Connect with us

Headline

Pendulum: Why President Buhari is Not Getting it Right

Published

on

By Dele Momodu

Fellow Nigerians, if I had any iota of hope or expectation left in me that our President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retired) has any chance of pulling some productive stunts in the less than two years to complete his second and final term, it evaporated and vamoosed into thin air a few days ago.

Let me start by congratulating the Thisday/Arise team that succeeded in persuading a usually taciturn and reluctant President Buhari to agree to speak to ordinary mortals at home instead of giving scoops to his favourite foreign journalists. Trust me, it was a landmark achievement for which the Group Chairman, Prince Nduka Obaigbena must be applauded. He once again demonstrated his famed daredevilry and nose for stories at the most opportune moment, at all times. The team of Segun Adeniyi, Reuben Abati, and Tundun Abiola, that he assembled also tried strenuously to ask all the right questions even if they got some wrong answers, for very obvious reasons.

I wish to disagree with those who have been disparaging the President and saying his performance was dismal and disappointing. In my view, the President performed above expectations given the seeming cold indifference with which he has come to be associated. As it is often said, water can only rise above its level. At nearer 80 than 70, the President cannot be expected to reinvent himself. He has never pretended to be a tech savvy wizard that modern leaders are expected to be. He has never shown himself to be anything more than a member of the analogue generation in imagination and innovation. He has little or nothing in common with the modern ways of life and it is clear that he is not prepared to ready to stress himself unnecessarily. He is perpetually and stoically stuck in his mindset. That is a fact.  We must also consider his health challenges for which God has been extremely kind.

I know you’re likely to ask me, so why did you guys support him in 2015? I will never get tired of giving my standard answer. One. We were tired of PDP after 16 years of profligacy and all kinds of bad behaviour that seemed to make General Abacha begin to look like a Saint. Two. In the days of tribulations, you sometimes run to the elders of the family in order to tap into their uncommon experience and wisdom notwithstanding their shortcomings. We perceived Buhari to be such an elder. Three. We reasoned that whatever is lacking in the President would be covered by the Vice President, Professor Yemi Osinbajo who is recognised not only as a cerebral and knowledgeable man, but also an outstanding and accomplished administrator, given his stint at the helm of affairs of the Ministry of Justice in Lagos State. Four. We expected the President to cooperate beautifully with some of the bright people in his Party, who know their onions and can guide him in the right direction. Five. We never thought in our wildest imagination that any leadership, no matter its background,  would ever have the temerity and audacity to lead us back to the dark days of the military. Six. We expected the President to have accepted the reality that the world has changed so drastically since he was forced out of power in 1985 and it is virtually impossible to continue to run government in analogue fashion.

It would certainly be definitely unfair and unkind to conclude that the President was totally bad in his responses and that he could be excused by the foibles and weaknesses that we recognise have become notable chinks in his armour. I’m happy he answered all questions honestly, frankly and sincerely. He deserves to be congratulated as well for even finding the confidence and courage to sit through the obviously harrowing interview session. I will now try to dissect this much talked about scoop of the year.

Setting. I loved the relaxed setting and atmosphere. The President dressed down and the interview must have taken place in his official residence and not in the office. It was obviously organised and presented to put the President at ease in an environment that he was most familiar and comfortable with. There would be no need to be guarded because he was in his natural habitat. One could see this confidence playing out in the course of the interview. Two of the very senior reporters, Segun Adeniyi and Reuben Abati were no strangers to the presidential villa where they had both respectively served as spokespersons to two previous Presidents, Alhaji Umaru Musa Yar’Adua and Dr Goodluck Ebele Jonathan. So, they came with intimidating credentials as brilliant journalists with verve and experience. The only lady in the team, Ms Tundun Abiola, the daughter of the winner of the June 12, 1993, Presidential elections, Chief Moshood Abiola, is also a very brilliant and intelligent lady, one of the most admired presenters on television today. She combines beauty with brains. Led by the Chairman, Nduka, it could only have been a perfect team operating in an equally perfect environment.

The session. The interview started well. The questions poured in from every direction but in a decorously gracious and graceful manner, without being the pugilistic affair that it could easily have been. Though pre-recorded, I doubt if there was much editing of the content. The President oscillated from one mood to another depending how lovely or irritable he interpreted or misjudged the questions.

The President was more vocal than I expected that he would be. He seemed prepared to answer as many questions as were posed without attempting to fudge. It was like one determined to lay bare everything on his chest and exorcise the demons. Nevertheless, many people complained of not hearing him loudly and clearly enough, and sometimes, even lucidly. However, I think that had to do with his natural accent and intonation and nothing sinister or amiss. Many people are also too bitter and biased to listen properly to what he was saying and the views he was espousing, and for that reason might not really have heard him. On my part, I enjoyed the interview for the mere fact that he granted one at home. And also, of course, because it answered several questions about the President’s health and well-being as well as his level of control. It is difficult now to blame others, and not the President, for the ills and woes from this government. Several myths were busted!

The President remained true to his old self and beliefs and refused to persuade anyone that he is a born-again Democrat, which was one of the borrowed garbs we dressed him in prior to the 2015 elections. The man I watched was a proud, haughty and arrogant military officer, with no apologies for being a ruthless dictator.

The President reflected a deep disappointment, resentment and anger against the youths of Nigeria, whom he described as being overtly recalcitrant. His view was one of whatever suffering they are going through must have been self-inflicted and they deserve to suffer for it. He would not empathise with them. For me, the President probably considers the near collapse of the Nigerian economy as something which the populace and, especially the youths need to go through if they are to appreciate life. I am also sure that he sees it as a form of punishment for the pesky youths who have dogged his tenure with unacceptable and impossible demands almost as soon as he took office.  Let me chip in here that he is obviously misinformed about Twitter. A country with our multitude and army of unemployed you would never ban social media, especially Twitter which has become a veritable tool of international business.                                                                                                                                   The President is without any fear of contradiction or apology a Fulani irredentist. He practically revealed that the itinerant Fulani herdsmen must be granted the rights of passage through the grazing routes established since the 1960s. This is a skilful way of telling the Southern Governors and whosoever is lamenting like the Biblical Jeremiah in the North Central to shut up. The President clearly does not seem to be concerned about the mayhem and carnage that these so-called Fulani herdsmen are leaving in the wake. Every Fulani is welcome in Nigeria regardless of the fact that most of the deadlier ones migrated here uninvited from the Sahel regions and are thus not Nigerian citizens.  Once again, he made no effort to hide his pathological hatred for the Igbo nation, a people he sees as wholly Biafran. He kept his threat against them but no one noticed the same degree of venom against the people causing maximum mayhem in every part of the country. He told us to ask the military who are fighting the bandits. Unfortunately, we haven’t really seen much. As a matter of fact, we have lost most of our brilliant soldiers in the North than in the South East.

The President justified spending billions of dollars on over-stretching our resources to build infrastructure to and within Niger Republic. Again, no remorse, no apologies. In a country that has not completed one of its most important motorways, the Lagos-Ibadan Expressway, in the last six years, it is preposterous and unfortunate to listen to the Commander-in-Chief romanticize his first cousins in Niger Republic. He even told us the only way to defeat Boko Haram and banditry is to take good care of Cameroon, Chad and Niger. But should charity not begin from home? Or maybe it does!

The President stoutly defended his now infamous lopsided appointments by anchoring it on merit. One would have thought from this answer, that most people in the Southern States of Nigeria are certified dullards who couldn’t pass their professional or other exams and interviews. Since we know the reverse is the case, we can not only wonder how the President can sit with a straight face and make the kinds of statements that he did about his lopsidedness that is clearly hinged on unbridled nepotism. And the President kept a straight poker face while justifying the biggest mistake of this government. Nothing has contributed more to the near disintegration of Nigeria than the feeling of those treated like second- and third-class citizens in their own country. That the President could seriously take the view that he did, and feel comfortable about it, demonstrates a personage who has been cut off from the outside world and whose depressing isolation is compounded by the fact that he has lost touch with reality. It is further distressing that the aides you have, who are at least blessed with some truth and knowledge of our excruciating conditions will not properly advise their Principal and set him on the right path whenever it seems he has derailed and needs to be reined back, out of monumental fear and trepidation.  However, it appears that the President’s subordinates are content with the role of lackeys and silent clowns in order to remain unseen and thus keep their jobs.

Rome is burning and the Emperor is busy fiddling away and regaling his captive audience in the villa and outside with tales of his supremacy, mastery and position of maestro in ages gone past.

On Democracy Day, it is  sad and depressing, a monumental tragedy, that we do not have a democrat in office as President. May God help Nigeria survive this misfortune and its backlash!

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Headline

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

Published

on

By

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

Continue Reading

Headline

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

Published

on

By

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.”

Continue Reading

Headline

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

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Trending