No amount of official reassurance or diplomatic damage control can erase the profound injury done to Nigeria’s national pride by a United States military strike on Nigerian soil. At the core of statehood lies a single, non-negotiable responsibility: the protection of sovereignty and territorial integrity against incursion by foreign powers, regardless of the justification offered.
For a country of over 220 million people, one that consistently projects itself as the giant of Africa, the very occurrence of a foreign military strike within its borders raises unsettling questions. These questions become even more troubling when the foreign power involved is led by an administration that has previously denigrated Nigeria in crude terms and promoted a deeply flawed narrative of a Muslim-orchestrated genocide against Christians. Such rhetoric is not merely offensive; it is dangerous, polarizing, and destabilizing.
The suggestion that Nigeria willingly opened its airspace to a unilateral U.S. military operation, or that Washington fully coordinated its plans with Abuja, deserves serious scrutiny. Under President Donald Trump, the United States repeatedly demonstrated a preference for unilateral action, particularly in matters framed as counterterrorism. Trump publicly pledged to strike Islamist terrorists in Nigeria, presenting the issue through a religious lens that ignored the country’s complex security realities.
Context matters. The strike followed closely after a terrorist bombing of a mosque in northern Nigeria and days after U.S. servicemen were killed by ISIS in Syria. To view the timing as coincidental is to ignore the pattern of retaliatory signaling that has characterized U.S. military actions in recent years. Whether or not Nigeria was informed after the fact, the broader message remains troubling: a foreign power exercised lethal force within Nigeria’s borders, reinforcing the perception that Nigeria lacks full control over its own security space.
Once a nation allows its sovereignty and airspace to be pierced, whether by consent, coercion, or quiet acquiescence, it sets a precedent that is exceedingly difficult to reverse. Sovereignty, once compromised, rarely returns intact. The genie, as the saying goes, does not go back into the bottle.
This issue transcends partisan loyalty or personal support for any sitting president. The defense of national sovereignty is sacrosanct and must stand above politics. African states have demonstrated this principle before. Burkina Faso’s firm response to the unauthorized penetration of its airspace by a Nigerian aircraft underscored a simple truth: respect among nations begins with the enforcement of boundaries.
Calls to celebrate foreign military intervention as a victory against terrorism are therefore premature. The true consequences of the strike—potential civilian casualties, destruction of villages, and political fallout in northern Nigeria—remain to be seen. These outcomes carry serious implications for domestic stability and could impose substantial political costs on the presidency.
In the final analysis, regardless of how the event is framed, the optics are damaging. The strike projects weakness, not strength; dependency, not leadership. It casts an unflattering light on Nigeria’s military capability, raises questions about the government’s control over national security, and undermines the country’s standing as a sovereign regional power.
For Nigeria, the lesson is stark and unavoidable: no nation can claim greatness while its sovereignty is negotiable.
The Chief Executive Officer of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Engr. Farouk Ahmed, has rejected allegations linking the funding of his children’s foreign education to corruption, describing the claims as misleading, ill-timed, and motivated by vested commercial interests.
In a detailed statement released on Tuesday, Ahmed said he welcomes scrutiny of his finances and has formally invited the Code of Conduct Bureau (CCB), the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), and the National Assembly to conduct comprehensive investigations into his assets, income, and regulatory decisions spanning over three decades of public service.
Background of Allegations
Recent claims circulating on social media alleged that Ahmed spent up to $5 million on his children’s secondary education in Switzerland, an amount critics argued was inconsistent with his official earnings as a public servant.
Responding to the allegation, Ahmed said the figure was “factually incorrect” and failed to account for merit-based scholarships, family education trust funds, and personal savings accumulated over 30 years in the Nigerian petroleum sector.
According to him, three of his four children received scholarships covering between 40 and 65 per cent of tuition costs, while additional funding came from education trusts established by his late father before his death in 2018.
“My annual compensation as NMDPRA CEO, approximately ₦48 million including allowances, is publicly available in audited reports,” Ahmed stated.
“When combined with decades of legitimate savings, cooperative investments available to civil servants, and family contributions, the expenses are fully explainable.”
Asset Declarations and Transparency
Ahmed said he has consistently filed asset declarations with the Code of Conduct Bureau since joining public service in 1991 and has authorized educational institutions attended by his children to release financial records to Nigerian investigators.
He added that foreign educational institutions do not accept illegitimate funds, noting that “schools abroad operate under strict financial compliance regimes.”
Allegations Linked to Regulatory Actions
The NMDPRA chief suggested that the timing of the allegations coincides with recent regulatory actions by the Authority, including:
Enforcement of stricter fuel quality standards
Introduction of transparent licensing and pricing frameworks
Approval of fuel import licenses to prevent supply shortages
Ahmed defended the import licensing decisions, citing Section 7 of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), which mandates the regulator to ensure energy security and prevent fuel scarcity.
“Granting import licenses when domestic supply is insufficient is not economic sabotage; it is a statutory obligation,” he said, warning against reliance on a single-source supply model.
Call for Investigation
Ahmed formally called for:
A full review of his asset declarations by the CCB
Examination of his financial transactions by the EFCC
Oversight hearings by the National Assembly
He pledged full cooperation and said he would testify under oath if required.
“The Price of Regulatory Independence”
Reflecting on his career, Ahmed said his rise from a junior engineer at the former Department of Petroleum Resources to CEO of NMDPRA was based on merit and technical competence, not political patronage.
He acknowledged that reforms introduced under his leadership, aimed at reducing opacity, preferential treatment, and regulatory capture, have created resistance among entrenched interests.
“If the price of regulatory independence is personal attacks and manufactured scandals, I accept that price,” he said.
Ahmed concluded by reaffirming his commitment to implementing the Petroleum Industry Act transparently and without favoritism, expressing confidence that “principled regulation will ultimately be vindicated.”
Abuja — ActionAid Nigeria has called on President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to intervene and ensure an independent public review following allegations involving the Chief Executive of the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), Farouk Ahmed.
The organisation said the move was necessary to reinforce accountability, transparency, and public confidence in governance institutions.
In a statement released in Abuja, the Country Director of ActionAid Nigeria, Dr Andrew Mamedu, stressed the importance of institutional integrity and timely responses that strengthen democratic governance nationwide.
Mamedu referenced media reports alleging foreign education expenses for four children of the NMDPRA boss, noting that the claims remain unproven. He urged calm, lawful scrutiny anchored in due process, fairness, and respect for all parties involved.
He called on the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) and the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) to immediately commence a thorough, transparent investigation, with findings made public.
ActionAid Nigeria commended Alhaji Aliko Dangote for raising concerns responsibly, describing whistleblowing as a positive civic duty that strengthens accountability and democratic participation.
Mamedu emphasised the need to protect whistleblowers, describing them as vital partners in safeguarding public resources and promoting a culture where ethical conduct is rewarded and corruption discouraged.
He said the allegations offered an opportunity for broader governance reforms, including modest leadership standards, verifiable income declarations, and responsible stewardship of public office to reduce inequality and expand opportunities for Nigerians.
The organisation also highlighted ongoing petroleum supply challenges, calling for increased investment in functional local refineries to ensure fair pricing, energy security, reduced import dependence, and transparent market practices that benefit vulnerable citizens.
ActionAid Nigeria noted that ending impunity would strengthen democracy, restore trust in public institutions, and reaffirm public service as a platform for national development rather than personal enrichment.
The group further urged prompt clarification from the official concerned and advocated stronger asset declaration systems, verification processes, and public access to information to empower citizens and oversight institutions.
ActionAid concluded by calling on Nigerians to actively monitor public resources, engage institutions constructively, and sustain collective demands for accountability, fairness, and effective service delivery across all levels of government.
As Nigeria prepares to inaugurate a new Minister of Defence, General Christopher Musa, recently pulled from his position as Chief of Defence Staff, the appointment highlights a familiar pattern: leadership reshuffles and reconfigurations of the security architecture that have so far failed to address the nation’s deepening insecurity.
Despite record defence budgets and years of military operations, Nigeria’s war against insurgency, terrorism, and violent crime remains far from won. Behind the official rhetoric of “decisive action” and “renewed hope,” the figures tell a sobering story: the country is spending more on security than ever before, yet becoming less safe.
An Internally Displaced Persons’ (IDPs) camp in Benue State
Between May 2023 and April 2024, at least 614,937 Nigerians were reported killed in violence linked to insecurity, according to data from the National Bureau of Statistics and independent research groups. Amnesty International estimates that more than 10,000 people were killed in the northern states alone during that period. Villages have been razed, farmers displaced, and highways turned into hunting grounds for kidnappers.
For 2025, the Federal Government earmarked ₦6.57 trillion for defence and security, nearly equivalent to the combined budgets of education, health, and agriculture. Yet insecurity persists. From Boko Haram’s remnants in the northeast to bandits in the northwest and separatist militias in the southeast, violence has become a permanent feature of daily life.
Nigeria’s insecurity cannot be solved by military might alone. “Nigeria’s security crisis is systemic, not merely operational,” a recent Counter-Insurgency and Anti-Terrorism Plan notes. “You can suppress conflict with soldiers, but you cannot kill an idea, or desperation, with bullets.” The country’s challenges go beyond insurgents and bandits; they are rooted in economic inequality, governance failures, and social exclusion, problems that no army, no matter how well-funded, can solve.
The Price of Peace Without Justice
Decades of economic inequality, corruption, and exclusion lie at the heart of the crisis. Wealth and resources are concentrated in the hands of a few, leaving large portions of the population marginalized. Communities excluded from decision-making or denied access to the country’s resources often turn to violence as a form of protest.
Other forces exacerbate the problem: mass illiteracy, youth unemployment, religious manipulation, and climate-induced displacement. Across northern Nigeria, desertification has swallowed farmland, forcing herders southward and triggering deadly clashes with farmers. In the mineral-rich central states, illegal mining networks, sometimes backed by foreign interests, have transformed into armed militias.
The insecurity is not merely a question of security operations; it reflects a broader governance failure, where political neglect, corruption, and impunity have created fertile ground for violence to thrive. Without addressing these structural issues, any attempt to suppress insurgency with force alone will remain temporary.
Spending More, Achieving Less
Nigeria’s defence spending has ballooned over the past four years: ₦966 billion in 2021, ₦1.2 trillion in 2022, ₦1.38 trillion in 2023, and now ₦6.57 trillion in 2025. Yet insecurity has worsened. World Bank data shows that the country’s military expenditure has risen faster than that of many African peers, without a corresponding reduction in violence.
Bigger budgets have meant more equipment, more contracts, and more commissions, but not necessarily more safety. Observers note that the country continues to fight the same war with the same tactics, expecting different results. High-profile military campaigns have occasionally neutralized specific threats, but the absence of complementary development and governance reforms has allowed insecurity to regenerate.
A New Strategy for a Broken Nation
Recognizing that force alone cannot deliver security, the counter-insurgency plan advocates a multi-dimensional approach that blends immediate security measures with long-term social, economic, and governance reforms. It is founded on the principle that lasting peace requires both containment of violence and addressing the root causes of unrest.
A central feature of the plan is the proposed Geopolitical Security and Development Summit. This high-level forum would bring together the Presidency, service chiefs, and state governors to coordinate priorities, share intelligence, and integrate human capital development into security planning. By aligning national and sub-national efforts, the summit aims to create a cooperative framework in which security operations respond to local realities rather than operating in isolation.
Education, rural empowerment, and healthcare are reimagined as tools of national defence rather than afterthoughts. By addressing poverty, unemployment, and social exclusion, the plan seeks to reduce the vulnerabilities that violent actors exploit. Economic opportunities, skill development, and access to services strengthen communities, making them less susceptible to recruitment by insurgents, bandits, or criminal networks.
Complementing this is a Stakeholders’ Summit involving religious leaders, traditional rulers, youth organizations, and civic groups. The forum is intended to promote interfaith dialogue, encourage conflict resolution at the community level, and empower citizens to take part in building peace. By fostering trust between communities and the state, the summit aims to prevent minor disputes from escalating into large-scale violence.
The plan emphasizes a shift in mindset: security is not just the absence of attacks but the presence of justice, opportunity, and inclusion. “Peace cannot be sustained through force alone,” it stresses. “It must be built on trust, understanding, and shared values.” Military interventions may suppress violence temporarily, but without addressing structural weaknesses, the gains remain fragile.
Reforming the Fault Lines
Several structural reforms are prioritized in the plan. Modernizing animal husbandry is one key step, including regulated ranching and strict enforcement of anti-open-grazing laws, paired with economic support for pastoralists to prevent marginalization.
Illegal mining, now a major source of funding for armed networks, is another critical target. The plan calls for a nationwide crackdown, formalizing artisanal mining into regulated cooperatives while reclaiming illegal mining corridors with security support.
Central to all reforms is restoring the rule of law. Impunity has become a pervasive issue in Nigeria, where political influence often shields offenders. The failure to prosecute crime erodes public trust and perpetuates violence. “A nation that does not punish crime inevitably rewards impunity,” the plan notes, emphasizing accountability as a cornerstone of sustainable security.
From Force to Fairness
At its core, the strategy envisions a paradigm shift in how Nigeria approaches security. True national security is not measured solely by military victories or the neutralization of threats; it is reflected in the ability of citizens to live without fear, access opportunity, and trust their government.
Political instability compounds insecurity. A culture of “do-or-die” elections fuels tension, undermines institutions, and perpetuates violence. Ensuring credible, peaceful elections is essential for creating a foundation on which sustainable security can be built.
The fight against terror and insurgency, the plan argues, will not be won solely in forests or creeks but in classrooms, farms, and courtrooms, where education, justice, and economic opportunity can finally triumph over despair.
“The time has come for Nigeria to prove that it can not only defend its territory but also heal its society,” the plan concludes.
Dahiru Ali: Journalist, academic, writes on governance, national security, and development policy. He is passionate about evidence-based reform and inclusive approaches to peacebuilding in Nigeria.
Administration after administration, the Nigerian state has failed in its most basic responsibility: guaranteeing the safety and security of its citizens. Ordinary Nigerians live in perpetual fear, often petrified to leave their homes after dawn. Let’s accept this as the backdrop before the usual critics start targeting the messenger.
As the 2027 presidential election approaches, citizens must brace for a surge of terror-driven political propaganda. Expect real attacks, fabricated incidents, recycled videos, AI-generated scenes of carnage, kidnappings, and orchestrated chaos, strategically pushed into our WhatsApp groups and social media feeds.
Violence is not new in Nigerian elections. From the First Republic to the “Wet e” era, political contests have often been marred by bloodshed. But the playbook has evolved—and worsened. The 2015 election between Jonathan and Buhari, and the 2023 contest among Obi, Atiku, and Tinubu, revealed how fear can be weaponized.
The stakes in 2027 are higher than ever, and ordinary Nigerians will bear the brunt. Expect spikes in terror attacks and gruesome content engineered to manipulate emotions. Social media will be awash with shocking videos, some real, many doctored, others entirely fictional but frighteningly convincing. Politicians will exploit these to control public perception and electoral outcomes.
Why does this work? Fear hijacks the human brain. Dopamine surges at shocking images, just as bloodthirsty crowds once roared in the Roman Colosseum. Bad news spreads faster than truth because it hooks emotions and triggers compulsive sharing. Fear and terror remain the most potent tools in the political power game, and those who seek control understand this perfectly.
We must resist. We must not allow manufactured, exaggerated, or even real terror to manipulate our choices. We must tame our fingers before hitting “share.” Panic is a political strategy, and we are the targets.
Social media algorithms—designed by what I call the true “evil geniuses,” exploit our emotional vulnerabilities. They monetize fear, incentivize outrage, and erode social and moral values. AI-generated fake news will only get harder to distinguish from reality. But intentionality, verification, and discipline can save us.
The fight is not just against political actors but against a system that thrives on fear, chaos, and manipulation. We must educate ourselves, question sensational content, and prioritize truth over virality.
As Nigerians, resisting the weaponization of fear is not optional—it is necessary for the survival of our democracy and the integrity of our electoral process.
May God save us from what lies ahead.
Adewale Alonge, PhD, Founder & President, Africa Diaspora Partnership for Empowerment and Development. www.adped.org, writes in from Dadeland, Miami, Florida, USA.
“What happened between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Nyesom Wike, and Navy Lieutenant A.M. Yerima is unfortunate. When Wike arrived at the site of the disputed land in Abuja, the officer explained that he was simply obeying lawful orders. Wike should not have exchanged words with the officer; he ought to have addressed his concerns through the officer’s superiors. He is our colleague, and he could have reached out to us to resolve whatever issue there was.
“The officer’s action was lawful—he was trained to be disciplined, loyal, and obedient to orders. Therefore, the young officer merely carried out his duty, which is worthy of commendation. He did not commit any offence under military regulations. If you observe carefully, he spoke respectfully and conducted himself properly.
FCT Minister, Nyesom Wike in near fisticuff with an officer of the Nigerian Navy
“There is, therefore, no offence under military law for which he should be charged. Wike should not have engaged him in an altercation, especially out of respect for the uniform he was wearing. Anyone who disrespects a soldier indirectly disrespects the President, who is the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. There is, therefore, no basis for any punishment against the officer. This is not about supporting the military to act disrespectfully towards civilians. The Minister should understand that every officer has superiors.
“I gathered that he called the Chief of Defence Staff, who advised him to wait for an investigation. However, he did not wait and instead went straight to the site. As a leader, he ought to have exercised patience and waited for the outcome of the investigation. Wike also contacted the Chief of Naval Staff, who assured him that an inquiry would be conducted. Yet again, he did not wait. It was supposed to be a one-day inquiry, but he chose to go there and confront them. Now that the Chief of Naval Staff has visited the area—since it involves a land dispute—the matter will be investigated to determine who owns the lawful documents. If the land has been revoked, there are established procedures to follow diplomatically.
“We [the Ministry of Defence] have not received any formal complaint from Wike, but I called him after the video went viral and advised that he should have spoken with me before going there, rather than confronting the officers directly.”
A Matter Effectively Closed
I have chosen to reproduce the words of Alhaji Bello Matawalle, the Minister of State for Defence, because of what they represent. Although he mentioned the need for further investigation, the tone and tenor of his statement suggest that the matter is effectively closed—and the naval officer has nothing to worry about. Lt. Yerima, by every indication, acquitted himself well. He was professional and measured in his conduct during that very public confrontation with a “super minister” known for his loquacity.
To reinforce the sense that the matter is closed, one only needs to recall the words of the Minister of Defence, Alhaji Mohammed Badaru, who stated that his ministry and the armed forces “will always protect our officers on lawful duty.” Badaru added: “We will not allow anything to happen to him so far as he is doing his job, and he is doing his job greatly well.” The defence minister made this statement during a ministerial briefing for the 2026 Armed Forces Remembrance Day in Abuja. Let that sink in.
You may call it esprit de corps, but several retired generals from both the North and the South—including former Chiefs of Defence Staff and Army Staff, Generals Lucky Irabor and Tukur Buratai—have spoken in Yerima’s defence. They even called for a public apology from Wike to both Yerima and the Commander-in-Chief, President Bola Tinubu, for dishonouring a military officer commissioned by the President himself.
Lawyers, Silence, and Political Optics
Notable voices have weighed in on the Wike–Yerima confrontation over the disputed plot of land in Abuja last Tuesday. Some are lawyers—senior and junior—while others are political commentators and public intellectuals. A few have argued in favour of Wike, citing the 1999 Constitution (as amended), but the majority have faulted him, emphasizing due process, the rule of law, and the impropriety of resorting to self-help, as appeared to be the case here.
As usual, the legal community has been divided—lawyers seldom agree on anything, even when the law seems straightforward to the “unlearned.” For most of the past week, they have been doing what they do best: lawyering. Their disputations may be intellectually stimulating, but one must not take them too seriously. Often, their arguments are shaped by convenient partisanship masquerading as constitutional fidelity.
By the way, has anyone noticed the deafening silence from Wike’s colleagues in the Federal Executive Council? Nearly fifty cabinet members, yet not one has publicly spoken in his defence. Does this silence reflect how they truly regard the Minister? As for President Tinubu, who appointed Wike “on our behalf,” the Minister may well be beyond reproach or removal—for obvious political reasons.
The Politics of 2023 and the Future of 2027
Wike appears untouchable—because of the past (2023) and the future (2027). President Tinubu, ever the political strategist, prioritizes electoral victory by any means necessary—the Machiavellian creed that the end justifies the means. And Wike fits perfectly into that school of thought.
Tinubu “discovered” Wike in 2023, when the latter was nearing the end of his governorship of oil-rich Rivers State. Having fallen out with his own party, the PDP, Wike was eager to prove his relevance. Tinubu needed a foothold in the Niger Delta and, by extension, the national electoral map. In that year’s presidential election, Wike reportedly “delivered” Rivers State to Tinubu—an opposition candidate—in defiance of his own party’s standard-bearer, Atiku Abubakar.
An APC governor from the North, astonished by Wike’s performance, allegedly remarked that his party merely begged for 25 percent of the votes but received an overwhelming—and inexplicable—victory. Unsurprisingly, the PDP still won the subsequent governorship election by a landslide, demonstrating the complex web of political transactions that define Nigerian elections.
In essence, Wike paid with the votes of Rivers people for his current position in a supposedly opposition-led federal government. That, in part, explains his “untouchable” aura. He remains a crucial asset for the 2027 elections—and the President knows it.
The Rivers Factor and a Trail of Conflict
Wike has long been a person of concern throughout his political career—from his days as Chairman of Obio/Akpor Local Government Area, to Minister, to Governor, and now to FCT Minister. Since assuming office in August 2023, controversies have dogged both his official and personal conduct.
He installed Siminalayi Fubara as his successor in Rivers State but soon fell out with him. Earlier this year, he was linked to political violence that led to a temporary declaration of emergency in the state, suspension of all elected officials—including the governor and lawmakers—by President Tinubu. The crux of the matter was political control. Wike openly claimed he nominated all elected officials, purchased their nomination forms, and installed them in office. The implication: Rivers State belongs to him.
A chastened Fubara has since been reinstated under conditions widely reported to include a promise not to defect to the APC as its leader and to forgo a second-term bid.
Throughout his political journey, Wike has sparred with nearly everyone who once aided his rise—from former President Goodluck Jonathan and his wife, Patience, to his predecessor, Rotimi Amaechi. His rift with Atiku Abubakar and the PDP leadership over the 2023 presidential ticket further cemented his image as a combative political loner.
On Saturday, he and his loyalists were reportedly expelled from the PDP—a move he predictably dismissed with scorn. Wike is, as the Igbo say, an ikiri—a tenacious creature that never lets go once it bites. But the real casualty may be the PDP itself, now adrift and internally fractured.
A court ruling against holding the party’s Ibadan convention underscores how the PDP’s legal and political machinery remains compromised. In Abuja, many judges are whispered to be “Wike’s judges,” highlighting his alleged influence over the judiciary.
Money, Power, and the Capital Territory
Wike’s public persona is equally polarizing. His frequent, combative media chats—lavishly funded from the FCT’s coffers—have become theatrical displays of arrogance. Barely two months after his appointment, he reportedly secured presidential approval to exempt the FCT from the Treasury Single Account (TSA) policy, giving him free rein over the territory’s internally generated revenue—beyond public scrutiny.
Allegations have since swirled around him: the revocation and reallocation of prime land to cronies and family members, misuse of public resources (including taking his children on official foreign trips), and failure to fully declare assets, notably properties in the United States allegedly registered in his wife’s and children’s names. He has also been accused of using public venues for partisan political events, including hosting a factional PDP meeting at the FCDA conference hall. Wike, for his part, has strenuously denied all allegations of wrongdoing.
A Dangerous Moment for Civil–Military Relations
The Wike–Yerima spat, however, carries deeper implications—especially against the backdrop of an alleged coup plot reportedly involving northern military officers. Although the government insists the arrests were disciplinary, many Nigerians remain skeptical.
The vehement defence of Lt. Yerima by northern political figures, including the Defence Ministers, raises its own concerns. And then came the cryptic post from the Nigerian Defence Headquarters’ X (formerly Twitter) account, in bold uppercase letters:
“IT IS AN HONOUR TO SERVE IN THE NIGERIAN MILITARY. UNSHAKEN. UNBENT. UNBROKEN.”
Make of that what you will.
Meanwhile, the National Assembly is reportedly considering legislation to make the military answerable not only to the President but to all tiers of civilian authority.
In a manner of speaking, may Wike not become Nigeria’s Achilles’ heel in this fragile and fractious democracy of twenty-six years.
About the Author
Ugo Onuoha is a veteran journalist, former Managing Director/Editor-in-Chief, Champion Newspapers Ltd, columnist, and public affairs analyst. His works often explore governance, power dynamics, and civic accountability in Nigeria’s evolving democracy. He writes from Lagos.
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) has broken its silence on the ongoing protests in Nigeria.
In a statement released on Tuesday, the ECOWAS Commission urged protesters to heed the call for dialogue and peaceful resolution of their grievances.
The body expressed deep concern over the violence, fatalities, and property destruction that have marred the demonstrations
The commission extended condolences to the families of those who have lost their lives in the protests and expressed sympathy with the Nigerian government and its people over the losses incurred.
The statement said, “The ECOWAS Commission has been closely monitoring the ongoing protests by citizens of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and deeply regrets reports of violence in the course of the protests and the unfortunate death of some protesters as well as alleged looting and destruction of public and private properties.
“The commission extends heartfelt condolences to the bereaved families and sympathizes with the Government and people of the Federal Republic of Nigeria over the losses.
“The ECOWAS Commission recognises the right of citizens to peaceful protests, as guaranteed by the 2001 ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance and enshrined in the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, as amended.”
ECOWAS also welcomed President Bola Tinubu’s recent State of the Nation address on Sunday, in which he called for inclusive dialogue to address the grievances of protesters.
“The Commission welcomes the State of the Nation address of August 4, 2024 by President Bola Tinubu and urges the protesters and all stakeholders to heed the President’s call for inclusive dialogue for the resolution of all grievances and the preservation of peace and security in Nigeria and the ECOWAS region at large,” it added.
The hunger protests in Nigeria, which began as a peaceful demonstration against the rising cost of living and food insecurity, took a violent turn last week, resulting in numerous deaths and the burning of properties.
The Labour Party (LP) presidential candidate in the 2023 election, Peter Obi, has stated that protest is allowed within the Nigerian Constitution.
Obi made this known amidst the proposed nationwide protest scheduled by some Nigerian youths to hold on August 1-10 over the current economic situation in the country.
In an interview with Channels TV after a visit to Abia State Governor, Alex Otti, on Sunday, the former Governor of Anambra State urged intending protesters to demonstrate in a civil manner.
Peter Obi pointed out that ‘huger and hopelessness’ in the country are the sponsors of the August protest.
He said, “Protest is allowed within the Nigerian Constitution. All I plead for all of those who are protesting to do so within the law and in a civil manner that allows us as a nation to show that we live within the law.
“Everybody knows that things are difficult, when they talk about the sponsors of the protest, I say the sponsors are very simple, is hunger, and hopelessness among the youths. So we all have to listen to what Nigerians are going through.”
Speaking further, Peter Obi urged security agencies to manage the situation within the law and avoid overbearing.
He added, “On security agencies, I will tell them to ensure that they manage the situation within the law. We should not try to be overbearing. Protest oa allowed everywhere globally. Listen to the reason why people are protesting, engage and talk with them, that is what governance is all about.”
The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited is set to hire more workers.
The NNPC spokesperson, Olufemi Soneye, confirmed this in a statement on Friday.
Soneye said the recruitment would be for various positions across various departments within the energy company.
He directed interested applicants to visit the NNPC careers page for application instructions.
“NNPC Ltd is pleased to announce that we are currently hiring for multiple positions across various departments. We are seeking talented and dedicated individuals to join our team. Visit our careers page for application instructions,” Soneye stated.
In an update, Soneye disclosed that due to unprecedented traffic to the NNPC Ltd career page from applicants applying for vacancies, the site is currently experiencing slow load times.
“Our techs are working diligently to rectify the problem.
“Please be assured that the application process deadline remains Aug 20, 2024,” he disclosed.
This may be the major recruitment exercise since the NNPC fully transformed into a limited company in 2022.
Former Lagos State Labour Party governorship candidate, Gbedebo Rhodes-Vivour, has advised against using the traditional Yoruba ritual, Oro, to threaten protesters.
Gbadebo Rhodes-Vivour accused the All Progressives Congress (APC) of assaulting Yoruba traditional institutions. He said the Yoruba are known for justice and fairness through upholding their traditions.
Gbadebo’s statement on Thursday followed an announcement on the Lagospedia X handle, on Wednesday. The handle announced that traditionalists in Lagos have fixed Oro to hold from August 1 to 15.
Lagos State government was accused of sponsoring the Oro event to shun the planned “EndbadgovernanceinNigeria” protest slated on August 1.
Gbadebo said, “The campaign by APC propaganda handles to use ORO – a sacred ritual in Yoruba land – to threaten protesters is an assault on our traditional institution. Casualizing centuries of a hallowed ritual with such juvenile intent debases our culture and corrupts our revered institution.
“The Yoruba are obsessed with Justice and fairness, not only as a guiding principle but also as a defining feature. It explains why, although the subjects recognize their king as an authority second only to the gods, the community does not tolerate high-handedness on the part of the king. Whenever they perceive such, there is bound to be a protest.”
He said while he supports peace and patience from the youths, the right to peaceful assembly must be respected by traditional leaders.
“I urge patience and restraint from our youth but defend their right to peaceful assembly. More importantly, I call on our respected traditional leaders to condemn our tradition’s desecration and guard our revered institutions jealously,” he added.
