Connect with us

Headline

Pendulum: Between An Old Buharist and The New Buharideens

Published

on

By Dele Momodu
Fellow Nigerians, today’s epistle was inspired last minute by an encounter I had last night with a Buharideen. I had been contemplating what to write about this week when I ran into a staff of Indomie Noodles, the most popular noodle-processing company possibly in Africa, at a restaurant in Ikeja, Lagos. The gentleman had walked up to me for a quick chat, which was perfectly in order, as far as I was concerned. Indeed, this is a regular occurrence most places I go. It is always likely that I run into those who usually walk up to me to request selfies or general discussion. And so, this young man announced himself as my fan. He did not stop there, he said he follows me on Twitter and enjoys my tweets but added matter-of-factly, so to say, that he does not always agree with me. I responded that I was grateful for his appreciation of me and his following, but I added that two people can never agree on everything, all the time.
Out of curiosity, I asked what his points of disagreements were. Before, he could answer, I already smelt a rat and so volunteered a guess. “Is it anything to do with Buhari?” I asked calmly. He replied in the affirmative, “yes it is…” Here we go again, I soliloquised. These days, I hate going into unnecessary and unproductive conversations with those who have been given the nomenclature “Buharideens” on social media. A Buharist is a mild and reasonable supporter of President Muhammadu Buhari. I belonged in that category between 2014-15. Not anymore. I like the President as a person, but his politics and economics leave much to be desired. I can write a PhD thesis on this subject. Back to definitions. On the other hand, a Buharideen is a blind and rabid supporter of Buhari. He does not, and will never see, anything wrong in Buhari, even if you supply all the evidence in the world. It is always a waste of time to engage such political fundamentalists in argument or dialogue. In the course of this election process, I expect that Atiku will probably also sprout such rabid followership. Such is the fervent, unfortunate passion that elections can engender in this country.
‘Why do you disagree with my position on Buhari?” I probed. “Buhari is still the best Nigeria can offer in the present circumstance…” Hmmm, I sighed. “What are your reasons for saying so?” I had pricked him at that moment and he wasted no time in launching a diatribe of sorts. “Only thieves and looters won’t appreciate this government. Things have improved even if not perfect under Buhari.” I laughed raucously. I was used to those lines whenever I encounter the Buharideens. Everyone is a thief and looter, or friends of corrupt people, except members of their group. Not to worry.
I decided to take him on, even if I didn’t have the luxury of time at hand. “Do you know your party APC and your Presidential candidate would find it hard to campaign with his strongest weapon, anti-corruption, when tomorrow comes, because APC is heavily populated by the same so-called looters who migrated from PDP. I have not read it anywhere that they were screened out or rejected by your party, rather they have been promptly and amply protected by your party…” He nodded in agreement, but still argued that APC was a much better party despite the obvious hiccups and conflicts of interests.

 

It won’t be hyperbolic to describe APC as being seriously hypocritical, I told my new friend. I reeled out names of the certified and certificated kingpins of corruption in Nigeria who have ensconced and embedded within the APC without as much as a whimper from the leadership of the party. My friend kept mute, as if thinking hard on how to tackle me. But I kept punching him with facts and my wide knowledge of Nigerian politics.
He tried to wriggle out by going totally banal. “We should just let Buhari complete his second term so that power can return to the South West after that.” Almost spontaneously, I exploded: “who told you power would shift to the South West in 2023?” My friend said “it will, if we support Buhari now…” but I disagreed most vehemently and tried to educate him a bit.
“If you are talking of zoning, then you are wrong to assume that it is a binding agreement. When Buhari contested in 2003, who was in power? Obasanjo, a Yoruba man. When Buhari contested in 2007, who was in power? Yar’Adua, his kinsman from Katsina State. When Buhari contested in 2011, who was in power? Jonathan, from the oil rich Bayelsa State in the South South, and he was merely completing the term given to him divinely after his boss died in power. When Buhari contested in 2015, who was in power? Jonathan, who was serving his own first term as President and was seeking a second term, the first time a President from the region that lays the golden eggs was in that position. Did anyone, including Buhari, give any consideration to those facts? Did Buhari not contest against Obasanjo? Why did he not say that it was the turn of the South West and so he would abstain and wait for the time when it was the North’s turn. This is the charade and chicanery on display by the promoters of zoning, which does not even exist in our Constitution.” I concluded.
My friend said no one can stop power coming back to the South. I asked if the South West was the only zone in the South and why he feels the South East or South South cannot have it. “Are the Igbos not Nigerians or why do you think they can’t contest and win the Presidency?” I wondered. My friend said the Igbos have not aligned with a realistic power base which is currently controlled by Buhari. So, I noticed and noted that the strategy of APC in the South West is to brainwash the people of the region into deluding themselves that power is coming back to them very soon as compensation for supporting Buhari. This is so naïve and simplistic. I warned my friend that as we speak, those who are already warming up for the 2023 Presidential election are not limited, or restricted, to any particular zone.
The nonsensical impression that this jejune assumption creates is that some people hold the levers of power as personal property which can be dashed out to anyone, or a group of people, at will, but this is a total fallacy. From the issue of zoning, my friend introduced another reason Buhari must continue as President. He claimed that this is because there is no viable alternative to him. I queried what the man was saying. How can anyone say there is no alternative in a country of nearly 200 million people? I told him that was virtually untrue. It would be pathetic of us as a nation if we believe such foolishness. Exceptional talents abound, in their multitude, that can take us to the promised land. He asked if I can support an Atiku as President of Nigeria and I answered, “why not?’. I felt his next line even before he regurgitated it. “But Atiku is a very corrupt man…” He started the usual vituperations against a man no one has ever tried in a court of Law since leaving office in 2007. No one has even invited Atiku to explain his source of wealth. I told my friend to perish the idea of thinking I, or indeed, any rational man, would ever join his ilk in maligning a soul just for the fun of it. When did allegation become conviction? I informed him clearly that if that is the only way APC hopes to tackle Atiku, it won’t hold much water.
He also exhibited a dangerous mind-set which is presently the fall-back position when Buharideens are cornered. “Where did Atiku get his wealth from?”. He felt he had delivered to me what he must have thought was a sucker punch, but I responded in kind. “Why is it that your members rejoice and gloat about poverty instead of celebrating achievement. If most of our leaders did what Atiku has done in retirement, our country won’t be in this mess. At least Atiku has invested heavily in Nigeria and profited in the process. He should be commended instead of being criminalised without proof. Not everyone possesses this type of business acumen” I added.
He could see he wouldn’t be able to browbeat me about the usual jargons of portraying APC as a party of angels, so he announced he had to go. He appeared sober and subdued. Before he left, I fired another shot. “How about your primaries? I’m reading all sorts? Would you say elections were held in many places? Where they held, would you say they were democratic? And what about the sordid allegations of bribery and corruption levelled by aggrieved members, including our adorable First Lady?” These were more of rhetorical questions and I did not expect him to have immediate answers. It was obvious he was not proud of the lack of internal democracy and lurid accusations of corruption that has blighted the conduct of the party primaries and almost set his party ablaze. He quickly thanked me and disappeared into the night.
At least he could not abuse me frontally like most Buharideens do whenever you confront them with hard facts. For me democracy is always a game of continuous experiment. Every four years, a President must undergo a serious examination about his performance so far, as well as subject his physical and mental state to public scrutiny. Nothing suggests that he must be promoted automatically to a second term in office if majority of the people do not think he has performed creditably. I’m of the firm opinion that whoever I support this time would be dropped if he still does not meet expectations. Being a Buharist does not mean I will become a Buharideen.
There is no doubt that APC is seriously struggling to convince Nigerians that it deserves a second chance. While I won’t join those who claim APC has failed totally, I will support those who feel it has not lived up to its grandstanding pre-2015 election. I say this because we had great expectations. Notwithstanding the rot that had set into our political, social and economic psyche Nigerians believed that true change was desirable and possible. We voted for APC and Buhari on this basis. That change has only happened in very few cases and objective members of APC agree they have fumbled disappointingly. Most of the areas that we wanted positive change in have turned out to be an embarrassing anti-climax for this government. I will applaud the President for some of the achievements of this government, but that is only because he is the titular head of government. Others, particularly the Vice-President and his economic team are to be commended for the fitful and irregular economic progress we are witnessing. The President himself has not personally shone brightly and is apparently surviving on a reputation that is at best jaded. The attitude of government to the rash of violence in the country is less than salutary. We were applauded for attacking President Jonathan over the shortcomings of his government but the Buharideens want Buhari to be treated like fresh eggs, or not to be touched at all. 
Things must really change urgently and drastically in practically all facets for this government to have any realistic chance of winning the elections. It may not be too late. But the current trend and discourse is not going to help it. I believe people are tired of the same worn platitudes. There are many like me who feel our democratic rights to choose our preferred candidates are sacrosanct and must be respected. I will never abuse or stop anyone from campaigning or voting for Buhari and I don’t expect anyone to abuse me for my personal choice, like the Buharideens love to do.
I expect the battle of wits to start from next week. The first offensive is likely to be launched by former President Goodluck Jonathan when the book on his political life and stewardship is launched at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel, Abuja, on November 20, 2018. It promises to be a blockbuster event. The Buhari government has blamed the Jonathan government endlessly for its inability to perform as expected. Former President Jonathan and his supporters would have the first major opportunity to launch a blistering attack on a government that rode to power on the crest of possessing the magic wand to cure the alleged cesspit of corruption and inefficiency they left behind. It is probably a time for Jonathan to compare and contrast. We may yet learn that it is not yet Uhuru, and the past three and a half years have been no more than running on the spot, if even that!
The only ace that the populace have is their democratic right to keep changing governments until we get it right. If we fail to make the right choice several times, that only improves our learning curve. Eventually, one day, our democratic education and experimentation will be complete, and we will throw up competent and capable candidates from whom we can make proper and informed choices. For now, the alternatives are stark. We can only make do with what we have and won’t keep a failed government just because we are afraid of the next. Who knows, where our salvation lies? God works, mysteriously. 
There are interesting days and times ahead…

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Headline

Opposition Parties Reject 2026 Electoral Act, Demand Fresh Amendment

Published

on

By

Opposition political parties have rejected the 2026 Electoral Act recently passed by the National Assembly, which President Bola Tinubu swiftly signed into law.

The parties called on the National Assembly to immediately begin a fresh amendment process to remove what they described as “all obnoxious provisions” in the law.

Their position was made known at a press briefing themed “Urgent Call to Save Nigeria’s Democracy,” held at the Transcorp Hilton Hotel in Abuja on Thursday.

In a communiqué read by the Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP) Ahmed Ajuji, the opposition leaders stated:

“We demand that the National Assembly immediately commence a fresh amendment to the Electoral Act 2026, to remove all obnoxious provisions and ensure that the Act reflects only the will and aspiration of Nigerians for free, fair, transparent and credible electoral process in our country. Nothing short of this will be acceptable to Nigerians.”

Some of the opposition leaders present in at the event include former Senate President David Mark; former Governor of Osun State, Rauf Aregbesola; former Vice President Atiku Abubakar; former Governor of Rivers State, Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi; and former Governor of Anambra State, Peter Obi, all from the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

The National Chairman of the New Nigeria Peoples Party (NNPP), Ahmed Ajuji, and other prominent members of the NNPP, notably Buba Galadima, were also in attendance.

The coalition said the amended law, signed by Bola Tinubu, contains “anti-democratic” clauses, which they argue may weaken electoral transparency and public confidence in the voting system.

At the centre of the opposition’s concerns is the amendment to Section 60(3), which allows presiding officers to rely on manual transmission of election results where there is communication failure.

According to the coalition, the provision weakens the mandatory electronic transmission of results and could create loopholes for manipulation.

They argued that Nigeria’s electoral technology infrastructure is sufficient to support nationwide electronic transmission, citing previous assurances by officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

The parties also rejected the amendment to Section 84, which restricts political parties to direct primaries and consensus methods for candidate selection.

They described the change as an unconstitutional intrusion into the internal affairs of parties, insisting that indirect primaries remain a legitimate democratic option.

The opposition cited alleged irregularities in the recent Federal Capital Territory local government elections as evidence of what they described as a broader pattern of electoral compromise.

They characterised the polls as a “complete fraud” and said the outcome has deepened their lack of confidence in the ability of the electoral system to deliver credible elections in 2027.

The coalition also condemned reported attacks on leaders of the African Democratic Congress in Edo State, describing the incidents as a serious threat to democratic participation and political tolerance.

They warned that increasing violence against opposition figures could destabilise the political environment if not urgently addressed.

In their joint statement, the opposition parties pledged to pursue “every constitutional means” to challenge the Electoral Act 2026 and safeguard voters’ rights.

“We will not be intimidated,” the leaders said, urging civil society organisations and citizens to support efforts aimed at protecting Nigeria’s democratic system.

On February 18, 2026, President Bola Tinubu signed the Electoral Act (Amendment) 2026 into law following its passage by the National Assembly. The Act introduced several reforms, including statutory recognition of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System and revised election timelines.

However, opposition figures such as Atiku Abubakar and Peter Obi have also called for further amendments, particularly over the manual transmission fallback clause, which critics say leaves room for manipulation.

The president said the law will strengthen democracy and prevent voter disenfranchisement.

Tinubu defended manual collation of results, questioned Nigeria’s readiness for full real-time electronic transmission, and warned against technical glitches and hacking.

The Electoral Act sparked intense debate in the National Assembly over how election results should be transmitted ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Civil society groups under the “Occupy NASS” campaign demanded real-time transmission to curb manipulation.

In the Senate, lawmakers clashed during consideration of Clause 60, which allows manual transmission of results if electronic transmission fails.

Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe (ADC, Abia South) demanded a formal vote to remove the proviso permitting manual transmission, arguing against weakening real-time electronic reporting.

The move led to a heated exchange on the floor, with Senate President Godswill Akpabio initially suggesting the demand had been withdrawn.

After procedural disputes and a brief confrontation among senators, a division was conducted. Fifteen opposition senators voted against retaining the manual transmission proviso, while 55 supported it, allowing the clause to stand.

Earlier proceedings had briefly stalled during clause-by-clause review, prompting consultations and a closed-door session.

In the House of Representatives, a similar disagreement came up over a motion to rescind an earlier decision that mandated compulsory real-time electronic transmission of results to IReV.

Although the “nays” were louder during a voice vote, Speaker Tajudeen Abbas ruled in favour of rescinding the decision, triggering protests and an executive session.

Continue Reading

Headline

AFP: How Tinubu’s Govt Paid Boko Haram ‘Huge’ Ransom, Released Two Terrorists for Kidnapped Saint Mary’s Pupils

Published

on

By

The Nigerian government paid Boko Haram militants a “huge” ransom of millions of dollars to free up to 230 children and staff the jihadists abducted from a Catholic school in November, an AFP investigation revealed Monday.

Two Boko Haram commanders were also freed as part of the deal, which goes against the country’s own law banning payments to kidnappers. The money was delivered by helicopter to Boko Haram’s Gwoza stronghold in northeastern Borno state on the border with Cameroon, intelligence sources told AFP.

The decision to pay the militants is likely to irritate US President Donald Trump, who ordered air strikes on jihadists in northern Nigeria on Christmas Day and has been sent military trainers to help support Nigerian forces.

Nigerian government officials deny any ransom was paid to the armed gang that snatched close to 300 schoolchildren and staff from St. Mary’s boarding school in Papiri in central Niger state on November 21. At least 50 later managed to escape their captors.

Boko Haram has not been previously linked to the kidnapping, but sources told AFP one of its most feared commanders was behind the mass abduction: the notorious jihadist known as Sadiku.

He infamously held up a train from the capital in 2022 and netted hefty ransoms for the release of government officials and other well-off passengers.

Boko Haram, which has waged a bloody insurgency since 2009, is strongest in northeast Nigeria.

But a cell in central Niger state operates under Sadiku’s leadership. The St. Mary’s pupils and staff were freed after two weeks of negotiations led by Nuhu Ribadu, Nigeria’s National Security Adviser, with the government insisting no ransom was paid. Nigeria’s State Security Service flatly denied paying any money, saying “government agents don’t pay ransoms”.

However, four intelligence sources familiar with the talks told AFP the government paid a “huge” ransom to get the pupils back. One source put it at 40 million naira per head – around $7 million in total.

Another put the figure lower at two billion naira overall. The money was delivered by chopper to Ali Ngulde, a Boko Haram commander in the northeast, three sources told AFP.

Due to the lack of communications cover in the remote area, Ngulde had to cross into Cameroon to confirm delivery of the ransom before the first group of 100 children were released.

Nigeria has long been plagued by mass abductions, with criminals and jihadist groups sometimes working together to extort millions from hostages’ families, and authorities seemingly powerless to stop them.

Source: Africanews

Continue Reading

Headline

Unlawful Invasion: El-Rufai Drags ICPC, IGP, Others to Court, Demands N1bn Damages

Published

on

By

Former Governor of Kaduna State, Nasir El-Rufai, has slammed a ₦1 billion fundamental rights enforcement suit against the Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC) for what he claimed was an unlawful invasion of his Abuja residence.

El-Rufai, in a suit filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja, also listed the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT, Abuja Magisterial District; Inspector-General of Police, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF) as 2nd to 4th respondents respectively.

According to the suit filed through his lawyers, led by Oluwole Iyamu, El-Rufai prayed the court to declare that the search warrant issued on February 4 by the Chief Magistrate, Magistrate’s Court of the FCT (2nd respondent), authorising the search and seizure at his residence as invalid, null and void.

Security operatives had stormed and searched the former Governor’s residence in the ongoing investigations against him.

However, he argued in the case marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/345/2026, that the search was in violation of Section 37 of the Constitution, and urged the court to declare that the search warrant was “null and void for lack of particularity, material drafting errors, ambiguity in execution parameters, overbreadth, and absence of probable cause thereby constituting an unlawful and unreasonable search.”

In the suit dated and filed February 20 by Iyamu, ex-governor, who is currently under detention, sought seven reliefs.

He prayed the court to declare that the invasion and search of his residence at House 12, Mambilla Street, Aso Drive, Abuja, on Feb. 19 at about 2pm and executed by agents of ICPC and I-G, “under the aforesaid invalid warrant, amounts to a gross violation of the applicant’s fundamental rights to dignity of the human person, personal liberty, fair hearing, and privacy under Sections 34, 35, 36, and 37 of the Constitution.”

He urged the court to declare that “any evidence obtained pursuant to the aforesaid invalid warrant and unlawful search is inadmissible in any proceedings against the applicant, as it was procured in breach of constitutional safeguards.”

El-Rufai, therefore, sought an order of injunction restraining the respondents and their agents from further relying on, using, or tendering any evidence or items seized during the unlawful search in any investigation, prosecution, or proceedings involving him.

“An order directing the Ist and 3rd respondents (ICPC and I-G) to forthwith return all items seized from the applicant’s premises during the unlawful search, together with a detailed inventory thereof.

“An order awarding the sum of N1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Naira) as general, exemplary, and aggravated damages against the respondents jointly and severally for the violations of the applicant’s fundamental rights, including trespass, unlawful seizure, and the resultant psychological trauma, humiliation, distress, infringement of privacy, and reputational harm.”

The breakdown of the ₦1 billion in damages includes “a N300 million as compensatory damages for psychological trauma, emotional distress, and loss of personal security;

“A ₦400 million as exemplary damages to deter future misconduct by law enforcement agencies and vindicate the applicant’s rights.

“A ₦300 million as aggravated damages for the malicious, high-handed and oppressive nature of the respondents’ actions, including the use of a patently defective warrant procured through misleading representations.”

He equally sought ₦100 million as the cost of filing the suit, including legal fees and associated expenses.

Iyamu argued that the search warrant was fundamentally defective, lacking specificity in the description of items to be seized, containing material typographical errors, ambiguous execution terms, overbroad directives, and no verifiable probable cause.

He added that the warrant violated Sections 143-148 of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015; Section 36 of the Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences (ICPC) Act, 2000, and constitutional protections against arbitrary intrusions and several other constitutional provisions.

“Section 146 stipulates that the warrant must be in the prescribed form, free from defects that could mislead, but the document is riddled with errors in the address, date, and district designation;

“Section 147 allows direction to specified persons, but the warrant’s indiscriminate addressing to “all officers is overbroad and unaccountable.

“Section 148 permits execution at reasonable times, but the contradictory language creates ambiguity, undermining procedural clarity,” he submitted.

Iyamu stated that the execution of the invalid warrant on Feb. 19 resulted in an unlawful invasion of his client’s premises, constituting violations of the rights to dignity (Section 34), personal liberty (Section 35), fair hearing (Section 36), and privacy (Section 37) of the Constitution.

He further argued that the search was conducted without legal justification and in a manner that inflicted humiliation and distress.

Evidence obtained without a valid warrant is unlawful and inadmissible, as established in judicial precedents such as C.O.P. v. Omoh (1969) NCLR 137, where the court ruled that evidence procured through improper means contravenes fundamental rights and must be excluded,” he said.

In the affidavit in support of the application, Mohammed Shaba, a Principal Secretary to the former governor, averred that on Feb. 19 at about 2p.m., officers from the ICPC and Nigeria Police Force invaded the residence under a purported search warrant issued on or about Feb. 4.

According to him, the said warrant is invalid due to its lack of specificity, errors, and other defects as outlined in the grounds of this application.

He said the “search warrant did not specify the properties or items being searched for.”

Shaba stated that the officers failed to submit themselves for search as provided by the law before proceeding with the search.

“That the Magistrate did not specify the magisterial district wherein he sits.

“That during the invasion, the officers searched the applicant’s premises without lawful authority, seized personal items including documents and electronic devices, and caused the applicant undue humiliation, psychological trauma, and distress.

“Now shown to me and marked as ‘EXHIBIT B’ Is the list of the items carted away.

“That no items seized have been returned, and the respondents continue to rely on the unlawful evidence.

“That the applicant suffered violations of his constitutional rights as a result, and this application is brought in good faith to enforce same,” Shaba said.

Source: Naijanews.com

Continue Reading

Trending