Opinion

Education,ASUU And The Globalist Agenda (I)

Published

3 years ago

July 24, 2022

Professor Lukman Diso

L. I. Diso
BUK

When William Saint, the World Bank Education Consultant, came to Bayero University, Kano in 1999/2000, he hadn’t had the slightest idea that ASUU was ready for him. He was shocked by the level of mobilization and the ambush set to give him the terrifying welcome. The naive mindset people on such missions usually have about Africans being complacent, or having short memory and lacking a sense of history, was clearly visible in his mien. The apparent sudden realization that, contrary to his expectation, ASUU seemed to know the agenda they had been implementing in the last three decades (1970s, 1980s & 1990s), was, perhaps, what terrified him the more.

Let us take a short trip through these decades to see the picture that provides the logical context to this discussion. We shall return to Mr Saint to see who he was, what his mission in Nigeria was, how he planned to accomplish the mission, his encounter with ASUU at Bayero University, Kano, and part of his report recommendations to the World Bank.

All these may help to unravel the critical questions of why education has been systematically accorded diminishing national priority, and its role in Nigeria’s national development been consistently receding in the last 60 years. They would also help to deepen our insights into the trajectory that has shaped ASUU’s evolution and its struggles through the decades. Arising from all this may be the temptation to raise and tackle the following questions:
– Why has ASUU, of all the education stakeholders, decided to be the only consistent defender of education in Nigeria?
– Why do different Nigerian governments invariably respond to education crisis in the same pattern?
– What are the implications of government’s brazen hostility to education and the intermittent disruptions that follow as a consequence?
– What lessons could be learnt from ASUU’s consistent struggles for decades?

ASUU Strike And Posterity-Ameer Abdul Aziz

The 1960s, the decade of Nigeria’s independence, was afflicted with crippling political crisis, so turbulent that the new nation was shaken to its very roots. Whether it was an inevitable corollary of colonial vestiges that characterized such emerging nations, education, especially university education, seemed to remain relatively insulated, and as robust as it was anywhere in the world. The university teaching and learning environment, infrastructure and facilities were of high standard and comparably as good as anywhere in Europe and North America. Conditions of service were equally good and attractive. Staffing policy, in terms of staff-students ratio and staff mix, was based on best-practice standards, which produced a cosmopolitan environment and a vibrant academic culture necessary for university to thrive.
Therefore, the need for coming together as a body to represent the academics was not felt until 1965 when the Association for University Teachers (AUT) was formed. AUT was not political. It was formed to cater only for the welfare of the academics. Other variables that define university seemed to have been taken for granted.

However, in the decade of prosperity and consolidation, as the 1970s were referred to, Nigerian Universities began to slide gradually, at the beginning, as the military consolidated their firm grips on the country. Suddenly, though consciously, as if jinxed to a morgaged future, Nigeria decided to embrace a policy that marked the beginning of the cascading crisis that has bedevilled education, particularly university education, to this day, and likely, to a distant future. AUT protested to the extent of a strike to press for the Government to address the deteriorating conditions of education – teaching and learning, and welfare of staff and students.

However, the Gowon Military Government responded ruthlessly and crushed the strike. That experience served as an eye opener for the academics, and they moved to change the dynamics.

Despite the relative obscurity of the policy’s source and contents, it triggered a warning from concerned visionary and farsighted Nigerian citizens, scholars and the ASUU, which was formed in 1978 from the National Association of University Teachers (NAUT). They warned that the policy was clearly meant to serve the master and to rule over the target with all ruthlessness, to forcefully impose its contents, and ultimately emasculate the university system and education in general. However, as the decade was largely characterized by military culture, and the government, itself remotely manipulated by the same forces that had designed the policy, the warning was ignored. This explains why Obasanjo Military Regime witnessed a lot of crises in the education sector.

The NPN civilian government under Shagari (1979-1983) was a bit cautious towards university education, although there were largely unsuccessful attempts to violate university autonomy in order to implement the same surreptitious agenda. ASUU’s spirited resistance thwarted the implementation of the agenda. As the dogged struggle deepened, the first agreement that gave the academic staff the USS scale with 20% differential relative to civil service scale, was signed in 1982.

The deepening contradictions in the Shagari Civilian administration provided the excuse that brought Buhari/Idiagbon military regime (Dec.1983- Aug. 1985) in a bloodless coup D’tat. Immediately they settled the military authoritarian culture began to manifest: the repressive policy mills were hastily deployed to launch a direct assault on the University and draconian decrees arbitrarily manufactured. Under this regime, the University was subjected to a torrent of attacks including:
– Termination of university cafetaria services
– Withdrawal of subsidies on accommodation in universities
– Workers retrenchment and wage freeze
– Transfer of university senate’s powers to NUC through Decree 16 of 1985
– Workers retrenchment and wage freeze
ASUU never relented in its strong resistence to these authoritarian policies despite all the harrassment and intimidation the union faced as a consequence.
The palace coup that toppled Buhari and brought Ibrahim Bodamasi Babangida (IBB) regime (1985 – 1993) was a continuation of the military and their repressive anti-intellectual culture. IBB regime never pretended that it was there to serve interests other than Nigerians’. Shortly after settling, the regime dropped the bombshell, unveiling a World Bank/IMF-packaged economic policy with fanatical determination to implement. While the regime initiated a national debate as to whether or not to take the IMF loan, it contemptuously ignored the process and silently took the loan with all the conditionalities before the public final verdict (a clearly overwhelming rejection). Nigerians were shocked by the regime’s stunning insensitivity in this reckless disregard for the far reaching and devastating socio-economic and political implications of this action.
ASUU became the intellectual light, in the forefront leading the resistance movement, providing an incisive critique of the regime’s economic policy and presenting simplefied but thorough analysis of the policy’s implications. The duo of ASUU and the Nigerian Labour Congress (NLC), the former being an affiliate of the latter, became the most consistent and vocal critics of the policy, vigorously mobilizing the nation with the dogged insistence, to force the government to reverse its decision. As the government intentensified the commitment to the ruthless implementation of this anti-people economic policy, ASUU, NLC, NANS and other pro-people organizations turned the situation into a season of revolutionary activities: intellectually scathing public lectures and production of mobilizational publications to galvanize public opinion against government’s submission to the oppressive policy.
Sensing the massive public support and reaction and the obvious likely consequences, the IBB Regime bared its fangs, unleashing all the repressive instruments at their disposal. Barely one year into IBB’s tenure, the Regime started the full implementation of the Structural Adjustment Programme (SAP) as a package of the IMF conditionalities. NLC, ASUU and NANS started to organize mass protest. NANS, using the Commemoration Day of “Ali-Must- GO”, staged a mass protest, in which many students were shot and killed in ABU, Zaria. The Government’s crackdown was widened and started in full swing:
– Arbitrary arrest of NLC leaders and “bombardment” of NLC offices started across Nigeria
– Plans to Weaken ASUU were hastily hatched and implemented
(1) ASUU was de-affiliated from the NLC by Decree 16 of 1986
(2) Payment of check off dues was made voluntary for ASUU and NANS
(3)The Abisoye Panel set up on ABU Crisis recommended sacking of lecturers for “…not teaching what they were paid to teach”
– A Year later (1987) UniBen VC, Prof. Grace Alele Williams, acting on the contrived report of visitation panel, announced the sack of ASUU President, Dr.Festus Iyayi, from the University. (ASUU Leadership Training Manual 2017).
By the time Dr Attahiru M Jega (Dr Iyayi’s Vice-President) was elected ASUU President in an early NDC in 1988, the IBB regime, following the World Bank Agenda, had added more to the list of its atrocities. In fact, a reign of terror was unleashed:
– Government’s plans to retrench lecturers and rationalize courses had already reached advanced stages
– Dr. Patrick Wilmot (ABU, Zaria), a Scholar and vocal critic of Western imperialism, and Ms. Firinne N.C. Adelugba (BUK) had been covertly abducted and deported from Nigeria
– Government was blatant in its refusal to implement the earlier negotiated EUSS (Elongated University Salary Structure)
– As fuel prices were hiked by the Regime, students protested and the Government responded with massive crackdown on their leadership and on other activists across the country
– NLC was summarily dissolved and sole administrator appointed. (ASUU Leadership Training Manual 2017)
These constituted Dr Jega’s immediate challenges as the new ASUU President, and his EXCO set out to confront them head on. They formed Joint Action Committee (JAC) with the Senior Staff Association of University Teaching Hospital, Research Institutes and Allied Institutions (SSAUTHRIAI) to present a united front. JAC submitted its demands to Government, which were expectedly shunned. Joint strike commenced nationwide on July 1, 1988. Curiously, only ASUU was immediately banned. The leadership of SSAUTHRIAI immediately capitulated, dissociated itself from the JAC and called off the strike. ASUU continued with the strike under University Lecturers’ Association (ULA). Government immediately launched a crackdown on national and local leadership of ASUU. Drs Jega, Iyayi, and other national officers were arrested and taken to unknown location (which was later learnt to be Lagos) for over a month. Many branch chairmen, secretaries and activists of the Union were arrested across the nation. Yet, the declared strike was kept alive by, more or less, leaderless members; it lingered for sometime, but finally fizzled out unofficially.
Signature campaigns for the release of all the arrested ASUU leaders and members were initiated nationwide. A legal action was instituted in Kano High Court for their freedom. A day to the verdict, Dr Jega was produced and presented to the court; and all others were released. Case closed, but ASUU remained officially banned (1988-1990). Despite this situation, academics never ceased to organize. They continued to network and organize under different names. It was remarkable, given the circumstances, to be able to stop the World Bank University Sector Loan Facility and consequential staff rationalization. The Loan Facility was carefully packaged to sow the seed for Nigerian University System Innovation Project (NUSIP), which popped up later as Obasanjo Administration’s initiative.
The occurrance of an interesting coincidence in 1990 helped to expose the desperation of the IBB regime to implement the IMF/World Bank policies. A day after the Association of University Teachers (AUT) – name adopted by the banned ASUU – had held a National Conference on the World Bank in OAU, Ile-Ife, the Orka Coup took place, April 22, 1990. In his coup speech, Major Gideon Orkar made apparently innocuous reference to the prevalent repressive tendencies of IBB and his Government. He adduced three reasons for the coup, part of which included:
“(d) The intent to cow the students by the promulgation of the draconian Decree Number 47.
(e) The cowing of the university teaching and non-teaching staff by an intended massive purge, using the 150 million dollar loan as the necessitating factor.”
Given the contemporary issues against which the ASUU, NLC and students were consistently united, and that which informed the core of their struggles against the government, it was easy for a sensitive government like IBB’s to perceive a connection between the coup and the conference. Hence, the conferene organizers, Prof. Omotoye Olorode and Dr. Idowu Awopetu (ASUU National Treasurer) were immediately arrested and detained as alledged coup suspects.They were subjected to military trials (Court Martial) but were found innocent and released. Yet, they were compulsorily retired “in public interest”. They were reinstated by the court when Prof. Aliu Babatunde Fafunwa became Education Minister.
After a long spell of unease between the Government and AUT (the former still defiant to address ASUU’s demands), September 1990 became a new dawn for ASUU as it was deproscribed. ASUU intensified its demand for collective bargaining – to negotiate the conditions of service and other work-related issues for its members. The IBB Gvernment remained adamant and invariably hostile whenever ASUU made attempt to push its demands, until May 1992, when Dr Jega was reelected President. After several failed efforts to get the Government to start negotiation, ASUU commenced the suspended strike. However, as if that was the Greenhouse conditions desperately needed, the Government readily submitted to start negotiation as the strike subsisted. What an irony! No sooner had the negotiation commenced than it was unilaterally suspended by the Government! ASUU had no option than to commence the strike.
On May 25, the strike commenced, but had to be suspended on May 30 as Industrial Arbitration Panel (IAP) stepped in. That marked the beginning of a series of crowded activities as ASUU responded to every Government move to arm-twist its way. ASUU continued to checkmate the Government’s unsavory litiny of absurdities until one by one they reached their climax and crumbled with a bang. Follow the labyrinth of tragicomedy of industrial relations as it unfolded:
– On June 1, the IAP found Dr Jega guilty of contempt of court, but the judge, apparently considering the weighty political implications, decided to waive it.
– On July 20, with Government irresponsibilty, ASUU had to commence the strike
– On July 22, ASUU was banned again, but the strike continued under Academic Staff of Nigerian Universities (ASNU)
– The situation remained until the Government was forced to negotiate through a committee it constituted
– On September 3, 1992, the two parties reached an agreement on Funding, Conditions of Service [with University Academic Salary Scale (UASS)], and Autonomy and Academic Freedom
– On September 4, the 4-month old strike was suspended and academic activities commenced.
Immediately the Agreement was signed, other university workers were instigated to ask for “parity”, insisting that whatever was given to ASUU must be given to them. Even some of their members reasoned and questioned the basis of their leaders’ claims to parity, pointing out that they had been part of JAC when the struggle had begun, but unilaterally decided to ditch the JAC, capitulated and called off the strike when the chips were down. With our union preserved and intact, and without any collectively bargained agreement, what justification do we have to claim parity? – these SSANU members rationally queried.
However, as implementation of the ASUU Agreement commenced SSANU intensified its parity demand, which led to another round of the “Theatre of the Absurd”. The new vicious cycle started with the appointment of Professor Ben Nwabueze as Secretary (Minister) of Education. He contrived a new concept of “the Agreement of Imperfect Obligation”, meaning that the FG/ASUU Agreement was not (legally) binding on the Government to implement. He therefore directed universities to stop implementing the UASS/USS. Without any provocation, Prof Nwabueze continued his vicious attacks on ASUU with systematic breaches of the Agreement. It was obvious that he was deployed to do the hatchet job, and he was certainly doing it with utmost efficiency. ASUU’s voice of protest was drowned in a wirlwind of blackmail and intimidation. Its persistent demand to stop the breaches of the Agreement came up against a brick wall. With most aspects of the Agreement rolled back and no sign of de-escalating the breaches, ASUU had no option other than to take action.
– ASUU resumed the strike on May 3, 1993, and all member universities joined
– Three days later, the Government announced the dismissal of all striking lecturers and salary stoppage
– A Decree making teaching essential service, retroactively prohibiting teachers from going on strike, was enacted
– All lecturers on strike were given sack letters
– In some campuses, lecturers were ejected from their houses, despite the argument that residency of campus quarters was governed by the rental law.
– A particular case of UniAbuja Vice-Chancellor, Prof. Isa Muhammed, was pathetic. He went to the extent of sending the estate staff to tear off the roofs of lecturers’ houses, and then the security personnel to eject them.
– Even after the reinstatement of all lecturers later, Prof. Isa Muhammed refused to reinstate the EXCO of UniAbuja.

(TO BE CONTINUED…..)

Opinion

Tears For Our Youth-Inuwa Waya

Published

13 hours ago

July 13, 2025

Nigerian Tracker

BY
INUWA WAYA

“You are the leaders of tomorrow”. “You are the future generation”. “ You are our hope”. “We are planning for your tomorrow”. These are the phrases society relied upon to give hope and aspirations to our youth. Being an aggregate of people living together, this article chooses the word “Society” as opposed to government or community which are narrow in scope.

What is being discussed herein affect everyone and everything. Willy nilly, the youth are the future leaders. The issues to consider are the type of society they would lead, the level of their preparedness and what levers the society is using to prepare them for leadership. The term “youth” generally refers to the period between childhood and adulthood,its exact age range can vary depending on the context. The United Nations and the World Health Organisation put the age range between 18 to 24, while the African charter defined it between 18 to 35.

Clearly from the age brackets, the youth are the most productive class of any society. The way and manner the society treats these productive class is therefore of utmost interest to us. Ditto for the youth’s understanding of their role as first class materials in any society. From the way they conduct their affairs , the Nigerian youth it appears do not appropriate their importance.

They are weak, vulnerable and debased with very little sympathy and empathy. This class of otherwise proud people had embarked on a misadventure that would if care is not taken, destroy them for good. It is only a fraction of them that understood the purpose of their existence and are determined to make the best Use of it.
In the current dispensation, the youth’s involvement in political activities leaves much to be desired. They virtually contribute nothing in terms of political development. They are used as political hirelings and online mercenaries. They specialised in verbal attacks and acts of political thuggery. They lacked the initiative to establish a grassroots based political movement that would transform into a political party in order to wrestle power from the hands of the old brigade. The way their peers in other parts of the World liberated themselves. In their flock, our youth have shown appetite in acquiring wealth and depicting an ostentatious lifestyle. Acting as buffoons and nincompoops, they hardly surprise anybody whenever they act without civility and respect. Instead of focusing on productivity and securing their future, our youth had adopted a deviant behaviour. They resorted to taking drugs and other type of narcotics. 80% of the patients at the NDLEA rehabilitation centres and those in the psychiatric hospitals around the Country are youth receiving treatments for drugs and substance addiction. This particular problem is an epidemic of alarming proportion that is destroying the lives of our youth. The influence of drugs leads to all vices including the commission of crimes. From misdemeanours to capital offences, the number of our youth as inmates in various Correctional facilities in the Country are very troubling. From petty thieves and common criminals, many of them came out from the correctional facilities to become hardened criminals and fraudsters, thereby making their incarceration counterproductive.

Perhaps the major area where our tears must drop for our youth relates to their search for greener pasture in foreign Countries. Nigerian youth are scattered in the Middle East, Asia, Europe and the United States of America. A significant number of them, however, ended up in various prisons. The offences for which Nigerian youth are convicted in foreign lands are, drug-related offences, robbery, murder, wired fraud, identity theft, computer fraud, romance scam, fraudulent claims, email compromise, domestic violence and violence related to cultists activities. In most cases, our youth are deported upon completion of their prison terms. In recent months, substantial number of ex- convicts were deported from the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, India, United kingdom and United States of America to mention but a few. Almost all the deportees were brought to their mother land in a depressive condition having suffered indignities at the deportation camps. Apart from the toll such takes on the life of those affected, there is an enormous amount of damage that is caused to the green passport at the International arena. It was on account of the way our youth behaved abroad, that Nigerians are subjected to embarrassing searches and rigorous scrutiny at the International airports. It is also because of their behaviour that foreign investors are wary of coming to explore the Nigerian market.

Direct foreign investment may become elusive if such criminal practices continue unabated. The exportation of crime to foreign countries tragically effected the position of our Country among the committee of Nations. It is because of that diminished status that many Countries refused to give entry visas to Nigerians. Innocent people who have genuine businesses abroad are prevented because of the cruel attitude of some Nigerians. There is no amount of plea or representation that would change the attitude any Country regarding entry visa to Nigerians, unless those responsible for these crimes repent. Based on the aforementioned, the task before the society is gigantic. First in preparing the youth for leadership and second in making them understand their pivotal role in the overall development of the society. The Federal, states and local governments should create the necessary synergy. They must review their policies especially as it affects the youth. Government should note that our youth have nowhere to call home but Nigeria. Its only in this Country they can enjoy rights and privileges. The global economic meltdown is forcing Countries to turn their back on foreigners. The United States had embarked on massive deportation of undocumented immigrants. They have introduced strict visa requirements to discourage economic migrants and students who may want to do a part-time job while studying in the US. The United Kingdom had equally carried out mass deportation and would soon introduce tougher visa rules. Generally in Europe, the nationalist parties are gaining popularity on daily basis because of their uncompromising stand on immigration. More than ever before, Nigerian governments at all levels must create wealth and distribute it evenly to assist our youth . Policies that would enhance job opportunities must be put in place as a matter of urgency. The current arrangements to tackle youth unemployment should be reviewed and fresh ideas injected. Commercial Banks should be brought in to handle all aspects of youth empowerment through loans for small scale and medium enterprises. The involvement of Banks would bring professionalism and ensure that appropriate mechanisms are put in place for judicious disbursement and repayment of these loans. Through the coordination of the three tiers of government, vast agricultural land should be carved out and allocated to our youth who are interested in farming. The Bank of agriculture should shortlist prospective applicants for loans, while its administration and disbursement should be handled by commercial Banks. Government should fully fund our universities and polytechnics and fast-track the development of science and technology. In order to fully engage our youth in education and scholarship, the government should declare a state of emergency on education by introducing free education in all government tertiary institutions for the next 10 years. That will enable qualified students from poor families to benefit from that intervention. The fight against drug abuse and trafficking must be vigorously pursued to save our youth from destruction. we must appreciate the efforts of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) for their doggedness in combating drug-related offences. In addition to fighting internal crimes, the law enforcement agencies must continue to fight crimes that bring shame and embarrassment to our nation. Here, we must salute the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) for its fight against the so-called “yahoo boys”. All other crimes such as banditry, kidnapping, murder, armed robbery, fraud and the rest of them must be completely eradicated by our security agencies. The Nigerian Correctional Services must be reformed to make it truly correctional and reformatory, such that inmates who are convicted on minor offences should not be release as hardened criminals. The administration of criminal justice must address the menace of prison congestion especially as it relates to the awaiting trial mates many of who spent years awaiting trail. Justice delayed is justice denied.

In conclusion and in as much as we implore the society to rescue our youth from the road to perdition, the bulk of the work lies with them. They must wake up from slumber and eject themselves from mental slavery. They must understand that their future is at stake. It is their responsibility to shape their destiny. It is time to have an attitudinal change. It is time for soul-searching. what they do today would make or mar
their future and by extension, the future of the society. All we require our youth to do is to be patriotic, to be obedient to the constituted authority and to participate in the political process by championing accountability and governance. Period.

Opinion

Guardians of Tradition: Why Gidan Rumfa Casts Out the Disloyal in Defence of the Throne

Published

4 days ago

July 9, 2025

Nigerian Tracker

By Abdulkadir Aliyu Shehu

The ancient city of Kano, a cradle of Islamic civilisation and one of the oldest surviving traditional emirates in sub-Saharan Africa, has once again demonstrated the enduring strength of its cultural institutions. With the reinstatement of His Highness Malam Muhammadu Sanusi II as the 16th Emir of Kano, a necessary purge of disloyal palace servants has taken place rooted not in politics, but in sacred custom and historical continuity.

Galadiman Sallama, Sarkin Yakin Danrimi, and Sarkin Tafarki, as well as several others whose refusal to pay “Mubayi’a “the traditional pledge of allegiance placed them in direct contradiction to centuries of palace protocol, were among those recently required to vacate the Emir’s palace, Gidan Rumfa.

Gidan Rumfa, established circa 1480 by Sultan Muhammadu Rumfa, is not merely a residence; it embodies Kano’s royal heritage. Serving as the heart of the Emirate’s political, spiritual, and judicial authority, it has historically been home only to those who recognise and serve the sitting Emir with complete loyalty.

The structure of Kano’s traditional institution is deeply hierarchical and meticulously organised. Titleholders known as masu sarauta are assigned roles that reflect the Emir’s trust and the Emirate’s values. These roles are more than titles; they are historical obligations passed down across dynasties. Loyalty is not symbolic it is operational and functional.

The Mubayi’a a rite dating back to the 14th century is more than a handshake or public appearance. It is a solemn vow rooted in Islamic and traditional authority, echoing bay’ah practices seen throughout Islamic dynasties. Without it, no palace official is recognised, and their residence in Gidan Rumfa is considered both illegitimate and sacrilegious.

In this context, the refusal of the aforementioned palace titleholders to pay Mubayi’a to Emir Muhammadu Sanusi II is a violation not just of tradition, but of spiritual and constitutional legitimacy. By instead offering allegiance to the deposed Emir Aminu Ado Bayero whose removal was duly executed through legislative and executive authority these individuals chose to defy the very institution they once served.

Historical precedent supports this outcome. When Emir Muhammadu Tukur was dethroned in 1893, several chiefs who remained loyal to him were removed from office and banished from the palace under the new Emir Aliyu Babba. Similarly, during the colonial transition and reorganisation of native authorities in the early 20th century, allegiance to the colonial-approved Emir became a requirement for continued service in Gidan Rumfa.

The recent exit of these servants, therefore, is not new it is a continuation of a long-standing principle: the palace belongs to the Emir, and those who reside within must recognise no other master.

What intensifies the matter is that some of these individuals were allegedly involved in the disturbance that occurred at the palace gates during the illegal visit of the deposed Emir, in what many described as an attempted forceful entry. This act was not only provocative but also placed the lives of palace guards and loyalists at risk, further justifying their dismissal.

The Kano State Government, under the leadership of Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf, reaffirmed its constitutional right to restructure the traditional institution. This was executed through a lawful repeal of the Kano Emirates Law (2019), which had fragmented the historical Emirate. With the reconstitution of a unified Kano Emirate and the return of Sanusi II, allegiance became the only path to continuity for palace officials.

The implications of refusing allegiance go beyond symbolic defiance. It erodes the moral fabric of the Emirate, challenges lawful authority, and introduces political instability into a sacred institution. It is for this reason that elders, historians, and Islamic scholars across Northern Nigeria have voiced support for the cleansing of the palace.

The late Alhaji Ado Bayero, father of the deposed Emir, upheld this very principle during his reign. Several disloyal aides who failed to recognise his authority upon his appointment in 1963 were stripped of their titles. Loyalty was not only expected it was enforced.

Therefore, the removal of Galadiman Sallama, Sarkin Yakin Danrimi, and Sarkin Tafarki is neither revenge nor political intimidation. It is a return to principle, a restoration of discipline, and a reaffirmation of the Emirate’s spiritual purity.

Many in Kano have applauded this action, describing it as necessary to protect Gidan Rumfa from betrayal have rallied behind Emir Sanusi II, asserting that those who undermine him are, by extension, undermining the very dignity of Kano.

The Emir, known for his intellect, humility, and justice, has resumed his duties with grace and poise. Traditional court sessions have returned to the palace, and emissaries from across the country have begun to restore ties severed during the turbulence of the past four years.

Meanwhile, the Emirate Council has opened the door for appointments to fill the vacated positions. It is expected that loyal, educated, and culturally grounded individuals will be considered those who understand the weight of serving the throne.

Calls have also grown louder for the Federal Government and political elites to respect Kano’s sovereignty and allow its traditional institutions to function without manipulation or interference. “Let Kano breathe,” has become a rallying cry, echoing from the palace to the streets.

This moment in Kano’s history is more than an administrative adjustment it is a cultural reset. It reasserts the supremacy of tradition over personal ambition, and of legitimacy over factional loyalty.

The legacy of Kano’s traditional leadership rests on an unbroken chain of loyalty, stretching from the era of Bagauda in the 10th century to the modern era. That chain must not be weakened by disloyalty, opportunism, or political convenience.

The events of the past weeks show clearly: Gidan Rumfa is not a place for divided loyalty. It is the fortress of tradition, guarded by those who see service to the Emir as service to the people, history, and God.

In preserving the sanctity of the palace, Emir Sanusi II has demonstrated statesmanship, patience, and a deep understanding of his forebears’ vision. The Emirate he leads is not built on transient power, but on values that have stood the test of time.

In conclusion, the removal of the disloyal palace servants is a testament to the strength of tradition in Kano a tradition that refuses to bend to politics, fear, or faction. As the Emirate restores its rhythm under a revered and legitimate monarch, the people of Kano look forward with hope, unity, and renewed trust in their heritage.

May Gidan Rumfa continue to flourish as the beacon of justice, wisdom, and unwavering loyalty.

Abdulkadir Aliyu Shehu is a journalist and public commentator, and writes from Gombe and can be reached via danfodio247@gmail.com.

Opinion

Waiya’s Transformative Impact On Kano’s Public Image

Published

1 week ago

July 5, 2025

Nigerian Tracker

By Umar Danliti

Since taking over as the Commissioner for Information in Kano State, Ibrahim Waiya has been on a mission to redefine the way the government interacts with the public. With a background as an activist, Waiya brings a unique perspective to the role.

Replacing Baba Halilu Dantiye, Waiya has wasted no time in implementing his vision for a more open and responsive government. His approach has been met with enthusiasm from both government officials and the general public.

One of Waiya’s key strategies has been to foster good working relationships with the media and other stakeholders. He believes that building trust and credibility is essential for effective governance.

Under Waiya’s leadership, the Ministry of Information has become more proactive in engaging with the public. The commissioner has made himself available to the press, providing timely and accurate information on government policies and initiatives.

Waiya’s experience as an activist has given him a deep understanding of the importance of public relations. He has leveraged this expertise to generate positive publicity for the state, highlighting its achievements and potential.

The results of Waiya’s efforts are already becoming apparent. The government’s image has begun to shift, with many Nigerians now viewing Kano State as a hub of progress and innovation.

Waiya’s approach is not limited to just spin doctoring; he is committed to ensuring that government policies and programs are people-centered. He believes that effective communication is key to building trust and support for government initiatives.

By engaging directly with the public, Waiya has been able to gauge their concerns and feedback. This information is being used to inform policy decisions, making government more responsive to the needs of the people.

One of the key challenges facing Waiya is managing the government’s online presence. He has taken steps to revamp the ministry’s social media platforms, ensuring that they are used effectively to engage with the public.

Waiya’s team has also been working to improve the government’s crisis communication strategy. By being proactive and transparent, they aim to minimize the impact of any potential crises on the government’s reputation.

The commissioner has also been working closely with other government agencies to ensure that their messages are consistent and effective. This coordination has helped to project a unified image of the government.

Under Waiya’s leadership, the Ministry of Information has become a hub of creativity and innovation. The commissioner encourages his team to think outside the box and come up with new ideas for engaging with the public.

Waiya’s vision for the ministry extends beyond just government publicity. He believes that the ministry should also play a role in promoting Kano State’s rich cultural heritage and tourism potential.

To achieve this, Waiya has been working with local artists, musicians, and other creatives to showcase the state’s unique identity. This initiative has helped to promote a sense of pride and ownership among the people.

The dividends of Waiya’s approach are already being felt. The government’s approval ratings have improved, and there is a growing sense of optimism about the state’s future.

Waiya’s commitment to transparency and accountability has also helped to build trust between the government and the people. Citizens are now more confident in the government’s ability to deliver on its promises.

As a seasoned activist, Waiya is well aware of the power of social media. He has used this knowledge to engage with the public and promote government initiatives.

The commissioner’s team has also been working to improve the government’s offline engagement with the public. Town hall meetings and other public forums have been organized to provide citizens with a platform to air their views.

Waiya’s leadership style is characterized by his willingness to listen and adapt. He is open to feedback and willing to make changes when necessary.

As Kano State looks to the future, it is clear that Ibrahim Waiya’s appointment as Commissioner for Information has been a game-changer. His unique approach and commitment to public relations have set a new standard for government communication in the state. With Waiya at the helm, the prospects for greater Kano look brighter than ever.

Umar Liti, is a concern Kano citizen, and can be reached at umarliti@yahoo.com