Opinion

Withdrawal Of Abacha’s Case Right Or Wrong?

Published

12 years ago

June 23, 2014

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.

Opinion

Curbing Youth Unemployment In Nigeria

Published

5 hours ago

March 30, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Ozoro Festival: Tradition or Tyranny?

Published

5 hours ago

March 30, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Bazia EXCO @ One: NUJ Rivers Reawakened

Published

1 week ago

March 23, 2026

The Tide

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