Connect with us

Opinion

Education,ASUU And The Globalist Agenda (I)

Published

4 years ago

on

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.

Advert

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…..)

Related Topics:

Opinion

IT IS OVER: Gov Yusuf Ends 50-Year BUK Land Crisis Ushering Progress for 6,000 Families

Published

3 days ago

on

September 1, 2026

By

 

By Abba Anwar

Fifty years of litigation, mistrust, protests and painful loss came to an end yesterday as the Kano State Government formally resolved the protracted land dispute between Bayero University Kano and the people of Rimin Zakara, Rijiyar Zaki and adjoining communities.

At a historic meeting attended by government officials, university authorities, traditional rulers and community representatives, Governor Alhaji Abba Kabir Yusuf declared the crisis over and unveiled a settlement built on “… justice with compassion” that protects both institutional development and innocent families.”

Commissioner for Public Procurement, Projects Monitoring and Evaluation, Nura Iro Ma’aji, represented the Governor, Commissioner for Land and Physical Planning, Abdujjabbar Muhammad Umar was there, Prof Ahmad Muhammad Tsauri, represented the Vice Chancellor of BUK and the people of Rimin Zakara, were led to the venue by Alhaji Baba Habu.

The exceptional effort is a clear testimony that Governor Yusuf’s administration is a peace-loving one which chooses resolution over confrontation.

Just as he said the settlement reflects the core philosophy of his administration, in an effort to confront inherited problems, restore institutions, protect ordinary citizens and deliver practical solutions to a lingering crisis. Which sometime in the past claimed innocent lives.

“We are not here to recount the history of Rimin Zakara. We are here to close it. For almost half a century, this crisis survived successive administrations. When we assumed office, we made a simple commitment, that we would not run away from difficult problems simply because they were inherited,” he emphasized.

The Commissioner for Land and Physical Planning, Umar, explained that a High-Level Committee was constituted after violent confrontations in early 2025 made it clear the dispute had become “… a serious issue of justice, public security, institutional development and community stability.”

He hinted that, after verifying more than 6,000 claims, examining historical records and conducting surveys, the Executive Council approved a settlement guided by one principle, that is to protect BUK, compensate genuine victims, restore peace and bring the dispute permanently to an end.

Under the informed terms of peace, it was positioned that, it would be land for BUK, plots and compensation for the People. An excellent crisis resolution strategy, commended by all and sundry.

The agreement made sure that BUK is protected. Where more than 85 per cent of Bayero University Kano’s landholding is preserved for future academic, research, residential and infrastructural development. The University made a significant sacrifice by accepting the excision of portions of land originally reserved for expansion.

Agreement further paved way for community resettlement. Where residential plots have been reserved and allocated to verified beneficiaries in the approved Rimin Zakara/Rijiyar Zaki and Jajira/Garun-Iya schemes.

Part of the agreement maintains that compensation should be ongoing. As monetary compensation for eligible claims and structures is being processed by the Ministry of Land and Physical Planning. Government has committed Billions of Naira for compensation, resettlement, planning, surveying and infrastructure.

Governor Yusuf warned henceforth that the decision to compensate was humanitarian, not a validation of illegal sales. “Thousands of people bought land in good faith from persons who had no lawful authority to sell it. Many invested their life savings. The strict application of the law without regard to these circumstances could throw thousands of families into a catastrophic situation.”

Only a government with human face can think this way. Or similarly. This good work on compassionate ground means a lot for electoral victory, come 2027. In fact some of the people who made speeches from the part of the community leaders, made it very clear that, their votes and those they control, would be in favour of Governor Yusuf. This was said without any hesitation, whatsoever.

What is worth celebrating in the resolution of Governor Yusuf’s 50-year BUK-Rimin Zakara land dispute is while Kano State has resolved its land dispute, several other states continue to grapple with age-long land conflicts that have lasted five decades and more without final resolution. This speaks volumes about Governor’s capacity, clean mind and strong political will in serving his people.

For example in Cross River/Ebonyi there is Adadama vs Amaegwu dispute. It is a story of a farmland dispute dating back to 1960. In April 2025, the crisis claimed 11 lives and displaced over 2,000 people. Despite a 2024 communique by both state governments, violence has continued. Which shows how strong is Kano’s strategy.

Advert

In Ebonyi–Ezza vs Ezillo/Iyionu, it is a land dispute of over 50 years old, with a major serious clash in 2008 that displaced communities for 18 years. In March 2026, displaced persons petitioned Gov. Nwifuru for resettlement. Clashes and abductions were still reported in 2024. These are the kind of scenarios Kano’s current administration averted. Kudos Mr Governor!

The Ogun/Oyo–Odeda boundary dispute that was rooted in colonial 1926 boundaries. In May 2025, the Ogun State House of Assembly again urged the National Boundary Commission to urgently delineate the border after allegations of forceful land acquisition and tampering with boundary pillars. Serious clashes were witnessed which caused some loses. In Kano, under Governor Yusuf, similar ugly situation has been averted.

While Imo–Mgbirichi/Abakuru vs 34 Artillery Brigade caused serious misunderstanding, where land acquired in 1977/78 is the causative agent. Communities protested in 2024 over alleged encroachment “up to backyards of houses.” A Defence Headquarters delegation visited in 2024 for dialogue, but the dispute remains unresolved. Kano’s Model is therefore one of the best in the country.

Kano’s settlement therefore stands out as one of the few instances where a decades-old land crisis has been decisively closed through compensation, resettlement and legal backing. A vote of confidence and thank is naturally directed at Commissioner Umar.

His genuine commitment and political will as copied from the Governor, gave him all the necessary guts and straightforwardness in mending the tore parts of Rimin Zakara and its surroundings, as related to BUK, as an institution.

To unveil some of the commendable strategic points to the gathering, the Commissioner added that government would reissue compensation cards directly to verified beneficiaries and that anyone who exploited the process badly would face legal action. Campassion not weakness indeed.

The resolution followed lawful process that was backed by Law and enforced for development. The settlement is reinforced by the judgment of High Court No. 11 in Suit No. K/M1638/2026 delivered on 18th August 2026, which declared the acquisition lawful and directed government to compensate verified claims. What the state is currently doing is just that.

Part of the resolution process suggests that with effect from 31st August 2026, all land within BUK’s demarcated boundaries would be protected exclusively for the university. Government infrastructure corridors will also be secured. The Governor warned that “Our compassion must never be mistaken for weakness.” And that obstruction or fresh encroachment would be met with firm enforcement.

In what I termed as from crisis to progress: the bigger vision, it is noteworthy to know that the Governor linked the resolution to his administration’s wider development agenda, emphasizing that peace is the foundation for progress.

Touching other areas he acknowledged that “… In Education, we declared a State of Emergency. In Health, we introduced free caesarean-section services. In Water, we approved ₦21.89 billion for Challawa and Tamburawa plants. In Agriculture, we gave ₦1 billion in free fertiliser to 52,800 farmers. In Roads, we are rehabilitating 17 metropolitan roads.”

While he further elaborated that “This is the same spirit in which we approached BUK–Rimin Zakara. We are rebuilding confidence in government’s capacity to solve difficult problems,” he then commended BUK’s Vice-Chancellor, Governing Council and management for their “… patience, maturity and genuine commitment to peace… ” and urged Rimin Zakara, Rijiyar Zaki communities, traditional and religious leaders to safeguard the agreement.

The Governor who was represented by the Commissioner for Public Procurement, Projects Monitoring and Evaluation, Ma’aji,, got a standing ovation when he said, “Today, by the grace of Almighty Allah, a crisis of five decades has an end. Now is the time to move from crisis to development, and from dispute to progress.”

With this all-encompassing peace deal of 50 years long, there are attendant benefits attached to it.
The resolution will definitely yield security and stability. While ending the decades of confrontation, litigation and community tension, peace will now reign in the community and other surrounding communities. This is peace at work.

As a cool way for institutional growth, BUK can now proceed with lecture theatres, laboratories, hospitals and hostels without encumbrances. Resolution gives peace a chance. Corridor for shelter and livelihood now comes to the fore. Thousands of families who bought land in good faith now have legal plots and a path to compensation.

Through the Commissioner for Land, Umar, the thrust of urban planning strategy can now proceed without any hindrance from these communities. The era of proper layouts, roads and infrastructure without illegal sub-division, that remained elusive for decades, is now in place. And indeed investor confidence is restored. Where a clear legal boundary restores confidence in land administration and public institutions in Kano. Weldone the people’s Governor.

Both BUK and Rimin Zakara representatives, Prof Tsauni and Habu, commended the effort of the the Commissioner for Land, Umar, in his unrelenting efforts during the crisis and during the resolution exercises. Assuring that the Commissioner got the courage as a result of the goodwill spirit he got from the Governor. Letters of Grant were distributed to the members of the communities affected. As compensation and other verifications are on top gear.

Anwar writes from Kano
Tuesday, 1st September, 2026

Continue Reading

Opinion

Bello Sharada: A Great Writer, A Bookish Soul, Gone Too Soon

Published

3 days ago

on

September 1, 2026

By

 

By Abba Anwar

I received the information about the sad and peaceful passing of a great writer and one of the bookish minds amongst his peers, whose writings, as a commentator, cut across our culture, governance, politics, geography and religious thought, as very shocking and unbearable!

Before the few paragraphs coming below, let me express my condolences to his immediate family first, then the former Governor of Kano State, Malam Ibrahim Shekarau, Malam Aminu Gusau, Malam Abubakar Mujahid, Malam Aminu Inuwa Muhammad, Malam Nura Adam Galadanchi, Malam Nafi’u Zangon Barebari, Malam Ibrahim Ado-Kurawa, Malam Ahmad Shu’aibu, Malam Muhammad Bakari Mika’il, all workers and volunteers of Al-Tajdid Hausa newspaper and all workers of Al-Tajdid Pharmacy, Sabon Titi.

A great loss of this magnitude is heartbreaking and very difficult to cope with. I first came to know Bello Sharada for close to three decades now. When struggle was the order of the day. Our youthful exuberance was glaringly visible and energizing.

From day one I understood that Malam Bello had a flair for writing. Especially on Islamic revivalism and struggle. Since then I knew he loved reading, reading and more reading. At later days, apart from comments on Islamic development, he also resorted to further engage in social and political commentary. Especially after the return of democracy in the country, in 1999.

As calmed and reserved as he was, he still liked discussions on politics, economy and governance. He didn’t hide his feelings about our nation, at the level of leadership and followers. Not minding whose ox was gored. So long as he believed with an opinion, after thorough research and discussions, he wrote his inner feeling for the public. Go and check some of his writings.

He did not hold back in amplifying what his conscience was clear on. As typical writers behave, they highlight certain traits that go down well with you today. And tomorrow they articulate what may not be palatable for your table. You know why? They don’t look at personalities, but other abstract realities. They observe attitudes, behaviors and realities.

Advert

Malam Bello was an embodiment of simplicity, good human relations, upright, and open discussions around many issues. The way he talked to other people gave insight of the kind of person he was. Very polite and selectively reserved. He related with people with respect and embracing engagement.

The way he handled Al-Tajdid newspaper was amazing and appealing. The editorial contents were catchy and convincing. As a religious source for information around us, then, amongst Hausa readers, there was semblance, to a higher degree, of objectivity and fairness in its reportage and other analyses.

He was glued to Al-Tajdid newspaper, that came to newsstand to offer an alternative to Sheikh Ibrahim Zakzaky’s Al-Mizan, that was managed by a good friend of mine Malam Danjuma Katsina. Whether Al-Tajdid was able to counter Al-Mizan to size, was a different story for another day. But today we are mourning the demise of our good friend of great substance.

As quintessential as he was, Malam Bello, was always in the social media and in the air via radio stations, creating awareness on many issues affecting our society. Be it from the lens of our religion or our culture, governance and leaders, followers and other societal settings. His major and particular interest was to see that our people are informed and wise enough to understand realities of life.

There was a scenario between the two of us when he once met me in my office, when I was the Features Editor of Triumph Newspaper, around 2005 and 2006, that time Al-Tajdid Islamic movement was, I think 10 years of 15 years at the time, I can’t remember the years vividly, he brought literature on how the movement started up to the time he met me in the office.

For younger readers, Al-Tajdid was a splinter group, exited from Sheikh Zakzaky’s movement many decades ago. The group then was led by people like Malam Abubakar Mujahid Zaria, Malam Aminu Gusau, Malam Ahmad Shu’aibu, Malam Aminu Inuwa Muhammad, Malam Nura Adam, Malam Nafi’u Zangon Barebari, amongst others.

Back to my office. When Malam Bello met me he put all the papers about Al-Tajdid history and said “Malam Abba we are celebrating the birth of Al-Tajdid. We need an article to be written by you, the Editor, and published in tomorrow’s or next tomorrow’s Triumph Newspaper please. I know you can do it. So I will tell my people that I gave you. So that they can expect it probably tomorrow.”

We laughed and he left. To Allah be the glory I worked hard and made sure it was published the following day. The very time he came calling I was busy editing four pages of articles for the following day publication. Because I always edited four pages daily. For the Daily paper and sometimes, but in rare cases, one or two pages for the Sunday Triumph.

But Allah Helped, I went through the literature brought by Malam Bello, I was able to finish the write – up and went back to three out of the four articles. Because Malam Bello’s work replaced the fourth page.

May Allah forgive all his shortcomings and accept all his good deeds. May Allah reward him with Jannatul-Fiddaus. May Allah guide his family as he exited from this world.

To the family specifically, please don’t let his library, his study room die a natural death.

Allah Ya jikan Malam Bello Sharada.

Anwar writes from Kano
Sunday, 30th August, 2026

Continue Reading

Opinion

Re: “Kano Spends #26.5BN On Govt House,Governors Office, Travels In Six Months

Published

1 week ago

on

August 27, 2026

By

 

 

Setting the Records Straight from the Published Budget Performance Report

By Hon. Muhammad Sanusi S. Kiru, FCIA

As a citizen of Kano State with an abiding interest in good governance, transparency and responsible public discourse, I consider it necessary to independently examine the figures currently circulating under the headline: “Kano Spends ₦26.5bn on Govt House, Governor’s Office, Travels in Six Months.”

Public expenditure must be subjected to scrutiny. The media has an indispensable responsibility to hold governments and public institutions accountable. However, such scrutiny achieves its purpose only when figures extracted from official financial documents are presented within their correct accounting and administrative context.

I have therefore examined the Kano State Second Quarter 2026 Budget Performance Report, the publicly available document from which the figures in the report appear to have been derived. My review reveals a number of important facts which members of the public deserve to know.

I. THE ₦25.869 BILLION IS NOT THE GOVERNOR’S PERSONAL EXPENDITURE

The official Budget Performance Report indeed contains an expenditure figure of approximately ₦25.869 billion under the broader Government House administrative classification.

However, this classification is not synonymous with the personal expenditure of the Governor, nor does the amount represent expenditure exclusively incurred by the Governor’s immediate office.

Rather, it is an umbrella administrative classification encompassing several offices, directorates, agencies and governmental functions.

It would therefore be misleading to interpret or present the entire ₦25.869 billion as money spent personally by the Governor or exclusively by his immediate office.

II. GOVERNMENT HOUSE PROPER RECORDED APPROXIMATELY ₦3.288 BILLION

A closer examination of the same official document shows that Government House proper, under administrative code 011100100100, recorded cumulative expenditure of approximately ₦3.288 billion as at June 2026.

This was against an approved annual provision of approximately ₦39.514 billion, meaning that only about 8.3 per cent of the annual provision had been utilised at the end of the first six months.

This distinction is fundamental.

The difference between the ₦3.288 billion expenditure attributable to Government House proper and the ₦25.869 billion aggregate expenditure under the wider administrative classification should not be overlooked in any objective analysis.

III. THE ₦25.869 BILLION COVERS SEVERAL ESTABLISHMENTS

The broader ₦25.869 billion figure incorporates expenditure attributable to several establishments and governmental functions administratively grouped under Government House.

Advert

These include, among others, the Deputy Governor’s Office, Protocol Directorate, Media and Publicity establishments and other offices and agencies.

For example, the official report indicates that approximately ₦4.471 billion recorded under the Deputy Governor’s Office was capital expenditure. The Protocol Directorate also accounts for a substantial component of expenditure contained within the broader administrative classification.

These are distinct governmental expenditures and should not be portrayed as the Governor’s personal expenditure.

IV. THE ₦626.95 MILLION DESCRIBED AS “TRAVEL”

The additional figure of approximately ₦626,947,782.13 deserves particular attention.

The amount does appear in the official Q2 2026 Budget Performance Report. However, examination of the underlying document shows that the figure appears under the Primary Healthcare expenditure reporting section, specifically against Local Travel and Transport: Training.

This raises a legitimate question as to the basis for adding the ₦626.95 million to the broader Government House administrative expenditure to arrive at the headline figure of approximately ₦26.5 billion.

If the expenditure is classified in the official document under Primary Healthcare and relates to local travel and transport for training, it should not be presented in a manner capable of creating the impression that the amount represents the Governor’s travel expenditure.

V. THE COMPARABLE EXPENDITURE ACTUALLY DECLINED

There is another important fact which deserves equal prominence.

The broader Government House administrative expenditure reportedly stood at approximately ₦28.84 billion during the first six months of 2025, compared with approximately ₦25.87 billion during the corresponding period of 2026.

This represents a reduction of approximately ₦2.97 billion, or about 10.3 per cent.

The year-on-year comparison therefore indicates a decline rather than an escalation in expenditure under the broader administrative classification.

MY FINDING

Having examined the underlying figures, my considered view is that the headline “Kano Spends ₦26.5 Billion on Govt House, Governor’s Office, Travels in Six Months” requires substantial clarification and context.

The ₦25.869 billion figure is contained in the official Budget Performance Report, but it represents expenditure under a broader administrative classification encompassing several offices, agencies, directorates and governmental functions. Government House proper recorded approximately ₦3.288 billion.

Similarly, the additional ₦626.95 million presented as travel expenditure appears in the official document under a Primary Healthcare expenditure section relating to Local Travel and Transport: Training. It should therefore not, without further evidence, be interpreted as the Governor’s travel expenditure.

Furthermore, the comparable broader administrative expenditure declined from approximately ₦28.84 billion in the first half of 2025 to ₦25.87 billion in the first half of 2026, representing a reduction of about 10.3 per cent.

Accountability is not served by shielding government from scrutiny. Neither is it served by presenting legitimate public expenditure figures without their necessary administrative and accounting context.

As citizens, we must continue to demand prudence, transparency and accountability from those entrusted with public resources. In the same spirit, public discourse—particularly on matters involving billions of naira of taxpayers’ money—must be anchored on accuracy, context and fairness.

The records are public. The figures can be verified. Let the facts speak for themselves.

Hon. Muhammad Sanusi S. Kiru, FCIA
Concerned Kano Citizen

Continue Reading

Trending