By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

Introduction

In the first part of this article, we examined the nexus between leadership and corruption, after which we embarked on a brief historical review of our political leadership from the pre independence period to the First Republic. Today, we shall examine how the first republic was aborted by the military coup and its push-back (the counter-coup) and how ethnic tensions preceeded the civil war which followed afterwards.

Thereafter, we shall trace the persistent trajectory of corruption through the ensuing thirteen years of military rule up to our 2nd experience of democracy between 1979 and 1983; the Buhari-Idiagbon military era (and its preference for draconian decrees) which was later replaced by the seemingly benevolent/benignly regime of our first (and only) military president, Ibrahim Babangida. Enjoy.

MILITARY COUPS: THE END OF THE FIRST REPUBLIC

By 1966, the situation had reached a boiling point. The civilian government, unable to control the escalating violence and political instability, was overthrown in Nigeria’s first military coup. On January 15, 1966, a group of young army officers, mostly of Igbo extraction, assassinated key political leaders, including Prime Minister Tafawa Balewa, Northern Premier Ahmadu Bello, and Western Premier Samuel Akintola.

Major Chukwuma Kaduna Nzeogwu, the leader of the coup, declared that the military intervention was necessary to rid the country of corruption, tribalism, and political mismanagement. In his words, “We must halt this rigged dancing competition where the winner is pre-determined before the music even begins.” However, rather than halting Nigeria’s downward spiral, the coup plunged the country into even deeper turmoil.

The coup was widely perceived in the north as an Igbo conspiracy to dominate Nigeria, especially since key northern leaders were among the casualties while the Igbo-dominated Eastern Region’s leaders remained untouched (see Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Nigerian Civil War. Wikipedia. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_Civil_War>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The result was a counter-coup in July 1966, led by northern officers, which culminated in the assassination of the new head of state, General Aguiyi-Ironsi, who was Igbo. Lieutenant Colonel Yakubu Gowon, a northern Christian, assumed leadership. What followed was a period of intense ethnic violence, particularly targeted against Igbos living in the northern regions. Tens of thousands of Igbos were massacred in what some historians consider a precursor to the Nigerian Civil War (ibid).

ETHNIC TENSIONS AND THE ROAD TO CIVIL WAR

As Nigeria lurched from one crisis to another, the dream of a united nation began to fade. The period from 1966 to 1967 was marked by intense negotiations to prevent the breakup of the country (ibid). However, the killing of Igbos in the north created a mass exodus of Igbos back to the Eastern Region. The regional military governor of the east, Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu, declared the secession of the Eastern Region, naming it the Republic of Biafra in May 1967 (Lewis, P. (2007). Oil, politics, and economic change in Indonesia and Nigeria. University of Michigan Press. p. 78. ISBN 9780472024742.). In his declaration, Ojukwu framed the conflict as a matter of survival for the Igbo people, stating that “We are humans. We live. We fight, fight because the decision to be free is a decision taken freely and collectively, because to become involved in violent struggle for freedom is the only honour left to an oppressed people threatened with genocide, because in the final analysis the only true bulwark against death is to live. Biafra rejects death…Biafra lives” (Brittle Paper. (2014). 9 powerful quotes by Ojukwu on the history of Biafra and the revolution. Brittle Paper. <https://brittlepaper.com/2014/06/9-powerful-quotes-ojukwu-history-biafra-revolution/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.).

Gowon, on the other hand, insisted on the unity of Nigeria. To him, allowing Biafra to secede would set a dangerous precedent for other regions, potentially leading to the disintegration of the entire country. His famous declaration that “There is no basis for a Nigerian nation, except the will to stay together” encapsulated the fragile nature of Nigeria’s unity.

What followed was a brutal civil war that lasted from 1967 to 1970, with millions of lives lost, particularly on the Biafran side which killed an estimated 500,000 to 3,000,000 people (see Encyclopaedia Britannica. (n.d.). Nigerian Civil War. Encyclopaedia Britannica. <https://www.britannica.com/topic/Nigerian-civil-war>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The images of starving children from Biafra became a symbol of the horrors of the war, drawing international attention. The war ended with Biafra’s surrender in 1970, and Gowon’s government famously declared that there was “no victor, no vanquished.” (Origins. (2020). The Nigerian Civil War: Remembering Biafra, 50 years later. Origins: Current Events in Historical Perspective. https://origins.osu.edu/milestones/nigerian-civil-war-biafra-anniversary. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). However, the scars of the war would linger, deeply affecting Nigeria’s political trajectory in the years to come.

CORRUPTION: A PERSISTENT THEME

While the political landscape of Nigeria was shaped by ethnic tensions and military coups, corruption quickly became a persistent theme in its governance. From the early years of the First Republic, political leaders were accused of using their positions to enrich themselves at the expense of the people (Republic. (2023). Political party financing in Nigeria. Republic. <https://republic.com.ng/February-March-2023/political-party-financing-in-nigeria/>. Assessed on the 18th of January, 2025.). A report by Nigeria’s Coker Commission of Inquiry in 1962 found that Chief Obafemi Awolowo’s government in the Western Region had used public funds to finance the operations of his political party, the Action Group. This was just one of many scandals that eroded public trust in the political class.

The military leaders who took over after the coup of 1966 were not immune to corruption either. While they came to power with promises of cleaning up the political mess, they quickly became entangled in the same web of patronage and self-interest. Gowon’s government, despite overseeing the end of the civil war and initiating efforts to “rebuild” the nation, was plagued by accusations of financial impropriety. Nigeria’s sudden oil wealth, thanks to the oil boom of the 1970s, only made matters worse (Ogunmodede, T. A., & Egunjobi, F. (2018). Historical analysis of Boko Haram insurgency and terrorism in Nigeria.Open Access Library Journal, 5(2), 1-13. <https://www.scirp.org/journal/paperinformation?paperid=83885>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). As one critic put it, “Nigeria is not suffering from poverty; it is suffering from the mismanagement of wealth.” (Ucha, C. (2010). Poverty in Nigeria: Some dimensions and contributing factors. American University. <https://www.american.edu/cas/economics/ejournal/upload/ucha_accessible.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024).

THE ERA OF MILITARY DOMINATION: AUTHORITARIANISM AND DEEPENING CORRUPTION (1980-1999)

The Military Marches In: Power Through the Barrel of a Gun

By the dawn of the 1980s, Nigeria had seen more coups than it had enjoyed democratic elections. The post-colonial optimism of the early 1960s had withered, leaving behind a country caught in the throes of military domination. The soldiers who had come to “save” Nigeria from the divisive politics of the First Republic now found themselves enmeshed in the very corruption, tribalism, and mismanagement they had sworn to eradicate. The rise of military rule in Nigeria was not an accident but a consequence of a fractured political system, made worse by economic mismanagement and elite-driven greed. As the Nigerian saying goes, “He who rides the tiger cannot dismount without being devoured.” The military, having tasted power, found it too tempting to give up.

After General Yakubu Gowon’s ouster in July of 1975, the military era took a sharp turn with the ascension of General Murtala Mohammed, a brash and energetic leader determined to right the ship of state. However, his tenure was cut short when he was assassinated in an attempted coup just six months into his rule, throwing the country once again into uncertainty. His deputy, General Olusegun Obasanjo, succeeded him and became the first military ruler to hand over power voluntarily to a civilian government in 1979, paving the way for Nigeria’s Second Republic. However, this democratic experiment was brief, as the nation soon returned to military rule in 1983, beginning what many call the “era of authoritarianism.” (Ameh, A. O., & Oghojafor, B. E. A. (2014). Leadership theories and Nigeria’s development crisis: A retrospective view. CORE. <https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/328106737.pdf>. Assessed on the 17th of January, 2025)

THE SECOND REPUBLIC: A FRAGILE DEMOCRACY

Nigeria’s Second Republic (1979-1983) came into existence amid cautious optimism. Obasanjo’s transition to civilian rule was lauded as a step toward stability, and Alhaji Shehu Shagari became the first democratically elected president of the Second Republic. Shagari’s government inherited a country rich in oil but mired in problems: poverty, ethnic divisions, and, most alarmingly, widespread corruption.

Oil was the lifeblood of Nigeria’s economy by this time, providing over 90% of the nation’s foreign exchange earnings (Chinweze, C. (2018). Analysis of the impact of oil spills and the Niger Delta crisis on Nigeria’s external relations. World Maritime University Dissertations. https://commons.wmu.se/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3304&context=all_dissertations. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). However, rather than being a blessing, this black gold became a curse. The government, flush with oil wealth, mismanaged the windfall, while politicians lined their pockets and patronage networks flourished. As one critic noted, “The Nigerian government is like a leaking basket filled with oil money the more you pour in, the more it spills out.”

During the Shagari administration, corruption became rampant, with large-scale embezzlement and looting of public funds HistoryVille. (2020). President Shehu Shagari: The honest man who was overthrown in a coup. HistoryVille. <https://www.thehistoryville.com/president-Shehu-Shagari/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Public projects were over-inflated, contracts were awarded to friends and allies, and government officials lived in opulence while the majority of Nigerians languished in poverty. A popular Nigerian proverb, “The goat eats where it is tied,” describes this situation perfectly. In the Nigerian political landscape, leaders and their close associates devoured the resources of the state with reckless abandon. The atmosphere of greed became so pervasive that when the oil prices collapsed in the early 1980s, plunging Nigeria into an economic crisis, the government was too crippled by corruption to provide meaningful solutions.

THE BUHARI-IDIAGBON ERA: WAR AGAINST INDISCIPLINE

On December 31, 1983, the military once again intervened. Major General Muhammadu Buhari and his deputy, Brigadier Tunde Idiagbon, overthrew the Shagari administration, accusing it of corruption and economic mismanagement. In his first speech as head of state, Buhari made his intentions clear: “Since what happens in any society is largely a reflection of the leadership of that society, we deplore corruption in all its facets. This government will not tolerate kick-backs, inflation of contracts and over-invoicing of imports etc. Nor will it condone forgery, fraud, embezzlement, misuse and abuse of office and illegal dealings in foreign exchange and smuggling.”

Buhari’s military regime was marked by an aggressive anti-corruption campaign. His government launched the “War Against Indiscipline” (WAI), a series of policies aimed at reforming the moral fabric of Nigerian society announced in March 1984 by Tunde Idiagbon, the Chief of Staff, Supreme Headquarters and the launch event was held at Tafawa Balewa Square to much fanfare. Public officials were arrested and tried for corruption, and draconian laws were introduced to curb societal vices like tardiness and disorder. Citizens could be flogged publicly for breaking queues, and civil servants faced harsh penalties for lateness. To Buhari and Idiagbon, discipline was the key to Nigeria’s recovery. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“We will not agree on every issue. But let us respect those differences, and respect one another. Let us recognize that we do not serve an ideology or a political party; we serve the people.” – John Lynch.

LAST LINE

God bless my numerous global readers for always keeping faith with the Sunday Sermon on the Mount of the Nigerian Project, by humble me, Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb., LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D, D.Litt, D.Sc, DHL, DA. Kindly come with me to next week’s exciting dissertation.

By Mike A. A. Ozekhome SAN

PROLOGUE

THE TYRANNY OF DEATH AND THE INDOMITABLE SPIRIT OF MANKIND

Death, shame on you. You have always killed the body, not the soul; never the legacy. Such is the fate of the last two men standing, Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo, who died few days from each other.

DEATH AND MANKIND

Let us now discuss the death that took them away. From the dawn of existence, mankind has lived under the unyielding shadow of death. It is the ultimate oppressor; the force that acknowledges neither power nor piety; neither nobility nor knowledge. It is the great leveller; the final conqueror before whom all men- kings and commoners; heroes and villains; patricians and plebeians; rich and poor-must bow. Wearing a monstrous visage with fangs bared, death stalks us unseen. It strikes without warning. It is indifferent to the hopes, aspirations, dreams and struggles of humanity. Like our shadow, it follows us everywhere, sticking to us like a second skin. Viktor Franki was dead right when he wrote, “Death is the greatest tyrant of all, it is the one that can take away our freedom, our dignity, and humanity”. Perhaps the most eloquent tribute to death came from Thomas Sowell. Hear him: “Death is the greatest leveler, the ultimate democrat, but it is also the greatest tyrant, for it treats all lives as equal in their insignificance”.

The Psalmist explains man’s fragility better: “Man is like a breath; his days are like a fleeting shadow.” (Psalm 144:4). Indeed, life is but a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. James 4:14 puts it better when it proclaims, “Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes” And now, that fleeting shadow has claimed the twin colossi of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo. These were two towering figures whose lives were totally dedicated to the attainment of justice, democracy, and the eternal struggle against oppression. They stood like ancient baobabs in the political landscape of Nigeria, their roots intertwined with the fight for equity, their voices thunderous in the corridors of power.

Expressing the fleetness of life, Macbeth in Act 5, Scene 5 of William Shakespeare’s Macbeth, intoned that “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Yet, for all their power and defiance, they too have fallen to the callous hands of death; embraced by the inevitable grasp of mortality. “The death of a righteous man is never the death of his deeds, nor the end of his influence.” This is the paradox of existence: death takes men, but it cannot take away their legacy. It silences voices, but it cannot silence the echoes of the truth they spoke. It buries bodies, but it cannot bury the fire they ignited in the hearts of those they left behind.

Consider the tale of Achilles, the greatest warrior of Greek mythology. He was given a choice: a long, uneventful life or a short life filled with glory that would make his name immortal. He chose the latter, knowing that though his body would perish, his name would be sung in eternity. Like Achilles, Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo chose the path of impact over the comfort of obscurity. Their names, their struggles, their legacy, will not be forgotten. NEVER!!!

Death, in its arrogance wrongly believes it has silenced them. But can death truly claim victory over men whose legacy outlives their mortal forms? The answer is an emphatic no. Death may take the body, but it cannot take the impact. It may silence the voice, but it cannot silence the ideology. The greatest flaw of death is its inability to erase the echoes of greatness. The African proverb is right that “the dead are not gone; they are only in another room”. As Haruki Murakami once put it, “Death is not the opposite of life, but a part of it”. Julius Caesar in Williams Shakespeare’s epic by the same title, “Julius Caesar” defanged death when he refused the entreaties of Calpurnia, his wife not to go to the Capital for fear of being assassinated by the conspirators. He shredded death thus, “No, Caesar shall not. Danger knows full well that Caesar is more dangerous than he. We are two lions littered in one day, and I the elder and more terrible”. (Act 2 Scene 2).

Yet, death still claimed Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo as it has claimed countless others before them. Death will still claim more. Its bacchanalian propensity to consume mortals like Bacchus the god of wine is relentless. The finality of mortality forces a painful question upon us: If even men of such towering stature like Clark and Adebanjo cannot defy death, then what hope does mankind have?

But therein lies the irony. True death is not the cessation of breath but the erasure of memory. These men are not truly gone. Their essence remains immortalized in the ideals they fought for, in the words they spoke, and in the lives they touched.

We are reminded of the African proverb: “A man dies twice. The first is when he breathes his last; the second is when his name is spoken for the last time.” Pa Clark and Pa Adebanjo, by virtue of their outstanding works, have ensured that the second death shall never come. Their names will be inscribed in the annals of history; their voices will continue to echo through the ages. In the grand battle between mankind and death, memory is the battlefield. And men like Clark and Adebanjo never truly lose out. They have been inducted into the pantheon of great men.

THE GIANTS AND THEIR ETERNAL STRUGGLES

To understand the lives of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo is to understand the very fabric of Nigeria’s history, its triumphs and tragedies, its betrayals and its resilience. These were not just men who merely lived through history; they made history themselves. They were not silent observers; they were architects of change and warriors in the relentless fight for justice.

Yet, even the greatest of warriors must one day lay down their swords. The passing of these two titans forces us to confront the painful reality that no man, no matter how powerful, can defeat the tyranny of time. It is as the Bible states in Ecclesiastes 9:11, “The race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favour to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.”

But if time has claimed their mortal frames, it has not diminished their impact. Death has never been able to claim greatness. It has tried throughout the ages but failed abysmally. Silencing Socrates did not kill philosophy. Crucifying Christ did not end Christianity. Assassinating Martin Luther King Jr. did not halt the civil rights movement. Killing Adaka Boro and Ken Saro Wiwa did not end Niger Delta agitation. Likewise, the passing of Chief Clark and Chief Adebanjo will not end their struggle. “O Death, where is thy sting?” Apostle Paul knew what he was doing when he compared death to a bee that has lost its sting.

CHIEF EDWIN CLARK, THE LION OF THE NIGER DELTA

This Nationalist spent all his life in ceaseless advocacy, ensuring that his people were not reduced to mere spectators in a nation built on their resources. He was not just a politician; he was a movement, a force of nature. He spoke for the voiceless, demanded justice for the marginalized, and carried the weight of an entire region’s hopes on his shoulders. Beyond these, his common cliché was “we are all Nigerians” a clear exemplification of this Pan-Nigerianity.

The story of Edwin Clark is the story of a man who refused to be silent or silenced. His life was defined by resistance, relentless advocacy and the ceaseless fight for equity. From his earliest days, he knew that the Niger Delta, despite being the economic heartbeat and financial basket of Nigeria, had been condemned to perpetual marginalization and squalor. Oil flowed beneath the feet of his people, yet poverty sat on their shoulders. Their land was rich, but their lives were poor. There is constant light in the environment, not from electricity, but from gas flaring that destroys both aquatic and agrarian life. There is “water water everywhere”, but like in the Ancient Marina, none fit enough to drink. Clark refused to accept this man-imposed destiny as their lot.

He fiercely championed resource control, true fiscal federalism and the rights of the marginalized oil-bearing communities, knowing that freedom is never freely given but must be fought for and won. His voice thundered in political arenas; his torch lit dark crevices; his presence was felt in the highest echelons of power; and his influence shaped the policies that sought to address the inequities of his time.

One of Pa Clark’s defining moments was the 2005 National Political Reform Conference midwifed by former president, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, where he led the South South Delegates Forum in one of the most historic protests against the injustice of oil revenue allocation. When Northern delegates refused to allow an 18% derivation formula for oil-producing states, Clark led a mass walkout. This was not just a political maneuvre; it was an act of defiance; a statement that injustice must never be negotiated, tolerated but must be rejected. I was the spokesperson for the entire South South delegates at the Conference.

A true leader does not retreat; and Clark never did. Even at 97, Pa Clark was still always on television screen, pontificating, advocating, teaching, directing and crusading for good governance, restructuring and a strong Nigerian nation. His life was a testament to the words of the legendary poet, Dylan Thomas, who wrote: “Do not go gentle into that good night. Rage, rage against the dying of the light.” Clark never surrendered to injustice. And though death has claimed him, his voice will continue to echo in every struggle for equity in Nigeria. His light will continue to illuminate dark paths towards national resurgimento, restructuring, equity, egalitarianism and social justice.

AYO ADEBANJO: THE ETERNAL FLAME OF IDEOLOGY

Chief Ayo Adebanjo, on the other hand, was the embodiment of ideological purity. As a disciple of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, he stood firmly by the principles of federalism, free education, and self-determination. His words carried the weight of history. His defiance against injustice never wavered; and his belief in a restructured Nigeria remained unshaken even in his final days. He was, as Marcus Garvey once said, “a lion who did not live to entertain hyenas.”

If Chief Edwin Clark was a warrior for the Niger Delta and enthronement of justice in the Nigerian space, Chief Ayo Adebanjo was a lion of ideological purity. In a world where political leaders switch allegiances as easily as changing tissue papers, Chief Ayo Adebanjo was steadfast. He remained unwavering in his ideological beliefs. From his earliest days in the Action Group under the mentorship of Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Adebanjo embraced a set of principles that would define his entire life-true federalism, free education, regional autonomy, and social justice. While many leaders evolved into political opportunists, Adebanjo remained a true disciple and guardian of Awolowo’s ideals, unshaken by the temptations of power.

Pa Adebanjo was imprisoned, harassed and exiled; yet he never compromised. In 1993, when the military annulled MKO Abiola’ selection, Adebanjo was at the forefront of NADECO (National Democratic Coalition), risking his limbs and life to demand the restoration of democracy. He was not one for silent negotiations; his brand of politics was radical, bold and unapologetic. “There is no diplomacy in truth,” he often said.

Chief Adebanjo’s fearless advocacy extended into his old age. In his 90s, he was still one of the loudest voices demanding the restructuring of Nigeria. While younger politicians hesitated or defected, fearful of repercussions, Adebanjo spoke with fire and clarity, insisting that Nigeria’s survival depended on true federalism. His courage reminds us of Winston Churchill’s words: “To each, there comes in their lifetime a special moment when they are figuratively tapped on the shoulder and offered the chance to do something unique to them and their talents. What a tragedy if that moment finds them unprepared or unqualified for what could have been their finest hour.”

Pa Adebanjo did not just seize his moment; he made sure every moment of his life was dedicated to fighting for justice. If Chief Edwin Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo have taught us anything, it is that death’s greatest weakness is its inability to erase legacy. It is said that when Alexander the Great lay on his deathbed, he ordered his generals to carry his coffin with his hands stretched out. When asked why, he said: “Let the world see that even the greatest conqueror leaves this world empty-handed.”

But some men do not leave empty-handed. They leave behind them movements, ideas, ideologies, revolutions and a generation greatly inspired to carry on their good works. That is the difference between ordinary men and legends. Clark and Adebanjo were legends.

Death thought it could silence Chief Clark and Chief Adebanjo, but death has yet failed. It could not erase or silence their names which are now immortal, etched into the pages of Nigeria’s history. Their ideas and ideals will live on in the youthful activists who demand a just Nigeria; in the communities that still fight for fairness; and in the common people who refuse to accept oppression as their fate.

Therefore, even as we mourn these two legends, we must recognize that they have won the only battle that matters-the battle against irrelevance; against obscurity. Surely, their bodies will rest, but their fight continues. They have transmitted from mortality to immortality.

DEFYING DEATH THROUGH LEGACY

As I reflect on the passing of Chief Edwin Kiagbodo Clark and Chief Ayo Adebanjo, I am struck by one immutable truth: death may take the man, but it cannot take his legacy. The true measure of a life is not in its duration but in its impact. These two titans of justice and democracy may have departed, but their spirits remain embedded in the struggles they fought and the victories they secured. The philosopher, Marcus Aurelius once said, “What we do now echoes in eternity.” And indeed, Chiefs Clark and Adebanjo lived lives that will echo far beyond their years. They were not merely politicians; they were symbols of defiance, embodiments of truth, and sentinels of justice who challenged impunity and spoke truth to power.

Their deaths, like those of all great men, force us to ask: What remains after the body has returned to dust? What is the true test of immortality? If it is in the endurance of one’s impact, then these men have conquered death itself. Thus, even death could not kill them.

MY PERSONAL ENCOUNTERS WITH PA ADEBANJO

I have had the rare privilege of knowing and working closely alongside these giants in their lifetime. My undiluted respect for them is not borne out of distant admiration, but from personal experiences; from standing in the trenches with them in the many battles for a better Nigeria. Of Chief Ayo Adebanjo, I had earlier written with conviction thus:
“Chief Ayo Adebanjo is truly one of the very last of the Mohicans – the last men standing. Here’s wishing and praying that he outlives his father and continues well beyond his 100-year anniversary in good health, fine cheer, and peace that passeth all understanding.”
(https://mikeozekhomeschambers.com/chief-ayo-adebanjo-a-member-of-the-dwindling-mohicans). But Pa Adebanjo died four years shy of the 100 years I had wished him. Only on March 18, 2024, the Patriots converged at the Nigerian Institute of International Affairs, Lagos, to honour late Professor Ben Nwabueze, SAN (the greatest constitutional lawyer to have emerged from the soil of Africa), at a National Dialogue on the constitutional future of Nigeria. I delivered the keynote address titled, “The Never-ending call for a new people’s Constitution”. At the event, Chief Adebanjo bared his fangs, lamenting the poor state of the Nigerian nation. He reiterated his call for restructuring, regional autonomy, social justice and a fair federalism.

Papa Adebanjo’s passing is therefore not just a personal loss but a national one. He was more than a political figure; he was an ideologue, a moral force in a landscape often devoid of conscience. He lived not for himself but for the idea of a fair and just Nigeria, and his unyielding advocacy for restructuring will not be forgotten. While he fought from the NADECO flank, I fought from the human rights and pro-democracy odeon. We always converged towards achieving common goals of having a better and more equitable Nigeria. His death becomes more painful to me because only in October, 2024, Chief Adebanjo forwarded one of the 5o books I presented to the public on October 17, 2024. He forwarded the book titled, “Nigeria’s Unforgettable Events”. And Pa Adebanjo has now departed. Thank you for goading me on for encouraging me.

MY PERSONAL ENCOUNTERS WITH PA CLARK

My encounters with Pa Edwin Clark were equally profound. I remember vividly the 2005 National Political Reform Conference, where I was entrusted with the role of Publicity Secretary and Spokesperson for the South-South Delegates Forum. It was there that I saw first hand Clark’s brilliance, his uncommon courage and defiance; and his ability to command respect from all and sundry. He was the undisputed leader of the South-South Delegation, and under his guidance and leadership of a field Marshal, we fought for a well-structured federation; for devolution of power; and for a fair derivation formula for oil-producing states.

Thus, when our proposal for a modest 18% derivation was rejected by the Northern delegates who said the South-South should even be grateful for 13% it was having, Clark led the historic walkout; an event that has since been termed the “First Walkout” in Nigeria’s conference history. It was a moment of historic reckoning, a statement that the oppression of the oil-bearing communities of the Niger Delta would not go unanswered. I stood with him, alongside other progressive minds, as we challenged the status quo and demanded justice and fairness. That was the kind of man Pa Clark was-fearless, courageous, bold, unrelenting and unbowed.

Pa Clark repeated his leadership qualities at the 2014 National Conference, where at 86 then, he fought for true fiscal federalism, like a trojan. He led the entire South-South to seek for justice and fair play in a warped federal set up. I worked ferociously with him. I was named the “Cicero of the 2014 National Conference” by the Conference leadership comprising of late Hon. Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi, JSC (rtd); GCON; Prof Bolaji Akinyemi; CFR and Chief (Dr) Valerie-Janette Azinge, SAN, OFR.

Pa Clark was a father to all; a mentor to millions; a scholar; an outstanding lawyer, and an activist who led from the front. He loathed sycophancy, servility and political opportunism. You either loved him passionately, or hated him malevolently; but never could you ignore him. He regarded me as his son’ encouraged me; energized me; and goaded me on. In October, 2024, Pa Clark happily forwarded one of the 50 books I presented to the public on October 17, 2024. The title of the book he forwarded is “Nigeria’s Evolution and the Political Players”. And now, papa is gone. Farewell sir.

THE TITANS’ FINAL DEFIANCE: A LEGACY THAT CANNOT BE BURIED

It is often said that “a man dies twice: once when his body ceases to function, and again when his name is spoken for the last time.” If that is true, then Clark and Adebanjo will never truly die. Their names will be spoken for generations to come, their contributions studied in classrooms, and their courage invoked by young activists who refuse to accept a Nigeria that is anything less than just.

Like Moses leading the Israelites through the Red Sea, they parted the waters of oppression and repression, clearing a path of for those who would come after them. Like Socrates drinking the hemlock based on his conditions, they stood by their convictions even when the price was too high. And like Mandela in Robben Island, they fought a system designed to silence them and won.

THE CURTAINS NOW DRAWN

If death thought it could kill them, it has grossly miscalculated. For their works remain; their speeches still resonate; their ideas still shape the destiny of Nigeria.

It is a cruel paradox of existence that we must often celebrate greatness in the shadow of its departure. That we must find words to honor titans whose very absence renders language inadequate. But if time is the great equalizer, then it is also the thief of presence. It robs us of our icons, leaving us with only echoes of wisdom where once stood the steadfast guardians of justice. Yet, not all echoes fade.

As I write this elegy for two legends, my heart is heavy and sad, not for the duo, but for Nigeria for whom they laboured for life long. Her story has not been encouraging. But my resolve is strengthened to fight on. The best way to honour them is not through mere words, but through action. To those of us who remain committed on this side, their deaths must not mark the end of their battles; it must mark their rebirth in those of us left behind.

They have passed the torch on to us. It is now our duty to ensure that the torch continues to shine brightly and that their labours and sacrifices are not in vain. Aluta continua, Victoria acerta.
Rest well, papa Edwin Clark.
Rest well, papa Ayo Adebanjo.

By Prof Mike Ozekhome SAN

INTRODUCTION

This paper provides a comprehensive evaluation of Nigeria’s political leadership from independence in 1960 to the present, with a focus on the persistent challenge of corruption. Nigeria’s journey from colonial rule to self-governance has been marked by cycles of hope, instability, and economic mismanagement, much of which has been driven by corrupt practices entrenched in both military and civilian governments. The study explores key periods in Nigeria’s political history, including the First Republic, military rule, and the Fourth Republic, highlighting how corruption has consistently undermined the country’s potential for sustainable development and effective governance. By examining the leadership approaches of key figures such as Olusegun Obasanjo, Muhammadu Buhari, and Ahmed Bola Tinubu, the paper traces the evolution of corruption in the Nigerian state and the various reform efforts that have been attempted. It concludes with recommendations for strengthening institutions, fostering electoral reforms, engaging youth, and promoting economic diversification as critical steps toward breaking the cycle of corruption and building a transparent and accountable governance system in Nigeria.

THE NEXUS OF LEADERSHIP AND CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA’S POLITICAL EVOLUTION

Since gaining independence in 1960, Nigeria’s political trajectory has been characterized by a mix of hope, turmoil, and persistent challenges, with leadership and corruption standing at the forefront of its journey. The dawn of independence was met with widespread optimism, as Nigerians believed that self-governance would pave the way for unity, prosperity, and equitable development. However, the newly independent nation was also deeply divided along ethnic, regional, and religious lines, fault lines that would complicate governance and the exercise of power from the very beginning. As Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, remarked, “I am convinced, and I want you also to be convinced, that the future of this vast country must depend, in the main, on the efforts of ourselves to help ourselves. This we cannot do if we do not work together in unity. Indeed, unity today is our greatest concern, and it is the duty off every one of us to work so that we may strengthen it.” (BlackPast. (n.d.). 1957: Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, first speech as Prime Minister. BlackPast. <https://www.blackpast.org/global-african-history/1957-abubakar-tafawa-balewa-first-speech-prime-minister/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Yet, this optimism would soon be overshadowed by political instability, ethnic divide and rising corruption.

Nigeria’s political history, from its independence to the present day, can be viewed as a series of cycles each marked by the rise of leaders, the accompanying hope for reform, and the eventual disappointment as corruption became deeply entrenched in the fabric of governance. Military coups and civilian governments alike have struggled to combat corruption, which has repeatedly hindered Nigeria’s ability to achieve sustained economic development and political stability. From the First Republic’s collapse under the weight of ethnic tensions and corruption to the military’s authoritarian grip during the 1980s and 1990s, Nigeria’s political leadership has often been marred by self-interest, mismanagement, and the prioritization of regional over national interests.

At the heart of Nigeria’s political crises lies the problem of corruption, a theme that has become an inseparable part of the country’s political narrative. Whether under military dictatorships or civilian rule, corruption has remained pervasive, affecting every level of government and public life. Leaders have come and gone, each promising to root out graft and restore accountability, but few have succeeded in achieving meaningful reform. The oil boom of the 1970s, which should have catapulted Nigeria into a new era of prosperity, instead deepened the corruption problem, as political elites siphoned off the country’s wealth for personal gain (Yakub, M. U. (2007). Financing small and medium enterprises in Nigeria: The small and medium industries equity investment scheme experience. Central Bank of Nigeria. <http://library.cbn.gov.ng:8092/jspui/bitstream/123456789/248/1/Pages%20from%20Vol%2032%20No%202%20April-June%202007-6%20Maaji%20Umar%20Yakub.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The phrase “Nigeria is not suffering from poverty; it is suffering from the mismanagement of wealth” succinctly captures the frustration many Nigerians have felt over the years.

As Nigeria transitioned into the Fourth Republic in 1999, following years of military rule, hopes were rekindled that democratic governance would bring with it transparency, accountability, and an end to the endemic corruption that had crippled the nation. However, even in the democratic era, corruption scandals, such as the Halliburton bribery case and the mismanagement of oil revenues, continued to undermine public trust. Successive leaders like, Olusegun Obasanjo, Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, Goodluck Jonathan, and Muhammadu Buhari came to power with anti-corruption platforms, but each faced significant challenges in overcoming the deep-rooted patronage networks and institutionalized graft that characterized Nigeria’s political system.

Today, as Nigeria moves further into the 21st century, the country remains at a critical juncture. The election of Bola Ahmed Tinubu in 2023 was seen by some as an opportunity for renewal, but his rise to power was also clouded by long standing allegations of corruption, raising questions about whether true reform can ever be achieved. The challenges Nigeria faces economic inequality, insecurity, and the enduring grip of corruption are as pressing as ever. The struggle for good governance continues, and the path forward is fraught with obstacles. Yet, as the Nigerian proverb wisely notes, “No matter how long the night, the day is sure to come.” The hope for a better future remains, but the journey toward that brighter day is far from certain.

POST-INDEPENDENCE DAWN: FOUNDATIONS OF POLITICAL LEADERSHIP (1960-1979)

THE BIRTH OF A NEW NATION: SETTING THE STAGE

In 1960, Nigeria stood at the cusp of a monumental shift, shaking off the shackles of British colonial rule to embark on a journey of self-governance. The elation of independence echoed across the vast expanse of the country, from the arid north to the humid coasts in the south. Nigerians, filled with hope, believed that their newfound freedom would usher in an era of prosperity, unity, and justice. The iconic words of Nigeria’s first Prime Minister, Sir Abubakar Tafawa Balewa, echoed this optimism: “This is a wonderful day, and it is all the more wonderful because we have awaited it with increasing impatience, compelled to watch one country after another overtaking us on the road when we had so nearly reached our goal.” (Premium Times. (2020). Nigeria@60: What Tafawa Balewa said in his Independence speech. Premium Times. <https://www.premiumtimesng.com/news/more-news/417848-nigeria60-what-tafawa-balewa-said-in-his-independence-speech.html?tztc=1>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.)

However, as the Nigerian flag was hoisted on October 1, 1960, the country was already grappling with its own set of complexities. The euphoria of independence masked deeper issues. Nigeria was a nation deeply divided along ethnic, religious, and regional lines (Nigerian Studies Association. (n.d.). Political leadership and corruption in Nigeria since 1960: A socio-economic analysis. Nigerian Studies Association.< https://unh.edu/nigerianstudies/articles/Issue2/Political_leadership.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.) While its leaders preached unity, it was clear that managing the diversity of over 250 ethnic groups would be a daunting task (Mba, P. O. (2013). On ethnicity and ethnic conflict management in Nigeria. African Journal on Conflict Resolution, 13(1). <https://www.accord.org.za/ajcr-issues/on-ethnicity-and-ethnic-conflict-management-in-nigeria/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Each group had its aspirations, and the seeds of political discord were already germinating.

COLONIAL LEGACIES: THE INHERITED POLITICAL LANDSCAPE

Nigeria’s political landscape, in its infancy, bore the deep imprints of British colonialism. The colonial masters had governed the country through a policy of indirect rule, particularly in the north, where they co-opted traditional leaders to maintain order (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Indirect rule. Wikipedia.< https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indirect_rule>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). In the more “modern” southern regions, however, a growing educated elite comprising professionals, activists, and intellectuals began to demand more political participation(ibid). These regional differences, crafted and cemented during the colonial era, laid the foundation for the political crises that would soon follow.

As the British handed over power, they left behind a federal structure that grouped Nigeria into three regions: the Northern Region, dominated by the Hausa-Fulani; the Western Region, primarily populated by the Yoruba; and the Eastern Region, home to the Igbo (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Colonial Nigeria. Wikipedia. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Nigeria>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). This arrangement, while seemingly representative, only exacerbated the existing divisions. The new government inherited a state where regionalism had become the central organizing principle of political life. Ethnic identities, rather than national unity, took precedence, and each region vied for dominance in the post-colonial government.

THE FIRST REPUBLIC: PROMISE AND BETRAYAL

The First Republic (1960-1966) began with high hopes. Nnamdi Azikiwe, an Igbo and a prominent nationalist leader, became Nigeria’s first president, a largely ceremonial role under the Westminster system of government (Wikipedia contributors. (n.d.). Nnamdi Azikiwe. Wikipedia. <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nnamdi_Azikiwe>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Tafawa Balewa, a northern Muslim, took on the more powerful position of prime minister (Encyclopaedia Britannica. (n.d.). Abubakar Tafawa Balewa. Encyclopaedia Britannica. <https://www.britannica.com/biography/Abubakar-Tafawa-Balewa>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Their partnership was seen as symbolic of Nigeria’s diversity and unity. But beneath this veneer of collaboration, cracks were already beginning to show.

The first major challenge of the Balewa government was managing the power dynamics among the regions (Academic Journals. (2013). Leadership crisis and political instability in Nigeria: Interrogating the nexus. African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 7(2), 65-74. <https://academicjournals.org/journal/AJPSIR/article-full-text-pdf/8F1BD3064785>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). Each region had its own political party. The Northern People’s Congress (NPC) in the north, the Action Group (AG) in the west, and the National Council of Nigeria and the Cameroons (NCNC) in the east (Joseph, R. A. (1983). Class, state, and prebendal politics in Nigeria. The Journal of Commonwealth & Comparative Politics, 21(3), 21-38. <https://www.jstor.org/stable/2784073>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). These parties, rather than promoting national interests, sought to advance regional and ethnic concerns. As the Yoruba adage goes, “Ile ni a ti n ko eso r’ode,” which means “Charity begins at home.” The politicians of the First Republic took this maxim to heart only their “homes” were not Nigeria as a whole but their respective regions.

The 1964 federal elections were a turning point. The elections were marred by widespread allegations of electoral fraud, violence, and voter intimidation, particularly in the Western Region (Sarma, A. (2023). Impact of leadership on organizational performance: A critical review. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Analysis, 6(1), 25-34. <https://ijmra.in/v6i1/Doc/4.pdf>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The political unrest that followed the controversial results gave rise to what became known as the “Wild Wild West.” (Vanguard News. (2013). Olunloyo and the Wild Wild West. Vanguard. <https://www.vanguardngr.com/2013/12/olunloyo-wild-wild-west/>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). The Western Region descended into chaos, with political thugs, or “agberos,” clashing violently in the streets. The rule of law crumbled, and the situation became a powder keg ready to explode.

Balewa, despite his personal reputation for honesty and integrity, struggled to hold the country together. The political instability was exacerbated by economic challenges. Nigeria’s economic policies, inherited from the colonial government, were designed to benefit the British economy more than the newly independent nation (ibid). Agriculture, the backbone of Nigeria’s economy, was regionally specialized, the north produced groundnuts, the west produced cocoa, and the east was known for palm oil (Okeke, M. (2017). The Nigerian economy before the discovery of crude oil. ResearchGate. <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322184134_The_Nigerian_Economy_Before_the_Discovery_of_Crude_Oil>. Assessed on the 19th of September, 2024.). While these crops generated revenue, they also deepened regionalism, as each region became economically dependent on its own cash crops rather than fostering national economic integration. (To be continued).

THOUGHT FOR THE WEEK

“Leadership is diving for a loose ball, getting the crowd involved, getting other players involved. It’s being able to take it as well as dish it out. That’s the only way you’re going to get respect from the players). – Larry Bird.

LAST LINE

God bless my numerous global readers for always keeping faith with the Sunday Sermon on the Mount of the Nigerian Project, by humble me, Prof Mike Ozekhome, SAN, CON, OFR, FCIArb., LL.M, Ph.D, LL.D, D.Litt, D.Sc, DHL, DA. Kindly come with me to next week’s exciting dissertation.