Connect with us

Headline

Herdsmen Killings: Obasanjo, Soyinka Knock Buhari

Published

on

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo and Nobel laureate, Prof. Wole Soyinka, on Wednesday knocked President Muhammadu Buhari for doing little to stop killings by herdsmen amid the general insecurity in the country.

Obasanjo, who paid a condolence visit to Governor Simon Lalong of Plateau State on Wednesday, said the magnitude of security challenge the country was experiencing under Buhari’s watch was on the high side when compared to what happened during his tenure.

However, Soyinka noted that killings by herdsmen had been persisting because the Federal Government under Buhari had been treating killer herdsmen with kid gloves.

Obasanjo challenged the federal and state governments to identify the root cause(s) of insecurity and deal with them so that people would get a reprieve from the incessant violence in the country.

Obasanjo admitted that although there were problems during his time in government, “but not in this magnitude.”

“Even in my time, we had problems but not in this magnitude; we thought we were dealing with them as of that time but the earlier we deal with it, the better. I believe we can find solutions, we must find solutions,” he emphasised.

The former President, however, expressed optimism that solutions could be found to address the challenges and extended his condolences to the bereaved families.

Obasanjo said, “I’m here (in Jos) to express my condolences; what happened is very sad that in this day and age, this type of barbaric act is taking place in our country. I have suggested and I will say it again that we should find out the root cause of this problem and deal with it.

“There must be the remote and immediate cause, if we deal with it; we are not going to be multiplying condolence visits. I believe that any human problem has human solutions, I do hope and plead with the government at the federal level, those of you in states and even local government level, to join hands even at the community level to find the causes and deal with them permanently. We offer our condolences to the bereaved families, all we can say is that God knows the best.”

In his response, Lalong appreciated Obasanjo for the visit, saying that a phone call would have been okay.

He said, “Insecurity is not new to me, we thought we could handle it. When we came in, we quickly put up a team including Berom and Fulani. They came out with a road map to proffer solutions, we adopted the recommendations and have implemented some and was in the process of implementing the remaining ones. We have done our best, we have learnt our lessons. We will be very firm.”

But Soyinka in a statement titled, “On Demand: A language of non-capitulation, non-appeasement,” urged President Buhari to make killer herdsmen pay for their crimes to send a strong warning that his administration would not tolerate forceful land seizure anywhere in Nigeria.

The Nobel laureate said Buhari’s claim that it was unjust for the public to accuse him of being silent on the killer herdsmen’s activities was based on their observation of his “erstwhile language of complacency and accommodativeness in the face of unmerited brutalisation.’’

He added that Buhari had yet to speak in the language that the “murdering herdsmen” understand by exhibiting that forceful seizure of land would not be tolerated in any part of a federation under his governance.

Soyinka said, “That the temporary acquisition of weapons of mass elimination by any bunch of psychopaths and anachronistic feudal mentality will not translate into subjugation of a people and a savaging of their communities.’’

The playwright noted that certain unconscionable events had taken place in the country which could not be ignored, adding that entire communities had been erased from the national landscape, thousands of family units in mourning and survivors scarred and traumatised beyond measure.

He stated that famine loomed in many areas, even in those lodged in acknowledged bread baskets of the nation, adding that “impunity, gleeful and prideful impunity substitutes for decent self-distancing from once unthinkable crimes – let us not even speak of expressions of remorse and human empathy. The instigators, increasingly fingered as directors of human carnage are strutting around, defiant, justifying the unspeakable, daring a nation…’’

Noting that land-grab must be reversed, Soyinka said the restored would still require to be defended and aggressors also served a lasting lesson both from the manifested responsibility of governance, and the resistant will of the people.

“Accounting for crimes is also part of that responsibility, and such criminality must not be seen to be rewarded through idealistic solutions that paper over crimes against humanity. For that is the present actuality. Crimes against our humanity have been committed, and restitution must be made. Nothing less will restore confidence in a government, and reassure the people of its integrity, its commitment to equity in internal relationships and the rightful custodianship of ancient resources,’’ Soyinka said.

The playwright said it was a time of far-reaching, yet immediate decisions, because the nation was dying.

According to him, the time for false pride is over and if the nation lacks the necessary technical resources, then there remains only one blameless, overdue  recourse and it is for the President to ‘Get help.’

Soyinka, who bemoaned the recent attacks on Barkin Ladi council area in Plateau State, noted that five young men were recently sentenced to death by a high court in Zamfara State for allegedly killing a herdsman.

The playwright stated that though he was not condoning murder in any cause or by anyone, it was necessary to insist on transparent and impartial justice.

He said, “The agitating question then is this: since this rampage began, has even one herdsman been brought up before those same courts on a charge of murder, much less sentenced to death at such lightning speed? Shall we wake up and find that they have been hanged? Yet Zamfara has lost hundreds to the homicidal orgy of these same herdsmen. There is a skewed application of justicial proceedings here that baffles many, this writer among them.’’

He revealed that when he visited the Governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom, some weeks ago, he bitterly lamented that security agencies had ordered his communities to surrender even the very machetes of routine use in farming.

Soyinka also said what he termed as ‘the Danjuma thesis’ that helpless Nigerians should defend themselves was neither new nor strange, but simply a restatement of the logicality of human response in the face of aggression.

He told the President that he strongly believed that the recent planned massacre had a numerical target which was the formal annunciation of a new law.

The playwright stated, “From now on, for every missing, maimed, even legally seized cow-perhaps for trespassing and damage-one human being shall die, and the commensurate land shall be forfeited. Make no mistake, that is the message! Berom or Ondo, Tiv or Efik. Egba or Igalla — it makes no difference — this is the language, and if your government does not understand it yet, we, whose field is language, both spoken and symbolic, must decode it for you.’’

Soyinka said he also learnt that a former Secretary to the Government of the Federation, Chief Olu Falae, whose ordeal of being kidnapped by the “marauders was still fresh in the nation’s mind,” was still under siege by the same forces as neither he nor his workers could routinely attend to the farms.

“An aggressor who sniffs, however faintly, the permissive air of immunity, is near totally beyond recall. Only the stern language of reprimand, manifested in act, will deter him,’’ he stated.

He noted that the language of the leaders of Myetti Allah whom he described as ‘self-vaunting instigators’ in the nation’s herder colonisation was being promoted by the Minister of Defence, Mansur Dan-Ali, on behalf of the government.

Soyinka added that if an individual qualified to be the guinea-pig for testing the outrageous hate bill speech contemplated by the nation’s lawmakers, it was the ‘unedifying pronouncements of the Minister of Defence, who “continues to defend the indefensible through his arrogant, provocative dismissals of an agenda of ethnic cleansing, dehumanising the victims anew, and camouflaging the failure of the government by his gratuitous blame-passing.”

According to Soyinka, the language of the Dan-Ali is a language that is now being contradicted by the meaning of ‘land grabbing shall be reversed.’

The Punch

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Headline

Mary Habila’s Death: Tinubu Has Failed Comprehensively, Disgracefully – Atiku

Published

on

By

By Eric Elezuo

A former Vice President, and Presidential Candidate of the African Democratic Congress (ADC), Atiku Abubakar, has lashed out at the administration of President Bola Tinubu over its prolonged silence on the death of a medical practitioner, Mary Habila, who died at the residence of the Minister of Works, Dave Umahi.

Atiku condemned the inability of the  Tinubu-led government from making any pronouncements or instituting any form of probe to unravel the cause of death since the sad incident occurred on June 27, 2026, saying the administration has failed comprehensively and disgracefully.

Atiku’s remarks are contained in a statement he released on his social platforms endorsed with his regular AA.

While not casting any blame on any particular person or entity, Atiku maintained that condolences are not enough,but must be accompanied by thorough investigation into the circumstances that led to the death of the 26 years old medical practitioner in her prime.

The former Vice President therefore called for a “credible, independent, and transparent investigation” to establish the truth, noting that “it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us”.

The statement in full:

I have followed with deep sorrow and mounting concern the reports surrounding the death of Miss Mary Habila, a 26-year-old Nigerian from Nok, Southern Kaduna, who died on June 27, 2026, within the private residence of the Honourable Minister of Works, Senator David Umahi, in Uburu, Ebonyi State.

First, I extend my heartfelt condolences to the Habila family. No family should have to mourn a daughter taken in the prime of her life while also fighting simply to learn the truth of how she died.

But condolences are not enough. Nigerians deserve answers, and it is on this score that the Tinubu administration has failed, comprehensively and disgracefully.

Consider the facts that are not in dispute. A young woman died in the residence of a serving Federal Minister. For nearly two weeks, neither the Minister, nor the police, nor any arm of government said a word to the Nigerian people. It took the courage of Sahara Reporters to bring this death into public view. Three weeks after her death, no autopsy has been performed. No cause of death has been established. The investigation remains domiciled in the very state where the Minister served two terms as Governor and where his influence is beyond question.

And through all of this, silence from the Presidency. Silence from the Federal Executive Council. Silence from the Inspector-General of Police. Silence from the National Assembly. Not one word. Not one directive. Not one gesture to assure Nigerians that the life of Mary Habila matters to this government.

Instead, the Minister has been permitted to manage the narrative of a death that occurred under his own roof: issuing statements through his personal aides, deploying his private lawyers to correspond with the police, and continuing his official duties as though nothing has happened, while civil society groups, youth organisations, and the family’s own community cry out for an independent inquiry.

Let me be clear: I make no pronouncement on anyone’s guilt or innocence. That is precisely the point. Only a credible, independent, and transparent investigation can establish the truth, and it is the refusal of the Federal Government to guarantee such an investigation that constitutes the scandal before us.

A government’s first duty is the protection of life. Where a life is lost in circumstances touching a high official of state, the burden on government to act transparently is at its heaviest.

President Tinubu’s administration has instead treated this tragedy as an inconvenience to be waited out. If the death of a young Nigerian woman in a Minister’s residence cannot stir this government to act, then Nigerians must ask: whose life, exactly, does this government value?

I therefore demand the following: One, President Bola Tinubu must direct the Honourable Minister of Works to step aside immediately, pending the conclusion of investigations. This is not a punishment; it is the minimum standard of public accountability in any serious democracy. No official under this cloud should preside over a federal ministry as though it were business as usual.

Two, the Inspector-General of Police must immediately transfer the investigation from the Ebonyi State Command to Force Headquarters, with the involvement of independent forensic experts. No investigation conducted in the shadow of the Minister’s home-state influence can command public confidence.

Three, a full, independent, and internationally credible autopsy must be conducted without further delay, with the findings made public. The stalemate over the post-mortem, three weeks after this young woman’s death is an indictment of every institution involved.

Four, the family of Mary Habila must be protected from any pressure, inducement, or intimidation, and must be guaranteed unfettered access to the facts of their daughter’s death.

The measure of a nation is how it responds when the powerful are touched by tragedy and the powerless demand truth. Mary Habila was somebody’s daughter, somebody’s sister, a young professional with her life ahead of her. She was a Nigerian. Her death must not be reduced to a footnote of political convenience.

Nigeria will work again, but only when the life of every Nigerian counts, and when no one, however highly placed, stands beyond the reach of accountability.

May the soul of Mary Habila rest in peace. May her family find justice. -AA

Continue Reading

Headline

Atiku Accuses INEC of Aiding Tinubu’s Alleged One-party State Agenda

Published

on

By

Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has accused the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) of aiding President Bola Tinubu’s agenda to weaken opposition parties ahead of the 2027 polls by granting access to a factional leader of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

In a statement issued Monday by the Atiku Media Office, Atiku alleged that INEC’s actions amounted to partisanship and a violation of the Constitution and the Electoral Act.

The statement referenced a July 11, 2026 claim by Nafiu Bala Gombe, who “parades himself as National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress (ADC)”, that he had succeeded in uploading the names of his candidates on INEC’s portal.

According to Atiku’s office, uploading candidates is part of the process for the 2027 General Elections, made possible by access codes granted to political parties in line with INEC guidelines.

“Meanwhile, INEC has been mum, and has not denied or confirmed this obvious contradiction to the law and its own guidelines,” the statement said.

Atiku’s team argued that by granting an access code to Bala Gombe, INEC was recognizing a “pretender” despite having “since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco.”

“By granting access code to Bala Gombe, a pretender, laying claims to the chairmanship of the ADC, though the law is not on his side and INEC has since validated the chairmanship of the Sen. David Mark-led exco, the electoral umpire is once again manifesting its partisanship,” the statement noted.

It drew parallels with a past incident under Prof. Joash Amupitan-led INEC, alleging the commission “illegally removed the names of the duly recognised ADC exco following the judicial rascality of Justice Lifu in ignoring a superior ruling of an appellate court.”

The statement described the “so-called ‘successful’ uploading of ‘candidates’ by Nafiu Bala Gombe” as lacking legal basis.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe is not recognised as ADC Chairman. Mark is duly recognised. Can there be two recognised Chairmen of a political party? Possibly only in an INEC led by Amupitan. Can INEC grant two access codes to a political party? Certainly not,” it added.

Atiku’s office warned that the development “is a recipe for crisis and confirms that Prof Joash Amupitan was appointed to enable the weakening of the opposition parties by creating crisis even where none exists.”

Citing the law, the statement noted that Section 222 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) provides that candidates must emerge through recognized party primaries supervised by INEC, while Section 84 of the Electoral Act 2022 requires parties to submit only one validly nominated candidate per elective office.

“Nafiu Bala Gombe and his criminal gang did not conduct any primaries. The INEC granting of access code to Nafiu Bala Gombe is unconstitutional and unlawful. The only submitted candidates known to the law are those of David Mark. Any parallel submission such as Nafiu Bala Gombe’s is null and void,” it said.

The statement called on the INEC Chairman to stop “fomenting crisis in the ADC and the other opposition parties and by so doing helping President Bola Tinubu’s agenda of total State capture.”

Continue Reading

Headline

Appeal Court Upholds Judgment Ordering INEC to Derecognise Mark-led EXCO

Published

on

By

The Court of Appeal sitting in Abuja on Monday affirmed the judgment restraining the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from recognising or participating in any state congresses organised by committees appointed by the Senator David Mark-led caretaker leadership of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The appellate court decision was a split of two-to-one.

A three-member panel of the appellate court, in a lead verdict delivered by Justice Okon Abang, said it found no reason to set aside the restraining order the Federal High Court in Abuja had issued against the Mark-led ADC on April 29.

It further upheld the order of trial Justice Joyce Abdulmalik, which restrained the Mark-led executives from interfering with the tenure and functions of the party’s elected state executives.

The appellate court concurred that responsibility for conducting state congresses of political parties rests with elected state executive committees, not with the national leadership.

While Justices Abang and Donatus Okorowo gave the majority verdict barring the electoral body from acknowledging the outcome of congresses held by the Mark-led leadership of the ADC, the head of the appellate court’s panel, Justice Abba Mohammed, gave a dissenting judgment.

In his minority decision, Justice Mohammed held that the case that precipitated the restraining order bordered on a non-justiciable internal affair of a political party.

He held that the trial court was wrong to have assumed jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal judgment may jeopardise the presidential candidacies of former Vice President Atiku Abubakar and other candidates who emerged through the national congress organised by the Mark-led faction of the ADC, ahead of the 2027 general elections.

It will be recalled that the High Court had, in its judgment, held that the four-year tenure of the ADC’s State Working Committees and State Executive Committees remained valid and subsisting, pending the conduct of properly constituted congresses and the convocation of a national convention.

The judgment followed a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/581/2026, lodged before the court by aggrieved members of the ADC.

Those behind the suit are Don Norman Obinna, Johnny Tovie Derek, Obah C. Ehigiator, Hon. Olona Yinka, Dr. Charles Idowu Omideji, Samuel Pam Gyang, and Obianyo Patrick, who told the court that they sued for themselves and on behalf of all State Chairmen and State Executive Committees of the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

Listed as defendants in the matter are the ADC; Sen. David Mark; Sen. Patricia Akwashiki; Mallam Bolaji Abdullahi; Ogbeni Rauf Aregbesola; and Prof. Oserheimen Osunbor (sued on behalf of the Caretaker/Interim National Working Committee); and INEC.

The plaintiffs had, among other things, challenged the decision of the Senator Mark-led leadership of the ADC to constitute committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

They challenged the validity of appointments made by the Mark-led caretaker committee, arguing that planned state congresses slated for April 2026, if conducted under the supervision of the said caretaker committee, would constitute a gross violation of the party’s constitution.

It was further the position of the plaintiffs that only duly elected party organs recognised under the party’s constitution possess the power to conduct congresses.

While agreeing with the plaintiffs, Justice Abdulmalik held that neither the 1999 Constitution, as amended, nor the Constitution of the ADC empowered the caretaker/interim National Working Committee led by Senator Mark to appoint committees for the purpose of conducting state congresses.

The court held that the claims brought before it by the plaintiffs were valid and deserving of judicial consideration, citing an alleged breach of constitutional and statutory provisions.

It held that Section 223 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended, mandates political parties to conduct periodic elections based on democratic principles, adding that Article 23 of the ADC Constitution also provides that national and state officers shall hold office for a maximum of two terms spanning eight years.

Justice Abdulmalik stressed that although courts are generally reluctant to interfere in the domestic affairs of political parties, they nonetheless intervene where there is a clear allegation of violation of constitutional or statutory provisions. Political commentary articles

She held that evidence before the court established that the tenure of the state executive committees of the ADC remained valid and must be allowed to run its full course without interference.

The court stressed that only those elected structures have the authority to organise state congresses, and it accordingly nullified any process initiated by the Senator Mark-led caretaker leadership.

Earlier, the court dismissed a preliminary objection filed by the defendants challenging the competence of the suit and the court’s jurisdiction to entertain it.

It held that the subject matter of the plaintiffs’ action pertained to the affairs of INEC and therefore fell within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court under Section 251 of the 1999 Constitution, as amended.

The court also waved aside the defendants’ contention that the plaintiffs failed to exhaust internal dispute resolution mechanisms before instituting the action.

It held that the plaintiffs had the requisite locus standi (legal right) to file the suit.

The appellate court, while upholding the restraining order, said it had a duty to intervene so as to “prevent anarchy and ensure the survival of democracy in Nigeria.”

It cited a recent Supreme Court judgment in the leadership crisis rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) to hold that the ADC case could not be classified as a domestic affair of a political party.

“Once a complaint before the court is anchored on a constitutional infraction, the shield of internal affairs drops and the veil is lifted for judicial intervention,” Justice Abang added in the majority judgment.

Consequently, the panel dismissed the appeal marked CA/ABJ/CV/608/2026, which the ADC lodged in order to set aside the high court judgment.

It held that congresses and the national convention conducted by the Mark-led ADC amounted to a nullity as they were held in disobedience to a subsisting order that the High Court made on April 14.

Having resolved the case against the ADC, the appellate court awarded a cost of N10million against the party.

Shortly after the judgment, the ADC, which was represented by its National Welfare Secretary, Mr Nkem Ukandu, said the party would take the case before the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Trending