Following the adjustment of the dates for the 2015 general elections by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from 14th February to 28th March and 11th April President Goodluck Jonathan has reassured the nation of his commitment to the sanctity of 29th May 2015 as the terminal date of his first term in office.
He strongly reaffirmed that 29th May is, has been, and will remain sacrosanct.
He appealed to all stakeholders to accept the adjustment of the election dates by INEC in good faith, saying the electoral body has a responsibility to conduct credible elections in which every Nigerian of voting age is afforded the opportunity to exercise their civic right without any form of hindrance.
"President Jonathan believes that this is not a time to trade blames or make statements that may overheat the polity, but a time to show understanding and support the electoral commission to conduct the elections successfully," a statement signed by the president's spokesman Reuben Abati said.
He maintained in the statement that it is the President’s understanding that INEC’s decision ought not to generate acrimony since it acted within its powers under the law and in consultation with all relevant stakeholders.
He called on the international community, civil society and the electorate to continue to support the administration’s commitment to a free, fair, credible, and non-violent electoral process.
Election Postponement Is Coup Against Nigeria-Falana
At a public lecture delivered at the Chartham House in London last month, the National Security Adviser, Colonel Sambo Dasuki disclosed that he had “advised” the Independent National Electoral Commission to postpone the election. The reason adduced then for the unsolicited advice was that the INEC needed time to distribute permanent voters’ cards to all registered voters. As an adviser to the President on national security the NSA has no powers whatsoever to give directives or advice to the INEC. Indeed, there is no statutory nexus between the INEC and the NSA to warrant the purported demand for the postponement of the General Election. To that extent, the NSA acted illegally. The INEC rightly rejected the unwarranted interference from the NSA.
But as soon as the INEC announced that all arrangements had been put in place for the distribution of the remaining permanent voters cards in readiness for the February 14 election the NSA began to sing a different tune.
At that juncture, President Goodluck Jonathan convened a meeting of the Council of State. The NSA and the security chiefs were curiously invited to the meeting with a view to convincing the Council members to endorse the postponement of the election. To their utter dismay, they failed to achieve the illegal objective as the Council declined to support the postponement of the election. The Presidency had wanted the advisory body to usurp the constitutional duty of INEC by taking a “decision” on the postponement of the election.
In a desperate bid to blackmail the INEC to postpone the election the NSA wrote a letter to the INEC to the effect that the armed forces could not provide security for the election because of the operations in the north east region. By writing directly to the INEC on the security situation in the north east region the NSA usurped the functions of the National Security Council. That is the only body that has the constitutional duty to “advise the President on matters relating to public security including matters relating to any organization or agency established by law for ensuring the security of the Federation.”
The Council which is established under section 153 of the Constitution is comprised of the President, Vice-President, the a Defence Minister, Chief of defence staff, minister of interior, minister of foreign affairs, inspector-General of police and national security adviser.
It is pertinent to point out that the security chiefs are not members of the National Security Council. Neither are they members of the Nigeria Police Council. Therefore, they lack the constitutional power to make any authoritative pronouncement on the security of the nation. Even though the NSA is a member of the National Security Council he cannot usurp the constitutional responsibilities of the body with the connivance of the service chiefs. Since the NSA and the service chiefs acted illegally and mala fide the INEC ought to have rejected their politically motivated request for the postponement of the Election. The reliance on section 25 of the Electoral Act by Professor Attahiru Jega, the INEC chairman is totally misleading. The provision does not support the postponement of a general election in the entire country but “in the area or areas” where there is violence or actual threat of a breakdown of law and order.
Since the reason for the postponement of any election must be “cogent and verifiable” it is crystal clear from the press conference addressed by Professor Jega last night that the INEC did not verify the bogus claim of the NSA and the security chiefs as required by the law. By saying that they would not provide security in aid of civil authorities pursuant to section 217 of the Constitution the security chiefs have committed the offence of mutiny contrary to section 52 of the armed Forces Act. Contrary to the mistaken belief of the INEC leadership the armed forces have no role to play in the electoral process.
Since it is the exclusive constitutional responsibility of the Nigeria Police Force to maintain law and order during elections the INEC should have called off the bluff of the security chiefs. More so, that the Inspector-General of Police had confirmed the readiness of the Police to provide security for the election. Just last week, the federal high court sitting in Sokoto declared illegal and unconstitutional the involvement of soldiers in election duties. That judgment is binding on all authorities and persons in Nigeria.
It is pertinent to point out that the postponement of a General Election throughout the country is provided for under section 135(3) of the Constitution where it is stated that “If the Federation is at war in which the territory of Nigeria is physically involved and the President considers that it is not practicable to hold elections, the National Assembly may by resolution extend the period of four years mentioned in subsection (2) of this section from time to time, but no such extension shall exceed a period of six months at any one time.” Since the President could not persuade the National Assembly to pass a resolution for tenure elongation on spurious grounds the service chiefs allowed themselves to be manipulated to subvert the democratic process. Thus, by causing the election to be postponed, the NSA and the security chiefs have staged a coup against the Constitution. They are liable to be prosecuted for the grave offence of treason at the appropriate time.
If the satanic Boko Haram sect is not defeated by the armed forces of the republics of Chad, Cameroon and Niger in the next six weeks, the security chiefs are likely to ask for another postponement of the General Election on the ground that the operations in the north east region have not been successfully concluded. As such extension cannot be accommodated under the Electoral Act and the Constitution, the democratic process may be terminated by the security chiefs to pave way for the much touted INTERIM NATIONAL GOVERNMENT. Since some of the Colonels who played a dominant role in the criminal annulment of the June 12, 1993 presidential election have taken over the security of the country, the democratic forces in Nigeria should be prepared for a long drawn battle for the restoration of civil rule. In the circumstance, I am compelled to urge Nigerians to beware of the “Ides of March”.
Femi Falana SAN
The Danger in Poll Shift
Though the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) has exercised its constitutional powers in shifting the February polls, the Afenifere Renewal Group (ARG) considers the reason given for the postponement as untenable.
Nigeria's defence and security institutions have not convinced Nigerians that they have the capability to curb the Boko Haram insurgency and it remains to be seen that they now possess new tactics and intelligence on how to curb it. Therefore, it is difficult to see how a six-year menace will disappear in six weeks.
Indeed, the events of the past few weeks lend credence to a pervasive public opinion that INEC was coerced into its adopted position. Nigerians were not particularly surprised at the postponement and many actually saw it coming. There is no doubt an "executive coercion" whose design and intent can only be to subjugate Nigeria's premier democratic institution, and until the security chiefs are able to advance believable reasons and demonstrate renewed commitment to their constitutional duty, Nigerians will remain suspicious of a premeditated plan to subvert democratic process.
The public perception that the defence institutions are being used to forcefully gain partisan ambition is widening and the current federal administration, as usual, appears not to give a damn. In fact, security chiefs are helping to reinforce this perception, in the light of recent revelation on Ekiti gubernatorial election, and it can only lead to truncation of democracy.
To worsen an already bad case, so much sacrifice is being demanded from Nigerians without commensurate sacrifice from the leadership cadre as if Nigerians signed a master-slave contract with their leaders.
Because patriotism should beget patriotism, if Nigerians are being asked to be patriotic enough to suffer the attendant cost of poll shift in order to fight insurgency - a man-made problem - then, is it not normal for an administration that has shown unprecedented lethargy in prosecuting war against insurgency to be equally patriotic enough to admit its failure and step aside?
To continue on the path of impunity and blatant abuse of the democratic right of Nigerians as the handlers of Nigerian state are doing is the foundation for injustice. Yoruba people loathe such insensitivity and will always reject such leadership because you can delay the burial of a corpse, but the delay can never resurrect the corpse.
Yoruba Nation is not blind to the grave implications posed by the current pursuit of invidious personal agenda to the detriment of collective goodwill. Toying with issues that should be sacrosanct in a democratic process is a shove that will soon turn to push and the Yoruba Nation will carefully consider its options for a desired peaceful and prosperous state.
We wish to warn those hell bent on scuttling our democracy to learn from history because, like they did in 2010 against the infamy known as "the cabal", Nigerians will continue to resist dictatorial agenda of a few who seek to hold the nation hostage.
Signed: Kunle Famoriyo
Publicity Secretary
We Welcome Poll Shift -- PDPPCO
Peoples Democratic Party Presidential Campaign Organisation (PDPPCO) said it concurred with the decision by the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) to shift the scheduled February general elections since it is in the best interest of deepening democracy and in the national interest.
Director of Media and Publicity of the PDPPCO, Chief Femi Fani-Kayode stated in a swift response to the poll shift announcement that INEC must be commended for showing the courage to shift the elections after acknowledging the fact that its state of preparedness was not 100 per cent.
According to Fani-Kayode, since the decision has been taken in the interest of deepening democracy and in national interest, his organisation accepts it in good faith.
“With this decision, INEC has allayed the fears of many of our citizens that they may not have had the opportunity to vote for the candidates and parties of their choice on Election Day," he said.
“INEC has, by the decision, ensured that no one will be disenfranchised and has helped to guarantee the safety and security of every single one of our citizens during the course of the elections.
“We are constrained to take this opportunity to wholeheartedly condemn the opposition APC for its paranoid delusions and its far-fetched and childish conspiracy theories when it comes to the issue of poll shift."
He added that by insisting that the elections should be conducted on February 14th the opposition was not only dangerously flirting with chaos but was also putting the country firmly on the path of confrontation, division, injustice, disaster and destruction.
“This is especially so, given the fact that no less than 34 percent of eligible voters have not been able to access their Permanent Voter Cards (PVCs) up till today- just seven days before the original date of the election. A situation where such a large percentage of our people would have been disenfranchised is unacceptable and the fact that the APC was insensitive to that fact speaks volumes," Fani-Kayode said.
“We are aware that INEC is having numerous logistical problems and numerous internal challenges and we believe that the poll shift will afford them the badly-needed time to tackle and resolve those problems and challenges before we arrive at the new dates that have been fixed for the elections.
“We believe that INEC must have drawn a useful guide from available security reports from the North-eastern zone where, despite the very serious challenges that our people are facing there from Boko Haram, we believe that elections must hold. We must insist on this in order to ensure that no parts of the country lose their right to freely, safely and peacefully participate in the coming elections and to vote for the candidates of their choice."
He held that it was against the backdrop of those developments that the campaign organisation commend INEC for finding the courage to do the right thing.
"In the same breath, we condemn the opposition APC leaders and members who are set to unleash confusion, mendacity and despondency everywhere and who are blaming everyone except themselves for the situation in which we have found ourselves," he added.
“It is a glaring testimony to their irresponsible and reckless disposition that they continue to insist on having an election on a date that the institution that is constitutionally charged to conduct that election has said that it would be impossible to go ahead under the present circumstances.
“The shift of date is a welcome development. It is solely the decision of INEC. The decision is not ours but we commend them (INEC) for showing courage by owning up to the fact that they are not ready to go ahead on February 14th. The shift will help INEC to organise themselves properly, to put their house in order and to put in place all the necessary arrangements for the polls. The shift will also enable the nation’s security agencies to do what they have to in order to secure the north-eastern zone and ensure that elections can hold there.
“In conclusion, we wish to encourage our supporters and we urge them to remain calm and to be patient. Our party is strong; our candidate is confident; our cause is just; our God is mighty and our victory is assured. No matter what happens and no matter how long it takes, we shall prevail. God bless Nigeria.”
 |
|
President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, on Saturday in Abuja, reaffirmed his administration's commitment to prioritising interfaith dialogue and promoting peace, harmony, and tolerance among Nigeria’s diverse religious communities.
The President made this statement while receiving in audience Archbishop Paul R. Gallagher, the Secretary for Relations with States and International Organisations of the Holy See, at his residence in Abuja. Archbishop Gallagher was ushered in by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ambassador Bianca Ojukwu.
President Tinubu said interfaith dialogue is the only path to addressing the country's security challenges.
He told the Archbishop that he had a long and cordial relationship with the Catholic Church, especially during his time as governor in Lagos. He said he strongly supports the Church's contributions to education and health.
The President said this belief led him to prioritise returning mission schools to religious institutions as soon as he became governor. The schools were taken over during the previous military administrations.
“I appreciate the Pope. It was an honour for me to lead the Nigerian delegation to his inauguration as Pope Leo XIV. It was a moment of history. I see his efforts all over the world to promote World Peace. We need his spiritual engagement, as millions around the world look up to him. I look forward to receiving him in Nigeria.
“My administration will continue to work on religious harmony among all faiths. Our Bishops and religious leaders have been doing a great deal. Please tell them to continue the good work they are doing. Let them continue to preach peace and tolerance. We cannot have an excess of that.
“I understand the roles that the Catholic church has been playing in expanding the frontiers of education, health and humanitarianism in Nigeria. It means a lot to us in Nigeria, and the country is benefiting from it.
“We are also doing a lot to guarantee freedom of worship. As you may be aware, my wife is a pastor at an evangelical church. This downplays the religious connotation that the religious controversy in our country might have taken.”
President Tinubu assured his guest that the Nigerian military has made significant progress in recent times and remains committed to sustaining these achievements, recognising that a single incident can undermine previous gains. He stated that more resources are being allocated to security, with intensified surveillance, particularly in previously ungoverned areas.
The President assured the Archbishop that his government is also investing in the youth to prevent their exploitation by terrorists and reduce vulnerability to radicalisation.
Archbishop Gallagher said he was in Nigeria for the 50th anniversary of the establishment of relations between the Federal Republic of Nigeria and the Holy See, noting that Nigeria is very strategic to the Catholic Church because of its vibrant Catholic community.
He also conveyed Pope Leo XIV’s appreciation for President Tinubu’s presence at his inauguration. He shared his impressions of Veritas University, established by the Catholic community in Abuja, noting its remarkable progress.
He described Nigeria as the heart of Africa and home to some of the most successful activities of Bishops on the continent. He commended President Tinubu’s efforts in promoting peace, particularly through military initiatives, and encouraged continued dedication. He also expressed appreciation to the Nigerian government for facilitating visas for bishops and for its responsiveness to the Church’s various needs.
Archbishop Gallagher informed President Tinubu that he looks forward to receiving the Nigerian Ambassador to the Holy See in a few weeks and assured him that this visit would be the first of several special visits from the Holy See.
Accompanying Archbishop Gallagher were H.E. Archbishop Michael F. Crotty, Apostolic Nuncio to Nigeria; Rev. Monsignor Suman Paul Anthony, Official of the Secretariat of State – Section for Relations with States and International Organisations; and Rev. Monsignor Patarne Koyassambia-Kozondo, First Secretary, Apostolic Nunciature in Nigeria.
News
Celebrating an African Institution: My Farewell from UBA
Why create an institution?
To ensure that an institution can live long, grow ever stronger and deliver a vision.
I have never been able to look at Africa and see only borders. Where many see fifty-four separate markets, I saw one continent, one destiny — waiting to be transformed, waiting to be believed in.
Africa does not have a shortage of brilliant women and men. Africa suffers a shortage of institutions that outlast brilliant women and men.
Today is a day of huge excitement – of potential delivered and continued opportunity.
Leadership is not about holding onto a position, but knowing when an institution is ready for the next chapter.
I conclude my tenure as Chairman of the Group Board of United Bank for Africa (UBA), on August 21, 2026, after twelve years and decades of association with this extraordinary institution, with profound gratitude, immense pride, and most importantly - great optimism for the future.
My objective was to build an institution that would outlive individuals, one capable of connecting Africa to itself and the world, creating opportunities for businesses, empowering entrepreneurs, supporting governments, rewarding shareholders, and transforming lives. Together, we pursued the belief that Africa deserved a world-class financial institution that remained proudly African at its core. We set out to do something that had not been done. We took a Nigerian bank and we made it an African one, Africa’s global bank. This has been my vision for UBA - the United Bank for Africa.
Today, that vision is reality. UBA Group serves over 50 million customers, operates across 20 African countries and four continents, supports trade and investment, and demonstrates that an African institution can compete globally, while being deeply committed to our continent's development.
This success belongs to generations of dedicated colleagues, exceptional management, visionary directors, loyal customers, supportive regulators, committed shareholders, and partners who believed in our shared purpose.
So, with great pride, I welcome Mr. Emmanuel N. Nnorom as the next Chairman of UBA. I have every confidence in his ability to lead the Bank. His experience, leadership, and deep understanding of our institution will provide the continuity and strategic direction needed to build on the strong foundation we have established. I ask our shareholders, customers, partners, and the entire UBA family to extend to him the same trust and support you have so generously given me over the years.
Business
In The Spotlight
It would appear there is no limit to the odium Nigerians will suffer at the hands of the administration of President Bola Tinubu, because just when the regime seems to have hit rock bottom in governance capacity; it somehow manages to find a way into further depths of ignominy. The latest spectacle, the raging scandal surrounding the Presidential Foreign Intervention Promotion Council (PFIPC), does not merely hint at systemic corruption and ineptitude; it scream-sings it from the rooftops of Aso Rock Villa. The Tinubu administration has now officially transcended the mundane boundaries of standard political malfeasance and entered the surreal realm of gothic administrative fiction. To watch presidential spokesperson Bayo Onanuga breathlessly frantically script a narrative where a single "con artist" - one Prince Adeniyi Adeyemi Matthew, unilaterally manifested a federal agency out of thin air is to watch a government aggressively self-indict; suggesting that under President Tinubu’s watch, the highest office in the land has degenerated into a "nest of fraudsters."
Let us engage in the precise dissection of reality that the administration’s spin doctors so desperately wish to avoid. In the 2026 Appropriation Act; a statutory document scrutinized by the Budget Office, vetted by the Federal Executive Council, passed by the National Assembly, and decorated with the actual ink of President Tinubu's signature; there sits a neat, undeniable allocation. The non-existent PFIPC was allocated ₦1.3 billion. Specifically, this "phantom" entity was earmarked: ₦802.98 million for personnel costs, ₦200 million for overhead, and ₦300 million for capital expenditure. By what administrative sorcery does a totally "fictitious" council successfully scale the multi-tiered architecture of state budgeting? How does a ghost collect over a billion naira? This is not a failure of oversight; it is a meticulous, codified arrangement. To claim ignorance of a line item in your own signed budget is to admit that the presidency signs state documents with the blind indifference of a rubber stamp.
At the epicenter of this disgusting swamp stands the President's Chief of Staff, Femi Gbajabiamila. He has leaped to disclaim the agency, yet he remains dogged by damning allegations. Prince Adeyemi insists that he was legally appointed, alleging he paid a staggering ₦400 million bribe through proxies to secure the role, with a further ₦200 million balance demanded. The dispute reportedly ruptured only when the "fake DG" refused to hand over a 48% kickback of a proposed ₦27.4 billion take-off grant. The presidency’s immediate defense is to sprint to the judiciary, slapping Adeyemi with an eight-count criminal charge. They highlight the suspicious hotel-room death of a key intermediary, Dolapo Tanimola, as if the mysterious expiration of witnesses magically absolves the state. To focus solely on exonerating Gbajabiamila; a figure whose history with disciplinary suspensions by the State Bar of Georgia has long provided fuel for skeptics, while completely ignoring the systemic structural bypasses that occurred, is a masterclass in political deflection.
The caustic comedy of Bayo Onanuga's position is found in its sheer impossibility. Consider what the presidency asks the Nigerian public to swallow. They claim a rogue citizen managed to: establish a physical, fully functional secretariat inside the Federal Secretariat complex in Abuja; secure an official waiver from the Secretary to the Government of the Federation to recruit 300 civil servants; bypass stringent Know-Your-Customer (KYC) protocols to open a Treasury Single Account (TSA) and multiple foreign currency accounts directly with the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN); and hosted formal diplomatic interactions with foreign envoys, seeking visa support under official presidential stationery. If a lone scammer can commandeer the Central Bank, the National Assembly, the civil service bureaucracy, and foreign diplomacy without any top-tier internal collaboration, then the Tinubu administration has achieved a level of institutional vulnerability that borders on comedic farce. If they did not know, they are aggressively incompetent. If they did know, they are profoundly corrupt. There is no comfortable middle ground here.
The presidency would have us believe that it is the victim of a masterful illusionist. If the PFIPC never existed, then Nigeria faces one of the most astonishing failures of institutional oversight in recent memory. If, on the other hand, official processes gave it legitimacy before it was later disowned, then the public deserves a full accounting of how that happened. Either way, the affair has evolved beyond a dispute over documents or personalities. It has become a referendum on the credibility of government itself. The Presidency claims the PFIPC is fictitious; insisting that forged documents were used to create an elaborate deception. Yet that explanation raises more questions than it answers. How could an allegedly nonexistent body reportedly interact with government institutions, engage diplomatic circles, and allegedly appear in official administrative processes without multiple safeguards failing? Those questions go to the very architecture of governance.
The public concerns deserve to be addressed on their merits, not merely rebutted through political messaging. If a private individual managed to deceive numerous public institutions, the failure is systemic. If public officials knowingly facilitated the activities, the failure is even more profound. Neither scenario inspires confidence. This scandal is no longer simply about whether one individual forged documents or misrepresented authority. It is about whether Nigeria's institutions possess the internal controls expected of a modern state. Budget preparation, civil service recruitment, diplomatic engagement, financial administration, and security oversight are designed precisely to prevent unauthorized entities from acquiring official recognition. If those mechanisms failed, Nigerians deserve to know why.
The official posture is that the matter is sub judice, pointing to the July 27 Federal High Court hearing. This is a cowardly shield. A trial cannot answer why the Budget Office and National Assembly printed billions for a phantom. The government's explanation cannot stop at identifying the perpetrator. Accountability requires tracing every administrative decision, every official correspondence, every approval, and every institutional lapse. Public confidence is restored through transparent facts, not through competing press statements. The implications extend far beyond domestic politics. Government institutions depend on credibility. Foreign governments, investors, development partners, and international organizations expect that official communications genuinely represent the Nigerian state. Any uncertainty surrounding that assumption carries reputational consequences that outlast news cycles. Equally important is the principle of equal accountability. Public confidence depends not only on whether investigations occur, but whether they are seen to apply without regard to political proximity or influence. Allegations involving senior public officials inevitably attract greater scrutiny because public office carries greater responsibility. That scrutiny should neither presume guilt nor confer immunity.
An independent inquiry would therefore serve multiple purposes. It would establish the factual record, identify institutional failures where they exist, recommend reforms, and either vindicate or implicate those involved based on evidence rather than political narratives. Such a process is far more likely to restore confidence than exchanges between government spokespersons and political opponents. This is not a moment for reflexive partisanship. It is a moment for institutional seriousness. Democracies are ultimately judged not by whether scandals emerge but by how transparently they are investigated and how consistently accountability is applied.
The PFIPC scandal has conclusively stripped away any remaining pretense of administrative integrity. The controversy presents Nigeria with a choice. It can become another episode consumed by political point-scoring, or it can become an opportunity to strengthen public institutions through independent scrutiny and meaningful reform. The latter course demands transparency, evidence, and due process, not assumptions, selective outrage, or premature conclusions. Until the facts are fully established through a credible investigation, the questions surrounding the PFIPC affair will continue to cast a shadow over the integrity of the Tinubu administration. That uncertainty serves no one; not the government, not the opposition, and certainly not the Nigerian people.
Opinions
In The Spotlight
Nigeria’s First Lady, Remi Tinubu, would be the subject of two fascinating books. The longer one would be autobiographical, because nobody can tell her story, let alone in the detailed form I presume she would like it.
I imagine that the former Senator, one-quarter politician, one-quarter wife, one-quarter Aso Rock Quarterback and one-quarter writer and editor, could produce her manuscript in one night.
And that the book would be published the following day, given that her account would require no additional eyes.
On the presidential campaign trail in February 2023, she famously admitted having begged the wife of now Vice President Kashim Shettima for money.
But then, three months later, just days before her husband took the oath of office, she declared her family to be rich and not requiring the resources of the state.
And she is, according to her own accounts, a generous woman. Various reports in the past three and a half years identify her with grants, scholarships, food relief, agricultural support, disaster relief, and support for elderly citizens and conflict victims.
In June 2026, she appeared to tweak her giving, offering politically targeted personal vehicles to APC women leaders in non-APC states.
Days later, she formally appeared to step into the Renewed Hope fairgrounds, perhaps to set the tone for the forthcoming election campaigns.
But it was her arrival in the pigsty, not the playpen she appeared to imagine: “We’re trying to give hope, and to start Akara business doesn’t take a lot of money,” she said. “To start roasting corn, or somebody even said kuli kuli doesn’t take much. We didn’t give them a loan; we gave it to them as a grant…
“I remember giving for TB. When I heard there were so many TB cases, I gave N2 billion. To breast cancer, I gave a billion. For food malnutrition, I gave half a billion…”
I know power and money can change people, particularly First Ladies, and make them lose perspective.
One recent First Lady, cornered with tens of millions of US dollars, said they were an assemblage of gifts. Another one humiliated her police ADC publicly for failing to deliver billions in cash gifts he had allegedly collected on her account.
Mrs Tinubu can avoid that crossroads: the one where temptation crosses paths with temptation. I could recommend strong, professional advisers, but I am not sure there is an answer to the question as to why anyone would listen to anyone less powerful or rich.
Nonetheless, Mrs Tinubu’s comments have seen Nigerians emptying their frustration upon her on social media.
The fundamental issue is her lack of clarity about who or what she is in Nigeria’s constitutional set-up.
The Office of the First Lady is simply a shorthand expression for whoever currently holds matrimonial, alias “other room”, chores. It is a domestic location publicly identified.
It is certainly not a real office. The First Lady is not, and cannot be, elected by anyone, and she has no executive authority to appropriate, disburse, or administer public funds. She has neither location nor voice in the law.
What this means is that when Mrs Tinubu ventures outside the private quarters of Aso Rock and speaks about funds she has “provided,” she must choose the words that follow very carefully. When she described her family as being “rich,” that was clearly referring to private resources.
Usually, when people like Warren Buffett or Aliko Dangote speak in the same way, the world can track the authority behind their words.
If the funds to which Mrs Tinubu says she is providing are public funds, were they appropriated by the National Assembly?
If so, through which ministry, department, or agency, and when? Because that is what the law says.
If they are not, she is breaking the law. Being related to a public official does not make you one, and public funds are subject to full constitutional scrutiny, transparency, audit, and legislative oversight.
For emphasis: the constitution does not disburse power or funds to an unelected spouse to perform governmental functions without constitutional accountability.
I must also flag Mrs Tinubu’s tell-tale pronouns: she switches between “I” and “We” as if they are options from a government playbook. When is she “we” and when is she “I”? Someone owes Nigerians an important clarification, so we do not mix up church offerings with infrastructure funding, the Auditor-General will be querying three months from now.
And then we come to her diagnosis, which suggests that she has come to teach Nigerians resilience. Nigerians are among the hardest working people anywhere, as anyone who works or competes with them would testify, and as is evident within our borders.
Our privileged elite, particularly those for whom traffic is routinely halted so they can breeze by in their opulent 100-SUV convoys, may be unaware, but Nigerians are not poor because they lack hustle. Nigerians are not hungry because they are lazy.
Nigerians are not unemployed because they have refused to sell things by the roadside. Nigerians are struggling because public policy has failed them.
A government cannot impose harsh economic reforms, preside over rising inflation, insecurity, currency instability, multiple taxation, poor electricity, collapsing purchasing power, and then tell citizens to go and trade by the roadside as if hardship is merely a motivational challenge.
To suggest roadside businesses as a national economic policy is condescension.
It is to walk through the battlefield and bayonet the injured. What Nigerians need, and cry for, are public policies to set them free to live and work in dignity.
And this is what the APC feasted on to win the presidency 12 years ago.
The party called it the APC Manifesto, but it betrayed Nigerians so profoundly that within two years of taking power in 2015, I labeled it a historic swindle.
Bola Tinubu appeared to agree that we were right. In 2023, he launched his Renewed Hope Agenda, which was basically the APC manifesto sprinkled with local perfume.
Both documents sing and dance in the language of lions and tigers, but stink like mice and cockroaches. As the government’s Renewed Hope review starkly demonstrated on its third anniversary just one month ago, Hope is a layer of lies atop a column of deception.
This is why a country of over 200 million people, many of whom are trained in some of the finest institutes worldwide, are being offered patronising roadside businesses on insecure streets.
We want our people to sit down and shut up rather than rise and conquer.
Let us be clear: charity cannot replace governance.
Nigerians are looking for governance, not tokenism. Offering shallow public palliatives while the elite spend billions on jets, yachts, SUVs, mansions and foreign travel and hurling no-bid contracts at friends is the same insult as throwing loaves of bread at hungry voters from moving trucks.
A graduate selling by the roadside because there are no jobs is not an economic success story.
A mother hawking under the sun because food prices have doubled is blackmail, not “empowerment.”
What are the Nigerian people asking for? Leadership. And it is not complicated.