Headline

Will Buhari Sack Isa Pantami?

Published

5 years ago

April 24, 2021

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

The last has definitely not been heard about the controversies surrounding the embattled Minister of Communication and Digital Economy, Isa Pantami, and his undeniable link to notorious terrorist organisations, notable among them the dreaded Al-Qaeda and Taliban.

Nigerians are worried that a man of Pantami’s calibre, who as head of the communications ministry, oversees agencies, and is responsible for databases of Nigerians and expatriates in the country, should have a kind of kind with dreaded terrorist groups. They complain that such affiliations are tantamount to security breaches, and the consequence can be untold.

With his unhindered and unrestricted access to the data base of the nation, some people have expressed fears that the minister can sympathetically sell out to the Islamist militant groups in more ways than one, and this could be nipped in the bud with his sack. But with a picture of President Buhari and Pantami together at a hajj ceremony, that may not be possible in the near future.

Reports also have it that the Minister also oversees the web infrastructure for most government ministries and agencies, armed forces, intelligence agencies, and Nigeria’s satellite infrastructure that provides communications and navigation support for the air force. In fact, the powers of the minister are huge and quite intimidating. It is therefore believed that a man with such encompassing responsibilities can be trustworthy, honest, full of integrity and able to live above board. A lot of Nigerians don’t think of that for Pantami as a result of the document extremist views he held in the past.

Though his so called sins are in the past, Nigerians say that like a leopard, Pantami is not likely to change his spots, especially with a avalanche of defence coming from his supporters, colleagues, and wait for this – the Federal Government of Nigeria! The say his apology is enough proof that he is a changed man.

This has given rise to the question if President Muhammadu Buhari will have the gut to sack him from the federal cabinet as being canvassed by a cross section of the Nigerian public.

Recall that in the near past, streams of video and documented evidence of the views Pantami held in the past had flooded the media space, portraying him as a diehard believer in the elimination of ‘unbelievers’ by notorious extremist groups such as Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Some of the documents are “purportedly from a 2010 meeting he chaired at the Jama’atu Nasril Islam (JNI), a top Islamic body, where it was agreed that Christians should be prohibited from building churches in city centres across northern Nigeria, which has a majority Muslim population although millions of Christians also live there.

“Audio and video recordings have also emerged of Mr Pantami’s fiery prayers and sermons at different stages of his career as an imam. In one sermon he volunteered to lead a force of the Sharia police, Hisbah, to Shendam in Plateau state, where there had been a deadly religious conflict, to fight in defence of the Muslims,” says a BBC report.

It was also reported that in a 2006 speech, Mr Pantami publicly offered his condolences after the death of al-Qaeda’s leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

In an audio clip, where he talks about the Nigerian army’s war against Boko Haram, he appears to be on the verge of tears as he passionately describes the militants as “our Muslim brothers” who did not deserve to be “killed like pigs”. Many believe that there is no way such a person will allow the war against Boko Haram, most of whose members are muslims, be decided in favour of the Federal Government. Consequently, the fears that he is sabotaging efforts of the security forces by his privileged position as the head of communications and database custodian of the nation, is rife among not a few Nigerians.

The same Pantami, who though has claimed repentance, also said in another audio recording, that he is always happy when infidels are massacred. Though he initially denied his involvement with the deadly groups, he did not deny the authenticity and veracity of the texts, audio and video clips.

Most of Pantami’s antecedents tell of tales of Islamic extremism. One was told about his time at the Abubakar Tafawa Balewa University where he, as cleric of a local mosque, was accused of instigating the gruesome murder of a Christian student leader whose crime was only distribute tracts and preached on the campus. It was also said that he was thrown out of the university for his extreme views. He denied these accusations and also said that he was never dismissed from the university.

While Nigerians patiently waited for the reaction of the Buhari-led Federal Government, most organisations across political, religious and social settings have led their voices in condemnation of the 48 years old minister, asking for his outright sack and prosecution. Some including Constitutional lawyer, Mike Ozekhome and Former Aviation Minister, Femi Fani-Kayode, have written essays expressing their displeasure and the urgent need for Buhari to relieve him of his duties.

Even the opposition Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) has added their voices to the call for his removalbut to no avail. They party even attempted to raise the matter in the upper house, but it was rebuffed ruling party members, who are in the majority. There seems to be a defensive shield from the powers that be for the Minister.

But finally, the executive reaction Nigerians had been waiting for came, and it came via a presidential spokesman, Garba Shehu, who speaks for President Buhari. In a nutshell, he said without equivocation that the administration of President Buhari “stands behind Minister Pantami.” He went ahead to accuse enemies of the government for the minister’s travails, saying that the minister’s apology should calm every nerve.

“The Minister has, rightly, apologized for what he said in the early 2000s. The views were absolutely unacceptable then, and would be equally unacceptable today, were he to repeat them,” he said in a statement which he also shared on his Twitter account:

“Today, there is an unfortunate fashion in public discourse that makes leaders in politics, religion, and civil society liable in the present for every statement they have ever made in the past – no matter how long ago, and even after they have later rejected them.”

The presidential aide blamed those calling for Pantami’s removal as the problems of this country.

He said: “I am saying to you that people who stand in criticism of this position of the man who said he had wronged himself, he had wronged the society, and has apologised that he has changed, and they are not willing to forgive to move on; they are the ones who are the problem.”

He continued: “In all our lives, we change and transform … we don’t remain in the same position. The people just assume that he cannot change; if the One who created you gives it to you that from being bad, you can become good, what tells you to deny some other persons this right?

“They are the ones who are deeply intolerant, and who are telling the world that in this country, we have the set of people who don’t forgive, who don’t want to move on; they are the problem of the society.”

He went further to absolve Pantami over former Minister of Finance, Mrs Kemi Adeosun, saying the ex-finister ministers crimes were more grievous that Pantami’s.

But critics have pointed out that the minister was already in his 30s when most of his controversial statements were made and so, was fully aware of the ramifications.

But reacting to the appointment of Pantami from the onset, on why the security agencies did not do due diligence, a former Director of the Department of State Security, Mr Amachree noted that the government of President Buhari was aware of the status of the minister, who started his education as an almajiri. He confided that his appointment was politically motivated, more like to balance a political equation. It is worthy of note that Pantami, a former director-general with the National Information Technology Development Agency (NITDA), is the only member of the Federal Executive Council from Gombe State.

While noting that Pantami should resign because it is difficult to deradicalise someone of his kind, the former DSS director said that information on all individuals of interest, including the minister’s past extremist views were communicated to the Federal Government and the legislature.

“There is no information that escapes the DSS. We have all of it, all. When I was working there, we keep a catalogue of anybody of interest that comes up to the limelight in this country.

“During the vetting process for anybody to be appointed a minister or commissioner or anything, your name is sent to the DSS for vetting. They check your background up to the extent of your grandmother.

“They check your schools up to the extent of your primary school. And of course, they keep a tab on you online and offline. We get a lot from open-source intelligence and I can tell you that in Pantami’s case, we have it.

“But there is a political angle to it. When somebody is being appointed, if the security agencies see that there is something wrong with his name, they will send it to the appointing agency,” Amachree said.

It is not hard to imagine that with the barrage of supports flowing from the seat of power to Pantami, it will be like forever before the desire of Nigerians to see the minister’s exit from the cabinet materialises.

The accusations trailing President Buhari as practicing nepotism in his administration may really be a stumbling block in the call for the removal of the repented lover of terrorist.

It is a waiting game, and the time begins now!

Headline

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

Published

1 day ago

July 16, 2026

Eric

By Eric Elezuo

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

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

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

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

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

The statement in full:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Headline

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

Published

4 days ago

July 14, 2026

Eric

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Headline

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

Published

4 days ago

July 13, 2026

Eric

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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