Connect with us

Opinion

The Story Of The Nigerian Academic And The ASUU

Published

on

Abdelgafar Amoka

 

By Abdelgafar Amoka

 

Some colleagues at home and in the diaspora that can’t stand ASUU have decided to pick up a new job to portray ASUU as the bad guy and the major problems of public universities rather than a solution.

 

 

They ascribed the mischievous and unfortunate activities of few academics in the universities to ASUU and claimed that these elements that should ordinarily have no business being in academics are shielded by ASUU.

 

 

 

They are also of the opinion that there are no quality thoughts and research in our universities. Meanwhile, they are divided in the quality of teaching in public universities. While some of them are of the opinion that the quality of undergraduate teaching is still good as our graduates are still able to cope during their postgraduate studies abroad, some insisted that Nigerian lecturers are bad from head to toe.

 

I will always use my nearly 16 years of experience in Academia to tell our story. There are quality thoughts in the form of good proposals on issues affecting our immediate society.

 

 

A researcher is expected to find solutions to problems in his immediate society first. But a good proposal is just a good idea on paper if there is no fund to execute them. As an Academic, I am not expected to use my salary that is barely enough to feed us for research. I am actually supposed to be made very comfortable to get the job done and funds are supposed to be available to assess on a fairground for research purposes, but that is sometimes not the case.

 

The government is supposed to engage their intellectuals and place policy-driven demands on them. But the government only puts money where some individuals have personal interest without any much expectations on output. Can you imagine that there is a budget for research for ministries but not for universities.

 

 

What research are they into at the ministries? I keep mentioning “cause and effect”. We seems to have place much emphasis on “effect” without much reference to the “cause”. Not much of impactful research is going on in our universities as expected because the relevant stakeholder has not created that structure.

 

 

No adequate provision for funds for that purpose. The drivers of our government agenda and policies prefer to buy a solution from abroad no matter the cost instead of engaging their intellectuals. That complex that anything from oyinbo land (abroad) is superior is still very much there.

 

The question is this; are the lecturers responsible to fund structures for research or the owner and the financier of the university? What makes a laboratory is not the space but the facilities in it. No organization will give you money to fill the space you call a lab to do research work for them. It is the facilities that you already have that will convince them that you have the capacity to do their research.

 

While I was in the UK, we use to have industrialists and potential collaborators visit our lab to see what we had to drive collaboration. When I got a scholarship for my PhD and I needed a university in the UK for it, I just googled “High Voltage Laboratories in the UK” and5 universities with that facilities pop up. I took the scholarship money to one of the universities. That is one of the issues ASUU is fighting for. Revitalization of public universities to put in place those facilities that will make it possible to effectively carry out research and teaching. Such facilities will also serve as a source of foreign exchange.

 

I still remember the university congregation that took place in 2008 where a member of the congregation asked of the budget for research. And I think the response then was that no budget for research but that he has set aside 10 million naira for research. I was a PhD student at the university then. The 10m naira if given to only me was not enough to acquire the facilities for my PhD research before luck came my way with the scholarship that took me out. No provision for research in the university budget and the VC possibly set aside that 10 million from the internally generated fund. That is the level the policymakers have placed the universities. Just a teaching institution but they still blame the university for not doing research.

Advert

 

When I got back from the UK, I prepared a proposal that was sent to the VC. Thinking the university will be able to source for funds to execute the project. The next day, i got a call for an invitation from the VC to make a presentation of the proposal to the university management.

 

 

He was very impressed after the presentation and made motivating comments. At the end of the meeting, he asked me to put in some things and return the proposal to him. The proposal died a natural death after leaving his office. I sent the same proposal to NASENI, a government agency. The email response was that they will see what they can do and nothing till today. After discussion with some friends, contact was made to Sam Amadi, the then Head of NERC. He requested I send the proposal. I emailed it to him and never got a response till today. All these happened in 2013.

 

Then I left for a postdoc in Norway in September 2013. I continued the quest for a grant on my return in September 2015 and that same proposal eventually won the 2019 TETFund NRF research grant and we are working on it presently. Meanwhile, before the grant, I started crowdfunding among family and friends in 2018. I was able to raise about 1.4 million naira to buy a few stuff for my lab. Is that how to create a research environment? How many people are ready to go this extra to raise money from his family and friends for a university lab just to have facilities to work with?

Breaking:ASUU Suspends Strike

To the best of my knowledge, the financier is supposed to put up the structure and you use the structure to get grants to sustain the research activities and even make money for the university and foreign exchange from international students. Where is the infrastructure to challenge us? our universities have lecturers trained in the UK, US, Europe, China, Russia, etc. Rather than engaging us, they hire consultants abroad, a case study of the Malaysian economic consultants in 2017, to solve our local problem and pay them in USD.

 

But then, even with the limited funds, the universities are still making frantic efforts to put in place research facilities. ABU for example, has Multiuser science laboratories, NLNG multiuser laboratory in Engineering, the Biotech Centre, the African Centre of Excellence for Neglected Tropical Diseases, the recently established high voltage materials laboratory in the physics department, etc. With all these constraints, we have Professors and middle career academics in ABU with research grants, 20 to over a hundred articles in index journals, and a Scopus h-index from 7 to 20. There are quite a number of them in ABU. Our efforts despite the harsh environment should be commended.

 

You can’t keep telling me the country doesn’t have the money to make provision for research funds for universities in our budget. The international community believes that we have the money. That was the reason why they took Nigeria off the list of “education least developed countries” and researchers in Nigeria are not qualified for the 15,000 USD TWAS research grant for basic sciences. I got the grant in 2013 and while trying to reapply in 2016, I discovered that applicants from Nigeria are no longer qualified.

 

I sent an email in January 2018 to a senior colleague (British) at National Grid UK that I want to establish a high voltage lab in my university in Nigeria. And his response was that; “Abdel, it’s like you like to take on tough challenges. Starting a high voltage lab from nothing is a tough one”. I take on the tough challenge with my colleagues with personal efforts, personal funds, and begging. The photo is one of the facilities in our lab.

 

Of course, not everyone can go that extra mile and you can’t fault them. You are employed and supposed to be given what you need to work. You are not supposed to go that extra and even turn to a beggar just to get what you need to perform some of your responsibilities as an Academic. This is our story!

 

So, who do we blame? The FG (the financier) who is the “cause” and still establishing more universities without a funding plan, or the ASUU’s struggle for the survival of public universities which is the “effect”? What we’ve got is surely not good enough and we need to do more. So, if you can’t come to join us to rebuild the system, don’t condemn us but encourage us and offer the necessary support.

 

Meanwhile, if you know any Lecturer that is into sexual harassment, sex-for-mark, money-for-mark, extortion of students, admission racketeering, etc, in any university, report him to the management of that university and copy ASUU local branch and even the ASUU National president and watch if he is shielded.

 

If you refused to make such reports or take the necessary actions to stop such ills in our universities and decided to go to Facebook to blame ASUU like the “Professor” from Benue State University, Markudi, then you are part of the problem.

 

 

Opinion

The Cap That Stopped a Boy’s Tears: Remembering Sadiq Modibbo

Published

on

 

By Sanusi Bature Dawakin Tofa

Fifteen years have passed since I last held my son, Sadiq Modibbo, in my arms. Even now, the memory of his laughter and the warmth of his tiny hand remains vivid in my mind. There was something remarkable about him, a light that shone through even in moments of fear or pain.

I remember the first time I realized how deeply he loved the simple things that connected him to me.

Whenever he cried, I would gently remove my cap, and just like that, his tears would stop. It was as if the gesture spoke to him in a language only he and I shared—a language of love, trust, and comfort.

Sadiq was often unwell, and our visits to the hospital were frequent. Yet, despite his fragile health, he carried himself with an unusual courage. The doctors, nurses, and other caregivers grew to know him well. They would smile at his little jokes, or nod knowingly when he quieted at the sight of me.

In those hospital rooms, I learned to see him not just as my son, but as a symbol of resilience. Every day, I watched him endure injections, treatments, and long hours of discomfort, yet he faced it all with a quiet strength. Even then, the cap—the small, unassuming piece of cloth—became a tool of love, a reminder that he was never alone.

Advert

Sadiq’s love for Kwankwasiyya was another remarkable part of his personality. It was a fascination that seemed larger than his years, and it sparked countless conversations between us. I would watch him with wonder, seeing how a young boy could find joy and meaning in something so vibrant, even in the midst of illness.

I often imagined what he would be like today if he were still alive. Would he be arguing with me as passionately as ever? Would his laughter fill our home in the way it did when he was a boy? The “what ifs” are endless, but in my heart, I carry the certainty that his spirit lives on in every memory, every smile, every small gesture of love that he shared.

Birthdays were special for Sadiq. He would light up at the smallest celebration, reminding us all of the beauty in simple joys. Even as a child who faced health struggles, he found light in each day. I can still see him running toward me, his eyes shining, his cap slightly askew from excitement.

Mourning him has been a lifelong journey. The world continued around us, but I learned that grief is a quiet companion. It is in the small moments—the empty chair at the table, the quiet hospital rooms, the cap that no longer needs to be removed to stop tears—that his absence is most felt.

Yet, even in sorrow, there is comfort. I tell myself that Sadiq’s courage, his love, and his laughter have left a lasting imprint. The lessons he taught me—about patience, joy, and unconditional love—remain guiding lights in my life. Every time I see a child comforted by a parent, I am reminded of him.

Today, I remember Sadiq not with despair, but with gratitude. The cap that stopped his tears symbolizes so much more than a simple gesture; it is a testament to the bond between father and son, to the small acts of love that shape a life. May Allah grant him eternal peace, and may his memory continue to inspire those who knew him—even for just a moment.

Sanusi Bature Dawakin Tofa is the Director General Media and Spokesperson to Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Restoring the Dignity of the Kano Emirate

Published

on

Two Prince of Kano Emirate and Emirs

 

By Muhammad Bello, Dutse, Jigawa State

The lingering power tussle between His Highness Aminu Ado Bayero and His Highness Muhammadu Sanusi II over the revered throne of the Emir of Kano has continued to generate intense public debate and concern across Northern Nigeria and the country at large. For an institution that has historically commanded immense respect, influence, and cultural significance, the prolonged dispute has unfortunately diminished the prestige and moral authority associated with the Kano Emirate.

The Emirate of Kano is not just a traditional stool; it represents centuries of history, leadership, and cultural identity. As one of the most respected traditional institutions in Nigeria, the stability of the throne is crucial not only for Kano State but also for the broader traditional governance structure in the North.

In view of this reality, urgent and sincere efforts must be made to resolve the crisis in a manner that restores dignity, unity, and respect to the institution.

As part of the Kano First Agenda of His Excellency Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, there is a timely opportunity to take bold and statesmanlike steps toward resolving the impasse. One practical approach would be for the state government to constitute a high-level reconciliation committee made up of respected traditional rulers, eminent Islamic scholars, religious leaders, and elder statesmen from within Kano State and across the country.

Advert

Such a committee would carry the moral authority and neutrality required to engage all parties involved and recommend a sustainable solution.

In my humble opinion, the committee should consider the following options:

First, both contending Emirs should be encouraged, in the interest of peace and the preservation of the dignity of the Kano Emirate, to voluntarily step aside by tendering their resignations. While this may appear difficult, history has shown that sacrifices made for peace often preserve institutions for future generations.

Second, the Kano State Government should allow the kingmakers to conduct a fresh and transparent nomination process for a new Emir. Transparency and adherence to tradition will help restore public confidence in the institution.

Third, in order to ensure neutrality and avoid further controversy, both current claimants to the throne should not be part of the new selection process.

The objective of these recommendations is not to undermine any individual but to safeguard the long-term stability, unity, and honour of the Kano Emirate. Institutions of such historic importance must be protected from prolonged political and legal battles that could erode their legitimacy.

Ultimately, wisdom, patience, and a spirit of sacrifice are required from all stakeholders. The people of Kano and indeed Nigerians hope to see a peaceful resolution that restores the dignity of the throne and preserves the rich heritage of the Emirate for generations to come.

May Almighty Allah continue to guide our leaders toward decisions that promote peace, justice, and unity.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Restoring the Glory That Was Always There: Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf and the Historical Vision Behind Kano First

Published

on

 

 

By Saminu Umar Ph.D | Senior Lecturer, Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano

Advert

Kano does not need to be invented. That is a truth so fundamental, so historically self-evident, that it should not need to be stated at all, and yet the circumstances of recent decades have made its restatement not merely appropriate but urgent. There is a tendency, in the discourse of Nigerian development, to treat every governance initiative as a beginning, as though the society being governed had no prior history of achievement, no accumulated wisdom, no tested traditions of institutional excellence on which new efforts might be built. This tendency is not merely intellectually lazy, but it is, in the specific context of Kano, a form of historical injustice, a failure to reckon honestly with the civilizational inheritance that this state carries and that its people have never entirely abandoned, even through the long and painful decades in which their institutions were hollowed out, their values eroded, and their confidence systematically undermined by the combined weight of misgovernance, corruption, and the slow cultural dislocation that follows when a society loses trust in the institutions that are supposed to embody its highest aspirations.
Kano was, long before Nigeria existed as a political entity, one of the most sophisticated and enduring centers of civilization in West Africa. Its greatness was not the greatness of conquest or of externally imposed order. It was the greatness of organic development, of a society that built, over centuries, a coherent and self-sustaining civilization on foundations that were simultaneously material and moral. The trans-Saharan trade networks that made Kano a commercial hub of continental significance were sustained not merely by geography or by the availability of goods, but by a culture of commercial integrity, of trust between trading partners, of contractual reliability, and of the kind of reputational accountability that makes markets function across distances and between strangers. The Islamic scholarship that gave Kano its intellectual authority was not merely a religious tradition. It was a governance philosophy, one that placed knowledge, justice, accountability, and the subordination of personal interest to public duty at the center of what it meant to hold power. The traditional political institutions that maintained Kano’s social order were not instruments of oppression but, at their best, mechanisms of consultation, legitimacy, and the managed resolution of social conflict.
These were not accidental achievements. They were the products of deliberate cultivation, of generations of Kano’s people choosing, consciously and consistently, to organize their collective life around values that made both individual flourishing and communal solidarity possible. That is what a civilization is: not a collection of buildings or a record of territorial expansion, but a living tradition of values, practices, and institutions that enables a human community to achieve, across time, more than any individual generation could accomplish alone. Kano built such a civilization. And the question that every serious governor of Kano must eventually confront, whether they frame it in these terms or not, is whether they are adding to that civilization or subtracting from it.
It is against this civilizational backdrop that the Kano First Initiative under Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf must be understood, not as a new idea imported into Kano from outside, not as a political slogan invented to win elections and abandoned when the votes are counted, but as a deliberate act of historical retrieval, an attempt to reach back through the debris of recent decades and recover the foundations on which Kano’s genuine greatness was built. The initiative’s framework document states this explicitly and without embarrassment: Kano’s most persistent challenges are not solely infrastructural or economic in nature. They are fundamentally behavioral, normative, and narrative failures, accumulated over time and reinforced by weak value transmission, fragmented authority, and uncoordinated messaging. This is a diagnosis of remarkable historical honesty, and it is one that only a governor with a genuine understanding of what Kano has been and what it has lost could have authorized.
Governor Yusuf’s historical vision is not nostalgic in the sentimental sense of the word. He is not proposing a return to a romanticized past that never existed in the uncomplicated form that nostalgia requires. He is proposing something simultaneously more modest and more ambitious: the recovery of specific values, specific institutional principles, and specific civic traditions that demonstrably worked, that demonstrably sustained Kano’s coherence and productivity over centuries, and that demonstrably began to break down when they were displaced by the governing logic of extraction, patronage, and the systematic subordination of public interest to private accumulation. Islamic ethical governance, communal responsibility, the dignity of productive labor, respect for legitimate authority, the centrality of knowledge in public life, these are not abstract ideals. They are the operational principles of a civilization that actually functioned, and their recovery is not a romantic aspiration but a practical governance imperative.
The intellectual architecture through which this recovery is being pursued bears the clear fingerprints of the Honourable Commissioner for Information and Internal Affairs, Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya, whose contribution to the Kano First Initiative has been, in every meaningful sense, the contribution of a man who understands both what Kano is and what it needs. The framework he has championed integrates three traditions that, taken together, give the initiative both its cultural legitimacy and its analytical credibility: the Islamic ethical governance tradition that historically underpinned Kano’s stability and justice, Kano’s own sociocultural heritage of communal solidarity and institutional accountability, and the modern behavioral change communication science that provides the methodological tools for translating values into measurable social outcomes. This integration is not accidental. It reflects a deep conviction, shared by both the governor and his commissioner, that genuine renewal cannot be achieved by importing foreign solutions but only by excavating and rebuilding on Kano’s own foundations.
The scale of what has been lost must be honestly acknowledged if the scale of what is being attempted is to be properly appreciated. Kano today carries wounds that decades of misgovernance have inflicted on its social fabric with a thoroughness that cannot be undone quickly or easily. Youth disaffection has reached levels that express themselves in drug abuse, street violence, and the nihilistic political thuggery that represents, at its core, the rage of young people who were promised a future and received instead a void. Institutional trust, once the bedrock of Kano’s civic life, has been so systematically eroded that the default posture of many citizens toward their government is not engagement but cynicism, not participation but withdrawal. The digital media ecosystem, which should be a tool of civic enlightenment, has in too many instances become a vehicle for the amplification of the very misinformation, polarization, and moral dislocation that the Kano First Initiative is designed to address. These are not small problems, and they will not yield to small solutions.
What gives the Kano First Initiative its historical seriousness is precisely that it does not pretend otherwise. The four-phase implementation framework, stretching from 2026 through 2030, is built on the recognition that the restoration of a civilization’s normative foundations is a generational project, not a political campaign. Phase One builds the empirical foundation, the baseline surveys, perception mapping, and narrative architecture that genuine social intervention requires. Phase Two deploys coordinated, multi-channel behavioral activation across youth networks, religious institutions, traditional authorities, and community organizations. Phase Three scales what works and deepens digital engagement. Phase Four embeds the initiative permanently into Kano’s governance architecture through a dedicated directorate and the annual Kano Values Index. This is not the timeline of an administration managing its image. It is the timeline of a government that has looked honestly at the depth of the challenge and committed itself to the depth of response that the challenge demands.
There is an emotional dimension to this story that deserves to be named directly, because it is one that the purely analytical framing of policy discourse tends to obscure. Kano’s people love their state with an intensity and a pride that is, even in a country of fierce regional loyalties, remarkable. They carry within them the memory of a greatness that their grandparents knew and that they themselves have glimpsed, in fragments and in moments, even through the long decades of disappointment. When Governor Yusuf speaks of restoring Kano’s glory, he is not merely making a political argument. He is speaking to something that lives in the hearts of ordinary Kano citizens, something that has survived misgovernance, political manipulation, and cultural erosion with a resilience that is itself a testament to the depth of Kano’s civilizational roots. That emotional resonance is not a weakness in the Kano First philosophy. It is one of its greatest strategic assets, because renewal that connects with people’s deepest sense of identity and pride generates the kind of civic energy that no top-down programme can manufacture.
The work of restoring that glory belongs, ultimately, not to government alone but to every institution, every community leader, every journalist, every religious scholar, every teacher, every trader, and every young person in Kano who chooses, in their daily conduct, to live by the values that made this civilization great. Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has provided the vision, the institutional framework, and the personal example of a leader who is willing to pay the political costs that genuine commitment to the public good always exacts. Comrade Ibrahim Abdullahi Waiya has provided the intellectual architecture and the communication infrastructure through which that vision can be translated into civic reality. The rest, as it must always be when a society is serious about its own renewal, belongs to the people.
Kano’s glory was never lost. It was covered over, layer by layer, by the accumulated debris of decades of bad governance, institutional betrayal, and the slow erosion of the values that once made it shine. The Kano First Initiative is not building something new on empty ground. It is clearing the ground of debris so that what was always there can breathe again, grow again, and reclaim the space in Nigeria’s national life and in West Africa’s historical memory that Kano has always, by right of civilization, deserved to occupy. That is the historical vision behind Kano First. And it is a vision worth every effort, every sacrifice, and every ounce of collective will that Kano’s people can bring to its realization.

 

Saminu Umar Ph.D is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Information and Media Studies, Bayero University, Kano. surijyarzaki@gmail.com

Continue Reading

Trending