Connect with us

Opinion

And Wike Will Speak at Great Ife, By Y.Z. Ya’u

Published

on

 

And this is the news: Wike is to deliver a lecture at Obafemi Awolowo University (OAU), Ile-Ife. According to the Vice Chancellor of the University, Prof. Adebayo Simon Bamire, Nyesom Wike, CON, is to deliver the 2025 Matriculation Lecture on the topic “Partisan Politics, Party Loyalty and the Challenges of Party Supremacy in Nigeria,” which will be held in June. The first thing that came to my mind on reading that Wike, the loquacious Minister of FCT, the very architect of the political crisis in the opposition PDP as well as a chief combatant of the political derby in Rivers State, will deliver a lecture at OAU, Ile-Ife was to recall my student days. Ife of the 70s to early 90s was simply an incredible place to be for an activist, and that experience and exposure have remained an everlasting moment in my growth.

This was the university where the icon of left ideas and struggle in Nigeria, Dr. Segun Osoba, lectured for decades. He, along with Dr. Bala Usman of ABU Zaria, did the minority report to the Constitutional Conference in 1977 which till date is a reference point. Like Bala, his compatriot in the minority report, Osoba did not want to be called a Professor in a context in which a number of those claiming the title could not in all honesty be said to be representative of true professors.

Although like any other university, Ife (I use Ife rather than OAU to underline the fact that I am writing of both the pre-OAU and the OAU years) was deeply divided between the Left and Right (and its internal ideological battles were very bitter), however for outsiders, Ife was readily associated with anything about the left. It was here that Prof. Biodun Jeyifo, the first ASUU president, cut his teeth in radical unionism, and Ife played a key role in the eventual transformation of ASUU from a petty bourgeois staff Association of University Teachers which was only interested in arranging flight tickets to London for summer holidays to a union that became rooted in the imperative of the social transformation of the country.

In its contribution to ASUU, Ife has produced a legend of leaders who stood firm for the working class and the poor in the country. They include Prof. Omotoye Olorode, Idowu Awepetu and Dipo Fashina (Jingo) among many others. These three became a reference point of radical engagement in Ife. Indeed, in Dipo, the presidency of ASUU could once again return to Ife after Jeyifo. And their contributions in ASUU and indeed in social struggle in the country speak volumes.

Let it be remembered that Ife gave us such legal advocates for the poor as Femi Falana, the late Bamidele Aturu and Big Sam, just to name three of the most visible faces of this clan of lawyers for justice for the common man. It has also given us fine and formidable journalists in Owei Lakemfa, who would rise to the position of Secretary General of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and Lanre Arogundade, a former NANS President. The campus gave us such cultural and literary giants as GG Darah, Yemi Ogumbiyi and many others, and the Ife Literary Tradition has in spite of all remained rooted in a left-wing commitment to this day.

Within the student population, Ife was as controversial as it had been on other fronts. Its student activists tended to belong to the Trotskyite Tendency, a matter that put it on a collision path with the Patriotic Youth Movement of Nigeria (PYMN), the key organization that was behind the strength of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS). The Ife Trotskyites considered the PYMN as Stalinists who should be fought, just like the ruling class, ensuring that there was hardly unity in the left-wing movement.

Advert

When an official of the World Bank decided to tour Nigerian Universities to sell the World Bank/IMF agenda of transforming Nigerian Universities, he was chased away from Ife. Months later, the leaders of the banned ASUU on the campus could organize a National Conference on the IMF and the University System in Nigeria to discuss the World Bank Agenda. While this was the outline for the conference, in actual fact, the conference provided the opportunity for ASUU activists from different universities to meet and strategize on how to continue with the struggle even as their union remained legally banned by the Military Government.

A day after the conference, when delegates were just leaving Ife for their respective bases, the Orkar Coup attempt occurred (Jega and I got the coup story while we were still at the Ife Central motor park, waiting for our vehicle to Kano to fill) and in the panicky response of the Government, it arrested the two arrowheads of the conference (Profs Olorode and Awepetu) along with Prof. Obaro, summarily dismissed them from their jobs and also charged them with treason (coup making) and they could remain detained for many months and only the legal tenacity of their lawyer got them out and reinstated into their jobs at Ife.

Ife was also one of the key nodes of both the Campaign for Democracy (CD) and the Democratic Alternative (DA) as well as fronts of these organizations that were set up to fight the military. And they fought tenaciously for people like PBAT to benefit. Ife was key to the founding of the Socialist Congress of Nigeria (SCON), the closest to what could be a contemporary Communist Party of Nigeria.

On the cultural front, Ife was a non-conformist environment. To be sure, on late afternoons, one was sure to find large numbers of students around the sports arena, members of the Christian Fellowship deep in prayer sessions and on Fridays you would see many men and women dressed for the Jumaat service, but by and large, it was no fertile ground for those warriors on behalf of God. Instead, the ever-watchful eyes of the Ogun and Orisa were there to keep a vigil on the lively campus. Ife was non-religiously religious.

In the past, no government official would like to have an Ife encounter, by taking the risk to address any public gathering on the campus. Even Vice Chancellors who have legitimate mandate to be there had trouble dealing with both their students and their colleagues in the academic union. Ife brooks no halfway measure nor tolerates hypocrisy: you are either for the masses or you are shouted out and escorted out of the campus.

This is the same university that a hawkish Minister will be going to address and tell the audience of the many good things that Uncle Bola Tinubu is doing in transforming the country. Of course, NANS has long been crushed and in its place a cash and carry non-students have assumed the leadership of students, the radical student movement which had been the backbone of NANS has been emptied out of the campuses, the PYMN has long collapsed and in its place mercenaries and rabid fundamentalists of all hues have taken over, while the radical tradition of ASUU is under stress. Who else is there to chase such an unwelcome guest? No one but his own political party in whose name he would be grandstanding.

This explains why a Wike would be at liberty to go there. But what will he say about party loyalty having spent years now serving in a government for which his party is the key opposition party? What party loyalty will he demonstrate when he decided to work against the presidential candidate of his party and worked to ensure that his party lost the election? How can someone who is doing everything possible to prevent the stabilization of his party be a credible person to talk about party loyalty?

Will he explain why the government is only happy to keep academics on poverty wages? Will there be an explanation why the libraries in the universities have no money to buy current journals and books for their shelves? Will there be an explanation on the lack of equipment and chemicals in the laboratories? Or now, come to think about it, will he explain why poverty is on the rampage in the country? These are not party loyalty matters: they tell the test of loyalty to the President.

But these questions were relevant before we lost our road long ago. Those who decided to afford him the podium on this topic have done a dishonor to not only the topic but to the nurturing and consolidation of democracy in Nigeria because they have chosen to promote the worst of party behavior in Nigeria as a possible example worthy of emulation. We wish him and his hosts good luck.

Opinion

INEC, David Mark, And Coming Abachaian Coronation

Published

on

 

By Farooq Kperogi

With INEC’s overtly partisan, intentionally illegal, and possibly remote-controlled withdrawal of recognition for the David Mark-led ADC, Nigeria has officially reverted to full-on Abacha-era suffocation of even the wispiest pretence to competitive electoral politics.

Lawyers have said that the judgment of the appeal court, which INEC invoked as a convenient crutch to carry out a predetermined action, said the status quo should be maintained. In other words, the judgment says David Mark should remain the chairman of the ADC until the merit of the appeal has been determined.

However, it appears that INEC is in the know of what the final judgment will be and decided to jump the gun. Yet the INEC chairman is a professor of law and a SAN! He can’t even pretend to be neutral.

Advert

It seems obvious that the ADC faction INEC will ultimately recognize, as I predicted in my column of two weeks ago, will be the faction that will merely be an extension of the APC, much like the PDP now is. They will either present dummy candidates or adopt Tinubu as their candidate, which is a distinction without a difference.

It is obvious that Tinubu wants a coronation, not a competitive election, in 2027. He is scared to death about a real electoral contest. We all know why.

Well, according to public records, it cost around ₦300–₦355 billion to conduct the 2023 presidential election. It is projected that it will cost almost ₦870 billion to conduct the 2027 election.

Why should Nigeria spend close to a trillion naira on a preset, make-believe, Abachaian coronation exercise? Let’s kuku cancel democracy and make Tinubu the supreme leader. At least we would save a trillion naira.

Continue Reading

Opinion

El-Rufai/Uba Sani And Pantami’s Perceived Peace Of The Graveyard

Published

on

 

By Bala Ibrahim.

Yesterday was Sunday, a day recognized as the first day of the week, which in the Bible, holds supreme significance as the day of Jesus Christ’s resurrection. Some Christians call it the Lord’s Day. There are many interpretations given to show the significance of Sunday. But for the purpose of this article, attention would be given to the significance of yesterday’s Sunday, (29/03/2026), with special bias to the role it played in promoting reconciliation between parties and friends, as well as how, at the National Mosque, Abuja, the wall of religious divide was unconsciously demolished, as followers of different faiths scrambled over each other, in the competition for space to participate in the funeral rites of late Hajiya Umma El-Rufai, the deceased mother of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai.

By the Islamic tradition, when a Muslim dies, before he or she is taken to the grave yard, special prayers are offered on the deceased person’s body, at any convenient place, before proceeding to the cemetery. For late Hajiya Umma El-Rufai, the National Mosque Abuja, was the venue. And what happened there, is the prelude to this article.

If I say everyone that is anything in Nigeria was there, I think I am making an understatement. But that is not surprising, given the personal and political profile of the bereaved, who is Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. It may interest the reader to know that, among the early callers at the Mosque, were reputable Christians, with people like Peter Obi and Rotimi Amaechi, rubbing shoulders with Muslims, in the stampede to partake in the Islamic ceremonial practice. They know they don’t belong to the Islamic faith, but they want to share with Mallam Nasir El-Rufai, as an honour of solidarity, in the last rites given to his beloved mother. The duo of NSA Mallam Nuhu Ribadu and Governor Uba Sani were there face to face with El-Rufai. The atmosphere was solemn, sombre and clearly sorrowful.

Also present at the Mosque was Prof. Isa Ali Ibrahim Pantami, former Minister and renowned Islamic cleric, who seized the opportunity to advance the imperative of reconciliation in Islam. He started in the Mosque and continued at the graveyard, to the extent of persuading El-Rufai to shake hands with Uba Sani, with a soft but casual commitment from both sides, on the pleaded forgiveness. It was difficult, very difficult, especially when perused through the prism of Mallam Nasir El-Rufai’s position.

Advert

Undoubtedly peace is fundamental to Islam, because it serves as a source of inner tranquillity and social harmony. The Quran has laid emphasis on reconciliation and kindness. So every Muslim is enjoined to embrace reconciliation. However, in advancing the course of reconciliation, timing is important, I think. We must not only perceive peace as merely the absence of conflict. No, it also has something to do with our state of mind. A man standing before the lifeless body of his beloved mother, at the graveyard, under intense pressure, is not in the appropriate state of mind to commit to any peace deal. Unless we are referring to the probabial peace of the graveyard.

The ambition of any reconciliation is to arrive at unity. And unity can only come after conflict, if there is healing. By definition, healing is the process of becoming healthy or whole again, encompassing the restoration of physical tissue, mental, or emotional well-being. A man under emotional pressure is not fit for commitment to any peace deal, I think. Unless we are referring to the probabial peace of the graveyard.

Peace of the graveyard is not genuine, because it could be deceptive, by resulting in forced calm, beneath which lies a deep tension. As a friend of the trio of El-Rufai, Nuhu Ribadu and Uba Sani, Sheik Pantami must go for a genuine, organic and sustainable peace agreement between the parties. More so, because they were genuine friends before.

All hands must be put on deck, to compel President Bola Ahmed Tinubu to come into the agreement. Because, he was the one who compelled Mallam Nasir El-Rufai to come into the Tinubu project in 2023. Indeed a lot of water had passed under the bridge. We should forget past misunderstandings or issues that are now irrelevant, and forgivable. Let’s move on from past disagreements and let go of grudges.That’s the only way to arrive at genuine reconciliation.

It may be recalled that the Muslim Rights Concern, MURIC, had long been appealing to the President, to come out clearly and reciprocate the gesture given to him in his time of need by Mallam Nasir El-Rufai. MURIC said they were the ones who persuaded El-Rufai to support Tinubu in 2023, as a result of which, he confronted the so called Buhari cabal, the then CBN Governor and other forces that were putting spanners in the work of the Tinubu project. The result of which is now President Tinubu. MURIC said El-Rufai does not deserve to be humiliated and went further to support their argument with the quote below:

“Noteworthy is a video clip showing how President Tinubu openly asked El-Rufai to join his government and this did not happen at a private meeting. It happened at a campaign ground, in the presence of thousands of party enthusiasts.”

Continue Reading

Opinion

Defection: Kwankwaso’s Legacy Under Scrutiny; A Critical Look at his Political Journey Since 1999

Published

on

Senator Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso

 

When Nigeria returned to democratic rule in 1999, the people of Kano embraced the moment with hope and expectation after years of military governance. Among the prominent figures who emerged at the time was Rabiu Musa Kwankwaso, whose leadership inspired confidence among many citizens eager for progress and representation.

More than two decades later, however, Kwankwaso’s political legacy continues to generate debate, with supporters highlighting his achievements and critics questioning the long-term impact of his leadership on Kano’s development.

Kwankwaso’s first tenure as governor (1999–2003) was marked by visible infrastructure projects, including roads and public buildings, which were widely welcomed by residents. At a time when tangible government presence was limited, these developments symbolised a new beginning. Yet, some analysts argue that while these projects addressed immediate needs, they did not sufficiently tackle deeper structural challenges, particularly the decline of Kano’s once-thriving industrial economy.

Historically a major commercial hub, Kano’s economy had been weakening due to years of policy neglect and infrastructural decay. Critics maintain that a more comprehensive economic strategy might have helped revive industries and reduce dependence on federal allocations.

Kwankwaso’s defeat in 2003 by Malam Ibrahim Shekarau marked a turning point. Observers note that while the loss strengthened his political network and grassroots appeal, it also raised questions about the sustainability of the systems established during his administration. Many of the projects, though impactful, were seen as lacking the institutional depth needed for long-term continuity.

Advert

Returning to office in 2011, Kwankwaso expanded his development agenda with increased infrastructure and an ambitious foreign scholarship programme that benefited thousands of Kano youths. The initiative is widely regarded as one of his most significant contributions, opening educational opportunities for many.

However, critics argue that despite these efforts, broader economic transformation remained limited. Rising population growth, unemployment, and declining industrial capacity continued to challenge the state’s development trajectory.

Beyond governance, Kwankwaso’s political influence has also shaped Kano’s power dynamics. His role in building a strong political movement—popularly known as the Kwankwasiyya—has been praised for mobilising grassroots support but criticised by some for reinforcing a personality-driven political structure.

Political analysts further point to the tensions surrounding the Kano Emirate as a significant episode in the state’s recent history. The controversial removal of Muhammadu Sanusi II highlighted deep divisions within the state’s political and traditional institutions, with varying opinions on the factors that led to the crisis.

In recent years, Kwankwaso’s shifting political alliances—from the PDP to the APC and later to the NNPP—have also drawn mixed reactions. While such moves are common in Nigeria’s political landscape, critics argue that they have contributed to instability and uncertainty within Kano’s political structure.

The 2023 elections brought another dimension to the discourse, with the emergence of Abba Kabir Yusuf as governor under the NNPP platform. Subsequent political developments, including evolving relationships between state and federal actors, have further shaped public debate about governance priorities and political strategy.

Today, Kwankwaso remains one of Kano’s most influential political figures, with a legacy that reflects both notable achievements and enduring controversies. While many credit him with expanding access to education and improving infrastructure, others believe that the state’s long-term economic and institutional challenges require deeper reflection.

As Kano continues to navigate its future, the assessment of past leadership—including Kwankwaso’s role—remains central to ongoing conversations about development, governance, and political direction.

Continue Reading

Trending