Connect with us

Headline

Why is President Buhari So Biased Against South East?

Published

on

By Eric Elezuo

The administration of President Muhammadu Buhari has been dismissed in many quarters for being tribalistic and nepotistic. These infamous qualities however, have continually received credence from the number citizen and his foot soldiers in the running of the affairs of the country and its people. The region said to have been the biggest culprit in Buhari’s reign of division has been the people of the South East, and analysts have said that the President is unapologetic of his stand.

It would be recalled that at the inception of his presidency, Buhari unequivocally revealed his intention to create a pariah governance and rule by selection when he hinted before an international press that there was no way he would treat those that gave him 97 per cent vote and those that gave him five per cent vote equally.

The president was fielding questions from journalists when Dr. Pauline Baker, the President Emeritus of The Fund for Peace, inquired about security in the Niger Delta area. The exact wording of her question was: “My question relates to another area of Nigeria that hasn’t gotten a lot of attention during this trip and that is the Niger Delta. It’s a challenge that you are going to face. I wonder if you would tell us how you intend to approach it with particular reference to the amnesty, bunkering, and inclusive development?”

Buhari, who seemed lost at the content of the question seemed to struggle before replying thus: “I hope you have a copy of the election results. The constituents, for example, gave me 97% [of the vote] cannot in all honesty be treated on some issues with constituencies that gave me 5%.”

“I think these are political reality,” the President added.

The president may have been answering questions relating to the Niger Delta at the time, but his body language and actions subsequently clearly showed he was referring to his relationship with the South East part of the country, which constitute the Igbo nation.

It is worthy of note that prior to the election of 2015 and even before, Buhari has never had the full support of the south east, and this has affected his general collation of votes, and to an extent created a political tension between him and the region. Stakeholders have therefore, concluded that Buhari’s response on that day, just few weeks after his inauguration, was premeditated, and no action so far from him has proved otherwise.

Matters have however, come to a different dimension as the Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation, Mallam Abubakar Malami, unilaterally declared that the federal government would not hesitate to invoke the emergency rule if all avenues of keeping the peace in Anambra State fail before the governorship election set for November 6, 2021 in the state.

In a swift response, the government of the state through the Commissioner for Information, Don Adinuba, dismissed such calls as anachronistic, saying that it is outrageous and nothing but politically motivated. He insinuated that the call was an offshoot of the bias on Mr President has for the south east, asking if such states like Bornu, Zamfara, Kaduna and others heavily ravaged by insurgency attacks have been given emergency laws.

The Commissioner, who spoke on Channels Television’s ‘Politics Today’ a current affairs programme was reacting to the state of affairs in the sttt.

Suspected hoodlums, last week, had killed Dr Chike Akunyili, the widower of the late former Minister of Information and Director-General of the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control, Prof. Dora Akunyili.

Dr Akunyili was reportedly shot dead on September 28 alongside seven others at Nkpor in the Idemili North Local Government Area of Anambra State. Some areas of the state including Nnewi have also recorded a pocket of violence as the November 6 governorship poll approaches and as the state governor, Willie Obiano of the All Progressives Grand Alliance, enters his last months in office after eight years.

Consequently, Malami, after the Federal Executive Council meeting at the Presidential Villa, Abuja, on Wednesday, said, “No possibility is ruled out by government in terms of ensuring the sanctity of our democratic order, in terms of ensuring that our elections in Anambra hold.

“And you cannot rule out the possibility of declaration of state of emergency where it is established, in essence, that there is a failure on the part of the state government to ensure the sanctity of security of lives, properties and democratic order,” he said.

However, reacting, the Commissioner of Information in Anambra said Malami’s statement was politically motivated.

He said there have been a high level of violence in All Progressives Congress states –Imo and Ebonyi – in the zone in the last few months yet emergency rule was not considered by the Federal Government.

Adinuba carpeted Malami, saying, “Nigerians are outraged by the threat by the Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Abubakar Malami, SAN.

“Since the renewed violence in Anambra State which we believe is politically motivated, not more than 15 persons have been killed. How many persons have died in Borno, Niger, Kaduna, Yobe, Zamfara, even Imo, which is APC-controlled, (and) Ebonyi, which is APC-controlled?

“Has anybody threatened emergency rule in any of these states?

“For the past seven years, Anambra has remained the safest state, most stable in Nigeria.

“We remain the only state in the whole country that for the past seven years, has not experienced one single bank robbery; what is going on is politically motivated and the declaration by the honourable Attorney-General of the Federation is a confirmation.”

Also, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Paul Ananaba, who spoke on the television programme on Wednesday night, said the insecurity experienced in Anambra has not degenerated into the declaration of an emergency rule.

Interpreting an emergency rule and its effects, Ananaba said, “What the State of Emergency does is to put aside the governor, the state assembly and all the institutions. It is an extraordinary measure. Anambra has not reached that point.

“Section 305 has made it clear that at the actual break down of law and order, there is no actual breakdown of law and order in Anambra State – schools are in session, banks are working, markets and all. There is violence but it has not gotten to the declaration of a State of Emergency.”

In a statement signed by the state’s Commissioner for Information,

Ndigbo Elders’ Forum has appealed to President Muhammadu Buhari to reverse his perceived hatred for the Igbo as shown in their near exclusion in his government.

The group in its meeting in Enugu, yesterday, said the president has since assumption of office in 2015, treated its  people as if they were not part of Nigeria.

Omife Omife, who said the issue had got to a head, described the exclusion of the Igbo in the National Security Council until recently when Major General Lucky Irabor from Delta State, was appointed Chief of Defence Staff, as worrisome, including denying them the position of inspector general of police.

He said appointments given to the Igbo in the Buhari government including ministerial portfolios were miserable.

Omife described Igbo as the most populous and patriotic stock in Nigeria, adding the people are found in every nook and cranny of the country, working assiduously to make the economy work.

He said no ethnic group has paid greater price for the unity of Nigeria than the Igbo.

Following the maltreatment meted to Ndigbo, Omife urged Buhari to allow them leave Nigeria since he would not give them their due share in the country.

He said they had to speak out as elders against ‘evil and the injustice’ of the government.

 

 

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

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

Headline

Attorney-General Asks Court to Deregister ADC, Accord, Three Other Parties

Published

on

By

The Attorney-General of the Federation has urged the Federal High Court in Abuja to compel the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to deregister five political parties, arguing that their continued existence violates constitutional provisions and undermines Nigeria’s electoral integrity.

In court filings, the Attorney General contended that unless the court intervenes, INEC would “continue to act in breach of its constitutional duty” by retaining parties that have failed to meet the minimum requirements prescribed by law.

The filing stressed that the right to associate as a political party is not absolute and must be exercised within constitutional limits. It further argued that it is in the interest of justice for the court to grant the reliefs sought by the plaintiffs.

The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2637/2026 and filed at the Abuja Judicial Division of the Federal High Court, lists the Incorporated Trustees of the National Forum of Former Legislators as the plaintiff.

The defendants include INEC as the first defendant and the Attorney General of the Federation as the second defendant, alongside five political parties: African Democratic Congress (ADC), Action Alliance (AA), Action Peoples Party (APP), Accord (A), and Zenith Labour Party (ZLP).

At the center of the issue in the case is whether INEC has a constitutional obligation to remove parties that fail to meet electoral performance thresholds set out in Section 225A of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) and reinforced by the Electoral Act 2022 and INEC’s own regulations.

The plaintiffs argue that the affected parties have persistently failed to satisfy the constitutional benchmarks required to retain their registration. These include winning at least 25 per cent of votes in a state during a presidential election or securing at least one elective seat at the national, state or local government level.

They contend that the parties performed poorly in the 2023 general elections and subsequent by-elections, failing to win seats across key tiers of government, yet continue to be recognised by INEC as eligible political platforms.

The plaintiffs maintain that this continued recognition is unlawful and undermines the integrity of Nigeria’s electoral system.

In the affidavit supporting the suit, the forum’s national coordinator, Igbokwe Raphael Nnanna, states that allowing parties that have not met constitutional requirements to remain on the register “is unconstitutional, illegal and a violation” of the governing legal framework.

The suit asks the court to declare that INEC is duty-bound to deregister such parties and to compel the commission to do so before preparations for the 2027 elections advance further.

Beyond declaratory reliefs, the plaintiffs are also seeking far-reaching orders that would bar the affected parties from participating in the next general elections or engaging in political activities such as campaigns, rallies and primaries. They further request injunctions restraining INEC from recognising or dealing with the parties in any official capacity unless and until they comply strictly with constitutional provisions.

Central to the plaintiffs’ argument is their interpretation of the law as imposing a mandatory duty on INEC. They argue that the use of the word “shall” in the Constitution leaves no room for discretion once a party fails to meet the stipulated thresholds.

In their written address, they rely on statutory provisions and judicial precedents to contend that electoral performance is an objective condition that must be enforced to maintain discipline, transparency, and accountability in the political system.

Tribune

Continue Reading

Headline

Supreme Court to Rule on ADC, PDP Leadership Crises Today

Published

on

By

Attention has shifted to the Supreme Court, which has fixed April 30 (today) for judgment in the leadership tussle within the African Democratic Congress (ADC).

A five-member panel led by Justice Mohammed Garba will resolve the appeal filed by the David Mark-led faction concerning the authentic leadership of the party.

Also on Thursday, the court is expected to determine the leadership dispute rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).

Two PDP factions—one led by Kabir Turaki and the other by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike—are laying claim to the leadership of the party.

The Supreme Court had on April 22 reserved judgment in the ADC crisis to a date to be communicated to the parties involved in the tussle.

However, on Tuesday, the ADC formally wrote to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, pleading for the quick delivery of judgment in the leadership tussle at the national level.

The party claimed it would suffer irreparable harm if judgment in the protracted battle was not delivered within the period allowed by the Electoral Act for fielding candidates for the 2027 general elections.

It stated in part: “Without the delivery of judgment within the next three days from the date of this letter, the ADC stands the grave and irreversible risk of being excluded from participating in the 2027 general elections.

“This would disenfranchise millions of Nigerians who have subscribed to the ideals of the ADC and deny them their constitutional right to freely associate and contest elections through a political party of their choice.”

At the April 22 hearing, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, who represented David Mark, urged the Supreme Court to allow the appeal, arguing that the apex court had earlier, on March 21, 2025, held that “no court has jurisdiction to entertain matters bordering on the internal affairs of political parties.”

During the hearing, Okutepa urged the apex court to hold that the Federal High Court in Abuja lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

However, Robert Emukperu, SAN, who represented the first respondent, Nafiu Gombe, urged the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the suit was premature.

It will be recalled that a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed Mark’s appeal, ruling that it was premature and filed without leave of the trial court.

In the PDP matter, the first appeal, marked SC/CV/164/2026, stems from a decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, who restrained the party from proceeding with its planned convention pending the determination of a suit filed by former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido.

On November 14, the court issued a final order restraining the PDP from conducting its national convention.

Justice Lifu held that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest for national chairman, in violation of the PDP constitution and internal regulations.

The Court of Appeal later upheld the decision on March 9, prompting the PDP to appeal.

The second appeal, SC/CV/166/2026, was filed by the PDP, its National Working Committee (NWC), and National Executive Committee (NEC).

It arose from a judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which stopped the party from holding its Ibadan national convention.

The Court of Appeal upheld that decision, agreeing that INEC should not validate the outcome of the convention.

After hearing all arguments, the Supreme Court reserved judgment, stating that the date would be communicated to the parties.

Continue Reading

Headline

Obasanjo Knocks Tinubu’s Govt over Inability to Protect Lives, Property

Published

on

By

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo has lambasted the administration of President Bola Tinubu over insecurity bedeviling the country.

In an interview with News Central, Obasanjo said any government that cannot protect lives and property of its citizens has no basis to exist.

The former leader was reacting to the recent wave of insecurity, which has confronted Nigeria, resulting in the killing of several citizens and abduction of others.

“Let me tell you, the government that cannot give security of life and property of its citizen has no right of existence.

“The elected members of our National Assembly have no right to fix their own salary and their own emolument.

“It’s not in our constitution for them to do that. It’s the revenue mobilization and allocation commission that should do it,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending