Connect with us

Featured

Tinubu Breaks Silence, Speaks on Herders Crisis

Published

on

The National Leader of the All Progressives Congress (APC), Bola Tinubu, has advised the Federal Government on ways to end the lingering crisis between herders and farmers in the country.

In a statement he personally signed on Saturday, he recommended a meeting at the instance of the federal, involving state governors, senior security officials, traditional rulers, and religious leaders, as well as representatives of herders and farmers.

Tinubu suggested that the purpose of such meeting should be to hammer out a set of working principles to resolve the crisis that has claimed many lives over the years.

He stated that the governors should convene follow-up meetings in their respective states to refine and add flesh to the universal principles by adjusting them to the particular circumstances of their states.

According to the former Lagos State governor, the herder-farmer dispute has taken on acute and violent dimensions and has cost too many innocent lives while destroying the property and livelihoods of many others.

He noted that the crisis has also aggravated ethnic sentiment and political tension and has yet to be significantly abated despite the efforts of some of those in positions of high responsibility and public trust.

The APC stressed the need for all to move in unison but decisively to end the spiral of death and destruction occasioned by the crisis.

He said that until this was achieved, it would neither be possible to uplift the farmer from his impoverished toil nor move the herder toward the historic transformation which he must make.

While noting the importance of security to the resolution of the matter, Tinubu believes enhanced security may be the necessary first step but not be the only step.

He stated that farmers have a right to farm their land unmolested while herders also have a right to raise their livestock without undue interference.

Read the full statement below:

STATEMENT ON THE HERDER CRISIS

The herder-farmer dispute has taken on acute and violent dimensions. It has cost too many innocent lives while destroying the property and livelihoods of many others.

It has also aggravated ethnic sentiment and political tension. Despite the efforts of some of those in positions of high responsibility and public trust, the crisis has not significantly abated.

Sadly, others who should know better have incited matters by tossing about hate-tainted statements that fall dangerously short of the leadership these people claim to provide.

We all must get hold of our better selves to treat this matter with the sobriety it requires.

Because of the violence that has ensued and the fretful consequences of such violence, if left unabated, we must move in unison but decisively to end the spiral of death and destruction.

Only when the violence and the illogic of it are halted can logic and reason prevail. Until the violence is rolled back, we cannot resolve the deep problems that underlie this conflict.

We will neither be able to uplift the farmer from his impoverished toil nor move the herder toward the historic transformation which he must make.

Yet, as vital as security is to the resolution of this matter, we must realise security measures alone will not suffice. Enhanced security may be the necessary first step, but it cannot be the only step.

Nor do we resolve this by hitching ourselves to emotional, one-dimensional answers. More to the point, those who cast this as exclusively a matter of ethnic confrontation are mistaken.

This is no time for reckless chauvinism of any kind, on either side of this dispute. This matter is not ethnic in factual origin or actual causation although in the minds and hearts of too many, it has become ethnic in recrimination and impulsive action.

There have been sporadic disputes in the past but this one is more severe. The reasons for the greater violence of this current dispute are myriad. Economic hardship and its resultant dislocation, proliferation of weapons, generalised increase in criminality, and weakening of social institutions all play a role.

Desertification, increased severity and length of the dry season, diminution of water resources, impairment of land fertility and population growth also contribute in no small measure. Thus, any durable solution must get at most, if not all, of these issues.

Farmers have a right to farm their land unmolested. Herders have a right to raise their livestock without undue interference.

However, when conflict between these groups arises to such an extent, we must set forth clear principles and policies to remove the tension, in order to allow both to proceed toward their stated goals and to live in harmony and according to their respective rights.

Just as I cannot go into your house and take your shirt because I do not have one of like colour, no one can destroy the crops of a farmer or seize the cattle of a herder simply because such destruction sates their anger or their selfish, short-term interests.

If such a condition were to hold, then all would turn into chaos; all would be in jeopardy of being lost. To destroy the crops or seize the property of the innocent farmer or herder is nothing if not an act of criminality.

Here, I must state two fundamental realities. One has been previously mentioned by me and others as part of the solution. The other reality is hardly discussed.

First, the situation of the herder is becoming untenable. Their nomadic ways fall increasingly in conflict with the dictates of modern society. This way of life is centuries old and steeped in tradition.

We can never condone or accept violence as a valid response to any hardship. However, we all must recognise and understand the sense of dislocation caused by the sudden passing of such a longstanding social institution.

I mention their dislocation not to excuse violence and other excesses. I raise it to underscore that we must realise the true complexity of this crisis. What is happening has been terrible, but it is not due to any intrinsic evil in either the herder or the farmer.

The calamity now being faced is borne of situational exigencies. It is but the tragic outcome when often desperate, alienated people are left too long unattended and when their understanding of the modern socio-economic and environmental forces affecting the very terms of their existence is incomplete.

An ethnically fuelled response will be to vociferously defend the nomadic way believing this tack will somehow protect the herder and cast the speaker as an ethnic champion.

However, careless words cannot shield the herder from relentless reality. Such talk will only delude him into believing that he can somehow escape the inevitable.

We do both herder and farmer grave injustice by allowing the herder to continue as he is – fighting a losing battle against modernity and climate change. In that fight, desperation causes him to flail and fight the farmer, who too is a victim of these impersonal forces.

Second, to help the herder and leave the farmer unattended is unfair and will only trigger a resentment that tracks already heated ethnic fault lines. The times have also been perilous for the hardscrabble farmer. He needs help to survive and to be more productive in ways that increase national food security.

Farm productivity and incomes must be enhanced. Soil enrichment, better irrigation and water retention as well as the provision of better rural roads, equipment and access to modern machinery are required to lift him above bare subsistence.

Both innocent and law-abiding farmer and herder need to be recompensed for the losses they have suffered. Both need further assistance to break the current cycle of violence and poverty. In short, the continued progressive reform of many of our rural socio-economic relationships is called for.

Based on these strategic observations, I recommend the federal government convene a meeting of state governors, senior security officials, herder and farmer representatives, along with traditional rulers and religious leaders.

The purpose of this meeting would be to hammer out a set of working principles to resolve the crisis.

After this meeting, governors of each state should convene follow-up meetings in their states to refine and add flesh to the universal principles by adjusting them to the particular circumstances of their states.

In addition to religious and traditional leaders and local farmer and herder representatives, these meetings shall include the state’s best security minds along with experts in agriculture (livestock and farming), land use, and water management to draw specific plans for their states.

To accomplish this goal, the wise policy must include the following elements:

– Maintain reasonable and effective law enforcement presence in affected areas. The proposed reform of the Nigerian law enforcement apparatus towards state and community policing can help in this regard.

The legislative and administrative measures required to make this a reality should be expedited. In addition to alleviating the present farmer-herder crisis, this reform will also bolster efforts against the banditry, kidnapping, and robbery plaguing communities across the country.

Governments need to employ new technology and equipment to enhance the information gathering/surveillance and response capabilities of law enforcement.

– Help the herders’ transition to more sedentary but more profitable methods of cattle-rearing. Unoccupied public land can be fenced into grazing areas or ranches and leased to herders on a very low-cost, nominal basis.

The leasing is not intended to penalize herders. Rather, the nominal fee is intended to ensure the herders are invested in the project and incentivised (by reason of their investment) to use the land provided.

This aspect will also mitigate any resentment over herders being given land for free. Government, in turn, being a responsible lessor, must help with supplemental feed and water in these areas.

This will enable herders to better maintain and care for their livestock thus enhancing their incomes. Herders can augment income by becoming suppliers to the leather goods industry.

Additionally, herders can also develop a more symbiotic relationship with farmers by, for example, trading animal compost to the farmer in exchange for animal feed.

– Assist farmers to increase productivity by supporting or providing subvention for their acquisition of fertilizer, equipment, and machinery and, also, by establishing commodity boards to guarantee minimum prices for important crops.

In the medium to long term, resources must be dedicated to establishing better irrigation and water catchment systems to further improve farm productivity and mitigate the dire impact of flood and drought cycles brought about by extreme climatic conditions.

– Establish a permanent panel in each state as a forum for farmers, herders, security officials, and senior state officials to discuss their concerns, mitigate contention and identify trouble and douse it before it erupts.

We are a populous nation of diverse ethnic groups. We are a people of potential richness, yet to escape present poverty. We have resources but not wealth. Often, our words speak of hope and fear in the same breath.

While we all hope and strive for the best, many fear that there is not enough of what is needed to go around and that they will be left out. In such a situation, harsh competition and contest are fated to occur.

In the unfolding of this social dynamic, one group of actors has been pitted against another over dwindling water and fertile ground. The confrontation has resulted in the needless loss of life and destruction of property.

If left to itself, this situation may spread and threaten the progress of the nation. It could call into proximate question the utility of the social compact that holds government and governed in positive bond, one to the other.

We have a decision to make. Do we attempt the hard things that decency requires of us to right the situation? Or do we allow ourselves to be a slave to short-term motives that appeal to the base instinct that runs afoul of the democratic principles upon which this republic is founded and for which so many have already sacrificed so much? In the question itself, lies the answer.

SIGNED

Asiwaju Bola Tinubu.

March13, 2021.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Featured

Attempted Coup: DSS Arraigns Five for Alleged Refusal to Reveal Timipre Sylva’s Hiding Place

Published

on

By

The Department of State Services (DSS) at the Federal High Court in Abuja, arraigned five associates of former Minister of Petroleum Resources, Timipre Sylva.

They are accused of concealing information regarding the whereabouts of their principal, who is alleged to be a financier of an aborted coup attempt against President Bola Tinubu.

Sylva, a former Governor of Bayelsa State, has been declared wanted by the Federal government, and his identified properties have been marked for forfeiture following his indictment as the sponsor and mastermind of the alleged coup plot.

The five associates are Reuben Ayuba, Musa Mohammed, Friday Paul, Paganengigha Anagaha, and Ayebaifife Suobite. They were arraigned on Wednesday before Justice Peter Lifu.

A two-count charge filed against them indicates that the accused became accessories after the fact of felony on April 28, 2026, by concealing the whereabouts of Timipre Sylva, who is classified as a fugitive. The alleged offense is contrary to Section 519 of the Criminal Code Act Law of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Additionally, the DSS has accused them of conspiracy to commit a felony, specifically for concealing the whereabouts of Timipre Sylva, also a fugitive, in violation of Section 516 of the Criminal Code, LFN 2004.

All the accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charges when they were read to them.

DSS lawyer, Emmanuel Orubor, requested that the judge schedule a date for the DSS to commence their trial by calling witnesses to testify against the defendants.

In response, Sunusi Musa (SAN), who represented Reuben Ayuba and Paganengigha Anagaha (the 1st and 4th accused persons), filed a bail application for his clients on various grounds.

Similar applications were made by Ibrahim Imadegbelo, representing Musa Mohammed (the 2nd accused), I. G. Kelubia, standing for Friday Paul (the 3rd defendant), and E. C. Sogo, who argued for Ayebaifife Suobite (the 5th accused person).

The lawyers pointed out to Justice Lifu that their clients have been in custody since October 25, 2025, and urged the court to grant them bail on liberal terms.

In a brief ruling, Justice Lifu granted them bail in the sum of N5 million each, along with two sureties for each, in a similar amount. The sureties are required to swear to an affidavit of means, provide evidence of three years of tax payment, demonstrate visible means of livelihood, and submit recent passport photographs.

Justice Lifu ordered that the claims of identities of the sureties must be verified by the Registrar of the Court.

Pending the perfection of the bail conditions, the Judge ordered that the accused persons be remanded in Kuje Correctional Centre in Abuja and fixed July 22 for the commencement of trial.

Continue Reading

Featured

UBA Reinforces Commitment to Rewarding Customer-Loyalty with N400m Bonus

Published

on

By

UBA Rewards Customer Loyalty with Over ₦400 Million Bumper Account Anniversary Bonus
…Reinforces commitment to rewarding customers for consistent savings
Africa’s Global Bank, United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc, has rewarded thousands of customers with over ₦400 million in anniversary bonuses under its flagship UBA Bumper Account, reaffirming the Bank’s unwavering commitment to rewarding customer loyalty and promoting a strong savings culture.

The payout, one of the largest loyalty rewards under the Bumper Account initiative since its launch, saw qualifying customers receive anniversary bonuses directly into their accounts, demonstrating UBA’s resolve to create lasting value for customers who consistently save with the Bank.

The UBA Bumper Account is a unique savings product that rewards customers simply for maintaining and growing their savings. Every year an eligible account reaches its anniversary, customers receive a cash bonus, making disciplined saving both rewarding and beneficial over time.
Speaking on the milestone, UBA’s Head, Retail Products, Tomiwa Sotiloye, said the Bank remains committed to ensuring that customers benefit directly from their relationship with UBA.

“At UBA, we believe customer loyalty deserves meaningful recognition. Every bonus paid is our way of saying ‘thank you’ to customers who continue to trust us with their financial aspirations. Surpassing the ₦400 million milestone reflects our commitment to creating products that not only help customers save but also reward them in tangible ways. It is another demonstration that when our customers grow, we grow with them.”

He added that both new and existing customers can open a UBA Bumper Account seamlessly through https://on.ubagroup.com/bumper-tc, any any UBA branch, the UBA Mobile Banking App, by dialing *919#, or online, positioning themselves to qualify for future anniversary rewards.

Also speaking, UBA’s Group Head, Brands, Marketing and Corporate Communications, Alero Ladipo, said the Bank’s customer-centric philosophy continues to shape its product offerings.

“The UBA Bumper Account reflects our unwavering commitment to putting customers first. We deliberately design products that reward responsible financial behaviour while delivering real value. Crediting over ₦400 million directly into customers’ accounts is not just a payout; it is evidence of our promise to make banking more rewarding and to continually appreciate the confidence our customers repose in us.”

The UBA Bumper Account remains one of the Bank’s flagship retail savings products, combining competitive savings benefits, digital convenience and attractive loyalty rewards. It forms part of UBA’s broader strategy to deepen financial inclusion by encouraging sustainable savings habits while delivering exceptional customer experiences.

Continue Reading

Featured

Dele Momodu Leadership Centre Hosts Media Scholar, Prof Abiodun Adeniyi

Published

on

By

By Anjorin Fehintola Stella

We often measure leadership by the institutions people build or the positions they occupy. Yet, during his visit to the Dele Momodu Leadership Centre, Professor Abiodun Adeniyi repeatedly returned to something less visible but perhaps more enduring; the responsibility of documenting one’s life and thoughts. He spoke as someone who understands, at a personal level, what is lost when experience is left unrecorded. His emphasis on documentation was not stylistic advice for writers. It was an argument about memory itself, about how societies retain or lose the wisdom of the people who pass through them.

Ideas disappear when they are undocumented because memory, at the collective level, is fragile and selective. A society does not remember everything that happens within it, it remembers what is written down, repeated, taught, or institutionalised. An undocumented thought, however brilliant, dies with the person who held it, or worse, drifts into vague anecdote, stripped of its original precision. This is why oral cultures, for all their richness, often struggle to transmit complex ideas across generations with fidelity. Professor Adeniyi’s point, then, was not simply about personal record-keeping. History remembers people largely through what they leave behind, not through what they intended to leave behind. Intention without artefact disappears.

When he spoke about travelling, it would be easy to reduce his words to a fondness for movement or exposure. But the deeper claim runs further than that. Travel disrupts familiarity. It exposes individuals to different ways of living, thinking, governing and imagining society. Professor Adeniyi suggested that travelling remains one of the simplest yet most profound forms of education because it broadens not only knowledge but perspective. A person confined to one environment mistakes the local for the universal. Movement across geographies forces a confrontation with alternative logics, alternative arrangements of power, family, and meaning, and that confrontation is often where genuine learning begins.

Perhaps the strongest advice he gave concerned the pursuit of a doctorate. When Aare Dele Momodu spoke of his desire to pursue a PhD, Professor Adeniyi’s response challenged a growing culture in which academic qualifications are sometimes pursued as symbols of prestige rather than vehicles of inquiry. A PhD earned for the title that follows a name produces a credential without a contribution. A PhD earned out of genuine curiosity produces new knowledge and, more importantly, sustains the kind of intellectual restlessness that defines a thinking life. Professor Adeniyi’s counsel was that one should choose a field that strikes them professionally and personally, something that connects to lived purpose rather than social signalling, because the value of advanced study lies in the questions it forces a person to keep asking long after the degree is conferred.

Professor Abiodun did not reserve his counsel for matters of scholarship alone. Turning to the younger staff in the room, Professor Adeniyi offered something closer to reassurance than instruction, that everything they are currently going through, the uncertainty, the striving, the sense of being far from where they hope to be, is a phase both he and Aare Dele Momodu have lived through themselves. It was a reminder that ambition rarely moves on a straight or visible timeline. The goals and dreams that feel distant now are not denied, only delayed, and what stands between the present moment and their fulfilment is simply time and dedication, applied without pause.

 

Underneath all these threads, travel, documentation, the meaning of scholarship, was a single, unifying idea about legacy. Legacy isn’t what people say about you. It’s what remains after you leave. This distinction matters because praise is temporary and circumstantial, shaped by mood, politics, and memory’s natural decay. What remains, however, is structural. It is the book on a shelf, the institution still running, the idea still being taught.

This is where the conversation returned, inevitably, to the Centre itself. The library. The scholars’ rooms. The conversations. The institution. Professor Adeniyi appeared genuinely moved by what he encountered, not by the scale of the buildings, but by what the buildings were designed to hold. Perhaps that is why Professor Adeniyi appeared genuinely moved by the Centre. It was never merely about architecture. It was about permanence. Buildings become legacy only when they preserve ideas.

Every visit leaves footprints. Some are physical. Others are intellectual. Professor Abiodun Adeniyi’s visit left the latter.

Continue Reading

Trending