Connect with us

Opinion

Should Indians Manage The Model Schools In Rivers?

Published

on

Iheanyi Ezinwo,

Publisher

First of all, I want to start by saying that the system of government we have makes it possible for a sitting governor to decide on whatever he wants to do, and also to do it whether it is right or wrong.

Now, the governor before this time had not hidden his intention to hand over the management of the model schools to Indians. As a person, I would want to see that as a novel development.

It is a new one because many of us had thought that there is hardly any category of personnel that we don’t have in Rivers State. But from the face of it, the first thing that will come to mind on hearing this is that there are no qualified people in Rivers State to do the job.

As an individual, I would say that it would have been better to allow our people here to do the job. It is a matter of evolving the appropriate structure that will make it possible that school visitations and monitoring are properly done. But since they have decided to do it, it will not be easy for us to just say what the governor is doing is wrong or right.

We need to know at what cost are they going to do the job? For how long? Remember that for some time payment of salaries in Rivers State was handed over to Zenith Bank. But within a short time, it was discovered that they were not doing better than those who were doing it before. But now, from what we read from the papers, the assignment has been returned to the civil servants. So, I would have preferred a situation whereby they would look at how the system was working before, identify the weaknesses, then come up with ways and means of strengthening the monitoring mechanism.

But since they are insisting to go and contract the job, it is only time that will determine or justify that decision. Since the work has not started, I cannot tell you now that it is a right decision or not. It is the outcome that will determine whether the decision is right or not.

I think the assumption is that these Indians have the capability to properly run the schools. But the worry there is for how long are they going to run those schools? Who are going to take over from them, is it not the same our people that are going to take over from them? As a person, I may have my reservations but I believe that the governor knows certain things that I may not know that motivated him to go for that.

But I want to see it generally as a political decision because the day he leaves office, it is most  likely that the next governor will reverse that decision. So, as a person, by saying it is good or not cannot change anything. I would prefer that we let it be and watch to see how the whole thing would go.

I would not call the decision an indictment on the enlightened class.  I will call it a vote of no confidence on local hands. In other words, it is a demonstration of lack of confidence in our people to do the job very well. That is the way a disinterested third party will see it.

 

Iwu Remigeus,

Businessman

To me, this is a welcome development in a way because Indians that I know are very thorough people who do things well. If the model schools are given to them to manage, they will manage them well and produce results.

Although I believe we have capable hands here to manage the model schools, the Indians will do it better. If our own people are asked to manage the schools, they may have the Nigerian factor to contend with. Even if they are good, they may be influenced by corrupt Nigerians to water down the standard the Indians may set.

But my concern about the policy is the cost implication. Has the government actually thought out what it will cost to bring these Indians to manage all the model schools in the state?

The policy is good on paper, but I hope we will not have problems in implementing it. I think the government should consult a little more.

 

Patrick George,

Businessman

First of all, let us look at the motives behind the state government bringing Indians to manage the schools. I don’t know what are their motives. But if you ask me, I would say that we have indigenous managers or school managers that can handle all these. But I think we have people that will be there to manage these schools,  and not the Indians. They are good in their own way but I prefer indigenous managers and indigenous teachers.

You pay these Indians in foreign currency, you pay them based on the salary agreement. It is like somebody importing goods. You pay more to the country where you import the goods. So, in our case, in terms of salary and maintenance, the state government will have to pay more, and in that case, some employed to manage these schools before now will now go back to the labour market.

I don’t know why the state government decided to bring Indians to manage the schools. To me, it is not good; I don’t like it. Let our people do the managing first. If after  two or three years, it is not working, they might think of another way out. Every problem has a solution.

If the next government comes and does not like it, they might ask them to go.

 

Jude Akaraonye,

Businessman

Actually, this is a surprise in the sense that in Rivers State even before the schools were built to a standard like this, where were the Indians before the innovations? Does it mean that our teachers cannot perform in a more beautifully built schools? Why must it just be the Indians now that the schools have been properly renovated, at  least, to standard? Why must it be the Indians that will now come and take over and manage the schools?. These are just a few of the questions.

Now, another thing is this: does  it mean we don’t have good enough academia? I mean classic ones in the entire state? We have professors, eminent professors that are well read all over. Does it mean we cannot involve such people to take charge of management or leadership of such schools, even if it involves sending them abroad for training, for proper training? Let it be that they are indigenous teachers.

So, based on that, I don’t think it is proper to involve the Indians to come over and manage our resources in this case, which means we don’t have good teachers.

 

Mrs. Atemie Sanipe,

Teacher

My opinion is that if the Indians will come and spot out the quacks and sanitise the model schools, let them come. Most teachers are not fit to be in our school system. May be the Indians will add value to the running of these model schools, otherwise I will say no to their coming.

I believe if Indians are engaged to run these schools, it will affect the employment of staff into the schools. Quality staff will be employed. If they employ the right persons, they will be laying a proper foundation. I believe it will take time before they deviate.

What I am saying is that the Indians will do better than our people if asked to manage the model schools. They are competent and they are the people that we emulate.

 

Theophilus Daerego,

Civil Servant

For Indians as usual to manage the schools, I think they can do better than our people here. What is there is that they have to manage the schools properly, and may be, after sometime, our people can undergo training and learn the job. Because right now, our standard of education has fallen. Sometimes, if you look at the way we Nigerians manage, we find it difficult.  So, that is where the problem lies.

If the Rivers State government says that they want experts or foreigners to manage the schools, I see nothing bad in it.

It is a welcome development. Because already, Indians during the seventies, or eighties were here with us, teaching us. I could remember when I was a student at Enitonna High School, Port Harcourt, it was Indians who taught us. And they taught us well.

I do not think bringing the Indians mean our people cannot do the work. They are bringing them because they are more advanced than we are educationally. They are also less corruptible. So, bringing them is a good thing for us to learn from them. You know we are learners and a Third World country. They are more than us in terms of technology, in terms of civilization and educationally. So, Indians managing the schools is very good.

Continue Reading

Opinion

Curbing Youth Unemployment In Nigeria

Published

on

Quote: “A nation that fails to empower its youth risks mortgaging its future.”
Youth, generally defined as individuals between the ages of 15 and 35, represent a critical phase of human development—a transition from adolescence to adulthood marked by ambition, energy, and the pursuit of purpose. In Nigeria, this demographic constitutes a significant proportion of the population, making it one of the country’s greatest assets. However, this strength is increasingly undermined by a persistent and troubling challenge: youth unemployment.
Unemployment, the condition of being without gainful employment despite the willingness and ability to work, remains a major global concern. In Nigeria, however, it has reached alarming levels, particularly among young people. With estimates suggesting that a substantial percentage of Nigerian youth are either unemployed or underemployed, the consequences have become deeply embedded in the nation’s social and economic fabric.
The impact of youth unemployment is both widespread and severe. Economically, it leads to increased poverty levels and reduced productivity. Socially, it fuels frustration, hopelessness, and disillusionment among young people. This often manifests in rising rates of crime, cyber fraud, substance abuse, and involvement in political violence. When young people are unable to find legitimate means of livelihood, they may become vulnerable to negative influences, posing a threat not only to themselves but to society at large.
One of the primary drivers of youth unemployment in Nigeria is the inadequacy of the educational system. While many young Nigerians graduate from tertiary institutions each year, a significant number lack the practical and technical skills required in today’s job market. The disconnect between academic curricula and industry demands leaves graduates ill-prepared for employment, thereby widening the gap between education and employability.
Furthermore, Nigeria’s heavy dependence on the oil sector has contributed significantly to the unemployment crisis. Over the years, this reliance has led to the neglect of other critical sectors such as agriculture, manufacturing, and technology—sectors that have the potential to generate large-scale employment. The failure to diversify the economy has limited job opportunities and stifled innovation, leaving many young people without viable career paths.
In addition, rapid population growth continues to put immense pressure on the labor market. Each year, thousands of graduates enter the workforce, but the number of available jobs remains insufficient to absorb them. This imbalance creates intense competition for limited opportunities, leaving many qualified individuals unemployed for extended periods.
Access to finance also remains a major barrier for young Nigerians who wish to venture into entrepreneurship. Despite the creativity and entrepreneurial spirit that many youths possess, the lack of access to credit facilities, mentorship, and business support systems makes it difficult for them to establish and sustain their own enterprises. This challenge is further compounded by infrastructural deficits, such as unreliable power supply and limited access to technology.
Security challenges across various parts of the country have also worsened the situation. In some regions, economic hardship and lack of opportunities have made young people susceptible to recruitment into violent or extremist activities. This not only exacerbates insecurity but also diverts the energy of the youth away from productive engagement.
Addressing youth unemployment in Nigeria requires a comprehensive and collaborative approach. The government must take the lead by implementing policies that promote economic diversification, particularly by investing in agriculture, manufacturing, and the digital economy. These sectors hold immense potential for job creation and can absorb a large portion of the unemployed youth population.
Equally important is the reform of the educational system to emphasize skill acquisition, vocational training, and entrepreneurship. Schools and institutions must align their curricula with market needs, ensuring that graduates are equipped with relevant and practical skills. Public-private partnerships can play a vital role in facilitating internships, apprenticeships, and job placement programs.
The private sector also has a crucial role to play in driving job creation and innovation. By investing in youth-focused initiatives and supporting startups, businesses can help unlock the potential of young Nigerians. Additionally, financial institutions should develop more accessible and youth-friendly credit schemes to support small and medium-sized enterprises.
On an individual level, young people must embrace self-development, adaptability, and continuous learning. In an increasingly competitive and evolving global economy, acquiring digital skills, engaging in vocational training, and exploring entrepreneurial opportunities can significantly improve employability.
In conclusion, youth unemployment remains one of the most pressing challenges facing Nigeria today. However, it is not an insurmountable problem. With deliberate policies, strategic investments, and collective action from government, the private sector, and individuals, Nigeria can transform its youth population into a powerful engine of growth and development. By empowering young people with opportunities, skills, and resources, the nation can secure a more prosperous and stable future.
IVARA Favour Isaac is a student of Pan-African Institute of Management and Technology.
By:  Ivara Favour Isaac
Continue Reading

Opinion

Ozoro Festival: Tradition or Tyranny?

Published

on

Quote:“These images are not merely disturbing; they represent a direct assault on human dignity, bodily autonomy, and the rule of law.”
In recent days, national attention has turned to the small community of Ozoro in Delta State, where what was once described as a cultural fertility rite—the Alue-Do Festival—has become the subject of outrage, grief, and urgent national reflection. According to accounts from notable indigenes of Ozoro and the Isoko ethnic group, the festival was originally conceived as a symbolic ritual intended to bless couples struggling with conception. In theory, it was meant to celebrate life, continuity, and communal identity. However, what reportedly unfolded on March 22 bore no resemblance to any noble cultural ideal. Videos circulating widely on social media show groups of men chasing women, forcibly stripping them, and subjecting them to sexual assault in public spaces. These images are not merely disturbing; they represent a direct assault on human dignity, bodily autonomy, and the rule of law.
They compel us to confront a difficult but necessary question: when does tradition cease to be culture and become tyranny? It is encouraging that prominent voices—including the First Lady, the Minister of Women Affairs, human rights organisations, and women’s advocacy groups—have condemned these barbaric acts. The Delta State Government has since banned the Alue-Do Festival, while law enforcement authorities have reportedly made arrests. Yet beyond the immediate outrage lies a deeper and more uncomfortable conversation—one that communities across the country must confront honestly: the thin line between culture and abuse. “Culture is not static—it evolves, or at least, it should.” Culture is often described as the soul of a people, encompassing traditions, beliefs, and practices passed down through generations. Nigeria is richly endowed with diverse cultural heritage, much of which we rightly celebrate.
 However, when culture becomes a shield for harmful practices, it loses its moral authority. When actions that violate fundamental human rights are justified in the name of tradition, we must ask: whose culture is this, and at what cost? The events in Ozoro illustrate how a practice that may once have held symbolic meaning can devolve into something deeply harmful. Even if the Alue-Do Festival began as a benign fertility rite, its present manifestation—marked by violence and coercion—cannot be defended. “Culture must align with dignity, consent, and respect—anything less is not tradition, but abuse.” One of the most persistent arguments in defence of controversial practices is that they are “part of our heritage” and therefore beyond criticism. Yet harmful practices—child marriage, inhumane widowhood rites, and domestic abuse—have long been justified using this same reasoning. This argument is not only flawed; it is dangerous. No culture is above scrutiny, particularly when it endangers the rights and safety of its people.
History reminds us that many practices once considered “normal” are now widely condemned. Societies progress by questioning and reforming such practices—not by clinging to them. Nigeria is not exempt from this reality. As a nation governed by law and constitutional principles, we cannot afford to tolerate practices that undermine the rights of citizens—especially women. At the heart of the Ozoro incident lies a broader societal issue: the perception of women as objects rather than autonomous individuals. The actions of the perpetrators were not isolated—they were enabled by a mindset that sees women’s bodies as accessible, controllable, and, in some contexts, communal property. “Women are not possessions, prizes, or objects of exploitation—they are individuals with rights, agency, and dignity.” This mindset reflects a deeper systemic problem often described as “rape culture,” visible in victim-blaming narratives, the dismissal of harassment, and the silence that frequently surrounds abuse.
 For meaningful change to occur, this mindset must be confronted directly. Parents, religious institutions, government agencies, and the media all have critical roles to play in reshaping societal attitudes. Traditional institutions also wield significant influence, particularly in rural communities. With that influence comes responsibility—not only to preserve culture but to ensure that cultural practices align with contemporary standards of human rights and decency.The reported denial by the Ovie of Ozoro Kingdom of knowledge of the recent festival raises important questions about oversight and accountability. Community leaders and members alike must rise to their responsibilities. Cultural practices are sustained by collective acceptance. Silence, indifference, or complicity only perpetuate harm. While cultural reform is essential, it must be accompanied by accountability. The arrests made in connection with the incident are a step in the right direction, but they must lead to tangible outcomes. “Justice must not only be done—it must be seen to be done.”
 Allowing perpetrators of sexual violence to go unpunished sends a dangerous message—that such actions are tolerable. This fosters a culture of impunity. The law must be clear and unequivocal: sexual assault, in any form and under any guise, is a crime. It is not a cultural expression—it is a violation.It must be emphasised that calling for the abandonment of harmful cultural practices is not an attack on tradition, but a call to refine it.  Culture, at its best, is dynamic—it adapts while preserving its core values.“Tradition should uplift, not oppress.” Modernising culture does not mean erasing identity. It means ensuring that traditions remain relevant, inclusive, and respectful of human dignity. As Nigeria continues to evolve, it must decide what kind of society it aspires to be: one that hides behind tradition to justify abuse, or one that embraces progress while honouring its heritage responsibly. The outrage over the events in Ozoro is justified—but outrage alone is not enough
. It must translate into action: legal, cultural, and educational. We must state, without ambiguity, that no tradition justifies the violation of human dignity. We must hold perpetrators accountable and challenge the attitudes that enable such acts. True development is measured not only by infrastructure or economic growth, but by how a society treats its most vulnerable members. “If a cultural practice dehumanises, degrades, or endangers, it has no place in a modern society.” Where tradition fails to uphold dignity, it ceases to be culture. It becomes tyranny.
By: Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Opinion

Bazia  EXCO @ One: NUJ Rivers Reawakened

Published

on

Quote: “For the first time in years, Rivers journalists are not just hearing promises—they are seeing a union that works.”
The first year in office of the Paul Bazia-led executive of the Nigeria Union of Journalists (NUJ), has offered something many had almost given up on—renewed confidence in union leadership. For a body as critical as the NUJ, whose responsibility goes beyond professional coordination to include the welfare, protection, and continuous development of journalists, expectations are always high. Unfortunately, past experiences had conditioned many members to expect less—less action, less visibility, and less impact.This is why the past twelve months stand out. Within a relatively short period, the Bazia-led administration has demonstrated a level of drive that distinguishes it from its predecessors. There is a noticeable shift from inertia to activity, from routine administration to purposeful leadership. Initiatives captured in the one-year report point to an executive that understands both the urgency of its mandate and the frustrations of its members.
Particularly commendable is the renewed attention to journalists’  welfare. For too long, welfare issues have lingered without meaningful resolution, leaving many practitioners feeling unsupported. The current leadership’s efforts—through engagement, structured support, and timely interventions—signal a welcome change in priorities. Equally important is the push toward professional development. In an era where journalism is rapidly evolving, capacity building is no longer optional. The administration’s commitment to training and skill enhancement reflects an understanding that a stronger union must be built on more competent and competitive professionals. There is also something to be said about visibility and voice. A vibrant NUJ must not only serve its members internally but also stand as a credible voice in the public space—defending press freedom, promoting ethical standards, and constructively engaging critical issues.
Encouragingly, the current executive appears more present and responsive, giving the union a renewed sense of relevance. Perhaps what resonates most, however, is the sense of movement. For many members, the difference between the present and the immediate past is not subtle—it is clear. Where there was once stagnation, there is now direction. Where there was doubt, there is growing belief. Beyond the visible strides recorded within this first year, what perhaps deserves even greater applause is the restoration of institutional confidence within the Nigeria Union of Journalists. For a long time, many members had grown disenchanted, viewing the union more as a ceremonial body than an active force capable of defending their interests and advancing their welfare. That narrative, however, is gradually changing. The Bazia-led executive has not only initiated programs but has also rekindled a sense of belonging among members.
 Meetings appear more purposeful, engagements more intentional, and decisions more reflective of collective interest. This psychological shift—subtle as it may seem—is one of the most critical achievements of the past year, because a union that its members believe in is already halfway to effectiveness. It is also important to underscore the contrast with the immediate past, not as an exercise in criticism, but as a necessary context for measuring progress. Where previous administrations struggled to translate plans into action, the current leadership has shown a greater bias for execution. Projects that once lingered in discussion stages are now seeing tangible movement, and issues that were previously deferred are receiving attention. This difference in approach—moving from prolonged deliberation to decisive action—has helped reposition the union as a more responsive and relevant institution.
While no administration is without its shortcomings, the willingness to act, even in the face of constraints, marks a significant departure from what members were accustomed to. Looking ahead, the expectations of members—and indeed the wider public—will only grow stronger. With a solid first year behind it, the Bazia-led executive now carries the burden of consistency. Members will expect deeper welfare interventions that go beyond immediate relief to more sustainable support systems. They will look for expanded training opportunities that prepare journalists for the rapidly changing media landscape. They will also expect a firmer, more courageous voice on issues affecting press freedom and professional integrity. Above all, they will demand continuity—assurance that the progress recorded so far is not a fleeting phase but the beginning of a sustained transformation.
Meeting these expectations will not be easy, but it is precisely this challenge that defines enduring leadership. That said, this moment of applause must also serve as a moment of reflection. A strong first year inevitably raises expectations. Journalists in Rivers State will now look beyond initial achievements toward consolidation. Welfare interventions must become more structured and far-reaching. Training programs must be sustained and expanded. Advocacy must become more consistent and impactful. Most importantly, the unity of the union must be strengthened, ensuring that all members feel included and carried along. Transparency will also be key. Continued open communication about finances, decisions, and challenges will deepen trust and set a standard for accountable union leadership. The task ahead is clear: to convert early momentum into lasting institutional progress.
For the Bazia-led executive, the opportunity is significant. It has, within one year, reawakened belief in what the NUJ Rivers State Council can be. The next step is to ensure that this renewed energy does not fade, but instead becomes the foundation of a stronger, more responsive, and more respected union. For the members, the message is equally clear—expect more, demand more, and support what works because in the end, a vibrant union is not built by leadership alone, but by a collective commitment to progress. And for now, under Bazia, that progress has truly begun.
By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi
Continue Reading

Trending