Headline

Opinion: New Electricity Tariffs: Questions-Reuben Abati

Published

6 years ago

January 7, 2020

Editor

By Reuben Abati

The Buhari administration has given Nigerians a most unusual and disturbing New Year Gift, in the form of a proposed increase in electricity tariffs, enforceable from April by the Electricity Distribution Companies (Discos) and to be completed by the end of 2021, with the full backing of the regulator, the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC). What happened? I am in a state of shock. What we knew, what we saw, before now, indeed what we were told, was that the electricity distribution companies were the weakest links in the electricity supply chain. They were accused of different infractions by the Ministry of Power, the Nigeria Bulk Electricity Trader (NBET) and the NERC which included, failure to abide by the provisions of the National Electricity Power Sector Reform Act (EPSRA), violation in particular of Section 74 thereof; failure to make due remittances to the Bulk Trader resulting in huge debts that had become a problem for the sector, and failure to comply with the metering system.

By October 2019, the NERC had served notice that it was prepared to revoke the licenses of the 11 Discos, should they fail within a 60-day deadline, to give reasons to the contrary in defence of their continued presence in the electricity market. The standard official line was that the Discos were incompetent and ineffective, making the value chain difficult for both the Transmission Company of Nigeria (TCN) and the Generating Companies (GENCOs). The DISCOS insisted that they had done nothing wrong. They complained about (i) the huge cost of doing business in the sector; (ii), the failure of government to enforce cost reflective tariffs in line with the Multi Year Tariff Order (MYTO); (iii) electricity theft, (iv) the non-availability of gas due to vandalism, (v) government’s refusal to engage with stakeholders in the sector and (vi) they alleged that government is the biggest debtor in the market due to the refusal of government departments and agencies to pay electricity bills.

The big take-away for me was the persistent threat by the Federal Government of Nigeria that the DISCOs will be scrapped, or that their licenses will be revoked and re-assigned. It was said quite loudly that the current owners of the licenses got involved in the electricity sector not because they have the technical know-how or the financial muscle, but simply because they were close to the Jonathan administration, which accelerated the power sector reform process. Cast in that shape, the electricity sector became part of the unending navel-gazing, Jonathan-caused-it card that has been consistently played by the Buhari administration.

What is shocking however is that the decision to increase electricity tariffs raises more questions than answers. On the surface of it, the Federal Government and its agents have capitulated to the DISCOs. How and why? At what point did the Federal Government buy into the argument of the DISCOs that the most important challenge in the electricity sector is the payment of cost-reflective tariffs? And how was the 77% increase arrived at, with consumers in the South East having to pay more than the rest of the country? Is this a case of ethnic discrimination? Do consumers under Enugu Disco use more electricity? What formula determined the new proposed rates? Well, they tell us it is all based on “changes in macroeconomic variables and available generation capacity”. Please, what does that mean in common man’s language? We have also been told that the proposed tariff hike is a retrospective adjustment to make up for revenue shortfall for the DISCOs from 2016 -2018. So, should the consumer be punished for the regulator’s failure to respect its own enabling Act? And by the way, in the last four years, electricity tariffs have increased by about 300%.

What we see is an excessive emphasis on revenue and profit by those in charge of the service delivery sectors of the Nigerian economy in general. Nobody cares about the consumer. On all fronts, the Nigerian consumer is left unprotected. He or she is perpetually served the short end of the stick, and violated without consultation or respect for his or her right to be heard. The electricity sector is one of the most inefficient sectors in Nigeria. The national grid collapsed more than 10 times in the year 2019. Every month, we were told that gas pipelines had been vandalized. The DISCOs complained endlessly that they were having problems, but they were merely giving excuses. The regulator towards the end of the year introduced a compulsory metering policy and urged consumers to get properly metered to avoid the menace of estimated billing and the grand corruption that comes with it The DISCOs resisted the metering policy and virtually either refused to support it or adopted measures to frustrate it. They circumvented the terms of the policy. Today, most consumers of electricity remain unmetered. They do not enjoy efficient service. They are billed on the basis of some nebulous categorization called “status.” What “status”? The owners of Yola DISCO pleaded force majeure and threw in the towel, but other DISCOs continue to operate without offering the people premium service. This has angered customers across the country. In Benin, the people once carried placards against the electricity distribution company, the BEDC. In other parts of the country, DISCO officials have been beaten up and given a bloody eye.

On top of it all, the proposed increase in electricity tariffs is insensitive to the feelings of electricity consumers. Many Nigerians insist that they are willing to pay for electricity if they get it on a regular basis – for now, we are a nation in darkness. The people want transparency – the pervasive estimated billing system does not promote that, the DISCOs simply charge as they wish on the basis of nebulous factors. The people want meters, but nobody is taking that seriously. The timing and announcement of the proposed increase are also unfair. It is an unkind New Year Gift to a people confronted with a year of more taxes, with Value Added Tax jumping from 5% in 2019, to 7.5% in 2020 along with other taxes under the Finance Act of 2019. Nigerian workers expect that the increase in the new national minimum wage will be fully implemented in the year 2020, but it is obvious as we enter the new year, that the new minimum wage has already been wiped out by increased inflation and taxation. It is ever so convenient for government to punish the common man. In other countries, governance is aligned to the people’s interests and welfare. In Nigeria, our governors seek to inflict pain and punish the people.

The opaqueness in the electricity sector is another problem. It promises to be worse than what we have seen so far in the oil and gas sector and the inefficiency of the oil corporation, NNPC. We are told on one hand that electricity tariffs will go up in April, while at the same time, the regulator announces that the Federal Government will underwrite N544.8 billion Electricity Tariffs Shortfall in 2020. How? Is that a subsidy? And if so, is there a provision for it in the 2020 Budget? N544.8 billion? How was that figure arrived at?

The Federal Government says the intended increase in electricity tariffs is meant to get the sector back on track. Taxing the poor and the impoverished is not the best way to get anything back on track. The electricity sector is in urgent need of a general review and reform, and there are many issues to be addressed. Cost reflective tariffs under the MYTO regime may make the investors happy, but making consumers happier and protecting their interests should be the priority of government. Will increase in tariffs translate into efficiency? I doubt. Efficient service delivery is important. Will government agencies, the biggest debtors in the electricity sector now pay their debts? We don’t know. Or has there been a quid pro quo at the people’s expense? Is government planning to write off the debts of the DISCOs, and forgive their sins? What has happened to the plan to revoke operational licenses in the sector? Too many questions. But that is Nigeria for you. Nothing is ever straight-forward.

II: The Pope And The Woman He Slapped

On New Year’s Eve, December 31, 2019, Pope Francis slapped a woman’s hand as she clung to him, and grabbed him while he was making the rounds greeting pilgrims at the Vatican. The following morning, the Pope apologized for what he called “yesterday’s bad example”. The footage of the Pope, freeing himself from the woman, with a scowl on his face, has since gone viral, but I am pleased that there are more people in support of the Pope than against him. Significantly, there has been no outrage. The Pope’s apology came swiftly in less than 24 hours but he actually didn’t need to apologize because he did no wrong.

What is established is that the Pope, often decorated with the toga of spotlessness, perfection and sainthood is human after all. He is like us. He is one of us. Like everyone else, if he feels threatened or unsafe, he will try to protect himself. The Pope was reacting to an invasion of his space. It is fine to shake hands but some people don’t know when a handshake sends a different signal. They grab. They linger. Women probably understand this better. The moment a handshake becomes an unwanted and unwelcome gesture; the other party is bound to recoil in horror or anger. That is precisely what the Pope did. He slapped the woman’s hand twice and freed himself.

I do not agree with those who argue that this is an indication of lack of clarity about Church teaching or that it is a case of “violence against women.” In any case, the Pope’s hand swat was just a mere tap. This wasn’t a case of an Anthony Joshua slapping an over-eager Asian woman at St. Peter’s square. Where was Vatican Security by the way? In his Angelus remarks on January 1, the Pope delivered a message of hope and preached about “violence against women.” He has been accused of hypocrisy for that but his critics are again unfair to him because the equivalence that they seek to establish with the event of the night before is false.

For me, by offering an apology, the Pope sets a good example and tone for the new year and decade. He reminds us of a value that is increasingly missing in social relations between the powerful and the ordinary in our world. The Pope is leader of over 2.1 billion Catholics in the world. He controls minds and imaginations. To see the head of such a large congregation getting angry in public, and even getting “physical”, is a reminder of the commonality of human emotions, but his apology in an age when many, especially the powerful and the privileged have lost the capacity to say “I am sorry, I didn’t mean to do that” is the most ennobling aspect of the incident. When last have you as a person, tried to say: “I am sorry”? In today’s world, we rarely apologise for the gaps between acts and intentions. We don’t care enough about the feelings of others. People are just intentionally offensive, be they leaders or followers – and that is why the world is such a troubled place today from Ukraine to Crimea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Israel, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, North Korea and the United States. Even when some people try to be contrite and they offer apologies, they sound more like Prince Andrew of the United Kingdom making empty noise about obvious wrongs, or like Jeremy Corbyn’s hollowness on anti-Semitism.

In this matter, we have focused more on the Pope, perhaps understandably. But let the point be made: that the woman who grabbed him is an archetype for followers who do not know their boundaries. Ordinary people tend to cling to leaders, particularly religious leaders. In the Bible, Luke 8: 40-49, the people crowded and pressed against the Lord Jesus Christ and a woman touched Him prompting Him to ask: “Who touched me?” Someone touched me, I know that power has gone out from me”. These days, the people overdo it, because they believe that their salvation lies with that touch, that encounter with the man of power or the symbol of divine authority. Many Christians worship Man rather than God. But it is perfectly normal for the Pope to act like a human being and good for all of us to see that he is just like “us”.

Headline

Who’s Afraid of New Electoral Act?

Published

10 hours ago

February 8, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

The furore generated with the passing of the Electoral Bill 2026 by the Nigerian Senate, is yet to die down as various groups, sections and institutions, have continued to lend their voices in condemnation of the tactical removal of the proposed real-time electronic transmission of results.

The Civil Society Organisations and Action Aid have declared a protest to kickoff on Monday, February 9, 2026, titled Occupy NASS Protest, until the Senate find reason to listen to Nigerians, and do what is right, and that aligned with the aspirations of Nigerians, according Samson Itodo, the Executive Director of YIAGA Africa.

In the same vein, the African Democratic Congress has pledged to begin a protest in Abuja on Monday over the removal of real-time clause in the new electoral bill.

The Senate, on Wednesday, passed the Electoral Bill 2026 following hours of debate, but ended up rejecting a proposal to mandate real-time electronic transmission of election results while however, approving significant reforms to election timelines, penalties for electoral offences and voting technology.

The Boss learnt that at the centre of the controversy was Section 60, which governs the transmission of polling unit results, where the Senators voted down a recommendation by the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters that would have compelled presiding officers to upload results to the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal in real time. The rejection has drawn the irk of majority of Nigerians, who have have wondered if anyone is actually afraid of the new electoral law? If yes, who? And what could be the reason behind such fears as the need to regulate a hitchfree and smooth and fair electoral process have remained the goal and aspirations of politically savvy Nigerian.

But the lawmakers, contrary to the yearnings of most Nigerians, have retained the approach in the 2022 Electoral Act, which allows electronic transmission after votes are counted and publicly announced at the polling unit. In other words, giving approval to transfer of results instead of transmit in real-time of results.

In their defence however, Senators opposing the real-time upload argued that inconsistent network coverage and logistical challenges could trigger legal disputes and undermine electoral credibility.

The rejected proposal was contained in the new Clause 60(5) of the draft bill, which aimed to mandate presiding officers to electronically transmit polling unit results in real time after completing and signing Form EC8A.

The clause was designed to strengthen transparency and reduce electoral malpractice through technology-driven result management.

The motion to reject the electronic transmission clause was swiftly seconded by the Deputy President of the Senate, Barau Jibrin.

Similarly, the Senate also rejected a proposed amendment under Clause 47 that would have allowed voters to present electronically-generated voter identification, including a downloadable voter card with a unique Quick Response (QR) code, as a valid means of accreditation.

In his defensive remarks, the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Adeyemi Adaramodu, described the debate as a process subjected to an invisible world of semantics.

“Electronic transmission remains part of the law,” he said, “and results will continue to be available to the public both electronically and through physical forms, ensuring verifiable records for disputes,” Adaramodu said.

In his own defence, President of the Senate, Godswill Akpabio, though admitted that the Senate deliberately deleted the provision for “real-time” transmission of election results from the Electoral Bill, 2026, noted however, that the Senate took the decision because it believed that “technology must save and not endanger democracy.”

Speaking at the launch of a book, “The Burden of Legislators in Nigeria”, authored by Senator Effiong Bob, in Abuja, Akpabio likened the issues raised in the book to the challenges faced by lawmakers in the course of their duties, including the controversy and alleged “abuses” directed at the Senate following the passage of the electoral bill.

The Senate President argued that the entire country could be thrown into chaos if, for instance, network or power failure affected the uploading of results.

He insisted that Form EC8A and other official election records should remain the most reliable means of declaring results.

“All we said was to remove the word ‘real-time’ to allow INEC decide the mode of transmission. If you make it mandatory and there is a system failure, there will be a serious problem,” Akpabio told the gathering, further confirming that the bill, as passed, excluded real-time electronic transmission of results.

Continuing, he said, “Real-time means that if there are nine states where there is no network, does it mean elections will not take place there?

“Or in any part of the country where there is a grid breakdown, does it mean there will be no election?”

The Senate President sounded a note of warning to Nigerians amid outrage, saying the legislature would not be “intimidated” into passing a faulty law simply to please opposition political parties, civil society groups and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).

He criticised NGOs for insisting that because they organised retreats for lawmakers, where ideas were exchanged on the electoral bill, the Senate must adopt their positions, even if such positions did not align with the interests of all segments of the country.

“Why are people setting up panels on television stations and abusing senators? I leave them to God.

“We will not be intimidated but will do what is right for Nigeria, not what one NGO says. A retreat is not law-making.

“Why do you think that the paper you agreed to in Lagos must be what we must approve?” he asked.

Akpabio frowned at the public attacks on the Senate, saying they were uncalled for, and stressing that any provision rejected by the Senate could be reinstated by the Conference Committee of the Senate and the House of Representatives. He said there was therefore no need to hastily criticise senators.

“We have not even completed it until we look at the votes and proceedings. When we bring out the votes and proceedings, any senator has the right to rise and amend it.

“We can amend anything before we approve the votes and proceedings. Why abuse the Senate when what we have is incomplete?

“I can’t talk until they tell me to drop the gavel. In this case, we are yet to complete the process,” he said.

Besides Akpabio’s defences, many groups and individuals have risen stoutly against the removal of the real-time electronic transmission clause, describing the act as irresponsible and detrimental to the feeling of Nigerians.

In his reaction, the National Chairman of the main opposition party, African Democratic Congress (ADC) Senator David Mark, who himself, was a Senate President, and was also present at the book launch, cautioned Akpabio against speaking for the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

“What the ADC is saying is: pass the law and let INEC decide whether it can implement real-time electronic transmission or not. Don’t speak for INEC.

“The position of the ADC is clear: pass the bill and let INEC decide what it will do with it,” Mark harped.

Reacting also, a former governor of Anambra State and presidential candidate of the Labour Party in the 2023 presidential election, Mr. Peter Obi, delivered knocks to the Senate for the rejection, noting that the Senate decision to stick to the 2022 Electoral Act, which concedes the discretion to apply electronic transmission of results to the Independent National Electoral Commission ( INEC), is an assault on democracy.

In a lengthy post in X titled, “We Continue to Confirm our ‘Now Disgraced Status’ as a Nation?” the now ADC chieftain expressed concern that while other nations have embraced the practise of electronic transmission of results, “the supposed giant of Africa, shamelessly lags behind, dragging the continent backwards.”

He wrote: “Let us all pause and pray for the souls of over 150 innocent lives lost in Kwara yesterday. This tragedy is precisely why I delayed commenting on the outrageous and shameful news surrounding our electoral system.

“The Senate’s blatant rejection of mandatory electronic transmission of election results is an unforgivable act of electoral manipulation ahead of 2027.

“This failure to pass a clear safeguard is nothing short of a deliberate assault on Nigeria’s democracy. By rejecting these essential transparency measures, they are eroding the very foundation of credible elections. “One must ask: Does the government exist to ensure order and justice, or to institutionalise chaos? Is its purpose to serve the people, or to fulfil the sinister ambitions of a select few?

“The turmoil, disputes, and manipulations that plagued past elections, especially the 2023 general election, stemmed directly from the refusal to fully implement electronic transmission.

“Nigerians were fed excuses of a fabricated “glitch” that never existed. While numerous African nations adopt electronic transmission to bolster democracy, Nigeria, the supposed giant of Africa, shamelessly lags behind, dragging the continent backwards.

“We are wasting time hosting conferences and drafting papers on Nigeria’s problems while we, the leaders and elite, are the real issue. Our deliberate resistance to reform is pulling the country backwards, dragging us toward a primitive state of governance.

“By rejecting mandatory electronic transmission—a critical safeguard for electoral integrity—we are entrenching disorder aimed at perpetuating confusion according to the whims of a small clique. Have we not reached a point where we must think seriously about the future of our country and our children? Should leadership not focus on building a credible, orderly, and livable nation for the next generation, rather than one permanently ensnared in chaos?

“When the former Prime Minister of the UK, aware of our history, labelled us “fantastically corrupt,” we reacted defensively. When President Donald Trump declared us a “now disgraced nation,” we were incensed. Yet, with every act of resistance against transparency and reform, we continue to affirm their claims. Those responsible will later point fingers at others for harming the country while they quietly suffocate its potential.

“Let there be no illusion, the criminality witnessed in 2023 will not be tolerated in 2027. Nigerians everywhere must start getting ready to rise up, resist, and reject the backward trajectory, legitimately and decisively reclaim our country from the clutches of deliberate malevolence.

“The International community must take heed of this groundwork for continued future electoral manipulation, endangering our democracy and development.”

Another respondent, Akin Osuntokun, who was the Labour Party campaign DG in 2023, noted that the removal is an affront to democracy.

“It (Rejection of e-transmission of election results) does not portend good omen, it does not portend good for the growth of democracy in Nigeria.

“The growth of democracy is rooted in accountability and the integrity of elections.

“So anything that makes elections less accountable makes the election less credible. Automatically, it is a drag and an obstruction of the growth of democracy in Nigeria.

“It does not serve the purpose of democratic consolidation, so far as the elections that are conducted on that basis will not meet the bar or threshold of credible election,” Osuntokun said while fielding questions from NAN.

Also, opposition senators have stepped out as a group, insisting that the Senate passed the Act with provision of real-time in it, stressing that anything other than that, is not a document from the Senate.

In the midst of the public outrage, Akpabio has insisted that senate did not remove or reject electronic transmission, clarifying that it cannot guarantee the transmission of results in real time hence the omission of the status of ‘real-time’.

While presiding over the debate session, Akpabio also dismissed claims that electronic transmission had been removed, emphasising that “Retaining that provision means electronic transmission remains part of our law.”

WHAT THE SENATORS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE FOR THE ELECTORAL BILL

But beyond the brouhaha of real-time electronic transmission, other major amendments to Nigeria’s electoral calendar were approved by the Senate.

The election notice period was reduced from 360 days to 180 days, the deadline for submission of party candidate lists was shortened from 120 to 90 days, and the nomination period was cut from 180 to 90 days.

To deter electoral malpractice, the fine for unlawful possession of voters’ cards was increased from N500,000 to N5 million, though the Senate rejected a proposal for a 10-year ban on vote-buyers, opting for stiffer financial penalties instead. The smart card reader was officially removed from the electoral framework and replaced with the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS).

Under the retained provisions, presiding officers are required to count votes at the polling unit, record results on prescribed forms, announce them publicly and transmit them electronically to the appropriate collation centre.

The e-transmission of results, if approved, would have required INEC presiding officers to upload results from each polling unit to the IReV portal in real time, immediately after completing Form EC&A, which must be signed and stamped by the presiding officer and countersigned by party agents.
Instead, the senators chose to retain the present Electoral Act provision, which mandates that “the presiding officer shall transfer the results, including the total number of accredited voters and the results of the ballot, in a manner as prescribed by the Commission.”

The Senate further upheld the provision mandating the use of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) or any other technological device prescribed by INEC for voter verification and authentication, rather than allowing alternative digital identification methods as proposed in the new bill.

With these decisions, the Senate reaffirmed the use of PVC and BVAS-based accreditation while rejecting efforts to expand digital voter identification and make electronic transmission of results compulsory.

Meanwhile, while Nigerians are planning to occupy NASS beginning from Monday, the Senate has called an emergency plenary for which the agenda is hitherto unknown, but related to votes and proceedings. It is interesting time in the Nigerian political circle now.

The bone of contention has remained ‘real-time’, and Nigerians continue to ask, ‘who is afraid of new electoral act’?

Headline

Senate Passes Electoral Bill 2026, Rejects Real-time Electronic Transmission of Results

Published

4 days ago

February 5, 2026

Eric

The Senate, yesterday, passed the Electoral Bill 2026 following hours of robust debate. But it rejected a proposal to mandate real-time electronic transmission of election results while approving significant reforms to election timelines, penalties for electoral offences and voting technology.

At the centre of the controversy was Section 60, which governs the transmission of polling unit results. Senators voted down a recommendation by the Senate Committee on Electoral Matters that would have compelled presiding officers to upload results to the INEC Result Viewing (IReV) portal in real time.

Instead, lawmakers retained the approach in the 2022 Electoral Act, which allows electronic transmission after votes are counted and publicly announced at the polling unit.

Relatedly, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), which concluded work on the timetable and schedule of activities for the 2027 general election, is unable to release it due to ongoing amendments to the Electoral Act by the National Assembly.

It also identified the inclusion of deceased persons on the voters’ register, prompting plans for a nationwide verification exercise.

On its part, the African Democratic Congress (ADC) raised the alarm over the National Assembly’s delay in passing the Electoral Act amendments, warning that the situation could expose political parties to technical and legal pitfalls ahead of the 2027 general elections.

Under the retained provisions, presiding officers are required to: count votes at the polling unit, record results on prescribed forms, announce them publicly and transmit them electronically to the appropriate collation centre.

Copies must also be provided to polling agents and security personnel where available. Violators face fines of up to N500,000 or a minimum of six months’ imprisonment.

Senators opposing the real-time upload argued that inconsistent network coverage and logistical challenges could trigger legal disputes and undermine electoral credibility.

Chairman of the Senate Committee on Media and Public Affairs, Adeyemi Adaramodu, described the debate as largely semantic.

Beyond the transmission debate, the Senate approved far-reaching amendments to Nigeria’s electoral calendar. The election notice period was reduced from 360 days to 180 days, the deadline for submission of party candidate lists was shortened from 120 to 90 days, and the nomination period was cut from 180 to 90 days.

INEC Chairman, Prof Joash Amupitan, noted the delay yesterday in Abuja at INEC’s first quarterly consultative meeting with Civil Society Organisations (CSOs).

The clause was designed to strengthen transparency and reduce electoral malpractice through technology-driven result management.

The motion to reject the electronic transmission clause was swiftly seconded by the Deputy President of the Senate, Barau Jibrin.

The Guardian

Headline

Wike Remains Undisputed Rivers APC, PDP Leader, Tinubu Rules

Published

6 days ago

February 3, 2026

Eric

President Bola Tinubu has, again, intervened to halt the escalating feud between Rivers State Governor, Siminalayi Fubara, and his predecessor and estranged godfather, Nyesom Wike.

The peace deal came after months of failed settlements that had pushed the state to the brink of governorship impeachment, legislative paralysis, and prolonged instability.

The president had previously intervened in the rift between Fubara and Wike in December 2023, when he brokered a fragile peace, which broke down soon after, leading the declaration of a six-month emergency rule in the state on March 18, 2025 by Tinubu and suspension of the governor.

However, in the fresh push to defuse one of the country’s most combustible political disagreements in recent times, Tinubu ordered an immediate suspension of any impeachment moves against Fubara, but with very strict conditions.

Multiple highly placed sources familiar with the issue told THISDAY that Tinubu, who acted just before departing for an official trip to Türkiye on January 26, laid down the political terms aimed at restoring peace between the two key political actors in Rivers State, a state seen as critical to the president’s re-election in 2027.

Tinubu’s intervention came with a blunt message to Fubara: Wike remains the undisputed political leader of the party, whether APC or Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in Rivers State, and he must be respected in that regard.

THISDAY was told that the president, visibly displeased by the depth of the rift, despite his efforts in the past, warned that continued hostilities would undermine governance in the state and lead to instability, a situation Tinubu said he was not ready to condone.

Tinubu was said to have clearly told Wike to back off any impeachment plots against Fubara and allow governance in the state.

Fubara and his predecessor, Wike, have had a cat and mouse relationship just within months of the governor’s swearing into office in May 2023. What is now out in the open is that Wike, who personally engineered Fubara’semergence as his successor, has sought to control the levers of power from Abuja, while the governor has resisted what many see as the FCT minister’s chokehold on him.

The relationship began to fracture within months of Fubara’s inauguration, as the governor quietly sought to assert his independence, with political actors in the state immediately taking sides. Notably, in the ongoing fight, almost all the state lawmakers align with Wike.

Subsequently, attempts to impeach Fubara emerged from the pro-Wike group in the House of Assembly. Although the governor has tried to wriggle out of the situation several times, the shadows of impeachment continue to haunt him every time there is a disagreement with the minister.

Several efforts have been made to resolve the crisis, all of which failed to produce lasting peace. The failure of one of the peace meetings eventually led to the declaration of a state of emergency in the oil-rich state, which lasted six months.

While Wike’s camp continues to accuse Fubara of betrayal and political ingratitude, the governor’s allies argue that Rivers State cannot be run from outside the state by a former governor now serving as the FCT minister.

Still on the latest attempt to seek an end to the prolonged imbroglio, one insider recounted the president’s thinking, drawing a parallel with Lagos State, where Sanwo-Olu is the leader of the party.

Tinubu was said to have stated, “Is Babajide Sanwo-Olu my leader in Lagos, or was Babatunde Fashola my leader when he was governor?”, according to a source.

The president was equally said to have stated that Fubara should respect elders, saying Wike is an elder statesman in Rivers politics and should be regarded as such. Tinubu, one of the sources added, made it clear that political seniority could not be wished away because of personal disagreements.

As part of the peace deal, the president directed Wike and his camp to immediately halt all impeachment-related actions against Fubara, citing his overriding concern about stability in Rivers State.

In return, Fubara was instructed to make significant concessions. Chief among them was the formal recognition of Wike as the “political leader” in Rivers State, with final authority on party matters.

Sources said Tinubu stressed that all internal party disputes in the state must ultimately defer to Wike.

However, the complexity of Wike’s case is that he is not a card-carrying member of APC in Rivers State. Officially, he remains a member of the struggling opposition PDP, although he is a top minister under the ruling APC government – A position he has used to weaken his party, the PDP.

Besides, the understanding covered the upcoming state House of Assembly bye-elections in Rivers State. Tinubu directed that candidates loyal to Wike should be recognised by the APC leadership for the two vacant assembly seats. “It was explicitly stated that Wike has two candidates for the by-elections and that those candidates are to be recognised by the APC party structure,” one source said.

Already, Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has fixed February 21, 2026 for the contentious by-elections into Ahoada East II and Khana II State Constituencies of the state.

THISDAY learnt that while the Ahoada-East II seat became vacant following the resignation of its former occupant, Edison Ehie, who was appointed Chief of Staff (CoS) to Governor Fubara, the Khana II seat was vacant since the death of its lawmaker, Dinebari Loolo, in September 2023.

Notably, the sensitive issue of Fubara’s second term ambition also came up for deliberation, the source said, but was deliberately side-lined, with the president alleged to have said such discussions were too early for now. One source said Tinubu described any talk about the 2027 governorship in the state as still premature.

ThisDay/Arise News