Connect with us

Opinion

Freedom of Movement is for Human Beings, Not Cattle and Sheep

Published

on

By Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, OFR, FCIArb, LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D

INTRODUCTION

The Northern elites, including the Hon Attorney General of the Federation, Abubakar Malami, SAN, miss the point sorely when they compare Igbo peaceful spare-parts dealers who go about their normal spare parts business legitimately, (building or renting their shops), with savage, maniacal AK-47-wielding herdsmen. Igbo traders do not kill or attack Northerners with their stock of motor-tyres, rims, spanners or chasis. They do not pour petrol from fuel tanks that they sell, on Fulani herdsmen. They do not use car bumpers or wind shields to smash the heads of herdsmen.

How does open and street grazing of cows by fully armed foot-patrolling youth which is now clearly anachronistic, diluvian, primitive and antiquated, be likened to legitimate spare parts business being carried out in shops or designated areas, with the Igbo traders paying tenement rate, taxes, water electricity and light bills? Have you ever heard of any herder paying tax? How do you equate spare parts dealers with mindless violence unleashed on poor helpless and hapless farmers in their own farms, and destruction of their crops with reckless abandon by these rampaging nomadic pastoralists who are on a mission of conquest and expansionism?

How do you compare apples with oranges, by equating Igbo spare parts dealers (who maintain log books, cash books, and accounting systems in their secluded and approved environments of peace and tranquility), with rampaging fully armed murderous bandits (passing for headers), who unleash terror and mayhem on innocent citizens? These open grazers kidnap travelers on the way, invade homes, rape mothers and their daughters and slash people’s throats, unprovoked, unmolested and undisturbed? Do Igbo traders overrun Northerners or Fulanis in their homes? Is it not the spaces legally allotted to them by the Federal Government, Local Governments, cities or MDAs, that they legitimately and quietly operate from?

How do armed herders who freely trespass on people lands, destroy their crops and other means of livelihood, and slaughter them, compare with peaceful traders plying their legitimate business? Do spare parts dealers pose security threat to their host, or anyone else? The Igbos do not foist any pre-determined supremacist hegemony and irredentism agenda or other races as the herders (many of them from neighbouring countries) are currently doing.

Freedom of movement is only for human beings. It is not for cattle, sheep and goats. Will the Northerners tolerate the open sale of alcoholic beverages in their States, even though it is the constitutional right of other ethnic groups to move about and sell beverages of their choice.

Are these Northern elites seriously arguing that Southern State Governors cannot ban open grazing in their states, to protect their innocent citizens from deadly killer herdsmen?

The freedom of movement guaranteed in section 41 of the Constitution (though for human beings, not animals), is not even absolute at all. Section 45 is pretty straightforward as regards derogation from section 41. It provides:

“(1) Nothing in sections 37, 38, 39, 40 and 41 of this Constitution shall invaluidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society:

(a) in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health; or
(b) for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons.”

Thus, the right to movement in section 42 of the Constitution can be overridden by section 45 of the Constitution which allows any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society in the interest of defence, public safety, public order, public morality or public health. Considering the incessant cases of Boko Haram killings, maiming, stealing, kidnappings, rape, armed banditry and robbery foisted on the Southern part of the country, Southern leaders have rightly taken it upon themselves to put in place laws and measures that will protect their citizens. To this end, it is safe to assert that individual rights to movement have not in anyway been violated by the various states’ anti-grazing laws because the laws were enacted in the interest of public safety, public order, public defence and public morality. The laws of and declaration by the Southern Governors are also to protect the peace, privacy and homes of Southerners as highlighted in section 37 of the 1999 Constitution. They are also for the “purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons”.

In the case of KALU v. FRN & ORS (2012) LPELR-9287(CA), the Court of Appeal made it clear that the rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement are not absolute and can be derogated from:

“The rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement, guaranteed respectively by Sections 35 and 41 of the 1999 Constitution, are not absolute…Section 41(2)(a) of the Constitution says that the right to freedom of movement may be deprived under a law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society that imposes restrictions on the movement of any person who has committed or is reasonably suspected to have committed a criminal offence in order to prevent him from leaving Nigeria”. An application for enforcement of a party’s fundamental right presupposes the right has been, is being or is likely to be violated otherwise than in accordance with the procedure permitted by law. That argument will be defeated when it is apparent that the right has been deprived of in accordance with the procedure permitted by law”, Per EJEMBI EKO, JCA (as he then was) (Pp 44 – 45, Paras G – E).

The above position of the law is further strengthened by the combined effect of the provisions of sections 4(7), 5(2), 11(2), 14(2) and 176(2) of the 1999 Constitution. Section 4(7) states that the House of Assembly of a State shall have powers to make laws for the peace, order and good government of the State. Section 5(2) provides that the executive powers of a State shall be vested in the Governor of that State. Section 11(2) gives the Governor of a State powers over the maintenance of supplies and services. Section 14(2)(b) enjoins the Governor to ensure that “the security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of government”. Section 176(2) makes the Governor of a State its Chief Executive. So, where have the Governors of Southern States gone wrong? I cannot see it. Or, can you?

In ASARI DOKUBO V. FRN (2007) NGSC 106 (decided June 8, 2007), the apex court of Nigeria held that national security overrides personal individual rights, where it is discovered that the individual’s right poses threats to national security. Substitute for this, States’ and groups’ rights and security supersede the individual rights of few rampaging, fully armed, AK-47-clutching and wandering Fulani herdsmen who are not merely grazing their cattle, but actually on a predetermined mission of conquest, expansionism and neo-colonialism of other ethnic nationalities. Such must be fully resisted within all legal boundaries as the Southern Governors are now doing.

WHAT THE STATE GOVERNORS MUST NOW DO

The 17 Southern Governors should immediately sue the Federal Government, invoking the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under section 232 of the 1999 Constitution. They should ask for a determination of their right to preserve their States from insecurity. Indeed, as held by the Supreme Court in AG OGUN STATE V. AG FEDERATION (1982) LPELR-11(SC), the making of law for the maintenance of law and order and securing of public safety and public order is the responsibility of both the National Assembly and the State Houses of Assembly. Consequently, the Southern Governors are clothed with legality and constitutionality to ban open grazing. The Governors should therefore not be burdened by the opinions of other Northern States Governors, and elites, as to do so will be limiting the Executive powers of the Governors as regards the states which they govern.

By banning open grazing, the governors are merely putting a stop to one of the greatest known sources of wars and terrorist convergence in their respective states. In my humble opinion, the Governors’ call is part of their responsibilities to the people of their states as the main mandate of each and every Governor is to protect the lives and property of the people of the states they govern. The openness of the Governors to the idea of yet another National dialogue to curb the insecurity (which I however consider unnecessary in view of the unused over 600 recommendations of the 2014 National Conference) can be seen as a honest bi-partisan call to see to the end of insecurity menace in Nigeria.

PRO-ACTIVE STEPS ALREADY TAKEN BY SOME STATE GOVERNORS

Some State Governors and Houses of Assembly in Bayelsa, Ebonyi, Oyo and Osun States have since taken steps by getting anti-grazing laws passed by their Houses of Assembly. For instance, there existed and extant, section 42(e) & (g) of the Ondo State Forestry Law which prohibit cattle tresspassing and cattle pasteurisation without the authority in writing of a prescribed Government Official.Indeed, Governor Samuel Orton of Benue State has already taken proactive steps to stop being the wailing Chief mourner of his people being murdered daily in cold blood by Fulani herdsmen (many a time with the active connivance of federal troops). He got the House of Assembly to enact the anti-RUGA (Rural Grazing Area) and Cattle Colony Law, called the “Open Grazing Prohibition and Ranches Establishment Law”, No 21 of 2017. He went further by challenging the Federal Government RUGA policy at the Federal High Court, Makurdi, in the case of AG OF BENUE STATE V. AG OF THE FEDERATION. On 4th February, 2020, Justice Mobolaji Olajuwon of the FHC, Makurdi, held that any move by the FG to acquire land for RUGA or cattle colony in Benue State without the State Government was null and void. The Judge granted an order nullifying every action of the FG to establish RUGA or cattle colony. Many constitutional provisions such as sections 5(6), 9(2), 20, 44(1), 58 and 315(5) and 6(b) were considered. Also considered were sections 1, 2, 5, 6, 26, 28 and 49 of the Land Use Act vis-à-vis sections 4, 5, 6, 7 and 19(c) of the Benue State Anti-Grazing Law.

It must be pointed out that the Governor of a State is the Chief Executive and Chief Security Officer of that State (sections 176(1) and 214-216 of the 1999 Constitution). By virtue of Section 1 of the Land Use Act, 1978, all land comprised in the territory of each State in the Federation have been vested in the Governor of that State and such land shall be held in trust and administered for the use and common benefit of all Nigerians. Thus, a Governor of a State commands great power in the usage of the land in his State. See the Supreme Court case of NIGERIA ENGINEERING WORKS LTD V. DENAP LTD & ANOR (2001) LPELR-2002(SC).

SHOULD SOUTHERN GOVERNORS HAVE FIRST CONSULTED THE NOTHERN ESTABLISHMENT?

The answer to this is a capital NO!

It must be emphasized that the decision of the Southern Governors does not in actuality impede the rights of cow rearers to own cattle. It merely limits their ability to openly graze on lands that are not theirs in the first place and inflict misery on the indigenous owners. The ban will also ignite more anti-grazing laws in other states in Nigeria.

Those Northern elites arguing that consultation ought to have been first made by Southern Governors before making such resolutions have not advanced any plausible argument anchored on the Constitution. In fact, they ought to applaud the Southern Nigerian Governors for willfully choosing to dialogue with their Northern counterparts and avoiding an impending doom.

The few wailing Northern elites have not explained to Nigerians why they never consulted their Southern counterparts before passing and enforcing Sharia Law in their States; or passing the various Hisbah laws. Did some of these Governors not cut off citizens’ hands for various offences, to the angst and condemnation of international communities? Did they not order for some others to be stoned? Recall the unfortunate cases of Buba Jangebe (2000), Auwalu Abubakar (23), Lawalli Musa (22), Abubakar Aliyu (15), Attahiru Umaru, Sani Rodi, Sarimu Baranda, Safiya Hussein, Amina Lawal and many others for merely either stealing a cow, bull, N32,000 or committing adultery. Did the Northern Governors consult their Southern counterparts? They did not explain why Southern Governors who are the Chief Security Officers of their States should first obtain their permission (like a pupil from a Headmaster) before dealing with security matters in their various States. It only shows their mindset of a relationship of masters and servants; conquerors and vassals; slave owners and slaves. They failed to tell Nigerians that all the Northern Governors had actually pro-actively taken a unanimous position to ban open grazing, at its virtual meeting held on February 9, 2021, presided over by their Chairman, Simon Lalong Governor of Plateau State. They had unanimously agreed that the “current system of herding conducted mainly through open grazing is no longer sustainable in view of growing urbanization and population of the country”. While urging all the Governors to meet over this matter, they agreed on other methods such as ranching. These critics of the Southern Governors hid the fact that in response to the Northern Governors’ call, the entire Nigerian Governors’ Forum of the 36 State Governors held a virtual meeting on February 11 (two days later) and unanimously agreed to end nomadic and pastoral cattle wandering, “to address the rising insecurity in the country and the activities of herdsmen…and the need for the country to transition into modern systems of animal husbandry that will replace open, night and underage grazing in the country”. They also encouraged ranching as alternative. The Northern elites carefully screened away the fact that Governor Abdullahi Ganduje, Kano State Governor’s had openly supported adopting anti-grazing measures.

Ganduje had argued in February, 2021, during his meeting with President Buhari and other APC Governors that such a ban would not only solve incessant clashes between farmers and herders, but also prevent cattle rustling. Inspite of attempts by some Northern groups to cow in, Ganduje stuck to his guns.

These Northern elites hid the fact that, as far back as 26th April, 2018, (over 3 years ago), the National Executive Council (NEC) had approved the recommendation of its sub-committee that open grazing of cattle be banned across the country.

The three-man sub-committee on herdsmen/farmers clashes constituted by the Buhari Government in February, 2018, was headed by the Governor of Ebonyi State, Dave Umahi.

It was specifically mandated to unravel the causes of herdsmen/farmers clashes (wrong usage: herdsmen’s unproved attacks on farmers is better). It was to dialogue with relevant stakeholders to end the killings of innocent citizens.

Other members of the sub-committee included Governors Simon Lalong (Plateau), Samuel Ortom (Benue), Darius Ishaku (Taraba), and Bindo Jubrilla (Adamawa). The panel was mandated to visit Benue, Taraba, Zamfara and Adamawa states.

Umahi had told Nigerians after the NEC meeting at the Presidential Villa presided over by Vice President Yemi Osinbajo, that the panel submitted its report to the Council which okayed the recommendation to ban open grazing, opting instead for the establishment of ranches in states affected by the herdsmen onslaught.

Governor Umahi, who said his team visited five states Benue, Taraba, Plateau Adamawa and Zamfara, said there were three main categories of herdsmen in Nigeria. These, according to him, are foreign herdsmen, nomadic herdsmen and migrant herdsmen, whose continued activities have resulted in clashes with farmers.

He said the NEC also agreed that the states affected by herdsmen killings should donate land for the establishment of ranches that will include nomadic schools and health facilities for their family members. Said Umahi:

“Niger and Kaduna have given lands, and Plateau is also giving land. We also agreed that through the agriculture ministry, we have to introduce new species of cows…… and to stop the further influx of foreign herdsmen into the country”.

So, where did the Southern Governors go wrong in reaffirming Federal Government and Northern Governors position? I cannot see it. Or can you?

Recall also that on September 10, 2019, the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo, SAN, had also inaugurated the National Livestock Transformation Plan at the Gongoshi Grazing Reserve, in Mayo-Belwa LGA of Adamawa State. Inaugurating the said project, Osinbajo said the plan was designed to run from 2019-2028, as part of Federal Government’s initiative in collaboration with States under the auspices of the National Economic Council. He said the plan, targeted at supporting the development of Nigeria’s livestock sector, was to be implemented in seven pilot states of Adamawa, Benue, Kaduna, Plateau, Nasarawa, Taraba and Zamfara.

According to the Vice President, the plan will be implemented as a collaboration project between the Federal and State governments, farmers, pastoralists and private investors. He said:

“In this plan, the State Government or private investors provide the land, the federal government does not and will not take any land from a State or local government…Any participating state will provide the land and its own contribution to the project. The federal government merely supports…It is a plan that hopes to birth tailor-made ranches where cattle are bred, and meat and dairy products are produced using modern livestock breeding and dairy methods…This solves the problem of cattle grazing into and destroying farmlands. It ensures a practical response to the pressures on water and pasture by forces of climate change”.

He noted that the plan was designed to provide modern meat and dairy industry and, in some cases, integrated crop farming. According to Osinbajo, the unique feature of the plan is that any participating state will determine its own model. Osinbanjo continued:

“I wish to emphasise that this is not RUGA. Because the idea of RUGA settlements launched by the Ministry of Agriculture created a problem when it was perceived as a plan to seize lands to create settlements for herders…RUGA was not the plan designed and approved by the governors and the President rightly suspended the implementation”.

Thus, even the Federal Government at the centre had already opposed anti-grazing and embraced ranching. So, where did the Southern Governors go wrong? I cannot see it. Or, can you?

SALEH’S ILLOGICAL AND PROVOCATIVE INANITY

Did you read the provocative inanity uttered by one Alhassan Saleh, National Secretary of Miyetti Allah? I read it, and became more convinced that our dire national situation may be hopeless afterall. Hear him deliver his gibberish sermon:

“If the south feels because they have oil, they can show this open hatred to the Fulani, I bet you, they are late.
You cannot expel an ethnic group that has a population of 17 million people from an entity. So, if the agitators want to divide the country today, or this minute, we will help. We are ready to go. We are more prepared than any other tribe.

Nowhere is this type of ban done. You can only control it. But the Fulani, by nature, move about with their animals. They are not only in Nigeria, they are all over Africa…

They (Southerners) want to force us to react but we don’t react that way. Compared to what we went through in Guinea and Sudan and we survived, this is even a child’s play.
We understand that 2023 is also part of the game plan. They want to get power on a platter of gold. Nobody will give them power like that. They must seek our support. People who want power don’t behave in this matter…

Today, we are ready, let them divide the country. Let them not wait till tomorrow. We are better prepared than any other ethnic nationality. So, we are ready, let them divide the country. Let us die, we that don’t have the oil.”

QUESTIONS BEGGING FOR ANSWERS FROM SALEH

Let me interrogate Saleh’s thesis with some questions. Is Saleh really telling us that cattle breeders (just like Igbo Alaba shop owners, or Yoruba cocoa farmers, or Ijaw fishermen (examples not used in any derogatory sense but to make the point), have so cheapened the proud Fulani race of Shehu Usman Dan Fodio (born Usman bi Fudi; 1754 – 1817), that they have actually become the Fulani’s mouthpiece, their spokespersons? I cannot understand this. Or can you? So, to ensure peace, Fulani herders who “are not only in Nigeria, but all over Africa (moving) about with their animals”, should be allowed to commit genocide against other Nigerians?

Let me ask Saleh one question: who is the aggressor? Did other Nigerians invade Fulani towns to attack them? So, Saleh is saying that Fulani herdsmen who migrate from all over Africa through open borders of the North (those of the South are firmly shut) should be allowed unchallenged, as they have been doing, especially since the last 6 years of the Buhari government, to continue to attack innocent people in their homes, spill blood and rape their wives and daughters? So, Fulanis should be allowed to invade helpless farmers’ farms, kill the farmers with their sophisticated AK-47 riffles, destroy their farms and freely graze on their crops with their cattle? Oh, Fulanis must be allowed to walk leisurely with herds and hordes of cattle across the Federal Secretariat buildings and Three Arms Zone of Abuja, with vehicles and trekking human beings stopping and waiting for them to pass? So, that is Saleh’s own warped idea of living together? So, Southerners should be wiped out from the face of Nigeria in a carefully choreographed genocidal script, and they must not complain just because they will seek power, and must need Fulani support? So, the Southern Governors hate the Fulanis for telling them to stop open grazing and movement of cows by road across the South, thereby killing innocent people and destroying people’s means of livelihood? So, the life of a cow is more precious than that of a human being?

I cannot understand Saleh and his Miyetti Allah’s reasoning and illogicality. Or can you? So, Governor Samuel Ortom of Benue State is a “vagabond-in-power”, simply because he cried out that he was tired of being a helpless undertaker, coffin maker, an elegy orator and chief mourner presiding over daily slaughter of his own people?

So, because the Fulanis are all over Africa, and they had successfully overrun Guinea and Sudan (predominantly Muslim countries), they should also be allowed to overrun plural Nigeria (there are actually more Christians than Muslims even in the North) and wipe out the other 373 ethnic groups of Nigeria (according to Professor Onigu Otite)? I cannot comprehend this man. Or can you?

More questions please, Saleh: So, a personal profit-making venture such as cattle rearing should be forced willy-nilly on all other Nigerians as a fundamental objective and directive principle of state policy? So, the yam produce, cocoa palm kernel and tomatoes farmers of other ethnic groups, should equally be allowed to invade and seize Fulani lands and impose their trade on them? How would the Fulanis feel if the Igbos insist that because they are excellent traders, shops must be built for them by the Federal and State Governments across Nigeria, free of charge, to ply their lucrative trade? How will they feel if rearers of pigs (even when the Muslim Fulanis forbid pork meat) overrun their territories with hordes of pigs, all in the name of keeping Nigeria together?

Nigeria’s population projection by the United Nations for July, 2021, is 210,665,492. Of this number, only 17 million people are Fulanis, according to Saleh. There are three classes of Fulanis based on settlement patterns: the Nomadic/Pastoral or Mbororo; the Semi-Nomadic and the “Settled” or “Town Fulanis”. Thus, the Miyetti Allah nomadic or pastoral group constitutes only one-third of Fulanis in Nigeria. This means, speaking arithmetically, 8% people out of Nigeria’s population of 210.6 million people. So, going by Alhassan Saleh’s puerile vituperations, a tiny, but powerful, well-connected, power-dominating minority of 8% of Nigeria’s population must be allowed forever to tyranise the vast majority, impose their will; govern them by force; kill them; wipe them out of Nigeria, all in the name of peace, unity, indissolubility and indivisibility of Nigeria? So, the other 92% Nigerian majority should be held down by the jugular, just to make Nigeria work and prevent Fulanis from leaving Nigeria? Haba! I can never understand this man and the cattle rearers he spoke for. Or can you?

Nigeria is a Federation that operates the principles of federalism. Under this, the FG, States and LGAs have their respective rights and spheres of influence. There is the exclusive, concurrent and residual lists under the Constitution. This was why Justice Olajuwon of the FHC, Makurdi, held that since land in every State is controlled and managed by the Governor and LGs of such States, the FG cannot whimsically and capriciously grab lands in States; but must go through either the Governor or LG of such State.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Opinion

Re-engineering the Mind: A Pathway to Freedom for Peoples, Corporates and Nations

Published

on

By

By Tolulope A. Adegoke PhD

“The most formidable borders we must cross are not geographic, but cognitive. True sovereignty—for peoples, corporates, or nations—begins with the courageous act of dismantling the internal architectures of limitation and rebuilding with the materials of our own authentic possibilities.” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

We live in a world shaped by history, yet our future is not predetermined by it. One of the most profound challenges facing individuals, corporations, and nations, particularly in contexts like Nigeria and Africa—is the legacy of mental colonialism. This isn’t merely a historical discussion; it’s about the unconscious frameworks that continue to dictate how we think, what we value, and what we believe is possible. Decolonizing oneself from this “mental slavery” is the essential first step toward delivering genuine, self-determined possibilities. This process requires honesty, courage, and a deliberate reclamation of thought.

Understanding the Invisible Chains

Mental slavery is the internalization of a worldview where the former colonizer’s culture, systems, and standards are seen as inherently superior, universal, and the sole benchmark for progress. It manifests in subtle ways: the devaluation of local languages and knowledge, the preference for foreign goods and credentials over local ones, and the persistent narrative that real solutions must always come from outside. This mindset creates a ceiling on imagination, fostering dependency and a crippling doubt in one’s own innate capacity to innovate and lead.

The Personal Journey: Reclaiming Your Inner Narrative

For the individual, decolonization is a deeply personal journey of unlearning and rediscovery. It starts with critical self-reflection.

  • Questioning Knowledge: It asks, “Whose history am I learning? Whose definition of beauty, success, and intelligence have I accepted?” It involves actively seeking out and valuing indigenous philosophies, like the Ubuntu concept of “I am because we are,” not as folklore but as viable, sophisticated frameworks for living.
  • Redefining Value: It means measuring personal success not only by proximity to Western lifestyles but by contributions to community, by cultural continuity, and by personal integrity aligned with one’s own roots.
  • Language as Liberation: It recognizes the power of language to shape reality. Embracing one’s mother tongue in thought and creative expression becomes an act of resistance and a reconnection to a distinct way of seeing the world.

The Corporate Transformation: From Extraction to Ecosystem

Businesses and organizations are often perfect mirrors of colonial logic, built on hierarchical control, resource extraction, and the standardization of Western corporate models. Decolonizing the corporate sphere requires a fundamental shift in purpose and practice.

  • Beyond Exploitation: It moves from a model that extracts value (from people, communities, and the environment) for distant shareholders to one that generates and circulates value within local ecosystems. It prioritizes regenerative practices and community equity.
  • Innovation from Within: It rejects the mere copying of foreign business playbooks. Instead, it looks inward, developing uniquely African management styles, products, and solutions that respond to local realities, needs, and social structures. It sees the informal sector not as a problem, but as a reservoir of resilience and ingenuity.
  • Partnership Over Paternalism: It abandons the “savior” complex—the idea that development is “delivered” from the outside. A decolonized corporate entity positions itself as a humble partner, listening to and amplifying local agency and existing expertise.

The National Project: Reimagining Governance and Identity

For nation-states like Nigeria, the legacy is etched into the very architecture of the state: borders that divide ethnic groups, economies structured for export of raw materials, and educational systems that glorify foreign histories.

  • Institutional Reformation: True decolonization necessitates the courageous reform of institutions. This means auditing legal systems, constitutions, and national curricula to root out colonial biases and integrate indigenous knowledge and juridical principles.
  • Economic Sovereignty: It demands a strategic, deliberate reduction of dependency. This involves prioritizing regional trade (like the African Continental Free Trade Area), adding value to natural resources locally, and investing in home-grown technology and manufacturing. It is a pivot from being a primary commodity exporter in a global system designed by others to being an architect of one’s own economic destiny.
  • Cultural Agency: On the global stage, a decolonized nation defines itself. It conducts diplomacy based on its own historical experiences and philosophical foundations, not merely by aligning with blocs formed by colonial histories. It tells its own stories, controlling its narrative.

Nigeria and Africa: The Crucible of Challenge and Promise

Africa, with Nigeria as its most populous nation, is the undeniable focal point of this global conversation. The continent’s challenges are real, but they are too often diagnosed through the very colonial lens that contributed to them. Nigeria’s specific struggle—to forge a cohesive national identity from its stunning diversity, to manage resource wealth for the benefit of all, and to overcome governance failures—is a direct engagement with its colonial past.

The “African Renaissance” envisioned in frameworks like Agenda 2063 is, at its heart, a decolonial project. It seeks an Africa integrated by its own people’s design, powered by its own intellectual and cultural capital, and speaking to the world with confidence and authority.

A Universal Call: Why the Wider World Must Engage

This is not a project for the formerly colonized alone. The wider world, including former colonial powers and global institutions, has a responsibility to engage.

  • Acknowledgment and Equity: It begins with a sincere acknowledgment of historical injustices and their modern-day economic and political echoes. It requires moving from a paradigm of charity and aid to one of justice, fair trade, and equitable partnership.
  • Enriching Humanity: Ultimately, decolonizing the mind enriches all of humanity. It frees everyone from the limitations of a single, dominant story about progress and human achievement. It opens the door to a world where multiple ways of knowing, being, and creating can coexist and cross-pollinate, leading to more resilient and innovative global solutions.

Conclusion: The Freedom to Imagine Anew

In this moment of global reckoning and transformation, the work of mental decolonization is not a luxury; it is an urgent necessity. It is the hard, internal work that must precede lasting external change. For the individual, it delivers the profound possibility of wholeness. For the corporation, it unlocks sustainable innovation and authentic purpose. For nations like Nigeria and for the African continent, it is the non-negotiable foundation for true sovereignty and transformational progress.

The ultimate deliverable is freedom—the freedom to imagine a future unbounded by the past, and the agency to build it.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke is a Distinguished Ambassador For World Peace (AMBP-UN); Nigeria @65 Leaders of Distinction (2025); Recipient, Nigerian Role Models Award (2024); African Leadership Par Excellence Award (2024). 

He can be reached via: tolulopeadegoke01@gmail.comglobalstageimpacts@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Dele Momodu’s Arrival: Day ADC Became Heavier

Published

on

By

By Dr. Sani S a’idu Baba

What does loyalty mean to you in friendships, family, or work? To me, loyalty is staying true, honest and supportive even when it’s hard. That truth defines my relationship with Chief Dele Momodu, whom I more often refer to as the pride of Africa. My loyalty to him is non-negotiable. It is not seasonal, transactional, or driven by convenience. It is rooted in conviction. So, the moment he collected his membership card of the African Democratic Congress (ADC) in his hometown of Ihievbe, Owan East, Edo State, I did the same in Kano. In that instant, distance dissolved, and purpose aligned. What happened yesterday was not just a decamping; it was a declaration. A declaration that the long, hard road to Rescue, Recover and Reset Nigeria has gained one of its most formidable travellers.

This is indeed a remarkable day for the ADC. While many defections into political parties come and go with the tides of ambition, Dele Momodu’s entry stands apart, loud in meaning, deep in symbolism, and heavy with consequence. For the ADC, this is not merely the acquisition of a new member; it is the embrace of a movement-builder, a conscience-keeper, and a bridge across Nigeria’s fractured divides, and these qualities are evident in his record.

First, Dele Momodu’s political pedigree is rare and refreshing. In an environment where political loyalty often bends toward power, he has never been part of the ruling party throughout his entire political life. This is not stubbornness; it is principle. It means he understands opposition not as noise-making, but as nation-guarding. He knows how to put governments on their toes firmly, intelligently, and fearlessly. The ADC has gained a man perfectly schooled in democratic vigilance, one who knows that true progress is sharpened by principled opposition.

Second, the ADC has gained a tested pro-democracy fighter in Dele Momodu. He paid a personal price during the military era for resisting dictatorship and standing firmly for democratic rule in the Third Republic. That history of sacrifice now translates into a major advantage for the ADC: a leader with the moral authority, experience, and courage to constitutionally, peacefully and intellectually confront the growing threat of a one-party state and one-man dictatorship. With Dele Momodu in its fold, the ADC is better equipped to defend democracy and lead the national effort to recover Nigeria from authoritarian drift.

Third, he is widely recognized as one of the most principled and loyal politicians Nigeria has produced. When Dele Momodu commits, he commits fully. No half-measures. No double games. No conditional loyalty. If he belongs to a party, he supports it wholeheartedly and unconditionally. For the ADC, this is priceless. In a time when political parties struggle with internal contradictions and wavering allegiances, here is a man whose word is his bond and whose presence strengthens internal cohesion.

Fourth, the ADC has attracted not just a member, but a truth-teller. Dele Momodu derives pleasure in saying the truth as it is, without varnish, without fear, without apology. Parties rise or fall not only by their slogans but by their capacity for honest self-examination. With Momodu in the ADC, the party gains its greatest advisor and most reliable mirror. He will celebrate what is right, challenge what is wrong, and insist on moral clarity. This is how serious political institutions are built.

Fifth, Dele Momodu is a magnet. He attracts highly responsible, competent, and patriotic Nigerians from every corner of the country. Many see him as a part-time and independent politician, one whose ultimate allegiance is not to party symbols but to Nigeria’s soul. That perception is powerful. It means that wherever he goes, Nigerians are ready to follow, to join, and to support. By welcoming him, the ADC has sent a clear signal to the nation: this is a home for credibility, courage, and Nigeria first politics.

Wherever Dele Momodu goes, Nigerians at home and in the diaspora admire him effortlessly. He never gets tired of engaging, mentoring, inspiring, and mobilising. Without any noise, he becomes a vehicle of mass mobilisation. With him, the ADC’s message will travel farther than billboards, deeper than rallies, and faster than propaganda. This is influence earned through decades of credibility, not imposed.

I speak from experience. I was the North-West Coordinator of the Dele Momodu Movement in 2022 when he contested the presidential primaries under the PDP. I later served as his agent at the primaries held at the Moshood Abiola Stadium, Abuja, on May 28, 2022. I went round with him all over Nigeria, and from that experience, I came to truly understand the perception of the ordinary Nigerian about the extraordinary pedigree of Dele Momodu, how people see him as consistent, authentic, accessible, and genuinely committed to Nigeria’s progress.

Sixth, the ADC has attracted a great promise-keeper in Dele Momodu. Let me back this claim with facts. I was among those who accompanied him to the screening before the PDP presidential primaries. When he came out and journalists asked him questions, his response was characteristically clear and sincere: it is totally about Nigeria, nothing personal. He went further to announce the promise he took during the screening, that he would support whoever emerged as the party’s candidate to victory, and he kept that promise. As great globetrotter that he is, no one can easily recall when last Dele Momodu stayed in Nigeria for months, working assiduously for the success of his party and its candidate, His Excellency Atiku Abubakar. While many others who took the same promise were busy throwing tantrums, he was on the field, mobilising, advocating, and delivering. That was a promise kept.

But beyond politics lies the most compelling asset Dele Momodu brings to the ADC: his story. The turbulent but triumphant journey of his life can draw tears not only from the over 140 million Nigerians living in extreme poverty today, but from anyone who understands struggle. It is a story that melts hearts across class, age, and geography. Relatable. Poignant. Edifying. It speaks directly to the Nigerian who feels forgotten by birth or battered by circumstance. It tells you that you may be a rejected stone today, penniless, down and out but you can become a chief cornerstone tomorrow. Not by cutting corners, but by patience, consistency, building networks of influence, embracing hard work, and staying faithful to your dream. Perhaps this is why Dele Momodu is arguably the Nigerian mentor with the highest number of mentees across every nook and cranny of this country, myself included. His mentorship culture is organic, generous, and transformational. He opens doors, builds people, and multiplies hope. For the ADC, this is a strategic advantage that cannot be overstated. A party that attracts Dele Momodu automatically attracts thousands of thinkers, professionals, youths, and patriots he has inspired over decades.

Dele Momodu is in a class of his own. Naturally unique. Authentically Nigerian. Globally respected and travels road less travel. His life proves that greatness can rise from adversity, and leadership can be forged without bitterness. With his entry into the ADC, the party has not just caught a “big fish”; it has netted a tide-changer. Yesterday, in Ihiebve, history was made. From Edo to Kano, from the grassroots to the global stage, a new chapter has begun. The ADC is no longer just preparing for the future, it is recruiting it. And with Dele Momodu on board, the mission to Rescue, Recover and Reset Nigeria has found one of its strongest voices and most trusted hands.

The journey ahead is demanding. But with men of principle, truth and influence like Chief Dele Momodu, the ADC is no longer asking Nigerians to believe. It is giving them a reason to.

Dr Baba writes from Kano, and can be reached via drssbaba@yahoo.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Reimagining the African Leadership Paradigm: A Comprehensive Blueprint

Published

on

By

By Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

“To lead Africa forward is to move from transactional authority to transformational stewardship—where institutions outlive individuals, data informs vision, and service is the only valid currency of governance” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

The narrative of African leadership in the 21st century stands at a critical intersection of profound potential and persistent paradox. The continent, pulsating with the world’s youngest demographic and endowed with immense natural wealth, nonetheless contends with systemic challenges that stifle its ascent. This divergence between capacity and outcome signals not merely a failure of policy, but a deeper crisis of leadership philosophy and practice. As the global order undergoes seismic shifts, the imperative for African nations to fundamentally re-strategize their approach to governance has transitioned from an intellectual exercise to an existential necessity. Nigeria, by virtue of its demographic heft, economic scale, and cultural influence, serves as the continent’s most significant crucible for this transformation. The journey of Nigerian leadership from its current state to its potential apex offers a blueprint not only for its own 200 million citizens but for an entire continent in search of a new compass.

Deconstructing the Legacy Model: A Diagnosis of Systemic Failure

To construct a resilient future, we must first undertake an unflinching diagnosis of the present. The prevailing leadership archetype across much of Africa, with clear manifestations in Nigeria’s political economy, is built upon a foundation that has proven tragically unfit for purpose. This model is characterized by several interlocking dysfunctions:

·         The Primacy of Transactional Politics Over Transformational Vision: Governance has too often been reduced to a complex system of transactions—votes exchanged for short-term patronage, positions awarded for loyalty over competence, and resource allocation serving political expediency rather than national strategy. This erodes public trust and makes long-term, cohesive planning impossible.

·         The Tyranny of the Short-Term Electoral Cycle: Leadership decisions are frequently held hostage to the next election, sacrificing strategic investments in education, infrastructure, and industrialization on the altar of immediate, visible—yet fleeting—gains. This creates a perpetual cycle of reactive governance, preventing the execution of decade-spanning national projects.

·         Administrative Silos and Bureaucratic Inertia: Government ministries and agencies often operate as isolated fiefdoms, with limited inter-departmental collaboration. This siloed approach fragments policy implementation, leads to contradictory initiatives, and renders the state apparatus inefficient and unresponsive to complex, cross-sectoral challenges like climate change, public health, and national security.

·         The Demographic Disconnect: Africa’s most potent asset is its youth. Yet, a vast governance gap separates a dynamic, digitally-native, and globally-aware generation from political structures that remain opaque, paternalistic, and slow to adapt. This disconnect fuels alienation, brain drain, and social unrest.

·         The Weakness of Institutions and the Cult of Personality: When the strength of a state is vested in individuals rather than institutions, it creates systemic vulnerability. Independent judiciaries, professional civil services, and credible electoral commissions are weakened, leading to arbitrariness in the application of law, erosion of meritocracy, and a deep-seated crisis of public confidence.

The tangible outcomes of this flawed model are the headlines that define the continent’s challenges: infrastructure deficits that strangle commerce, public education and healthcare systems in states of distress, jobless economic growth, multifaceted security threats, and the chronic hemorrhage of human capital. To re-strategize leadership is to directly address these outputs by redesigning the very system that produces them.

Pillars of a Reformed Leadership Architecture: A Holistic Framework

The new leadership paradigm must be constructed not as a minor adjustment, but as a holistic architectural endeavor. It requires foundational pillars that are interdependent, mutually reinforcing, and built to endure beyond political transitions.

1. The Philosophical Core: Embracing Servant-Leadership and Ethical Stewardship
The most profound change must be internal—a recalibration of the leader’s fundamental purpose. The concept of the leader as a benevolent “strongman” must give way to the model of the servant-leader. This philosophy, rooted in both timeless African communal values (ubuntu) and modern ethical governance, posits that the true leader exists to serve the people, not vice versa. It is characterized by deep empathy, radical accountability, active listening, and a commitment to empowering others. Success is measured not by the leader’s personal accumulation of power or wealth, but by the tangible flourishing, security, and expanded opportunities of the citizenry. This ethos fosters trust, the essential currency of effective governance.

2. Strategic Foresight and Evidence-Based Governance
Leadership must be an exercise in building the future, not just administering the present. This requires the collaborative development of a clear, compelling, and inclusive national vision—a strategic narrative that aligns the energies of government, private sector, and civil society. For Nigeria, frameworks like Nigeria’s Agenda 2050 and the National Development Plan must be de-politicized and treated as binding national covenants. Furthermore, in the age of big data, governance must transition from intuition-driven to evidence-based. This necessitates significant investment in data collection, analytics, and policy-informing research. Whether designing social safety nets, deploying security resources, or planning agricultural subsidies, decisions must be illuminated by rigorous data, ensuring efficiency, transparency, and measurable impact.

3. Institutional Fortification: Building the Enduring Pillars of State
A nation’s longevity and stability are directly proportional to the strength and independence of its institutions. Re-strategizing leadership demands an unwavering commitment to institutional architecture:

·         An Impervious Judiciary: The rule of law must be absolute, with a judicial system insulated from political and financial influence, guaranteeing justice for the powerful and the marginalized alike.

·         Electoral Integrity as Sacred Trust: Democratic legitimacy springs from credible elections. Investing in independent electoral commissions, transparent technology, and robust legal frameworks is non-negotiable for political stability.

·         A Re-professionalized Civil Service: The bureaucracy must be transformed into a merit-driven, technologically adept, and well-remunerated engine of state, shielded from the spoils system and empowered to implement policy effectively.

·         Robust, Transparent Accountability Ecosystems: Anti-corruption agencies require genuine operational independence, adequate funding, and protection. Complementing this, transparent public procurement platforms and mandatory asset declarations for public officials must become normalized practice.

4. Collaborative and Distributed Leadership: The Power of the Collective
The monolithic state cannot solve wicked problems alone. The modern leader must be a convener-in-chief, architecting platforms for sustained collaboration. This involves actively fostering a triple-helix partnership:

·         The Public Sector sets the vision, regulates, and provides enabling infrastructure.

·         The Private Sector drives investment, innovation, scale, and job creation.

·         Academia and Civil Society contribute research, grassroots intelligence, independent oversight, and specialized implementation capacity.
This model distributes responsibility, leverages diverse expertise, and fosters innovative solutions—from public-private partnerships in infrastructure to tech-driven civic engagement platforms.

5. Human Capital Supremacy: The Ultimate Strategic Investment
A nation’s most valuable asset walks on two feet. Re-strategized leadership places a supreme, non-negotiable priority on developing human potential. For Nigeria and Africa, this demands a generational project:

·         Revolutionizing Education: Curricula must be overhauled to foster critical thinking, digital literacy, STEM proficiency, and entrepreneurial mindset—skills for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Investment in teacher training and educational infrastructure is paramount.

·         Building a Preventive, Resilient Health System: Focus must shift from curative care in central hospitals to robust, accessible primary healthcare. A healthy population is a productive population, forming the basis of economic resilience.

·         Creating an Enabling Environment for Talent: Beyond education and health, leadership must provide the ecosystem where talent can thrive: reliable electricity, ubiquitous broadband, access to venture capital, and a regulatory environment that encourages innovation and protects intellectual property. The goal is to make the domestic environment more attractive than the diaspora for the continent’s best minds.

6. Assertive, Strategic Engagement in Global Affairs
African leadership must shed any vestiges of a supplicant mentality and adopt a posture of strategic agency. This means actively shaping continental and global agendas:

·         Leveraging the AfCFTA: Moving beyond signing agreements to actively dismantling non-tariff barriers, harmonizing standards, and investing in cross-border infrastructure to turn the agreement into a real engine of intra-African trade and industrialization.

·         Diplomacy for Value Creation: Foreign policy should be strategically deployed to attract sustainable foreign direct investment, secure technology transfer agreements, and build partnerships based on mutual benefit, not aid dependency.

·         Advocacy for Structural Reform: African leaders must collectively and persistently advocate for reforms in global financial institutions and multilateral forums to ensure a more equitable international system.

The Nigerian Imperative: From National Challenges to a National Charter

Applying this framework to Nigeria requires translating universal principles into specific, context-driven actions:

·         Integrated Security as a Foundational Priority: Security strategy must be comprehensive, blending advanced intelligence capabilities, professionalized security forces, with parallel investments in community policing, youth employment programs in high-risk areas, and accelerated development to address the root causes of instability.

·         A Determined Pursuit of Economic Complexity: Leadership must orchestrate a decisive shift from rent-seeking in the oil sector to value creation across diversified sectors: commercialized agriculture, light and advanced manufacturing, a thriving creative industry, and a dominant digital services sector.

·         Constitutional and Governance Re-engineering: To harness its diversity, Nigeria requires a sincere national conversation on restructuring. This likely entails moving towards a more authentic federalism with greater fiscal autonomy for states, devolution of powers, and mechanisms that ensure equitable resource distribution and inclusive political representation.

·         Pioneering a Just Energy Transition: Nigeria must craft a unique energy pathway—strategically utilizing its gas resources for domestic industrialization and power generation, while simultaneously positioning itself as a regional hub for renewable energy technology, investment, and innovation.

Conclusion: A Collective Endeavor of Audacious Hope

Re-strategizing leadership in Africa and in Nigeria is not an event, but a generational process. It is not the abandonment of culture but its evolution—melding the deep African traditions of community, consensus, and elder wisdom with the modern imperatives of transparency, innovation, and individual rights. This task extends far beyond the political class. It is a summons to a new generation of leaders in every sphere: the tech entrepreneur in Yaba, the reform-minded civil servant in Abuja, the agri-preneur in Kebbi, the investigative journalist in Lagos, and the community activist in the Niger Delta.

Ultimately, this is an endeavor of audacious hope. It is the conscious choice to build systems stronger than individuals, institutions more enduring than terms of office, and a national identity richer than our ethnic sum. Nigeria possesses all the requisite raw materials for greatness: human brilliance, cultural richness, and natural bounty. The final, indispensable ingredient is a leadership strategy worthy of its people. The blueprint is now detailed; the call to action is urgent. The future awaits not our complaints, but our constructive and courageous labor. Let the work begin in earnest.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke is a globally recognized scholar-practitioner and thought leader at the nexus of security, governance, and strategic leadership. His work addresses complex institutional challenges, with a specialized focus on West African security dynamics, conflict resolution, and sustainable development.

Continue Reading

Trending