Connect with us

Features

Insecurity, poverty, ‘janjaweed philosophy’ features of Buhari’s administration

Published

on

By Benneth Joshua

In 2020, at a ministerial retreat, President Muhammadu Buhari had commended his administration for innovatively addressing insecurity and insurgency by rehabilitating and re-integrating repentant terrorists into society.

A seemingly triumphant Buhari had affirmed that his administration is on the right course and highlighted their efforts in building strong institutional capacities to fight corruption, while urging his appointees to defend his government by going on the offensive to better present information.

In that September 2020 get-together of his cabinet, Mr Buhari alluded that his government was in touch with its promises to ensure equitable distribution of the nation’s wealth and close the gap between different classes.

It was five years short of his earlier campaign promises in 2015 to, in the next ten years, lift about a 100 per cent of the country’s population out of poverty.

However, and unfortunately, with about two years left in the life of his administration, that is barring any third term agenda of the government, the percentage of Nigerians living in poverty has risen by an additional 40 per cent in October 2019, from 54.7% in 2004, according to statistics from the National Bureau of Statistics.

The NBS in its report said that the figure represents 82.9 million people.

This stark reality was expressed by President Olusegun Obasanjo in year under review when he said he was embarrassed about how President Buhari is running the country, insisting that Africa’s most populous black nation is moving towards becoming a failed State.

The former President then openly accused Mr Buhari of mismanaging diversity by allowing disappearing old ethnic and religious fault lines to reopen in greater fissures with drums of bitterness, separation and disintegration.

Obasanjo’s dirge was echoed by a former Buhari supporter, Wole Soyinka, who described the country as a crumbling edifice on the edge of collapse.

But the duo of Obasanjo and Soyinka were not alone on the voyage. Late elder statesman, Balarabe Musa, added his voice to the call for reason, perhaps, ostensibly believing that the man at the Presidential wing of Aso Rock would have some latitude to give listening ears to constructive voices.

Balarabe had lambasted the attacks across the country by bandits and criminal herdsmen, insisting that the failure to rein-in the urchins is because the government was a subterfuge.

He said, “no serious and patriotic government will allow this level of killings of its citizens by terrorists and be watching aimlessly’.

If Obasanjo, Soyinka and late Balarabe are to be described as men without insight into the metaphysical reality surrounding Nigeria, hence their blindness to the milk of kindness flowing in Mr Buhari, for Nigerians, what would one then say of the submission of prominent Islamic scholar, Sheik Murtala Sokoto, who described those still praising Buhari as liars and hypocrites.

Even within President’s own party, All Progressives Congress (APC), many people who worked for his victory complain openly that the mission that brought them to power might have been willfully abandoned.

In April of 2021, the APC admitted that the current security situation across the country is worrisome, describing it as the “current realities” of this administration.

The party in a statement by its interim National Secretary, John Akpanudoedehe, said “the issue of insecurity in the country has found expression in terrorist and criminal activities of Boko Haram, bandits, kidnappers, rustlers and recently the highly condemnable attacks on security formations in some states.”

Available records show that from 2017 when Buhari took over office, to 2020, over 2,539 persons have been killed from 654 attacks alone.

And in 2019, Nigeria was ranked 3rd below Afghanistan and Iraq out of 138 countries in the Global Terrorism Index and is said to be the 14th most fragile in the world and the 9th in Africa, according to the Fragile States Index.

Banditry violence alone has swept across states such as Zamfara, Kaduna, Niger, Sokoto, Kebbi and Katsina states in the northwest, with an estimated 21 million people living in these states having being directed affected by the activities of bandits.

The banditry violence began as a farmer/herder conflict in 2011 and intensified between 2017 to 2018 to include cattle rustling, kidnapping for ransom, sexual violence and killings. The violence has affected about 35 out of 92 local government areas in the 4 states.

In the middle belt, farmer-herder clashes left more than 1,300 people dead and displaced 300,000 people across the country from January-June 2018, with the figure rising exponentially from 2019 to 2020.

The list of woes is endless but it is an instructive commentary according to Jeff Istiffanus, Team Lead, Centre for Crisis Mitigation as it offers the government’s acceptability before the people.

The fact on ground shows that since Mr Buhari and his band assumed office in 2015, the country has unwittingly lost more than it bargained for.

From the notoriously restive northeast, to the once peaceful middle, the orgy of violence has spread to the South East where its people preferred commerce and a peaceful environment, to the rampaging hooliganism of criminals decorated in beautiful toga called “unknown gunmen.”

At every turn and on daily basis, Nigerians are confronted with gory tales of killings, bloodbath, misery and destitution, with thousands of compatriots killed and many more injured and displaced in various parts of the country.

From Kano to Cross River, Lagos to Borno, Kaduna to Imo, Kogi to Ebonyi and all parts of the country, the administration either by sheer ineptitude or grand conspiracy, has erected altars of violence and pushing life to extinct.

The use of hoodlums to attack Nigerians during any protest against the government, as witnessed in the EndSARS protest as well as the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) protest in Kaduna, tells it all.

What is today happening in the South East is asymptomatic of the type of government the party has brought upon the country.

The situation is most likely not unconnected with the purported ‘janjaweed’ philosophy the party has over time being accused of.

Joshua is a journalist and a Public Affairs Analyst.

Features

Bruno Fernandes: Mikel Arteta credits ‘smart’ Man Utd captain for free-kick as Gary Neville says wall ‘too far back’

Published

on

The Arsenal wall was measured 11.2 yards away from the ball instead of the regulation 10 at the free-kick which Bruno Fernandes scored from

Mikel Arteta says Bruno Fernandes was “smarter” than referee Anthony Taylor over his free-kick that gave Manchester United the lead against Arsenal in 1-1 draw on Sunday; referee moved defensive wall 11.2 yards back; Gary Neville criticised Arsenal over incident

Mikel Arteta refused to criticise Anthony Taylor for sending Arsenal’s defensive wall too far back for Bruno Fernandes’ free-kick in their 1-1 draw but said the Manchester United captain had been “smarter” than the referee in taking advantage to net his fine strike.

Broadcast technology found Taylor marched the Arsenal defensive line 11.2 yards back, further than the minimum 10 yards required in the Laws of the Game, before Fernandes curled a dead ball inside the near post shortly before half-time.

“At the end of the day the referee is pushing them back too far, which is a mistake, but ordinarily you would sense you’re too far away and creep forward,” said Gary Neville on the Gary Neville Podcast.

“They didn’t do that and it ends up that Bruno Fernandes has the ability to play it over the wall.”

The United captain’s technique was superb but, like Neville, the Super Sunday pundits questioned whether his goal would have been possible had Arsenal’s five-player wall been closer.

Arteta refused to be drawn over the incident, only to congratulate Fernandes for making the most of the advantage he had been given.
“He’s been smart and he took advantage, that is football,” he told Sky Sports. “He’s been smarter than the ref. That’s OK, they allowed him to do it.”

Player of the match Declan Rice, who netted Arsenal’s equaliser after half-time, took the blame for the goal on himself and the other members of the Gunners wall, though he also felt it had been pushed too far back.

“It felt like a couple of us jumped and some of us didn’t, but I’ve not seen it back,” he told Sky Sports. “It felt like the ball flew over us at quite a low height so, from the wall’s perspective, we could have done a lot better.
“The wall did feel far back. Even on our free-kick, when Martin [Odegaard] took it, they felt far back as well, more than usual. But the referee makes that decision.”

After half-time, another free-kick from Martin Odegaard was being lined up when Taylor again appeared to exceed 10 yards when marking out where Man Utd’s defensive wall could stand.

As Neville had suggested Arsenal should do, Noussair Mazraoui questioned Taylor over the distance, while the wall itself crept forward before Odegaard’s strike – and did its job when his effort rebounded away to safety.

Manchester United head coach Ruben Amorim told Sky Sports he had noticed the issues with both free-kicks but had no intention of helping Arsenal out ahead of Fernandes’ opener.

He said: “It was clear, both free-kicks. So when it’s your free kick, you don’t say anything. When it’s the opponent, you try to push because it’s a big difference.

“It was fair, one for us, one for them. We had Bruno and he solved the problem.”

Man Utd midfielder Christian Eriksen, who has scored eight Premier League free-kicks, explained after the game the sizeable difference even 1.2 yards extra would make for a dead-ball specialist.

“It makes a very big difference,” he told Sky Sports. “When the ball is over the wall you don’t need to hit it as high – going down to statistics and how far they are back and how many metres and how they jump. So it’s easier and it gives Bruno a bit more space to put it over the wall.

“It was very good. It helped that the wall was about 15 metres away, so it was perfect for him to put it over.

“I saw it early [that the wall was a fair way back]. Even before the kick you could see how far back they were, and it was the same when they had it in the second half – obviously we were a bit angry with the ref [at that point] for putting us so far back after we saw that Bruno scored.

“But I think it was just beneficial to us.”

Continue Reading

Features

Sule Lamido: Statesman, bridge builder

Published

on

Former Governor of Jigawa State, Alhaji Sule Lamido

Alhaji Sule Lamido was born August 30, 1948. He is a native of Bamaina village, Jigawa State, and is known for his wide-level exposure in leadership. He attended Birnin Kudu school, for his primary education in 1955 and proceeded for his secondary education at the prestigious Barewa College, Zaria, Kaduna State.

Lamido embarked on a course in Railway engineering at the Permanent way training school, Zaria, Kaduna where he gained knowledge on the rail transport operations. Upon graduation from the Permanent Way Training School, Lamido started his career as a Quality Control officer at the Nigeria Tobacco Company in Zaria. He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country.

He also worked in Bamaina Holding Company, amongst other companies in the country. In 1992, Lamido ventured into politics, first in the second republic as a member of the Peoples Redemption Party (PRP) where he was an active member. Lamido was also active in the third republic, as a member of the Social Democratic Party (SDP), and played a key role as the National Secretary in the party. The seasoned politician was also a delegate of the 1995 National Constitutional Conference in Abuja the Federal Capital Territory (FCT).

During the military regime of the late Gen Sani Abacha, Lamido was a member of the G-34 political movement which was a notable and powerful opposition group that shaped Nigeria’s fourth republic. After several years of the Military junta in Nigeria, Sule Lamido returned back to active politics in the fourth republic under the platform of the People’s Democratic Party.

He was appointed the Foreign Affairs Minister in the first four years of President Olusegun Obasanjo (1999-2003) at a time Nigeria had to reposition and redeem its image in the international community. As Foreign Minister he travelled with Former President Obasanjo across the globe, restoring broken relationships with the western bloc nations and opening new frontiers with countries like Japan, Russia, Brazil, China and Australia.

Other roles he played as foreign minister was representing Nigeria in the United Nations, G77 bloc of nations, Commonwealth of nations, Organization of African Unity and Economic Community of West Africa States. In November 2001, at the United Nations , Lamido described the corrosive impact of corruption on new democracies such as Nigeria, and called for “an international instrument” against transfer of looted funds abroad.

As Governor of Jigawa, Sule Lamido put the State on national scale with significant investments in infrastructure, healthcare, agriculture, housing & urban development, empowerment programmes, education, rural development and industrial projects. The elder statesman is also known for his capacity to build consensus across the nation.

Continue Reading

Features

Remembering Anthony Enahoro

Published

on

By Abiodun Komolafe

It is a settled fact that Anthony Eromosele Enahoro (July 22, 1923 – December 15, 2010) was an outstanding product of Nigeria’s pre-independence era. Enahoro moved one of the motions for independence and there’s a lot for us to look at in the context of the life he lived and the political firmament that brought him up. Therefore, remembering this Father of Nigerian Nationalism is to reminisce about an era where courage and conviction were the
currencies of change.

As a pioneering journalist, politician and champion of independence, Enahoro’s unwavering commitment to Nigeria’s self-rule has left an enduring legacy that continues to inspire generations. His remarkable story is a testament to the transformative power of leadership, perseverance and the unrelenting pursuit of freedom.

Building on his legacy as a champion of independence, Enahoro went on to serve in various capacities, including as Minister of Information and Labour. He was later tried alongside Obafemi Awolowo and others for treasonable felony, a trial that became infamous in Nigerian history. Although convicted, Enahoro was later released and continued to play a significant role in shaping Nigeria’s political landscape. 

Enahoro was an outstanding nationalist and a principled person, and this was evident in his involvement with the National Democratic Coalition (NADECO). Of course, there was no need for him and Alfred Rewane to have been involved in the struggle for the enthronement of democracy, particularly in the aftermath of the annulled June 12, 1993 presidential election won by MKO Abiola as they had too much to lose!. But they risked everything to fight for popular democracy, Although Rewane ultimately lost his life in the struggle, Enahoro was fortunate to have escaped the same fate.

Despite the risks and challenges, Enahoro remained unbending in his convictions, refusing to waver even in the face of adversity. As a gifted individual, he recognized that the issue at hand was not just about the violation of an individual's rights, but an affront to democracy and national sovereignty. He, along with Alfred Rewane and others fought for principles, not personalities. This commitment to principle was evident in their diverse backgrounds: Enahoro was a Christian from Uromi in Edo State, with Esan extraction; Rewane was a Christian of Urhobo descent from Delta State; and Abiola, whose rights they fought for, was a Muslim Yorubaman, from Ogun State. Unlike some NADECO members who howled with the wolves and bleated with the sheep for convenience, Enahoro was not
duplicitous. Unlike the crop of Janjaweeds who now populate our political landscape, he remained steadfast, refusing to compromise his values.

Olajumoke Ogunkeyede, a close ally of Enahoro, described him as “a man with a seriously fantastic sense of humour; Ogunkeyede, fondly called JMK, shared several instances of Enahoro’s ability to bring joy to those around him. His humorous takes on serious issues, such as the demons in Abuja, showcased his wit. Moreover, his clever commentaries, including his defence of now-President Bola Tinubu’s aspirations, and his ingenious use of allegories and analogies, like; Ogbuefi; and; Ogbueniyan’, collectively attested to the capacity of his wit and charm.

When writing about individuals like Enahoro, Rewane, Herbert Macaulay, Awolowo, Aminu Kano, Maitama Sule, and others, it’s essential to consider the context in which they lived. This context is bittersweet, as they represented an era where political activism was rooted in philosophical positions and guided by principles.

People during this time held strong convictions and were willing to make sacrifices for their beliefs. That’s why society was more orderly in their time, and it achieved proper sustainable development, unlike today where what we have is largely ‘growth without development’, to be polite, or, if we want to be impolite, ‘the development of underdevelopment’. Amidst this, our leaders continue to sing the same old, worn-out refrain while satiating a vacuous idolatry that elevates an ego bereft of substance, a hollow monolith that stands on feet of clay.

If we look at people like Enahoro and Adegoke Adelabu, their lives exemplified a paradox that underscored the tenuous relationship between knowledge and credentials. This was because, despite lacking university degrees, they possessed a profound intellectual depth that eluded many of their contemporaries who boasted an array of impressive certifications, forgetting that it is not the parchment that confers wisdom, but the depth of one's inquiry, the rigour of one's thought and the breadth of one’s understanding.

Enahoro became the youngest editor of Nnamdi Azikiwe's newspaper, the Southern Nigerian Defender, in 1944 at the age of 21 while Peter, his younger brother, became the editor of The Morning Star at the age of 23. The older Enahoro also worked with other publications, including Daily Comet and West African Pilot before parting ways with Azikiwe, whom he always referred to as his chairman, while Awolowo was his political leader. The reasons behind this preference are intriguing, but that’s a story for another time.

These early experiences laid the foundation for Enahoro’s later involvement with the Action Group (AG), a political party that shared his vision of ‘making life more abundant.’ Enahoro and the AG represented an understanding that the process of economic development must be structured and based on a philosophical thrust. In contrast, what is absurdly described as ‘politics’ today is terribly bad and basically transactional; and it’s driven by a cash-and-
carry mentality, where individuals seek to outdo one another in a chop-and-quench; political economy! No unity! No discipline! No structure! For them, any goose can cackle and any fly can find a sore place!

Looking at the plane, Enahoro’s life and career epitomized the complexities of Nigeria’s struggle for
independence and democracy. His life and work embodied the intersection of individual agency and structural forces that steered the trajectory of nations. As a prominent anti-colonial and pro- democracy activist, he played a pivotal role in the country’s transition from colonial rule to independence. The Adolor of Uromi and the Adolor of Onewa was a vocal critic of authoritarianism and a strong advocate for human rights. His perseverance in the face of resistance, setbacks and imprisonment demonstrates the dedication required to bring about
transformative change.

In moments of emotions and situations, we often discover our true strength and resilience. Enahoro has gone to the ages but his legacy continues to inspire, much like Abraham Lincolns. In simpler terms, he was a brave soul who dared to challenge the colonial powers. So, his legacy should serve as inspiration and role model for future generations, demonstrating the potential for excellence that exists within individuals and communities. In fairness to fate, Enahoro and his contemporaries were well-prepared for the liberation movement, thanks to their involvement in the West African Students Union (WASU) and their time at King’s College, Lagos. This institution, attended by Enahoro and Chukwuemeka Odumegwu Ojukwu, was a hotbed for political activism and discourse. To truly reboot, Nigerians must remember the personal histories of pioneers like Enahoro.

Today, we remember Enahoro, a pioneering figure who dared to dream of independence for Nigeria. We honour not only his significant contributions to Nigeria’s history but also his untiring commitment to democracy, self-determination and human rights. As we remember him and his dogged commitment to federalism and the quest for social justice, it is in our best interest to recreate the ethos and the spirit which created him and people like him.
May Anthony Enahoro’s spirit soar on the wings of eternal peace!

May his memory continue to serve as a testament to the enduring impact of individual agency
on the course of national history!

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)

Continue Reading

Trending


Address: 1st Floor, Nwakpabi Plaza, Suite 110, Waziri Ibrahim Crescent, Apo, Abuja
Tel: +234 7036084449; +234 7012711701
Email: capitalpost20@gmail.com | info@capitalpost.ng
Copyright © 2025 Capital Post