Not media enabling security, but FG and elites

 

THE recent imposition of a N5 million fine each on Trust Television Network, Multichoice (DSTV), TSTV and NTA-Startimes by the National Broadcasting Commission for airing a documentary on bandits, and threats against the BBC for a similar programme are misplaced and diversionary. Earlier, the Minister of Information and Culture, Lai Mohammed, had threatened sanctions against them for alleged “terrorism glorification” in their separate documentaries that featured interviews with bandit leaders. Rather than harass the media, the Federal Government should direct its fury and instruments of coercion against the sundry terrorists threatening the country’s corporate existence.

The federal and northern state governments and elite should also start rolling back the policies and actions that embolden criminals and address the root causes that give rise to and sustain insecurity. The assault on the media shows that the President, Major General Muhammadu Buhari (retd.), and his regime are still in denial of the real threat and reverting to their default mode of inertia and blaming others for their failures.

Emphatically, the media outlets were only carrying out their legitimate duty. For sure, insecurity and terrorism are global scourges afflicting many countries, with its “centre of gravity” shifting to sub-Saharan Africa, according to the Global Terrorism Index. Nevertheless, Nigeria’s elite pursue actions that facilitate their staying power locally. Government and its agencies have failed woefully to secure lives and property, deter crime and criminals, and to track down, arrest and prosecute the terrorists of diverse garbs destabilising the country.

Similarly, the elite, including successive northern state governors, clerics and traditional institutions have over the years, created conditions, pursued policies, and acted in ways that provide fertile ground for insecurity and terrorism to flourish. They should change course and halt the country’s spiral into chaotic failure.

The documentaries only confirm official incompetence. Elsewhere, it is the security agencies that would need to explain why they have for so long failed to pinpoint and storm the outlaws’ hideouts.

The tragedy of the unravelling Nigerian union is that by manipulating and politicising religion above unifying values, the elite have inadvertently encouraged insecurity, impunity, and entitlement. By promoting religion in defiance of the constitution and trampling on rights, fanatics who believe that the state has not gone far enough in imposing sectarian diktats have resorted to violent jihadism.

Similarly, years of brigandage, mass murders and violent invasion of farmland by Fulani herders/militants in the North-Central and in Southern Kaduna State without consequences have fostered a culture of entitlement. Like Buhari and other regime actors, the herders constantly lay claim to and demand untrammelled rights to non-existent “grazing routes” and “grazing reserves,” including the right to occupy public forest reserves.

Amid fiscal risk, federal government borrowed N2.45trn from CBN

 

The Federal Government’s total borrowing from the Central Bank of Nigeria through Ways and Means Advances rose from N17.46tn in December 2021 to N19.91tn in June 2022.

According to data from the CBN, this shows that the Federal Government borrowed N2.45tn from the apex bank within six months.

The N19.91tn owed the apex bank by the Federal Government is not part of the country’s total public debt stock, which stood at N41.60tn as of March 2022, according to the Debt Management Office.

The public debt stock only includes the debts of the Federal Government of Nigeria, the 36 state governments, and the Federal Capital Territory.

Ways and Means Advances is a loan facility through which the CBN finances the shortfalls in the government’s budget.

According to Section 38 of the CBN Act, 2007, the apex bank may grant temporary advances to the Federal Government with regard to temporary deficiency of budget revenue at such rate of interest as the bank may determine.

The Act read in part, “The total amount of such advances outstanding shall not at any time exceed five per cent of the previous year’s actual revenue of the Federal Government.

“All advances shall be repaid as soon as possible and shall, in any event, be repayable by the end of the Federal Government financial year in which they are granted and if such advances remain unpaid at the end of the year, the power of the bank to grant such further advances in any subsequent year shall not be exercisable, unless the outstanding advances have been repaid.”

However, the CBN has said on its website that the Federal Government’s borrowing from it through the Ways and Means Advances could have adverse effects on the bank’s monetary policy to the detriment of domestic prices and exchange rates.

Wrong choice will consume Nigeria, says Obasanjo

 

Former President Olusegun Obasanjo on Wednesday urged Nigerians to make the right choice during the 2023 general elections.

He warned that making the wrong choice in the election may consume the nation.

Obasanjo spoke as the special guest of honour at the Wilson Badejo Foundation’s 15th annual lecture with the theme, ‘Overcoming the twin challenge of poverty and insecurity in Nigeria’ held in Lagos.

The former President expressed the hope that if the right choice was made in 2023, the nation may witness progress.

“It is either we make the right choice in 2023 because if we make the right choice, we would get there.

“However, if we do not make the right choice in 2023, things would consume us and we pray against that one. We must make the right choice in 2023,” Obasanjo said.

He had earlier said that Nigeria has not taken its rightful position because of poverty and insecurity.

He said, “Nigeria is not where it is supposed to be today. If anyone says it is ok where we are at the moment, then the person’s head needs to be examined.

HISTORY OF THE UNITED KINGDOM

 

The history of the United Kingdom began in the early eighteenth century with the Treaty of Union and Acts of Union. The core of the United Kingdom as a unified state came into being in 1707 with the political union of the kingdoms of England and Scotland,[1] into a new unitary state called Great Britain.[note 1] Of this new state of Great Britain, the historian Simon Schama said:

A published version of the Articles of Union, agreement that led to the creation of the Kingdom of Great Britain in 1707

What began as a hostile merger would end in a full partnership in the most powerful going concern in the world... it was one of the most astonishing transformations in European history.

— Simon Schama, [2]

The Act of Union 1800 added the Kingdom of Ireland to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.

The first decades were marked by Jacobite risings which ended with defeat for the Stuart cause at the Battle of Culloden in 1746. In 1763, victory in the Seven Years' War led to the growth of the First British Empire. With defeat by the United States, France and Spain in the War of American Independence, Britain lost its 13 American colonies and rebuilt a Second British Empire based in Asia and Africa. As a result, British culture, and its technological, political, constitutional, and linguistic influence, became worldwide. Politically the central event was the French Revolution and its Napoleonic aftermath from 1793 to 1815, which British elites saw as a profound threat, and worked energetically to form multiple coalitions that finally defeated Napoleon in 1815. The Tories, who came to power in 1783, remained in power (with a short interruption) until 1830. Forces of reform, often emanating from the Evangelical religious elements, opened decades of political reform that broadened the ballot, and opened the economy to free trade. The outstanding political leaders of the 19th century included Palmerston, Disraeli, Gladstone, and Salisbury. Culturally, the Victorian era was a time of prosperity and dominant middle-class virtues when Britain dominated the world economy and maintained a generally peaceful century from 1815 to 1914. The First World War (1914–1918), with Britain in alliance with France, Russia and the United States, was a furious but ultimately successful total war with Germany. The resulting League of Nations was a favourite project in Interwar Britain. However, while the Empire remained strong, as did the London financial markets, the British industrial base began to slip behind Germany and, especially, the United States. Sentiments for peace were so strong that the nation supported appeasement of Hitler's Germany in the late 1930s, until the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939 started the Second World War. In the Second World War, the Soviet Union and the U.S. joined Britain as the main Allied powers.

Britain was no longer a military or economic superpower, as seen in the Suez Crisis of 1956. Britain no longer had the wealth to maintain an empire, so it granted independence to almost all its possessions. The new states typically joined the Commonwealth of Nations. The postwar years saw great hardships, alleviated somewhat by large-scale financial aid from the United States, and some from Canada. Prosperity returned in the 1950s. Meanwhile, from 1945 to 1950, the Labour Party built a welfare state, nationalized many industries, and created the National Health Service. The UK took a strong stand against Communist expansion after 1945, playing a major role in the Cold War and the formation of NATO as an anti-Soviet military alliance with West Germany, France, the U.S., Canada and smaller countries. NATO remains a powerful military coalition. The UK has been a leading member of the United Nations since its founding, as well as numerous other international organizations. In the 1990s, neoliberalism led to the privatisation of nationalised industries and significant deregulation of business affairs. London's status as a world financial hub grew continuously. Since the 1990s, large-scale devolution movements in Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales have decentralised political decision-making. Britain has moved back and forth on its economic relationships with Western Europe. It joined the European Economic Community in 1973, thereby weakening economic ties with its Commonwealth. However, the Brexit referendum in 2016 committed the UK to leave the European Union, which it did in 2020.

In 1922, Catholic Ireland seceded to become the Irish Free State; a day later, Northern Ireland seceded from the Free State and returned to the United Kingdom. In 1927, the United Kingdom changed its formal title to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,[3] usually shortened to Britain and (after 1945) to the United Kingdom or UK.

18th century

1800 to 1837

Postwar reaction: 1815–1822

Victorian era

Early 20th century 1901–1918

Interwar era 1918–1939

Second World War 1939–1945

POLITICAL HISTORY OF NIGERIA

 

For a long time, the political environment in Nigeria has featured severe contestations among the country’s diverse ethnic groups. This legacy of contestations has created a multi-layered and multi-faceted political structure that is peculiar to Nigeria. In Nigeria, politics is interspersed by ethnicity, making it a collective means to rights and ownership. The Nigerian federation remains sloppy, contested and conflict-infected; from independence in 1960, Nigeria has been struggling to survive not only in managing society but also in improving the socio-economic conditions of the people. Nigeria’s political landscape has been inundated with military interventions and unhealthy inter-ethnic competition. To a large extent, these incidents have shaped how we can understand the different forms and dynamics of politics in Nigeria today. They have also influenced democratic practices, the degree of peace and tranquillity and Nigeria’s development trajectory. Consequently, the texts in this reading list, while not exhaustive, attempt to expand on how Nigerian politics arrived at what it is today.

The transition to the Fourth Republic in 1999 served as a turning point in Nigeria’s politics. So far, it has been the longest period of democratic governance in Nigeria, and one that has seen Nigeria’s political landscape transition from an embryonic state towards maturity. Many, as the texts in this reading list suggest, have argued that the long periods of military dictatorship that preceded the Fourth Republic undermined democratic practices in Nigeria, hindering the country from achieving the dividends of democracy even after 1999. This argument has some merit, as not only did military rule truncate Nigeria’s political development, it also stunted the organic growth of Nigerian society. Some of the incidents that occurred under military rule in Nigeria, include the 1966 coup d’état and counter-coups that eventually led to the civil war, the uprooting of civil practices, the introduction of ill-suited policies, and the annulment of the June 12 general elections in 1993.

Despite the merits in blaming the military, this reading list suggests it is also possible to argue that the civilian-led Fourth Republic has also failed to improve the living standards of average Nigerians. Bridled with unemployment, inflation and corruption, Nigeria is presently one of the world’s most impoverished countries. It is further plagued with insecurity in the forms of terrorism, kidnapping, armed robbery and violent conflicts. In the political sphere, election fraud and gross indiscipline are pervasive. Moreover, the presence of incompetent, unpatriotic and corrupt leaders has hindered the development of politics in Nigeria. It is fair to argue that the rise of ethnic idiosyncrasies and religious fundamentalism in the 1980s cemented the trajectory of politics in Nigeria leading up to the present dispensation.

RICHARD. L. SKLAR

NIGERIAN POLITICAL PARTIES: POWER IN AN EMERGENT AFRICAN NATION

NEW JERSEY, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1963 (AVAILABLE HERE); AND

A.A UJO

UNDERSTANDING POLITICAL PARTIES IN NIGERIA

KADUNA: KLAMIDA BOOKS, 2000 (AVAILABLE HERE)

Sklar’s Nigerian Political Parties is one of the most critical works on the emergence of political parties in Nigeria. It addresses the structure(s) and organization(s) of political parties in Nigeria, from their emergence during the colonial period to their post-colonial expansion. Political parties are important to politics in Nigeria, as they provide platforms for politicians and the electorate to come together to develop and mobilise political ideologies. The lasting importance of political parties in Nigeria makes Ujo’s Understanding Political Parties in Nigeria not only a useful companion to Sklar’s text, but also a vital contribution. Ujo helps us understand the formation Nigerian political parties beyond the First Republic (1963-1966). Building on Sklar’s work, Ujo traces the genealogy and affiliations of parties that emerged during and beyond the Second Republic (1979-1983).

ABDULLAHI TANKO UMARU

DEMOCRACY AND ISSUES OF MARGINALIZATION IN NIGERIAN POLITICS

NIGERIAN JOURNAL OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, VOL 12 NOS. 1 & 2,

AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY PRESS, 2008. (AVAILABLE AT THE CENTRE FOR DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT, RESEARCH AND TRAINING, ZARIA)

Nigeria has a large, multi-ethnic and multi-religious population. Mismanagement of this diversity, without a doubt, has limited Nigeria’s ability to foster harmonious development. Since independence, the political scene has been replete with ethnic rivalry, such as between the Hausa people and non-Hausa people located in Southern Kaduna, or in Plateau State between the Berom, Hausa and Fulani, and between the Itsekiri, Ijaw and Urhobo of Delta State. The political scene has also featured religion-motivated conflicts such as the controversial shari’a debate, which has been going on since the 70s, and the 2000 shari’a crisis that occurred in many states of northern Nigeria. Beyond the foregoing context, Umaru assesses incidents of marginalization in Nigerian politics, focusing, for instance, on the disparities in infrastructural developments between northern and southern states.

ALKASSUM ABBA & ABDULLAHI MOHAMMED

DEMOCRACY AND CORRUPTION IN NIGERIA, SELECTED SPEECHES, PAPERS AND CAMPAIGN DOCUMENTS OF M. D. YUSUFU 1997-2010

ZARIA: CESDERT, 2018 (AVAILABLE AT CESDERT, ZARIA)

The 1990s were interesting times in Nigerian history. In 1993, under the leadership of General Ibrahim Babangida, the military annulled the presidential elections and arrested its winner, Moshood (MKO) Abiola. Not long after the ‘June 12’ annulment, were the rise of General Sanni Abacha, and the arrests and/or killings of activists such as Kudirat Abiola. Despite the tyranny and violence that pervaded this period, there were Nigerians who stood and challenged the system. One of such people is M.D. Yusufu, a then-presidential aspirant under the Grassroots Democratic Movement (GDM).

In 1995, military government of General Abacha set up a transition programme designed to produce the next civilian leader. However, Abacha dominated the transition process, and positioned himself to become the civilian leader from 08 June 1998. Even though Abacha did not formally express his intentions, four out of five political parties had adopted him as their presidential candidate with the exception of GMD. This is because one of GMD’s aspirants refused to forfeit his candidature. M.D. Yusufu adopted legal and constitutional steps to challenge Abacha.  The book is a collection of speeches delivered by Yusufu from 1997, during the political debacle, to 2010.

H.N. NWOSU

LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR NIGERIA’S DEMOCRACY: MY ACCOUNT OF JUNE 12, 1993 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION AND AMENDMENT

IBADAN: MACMILLAN, 2008 (AVAILABLE HERE)

After about ten years of military rule, the elections of June 12, 1993 were highly anticipated. The then-military head, General Babangida, oversaw the elections, which were to produce a democratically elected president. However, the 1993 elections were among the most controversial elections in Nigeria’s history. After MKO emerged winner, the Babangida administration annulled the elections. However, given the outpour of support for MKO under the Social Democratic Party (SDP) from across the states, it was considered the most free and fair elections in the history of the country. The annulment ultimately led to a political crisis during which General Sani Abacha seized power.

There have been attempts by political scientists and historians to explain the events surrounding the annulment of the 1993 elections. Some believe that the military never intended to hand over power to MKO. Moreover, it is a widely held view that the military undermined MKO’s popularity.  Humphrey Nwosu, in his capacity as the Chairman of the National Election Commission (NEC), gives a first-hand assessment of the 1993 elections. His contribution helps us see through the most important institution involved in the June 12 elections.

OBAFEMI AWOLOWO

AWO: THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF CHIEF OBAFEMI AWOLOWO

CAMBRIDGE: UNIVERSITY PRESS 1960 (AVAILABLE HERE);

NNAMDI AZIKWE

MY ODYSSEY: AN AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF DR. NNAMDI AZIKWE

IBADAN: SPECTRUM BOOKS, 1970 (AVAILABLE HERE); AND

ANTHONY ENAHORO

FUGITIVE OFFENDER:THE STORY OF A POLITICAL PRISONER

LONDON: CASSELL,1965 (AVAILABLE AT AREWA HOUSE, KADUNA)

What better way to understand a chain of events than from those who played an active role in engineering those events? Chief Obafemi Awolowo, Dr Nnamdi Azikwe and Chief Anthony Enahoro were every Nigerian politician’s forebears. They championed the decolonization process and challenged the status quo by demanding an end to colonial rule. They headed key positions and, with the exception of Enahoro, contested for the highest position in the country. There is no doubt that the objectivity of these autobiographies can be questioned for autobiographies can be self-serving and highly subjective. The works of Awolowo and Azikwe especially have been highly criticized for being contradictory. One such criticism could be of their ideological dissonance whereby each leader preached socialist principles but were themselves staunch capitalists. Nevertheless, these autobiographies shed light on the visions of these leaders, the foundations they built and their contributions to Nigerian politics complicated as they were.

BILLY DUDLEY:

AN INTRODUCTION TO NIGERIAN GOVERNMENT AND POLITICS

INDIANA: UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1982

A versatile political scientist and one of the co-authors of the 1979 Constitution of Nigeria, Dudley examines Nigeria’s politics from different vantage points in An Introduction Government and Politics. In the book, he argues that, to a large extent, the social values of a people influence their political behaviour. An Introduction also includes some analysis of Nigeria’s 1979 elections. An interesting aspect of the book is that it conjures in the mind of the reader a political pattern that is apparent in Nigerian politics. When compared to the elections of 2019 on subjects such as curbing political party excesses and vote rigging, Dudley’s assessment of the 1979 elections shows that nothing significant has changed in the attitudes of the political elites or masses. This book creates a comprehensive understanding of the process of Nigerian politics; specifically, it enlightens readers on election culture, political tussle and power play in Nigeria.

CHINUA ACHEBE

AN IMAGE OF AFRICA AND THE TROUBLE WITH NIGERIA

LONDON: PENGUIN BOOKS, 1983  (AVAILABLE HERE)

Achebe’s booklet addresses two major issues: the racism of Polish-British author, Joseph Conrad, and the problem of Nigeria. Though very brief, in ‘The Trouble with Nigeria’, Achebe shares his views on the political atmosphere at the eve of the Second Republic. Furthermore, he makes a case against the founding fathers, Chief Obafemi Awolowo and Dr. Nnamdi Azikwe, who stood for the 1979 presidential elections. Achebe’s essay is useful to read against the autobiographies of these leaders.

EGHOSA. E. OSAGHE

CRIPPLED GIANT: NIGERIA SINCE INDEPENDENCE

JOHN ARCHERS, IBADAN, 1998 (AVAILABLE HERE)

In Crippled Giant, Osaghe questions the validity of Nigeria’s title as the ‘Giant of Africa’ by analysing Nigeria’s political development from 1960 to 1996. The book analyses major political events that have shaped Nigerian history such as the 1960 Tiv Riots, the 1962 census disturbances, and the 1964 Western Region crisis, all of which culminated in the 1966 coup d’état. The book discusses military interventions and how these events stunted the growth of democracy in Nigeria. As a historical inquisition of Nigerian political history, this text is particularly relevant for students and those new to Nigerian politics.

LARRY DIAMOND

CLASS, ETHNICITY AND DEMOCRACY IN NIGERIA: THE FAILURE OF THE FIRST REPUBLIC

NEW YORK: SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY PRESS, 1988 (AVAILABLE HERE)

Little can be understood about Nigerian politics absent an exploration of Nigeria’s ethnic diversity. Diamond did this aspect justice by revealing how the major ethnic groups in Nigeria came to dominate their respective regions. He argues these groups compete for power through the economic and social consolidation of class dominance. In explaining the pervasive nature of conflicts in Nigeria’s politics, Diamond traces its genesis back to the 1940s linking it to struggles between Yoruba and Igbo petit bourgeoisie that ended up splitting the nationalist movement along ethnic lines. Till today, Nigeria is a multi-ethnic, multi-religious and multi-dimensional country. Ethnicity still plays a major role in the affairs and politics of the Nigerian society. Diamond provides insight into how these identities forge divides, which go on to continually influence Nigeria’s domestic politics. 

OLUSEGUN ADENIYI

POWER, POLITICS AND DEATH: A FRONT-ROW ACCOUNT OF NIGERIA UNDER THE LATE PRESIDENT YAR’ADUA

LAGOS: KACHIFO LIMITED, 2011 (AVAILABLE AT CESDERT, ZARIA)

In Power, Politics and Death, Adebiyi offers a front-row account of Nigeria, under the late President, Umar Musa Yar’adua, who died in 2011. Adeniyi chronicles the power play and political controversies that occurred during the Yar’Adua administration. The death of President Yar’Adua 2011 marked a turning point in Nigerian political and democratic history. In uncovering this history, Adebiyi highlights the political culture prevalent in the Fourth Republic and the roles key personalities such as the then-first lady, Hajiya Turai Yar’Adua, played. Adebiyi also highlights the political aspirations, struggles and unfulfilled dreams of late President Yar’Adua.

TAFAWA BALEWA

A SELECTION OF SPEECHES MADE BY ALHAJI THE RIGHT HONOURABLE SIR ABUBAKAR TAFAWA BALEWA, PRIME MINISTER OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

LAGOS: NIGERIAN NATIONAL PRESS, 1964.

The collection consists of speeches by the first prime minister of Nigeria from 1960-1966, before his assassination. It provides insight into the psychology and politics of the First Republic and the general relationship between the then-ruling government and its opposition. The collection is quite relevant especially regarding how the events of the 1960s influenced Nigeria’s politics, growth and development.

TOYIN FALOLA & JULIUS IHONVBERE

THE RISE AND FALL OF NIGERIA’S SECOND REPUBLIC, 1979-84

LONDON: ZED BOOKS LTD, 1985 (AVAILABLE HERE)

The Second Republic was short-lived, lasting only four years. The Rise and Fall of Nigeria’s Second Republic delves into the 1979 constitution, and the rules governing political parties.  Falola and Ihonvbere further discuss how the pronounced intra-class contradictions and conflicts within the bourgeoisie had led to several alignments and re-alignments of class forces between the inception of the second republic in 1979 and the late 1983 elections. They also consider how these shifts affected the nature and conduct of the elections itself. The book gives a comprehensive description of the events during the second republic that led to the era’s abrupt end.

KUNLE AMUWO

‘TRANSITION AS DEMOCRATIC REGRESSION’ IN NIGERIA DURING THE ABACHA YEARS (1993-1998): THE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL POLITICS OF DEMOCRATIZATION

IBADAN: IFRA, 2001. (AVAILABLE HERE)

Amuwo examines the rise and fall of General Sani Abacha’s regime, providing a glimpse into the political climate Abacha’s regime created, and what dynamics between the military and civil society shaped and were shaped by the regime. Today, the Abacha regime is considered to have been one of the most corrupt in Nigeria’s history. Only this month, another offshore bank account containing looted funds was traced to the former Nigerian leader. Amuwo’s article, thus, is nothing if not timely.

 

While this is not an exhaustive list on Nigeria’s politics, these texts will set a path for the reader in understanding Nigeria’s politics. There is certainly a growing number of reasons to pay attention to Nigeria’s political history. The re-election of President Buhari earlier this year means looking forward to his appointment of cabinet members, and how the Buhari administration will advance its relationship with legislative leaders and the citizenry at large; as well as observing the administrations attempts at fulfilling its promises on security, economic development, employment and others.

There are many who believe Nigeria’s political landscape is at a new dawn. This belief has some merit as a result of both citizen- and government-led initiatives. One such citizen-led initiative has been the ‘Not Too Young to Run’ campaign, which sought to reduce the age limit for elective positions and was successful in May 2018. Not Too Young to Run created an opportunity for young Nigerians to participate in politics and this was evident during the 2019 elections. From the government, notable was the declaration of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018. This symbolic gesture from the Buhari administration makes it important to examine the original events of June 12 1993, and to understand why it holds meaning for Nigeria and Nigerians. It is hoped that these moves from both citizens and the government will create a culture of mending the past and forming a more representative and progressive society characterized by social justice, security, and political maturity.

INEC denies backdating Lawan and Akpabio's documents

 

THE Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC, yesterday, debunked speculations that it may have illegally bent backwards to backdate its documents in favour of candidates of the ruling All Progressives Congress, APC, for Yobe North and Akwa Ibom North-West.

The Senate President, Ahmad Lawan, who currently represents Yobe North and former Niger Delta Affairs Minister, Senator Godswill Akpabio, from Akwa Ibom North-West, had lost out of plans to return to the Senate next year as the electoral umpire said the duo did not participate in the respective senatorial primary elections.

Both men were presidential aspirants at the June 8 primary election of the APC, which held days after the party had already concluded its senatorial primary elections across the country.

However, an online report had yesterday, accused INEC of re-enlisting the two names in its files as bonafide candidates of the party.

But when contacted, Chief Press Secretary to the INEC Chairman, Mr Rotimi Oyekanmi, told Vanguard that the report was false.

Oyekanmi said: “The allegation is the figment of the imagination of those making it. The commission is not complaining of being under any pressure and we did not backdate any document. It’s all fake news. Nigerians should disregard the rumour.

Lessons Nigeria should learn from Kenya August 9 2022 general election

 By Jide Ojo

Yesterday, August 9, 2022, Kenyans marched to the polls to elect their new set of political leaders. At the time of writing this on the day of the election, winners are yet to emerge although the odds favour veteran opposition leader, Raila Odinga, to get lucky after four previous failed attempts. This is because he has the backing of his foe-turned-friend and outgoing president, Uhuru Kenyatta, despite not belonging to the same political party. Aside from that, Raila was a former Prime Minister (2008 – 2013) in a power-sharing agreement after the 2007 electoral debacle that saw over a thousand people killed in post-election violence. Should the pundit fail in their prediction of a Raila victory, that will be the end of the road for the battle-weary opposition leader as this seems his last chance at clinching victory. He is 77-year-old and waiting for another five years will mean he will be recon-testing at 82. Definitely, he won’t be able to perform optimally even if he wins at that old age.

Apart from coming from a political dynasty established by his late father, Odinga Odinga, who was Prime Minster to Jomo Kenyatta, Uhuru’s father, the fact that Raila decided to choose Martha Wangari Karua, a woman who is also the former Minister of Justice and a Kikuyu tribe like the outgoing president may work in his favour. William Ruto, who is the current Deputy President and a frontline candidate in this election, may however pull a surprise given his relatively young age of 55 and the resonation of his campaign of “Hustler Movement” with the Kenyan youths. Irrespective, my instinct favours Raila as his loss will be a collateral failure of both himself and the outgoing president with whom William has been locked in a bitter political feud in the last three years. A defeat of Raila is a defeat of the Kenyatta and Odinga dynasties. That will be a great political upset.

Away from that, there are quite a lot of things Nigeria can learn from Kenya and I will come to that in a bit but first a look at the factsheet on Kenya. According to the International Foundation for Electoral Systems’ Frequently Asked Question information kit, 22,120,458 registered voters participated in yesterday’s Kenyan General Election. The country has 46,233 Polling Stations; the numbers of seats contested in yesterday’s elections are one Presidential, 290 members of the National Assembly, 47 women representatives in the National Assembly, 47 members of the Senate, 47 governors and 1,450 members of County Assemblies. Interestingly, in Kenya, there is no campaign expenditure and donation limits.

The August 9, 2022 poll is the country’s sixth set of general elections since the end of the one-party state in 1991 and the third set of general elections under the 2010 Constitution of Kenya. Worthy of note is the fact that in the last electoral cycle of 2017, the Supreme Court cancelled the presidential elections and ordered a new election to take place within 30 days. Frontrunner Raila Odinga decided to withdraw from the second race, allowing President Kenyatta to win a landslide with over 98 per cent of the vote.

As Nigeria prepares for her seventh general elections in this Fourth Republic in the first quarter of 2023, there are quite a number of lessons the country can learn from our East African brothers. First is gender equity. According to IFES FAQ on the 2022 Kenyan elections, “Kenya’s legal framework includes firm principles of gender equity. According to the 2010 Constitution, no more than two-thirds of the membership of any elective body in Kenya may be of the same sex. In this respect, the National Assembly reserves 47 seats for women and the Senate reserves 16 for women, with two more Senate seats reserved for women representing youth and persons with disabilities.” Interestingly, three out of the four presidential candidates chose female running mates. Similarly, the country believes in the twinning principle. For instance, out of the seven members of the Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission, two are women. While the head of the commission, Wafula W. Chebukati is a man, the vice chairperson, Juliana Cherera is a lady.

Another exemplary provision in Kenyan electoral law is the out-of-country voting provision. According to IEBC, out-of-country voting is allowed for the presidential election only.  Kenyan voters outside the country may only vote from 12 countries, chosen based on the number of Kenyans who live there. The countries are Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi, South Africa, South Sudan, Germany, United Kingdom, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Canada and the US.  A total of 10,444 diaspora voters, who registered for 2022 elections, are expected to have voted yesterday at their country’s consulates and embassies in those countries. It is quite unfortunate that despite the enormous contributions of Nigerians in Diaspora to the country’s economy and image laundry, they have no say in determining the political leadership of their fatherland except they take the cumbersome option of travelling down to Nigeria to register and later to vote.

Minority threatens to impeach Buhari: APC Rep

 

The Deputy Chairman of the Committee on National Security and Intelligence in the House of Representatives, Adejoro Adeogun, explains the issues with Nigeria’s security architecture in this interview with LEKE BAIYEWU

Many Nigerians are blaming the intelligence community for failing to detect crimes until they are executed, especially with the recent attack on Kuje Prison by terrorists. Who is responsible for this?

If Nigerians blame the intelligence community for failing to detect crimes, they are justified because of the expectation that most of the acts of criminality being perpetrated across the country would be prevented with proper intelligence.

However, there were situations, like the Kuje Prison attack that you mentioned, where early warning intelligence was allegedly received but not acted upon. I read in one of the dailies – a statement attributed to a minister who said there were Department of State Services’ reports of imminent prison break but that the reports did not specify that it would be Kuje.

I considered that excuse untenable, considering that the recipient of the reports could have asked further questions or put two and two together to identify correctional centres with high-profile inmates.

That the correctional service failed to act on available intelligence was indicative of the laxity with which our agencies treat intelligence. So, much as Nigerians are justified in blaming the intelligence community, sometimes the security failures are the outcome of negligence by the recipients of shared intelligence.

Where the intelligence agencies have intelligence about an imminent attack and notify other agencies, but they fail to act on it. What happens?

Fayemi and Sanwoolu's company with Wike baffles Amaechi

 

There are strong indications that the Rivers State All Progressives Congress led by immediate past Minister of Transportation, Rotimi Amaechi, is angry about the romance between the APC presidential candidate, Bola Tinubu’s men; and the Rivers State Governor, Nyesom Wike.

Wike has in recent times been meeting with some APC chieftains, including Tinubu’s allies. On Monday, the Lagos State Governor, Babajide Sanwo-Olu, was invited by Wike to inaugurate a road project.

The Rivers governor also invited former Governor Aliyu Wamakko of Sokoto State and the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Femi Gbajabiamila to inaugurate some projects in his state.

Earlier, some APC governors led by the Chairman of the Nigerian Governors Forum, Kayode Fayemi, had also met Wike in his state amid his feud with the presidential candidate of the Peoples Democratic Party, Atiku Abubakar.

However, sources close to Amaechi, told The PUNCH that the romance between Wike and Tinubu was disrespectful especially since it was public knowledge that Wike and Amaechi were political foes.

They also accused Tinubu of supporting Senator Magnus Abe who recently dumped the APC to run for governor on the platform of the Social Democratic Party.

An associate of Amaechi who wished to remain anonymous because he was not authorised to speak on the matter, said, “The APC leaders have been coming to Rivers State to lobby Wike and make all manner of promises to him. These people never came to Rivers even when the party was having a crisis.

HISTORY OF THE IGBOS

 

The biggest country in Africa that the United Kingdom colonized is Nigeria. The biggest country that the United Kingdom colonized in Asia is India (which then comprised the present Pakistan and Bangladesh). When the UK came into Nigeria and India, like all other countries they colonized, they brought along their technology, religion (Christianity), and culture: names, dressing, food, language, etc.

Try as hard as the British did, India rejected the British religion, names, dressing, food, and even language, but they did not reject the British technology. Today, 80.5% of Indians are Hindus; 13.4% Muslims; 2.3% Christians; 1.9% Sikhs; 0.8% Buddhists, etc. Hindi is the official language of the government of India, but English is used extensively in business and administration and has the status of a “subsidiary official language.” It is rare to find an Indian with an English name or dressed in suit.

On the other hand, Nigeria embraced, to a large extent, the British religion, British culture – names, dressing, foods, and language – but rejected the British technology. The difference between the Nigerian and the Indian experiences is that while India is proud of its heritage, Nigeria takes little pride in its heritage, a situation that has affected the nationalism of Nigerians and our development as a nation. Before the advent of Christianity, the Arabs had brought Islam into Nigeria through the North. Islam also wiped away much of the culture of Northern Nigeria. Today, the North has only Sharia Courts but no Customary Courts. So from the North to the South of Nigeria, the Western World and the Eastern World have shaped our lives to be like theirs and we have lost much or all of our identity.

Long after the British and Arabs left Nigeria, Nigeria has waxed strong in religion to the extent that Nigerians now set up religious branches of their home-grown churches in Europe, the Americas, Asia and other African countries. Just like the Whites brought the gospel to us, Nigerians now take the gospel back to the Whites. In Islam, we are also very vibrant to the extent that if there is a blasphemous comment against Islam in Denmark or the US, even if there is no violent reaction in Saudi Arabia, the Islamic headquarters of the world, there will be loss of lives and destruction of property in Nigeria.

If the United Arab Emirates, a country with 75% Muslims, is erecting the tallest building in the world and encouraging the world to come and invest in its country by providing a friendly environment, Boko Haram ensures that the economy of the North (and by extension that of Nigeria) is crippled with bombs and bullets unless every Nigerian converts to Boko Haram’s brand of Islam. We are indeed a very religious people. Meanwhile, while we are building the biggest churches and mosques, the Indians, South Africans, Chinese, Europeans and Americans have taken over our key markets: telecoms, satellite TV, multinationals, banking, oil and gas, automobile, aviation, shopping malls, hospitality, etc.

Ironically, despite our exploits in religion, we are a people with little godliness, a people without scruples. It is rare to do business with a Nigerian pastor, deacon, knight, elder, brother, sister, imam, mullah, mallam, alhaji or alhaja without the person laying landmines of bribes and deception on your path. We call it PR, facilitation fee, processing fee, transport money, financial engineering, deal, or whatever. But if it does not change hands, nothing gets done. And when it is amassed, we say it is “God’s blessings.” Some people assume that sleaze is a problem of public functionaries, but the private sector seems to be worse than the public sector these days.

One would have assumed that the more churches and mosques that spring up in every nook and cranny of Nigeria, the higher the morals in our society. But it is not so. The situation is that the more religious we get, the baser we become. Our land never knew the type of bloodshed experienced from religious extremists, political desperadoes, ritual killers, armed robbers, kidnappers, internet scammers, university cultists, and lynch mobs. Life has become so cheap and brutish that everyday seems to be a bonanza.

We import the petroleum that we have in abundance, rice and beans that our land can produce in abundance, and even toothpicks that primary school children can produce with little or no effort. Yet we drive the best of cars and live in the best of edifices, visit the best places in the world for holidays and use the most expensive electronic and telecoms gadgets. It is now a sign of poverty for a Nigerian to ride a saloon car. Four-wheel drive is it! Even government officials, who were known to use only Peugeot cars as official cars as a sign of modesty, have upgraded to Toyota Prado, without any iota of shame, in a country where about 70 per cent live below poverty. Private jets have become as common as cars. A nation that imports toothpicks and pins, flaunts wealth and wallows in ostentation at a time its children are trooping to Ghana, South Africa and the UK for university education and its sick people are running to India for treatment.

India produces automobile and exports it to the world. India’s medical care is second to none, with even Americans and Europeans travelling to the country for medical treatment. India has joined the nuclear powers. India has launched a successful mission to the moon. Yet bicycles and tricycles are common sights in India. But in Nigeria, only the wretched of the earth ride bicycles. 

I have intentionally chosen to compare Nigeria with India rather than China, South Korea, Brazil, Malaysia, or Singapore, because of the similarities between India and Nigeria. But these countries were not as promising as Nigeria at the time of our independence.

Some would say that our undoing is our size: the 2012 United Nations estimate puts Nigeria’s population at 166 million, while India has a population of 1.2 billion. Some would blame it on the multiplicity of ethnic groups: we have 250 ethnic groups; India has more than 2000 ethnic groups. Some would hang it on the diversity in religion: we have two major religions – Christianity and Islam; but India has many. Some would say it is because we are young as an independent nation: we have 52 years of independence; India has 65 years, while apartheid ended in South Africa only in 1994.

THE HIDDEN FACTS

 

*I DON'T WANT TO BELIEVE THIS, BUT IT'S WRITTEN BY AN IBO PROF.* 

*(By Prof. Ihechukwu Madubuike)*

*THIS IS SIMPLY THE REASON WHY HAUSAS, YORUBAS, EDO AND THE NIGER DELTA MAN  WILL NOT TRUST THE IBO MAN AT THE CENTER AND WHY THE HAUSAS MAY NOT WANT TO RELINQUISH POWER IN NIGERIA* 

*Any historians in the house to vet this but no insults or character assassination please:*

*Forgotten History Of Igbo Tribe And Northern Alliance.*

*Do you know that when Tafawa Balewa was Prime Minister of Nigeria;*

*Chief of Army Staff was from SE*

*Chief of Naval Staff was from SE*

*IG of Police was from SE*

*Chief of Defence Staff was from SE*

*Internal Affairs Minister SE*

*External Affairs Minister SE*

*Education Minister South SE*

*Many other key ministries to SE*

*Parliament President SE*

*Unilag VC from SE*

*The University of Ibadan VC from SE*

*North resisted same at ABU!!!*

*Still, there was dissatisfaction by SE, the officers from the region killed this same Balewa!!!*

*Out of all the most senior officers in Nigeria, SE has 37, none was killed. 8 from the north, all of them were killed. 10 from the west, 2 were killed.*

*Then Ironsi imposed a unitary system of government on the country so that everything can belong to a region who snatched it!*

*We must know our history so that when we want to make corrections, we will not end up concealing the truth.* 

*This has nothing to do with tribalism but everything to do with the truth.....at times when lies litter the streets.* 

*There is a tendency to think those are truths and facts.*

*What follows are documented facts that can be cross-checked for authenticity!"*

*Thou shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free.*

* *“Prof. Ben Nwabueze was the man who drafted the constitution that took away powers from regions and handed it to the central government because his brother Aguiyi THEORY WOES IN NIGERIA TODAY:*

*The Igbo man is known to enjoy blaming the Hausa fulanis, Yorubas and indeed every other Nigerian tribe and Lord Luggard/Britain for their seeming claim of being in third class citizen status in Nigeria.* 

*In their perpetual attempts to play the victim card, they recount the political events of Nigeria from 1914 to the present in a half-baked and highly selective manner which cleverly avoids the mention of the roles played by their elite who by all natural laws of judgement were actually responsible for the woes that befell not only the Igbo race but the entire Nigeria nation.* 

*The story told in the post above is one of such selective and distorted accounts of history which the average Igbo man is fond of narrating.*

*However, the national archives have the complete and unedited history of Nigeria regarding the political events beginning way back from even before 1914.* 

*I will therefore proceed to furnish my readers with the complete story for all to read and be endowed with enough facts so as to judge and act from an informed position.*

*Shortly after the 1914 Amalgamation of the Northern and Southern Protectorates, it started getting clear that the country was bound to fail as the amalgamation in question was done with colonial fiat without the consent and consensus of the different tribes which were over 300.*

*This prompted the political leaders to start asking for de-amalgamation so as to forestall the future danger which the forced amalgamation portended.*

*To that end, Ahmadu Bello, speaking on behalf of the Northern protectorate in 1944 described the amalgamation as* *"The mistake of 1914 which if allowed to remain will ultimately lead to unstoppable bloodshed and a failed country".*

*Awolowo, speaking on behalf of the Yorubas and Western minorities, described Nigeria as a mere geographical expression not qualified to be called a country let alone a nation.* 

*Awolowo added that if the5 amalgamation could not be reversed, then Nigeria should be structured as a strictly federal state so as to enable each tribe enjoy autonomy this freedom from being dominated by any one single tribe.*

*But Nnamdi Azikiwe, speaking for the Igbos, denounced Awolowo and Ahmadu Bello, terming them ethnic champions.* 

*He accused them of nursing a sectional agenda against the unity of Nigeria, and he declared further that the Unity of Nigeria was non-negotiable.*

*After moving the motion for independece in 1953, Anthony Enahoro proposed that a secession clause should be incorporated into the future constitution of Nigeria so as to give legal backing for any tribe to peacefully exit the forced union if it feels marginalized in future.*

*According to Enahoro, such provision in our constitution would instill in all Nigeria's future leaders the fear of the consequences of misgovernance.* 

*But Azikiwe, speaking on behalf of Igbos, rose against him in the parliament and labelled him an agent of disunity, and enemy of Nigeria.* 

*At a later date, Awolowo too made a case for secession clause, but Azikiwe again resisted him and instigated the colonial authorities to threaten him and Enahoro with charges of treasonable felony if they didn't stop proposing secession clause for the future constitution.* 

*While Azikiwe did all these, Igbos cheered and urged him on because they felt the future Nigeria was theirs to dominate and lord it over every other tribe.*

*Before independece, Tafawa Balewa too had in a public speech described Nigeria as a British experiment and Nigeria's unity as a British intention which Nigerians themselves don't believe in. But Azikiwe kicked and demonized him too.* 

*Had Azikiwe co-operated with Enahoro, Awolowo, Ahmadu Bello and Tafawa Balewa about the secession clause, Nigeria perhaps would not have been this misgoverned.*

*For those in doubt, here is a link of one of the numerous instances in which Nnamdi Azikiwe fought against the secession clause proposal for the future Nigeria constitution.*

*It should be noted that there were many Igbo members of the parliament in which Azikiwe fought against Awolowo's secession clause proposal in the link above, but not a single one of them rose against Azikiwe or condemned him.*

*Igbos initially never wanted to hear anything like secession in Nigeria because they so much believed, though falsely, that they were the most educated tribe. (The first Nigerian tribe to produce a university graduate is the Binis).* 

*As an evidence of Igbo domination agenda hence their initial resistance to the idea of secession; here are some quotes:*

*"From all indications, the god of us Igbos have destined us to rule the whole of Africa"..... Nnamdi Azikiwe (1945).*

*"It is getting clearer each day that Igbo domination of Nigeria is just a question of time"... Oscar Onyeamma. (1949).*

 *As at 1900, the whole of the present Benue State, Kogi East Senatorial District and some southern parts of Taraba State called Munchi District back then; were all in the Southern Protectorate.* 

*Whoever doubts this should consult MacMillan Atlas for secondary schools in Nigeria. With that situation the South had a higher population than the North hence always had an upper hand in any democratic bargain.*

*But as at the early fifties when the regions were being created, common sense dictated clearly that these areas should fall in the future Eastern Region.* 

*But against common sense, the colonial masters decided to gerrymander them into the Northern Region.* 

*While they did that, Azikiwe who was supposed to be in Enugu fighting against it as the leader of the East, was far away in Ibadan struggling with Awolowo to rule the Western Region and also playing the spoiler role against Awolowo's attempts to have Kwara and present Kogi Yorubas carved into the Western Region from the North which was already too large by landmass.*

*While he abandoned his burning house and was far away in Ibadan struggling against Awolowo for his own (Awolowo's) region, Igbos saw absolutely nothing wrong with that. Rather they applauded him as a nationalist.* 

*A nationalist whose house was burning yet busy chasing rats in a far away land.*

*When opinions became unanimous that Lord Luggard and his government must be forced out of Nigeria and indeed the whole of Africa, it was still the Igbos that frustrated the attempts.* 

*Here is how:*

*In 1948, Anthony Enahoro organized an anti-colonization symposium in Lagos for which Azikiwe and some other Igbos had agreed to deliver the keynote address.* 

*But when the D-day came, Azikiwe was nowhere to be found as he deliberately disappeared into thin air for fear of being arrested and dealt with by Lord Luggard.* 

*Anthony Enahoro then quickly replaced Azikiwe with another person who did the job improptu but perfectly well as he lambasted and lampooned Lord Luggard and the British Government.* 

*However, the British soldiers invaded the symposium venue, arrested the speaker and Enahoro and jailed them for treasonable felony. Ironically, the next day Azikiwe came out of hiding and granted a radio interview in which he accused Enahoro and the other organizers of suffering from youthful exhuberance.*

*On regaining his freedom few weeks later and being told of Azikiwe's radio interview, Enahoro resigned from his post as Editor of Azikiwe's newspaper - The West African Pilot.*

*Then he wrote a book titled "Nnamdi Azikiwe: Sinner of Saint". After launching the book, Enahoro left Azikiwe's party - the NCNC, and moved over to Awolowo's Action Group.*

*The first military coup in Nigeria was carried out by majority of Igbo army officers.* 

*That was the coup that truncated democracy just six years post Independence and led to a succession of coups which put the country on the reverse gear for 33 years.*

*Through that first coup, those Igbo army officers who accused the politicians and government of the day of monumental corruption, killed the political leaders of the Northern, Western and Midwestern Regions but allowed all Igbo political figures to escape by tipping them off prior to the D-Day.* 

*In addition to the killing of political figures, they also killed a total of 27 innocent high ranking military officers from every region except their Eastern Region.*

*In the end an Igbo man called Aguiyi Ironsi, who was supposed to have been killed alongside other military officers, ended up becoming the new military ruler of Nigeria. Rather than immediately arrest and punish the coup plotters, he kept them in detention where they were treated as heroes.* 

*This was actually what sowed the seed for the eventual Biafra War. On the 23rd of February 1966 (i.e. a month and 8 days after the first coup porpularly but wrongly known as Nzeogwu coup, an Ijaw born Army officer called Isaac Adaka Boro who hailed from Kaima town of present Bayelsa State, declared the secession of the Niger Delta Republic in an attempt to free his Ijaw people from the monumental marginalization they had been suffering under Igbos in the old Eastern Region.*

*But Aguiyi Ironsi immediately ordered Colonel Odumegwu Ojukwu to arrest him and hand him over to the military high command under him in Lagos. Ojukwu went all out against Isaac Adaka Boro with federal military might and within 12 fighting days killed 150 Isaac Boro's soldiers, arrested him, stripped him naked, and had him driven to Lagos and handed to Ironsi who immediately charged him to court and within two months secured against him a conviction of treasonable felony for which he was sentenced to death by hanging fixed for December that year by the Supreme Court. His 'crime' was that he declared secession of The Niger Delta Republic from Nigeria. Meanwhile the Igbo coupists who shed innocent blood of other tribes and even sprayed bullets into the bellies of the pregnant wives of Ahmadu Bello and Brigadier Shodeinde were not charged to court or arraigned before any military tribunal.*

*Isaac Adaka Boro was in detention waiting for December to come for him to join his ancestors. But God so kind, a revenge coup happened on July 29 by Northern soldiers and Ironsi was overthrown and killed. Gowon took over and released Isaac Adaka Boro unconditionally, reinstated him into the Army with his previous rank.*

*Then on May 30, 1967, Ojukwu too declared secession of Biafra Republic from Nigeria and without consulting or apologising to Isaac Boro, drew a Biafra map which included the very areas that made up Isaac Adaka Boro's earlier declared Niger Delta Republic for which he fought against him and killed his soldiers. Seeing such level of arrogance in Ojukwu, Isaac Boro asked Gowon to provide arms for him to crush Biafra by fighting on the Nigerian side in vengeance for Ojukwu's frustration of his own secession declaration 15 months earlier.*

*Isaac Boro, as an Ijaw man conversant with the waterways, led the Nigeria Army through the coastal areas into Igboland to finish off thousands of Ojukwu's soldiers thus leading to the crushing defeat of Biafra. But today, Igbos accuse Ijaws of betraying them in the war. But from the facts as above, who really betrayed the other in all honesty? Be the judge. Why Gowon fought against Ojukwu's declaration of Biafra was as follows:*

*After Ironsi and Ojukwu successfully crushed Isaac Boro's Niger Delta Republic declaration, Ironsi immediately proceeded to promulgate the Anti-secession Decree which made the mere mention of secession from Nigeria punishable with death by hanging.*

*Ojukwu openly supported and endorsed the decree despite disapproval of it by the general public. So when Ojukwu later declared Biafra secession, he was reminded of the Anti-secession Decree made by him and his brother Ironsi.*

*Igbos frequently reference Aburi Accord to create the impression that the rest of Nigerian tribes don't honour agreements. This is a very dishonest narrative from Igbos.*

*First and foremost Aburi Accord was organized by soldiers and unelected civil servants who should not participate in political exercises like making laws due to the civil service anonymity principle. Secondly, those civil servants and military men in attendance were not elected by their federal constituencies to the Aburi summit. In the philosophy of democracy the only universally acceptable way of making laws is through duly elected representatives of the people. But in going to Aburi the peoples' representatives duly elected in the 1965 elections were all sidelined for soldiers to hijack the process. Where on earth do soldiers make laws for the people? Rather, the civilian populace makes laws that guide the military. Aburi Accord therefore had no seal of the people's sovereignty hence it was an illegality which shouldn't have been allowed to stand.*

*Thirdly, in 1957, Nigerians from all federal constituencies democratically elected representatives whom they sponsored to London, paid their flight tickets and hotel accommodation for the Independence constitutional conference.* 

*Those representatives all resolved and agreed on federalism marked by regional autonomy and resource control in the Independence Constitution which they brought back home and everyone accepted it.*

*In that constitution, Nigerians all agreed that on no account shall the military take over power. It was also clearly stated in it that ammendments to it could be done by only democratically elected representatives.*

*That constitution was the first ever agreement between all Nigerians.* 

*On the day of his inauguration as the Army GoC, Aguiyi Ironsi stood before the whole world and with his own mouth swore to protect and defend that sovereign Independence constitution regardless of the circumstances that may later arise.*

*But just six years after he manufactured an excuse to clinch power against the clear provisions of that constitution we all agreed to, unilaterally began to amend its provisions with his very offensive Decrees, and ended up dismantling the federalism and resource control therein, and ultimately subverted that constitution we all painstakingly sacrificed to draft. That was the height of Irresponsibility and the dishonoring of sacred agreement. That was how Igbos breached the first agreement, all Nigerians, ever all mutually consented to, thus laying the foundation for violation of future agreements.*

*So Aburi Accord was only treated exactly the same way Igbos treated the Independence constitution agreement.*

*Obasanjo removed history from the school curriculum hence the reason why many of what we know of the eventualities in Biafra war were altered to suite their narratives.*

*Anytime i hear or watch NNAMDI KANU talk i never take it serious but only as a noisemaker.*

*Thank God for this author. The Lord will bless him for us all! Everyone needs to know this for real. Knowing the truth sets free. We need  we as a Nation.* 

*We need to face facts, admit the stupid errors of history and eventual forgive ourselves for the sins, enormous sins committed by our forefathers. Love covers a multitude of sins.*

*Very important history please read, understand and also share and encourage others to know.*

*#COPIED*