Connect with us

Headline

Opinion: Public Service And The Hakeem Muri-Okunola Example

Published

5 years ago

on

 

By Michael Effiong

In today’s Nigeria we are always quick to heap condemnation on public servants and officials when they falter,  we should therefore not hesitate to commend when they act responsibly-and this what ignited this piece.

I am a professional journalist and news junkie, and have been for decades and would not be shy to say except I have very important meetings, or gym sessions, I try to have a feel of early morning television and radio shows before dipping myself into the business of the day.

From AIT’s Kakaaki, I usually swing to Channel TV’s Sunrise Daily, and now I have added, Arise TV’s Morning Show before rounding off on TVC’s This Morning anchored by the veteran, Yori Folarin.

Unlike the other shows, This Morning is a programme that allows immediate audience participation via a phone-in segment-and it was during this segment last week that Mr. Hakeem Muri-Okunola, the Lagos State Head of Service made quite an impression.

The discussion was on the JUSUN strike and there was a healthy debate in the studio when suddenly the Anchor announced that he had Hakeem Muri-Okunola on the line.

As a celebrity reporter of over 30 years, I know famous people and faces, and definitely knew Hakeem Muri-Okunola. I was first shocked, then the Nigerian in me kicked in “How can a whole Head of service call? Then I thought maybe it was just a same name coincidence, then the caller began to speak. The voice was unmistakable, it was the Head of Service, the cool, bespectacled gentleman everyone calls HMO.

Mr. Muri Okunola began by explaining that he had no problem with the agitation of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN), especially because they are agitating to enforce a constitutional position and provision. But wondered why the Lagos State Chapter of JUSUN was on strike when the state government was not in breach of the said provision that the others are fighting for.

He went on to explain that Judicial autonomy was not strange to Lagos State as it has been in force for years. He said Lagos State is in 100 per cent compliance in respect of recurrent expenditure and 80 per cent compliant in terms of capital expenditure. He said the capital expenditure issue is as a result of dwindling revenue of the state which has affected spending projections of all the other tiers of government.

In the view of Mr. Muri-Okunola he does not see why members of JUSUN, Lagos State Chapter should embark on a strike.What are they fighting for? he asked rhetorically.

Since the call came towards the end of the programme, there was little time for Anchor and guest to digest this information and allow others weigh in.

Though what Mr. Muri Okunola has stated is in the public domain as it had already been disclosed by the Lagos State Governor, Mr Babajide Sanwo-Olu during a meeting with the Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) Lagos State Chapter but the fact that he picked up his phone to call and explain is the “koko”.

Some cynics will say, what is the big deal? Is it not a mere phone call? Well, I dare say in today’s Nigeria where even the file-carrying level 4 clerk thinks he is doing you a favour to perform a duty he is paid for, that call is a big deal.

What he did should be the norm, but is anything normal again in Nigeria today? The abnormal is our new normal especially when people who are elected into office see themselves as rulers instead of the servants they ought to be.

Unlike some haughty Public officers, the Lagos State Head of Service, did not speak about JUSUN with derision. He simply explained what he termed as the facts and allowed the viewers to make their own deductions.

I am a good judge of character and I can say that his composure and comportment during the call showed him as a good manager of men. He came across as friendly, urbane, sincere and someone who has the right balance of standing up for principles when need be and using diplomacy when necessary.

When Governor Akinwunmi Ambode swore him in on December 28, 2020, Muri-Okunola made history as the youngest person ever to attain the position of Head of Service in Lagos State.

The then Governor described the appointment as a new chapter in the state’s civil service. He expressed strong optimism in the ability of Mr. Muri-Okunola to effectively take charge on account of his capacity, knowledge, exposure, experience and youthful energy. He urged him to lead by example and encourage accountability and professionalism in the service.

Those were weighty words that conferred a lot of responsibility on the shoulders of the 46 year-old, it is enough to overwhelm anyone who is to begin the assignment of being the numero uno civil servant in the Centre of Excellence. But it seemed Mr. Muri-Okunola was not fazed.

People can speculate about his network, his heredity and say that he rose rapidly because of this or that, but Mr. Muri-Okunola has got juice period! Though I have not bothered to investigate how he has so far performed as Head of Service, but he has shown capacity and competence on the job by that seemingly innocuous action. If he has faltered, we would have heard about it.

When people in government speak to the citizenry, it is not a favour. Today, many top government officials hide from the people and churn out statements through their spokespersons, but nothing beats the human touch.

Another good example is the video message being circulated by the Governor of Lagos State, Mr Babajide Sanwo-Olu on his second anniversary plans. That hit the mark big time too.

Speaking directly to the people or about a problem serves many purposes: it can deescalate tension, it can reduce friction and has the tendency to build goodwill and better friendships as we say in Rotary International. The bond between the government and the governed would rather than widen be shortened.

According to the late Super Civil Servant, Allison Ayida, a nation’s civil service should habour its best brains because if the nation was a car, the civil service will be its engine.

In his view, Nigeria’s gradual degeneration from the zenith to the nadir of the development index is as result of the dwindling standard of personnel in the civil service. “In those days, our best and the brightest joined the civil service, today, it is no longer the case. The engine is faulty and it has been so for many years”

The point being made by this late astute Public Administrator is that we need more men with impeachable sense of duty in our civil service like HMO to drive Nigeria out of its current state of inertia.

If our Civil Service is made up of first class brains, we can only expect first class performance. It is therefore time for an overhaul of the recruitment process into Ministries, Departments and Agencies of government at the State and Federal levels. If not for anything, let meritocracy be the new order.

Mr. Muri-Okuola has shown that even the minutest of things matter, let others follow, and gradually, we will get to our Promised Land.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Related Topics:
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

8 hours ago

on

February 26, 2026

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

3 days ago

on

February 24, 2026

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

4 days ago

on

February 23, 2026

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