Editorial
That Accord On Violence-Free Polls
Presidential candidates signed a
violence-free 2015 elections recently
and caused many Nigerians to heave a sigh of relief. The document referred to as the “Abuja Accord” was the highlight of a sensitisation workshop on violence-free elections in Abuja.
Clearly, the workshop which was attended by nearly all the 14 Presidential candidates, among them, a woman, could not have come at a better time. It was a direct response to fears being expressed over the safety of lives and property over the 2015 elections.
Already, apart from media hostilities and some unbridled threats among the parties, incidences of physical clashes between the two leading parties have sent shivers down the spines of many Nigerians and the international community alike.
Indeed, the bombing of a party office in Okrika and the attack of persons going for the flag off of the Presidential campaign of the All Progressives Party (APC) in Port Harcourt all in Rivers State as well as the burning of campaign buses of the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) in Jos had only set the stage for crisis.
Although Nigeria has a history of electoral violence, the build-up for an offensive appears to be unprecedented this time around. Coming at a time when some persons still insinuate a possible collapse of the Nigerian State the authorities cannot afford to overlook anything or hope to do anything when the crisis begins.
This is why we commend the organisers of the sensitisation workshop and the magic they used to bring together the Presidential candidates, Chairman of the Independent National Electoral Commission and the International Community, including the former Secretary General of the United Nation, Mr. Kofi Annan.
We have no reason to doubt the frankness of the Presidential candidates who took time to speak one after another. But we hope that they will be able to take the message home to their parities and ensure the realisation of the “Abuja Accord.”
As a matter of fact, the accord will have very little meaning if it is not replicated in all the 36 states of the country. The reason is simple; in some of the States, the influence of their Governors is so intimidating and if the Governor does not sign, what Abuja had done may not be seen to be binding on them.
Even so, there must be a way of monitoring the actualisation of the accord and the identification of persons to be held responsible in the event of a breach. This is more so because desperate politicians are known to have used mobs and pretended to be saints.
Perhaps, another area of interest raised at the workshop were some issues raised by the presidential candidates. If it is not too late, in fact it should not be too late as some of the issues do not only command validity beyond 2015, but should perpetually colour the political and electoral culture of Nigeria.
The organisers of the workshop and the INEC must look for ways of collating those ideas and come up with a document that the National Assembly can work with. Indeed, it is of essence that aspects of the concerns so eminently expressed are acted upon immediately if Nigeria is to be the winner of the 2015 elections.
Apart from the reckless abandon with which provocative, sectional and religious-laden statements are made by some politicians to divide Nigerians, the commitment of the security agencies and he judiciary to electoral justice; the need to screen aspirants with the security agencies and the need to make electoral victories beneficial to more parties are issues too weighty to leave behind at the workshop hall.
While we want to underscore the appeal for leaders to put the interest, peace and unity of Nigeria above any other consideration, the electorates who may have decide to stay away from the polling stations for fear of violence, can now change their minds and actively participate in the choosing of the next set of leaders in Nigeria.
Editorial
Rivers’ Retirees: Matters Arising

Editorial
That FEC’s Decision On Tertiary Institutions

Editorial
Addressing Unruly Behaviours At The Airports

It began as a seemingly minor in- flight disagreement. Comfort Emmason, a passenger on an Ibom Air flight from Uyo to Lagos, reportedly failed to switch off her mobile phone when instructed by the cabin crew. What should have been a routine enforcement of safety regulations spiralled into a physical confrontation, sparking a national debate on the limits of airline authority and the rights of passengers.
The Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) wasted no time in condemning the treatment meted out to Emmason. In a strongly worded statement, the body described the incident as “a flagrant violation of her fundamental human rights” and called for a thorough investigation into the conduct of the airline staff. The NBA stressed that while passengers must adhere to safety rules, such compliance should never be extracted through intimidation, violence, or humiliation.
Following the altercation, Emmason found herself arraigned before a Magistrate’s Court and remanded at Kirikiri Maximum Security Prison, a location more commonly associated with hardened criminals than with errant passengers. In a surprising turn of events, the Federal Government later dropped all charges against her, citing “overriding public interest” and concerns about due process.
Compounding her woes, Ibom Air initially imposed a lifetime ban preventing her from boarding its aircraft. That ban has now been lifted, following mounting public pressure and calls from rights groups for a more measured approach. The reversal has been welcomed by many as a step towards restoring fairness and proportionality in handling such disputes.
While her refusal to comply with crew instructions was undeniably inappropriate, questions linger about whether the punishment fit the offence. Was the swift escalation from verbal reminder to physical ejection a proportionate response, or an abuse of authority? The incident has reignited debate over how airlines balance safety enforcement with respect for passenger rights.
The Tide unequivocally condemns the brutal and degrading treatment the young Nigerian woman received from the airline’s staff. No regulation, however vital, justifies the use of physical force or the public shaming of a passenger. Such behaviour is antithetical to the principles of customer service, human dignity, and the rule of law.
Emmason’s own defiance warrants reproach. Cabin crew instructions, especially during boarding or take-off preparations, are not mere suggestions; they are safety mandates. Reports suggest she may have been unable to comply because of a malfunctioning power button on her device, but even so, she could have communicated this clearly to the crew. Rules exist to safeguard everyone on board, and passengers must treat them with due seriousness.
Nigerians, whether flying domestically or abroad, would do well to internalise the importance of orderliness in public spaces. Adherence to instructions, patience in queues, and courteous engagement with officials are hallmarks of civilised society. Disregard for these norms not only undermines safety but also projects a damaging image of the nation to the wider world.
The Emmason affair is not an isolated case. Former Edo State Governor and current Senator, Adams Oshiomhole, once found himself grounded after arriving late for an Air Peace flight. Witnesses alleged that he assaulted airline staff and ordered the closure of the terminal’s main entrance. This is hardly the conduct expected of a statesman.
More recently, a Nollywood-worthy episode unfolded at Abuja’s Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport, involving Fuji icon “King”, Wasiu Ayinde Marshal, popularly known as KWAM1. In a viral video, he was seen exchanging heated words with officials after being prevented from boarding an aircraft.
Events took a dangerous turn when the aircraft, moving at near take-off speed, nearly clipped the 68-year-old musician’s head with its wing. Such an occurrence points to a serious breach of airport safety protocols, raising uncomfortable questions about operational discipline at Nigeria’s gateways.
According to accounts circulating online, Wasiu had attempted to board an aircraft while he was carrying an alcoholic drink and refused to relinquish it when challenged. His refusal led to de-boarding, after which the Aviation Minister, Festus Keyamo, imposed a six-month “no-fly” ban, citing “unacceptable” conduct.
It is deeply concerning that individuals of such prominence, including Emmason’s pilot adversary, whose careers have exposed them to some of the most disciplined aviation environments in the world, should exhibit conduct that diminishes the nation’s reputation. True leadership, whether in politics, culture, or professional life, calls for restraint and decorum, all the more when exercised under public scrutiny.
Most egregiously, in Emmason’s case, reports that she was forcibly stripped in public and filmed for online circulation are deeply disturbing. This was an act of humiliation and a gross invasion of privacy, violating her right to dignity and falling short of the standards expected in modern aviation. No person, regardless of the circumstances, should be subjected to such degrading treatment.
Ibom Air must ensure its staff are trained to treat passengers with proper decorum at all times. If Emmason had broken the law, security personnel could have been called in to handle the matter lawfully. Instead, her ordeal turned into a public spectacle. Those responsible for assaulting her should face prosecution, and the airline should be compelled to compensate her. Emmason, for her part, should pursue legal redress to reinforce the principle that justice and civility must prevail in Nigeria’s skies.