President Joe Biden has two military bases in Niger Air Base 101 in Niamey, and Air Base 201 in Agadez, which was constructed at the cost of $110 million. The American interventions in Niger have included the deployment of special operations forces, unmanned aerial vehicles and drones by its Air Force, while the CIA has engaged in counter-terrorism operations.

After its ejection from the other francophone countries in West Africa, France (NATO member), with the support of America, has reinforced its presence in Niger and despatched hundreds of its operatives to the southwest of the country, towards the Malian border. Niger previously served mainly as a transit base for Frances operations in Mali.

And just recently, precisely in May 2023, in a new strategic partnership, Niger accepted 1,500 French soldiers on its soil to bolster its armed forces, at a time of a great security threat. Before then the European Union (EU) had accepted the call from Nigers parliament to station special operations forces (SOF) in the country in order to counter its problems of insecurity. Note that the security of EU and NATO are inter-connected having respectively 27 and 31 member states, of which 22 states are members of both.

It is also worth noting that the US and French Special Forces have jointly and discreetly undertaken major military operations within the ECOWAS region. It could be recalled that at some point the US special forces secretly came into Nigeria and killed several kidnappers while rescuing a 27-year-old American citizen, Philip Walton, who was abducted in Niger in 2020.

Similarly, during the Tongo Tongo ambush in 2017, when armed terrorists attacked US and Nigerien soldiers in an ambush, French aircraft swiftly responded to this and brought the fire-fight to an end. Although some Americans and Nigeriens were killed during the military intervention, many soldiers actually survived that operation.

While ECOWAS is struggling to ensure that the Niger crisis is resolved amicably, some Nigerians are unmindful of their provocative behaviours and statements. It is quite shameful that those who never experienced a civil war or a military coup, are the ones clamouring for a military intervention in the worlds most populous black nation on the basis of myopic sentiments. Any attempt to disrupt the current democratic administration, under the leadership of President Ahmed Bola Tinubu, will not only lead to the dissolution of the country but would unleash on each region monumental security challenges that it barely has the capacity to contend with. Imagine an explosion of terrorism in the North-East, banditry in the North-West, kidnappings in the North-Central, volatile militancy in the South-South, violent secessionist agitation in the South-East, and cultism in the South-West. No single region will be willing to stick its neck out in furtherance of any campaign for a united country thereafter.

In a nutshell, I agree with the recent position of the Arewa Economic Forum (AEC) supporting the deepening of democratic principles in the subregion and urging ECOWAS to allow the socio-economic reality of Nigeriens to govern their choices. While suggesting that sanctions should be targeted at the military junta and its cronies, the Forum yet admonished that ways have to be found to protect innocent citizens, especially vulnerable people, including traders, women and children, from these penalties.

Being one of the poorest nations on earth, any further deterioration of the precarious living conditions of Nigeriens would activate hordes of new migrations into Nigeria for succour, which will invariably burden our current economic situation and put further pressure on our scarce national resources.

All said, Nigeria must avoid going into a new war when the country is yet to contain ISWAP-Boko Haram terrorism and the pervasive acts of banditry, especially along the Northern corridor. Dialogue and diplomacy should be sustained towards resolving not only the Nigerien but also the ECOWAS crises.

Yushau A. Shuaib, author of “An Encounter with the Spymaster” and “Award Winning Crisis Communication Strategies” www.YAShuaib.com yashuaib@yahoo.com

The post Niger Coup: On Russian Mercenaries, NATO Forces and Looming Proxy Wars in ECOWAS appeared first on YAShuaib.