Opinion

Call For 2015 Election Postponement: Nigerians React

Published

12 years ago

January 26, 2015

Mr. Chris Finebone – APC State Publicity Secretary
That call by the National Security Adviser is most unfortunate. We in APC are not surprised that officers of the Jonathan administration are terrified at the massive failure staring them in the face in the forthcoming presidential election hence the call to see how to stem off their impending loss. For us, there are no credible and verifiable reasons why the elections should be postponed.

Monday Wehere – National President Community Newspaper Publishers Association of Nigeria (CONPAN)
For and for most, I saw the comment myself. The unfortunate thing is that he did not tell Nigerians under what capacity he was speaking, whether he was speaking as the chieftain of security in Nigeria or he was talking as a traditional ruler or as a person. That is why I find it somehow difficult to react to that.
However, there is no provision in the constitution which says that certain number of Nigerians must have PVC before elections could be conducted. Now, America is about 350 million people and in any election you hardly have about 50 million people voting. In most case only about 14 million people vote in a presidential election in America. So, for you to say that elections should be postponed just because some people have not gotten their PVC, to me it does not hold water. Again, why I will not support such suggestion is this. I came back from Abuja recently, because of the forthcoming election, everything is stalled. Nothing is moving. There is no key person holding a key position in the federal government that can commit himself now to any matter of national importance because they don’t know their fate, whether they will stay. So there is a lacuna. There is a hill, so, I can say that call he is making should not be accepted.
The only way I could have said let’s take him serious was assuming INEC is saying, “Sorry, we have not done what we were supposed to do, please give us enough time.” Then we can listen to INEC chairman. But INEC say they are ready for the elections. So if INEC is ready, they should go ahead and do the election. Even President Jonathan cannot stop the election now because INEC says they are ready. The only way President Jonathan can even advise INEC to postpone it is if INEC is saying now that they are not ready.
So I don’t think his advise should be accepted without him giving any security reason or any other cogent reason why it should be postponed. That is the problem we are having in this country. A lot of us are saying Jonathan is not performing. Dasuki has not even received that kind of power to make such statement. This is a matter that would have been discussed at the National executive council after which if the need be, INEC would have mandated him to talk to the press. How can he on his own make such statement? That tells you that they are not working with Jonathan. If this man is working with Jonathan he cannot just come and make such statement. So you can imagine the kind of problem Jonathan is having, that he is working with those who are not supporting him. How can he make such a statement without consulting Mr. President? If he had done that Mr. President would have advised him not to make such statement. Now he has said it, he is now trying to put the country into problem.
And I want to disagree with the opinion of the APP that Dasuki’s call for the postponement of the election is a play by PDP to rig the election. Dasuki was not mandated by the PDP. He did not also speak on behalf of the federal government. APC should have known that what Dasuki said was his own personal opinion. As a PDP man, I know that if you postpone the election now it will not even favour us, because we are set, we have done a lot of home work. So the election must hold because INEC said they are ready and we are also ready.

Mr. Ifeanyi Ezinwo -Publisher
Dasuki is a responsible Nigerian, holding a very sensitive office where he has access to a lot of information. So for him to make that kind of comment, I wouldn’t want to dismiss it in a hurry, unless we are assuming that he is not a serious person, that he is a person who speaks flippantly. He might have predicated his conclusion on very sensitive and important matter like we had, on the distribution of voter’s card. I am not in his mind but I want to believe that he might have considered that volume of cards that a yet to be collected and just a posed that with the time and the way things are going and felt that it might be reasonable to postpone it.
My own position is that we should not be in a hurry to condemn him although INEC had said that they don’t have any plans to postpone the elections. But the issue is, can INEC guarantee us that every registered voter can have his card before the election? And if paradventure, as at the time we are going in for election we still have millions who have not got this card, what is going to be the likely implication of disenfranchising that large number of people? So, I want to believe that what Dasuki said should be a food for thought for INEC and all the relevant state holders. Because if tomorrow now, maybe about 15 million did not collect their cards and they do the election and Jonathan wins, Buhari will say, “OO! the people who would have voted for me were disenfranchised”. Some of those who were disenfranchised can go and begin to demonstrate that thing were not allowed to vote. Some of them may even disrupt the election. It’s possible, depending on their number in certain areas. It could become a political tool.
So, I want to say that people should not dissipate energy condemning the man. Rather, if possible they should invite him, invite INEC and maybe some people from the National Assembly who would put heads together in search of solution. If it is possible for everybody to get his voters card fine. But if it is not possible, then they have to think of what to do to make sure everybody gets voters card.
My own position is that whatever that is worth doing is worth doing well. If we want to have a credible election nobody should be disenfranchised. If huge number of people are disenfranchised, I don’t know how it will look like. Can we say that we have conducted a credible election that is all inclusive? So I want to suggest that instead of the stakeholders passing bulk, they should sit down with INEC and see how they can contribute ideas to make sure that all those who are registered get their voters card.

Mr. Innocent Nweke – Public Servant
Well, to me as a person, in view of what is going on in the country right now, Boko Haram insurgency, threats here and there, the President, those in government and all the parties should come together resolve various issues first before talking about election. It is then that we will know that they are ready to take us to the polls.
However, if INEC says they are ready for the elections, then they should go ahead. They are the people to tell us what to do. And we are ready to do just that if INEC says they are ready, that everything is in order. let them set out some day for people to go and collect their PVCs. The people that considered it important went out to get their PVCs and they got them. I was in Abuja but I had to come back to Port Harcourt to make sure I got mine. And government gave some holidays for the collection of the PVCs, yet many people refused to go and collect. So even if you give them till next year, many people will not get it. So if INEC says they are ready, they should work with the number they have and do the election. Besides, not everybody that gets the PVC will go out for the election. Of course, even many of the people that have collected their PVC will not all go out to cast their votes on the election days.

Mr. Israel Walezi – Businessman
It was announced that everybody should go and collect their PVC and government declared holidays for that. INEC has given the dates for the elections since last year and they said everybody should go and collect his/her PVC. For me, the election should go on. If you take a look at the country now especially Rivers State, you will find out that everything is not moving well because of this election. No projects are going on. Everywhere in the country, things are stand still because our leaders are involved in politics. Many civil servants have not been paid for months because of this election. I believe when this election is done with, things will normalise.

Mr. Nwachukwu Jeremiah – Transporters
They should not postpone the election. If they postpone the election, they will give chance for corruption and People will rig the election.
What I mean is that, if they postpone this election, people will use the opportunity to do some funny things. So the election should go on. If some people could not collect their PVCs and they are willing to vote, they should be allowed to use their temporary voters cards and cast their votes. Their names are there on INEC list, so they should make use of it.

Opinion

Checking Voter Apathy In Nigeria’s Electoral Process

Published

3 days ago

October 26, 2026

The Tide

Quote:“Apathy may express frustration, but surrendering our votes only gives others greater power to determine our future. Nigeria needs credible elections, accountable leaders and citizens who refuse to abandon their democratic rights.”

“I actually don’t know what is wrong with this country called Nigeria. Nothing will ever make me go out under the scorching sun to vote for anybody again. After all, my vote doesn’t count. “We go out and vote, but in the end, they announce whatever result they want and tell the opponents to go to court. Is this the Nigeria we all want?” These are the frustrations of many Nigerians who have lost faith in the electoral process. For them, elections have become a cycle of high expectations, alleged irregularities and disappointing outcomes. Consequently, many are becoming indifferent to how political leaders emerge and what they do after assuming office. This growing voter apathy poses a serious threat to Nigeria’s democracy and must be addressed before the 2027 general election.

Some politicians, including councillors, local government chairmen, members of the House of Representatives, senators and governors, have disappointed the people they were elected to represent. Constituents who expect their representatives to address pressing community needs often complain of neglect, poor performance and limited engagement after elections.bAs Chinua Achebe’s celebrated novel, “Things Fall Apart”, suggests, things appear to be falling apart in Nigeria’s electoral system. Yet, withdrawing from the electoral process is not the solution. Rather, it could worsen the situation by allowing a relatively small proportion of voters to determine the country’s political future. Recently, the National Orientation Agency (NOA) launched a nationwide grassroots mobilisation campaign to address voter apathy, vote buying and electoral violence ahead of the 2027 general election.

The campaign, themed “Your Vote, Your Voice, Our Future: Say No to Apathy, Vote Buying and Violence. Let’s Build a United Nigeria in 2027,” was inaugurated in Abuja. Speaking at the event, the Minister of Information and National Orientation, Mohammed Idris, commended the agency for the initiative, emphasizing that citizens must recognize the importance of their votes in determining the country’s political leadership and future. He warned that voter apathy, vote buying and electoral violence threatened democratic development, calling for stronger collaboration among government institutions, electoral authorities, security agencies, community leaders and citizens. The Director-General of the NOA, Mallam Lanre Issa-Onilu, explained that the agency would deploy its state directorates across the 36 states and the Federal Capital Territory to promote responsible electoral participation.

The campaign will use local languages, radio programmes, town hall meetings, community dialogues, drama and digital platforms to reach Nigerians in both urban and rural communities. The Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Prof. Joash Ojo Amupitan, also reaffirmed the commission’s commitment to conducting free, fair, transparent, inclusive and credible elections in 2027. He stressed the importance of early preparation, stakeholder collaboration and active citizen participation. These initiatives are commendable. However, their success will depend on sustained implementation rather than public announcements alone. Voter education must continue beyond election periods, while electoral institutions must demonstrate through their conduct that citizens’ votes deserve protection.

The government, political parties, electoral authorities and civil society organisations (CSOs) all have important roles to play. First, governments must demonstrate genuine commitment to credible elections by rejecting electoral manipulation, vote buying and the use of thugs to intimidate voters. Electoral offences must be investigated and prosecuted in accordance with the law. Security agencies must also remain professional and impartial throughout the electoral process. Beyond elections, elected officials must deliver the dividends of democracy. Reliable electricity, accessible healthcare, quality education, good roads and employment opportunities can help restore public confidence in governance. Citizens are more likely to participate when they see that democracy can improve their lives.

Political officeholders must also change their attitude towards their constituencies. Representatives should maintain regular contact with their constituents, explain their activities and demonstrate how they address local concerns. Representation should not end with election campaigns, nor should elected officials remember their constituents only when another election approaches. CSOs and political parties must intensify voter education, helping citizens understand that voting is a fundamental democratic right and an important means of holding leaders accountable. Voters should also learn to verify electoral information, report irregularities through appropriate channels and reject inducements that compromise their choices.

The electorate, too, has responsibilities. Voters must resist the temptation to sell their votes for money, food or other temporary benefits. Although economic hardship makes such inducements attractive to some, selling a vote undermines the opportunity to demand accountable leadership. Equally important is the rejection of electoral violence and misinformation. Nigerians must learn to disagree politically without becoming enemies. Citizens should verify claims before sharing them, particularly on social media, and report suspected electoral malpractice to the appropriate authorities. Participation also extends beyond voting. Citizens can attend community meetings, question elected representatives, monitor public projects and demand transparency between elections.

Nevertheless, citizens cannot be expected to sustain enthusiasm when credible complaints are ignored or electoral processes lack public confidence. INEC must therefore strengthen transparency, improve election logistics, communicate promptly and ensure that electoral complaints are handled in accordance with the law. Where disputes arise, the courts must provide lawful remedies. Nigeria’s democracy cannot thrive when eligible voters surrender their voices out of frustration. Restoring participation requires more than urging people to turn out on election day. It demands credible elections, responsible leadership, effective civic education and accountability. The 2027 general election presents an opportunity to rebuild public trust.

The NOA campaign is a welcome step, but all stakeholders must translate its message into action. Every eligible Nigerian should understand that a vote is not merely a mark on a ballot paper; it is an opportunity to influence the country’s future. Apathy may express frustration, but active and responsible participation offers a better chance of achieving change. The time to restore confidence in Nigeria’s electoral process is now. The earlier we act, the better for our democracy and future generations.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Oil Exploration Mustn’t Cost Lives

Published

3 days ago

October 26, 2026

The Tide

Quote: “No oil vessel, commercial contract or operational deadline is worth the loss of innocent lives; where environmental grievances are ignored and dialogue gives way to confrontation, the entire society pays a price that no compensation can adequately erase.”

The recent boat tragedy in Kula Kingdom, Akuku-Toru Local Government Area of Rivers State, has highlighted the troubling relationship between petroleum operations, environmental grievances and the safety of oil-producing communities. The reported loss of lives during a confrontation over an oil vessel is a painful reminder that commercial interests must never overshadow human life. The incident occurred on October 20, 2026, along the Robertkiri waterways of Kula, when a community boat capsized amid tensions surrounding the movement of the ANAMBRA BASIN Floating Storage and Offloading (FSO) vessel. Community members were reportedly protesting unresolved concerns over an alleged oil spill, environmental remediation and other outstanding obligations. Reports initially indicated that 10 people were feared dead. However, TheCable reported on October 23 that seven people had died, with five bodies recovered and two others missing. Investigations are needed to establish the circumstances surrounding the incident.

The tragedy raises fundamental questions about how disputes between oil-related businesses and host communities are managed. Why should disagreements over environmental concerns and contractual obligations escalate into situations involving loss of lives? What mechanisms exist to address grievances before they develop into dangerous confrontations? These questions demand urgent and impartial answers. For decades, communities across the Niger Delta have complained about oil pollution, damaged fishing grounds, declining livelihoods and inadequate environmental remediation. In riverine settlements such as Kula, fishing sustains many households. Pollution therefore threatens not only the environment but also food security, family income and children’s welfare.

Allegations of oil spills must not be dismissed as routine complaints or obstacles to petroleum operations. They require prompt investigation, independent environmental assessment and appropriate remediation wherever pollution is established. Disputes over compensation or contractual obligations should be resolved transparently, using verifiable records rather than confrontation. The incident also highlights the need to clarify responsibilities among vessel owners, contractors, petroleum operators and other parties. Max Shipping Services Limited, owner of the ANAMBRA BASIN vessel, has denied responsibility for the underlying oilfield operations and explained that the vessel was hired to Menal Technical Services Limited. These claims must be examined alongside community allegations and available evidence. No company should be condemned without proof, but contractual arrangements must not shield anyone from established responsibility.

Equally important is the reported involvement of armed security personnel in the confrontation. Security agencies have a legitimate duty to maintain law and order and protect lives. However, their operations require professionalism, restraint and sound judgement, especially in tense communities. Armed personnel deployed to manage disputes should help de-escalate tensions, protect civilians and facilitate peaceful resolution. Investigators must establish the circumstances surrounding their deployment, the sequence of events leading to the boat’s capsizing and whether reasonable precautions were taken. All parties deserve a fair hearing, and anyone found culpable should face appropriate legal consequences. The Rivers State Government must not treat the incident merely as a marine accident without examining its underlying grievances.

Beyond expressing sympathy, government should support a credible investigation, assist affected families and facilitate engagement among the community, companies and regulatory agencies. Every necessary effort should also be made to locate the missing persons. Environmental and petroleum regulators must independently investigate the alleged spill and determine whether remediation is necessary. Where pollution is confirmed, responsible parties must fulfil their legal obligations. The Petroleum Industry Act provides a framework for host-community development and environmental responsibilities; these provisions must deliver practical protection for affected communities. Community leaders and youths must equally pursue legitimate demands through peaceful and lawful channels. This does not require silence in the face of pollution or alleged breaches of agreements. Rather, petitions, negotiations, peaceful protests and legal remedies can advance accountability without exposing residents to avoidable danger.

Companies and contractors must maintain effective communication with host communities and address complaints promptly, rather than engage only when disputes threaten operations. Government must intervene early, not wait until tensions erupt. Transparent agreements, independent assessments and accessible grievance mechanisms can prevent misunderstandings from escalating into deadly confrontations. The Niger Delta has endured decades of environmental concerns and disputes over the benefits and burdens of petroleum extraction. Its people should not have to risk their lives to secure attention to legitimate grievances. Oil revenue cannot justify preventable deaths or the neglect of communities where extraction takes place.

The Kula tragedy must become a turning point. Authorities must establish the truth, determine responsibility based on evidence, support bereaved families and ensure legitimate environmental concerns receive attention. Ultimately, petroleum operations should be judged not only by revenue generated or crude oil transported, but also by whether host communities enjoy environmental protection, economic opportunity and personal safety. Oil profits must never cost lives. Kula deserves justice, transparency and lasting solutions. The deaths on its waterways must not become another statistic in the Niger Delta’s troubled history. They must remind every responsible institution that no commercial interest is more valuable than human life.

By: Sylvia ThankGod-Amadi

Opinion

Gift Or Will: Why Wait Until Death To Give?

Published

1 week ago

October 19, 2026

The Tide

Quote:”The value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?”

Will and gifts are subjects that many people, particularly in this part of the world, are reluctant to discuss. This may be due to the misconception that they are matters reserved for the dying and that talking about them could somehow invite death. Yet, both are important subjects that everyone, young and old alike, should understand. Every property owner should ask a fundamental question: Why wait until death before allowing the people we love to enjoy the fruits of our labour? Many parents spend their productive years acquiring houses, land, businesses and other valuable assets, yet postpone sharing these blessings with their children and loved ones until they are no longer alive. They prepare Wills, appoint executors and hope their wishes will eventually be fulfilled. But is there a case for giving more generously during one’s lifetime?

A Will is an important legal instrument, and nobody should be discouraged from making one. However, lifetime gifts deserve greater attention because they allow property owners to witness the benefits of their generosity and, where properly completed, transfer ownership before death. One practical difficulty with inheritance is that writing a Will does not automatically make the property available to beneficiaries upon the testator’s death. Ordinarily, executors must obtain a grant of probate from the appropriate Probate Registry before administering the estate under the Will. The process may involve producing the original Will and death certificate, identifying executors and beneficiaries, preparing an inventory and valuation of assets, completing prescribed forms, paying applicable fees and satisfying other registry requirements. Procedures vary across jurisdictions in the country and depend on the circumstances of each estate.

Where documentation is incomplete, the estate is complex or questions arise about the Will, administration may be delayed. Matters become more difficult when a relative or beneficiary challenges the Will, enters a caveat or commences litigation. Legal expenses accumulate, family relationships deteriorate, and intended beneficiaries may wait for years before receiving their inheritance. A child expecting to inherit a house may be unable to deal freely with the property while administration remains outstanding. Similarly, a beneficiary hoping to use inherited funds to establish a business may be frustrated by delays. Across Nigeria, families have experienced difficulties accessing their late parents’ estates because of disputes over Wills and prolonged legal proceedings. See Dan Jumbo v Dan Jumbo. Where a court declares a Will invalid, those named as beneficiaries may lose their entitlement under that document, and the estate may instead be distributed under the applicable intestacy rules. Consequently, people the deceased deliberately intended to benefit may receive nothing under the disputed Will. Ajibaiye v Ajibaiye

This does not mean every challenge will succeed or that all beneficiaries will necessarily be excluded. It nevertheless highlights a risk in postponing every act of generosity until death: the intended beneficiaries may have to establish their entitlement through a process whose outcome is uncertain. A lifetime gift, commonly called a gift inter vivos, is a gift intended to take effect during the donor’s lifetime. Where validly completed, ownership of the transferred interest generally passes to the beneficiary, and the property ordinarily ceases to form part of the donor’s estate.This distinction is significant. A beneficiary who acquires valid ownership of property during the donor’s lifetime does not ordinarily have to establish entitlement to that property through the donor’s Will. The claim rests on the completed transfer rather than a testamentary promise. For instance, a parent with several properties may transfer a house to a child who needs accommodation or give land to another who wishes to build a home. A business owner may transfer an interest in a business to a child already involved in its management. These arrangements provide practical support while allowing the giver to witness the benefits.

Properly completed lifetime gifts may also reduce the assets that must subsequently pass through probate, potentially simplifying the administration of the remaining estate. However, such transfers must comply with applicable law. A mere declaration or unfulfilled promise to give land may not be sufficient. Depending on the circumstances, a gift may require an appropriate deed, acceptance, execution, registration and any necessary consent. Sections 21 and 22 of the Land Use Act 1978 regulate certain dealings involving statutory and customary rights of occupancy. Lifetime gifts are not immune from disputes though. Transfers may be challenged on grounds such as fraud, undue influence, incapacity or failure to comply with legal formalities. Proper legal advice and documentation are therefore essential. Encouraging lifetime gifts does not mean abandoning Wills. A Will remains useful for assets an owner wishes to retain throughout life, property acquired later and assets not transferred before death. It also allows the testator to appoint executors and give instructions for distributing the remaining estate.

Property owners must also avoid giving away assets indiscriminately. Adequate provision should be made for personal upkeep, accommodation, healthcare and other financial responsibilities. Parents should never be pressured into transferring their entire estates or surrendering their financial independence. Where a donor wishes to retain the right to occupy a gifted house, that arrangement should be properly structured and documented. Ultimately, the value of wealth is measured not only by what a person leaves behind but also by the good it accomplishes during that person’s lifetime. A gift of land may enable a child to build a home; financial assistance may help a young person establish a business; and a properly transferred property may provide security while the donor is still alive to share in the beneficiary’s joy. Probate is a necessary safeguard, not a reason to dismiss Wills. Nevertheless, where appropriate, lifetime gifts can reduce the property left for administration and help beneficiaries avoid waiting for assets that could have been transferred earlier.

My appeal is simple: let us cultivate a culture of thoughtful giving. Make a Will, but also consider what you can responsibly give today. Seek legal advice, document your intentions and ensure every transfer is properly completed. Why wait until death to give when we can make a meaningful difference in the lives of those we love today?

By: Calista Ezeaku