Opinion
Buhari vs Ortom: Why President’s media aide, Shehu needs ‘refresher course’
President Muhammadu Buhari’s Senior Special Assistant on Media and Publicity, Garba Shehu’s reaction to an interview granted by the Executive governor of Benue State, Samuel Ortom on Tuesday on Channels Television was not only disappointing to those who are abreast of the reality of carnage in the land, but his statement was an embarrassment to journalism profession.
Sadly, it’s been long Shehu actively practised journalism other than being media aide to top politicians that has made him delved into more of personality packaging, image making and public relations stuff.
In the 10 paragraph statement issued by Garba Shehu on Wednesday, 25th August, 2021 which was widely circulated in electronic, print and online platforms, he failed to address the substance of issues of insecurity and tragedy of governance that was raised by governor Samuel Ortom on the National Television, but deviated and dwelt on windy missives as if concerns raised on the television were new to Nigerians.
Firstly, the issue of killing in Benue State and across the States of the Federation have been the regrettable situation Nigerians have been living with, in the last six years of President Muhammadu Buhari’s administration and there’s nothing to show the situation would abate in the remaining two years. If the mention of killings without federal government decisive action to stop it is interpreted to mean an incitive statement as Garba Shehu would want Nigerians to believe or too toxic for the calibre of a sitting governor to make that kind of comment, why didn’t he mount his own statement to detoxify Ortom’s position by way of explaining reasons there were genocide all over the places including Buhari’s home state, Katsina in the northwestern Nigeria.
As an image maker in his position, one expected Shehu not to gallivant, but to directly address those issues raised. And to ensure unity rather than divisive, religious and ethnic colourated statement.
Unfortunately, from the first to fifth paragraph of Shehu’s statement, it would confuse those who missed Benue governor’s interview with which he was reacting as he failed to lay the background before tackling Ortom.
For emphasis, Shehu’s statement is rewritten thus: “Governor Samuel Ortom has few political principles. We can see this from the fact that he has changed political party five times during his undistinguished career.
“Every time he feels the wind may be blowing in a certain direction, he follows it.
“Unfortunately, for the good citizens of Benue State, the most dangerous direction he blows in today is that of sectarianism and ethnicity.
“Specifically, Ortom stirs up hatred by targeting one single ethnic group in Nigeria – using language reminiscent of the Rwandan genocide.
“As was the case in Rwanda where the then Hutu leaders of the country incited their countrymen against each other, claiming there was a “secret Tutsi agenda” over the Hutu, Ortom claims there is a “secret Fulanization agenda” over other ethnic groups in his state and in Nigeria. This is a copy of the language of Hutu Power – which falsely, and intentionally, accused the Rwandan Tutsi of plans to dominate the country.”
Well, all of us should be reminded that Garba Shehu’s exempli gratia of Hutu and Tutsi’s 100 days war in Rwanda was primarily a result of class strife and cattle ranching policy. The Tutsi tribe were perceived to have more wealth with cattle ranching at the expense of Hutu who were majorly farmers, but could no longer bear the brunt and that was what led to Rwandan war from 7th April to 15th July, 1994 with over 800,000 dead and over 1,000,000 victims on both sides.
The sad Rwanda incident should be a guide to avoiding pitfalls rather than labelling Ortom an ethinic irredentist. The cattle policy in Rwanda was the exactitude of cattle policy in Nigeria despite the fact that cattle is a personal business of the rearers. If only the law allows government to take over land in public interest, there shouldn’t be reasons land should be taken away for somebody’s personal business of cattle rearing.
Yes, in the said interview, Ortom mentioned President Muhammadu Buhari’s attempt to islamise and Fulanise the nation. Without the mention by Benue State governor, every rational mind already knew that, that has been the situation in the last six years. This is deducible from Fulani herders’ endless attacks in Benue State with massive killings of innocent lives. The carnage going on in Benue State has created artificial internally displaced persons (IDPs) with the Federal government caring less.
Should Ortom who took an oath of office to uphold and protect the people be sitting supine watching while Benue people are being maimed by the herders. For years, the Miyetti Allah, a Fulani Socio-cultural group have made unconscionable statement and threatened to make Benue State ungovernable on television, and in print and other electronic media platforms, but were never cautioned neither were their statements considered incitve by the government controlled DSS for interrogation, yet they made good of their promises by invading Benue State severally.
More so, if Ortom was inciting Christians against Muslims, farmers against herders leading to deaths of innocent lives, according to Shehu’s statement, one tends to question the morality and rationality of a media aide of a President who’s words should shape impression in good or bad light of the happenings in the presidency. The statement didn’t flow from unbiased heart of Mr Shehu because one of the second biggest challenge facing the present administration which no one should pretend is the armed Fulani herders. This menace, if solved would have resolved almost 70% of nation’s security challenges. They have vowed to attack farmers and dared to kill because of anti-grazing laws which is a right of State governors.
Would it be in anyone’s imagination that governor Samuel Ortom was responsible for killings and bandits attacks in Katsina, Kebbi, Zamfara, Kaduna with the latest heat in plateau? Even some governors who have turned themselves into bootlickers of the presidency in the obvious fatalities were also not spared of these known marauders. If the passion with which the Federal government was pursuing the ‘cow policy’ was put into tacking insecurity, the nation would have faired better. The latest vexed directive on the creation of cow routes in the 25 out of 36 States of the federation with huge funds already released to some States against the provision of the Land Use Act 1978 is ‘ultra vires’, invalid and would be thrown out, if the directive is tested in the Court of competent jurisdiction.
Shehu should have known that the interview has set in motion the need for crisis communication which would have made it more of defence explanation rather than name calling and wharped logic.
Samson Atekojo Usman is a journalist and can be reached through: ateko2007@gmail.com
By Abiodun KOMOLAFE
The concepts of power, privilege and governance are complex and multifaceted. Power refers to the ability to influence others, while privilege denotes unearned advantages.
Governance encompasses institutions, structures and processes that regulate these dynamics. Together, these concepts raise fundamental questions about justice, equality and resource distribution.
It emphasizes the importance of considering marginalized groups’ experiences and perspectives. The main problem in Nigeria today is its political economy, which is rooted in rent-seeking and fosters a mindset that prioritizes patronage over production.
The country’s politics are characterized by a patron-client relationship, where everything revolves around government handouts rather than effective governance. This has led to a situation where “politics” in Nigeria is essentially a scramble for resources in a country with severely limited opportunities for self-improvement.
When French agronomist René Dumont wrote ‘False Starts in Africa’ in 1962, he inadvertently described Nigeria’s current state in 2025. Nigeria’s missteps have magnified themselves in the theatre of the absurd, such as the construction of a new vice presidential residence and Governor Chukwuemeka Soludo’s boasts about the lavish official residence for the governor of Anambra State, currently under construction.
It is to be noted in contradistinction that the newly sworn-in Prime Minister of Canada, Mark Carney, is looking for somewhere to live. The official residence of the prime minister, 24 Sussex Drive, the Canadian equivalent of 10 Downing Street, is in disrepair and uninhabitable. No Canadian government can dare ask the parliament to appropriate the $40m needed to refurbish the residence.
Canada’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) exceeds $2 trillion, while Nigeria’s GDP is less than $400 billion. Still, Nigeria claims to be a giant! With an electricity generation capacity of less than 6,000 megawatts, Nigeria’s proclamation seems absurd, especially when compared to cities like Johannesburg, Singapore, Hong Kong and Mumbai. Even Lagos State alone should be generating, transmitting and distributing at least 15,000 megawatts, which would be a basic expectation rather than an achievement.
Nigeria today needs a comprehensive overhaul of its governance crisis to build a new political economy and social services that are fit for purpose. Although the government is on the right path in some ways, a root-and-branch transformation is still necessary.
A notable breakthrough is the decision to recapitalize development finance institutions, such as the Bank of Industry and, crucially, the Bank of Agriculture. This move is significant in a rent-seeking state, as it addresses the need for long-term capital – a prerequisite for achieving meaningful progress.
The development finance institutions require annual recapitalization of at least N500 billion, ideally N1 trillion. Achieving this necessitates a thorough cost evaluation of the government’s machinery, starting with the full implementation of the Oronsaye Committee’s recommendations.
The resulting cost savings can then be redirected to development finance institutions and essential social services like primary healthcare. Furthermore, the government should be bolder, if it can afford to be so, especially since there’s no discernible opposition on offer At the moment, the Nigerian political establishment across the board appears to be enamored by the position put forward by the leader of the Russian revolution, Vladimir Lenin, after the failed putsch. Lenin wrote the classic, ‘What is to be done?’
His observation is that revolutions do not take place at times of grinding poverty. They do so during periods of relatively rising prosperity. Significant sections of the Nigerian establishment believe that relatively rising prosperity could trigger off social discontent.
In their own interest, they had better be right. The caveat is that Lenin wrote ‘What’s to be Done’ in 1905. The world has moved on and changed since the conditions that led to the failure of the attempted takeover of government in Russia in 1905. Therefore, the Nigerian political establishment, for reasons of self-preservation, had better put on its thinking cap. Addressing power and privilege in governance requires collective action, institutional reforms and a commitment to promoting social justice. Nigeria currently lacks a leadership recruitment process, which can only be established if political parties are willing to develop a cadre. Unfortunately, the country is dealing with Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) instead. It’s rare to find leadership in Nigeria operating political boot camps to recruit and groom youths for future leadership roles.
This might be why many young people have a misguided understanding of politics, viewing it as merely a means of sharing the nation’s commonwealth. Mhairi Black was elected to the British House of Commons at 20 years old.
However, the key point is that Black had started becoming involved in politics at a young age. By the time she was elected, she had already gained significant experience, effectively becoming a veteran in the field. In Nigeria, politics is often seen as one of the few avenues for self-fulfillment. However, the economy is stagnant, with few jobs created in the public sector and limited investment opportunities.
This is a far cry from the 1950s and 1960s, when political parties were more substantial. Today, it’s worth asking how many Nigerian political parties have functional Research Departments. Besides, what socialization into any philosophy or ideology do our politicians have? Similarly to former Governor Rotimi Amaechi, many of those who currently hold power are motivated to stay in politics due to concerns about economic stability.
Of course, that’s why the Lagos State House of Assembly has had to revert itself. It is the same challenge that has reduced the traditional institution to victims of Nigeria’s ever-changing political temperature. It is the reason an Ogbomoso indigene is not interested in what happened between Obafemi Awolowo and Ladoke Akintola.
It is also the reason an Ijebuman sees an Ogbomoso man as his enemy without bothering to dig up the bitter politics that ultimately succeeded in putting the two families on the path of permanent acrimony. Of course, that’s why we have crises all over the place! May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
KOMOLAFE wrote from Ijebu-Jesa, Osun State, Nigeria (ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419)
Byabiodun KOMOLAFE
Rivers State is now under emergency rule, and it’s likely to remain so for the next six months, unless a drastic change occurs.
If not managed carefully, this could mark the beginning of a prolonged crisis.
In situations like this, opinions tend to be divergent. For instance, some people hold the notion that the security situation and the need to protect the law and public order justified President Bola Tinubu’s proclamation of a state of emergency in, and the appointment of a sole administrator for Rivers State.
However, others view this act as ‘unconstitutional’, ‘reckless’, ‘an affront on democracy’, and ‘a political tool to intimidate the opposition’. When we criticize governments for unmet expectations, we often rely on our own perspectives and biases.
Our individual identities and prejudices shape our criticism. However, it’s essential to recognize that not all criticism is equal. Protesting within the law is fundamentally different from protests that descend into illegality. Once illegality creeps in, the legitimacy of the protest is lost.
As John Donne wrote in ‘Devotions Upon Emergent Occasions’, “Never send to know for whom the bell tolls.” A protest is legitimate when it aligns with societal norms, values and laws. But when protests are marred by violence or sabotage, they lose credibility. Without credibility, protests become ineffective.
Regarding the validity or otherwise of the emergency rule in Rivers State, it is imperative that the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) governors approach the Supreme Court immediately. They should seek a definitive clarification on whether the proclamation is ultra vires or constitutional.
For whatever it’s worth, they owe Nigerians that responsibility!May the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world, grant us peace in Nigeria!
Abiodun KOMOLAFE,ijebujesa@yahoo.co.uk; 08033614419 – SMS only.
Abba Dukawa
The political crisis began in December 2023, when Governor Fubara ordered the demolition of the state House of Assembly complex, which remains unrebuilt to this day. This act has effectively paralyzed the legislative arm, disrupting the state’s system of checks and balances.
The Supreme Court highlighted the severity of this situation on February 28, 2025, emphasizing the absence of a functional government in Rivers State and the executive’s role in collapsing the legislative arm, thereby creating a governance void
Additionally, recent reports indicate that militants have been vandalizing pipelines and issuing threats without any intervention from the state government, raising concerns about the state’s security and economic stability.Given Rivers State’s crucial role in the country’s economy, this situation necessitates urgent and cautious intervention from the federal government.Despite interventions from various stakeholders, including Tinubu himself, the crisis has persisted
.It’s worth noting that Tinubu is the third president to invoke Section 305 of the Constitution, after Ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo and Former President Goodluck Jonathan.
President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State has sparked intense debate about its necessity and potential motivations. During his nationwide speech, Tinubu warned that this decision could set off a chain of unpredictable events, potentially leading to radical ideologies and extremist tendencies.
Critics argue that Tinubu’s decision was unnecessary and politically motivated, particularly given his connection to Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, who is accused of being the “arrowhead” of the crisis. Some believe that Tinubu’s administration aims to remove Governor Fubara, perceived as hostile to the 2027 Tinubu/Wike project.Ultimately, the motivations behind Tinubu’s decision remain unclear, and its implications for Rivers State and Nigeria as a whole are yet to be fully seen.
Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) has strongly opposed President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State and his suspension of Governor Siminalayi Fubara, his deputy, and members of the Rivers State President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.House of Assembly. President Tinubu, in his national address, cited rising political tensions and recent acts of pipeline vandalism as justification for the emergency declaration.
The NBA pointed to Section 305 of the 1999 Constitution, which governs the procedure for declaring a state of emergency. While this section grants the President emergency powers, it does not allow for the removal or suspension of elected officials. The NBA stressed that the only constitutional method for removing a governor or deputy governor is through impeachment as outlined in Section 188.
Furthermore, the removal of lawmakers must adhere to electoral laws and constitutional provisions insisted that a state of emergency does not equate to an automatic dissolution of an elected government, and any attempt to do so is an overreach of executive power.
Also Former Vice President Atiku Abubakar has strongly condemned President Bola Tinubu’s declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State, calling it an “assault on democracy” that must be denounced in the strongest possible terms . Wazirin Adamawa argues that Tinubu’s administration is responsible for the chaos in Rivers State, either by enabling it or failing to prevent it. He emphasizes that the President should bear full responsibility for any compromise of federal infrastructure in the state, rather than punishing the people of Rivers State with a state of emergency.
Abubakar also accuses president Tinubu of being a partisan actor in the political turmoil in Rivers, and his refusal to prevent the escalation is seen as “disgraceful to the people of Rivers” The former Vice President believes that the destruction of national infrastructure in Rivers State is a direct result of the President’s failure to act, and punishing the people of Rivers State would be undemocratic.
In his statement, former vice president asserts that the declaration of a state of emergency “reeks of political manipulation and outright bad faith. He urges that the people of Rivers State should not be punished for the political gamesmanship between the governor and Tinubu’s enablers in the federal government. Other analyst believes that the situation in Rivers State, though politically tense, does not meet the constitutional threshold for the removal of elected officials.
For a state of emergency to be declared, Section 305(3) of the Constitution outlines specific conditions, including:
1. War or external aggression against Nigeria. Imminent danger of invasion or war. A breakdown of public order and safety to such an extent that ordinary legal measures are insufficient.
Other reasons for such decisions to be enforced are clear danger to Nigeria’s existence and Occurrence of any disaster or natural calamity affecting a state or a part of it. Where public danger constitutes a threat to the Federation.
Since the state of the emergency in Rivers state has been promulgation, political watchers questions whether the political crisis in Rivers State has reached the level of a complete breakdown of law that has warranting the removal of the Governor and his administration. Political disagreements, legislative conflicts, or executive-legislative tensions do not constitute a justification for emergency rule.
Had been the president remain filmed Such conflicts should have been resolved through legal and constitutional mechanisms, including the judiciary, rather than executive fiat.
A state of emergency is an extraordinary measure that must be invoked strictly within constitutional limits. The removal of elected officials under the pretext of emergency rule is unconstitutional and unacceptable.Tinubu’s administration decision to declare a state of emergency has been met with mixed reactions. Some argue that it was necessary to restore sanity to the state and ensure the country’s stability. Others,, believe that it was an unnecessary decision that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Was declaration for Rivers state is necessary or political motivation? President Bola Amed Tinubu is fully aware that the declaration of State of Emergency in a prevalent democratic system is not the solution to the self-inflicted crisis bedeviling the State.
What Tinubu needed most was to call Wike, his Minister of FCT, to order. The former governor Wike is the arrowhead of the crisis bedeviling the State.
Now what the president Tinubu decision for the declaration of a state of emergency in Rivers State was an unnecessary decision” that could have dire economic and security implications for the state and Nigeria at large.
Other views whether president decisions of keeping his ally, Minister of the Federal Capital Territory Nyesom Wike, is worth jeopardizing Nigeria’s economy.The keen watcher of events regarded the decision as a display of unpardonable mediocrity and diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027.
Tinubu administration wants to use the excuse of the political instability and other security challenges in Rivers to remove Governor FUBURA from the POWER considered hostile to the minister of the Federal Capital Territory or TInubu/Wiki diabolic partisanship geared towards 2027 election.
During his speeches Mr. President, blaming only the state governor and House of Assembly for the crisis in Rivers State is like expecting one iron to make a loud sound – it’s unrealistic and ignores the roles of others, including the former governor and a cabinet member in your administration.
Let us not forget; The situation in Rivers state is indeed complex, with President Tinubu’s intervention aiming to restore order, but also raising important questions about the balance between federal intervention and state autonomy. Invoking a state of emergency to suspend elected officials is a drastic measure that may set a worrying precedent, especially if not handled carefully.
The appointment of a retired military officer as the state’s administrator also raises concerns about the militarization of a democratic government. This move may be perceived as an attempt to exert federal control over the state, rather than allowing democratic processes to unfold, the initial six-month period of emergency rule, with provisions for extension, could lead to prolonged federal control. This is why it’s essential to establish clear timelines and measurable objectives to ensure a timely return to democratic governance.
Some of the key concerns that need to be addressed include: The potential for abuse of power*: The suspension of elected officials and the appointment of a military administrator could be seen as an attempt to consolidate federal power.
– *The impact on democratic institutions*: The emergency rule could undermine the democratic institutions in Rivers state and set a precedent for future interventions.
– *The need for transparency and accountability*: The federal government must ensure that the emergency rule is transparent, accountable, and subject to regular review. Ultimately, finding a balance between restoring order and respecting democratic institutions is crucial. The federal government must tread carefully to avoid exacerbating the situation and ensure a peaceful resolution.
Dukawa public affairs commentator and can be reached at abbahydukawa@gmail.com
-
Politics1 week agoOpposition leaders announce coalition to challenge Tinubu in 2027
-
Foreign6 days agoHouthis declare Ben-Gurion Airport ‘no longer safe’ after renewed Gaza fighting
-
Politics1 week agoYahaya Bello deceptively arranging recall of Senator Natasha, desperate to replace her – Constituents
-
Politics1 week agoAtiku, El-rufai, Obi condemn Tinubu’s suspension of Rivers Governor, demand reversal
-
News1 week agoWhy Christ Embassy’s Pastor Chris holds Abuja mega crusade – Fisho
-
News7 days agoUmeh denies receiving $10,000 with other 42 Senators to support state of emergency in Rivers
-
Crime1 week agoGhana’s anti-drug agency nabs Nigerian drug kingpin, Uchechukwu Chima, seizes $2.1m worth of cocaine, heroin
-
Business1 week agoFlutterwave, FIRS collaborate to digitize tax collection in Nigeria