Connect with us

Opinion

Withdrawal Of Abacha’s Case Right Or Wrong?

Published

on

The Attorney-General of the Federation, and Minister of Justice, Mohammed Bello Adoke, (SAN), last Wednesday withdrew the money laundry charges preferred against Mohammed Abacha, the eldest son of late military dictator, Sani Abacha.
Some Port Harcourt residents joined other citizens in other parts of the country to react to the federal government’s decision. They spoke  to our chief correspondent, Calista Ezeaku. Our photographer, Dele Obinna captured their images.
Bar Bariyima Kokpan
Legally speaking, there is nothing wrong with the withdraw of that allegation. The government has the power to do that. But when you look at the action morally, it is wrong. It is a set back in the fight against corruption in the country and it will encourage other people to indulge in corrupt practices. I learnt the money involved runs into billions of naira and for the federal government to just suddenly withdraw the case without any reason, no condition. It’s somehow. I don’t know weather there are other consideration but in the best of my knowledge and what I read in the newspapers, no cogent reason was given for the decision.
The government is the persecutor, they have the facts, they have the evidence. So if at the end of the day they find out that if they proceed with the prosecution the likelihood of them getting a conviction is not there, government can go ahead to drop the charges.
You have to bear in mind that if the government continues with the charge and eventually he is discharged and acquitted he has a right against the government to sue for malicious prosecution. So, subject to the facts available to the federal government, I know, as a lawyer, that the Attorney General of the federation, even of the state has the right to withdraw a charge.
But as I said earlier, the considerations for the withdrawal of this allegation is not clear. If you are talking about plea bargaining, can we really say that was what transpired in this case. If there was plea bargain, I’m sure we will be aware. For instance there was plea bargain in Tafa Balogun’s case. There was plea bargain in Cecilia Iburu’s case. When there is plea bargain the accuser says, Ï am ready to forfeit so, so amount out of the money you are accusing me that I allegedly stole, while I keep the other one. And the government says if you can give us maybe 70% or 80%, we will forgive you.
In this case how much was he alleged to have laundered, how much is he refunding to the government? How much is he keeping? In the absence of all these explanations it is difficult to just come up to say they have refunded some money to the government. I just pray that it is not all about political consideration.
It gives an impression  that the federal government is not determined to fight corruption. Even though the federal government may have her reasons, but the general impression is that government is not really serious to fight corruption. The effect is that people continue to think that you can do anything and get away with it.
Look at it from another angle. Look at the amount involved, consider that there are so many people languishing in our prisons perhaps for stealing handsets of N2,000.00. So the higher you go, the freeier you become. That’s why I started by saying that morally speaking the withdraw is wrong.

Mr Olubwayo Alex Olanrewaju (Banker)
For me I think it shows that we are not ready to fight corruption. In the  first instance somebody is being charged for corruption and the same people that found him wanton are discharging that same person of that allegation. How did they come about it? For me I strongly feel we are not serious. We are not ready to take the bull by the horn. Both the ICPC, EFCC and all that are just joking. Our courts are in shambles. The verdicts they have these days, I don’t know how they come about them.
For me, that shouldn’t be. The guy has to face the music. There are serious allegations against him and he should not just be discharged like that. It doesn’t make sense. The judiciary really needs to sit up. They say judiciary is the last hope of the common man but right now, I don’t see any hope there. As a country, does it mean we cannot address this problem of corruption? Is corruption bigger than Nigeria? I don’t think so. I think the withdrawal of the money laundry case is not right at all. Human Right Organisations, National Orientation Agency really have to sensitise Nigerians on the evils of corruption, starting from the primary schools, Nigerians really need to be re-orientated.

Mr Nixon Madume(Public servant)
In my own view, the withdrawal of the case is wrong because he committed an offence and under normal circumstances, where the judiciary is working very well he should be prosecuted for it but because of one thing or the other, maybe because of the powers from the north or for political reasons they decided to pardon him. But I think it is a very wrong approach to our war against corruption. Most times people who were involved in crimes like that were set free and tomorrow we say we are fighting corruption while we cannot set example with the cases we have already. Sometimes I wonder how justifiable it is to punish people in the lower cadre in the society  who commit one crime or the other while the people up there who commit greater offences are set free.
I don’t think other countries will take us serious when we say we are wagging war against corruption, in this country. I will advise that justice should always prevail, no matter who is involved.

Mr Beemene Tanee (journalist)
Well, the truth is that Nigeria is becoming very reluctant to respond to the imperatives of justice. For political reasons, this allegation has been withdrawn but there are fundamental issues that need to be addressed so that we cannot relapse into the insensitivities of the past. If we say that we are trying to review the country on the part of democracy, then there is need for people to be answerable for their misdeeds against people. And that draws us to the fact that at a time Abacha’s family was frontal in the Nigeria management and they misused it. But now they have given them political concession and they are trying to give them a soft landing when there are a lot of issues to be addressed. It’s like you are giving a blank cheque to public servants to loot that at the end of the day, nothing will happen.
Justice should not be selective. Any person that has been found wanton should be brought to book. At a point in time, Mohammed Abacha was more draconian than his father because of unfertile access to state resources. That was very wrong. And I want to call on the federal government to ensure that the fight against corruption is not selective and that every person that is found wanton should be properly investigated and brought to book according to the law.
This withdraw of money laundry case against Abacha’s son gives the impression that the fight against corruption in Nigeria is dismal. It is not a vibrant fight. The federal government is soft peddling but they say he who comes to equity must come with clean hands. You don’t expect to give some people soft landing while you direct your fight against maybe those you consider to be against the powers that be.
So, it is wrong. The federal government must be proactive in the fight against corruption by ensuring that every sector of the economy is sanitised.
Meanwhile, Abacha’s family should not be the only people in focus maybe because the patriarch is no longer there. All  past leaders, Generals should be investigated. And all excesses in terms of mismanagement of funds should be properly addressed.

Mr Iheanyi Ezinwo (Publisher)
As a behavioral scientist, I don’t run into conclusions. It is only people who have some hidden agenda that will run into conclusions. Before a case is withdrawn, it presupposes that some discussions or agreements have taken place. You remember that even before Jonathan’s administration, we have had some cases of plea bargaining where somebody pleads guilty, returns some amount of money and he is allowed to go. I also read that Abacha’s family refunded millions of dollars to the federal government. It is possible that there have been some discussions, some agreements that if they refunded certain amount, he would be allowed to go, and some out of court settlements and decisions like that. So it is not just enough for somebody to say öh federal government has let this people go” and this and that. There must have been a reason. I read where federal government explained that Abacha’s family has refunded some money and that was the reason for withdrawing the case.
You see, a lot of people who are raising eye brows and shouting to the hilltops over whatever may have transpired, forget that Abacha was not the first and last head of state this country has had. There have been both civilian and military heads of state before Abacha and after him. And all of them took more than their fair share of our resources and many of them are still parading around and even condemning this decision. An situation where some will want to be talking about Abacha’s family because the man is late, I don’t think it is right. Abacha was not the only person who stole Nigeria’s money. Other former heads of state stole. They should go and  recover it from them. Even some people who are in government today are busy stealing and they will be the first to raise alarm.
So I believe that is not the best way to move forward in this country. If we want to make progress the fight against corruption must be holistic weather you are dead or alive.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Restoring Order, Delivering Good Governance 

Published

on

Quote:”But the tide must now turn. With the Senate’s approval of a record ?1.485 trillion budget for Rivers State for 2025, a new opportunity has emerged”.

The political atmosphere in Rivers State has been anything but calm in 2025. Yet, a rare moment of unity was witnessed on Saturday, June 28, when Governor Siminalayi Fubara and Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike, appeared side by side at the funeral of Elder Temple Omezurike Onuoha, Wike’s late uncle. What could have passed for a routine condolence visit evolved into a significant political statement—a symbolic show of reconciliation in a state bruised by deep political strife.

The funeral, attended by dignitaries from across the nation, was more than a moment of shared grief. It became the public reflection of a private peace accord reached earlier at the Presidential Villa in Abuja. There, President Bola Ahmed Tinubu brought together Governor Fubara, Minister Wike, the suspended Speaker of the Rivers State House of Assembly, Martin Amaewhule, and other lawmakers to chart a new path forward.

For Rivers people, that truce is a beacon of hope. But they are not content with photo opportunities and promises. What they demand now is the immediate lifting of the state of emergency declared in March 2025, and the unconditional reinstatement of Governor Fubara, Deputy Governor Dr. Ngozi Odu, and all suspended lawmakers. They insist on the restoration of their democratic mandate.

President Tinubu’s decision to suspend the entire structure of Rivers State’s elected leadership and appoint a sole administrator was a drastic response to a deepening political crisis. While it may have prevented a complete breakdown in governance, it also robbed the people of their voice. That silence must now end.

The administrator, retired naval chief Ibok-Ette Ibas, has managed a caretaker role. But Rivers State cannot thrive under unelected stewardship. Democracy must return—not partially, not symbolically, but fully. President Tinubu has to ensure that the people’s will, expressed through the ballot, is restored in word and deed.

Governor Fubara, who will complete his six-month suspension by September, was elected to serve the people of Rivers, not to be sidelined by political intrigues. His return should not be ceremonial. It should come with the full powers and authority vested in him by the constitution and the mandate of Rivers citizens.

The people’s frustration is understandable. At the heart of the political crisis was a power tussle between loyalists of Fubara and those of Wike. Institutions, particularly the State House of Assembly, became battlegrounds. Attempts were made to impeach Fubara. The situation deteriorated into a full-blown crisis, and governance was nearly brought to its knees.

But the tide must now turn. With the Senate’s approval of a record ?1.485 trillion budget for Rivers State for 2025, a new opportunity has emerged. This budget is not just a fiscal document—it is a blueprint for transformation, allocating ?1.077 trillion for capital projects alone. Yet, without the governor’s reinstatement, its execution remains in doubt.

It is Governor Fubara, and only him, who possesses the people’s mandate to execute this ambitious budget. It is time for him to return to duty with vigor, responsibility, and a renewed sense of urgency. The people expect delivery—on roads, hospitals, schools, and job creation.

Rivers civil servants, recovering from neglect and under appreciation, should also continue to be a top priority. Fubara should continue to ensure timely payment of salaries, address pension issues, and create a more effective, motivated public workforce. This is how governance becomes real in people’s lives.

The “Rivers First” mantra with which Fubara campaigned is now being tested. That slogan should become policy. It must inform every appointment, every contract, every budget decision, and every reform. It must reflect the needs and aspirations of the ordinary Rivers person—not political patrons or vested interests.

Beyond infrastructure and administration, political healing is essential. Governor Fubara and Minister Wike must go beyond temporary peace. They should actively unite their camps and followers to form one strong political family. The future of Rivers cannot be built on division.

Political appointments, both at the Federal and State levels, must reflect a spirit of fairness, tolerance, and inclusivity. The days of political vendettas and exclusive lists must end. Every ethnic group, every gender, and every generation must feel included in the new Rivers project.

Rivers is too diverse to be governed by one faction. Lasting peace can only be built on concessions, maturity, and equity. The people are watching to see if the peace deal will lead to deeper understanding or simply paper over cracks in an already fragile political arrangement.

Wike, now a national figure as Minister of the FCT, has a responsibility to rise above the local fray and support the development of Rivers State. His influence should bring federal attention and investment to the state, not political interference or division.

Likewise, Fubara should lead with restraint, humility, and a focus on service delivery. His return should not be marked by revenge or political purges but by inclusive leadership that welcomes even former adversaries into the process of rebuilding the state.

“The people are no longer interested in power struggles. They want light in their streets, drugs in their hospitals, teachers in their classrooms, and jobs for their children. The politics of ego and entitlement have to give way to governance with purpose.

The appearance of both leaders at the funeral was a glimpse of what unity could look like. That moment should now evolve into a movement-one that prioritizes Rivers State over every personal ambition. Let it be the beginning of true reconciliation and progress.

As September draws near, the Federal government should act decisively to end the state of emergency and reinstate all suspended officials. Rivers State must return to constitutional order and normal democratic processes. This is the minimum requirement of good governance.

The crisis in Rivers has dragged on for too long. The truce is a step forward, but much more is needed. Reinstating Governor Fubara, implementing the ?1.485 trillion budget, and uniting political factions are now the urgent tasks ahead. Rivers people have suffered enough. It is time to restore leadership, rebuild trust, and finally put Rivers first.

By: Amieyeofori Ibim
Amieyeofori Ibim is former Editor of The Tide Newspapers, political analyst and public affairs commentator

Continue Reading

Opinion

Checking Herdsmen Rampage

Published

on

Quote:”
Do the Fulani herdsmen have an expansionists agenda, like their progenitor, Uthman Dan Fodio? Why are they everywhere even the remotest part of other areas in Nigeria harassing, maiming, raping and killing the owners of the land?”
According to reports,   suspected Fulani herdsmen on June 25, 2025 invaded Ueken, the ancestral home of the Tai Kingdom, in the Ogoni Ethnic Nationality of Rivers State and murdered one  Goodluck Dimkpa, a father of one. The attack has reportedly caused panic and led to residents fleeing the community. It also generated coordinated protests from aggrieved Ogoni youths.
In a swift reaction, The Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP) decried and  strongly condemned the  invasion  by suspected Fulani herdsmen.

In his denunciation,  MOSOP President Fegalo Nsuke described the incident as very unfortunate and deeply troubling, warning against a recurrence of the violence experienced in Benue State. “The killing of yesterday is bad and very unfortunate. We are getting preliminary information about how the herders gained access to the farmland, and it appears some hoodlums may be collecting money and granting access illegally.”

He called on the Hausa community in Rivers State to intervene swiftly to prevent further attacks.
“We want the Hausa community in Rivers State to take urgent action to ensure these issues are resolved”.
But will such appeal and requests end the violent disposition of the Fulani herdsmen? It is not saying something new that the escalating threat and breach of peace across the country by the Fulani herdsmen or those suspected to be Fulani herdsmen, leaves much to be desired in a country that is bedevilled by multi-dimensional challenges and hydra-headed problems.

On June 13-14, 2025, about 200 adults and children were reported to have been gruesomely murdered and burnt in Yelewata, Guma Local Government Area of Benue State, by suspected herdsmen who stormed the community, attacked the innocent people, and wreaked  havoc described as one the deadliest attacks in the Middle Belt of Nigeria, in recent times.Two days before the Yelewata senseless massacre, precisely on June 11, 2025, about 25 people were killed in Makurdi still by people suspected to be Fulani herdsmen.
Plateau State, Southern Kaduna and other Middle Belt States have their own tales of woe from the unprovoked attacks by the Fulani herdsmen leading to loss of lives and properties.
Some upland Local Government Areas  of Rivers State, such as Etche, Omuma, Emohua, Ikwerre, Oyigbo, Abua, Ogba/Egbema/Ndoni, have severally recounted their ordeals, as herdsmen invaded farmlands, destroyed crops, raped female farmers and killed protestant residents.

In my considered view the Fulani herdsmen whom life means nothing to, have gone too far. The right to life and property are fundamental but the  herdsmen’s invasions violate such inalienable rights of the people.Already Nigeria seems to exist on a precipice with the majority of her about 200 million people groaning in the quagmire of unpopular economic policies, reprehensible democratic practices translating to a gale of decampment to the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC) which is a tell-tale sign of an imminent one party State, looting of public funds with impunity and barefaced corruption in all sectors of the nation.
Nigerians, therefore, cannot afford to live with the debilitating consequences that the activities of the Fulani herdsmen portend in the face of the trending precarious socio-political and economic challenges. In fact, in all the States like Benue, Borno, Plateau, where incessant herdsmen attacks are frequent, residents live in petrified fear because of the disregard and disrespect for the sanctity of human lives. This fear leads to gross lack of development.
The governors of those States though Chief security officers, seem to be incapacitated, to carry out the primary responsibility of protection of lives and property of their citizens as enshrined in the grand norm. The mayhem caused by herdsmen in many states of Nigeria has left indelible pains in some families and communities, sufficient enough to make the government to control the activities of the herdsmen.
Some of these men who claim to ply their occupation are seen carrying lethal weapons. Which law in Nigeria gives people right to illegally possess weapons? How could the herders publicly carry lethal weapons without security operatives’ arresting and questioning them? The Fulani herdsmen, it’s not out of place to say,  are above the law. Because of their possession of weapons, the herdsmen are licensed to destroy lives, property and crops-the source of livelihood of others, thereby increasing food insecurity, poverty, hunger,  hostility and lack of development.
Do the Fulani herdsmen have an expansionists agenda, like their progenitor, Uthman Dan Fodio? Why are they everywhere even the remotest part of other areas in Nigeria harassing, maiming, raping and killing the owners of the land? Such nonsense must be made to stop, no matter whose ox is gored. Security operatives should be proactive to check  attempts of Fulani herdsmen to breach the peace. They should arrest and prosecute culprits because Fulani herdsmen who perpetrate  the heinous  acts have always been allowed to go  non reprimanded.
There is need to enhance vigilance and community coordination while residents should be alert,  take necessary precautions and work with traditional rulers, chiefs, youth leaders and local vigilante to stem the ugly trend.
Again the wanton destruction of lives and properties which no doubt has overwhelmed the Nigerian Police, makes the clamour for State Police, indispensable. The National Assembly should consider the amendment of the Constitution to allow States to have their Statutory policing agencies.
Igbiki Benibo
Continue Reading

Opinion

Is Nigeria Democratic Nation?

Published

on

As insurgency has risen to an all time high in the country were killings has now grown to be a normal daily activity in some part of the nation it may not be safe to say that Nigeria still practices democracy.

Several massacres coming from the Boko Haram and the herdsmen amongst all other insurgencies which have led to the destruction of homes and killing, burning of communities especially in the northern part of the country. All these put together are result of the ethnic battles that are fought between the tribes of Nigeria and this can be witnessed in Benue State where herders and farmers have been in constant clashes for ages. They have experienced nothing but casualties and unrest.

In the month of June 13-14, the Yelwata attack at the Guma Local Government Area by suspected gunmen or herdsmen who stormed the houses of innocent IDPs (Internally Displaced Persons) claiming the lives of families, both adults and children estimated to be 200 victims. They were all burnt alive by these unknown gunmen.

This has been recorded as one of the deadliest insurgencies that had happened in recent years.  Some security personnel that were trying to fight the unknown gunmen also lost their lives.

Prior to the Yelewata attack, two days before the happening, similar conflict took place in Makurdi on June 11, 2025. 25 people were killed in the State. Even in Plateau State and the Southern Kaduna an attack also took place in the month of June.

All other states that make up the Middle Belt have been experiencing the farmers/herders clash for years now and it has persisted up till recent times, claiming lives of families and children, homes and lands, escalating in 2025 with coordinated assaults.

Various authorities and other villagers who fled for safety also blamed the herdsmen in the State for the attack that happened in Yelwata community.

Ehebha  God’stime is an Intern with The Tide.

Continue Reading

Trending