By Shariff Aminu Ahlan

Politics has always been a battlefield where success attracts admiration from supporters and resentment from adversaries. However, there comes a time when criticism ceases to be constructive and transforms into a calculated campaign of character assassination. Such appears to be the case in the relentless and coordinated attacks being launched against Commissioner Waiya, one of the most visible and effective members of the Kano State Government.

It is both shocking and disturbing to witness the growing wave of sponsored attacks against a public servant whose only “offence” seems to be his commitment to duty and his unwavering dedication to the ideals of the administration. Across various media platforms, particularly radio stations, certain individuals have embarked on what appears to be a well-funded mission aimed at tarnishing the image of the commissioner, undermining his achievements, and ultimately convincing the Governor to remove him from office.

The question on the minds of many observers remains simple: Why Commissioner Waiya?

Why has a man widely recognized as one of the finest performers in the current administration suddenly become the target of such sustained hostility? Why is a commissioner who has consistently demonstrated competence, loyalty, and effectiveness being subjected to daily attacks by individuals who offer little beyond insults and baseless allegations?

The answer may not be difficult to find. Commissioner Waiya has established himself as a hardworking and result-oriented public official who has distinguished himself through service, innovation, and inclusiveness. Since assuming office, he has worked tirelessly to promote the policies and achievements of the government while fostering unity among media practitioners across the state.

One of his most commendable achievements was the revival and strengthening of the historic “Gauta Club,” a platform that brought together diverse media commentators and radio presenters under one umbrella. Through dialogue, engagement, and mutual understanding, he succeeded in reducing the culture of reckless attacks, inflammatory statements, and unnecessary political insults that had gradually become common across many radio programs.

His intervention restored a measure of professionalism, dignity, and decorum to political discourse. It helped transform the media environment from one dominated by hostility and personal attacks into one that increasingly emphasized constructive engagement and responsible commentary.

Even more remarkable is his open-door policy, which has become a defining feature of his leadership style. Unlike many public officials who isolate themselves from the people they serve, Commissioner Waiya has remained accessible, accommodating, and respectful to all, regardless of political affiliation, social status, or ideological differences.

Media practitioners, political stakeholders, and ordinary citizens alike can testify to his willingness to listen, assist, and provide support whenever necessary. Under his stewardship, many individuals and groups have benefited from various forms of assistance, encouragement, and interventions designed to address their challenges.

Ironically, some of the loudest voices attacking him today are individuals who once sought his assistance, benefited from his generosity, and enjoyed his goodwill. The sudden transformation of these beneficiaries into fierce critics raises legitimate questions about the motives behind their actions.

What is even more troubling is the growing belief that these attacks are not spontaneous but carefully orchestrated. There are indications that certain ambitious individuals, desperate to occupy the commissioner’s position, may be financing and directing this campaign behind the scenes. Unable to match his performance, achievements, and growing influence, they have allegedly resorted to smear tactics as a shortcut to political relevance.

Their objective appears clear: weaken his reputation, create unnecessary controversies, and manufacture a perception of failure where none exists. Unfortunately for the conspirators, facts remain stubborn.

Governor Abba Kabir Yusuf has repeatedly demonstrated confidence in Commissioner Waiya’s capabilities. This confidence is evident not only in the responsibilities entrusted to him within the ministry but also in his recent appointments to sensitive committees that play crucial roles in advancing the government’s developmental agenda. Such appointments are not given as political favours; they are earned through competence, trustworthiness, and proven performance.

The Governor’s continued reliance on Commissioner Waiya is itself a powerful testament to the value he brings to the administration. It reflects a level of trust that many public officials can only aspire to attain. This growing confidence from the highest levels of government appears to have unsettled his opponents. Unable to tolerate his rising profile and expanding influence, they have intensified their efforts to bring him down by any means necessary.

Yet history teaches us that genuine performance often survives propaganda. Public servants who deliver tangible results ultimately earn the respect and support of the people, regardless of the noise generated by their detractors.
Commissioner Waiya’s record speaks for itself. His commitment to service, his efforts to foster unity within the media landscape, his accessibility to the public, and his dedication to the Kano First Agenda have earned him recognition far beyond the walls of his ministry.

The ongoing attacks against him therefore reveal more about the desperation of his adversaries than they do about the commissioner himself. As Kano continues its journey toward development and progress, citizens must remain vigilant against campaigns designed to sacrifice competence on the altar of personal ambition. The state needs dedicated public servants focused on delivering results, not victims of politically motivated conspiracies.

In the final analysis, the campaign against Commissioner Waiya appears less like a quest for accountability and more like a desperate attempt by unseen forces to eliminate a performer whose growing influence has become uncomfortable for those driven by selfish interests. Whether these conspirators succeed or fail remains to be seen. What is certain, however, is that Commissioner Waiya’s achievements, dedication, and service to the people have already left a mark that no amount of sponsored propaganda can easily erase.

Shariff Aminu Ahlan
APC Intellectual Warrior.
Realahlan0101@gmail.com

Modern campus life is undergoing a quiet but profound psychological shift. If you walk into any university hostel or library late at night, you will see students intensely staring at their screens. They are not just scrolling through social media or typing out assignments; many are having deep, highly personal conversations with artificial intelligence. Faced with intense academic pressure, social isolation, and a volatile job market, students are increasingly treating generative AI chatbots not just as functional engines, but as emotional lifelines.

This emerging phenomenon highlights what can be called the “AI Delusion”—the psychological tendency for users to attribute real human consciousness, genuine empathy, and authentic wisdom to automated language models that are simply predicting words based on statistical data. From a student’s perspective, this reliance is quietly reshaping the three foundational pillars of the higher education experience: interpersonal relationships, academic mentorship, and mental health counselling.

First, AI is radically changing the landscape of campus relationships. Loneliness remains a massive hurdle in student environments, prompting many undergraduates to turn to AI companion applications for immediate interaction.

These applications are available 24/7, never judge, and offer a simulated space of comfort. However, the delusion occurs when a student confuses this simulated, one-sided validation with a real, reciprocal relationship. While data on conversational AI shows these tools can temporarily lower perceived feelings of isolation, psychologists confirm they do not resolve structural clinical symptoms. Human relationships are naturally messy. They require conflict resolution, compromise, and mutual vulnerability. By retreating into digital relationships with chatbots, students risk letting their real-world social skills atrophy, making genuine human interaction feel too exhausting to pursue.

Second, the delusion is altering the nature of academic and career mentorship. Guidance traditionally came from professors, older peers, or university alumni who shared lived experiences, industry networks, and personal failures. Today, students frequently bypass this human network entirely, asking AI to evaluate their skills and map out their professional futures. While generative AI tools excel at formatting resumes or providing structured career advice, they carry a high risk of user over-reliance.

Educators confirm that automated tools fundamentally lack the nuanced relational, situational, and developmental depth that defines authentic human mentorship. Students who depend solely on automated advisors miss out on the critical “hidden curriculum” of professional networking and human intuition that an algorithm simply cannot simulate.

Third, and perhaps most critically, AI is transforming mental health counselling on campus. University wellness centres globally face extreme backlogs, high costs, and institutional bottlenecks, forcing students to look for alternative solutions. Consequently, an increasing number of youth now utilize AI chatbots as standalone “pocket therapists” to process anxiety and trauma. The delusion of the digital counsellor poses serious psychological risks. Large language models do not possess clinical judgment or genuine empathy. Medical experts warn that while evidence-based digital therapy apps can serve as helpful administrative or basic self-help scaffolds between sessions, they cannot substitute for a qualified human therapist. Relying on pattern-recognition robots during a severe psychological crisis can result in superficial coping mechanisms or dangerously isolated coping loops.

Ultimately, analyzing this trend from a student’s perspective reveals that technology must have strict emotional and practical boundaries. AI is an incredible tool for brainstorming, accelerating research, and enhancing productivity, but it becomes a delusion the moment we allow it to replace human depth. If our generation is to thrive in a digital future, we must treat AI as a bicycle for the mind rather than a replacement for the human heart. True growth, emotional resilience, and professional success will always require real human connections, authentic mentors, and real human empathy.

Adeyemi Ige Taiwo Oluwatosin
200-level student, Department of Development and Strategic Communication, University of Abuja.

By Abraham Victory

When more than forty schoolchildren were abducted during coordinated attacks on schools in Borno in May, Nigerians were reminded of one of the country’s darkest security nightmares: the return of large-scale school kidnappings.

Only weeks later, reports emerged of fresh bandit attacks in Zamfara, where farmers were killed while working on their farmlands. Across parts of Benue and the Middle Belt, communities continued to mourn victims of deadly attacks that left many families displaced and fearful about what tomorrow might bring.

For ordinary Nigerians, these incidents are no longer isolated headlines. They have become symbols of a broader security crisis that has persisted despite the presence of numerous security agencies and repeated government reforms.

It is against this backdrop that President Bola Ahmed Tinubu’s creation of the office of Special Adviser on Homeland Security deserves serious public scrutiny.

The appointment has generated debate among security experts, policymakers, and citizens alike. Supporters argue that Nigeria’s growing internal security challenges require specialised attention. Critics worry that the country may be creating another layer of bureaucracy without addressing the real problem.

The question Nigerians should be asking is straightforward: Would another office have prevented these attacks?

The answer depends on how one understands Nigeria’s security challenge.

Take the recent school abductions. The issue was not the absence of security institutions. Nigeria already has the military, police, DSS, civil defence, intelligence agencies, and the Office of the National Security Adviser. The challenge was whether intelligence was gathered early enough, shared effectively, and acted upon before the attacks occurred.

The same question applies to the recurring attacks in Benue and the resurgence of bandit activities across the North-West. In many cases, local communities claim warning signs existed before attacks occurred. Yet security responses often arrived after lives had already been lost.

This suggests that Nigeria’s greatest security challenge may not be a shortage of institutions but a shortage of coordination.

The Office of the National Security Adviser was created precisely to address this problem. The NSA coordinates intelligence activities, advises the President on security matters, and facilitates cooperation among agencies. If Homeland Security is established as a parallel structure with overlapping responsibilities, the risk is that coordination problems could become even more complicated rather than less.

Who receives intelligence first? Who coordinates domestic threat responses? Who bears responsibility when security failures occur?

These questions matter because effective security management depends on clear authority and accountability.

None of this means Homeland Security is unnecessary. The recent wave of kidnappings, bandit attacks, and mass killings demonstrates that Nigeria’s internal security challenges require specialised attention. However, specialisation should strengthen coordination, not weaken it.

A Homeland Security structure can add value if it operates under the strategic framework of the National Security Adviser, focusing specifically on domestic threat management, emergency preparedness, critical infrastructure protection, and internal intelligence integration.

What Nigerians need today is not another competition among security institutions. They need a system capable of preventing the next school abduction, stopping the next bandit attack, and protecting the next vulnerable community before tragedy occurs.

The success of Homeland Security will therefore not be measured by the title of the office or the prestige of the appointment.

It will be measured by a far simpler standard: whether fewer children are kidnapped, fewer communities are attacked, and fewer Nigerians lose their lives to insecurity.

That is the question the government must answer, and it is the result Nigerians deserve.

Abraham Victory
Department of Development and Strategic Communication
200 Level
Abuja, Nigeria