TodayPrice

Category: Colums

  • Militocracy: The return of Sole Administrators in Nigeria, by Olu Fasan

    Militocracy: The return of Sole Administrators in Nigeria, by Olu Fasan

    The President of Nigeria, Bola Tinubu, is a civilian. The “governor” of Rivers State, Vice-Admiral (rtd) Ibok-Ete Ibas, is a military officer who rules the state as its Sole Administrator. Last week, the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, Lateef Fagbemi, said that Tinubu would “not hesitate” to declare a state of emergency in more states, remove more elected governors and install more retired military officers as Sole Administrators. And, of course, the National Assembly would not hesitate to approve such proclamations with a voice vote, as it did on Rivers State, thereby entrenching Sole Administrators across the country. Who says Nigeria is a democracy? Of course, it is not. Far from it!

    Indeed, in its annual Democracy Index, the Economist Intelligence Unit, EIU, never refers to Nigeria as a “democracy”; rather, it consistently refers to Nigeria as a “regime”, specifically, a “hybrid regime”. The word “hybrid” means something that is not pure-bred but composed of two different elements. Thus, Nigeria is a hybrid regime because it is a mix of autocracy and democracy. In truth, what Nigeria practises today, under Tinubu, is a diarchy, a government consisting of elements of militocracy and democracy.

    The last time Nigeria had a diarchic government was under the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida, Tinubu’s mentor – recall that, recently, Tinubu said Babangida influenced him to enter politics. Under the Babangida regime, General Babangida himself and members of the Armed Forces Ruling Council, AFRC, ruled the country, while civilians ruled the states as governors and assembly members, although Babangida and the AFRC kept watchful eyes on them. Under Tinubu’s diarchy, he and members of the National Assembly (elected civilians) rule the country, while an unelected retired military officer rules Rivers State as the Sole Administrator, albeit taking orders from Tinubu, the magisterial president.

    As noted earlier, the AGF, Lateef Fagbemi, has laid down the marker and nailed the Tinubu administration’s colours to the mast. Threateningly, the AGF said: “It is Rivers State’s turn today; it can be anybody’s turn tomorrow.” Now, if Fagbemi is right, and Tinubu is ready to declare a state of emergency in more states, sack more elected governors and state lawmakers and appoint more Sole Administrators, then Nigeria must brace itself for a full diarchy, with Sole Administrators mushrooming across the country! A boon to retired military officers!

    Since its independence in 1960, Nigeria has had four Sole Administrators under civil rule. The first was in 1962 when the Tafawa Balewa administration removed the Premier of Western Region, following a political crisis in the region, and appointed Moses Majekodunmi, a medical doctor, as the Sole Administrator. The Balewa government acted under the Emergency Powers Act of 1961, enacted under the 1960 Constitution.

    In 2004, President Obasanjo installed General (rtd) Chris Ali as Nigeria’s second Sole Administrator after using an emergency rule to remove Governor Joshua Dariye of Plateau State from office. Obasanjo’s Attorney-General, Akin Olujinmi, claimed the emergency rule was declared under the Emergency Powers Act of 1961. But given that the 1960 Constitution from which the act derived its enabling powers had become defunct, the act itself had no legs to stand on. Chief Rotimi Williams, whose committee drafted the 1979 Constitution, on which the 1999 Constitution is based, said unequivocally: “There is no provision contained in any part of our Constitution which confers such a power on the President.” Several renowned constitutional lawyers and scholars agreed with him. But Obasanjo was undeterred. Two years later, in 2006, he invoked the same 1961 act to remove Governor Ayo Fayose of Ekiti State from office and install Brigadier-General Tunji Olurin as Nigeria’s third Sole Administrator.

    Of course, Obasanjo, a former military dictator, has never pretended to be a democrat. Several decades ago, Obasanjo called for a one-party system in Africa. Years later, as a civilian president from 1999 to 2007, he ruled Nigeria with undisguised authoritarianism and even attempted to change the Constitution to run for a third term in office. Today, Obasanjo says “Western Democracy” has failed in Africa, and calls, instead, for “Afro Democracy”!

    But here’s the point: Obasanjo’s emergency rule proclamations in 2004 and 2006 were unconstitutional and should never be a precedent that any president, who claims to be a democrat, should follow. President Jonathan wisely avoided it, but Tinubu enthusiastically embraces it. He installed Nigeria’s fourth Sole Administrator and, going by Fagbemi’s threat, he is willing to sack more elected governors and install more Sole Administrators. Why?

    Truth is, Tinubu is a civilian in a military toga. For decades, he beguiled Nigerians into believing he was a democrat who fought for democracy and against military rule. He ferociously condemned all previous emergency rule proclamations since 1999. But in power, as governor and now president, Tinubu rules as an autocrat. Read Professor Erica Frantz’s book, Authoritarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know, and you will see Tinubu in every page. Authoritarians surround themselves with sycophants, praise-singers and hero-worshippers; they have a messianic mentality, believing they are a living embodiment of the people; and they operate according to their own rules, not the rule of law. Furthermore, they subscribe to the Machiavellian laws of power, as Robert Greene sets out in his book, The 48 Laws of Power!

    Think about it. Within less than two years in powers, Tinubu has had five national monuments named after him. He has totally captured and neutered the National Assembly and coopted the judiciary. On his first day in office, he declared abruptly: “Subsidy is gone”; a few months later, he changed the National Anthem within days; and now he declared a state of emergency, replacing a state’s democratically elected governor and legislature with an unelected Sole Administrator. He did all these with absolutely no regard for consensus-building, for due process, for the rule of law and for constitutionality. What’s more, his attorney-general is threatening fire and brimstone: “Mr President will do it again,” Fagbemi said, adding: “This time with even greater vigour and vitality.” Wow! What a country!

    There is a saying that when a government fears the people, there is liberty; but when a people fear their government, there is tyranny. Tinubu wants Nigerians to fear him and his government. Yet, here’s a president who was elected with just 36.6 per cent of the popular vote, thereby rejected by 63.4 per cent of the electorate! He lacks the mandate and the legitimacy to exercise powers without restraints. He’s overreaching himself.

    The President of Nigeria, Bola Tinubu, is a civilian. The “governor” of Rivers State, Vice-Admiral (rtd) Ibok-Ete Ibas, is a military officer who rules the state as its Sole Administrator. Last week, the Attorney-General of the Federation, AGF, Lateef Fagbemi, said that Tinubu would “not hesitate” to declare a state of emergency in more states, remove more elected governors and install more retired military officers as Sole Administrators. And, of course, the National Assembly would not hesitate to approve such proclamations with a voice vote, as it did on Rivers State, thereby entrenching Sole Administrators across the country. Who says Nigeria is a democracy? Of course, it is not. Far from it!

    Indeed, in its annual Democracy Index, the Economist Intelligence Unit, EIU, never refers to Nigeria as a “democracy”; rather, it consistently refers to Nigeria as a “regime”, specifically, a “hybrid regime”. The word “hybrid” means something that is not pure-bred but composed of two different elements. Thus, Nigeria is a hybrid regime because it is a mix of autocracy and democracy. In truth, what Nigeria practises today, under Tinubu, is a diarchy, a government consisting of elements of militocracy and democracy.

    The last time Nigeria had a diarchic government was under the regime of General Ibrahim Babangida, Tinubu’s mentor – recall that, recently, Tinubu said Babangida influenced him to enter politics. Under the Babangida regime, General Babangida himself and members of the Armed Forces Ruling Council, AFRC, ruled the country, while civilians ruled the states as governors and assembly members, although Babangida and the AFRC kept watchful eyes on them. Under Tinubu’s diarchy, he and members of the National Assembly (elected civilians) rule the country, while an unelected retired military officer rules Rivers State as the Sole Administrator, albeit taking orders from Tinubu, the magisterial president.

    As noted earlier, the AGF, Lateef Fagbemi, has laid down the marker and nailed the Tinubu administration’s colours to the mast. Threateningly, the AGF said: “It is Rivers State’s turn today; it can be anybody’s turn tomorrow.” Now, if Fagbemi is right, and Tinubu is ready to declare a state of emergency in more states, sack more elected governors and state lawmakers and appoint more Sole Administrators, then Nigeria must brace itself for a full diarchy, with Sole Administrators mushrooming across the country! A boon to retired military officers!

    Since its independence in 1960, Nigeria has had four Sole Administrators under civil rule. The first was in 1962 when the Tafawa Balewa administration removed the Premier of Western Region, following a political crisis in the region, and appointed Moses Majekodunmi, a medical doctor, as the Sole Administrator. The Balewa government acted under the Emergency Powers Act of 1961, enacted under the 1960 Constitution.

    In 2004, President Obasanjo installed General (rtd) Chris Ali as Nigeria’s second Sole Administrator after using an emergency rule to remove Governor Joshua Dariye of Plateau State from office. Obasanjo’s Attorney-General, Akin Olujinmi, claimed the emergency rule was declared under the Emergency Powers Act of 1961. But given that the 1960 Constitution from which the act derived its enabling powers had become defunct, the act itself had no legs to stand on. Chief Rotimi Williams, whose committee drafted the 1979 Constitution, on which the 1999 Constitution is based, said unequivocally: “There is no provision contained in any part of our Constitution which confers such a power on the President.” Several renowned constitutional lawyers and scholars agreed with him. But Obasanjo was undeterred. Two years later, in 2006, he invoked the same 1961 act to remove Governor Ayo Fayose of Ekiti State from office and install Brigadier-General Tunji Olurin as Nigeria’s third Sole Administrator.

    Of course, Obasanjo, a former military dictator, has never pretended to be a democrat. Several decades ago, Obasanjo called for a one-party system in Africa. Years later, as a civilian president from 1999 to 2007, he ruled Nigeria with undisguised authoritarianism and even attempted to change the Constitution to run for a third term in office. Today, Obasanjo says “Western Democracy” has failed in Africa, and calls, instead, for “Afro Democracy”!

    But here’s the point: Obasanjo’s emergency rule proclamations in 2004 and 2006 were unconstitutional and should never be a precedent that any president, who claims to be a democrat, should follow. President Jonathan wisely avoided it, but Tinubu enthusiastically embraces it. He installed Nigeria’s fourth Sole Administrator and, going by Fagbemi’s threat, he is willing to sack more elected governors and install more Sole Administrators. Why?

    Truth is, Tinubu is a civilian in a military toga. For decades, he beguiled Nigerians into believing he was a democrat who fought for democracy and against military rule. He ferociously condemned all previous emergency rule proclamations since 1999. But in power, as governor and now president, Tinubu rules as an autocrat. Read Professor Erica Frantz’s book, Authoritarianism: What Everyone Needs to Know, and you will see Tinubu in every page. Authoritarians surround themselves with sycophants, praise-singers and hero-worshippers; they have a messianic mentality, believing they are a living embodiment of the people; and they operate according to their own rules, not the rule of law. Furthermore, they subscribe to the Machiavellian laws of power, as Robert Greene sets out in his book, The 48 Laws of Power!

    Think about it. Within less than two years in powers, Tinubu has had five national monuments named after him. He has totally captured and neutered the National Assembly and coopted the judiciary. On his first day in office, he declared abruptly: “Subsidy is gone”; a few months later, he changed the National Anthem within days; and now he declared a state of emergency, replacing a state’s democratically elected governor and legislature with an unelected Sole Administrator. He did all these with absolutely no regard for consensus-building, for due process, for the rule of law and for constitutionality. What’s more, his attorney-general is threatening fire and brimstone: “Mr President will do it again,” Fagbemi said, adding: “This time with even greater vigour and vitality.” Wow! What a country!

    There is a saying that when a government fears the people, there is liberty; but when a people fear their government, there is tyranny. Tinubu wants Nigerians to fear him and his government. Yet, here’s a president who was elected with just 36.6 per cent of the popular vote, thereby rejected by 63.4 per cent of the electorate! He lacks the mandate and the legitimacy to exercise powers without restraints. He’s overreaching himself.

  • Akpabio and the allegory of tortoise, by Ikechukwu Amaechi

    Akpabio and the allegory of tortoise, by Ikechukwu Amaechi

    My March 13, 2025 column titled, “Akpoti-Uduaghan’s suspension: The joke is on Akpabio, Senate,” elicited diverse comments. I would have been surprised if it didn’t. The roforofo between Senate President Godswill Akpabio and Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is no longer just a case of “two fighting” but a national debacle that has exposed Nigeria to international ridicule. Two of the comments were particularly instructive.

    First, a female colleague who obviously has sympathy for the Senate President, asked rhetorically: “How is the joke on Akpabio? What are the facts on ground to warrant your conclusion? If you believed that Akpabio would promise Natasha ‘quality time’ in his house in any part of Akwa Ibom State, then you could believe anything.”

    The second comment came from a serving Senator, who, I am not at liberty to disclose his name but who I know is not a fan of Akpabio. Suffice it to say that he is one of the few federal lawmakers that I respect.

    He wrote: “Ike, I know that Akpabio is on the crosshairs of everyone given the damning performance of the Tinubu government and the obvious missteps of the Senate President in handling this matter. However, she (Natasha) is not an innocent in this matter and has been manipulating public opinion. Some of us who are well aware of other issues not in the public domain regarding them (who were family friends and enjoyed fraternities) are understandably reluctant to engage in pillorying Akpabio. There is much more to all this.”

    I agree that only Akpabio and Natasha, and not even their spouses, know the full story, but I have no doubt that Akpabio made sexual advances at Natasha and she has incontrovertible evidence against him, which explains why the Senate President has made every effort to forestall a transparent investigation as demanded by well-meaning Nigerians. The most effective way to shut Natasha up is to allow for an open investigation but that will be too much of a risk for Akpabio to take. Unfortunately for him, resorting to the rather puerile theatrics of kissing his wife publicly at the drop of a hat, good optics as the gesture may be, cannot be a proof of innocence.

    While such public show of affection may, indeed, be an indication that Akpabio loves his wife, Unoma, to bits, it cannot be a proof that he didn’t make passes at Natasha. Moreover, nothing says that men who have affairs with other women, single or married, love their wives less and Nigerians are not interested in knowing how crazily in love he is with his delectable wife.

    What those defending Akpabio seem not to realise is the fact that the issue at stake is not whether Akpabio made passes at Natasha, a woman of extravagant beauty. After all, as former Minister of Works, Senator Adeseye Ogunlewe, recently said, her beauty poses a problem for her in politics because men will find it difficult to ignore her presence. Perhaps, Akpabio is one of those men to whom, according to Senator Ogunlewe, Natasha’s beauty has become a problem; men to who “it is a natural thing to look at beautiful women” and who are not expected to close their eyes when a beautiful woman is passing.

    So, there is nothing wrong if Akpabio appreciates Natasha’s stunning beauty even though it will be morally wrong if the appreciation goes beyond the bounds of decency, more so when the woman in question is the wife of his bosom friend. But it becomes a national scandal, in fact a crime, if the Senate President decides to demean and persecute her because his amorous advances were rebuffed which is exactly the allegation Natasha is making.

    So, those who say that she is guilty of breaking Senate rules and deserves to be punished miss the point. Senator Natasha’s position is that her being called a club girl at plenary, relocation of her seat, though a prerogative of the Senate President, and removal as chairperson of the Local Content committee are all acts of victimisation which would not have happened if she acceded to Akpabio’s request to “make him happy.” And her open rebellion, which Akpabio now used to suspend her for six months and withdraw all her privileges as a senator, is her own way of protesting against the perceived injustice.

    Whenever I reflect on the Akpabio-Natasha debacle, what comes to my mind is the allegory of the tortoise that willfully refused entreaties from concerned friends who desperately tried to dissuade him from a disaster prone journey. Asked when he would return, his “not until I am disgraced” retort was both instructive and foreboding. His friends, aghast, must have wondered what would spur him on such nihilistic mission.

    Akpabio seems to have embarked on that tortoise-like journey from which he is unprepared to turn back until he is thoroughly disgraced. The sad thing is that he seems poised to throw mud not only at the Senate but the country in the process. Warriors, as the saying goes, pick their battles, a concept, which is a core principle in Sun Tzu’s “The Art of War,” which emphasizes the importance of knowing when to fight and when not to.

    The former governor of Akwa Ibom State should have known that this battle with Natasha is needless. If he was a man given to choosing his battles wisely, he should have known that Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is the wrong person to pick a fight with because she is a ruthless fighter herself. Unlike Akpabio who was propelled to the Senate by the criminal Nigerian system even when he didn’t contest the primaries, Natasha conversely battled the system to a standstill to be at the Senate. She fought and overwhelmed a vicious ruling party and brutal political actors in Kogi State who don’t take prisoners and came out triumphant.

    The fact that she is representing her senatorial district of birth – Kogi Central – rather than Delta State where she is married, on the platform of the opposition Peoples Democratic Party, PDP, the first elected female senator in Kogi State, should have told Akpabio something about the woman. Her parting “this injustice will not be sustained,” shot before she was escorted out of the Senate chambers on the day she was suspended for six months should have told Akpabio that he was dealing with a determined woman.

    The fact that unlike her male colleagues – Femi Okurounmu (1999), Joseph Waku (2000), Arthur Nzeribe (2002), Isah Mohammed (2004), Ali Ndume (2017), Ovie Omo-Agege (2018) and Abdul Ningi (2024) – who went home sulking after their suspension, Natasha was not only defiant but escalated the matter internationally by presenting her case at a UN forum, speaking at the Women in Parliament session during the recently concluded Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting at the United Nations in New York should have told Akpabio to tread carefully. Rather than being eclipsed, Natasha has become an international celebrity, granting interviews to the likes of BBC and Sky News, while her traducers have become international pariahs.

    I dare say that Natasha will win this battle even in the very unlikely event that she is recalled from the Senate. From what happened on Tuesday when she went home, it was clear her constituents love her. She connects with them in a way that 99.9 per cent of Nigerian politicians can’t. That is a huge political capital, which not even Akpabio can boast of. He will be the ultimate loser.

    The first law of holes is an adage which says: “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging.” Simply put, it is a metaphor which warns that when in an untenable position, it is best to stop making the situation worse.

    Right now, Akpabio is in an untenable position in his tango with Natasha. The wise thing to do is to pull back and deescalate. But blinded by hubris and a warped sense of invincibility, he is not. Instead, he continues to dig, plotting for her recall from the Senate.

    In his 1961 book, The Theatre of the Absurd, Martin Julius Esslin, a Hungarian-born British journalist and professor of drama, lamented what he called absurdism – the inevitable devaluation of ideals, purity, and purpose. Esslin couldn’t have had the 10th Nigerian Senate in mind when he wrote his famed book 63 years ago. But nothing captures the state of affairs in the Akpabio-led red chamber of the National Assembly more profoundly than Esslin’s “theatre of the absurd.”

    That the 10th Senate has become a theatre of the absurd is an understatement. What is worse, the situation is getting more bizarre by the day, a situation which the theatre critic further labelled “the absurdity of the absurd,” with impunity walking on all fours. Truth be told, Akpabio has done enough damage to the Nigerian brand. It is high time he and his minions stopped.

  • Dear Bunmi, I miss my ex… can I tell him?

    Dear Bunmi, I miss my ex… can I tell him?

    Dear Bunmi, I recently made contact with an ex-boyfriend on Facebook.

    He was my first love. We were together for four years from the age of 17 to 21, until we had to go our separate ways to further our studies.

    I’m now 36 and happily married with four lovely children. My ex also has a wife and a family.

    I often think about him but not in a romantic way, but as a potential good friend who I miss having in my life.

    Do you think it’s Ok for me to tell him this or, given our past, should I keep my thoughts to myself?

    Gladys, by e-mail.

    Dear Gladys,

    Don’t even go there!   Even if your feelings are entirely innocent, you never know where they might lead.   There’s no point revisiting the past.   How would you feel if you found out your husband had been in touch with an ex?   I expect you wouldn’t be thrilled and might read more into it than a conversation between two old friends.

    On the other hand, are you prepared to talk to your husband honestly about it, so there are no secrets or misunderstandings?   If you don’t feel you can do that, then forget it!

    Share your problems and release your burden, write now to Dear Bunmi: bunmsof@yahoo.co.uk

  • FLY NIGERIA ACT: What analysts say!

    FLY NIGERIA ACT: What analysts say!

    Minister of Aviation and Aerospace Development, Mr. Festus Keyamo, has aroused mixed feelings among stakeholders in the air transport sector with his determination to introduce the Fly Nigeria Act to the National Assembly.

    Questions surrounding the minister’s commitment to ensuring that Indigenous carriers receive absolute patronage from public officials range from local airlines’ competitiveness to the policy’s workability.

    Designed to improve air travel, the Fly Nigeria Act, if approved by the Federal Executive Council, FEC, and passed into law by the country’s apex legislative body, would mandate government officials to prioritize domestic airlines for official foreign trips.

    It is for this reason that Keyamo, at the 2025 ministerial press briefing in Abuja, revealed that he is in the process of proposing the bill to the country’s highest legislative organ.

    “Once the Fly Nigeria Act is finalized, it would be presented to the FEC, Federal Executive Council, for approval. After that, we will take it to the National Assembly to ensure that local airlines are given priority on international routes before international airlines,” the minister told newsmen last Thursday.

    Past and present efforts

    Although the idea of a Fly Nigeria Act is not new in the country’s aviation industry, the latest drive by the minister to ensure a favorable outcome has been reviewed by analysts, with suggestions made.

    Saturday Vanguard recalls that a formal attempt to legislate the act began some 16 years ago when former Minister of Aviation, Babatunde Omotoba, 2009, introduced the policy to the FEC through a memo.

    The memo, titled: ‘Fly Nigeria Policy: Patronage of Indigenous Airlines by Federal Public Officers,’ sought the council’s “approval for the introduction of a policy (Fly Nigeria) making it compulsory for all Federal public officers to patronize Nigerian airline operators when undertaking official trips overseas on routes operated by the indigenous Nigerian airlines.”

    While Omotoba did not succeed in overseeing its ratification, a former President of the Nigerian Bar Association, NBA, Dr Olisa Agbakoba, and members of the Aviation Safety Round Table, ASRTI, among others, have persisted in advocating for the act.

    Early last year, Agbakoba, during a media chat, urged the Federal Government to enact it, and assured that a Fly Nigeria Act would strengthen air transport in Nigeria.

    “Proposals such as the Fly Nigeria Bill, the Aviation Corporate Governance Code, and the domestication of international conventions have been suggested to address these challenges,” he said.

    The legal practitioner further asserted that Fly Nigeria, copied from the Fly America Act, “aims to apply public funds for air travel exclusively to national carriers, generating passenger traffic and supporting their international growth.”

    What  analysts say

    With the current minister of aviation disclosing that he is in the process of making another push for the act, many have shared their thoughts.

    Among them is the Chief Executive Officer of Centurion Aviation Security and Safety Consult, Group Captain John Ojikutu, retd.

    Ojikutu, in a chat with Saturday Vanguard, asked: “Do we have the airlines that will compete with all these foreign airlines if the act is implemented?”

    Abacha era

    The analyst recalled that during the administration of former military Head of State, late General Sani Abacha, many government officials traveled to Ghana to satisfy their craving for British Airways despite Abacha banning the airline from flying into Nigeria.

    He said: “I do not know whether people remember that when Abacha stopped British Airways, BA, from coming into Nigeria, many Nigerians, including government officials, traveled to Accra to fly the airline out of the country.”

    Ojikutu argued that the Fly Nigeria Act would not help domestic airlines, stating that the best move would be for the minister to restrict foreign airlines to a single entry point.

    “That is the only way domestic airlines, including Air Peace, can benefit. Foreign airlines can be allowed to go to either Abuja or Lagos 100 times a day. However, to go to Abuja and fly into Lagos should not be allowed because that is the only way you are going to create a market for your airline within the country,” he said.

    Mexican model

    Ojikutu suggested that Nigeria could learn from Mexico, which implements similar restrictions.

    “We are just wasting time on something that won’t materialise. Fly Nigeria on which airline? If you are doing that with a national carrier, then it is different. Again, that is why I do not agree with the national carrier because I saw how Nigerian Airways was wrecked by government officials.

    “Officials would collect money  government in dollars for first class, business class tickets. Even when issued economic class tickets, they would fly first class or business class and deny the airline funds from passengers who had money to pay. There are about 30 foreign airlines flying into this country, is it only Air Peace that would compete with them? How many passengers will it pick? It will not work,” Ojikutu added.

    Workability

    Like him, aviation journalist, Wole Shadare, wondered if Nigeria had the airlines to enable it work.

    He said: “it looks good on paper. It looks fantastic. It is good that the minister wants to support Nigerian airlines, but where are the airlines? Do we have an aviation industry that is as developed as the United States’ from whom we want to copy? A lot of things will be considered for it to be passed.”

    Benefits

    Unlike Shadare and Ojikutu, the Managing Director of Aero Contractors, Captain Ado Sanusi, told Saturday Vanguard that it would be a clever move if the minister is able to oversee its enactment.

    Sanusi explained that the act would be beneficial to both international travellers and domestic airlines because it would mean more business and better service.

    According to him, “it means that for any official of government or contractor doing business with the Nigerian government and is being paid by the Nigerian government, there is a requirement for him to fly the country’s flag carrier when going on foreign trips.  I think it is a national duty to do it because every country would like to protect its business and see it grow.”

    He also said efforts geared towards its implementation commenced long ago, adding that he had thrown his weight behind the bill from his days in Arik Air.

    “We have been fighting for it since I was in Arik. We want to ensure that public servants flying out of the country use either the flag carriers or the national carrier. It will definitely push traffic to these carriers and boost their revenue. It is a very good thing to have and grow the industry,” he told Saturday Vanguard.

    Support our own

    Sanusi insisted that it is the duty of Nigerians to ensure the success of domestic businesses, saying it is a national responsibility.

    “As a country, we just have to support our own. For any industry, be it banking, telecommunication, oil and gas, you just have to support your country. It is not possible to support other countries over ours and expect it to grow. All these beautiful carriers that we see outside the country coming in, all these beautiful things that we see in developed countries were supported by citizens. It is not aliens that built industries for foreigners, they did it themselves, and we can learn from them,” he said.

    Hope

    For the General Secretary of the Aviation Safety Roundtable Initiative, Mr Olumide Ohunayo, he expressed hope that the FEC would not repeat what it did to Omotoba, urging them to use the initiative in reserving a market for Nigerian carriers.

    “We can now see the partnerships that Nigerian carriers are getting. This is because we now have a minister that is pushing the Nigerian product. I hope that the minister is able to break the ice that Omotoba could not break,” the analysts said.

    Ohunayo, however, added that whatever comes out of the proposal should not deter local airlines, saying they should continue to increase collaboration with international carriers.

    “Whichever way, Nigerian airlines should not lose focus, they should continue to deepen partnership. If implemented, Fly Nigeria will work better if those who fly Nigerian carriers are put in other flights beyond that point where they are operating to. With that, there will be options and varieties for Nigerians when they are flying a domestic carrier,” he said.

  • I was over half a billion in debt – Mr Macaroni shares financial struggle

    I was over half a billion in debt – Mr Macaroni shares financial struggle

    Popular content creator and actor, Mr Macaroni, has opened up about his financial challenges, revealing that he fell victim to both a scam and a failed investment in 2021, which wiped out his savings.

    Following these financial setbacks, he resorted to borrowing money to meet his obligations, eventually accumulating a staggering debt of N500 million.

    He acknowledged that his generosity and financial recklessness contributed to his struggles.

    In a detailed post shared on his X handle on Thursday, Mr Macaroni disclosed:

    “Sometime around 2021/2022 I was victim of a scam and simultaneously a failed investment that cost me all I had saved at the time. It shook me deeply but I told no one about it. If you know me well enough, you would know I do not like to share my problems. I could be going through the worst and at the same time helping others solve their own problems but I just would never share mine.”

    He explained that after losing all his savings, he turned to borrowing to meet his commitments, assuming his income would be sufficient to cover the debts.

    However, he soon realised he was merely paying off interests, which worsened his financial situation.

    “After I lost all the money I had then, trouble started when I had to borrow money from different sources to settle all pending commitments and also fulfill certain responsibilities I have always believed were mine to fulfill. I make money in millions so I never thought borrowing money to pay back with interest could ever be a problem. But I got too comfortable and it took me a long time to realize that I was using the money I was earning to pay back interests. Also, my financial recklessness did not help. Please don’t borrow money! But if you must, please be responsible.”

    The actor described 2024 as both a defining moment in his career and the most challenging year of his life due to his enormous debt burden.

    His frustration was further compounded by a betrayal from someone he once regarded as “a friend and sister.”

    Despite these struggles, Mr Macaroni expressed gratitude to his family and friends, whose unwavering support helped him through difficult times.

    He shared that he now feels much better than he has in years.

    He concluded by saying that he chose to open up about his ordeal to inspire others facing financial difficulties, urging them to remain strong and seek support.

  • Meet Nigeria’s first professor of aviation law, Ismail Adua Mustapha

    Meet Nigeria’s first professor of aviation law, Ismail Adua Mustapha

    Ilorin-born Ismail Adua Mustapha has made history as Nigeria’s first professor specialising in aviation law.

    His academic journey began at the University of Ilorin where he joined as an Assistant Lecturer on February 23, 2008. Over the years, he steadily advanced through the ranks, ultimately earning the prestigious title of professor.

    Read Also: Meet Angela Kyerematen-Jimoh, first African woman executive director for IBM

    Mustapha was appointed as a Lecturer in the Department of Business Law, Faculty of Law, at the University of Ilorin in 2008. He later pursued and obtained his PhD from the International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) in 2014.

    An authority in both Business Law and Aviation Law, Professor Mustapha has contributed extensively to his field, with numerous scholarly articles published in national and international journals.

    Professor Mustapha’s research primarily focuses on Aviation Law and Business Law. Currently, he holds the position of Head of the Department of Business Law at the University of Ilorin’s Faculty of Law.

    His academic excellence was evident early in his career, as he received the departmental award for Best Final-Year Student in Islamic Law at the University of Ilorin during the 2003/2004 academic session.

    He is an active member of the Nigerian Bar Association and the Muslim Lawyers Association of Nigeria. His professional contributions include serving as an External Examiner for the Council of Legal Education in Nigeria.

    Among his notable publications is Aviation Security: Airline Passengers’ Roles in Combating Air-Terrorism in the 21st Century, published in 2015 in the Al-Hikmah University Law Journal.

  • FCCPC not a price control board – Bello

    FCCPC not a price control board – Bello

    The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) is not a Price Control Board, the Executive Vice Chairman, Mr. Tunji Bello, has said.

    He spoke at the 2025 World Consumer Rights Day celebration today, in Abuja.

    According to him, there has been a misconception among some members of the public who expect the FCCPC to act as a Price Control Board, insisting that the commission had no such mandate.

    His words, “Permit me to briefly respond to a very concerning trend. Which is what I consider the misconception of the role of FCCPC in some quarters.  I observe this tendency among some of our commentators in the media space who misunderstand the provisions of the law and inadvertently mislead the public.

    “To be sure, Sections 17 and 18 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018 expressly vest the Commission with the statutory authority to regulate competition and consumer protection across all sectors in our national life which is consistent global best practices.

    “This notion was, in fact, recently affirmed by the court of competent jurisdiction. In one word, the law charges the FCCPC to champion the rights of consumers of goods and services in Nigeria.

    “It is, therefore, very disturbing to hear or read parochial arguments of those who, out of ignorance of the law, seek to erect walls of sophistry against FCCPC in its discharge of this clear mandate.

    “The Commission has never claimed or pretended to be a price control board. Rather, we get involved when the rights of consumers are breached or when the market is being manipulated in a manner that impedes fair competition.”

    He said that the celebration was an opportunity for the FCCPC officials to rededicate themselves to championing the interests of the Nigerian Consumers.

    He said, “By the FCCP Act of 2018, our mandate is clear. Which is the promotion and protection of the interests and welfare of consumers by ensuring fair competition and ethical business practices. In the context of a just transition, this means.

    Ensuring affordability and accessibility. That is, sustainable choices should not be expensive or difficult to access; they should be within the reach of all consumers.

    Empowering consumers. That is, providing accurate information and raising awareness about the impact of their choices, so that they can make informed decisions.

    Holding businesses accountable. That is, ensuring that industries comply with environmental and ethical standards while preventing deceptive marketing of so-called ‘green’ products.

    Driving innovation and fair competition. That is, encouraging businesses to develop sustainable products and services while ensuring a competitive market that benefits consumers.

    Protecting vulnerable communities. That is, ensuring that low-income groups are not disproportionately burdened by the costs of the transition to sustainability.”

    Mr. Bello said the theme for this year’s celebration “A Just Transition to Sustainable Lifestyles” was apt considering the existential challenges facing humanity across the world at the moment.

    He observed that most countries were contending with inflationary trend which has been traced to the economic  disruption occasioned by COVID 19 of 2020 and Russian-Ukrainian war which brought fresh disruption to the global food supply chain, thus worsening the plight of consumers of goods and services.

    According to him, “Against this backdrop, it is therefore a matter of necessity that we rethink our choices and fashion new coping strategies to adapt to new realities.

    “Looking ahead, the world is undoubtedly moving towards a greener, more sustainable ways of living. The overarching challenge is ensuring that no one is left behind. Sustainability should not be a privilege for a few, but a right for all.

    “A just transition means making sustainable products and services affordable, accessible, and fair to consumers while ensuring that businesses and industries uphold responsible practices.”

  • Multichoice and latent broadcast issues, by Okoh Aihe

    Multichoice and latent broadcast issues, by Okoh Aihe

    A simmering broadcast news recently has been the story of Multichoice Nigeria jacking up subscription rates on its various packages in order to remain in business in Nigeria. Coming on the heels of other similar developments like the 50 percent hike in telecoms tariff, and the stratospheric increase in electricity tariffs last year, Nigerians were outraged, understandably.

    Their cries got to the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, FCCPC, which immediately asked Multichoice to stay action while proper investigations were being carried out. I would probably have said while a determination was being made.

    March 1, 2025 as per the notice sent to subscribers, and like words cast in stone, Multichoice carried out increases between 20 percent and 25 percent. No diplomacy at all to try and sweet-talk FCCPC into a position where nobody would feel humiliated.

    I have always wondered why the tangle wasn’t between Multichoice and the regulator of the broadcast industry, the National Broadcasting Commission, NBC. It would probably have been a straight fight. There may be a reason for this. I have been looking at the broadcast books, like the NBC Act CAP N11, 2004, and the the Nigeria Broadcast Code and can’t remember any area where a price determination was ever suggested, except the Code which forbids broadcast operators from engaging in anti-competitive behaviour.

    Could it have been superfluous if the NBC inserted the opportunity to have a say in the determination of prices and tariffs of products and services in the industry it superintends? Perhaps  this may yet be done through some amendments that could be introduced the Act and the Code.

    Don’t get me wrong at all. I stand for the dictates of the free market where the business owner can fix prices, especially in a challenging economy that is humbling everybody. That is the reason I put my head on the chopping board to advocate for telecoms tariff hike. This should also indicate where I stand on the Multichoice matter. However, things should be done reasonably and in order with respect to the various laws of the land and even constituted authorities. But the case is going through the court motions and we should all shut up like the unlearned people we are!

    Once Multichoice initiated the increases, the FCCPC immediately went to the courts to file proceedings against the pay TV service provider and its Chief Executive, John Ugbe, over alleged violations of regulatory directives and obstruction of ongoing inquiry.

    Nobody would blame FCCPC which carries the expectations of the people on its shoulders and should be seen to be taking actions to alleviate their burden at this time. One would pray here that at some point, the organisation should create some time to look at the atrocities of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria, PHCN, which, in a most shameful way, albeit boastfully on its part, has been trying to share 6003 megawatts of electricity among over 220 million Nigerians. Afterall, Nigerians feel even more pained by the near absence of electricity supply.

    Following an exparte motion filed by its lawyers, Multichoice, March 3, 2025, had its prayers answered as it secured an interim injunction restraining FCCPC and its officers from carrying out the threatened prosecution of Multichoice pending the hearing and determination of the motion of an interlocutory injunction.

    Oh! Things getting more interesting and getting more muddled up? This is not a review of the court proceedings, as I am the least competent to do so, being unlearned. I also do not want to speculate about the outcome of this case which is as sure as tomorrow happening or as sure as the painful reality that there will be no electricity supply to about three quarters of the population of Nigeria today or even a larger percentage not having food on the table. However, quite a number of things have come up on the side, so loud that they drown reason and common sense.

    One. There is a strong demand that the NBC should be involved in the fixing of subscription prices. This is understandable in the sense that only in 2023, Multichoice raised subscription twice, one in April and the other in November. And then this increase, March 2025. But as it is now, such demand is not possible. The market is deregulated and the operators have a right to operate without threatening inhibitions from the regulator.

    Two. It has been sugggested that the regulator should break the monopoly of Multichoice. It will stop the operator’s arbitrariness concerning subscription. This is more of wishful thinking. Did the NBC deliberately create a monopoly in Multichoice? I don’t think so. Monopoly can grow from market distortions created by an unpredictable economy, including cost of money, unwarranted feeling of entitlement mentality by some licencees,  presumptive feeling of market understanding even when a proper feasibility has not been done, and especially for pay TV the lack of patience or capacity to build to build attractive and marketable channels.

    The regulator will have to do something extraordinary and, in fact, go beyond regulation to achieve a different result and meet the yearnings and prayers of pay TV subscribers. That will not happen immediately, not by waving a magic wand, even if this obvious truth can prove painful to some people.

    To be honest, I believe the pay TV sector needs a reset, a recreation of the entire ecosystem in order to deracinate some latent booby traps that will continue to abort efforts invested in the sector. All efforts to create competition in the sector have failed not because there is a monopoly that swallows up competitions but because of some obtuse realities not sensed at the early stages of licensing. Time has come for the regulator to interrogate the process and take some urgent decisions.

    There is something else that has to be done. There is a failing that cannot be swept under the carpet, if you accommodate this cliche. The regulator must quickly revisit the Digital Switchover, DSO, process, ensure thorough re-examination and reactivation of the process and do everything possible to bring it to conclusion. Concluding the process can do a lot of good for the entire broadcast industry. So much monies will change hands, jobs will be created and technology will be upscaled as there will be more channels to be filled with new contents.

    Competition in the pay TV cannot be legislated, no matter how you may feel about some developments. But it is not too early or late to address a problem that may well last into the future. The onus rests on the NCC to act.

  • Journey through “reborn” Ogoniland, by Ochereome Nnanna

    Journey through “reborn” Ogoniland, by Ochereome Nnanna

    Thirty years ago, the Ogoni people’s struggle finally pierced through the iron curtain of the international community’s attention. It took the spilling of blood and emasculation of the Ogoni elite for the world to take note.

    In April 1994, I had the privilege of encountering foremost author and Ogoni activist, Ken Saro-Wiwa, at a seminar in Enugu aimed at fashioning a common Igbo position as the nation prepared for the National Constitutional Conference, NCC, empanelled by General Sani Abacha. Saro-Wiwa was a guest speaker. The event offered him and former Biafra leader, Chief Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, the opportunity to “reconcile” after playing historical roles in opposite sides of the Nigerian Civil War.

    That was virtually Saro-Wiwa’s final public outing. A few days later, mayhem exploded in Ogoniland. Four prominent Ogoni leaders, known as the Ogoni Four – Albert Badey, Edward Kobani, Theophilus Orage and Samuel Orage – were gruesomely murdered. Their corpses were never found. Saro-Wiwa and eight other leaders of the Movement for the Survival of Ogoni People, MOSOP, were arrested, summarily tried and hanged for the alleged incitement that led to the lynching of the Ogoni Four.

    The Ogoni elite had been torn into two mutually destructive camps. The Ogoni Four were accused of “compromising” the struggle by being soft on the Federal Government and Shell, the oil company responsible for the environmental devastation of Ogoniland. On the other hand, the Ogoni Nine were perceived to have precipitated the killing of their counterparts. The Abacha government ignored all entreaties to spare the lives of Saro-Wiwa and his colleagues.

    These sad events placed the Ogoni struggle on the agenda of the United Nations which became gravely concerned over severe environmental pollution of Ogoniland after over 50 years of irresponsible oil exploitation. In 2006, the United Nations Environmental Programme, UNEP, sent experts to investigate the environmental disaster in Ogoniland and submit a report that would guide remediation. In 2011, the UNEP Report was submitted to President Goodluck Jonathan.

    It was not until April 2022 when the Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project, HYPREP, was created that the “Ogoni clean-up” programme concretely began. Because of the prolonged period of lip service paid to the project, many Nigerians, including major media stakeholders, never knew the amount of world class action going on under the leadership of Professor Nenibarini Zabbey at HYPREP’s Project Office in Port Harcourt. Indeed, when I sent a Facebook post from one of the shoreline reclamation project sites in Goi, Gokana LGA, people were pleasantly surprised that the clean-up was real and not mere propaganda.

    We had two days of intensive tour of all four local government areas of Ogoniland – Tai, Eleme, Khana and Gokana. We visited the HYPREP regional water scheme at Kpoghor. About 30 communities whose water resources were polluted now enjoy potable water piped to them from these waterworks. In Ajen Okpori and Ogale in Eleme, we witnessed how the polluted soil and underground water were excavated and cleaned by experts, and land restored for normal human activity. Soil and underground water purification are going on simultaneously in 39 communities across Ogoniland.

    The most eye-catching and obviously largest of the HYPREP projects is at Wiiyaakara in Khana LGA. The Centre of Excellence and Environmental Remediation, CEER, under construction by the China’s CCECC, is much like an international university town, complete with its research faculty buildings, residential zone, solar farm, sports complex and massive laboratories. It will incubate experts in all aspects of practical environmental science from all parts of the world.

    By far the most exciting adventure for us was the visit to Goi in Gokana LGA. It is a shoreline community where technicians were labouring with machines to suck out spilled oil sludge from the muddy soil of the shoreline. The experts said the presence of live periwinkles in the mud meant the shoreline restoration was beginning to work. Shoreline restoration is taking place in five communities throughout Ogoniland.

    We took a 45-minute boat ride to Bomu, also in Gokana LGA, where mangrove trees were being replanted after soil restoration. Each of us had the privilege to plant a mangrove tree! In a few years when the trees have matured, the mangrove ecosystem will hopefully be fully restored, provided that the HYPREP activities are sustained and re-pollution prevented. According to HYPREP officials, the Ogoni clean-up is just the first step towards the extension of same to all parts of the Niger Delta and beyond.

    Ogoni people and Ogoniland are harvesting the benefits of their struggle. Ogoni has become a pacesetter in many ways. Other Niger Delta agitators sprang up due to the attention the Ogoni struggle elicited from all over the world. The Ogoni clean-up is being conducted mainly with the expertise and manpower of Ogoni indigenes. The Centre of Excellence will draw experts from all over the world. Even after the clean-up, the knowledge, expertise and experience that the Ogoni men and women are accumulating will be exported to service polluted communities throughout Nigeria and beyond.

    HYPREP has trained 2,500 Ogoni youth with International Maritime Organisation, IMO, Levels 1 and 2 certification in shoreline clean-up and mangrove restoration, which they are freely deploying to make a living.

    There is a saying: “No pain, no gain”. The Ogoni struggle attracted a scorched-earth military pacification mission on the people. The names of Abacha’s hit men, Major General Obi Umahi and Brigadier General Paul Okuntimo, will remain indelible in Ogoni history. They lost their best, the Ogoni Four and Ogoni Nine. But today, Ogoniland occupies a place of pride in all Niger Delta because of dividends that the HYPREP projects are bringing on the people and their ancestral land.

    Where would the Ogoni people be today without the Ogoni struggle?

  • Import licenses: Court dismisses NNPCL’s objection, okays Dangote’s suit for hearing

    Import licenses: Court dismisses NNPCL’s objection, okays Dangote’s suit for hearing

    ABUJA — A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Tuesday, dismissed as lacking in merit, an application the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited, NNPCL, filed to query its jurisdiction to hear the suit that was brought against it by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE.

    The suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 seeks to nullify the licenses the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, NMDPRA, issued to enable the NNPCL and other marketers, to import refined petroleum products into the country.

    Other defendants in the matter are AYM Shafa Limited; A. A. Rano Limited; T. Time Petroleum Limited; 2015 Petroleum Limited; as well as Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.

    The plaintiff, Dangote Refinery, had insisted that it was wrong to issue licences for importation of petroleum products such as Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) and Jet Fuel (aviation turbine fuel) into Nigeria when there is no shortfall in its own local production.

    Aside from praying the court to award N100 billion in damages against the NMDPRA for issuing import licenses, the plaintiff applied for an order of injunction to restrain the 1st defendant (NMDPRA) from further issuing and/or renewing import licenses to the 2nd to 7th defendants or other companies for the purpose of importing petroleum products.

    Meanwhile, before the matter could be heard, the NNPCL filed a preliminary objection to challenge the competence of the suit and the jurisdiction of the court to hear it.

    Arguing that the plaintiff sued a non-existing party, it noted that what was listed as the 2nd defendant in the matter was ‘NNPC’, an entity that is currently non-existent.

    Consequently, NNPCL urged the court to strike out its name from the suit, even as it challenged the locus standi (legal right) of the plaintiff to file the action it described as “premature.”

    “The 2nd defendant is not a competent party. The plaintiff’s suit is incompetent. This honourable court lacks the jurisdiction to hear this suit,” the NNPCL argued.

    However, in his ruling on Tuesday, Justice Inyang Ekwo dismissed the objection for want of merit.n

    The court further granted an application the plaintiff filed to amend the suit to reflect the proper name of the NNPCL.

    In a related ruling, the court dismissed an application the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, FCCPC, filed to be joined as a defendant in the suit.

    The court held the the dispute before it could be effectively determined without the FCCPC which it said was not a relevant or necessary party.