Connect with us

Headline

Pendulum: Why Nigeria Must Avoid Another Civil War

Published

on

By Dele Momodu

Fellow Nigerians, I have decided to write on this topic today because of the dangerous giddiness I observe in many of our young ones today, especially on social media. I have no doubt that many of them love our country so passionately but are disappointed in how messy things have been. Many have struggled to go to school hoping to find something meaningful to do thereafter but no such luck. Many have become frustrated and despondent and desperate in the process. The resultant effect naturally is deep seated resentment and anger. But I read somewhere that “anger beclouds reasoning” more often than not. Someone needs to plead with those who think war is a tea party to perish the thought. It is not a game and to fit it into language which our youths of today will probably understand, it is not a video game. No matter how angry we were in our younger days, (and I was a pioneer JAMBITE in 1978, some 41 odd years ago), we tried hard to avoid bloodshed even when security forces fired at us, as they still do till this day. And compared to war, such confrontations are child’s play!

Even if war must come as the very last resort, there must be a method to madness. War should never be fought for the sake of war. One must ask the pertinent questions: what are we fighting for, the objectives; who is leading the war and will they come out on the battlefield with members of their own family or send others out as Guinea pigs; what guarantees have we that even if we win, which cannot ever be guaranteed, we can win with minimum collateral costs and damages? That is why we have what is called a pyrrhic victory, a victory so devastating and debilitating that it might as well have been a defeat! And in a civil war, there is ultimately no victor or vanquished because the protagonists all bear the scars for a very long time. Those who participated in and survived the Nigerian civil war will tell you of the emotional pain, anguish and torture that they still suffer till today alongside the physical injuries and wounds. We have examples of other wars fought across the globe and we know their outcomes. Even where victory has been proclaimed in some of them, we feel the aftershocks and aftermath much later on and wonder why, if it was all so in vain, we ever got involved in the process.

True, war is sometimes unavoidable, but I don’t think Nigeria or Nigerians can afford, or survive another round of a bloody civil war. Of course, it is not just the fact that such a war is likely to lead to the disintegration of the country, because some people will claim that this is what they want in any event, it is  the nature of the disintegration that must be feared and avoided. We have become too divided along ethnic lines that we may need to create tens and tens of nations out of present-day Nigeria. Each of the so-called majority tribes in Nigeria have their own local internecine battles being fought with the minority ethnic groups. Just as some majority tribes insist they want to secede or break away because they cannot stand other tribes lording it over them, so also the smaller clans which will have become bigger groups in a vastly reduced sub-region will complain about the overlordship of the new majority tribe in any new nation.  Our people are never satisfied or content.  There will always be room and avenue for complaints.  It is therefore not going to be as simple as many of those calling for war think to conceptualise the numerous nations that will be birthed by a war-ravaged Nigeria.

I have been privileged to read voraciously about the history of wars globally. What pains me the most is that after the insanity that started every war calms down, the antagonists would usually sit down across a table, and dialogue with one another having agreed to a conversation they had rejected out of hand in the past, in their collective stupidity. Many of them would later come back to preach about the importance of unity after wasting so many innocent lives, but never the lives of those close to them. Those ones are usually ensconced in safety in far-away climes.

Apart from reading, I have travelled through several war-torn zones and saw first-hand the vestiges of mutually acquired suspicion and the destruction and calamity that ensued following the seeming intractable disputes that had led to the field of battle. I was in Sierra Leone in 2001 and visited Port Loko and Mange, towns or villages that were ravaged and devastated by the war that raged with so much venom that hands and arms were amputated by whether you were wearing long sleeves or short sleeves. I wondered what on earth could have led to such meanness, wickedness and evil. I also travelled to Liberia where, again, I visited our soldiers who controlled ten of the 15 counties in the country, at the time. The story was quite similar to that of Sierra Leone. No compassion, no sympathy, no empathy. There was looting, raping and murder all in the name and disguise of war. Evildoers in these countries took refuge under the umbrella of war to unleash their bestial nature on poor unsuspecting citizens who despite their pleas and entreaties were massacred in their thousands with great mirth and debauchery accompanying the sickening killings and rapes.

I have also travelled to Rwanda many times in the last couple of years and can authoritatively confirm that no country should ever experience such a pogrom or genocide for any reason. The carnage, bloodbath and ethnic cleansing that I heard about seemed to come out of stories one reads in novels and fantasies only that I saw and met those who had been unfortunate to be victims of a macabre example of man’s inhumanity to man.

I’m particularly worried that many of those shouting war, war, war in Nigeria hardly know the meaning of it. My visits to the Kigali Genocide Memorial convinced me that we are playing with naked fire. I see too many similarities to how the conflagration started in Rwanda. Before the two main rivals in the ethnic jingoism knew what was happening, they had started a war that wasted too many lives. I passed through that museum again some days ago and still had tears in my eyes. I ran into many Nigerians and wished they will all go back as Peace Ambassadors having witnessed the harm and suffering that a war of attrition such as that being espoused by some of our youths and aged elders can bring.

Nearer home, I have seen the effect that a mini war can have in the Ife-Modakeke crisis of the 1980’s. Close friends and families suddenly became sworn enemies. People used the opportunity to settle old scores. Young men were slain for apparently no reason.  Those who provided the guns and ammunition, the petrol and the lighters for the killings and arson that took place hid their closest and dearest from the blood-letting that ensued. When the dust settled the discerning members of both communities sat down to wonder what it was all about.  However, the damage had been done! Till this day, just as there is mutual distrust and suspicion amongst the various majority tribes of Nigeria, so also is there such distrust and suspicion between the Ifes and the Modakekes.

It is so disheartening that many of those controlling the appurtenances of power in our country today once fought for the unity of Nigeria during the civil war of 1967 to 1970. How come they have forgotten the monstrosity and monumental tragedy that befell Nigeria at that unfortunate moment? Why can’t these leaders realise that our country deserves better than to be governed in such petty manner as we now are doing? Why can’t they concentrate on the onerous tasks of nation building instead of nation wrecking? Nigeria is a great country that will become greater still if we stop fanning the ethnic embers and concentrate on building a thriving successful nation. Our diversity should be our strength and not a weakness or an albatross around our neck. Without any doubt, the price of peace is always cheaper than the cost of war. Anarchy will never lead to progress and development. It can only worsen or situation.

However, all the blame cannot be laid at the doorstep of our leaders, especially those in government. I see middle-aged people who were young people at the time, and were unfortunate childhood participants, actors or spectators in disaster that was the Nigerian civil war. This is because in reality, no region was spared. The civil war did not in fact begin in 1967, its genesis was in the mutiny and subsequent military putsch of January 1966. The January 1966 affair became a raging inferno once the retaliatory coup of July 1966 took place and given the egos and youthful exuberance of our military leaders at the time, it was no wonder that they committed to going down the slippery slope of war rather than discourse. One would have thought that with age and maturity, those leaders who are alive, and were active participants in the turmoil that embroiled Nigeria in those crazy days, would reflect and ensure that nothing of that nature ever occurs again in our country.  However, it is sad to see that some of them are in the forefront of the agitation for war as means of resolving what is after all a political issue.

The buck still stops at the table of our leaders, especially the President, Muhammadu Buhari. He needs to work harder at reassuring the nation that he means well for Nigeria and that he respects all Nigerians as equals no matter where they come from. For the moment and at this present time in our history, the President must not only recognise the existence and utility of all regions, regardless of their part in his electoral success, he must integrate them. It is not too difficult to do. Our Constitution already provides the foundation for any determined leader to seize the moment and take the initiative. There is provision for Federal Character in most appointments and although this has sometimes been used to crown mediocrity over merit, in the hands of an astute manager, it can be used to assuage and heal old wounds and to kickstart the country’s journey towards living in harmony and unity.

I believe that we must learn to be tolerant towards each other. Some of the complaints about our leaders’ stem from the intolerance and impatience on both sides.  This is justified because of our history which our leaders have never properly addressed. At the same time, I also believe that our leaders must focus mainly on the real ills of our society especially poverty, education and unemployment. Dealing decisively with these matters will lead to our youths being more discerning and deciding not to be cannon fodder for anybody. There must come a time when it should not matter where successive Presidents come from or indeed whether they come from the same parts as their deputies. What should matter is merit and good governance. This can only be achieved when those leading us abandon the seeming toga of ethnic overlords that they are adorned with, when it is not their style or portion. This they can only do by transparently demonstrating that they are true nationalists and patriots and will treat all Nigerians the same irrespective of their ethnic backgrounds.

That is the future, our future, not war, secession or disintegration.

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