Opinion

Is Baba Obasanjo being vindicated?

Published

14 years ago

June 11, 2012

Is it right to claim that corruption, massive looting of public funds, armed robbery, youth banditry and gangsterism as well as militancy are queer attitudes that have crept into our lives? I remember my old mother used to tell me that the worst crime a family feared for its members was stealing peoples’ property which was likened to armed robbery.

So any family whose member was identified as a thief was cursed by the whole village and no one would marry from or be married to the family. Such thieving family would never be trusted or entrusted in the society until they repented and displayed otherwise openly for a long time. Because of the gravity of similar social vices, culprits were buried alive in big mould of sand or forced to drown in the river by tying heavy stones to them. This was in the good olden days.

But now some Nigerians openly parade themselves as corruption agents, militants and bandits massively looting public funds and causing mayhem to the society that they are supposed to assist in building. They easily forget that some people genuinely put in their lives for the victory they claim in elections. What have the governments made up of these politicians at the three levels done for the families of those who died while ensuring that the politicians won their elections or re-elections, or putting it rightly, in defence of the nation’s democracy?

It is not new the statement credited to former president of Nigeria, Chief Matthew Olusegun Obasanjo, popularly called Baba where he described the National Assembly as being made up of rogues. Obasanjo is such a leader that can be seen to possess faceless, fearless and considerably unassuming costume when corruption is talked about in Nigeria. At least, even if the other four of his fingers may be pointing towards his direction, he could be sure of what he says.

Whether it is accepted or not, Obasanjo is the pioneer in the making of NIGERIA TODAY. He is, and even while gradually losing grip of the rope hanging down from the Aso Rock, the godfather of many of those in power today. So, it is to be doubted that he may have put up a total falsehood for mere relevance – such relevance that he has maintained since Nigeria returned to democratic governance in 1999. After all, he can claim untouchability!

Obasanjo cannot be unaware of all the probes conducted and being conducted by the assemblymen. He cannot be unaware of the executive bills which are often imposed on the people through the national chambers and the financial efforts it takes to make such bills sail through the chambers. He had practically experienced and successfully enforced such in the past. Obasanjo cannot be unaware of the current bribery allegation of N44 million involving an assemblyman and the director general of Security and Exchange Commission (SEC). Obasanjo, having been too long in government at that highest level, remains an insider in government and therefore cannot just open his mouth to make frivolous accusations. After all, he also accused the judiciary and the police. He even acknowledged that some justices were sacked on bribery and corruption related matters during the hard democratic experiment of his tenures.

For the national chambers to find a soft landing for themselves and for Obasanjo is an attempt to cover the fawning ass of the foul. It is either they accept what Obasanjo has said and then swallow the shame or challenge the relevance Obasanjo is searching for and vindicate themselves.

What does the House Committee on Information, Hon. Zakari Mohammed imply by proclaiming not to join issues with former President Obasanjo who accused them of being rogues? Accused of being rogues! Is this accusation not enough – even if it is believed to be mere allegation – to sue the accuser to court for character assassination of the distinguished and honourable assemblymen? A whole assembly accused!

Zakari, in playing down this great accusation, could only find such words as, “…I think it is wrong for an elder to stand outside and pee into the house”. There are two sided revelations from this. It is either that the elder has become mentally weak that he can no more differentiate his position of being outside the house or he is sure that it makes no difference peeing into the house because the house has the similitude of a urinary. It is really a confusing scenario. The assemblymen should go further to clarify and reclaim their dignity within this context and challenge Obasanjo on this.

One startling revelation from Zakari’s defence was, “Since I came here as a legislator, I have not heard stories of Ghana-must-go bags but when former President Obasanjo was in charge, nocturnal visits of Ghana-must-go bags were a routine in an attempt to buy over the legislature and having failed especially with the last one over his third term agenda during which several MILLIONS OF DOLLARS were involved, I don’t think it is right for anybody to have headache over whatever he says”.

For the avoidance of doubt, it has been established by the assemblymen themselves that Obasanjo squandered public funds (millions of dollars) in pursuit of his then pet project codenamed ‘tenure elongation’. Has any action been taken by the assemblymen to unveil and punish the originators, proponents, distributors and collectors of the acknowledged millions of dollars? Obasanjo surely knows those who collected the money in full but refused to deliver their promises to him. Are there no more nocturnal visits within the political sphere?

Can Hon. Zakari patriotically and religiously authenticate his claim that since 2007 when Obasanjo left office as the President of Nigeria or at least from May 2011, that Ghana-must-go bags have ceased to come the ways of politicians, including the assemblymen? Why has Obasanjo not been investigated despite all the glaring indices that his regime was believed to be administratively corrupt? A regime of unequalled squandermania, power-throttling force, socio-economic vandalization and religio-political victimization!!

In the same vein, the Deputy Minority leader of the House, Hon. Suleiman Kawu postulates, “Obasanjo does not have credibility in Nigeria. Remember he was dragged to court by his own son accusing him of sleeping with his wife”

Chairman, Senate Committee on Information, Media and Public Affairs, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe, while at a press conference in Abuja challenged Obasanjo, “in the new spirit of transparency and openness Obasanjo should assist the National Assembly by naming those that he knows in the National Assembly as either rogues or criminals. That would help us to be able to sanitise the polity and we sincerely thank him for his role in Nigeria, someone who cares very deeply about the Nigerian state and how it is at the moment”, adding, “the National Assembly can never engage in any talk back to the president.”

Is Obasanjo a Rock that he cannot be summoned to the National Assembly for interrogations? Remember that harmless Muhammadu Buhari has severally been verbally drilled over his misquoted statement on the 2015 elections. Buhari has been subjected to merciless tongue-lashings by Nigerians most of whom he is capable of fathering even in the political sphere. Poor Buhari!

Nonetheless, we should not forget that Obasanjo started behaving like a born-again Christian after leaving office as the president of Nigeria. Those who watch African Independent Television (AIT) may have seen when he appears to sing a gospel song saying, “I have decided to follow Jesus…” To this, one of my neighbours burst into a wild laughter saying, “Is it our Lord Jesus whom we Christians worship that Obasanjo means?”

All in all, this is a case that should not be ignored. It is either Obasanjo is right or he is openly summoned to explain if he spoke in rhetoric or was misquoted. This theory of allegation and denial in Nigeria should stop henceforth. On the other hand, what joy and results have the several probes carried out by the assemblymen brought us? Are these exposures just a tip in the iceberg?

Ajah is a writer, based in Abuja.

Muhammad Ajah

Opinion

One Attack Too Many

Published

1 day ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By: King Onunwor

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth

Published

2 days ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael Abraham

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s Outburst

Published

2 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection.

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office