Editorial
Education: Dangers Of Early Start
There are worries these days about the way parents are sending their kids to school earlier than it was many years ago; for example, a situation where children of six and nine months are sent to creche and day care centres all in the name of starting them early.
Although some parents whose schedules are tight say they have no choice than to do so since getting a house help or nanny has a lot of implications for the child and the family. But aside that, some people feel that the benefit of sending their children to school so early will help them secure job early. And the issue of starting life early.
So many years ago, children of school age were not allowed to start school until their hands could cross from one part of their ear to another. That was the yardstick used to ascertain whether one could start school or not.
It is important that our wards acquire education early but their lives should not be put to danger because we want them to finish school early. The truth is that parents are pushing their children into school these days as if there is competition among families and friends. This is not healthy enough for our young ones.
I don’t understand why a child of 12 years should be in Senior Secondary Two (SS2). It means that the child will be a graduate at age 13 or 14 in SS3. This should be discouraged by government and private school operators.
Which university will admit a student of 14 or 15 years when universities insist that they must be 16-years old before being admitted? I’ve seen a child who performed well both in SSCE and UTME but was denied admission by one of our universities because he was below 16 years.
That is a welcome development. Maturity is one of the factors in the teaching and learning process. We should not send our children to school earlier than it should be. No matter how intelligent a child is, he should not be allowed to jump any class. School managers should resist parents who may want their children to jump from one class to another.
Even if a child scores Excellent in all subjects in a particular class, that child should be allowed to touch all the classes, complete primary 6 of lower basic. That will make a significant impact on that child. Years back, many of us started secondary school at the age of 12 and 13 and never lost anything, as we finished at 17, 18 and 19 before seeking admission into the university.
Back in secondary school, some students were already 20 years and never bothered being in the same class with younger persons. There are children who are exceptionally good but that does not mean a child should be sent to school prematurely. That child may suffer inferiority complex in the midst of seniors.
Children should be allowed to move with their peers. This will give them a sense of belonging among peers. When a child begins to nurse the problem of inferiority complex, he will certainly experience withdrawal syndrome. Peer group pressure becomes a problem on the child.
Those are some of the challenges resulting from keeping younger persons among the older ones. We are not in danger so we should not put our children into such uncomfortable scenario. Nowadays, children are getting into school at tender age as parents dictate. There are things children are supposed to learn as kids at a particular level and when they jump such level and get to a point where parents want them to be, one day, those children will definitely feel it and the significance of the level will manifest.
Children should be allowed to enjoy whatever thing they are meant to enjoy at every level. No level of a child’s development should be ignored. Every stage of development is important, no matter how intelligent that child may be. Stakeholders know why every curriculum is prepared in a way to suit every child. So, parents should allow children to enjoy every stage in their lives.
A teacher once told me that children below 10 years who find themselves in secondary school do not concentrate in class. They find it difficult to concentrate, no matter what the teacher does.
Parents deny their kids parental care. Sometimes in schools, parents abandon their wards at the mercy of minders after school hours, up to 6:00pm. Whereas they should have gone home earlier to prepare for the next day. Even at home, they are left in the hands of house helps and nannies while parents are busy looking for money. Children are denied parental care and are not getting full maturity because of these factors.
Another reason for this rush by parents is pride. A parent may be boasting that his child is either in ABC school and representing the whole world while another person’s child is at home or one “inferior” school.
Children who are pushed into school prematurely do not sustain it most times. Students of 15 and 16 years old going into university can suffer depression according to research. Researches have also shown that they (younger ones) risk the problem of mental health more than their older classmates.
In the case of creche and day care centres, the idea is not really to acquire education; yet, parents decide to keep their babies so that they can go about their daily businesses. It is true they need money to cater for their households.
Teaching and learning process begins with the parents. No matter how tight our schedules may be, we must take care of our kids. Parents must devote time to nurture and teach their children many things that they cannot be done in classroom. We should not rush them through life all in a bid to acquire education early.
It is worrisome that parents rush their children to school while they cannot speak and understand their languages and dialects. One of the guidelines in the National Policy in Education is that children should be taught in their mother tongue at home while they learn foreign language in school.
The Policy also stipulates that every child at the basic level should be taught the language of the place of residence. I’m not sure school managers are obeying this instruction and parents do not do a follow-up.
Parents rush their children to school while they do not understand their environment, culture and tradition of theirs and others. Although few schools devote little time to mark cultural day for the kids. It is good that people start school early and graduate at 20, 21 and maybe get a job at 23 and 24 as some employers will indicate.
There was a period when students secured admission between the ages of 22 and 23 years as a result of either delay in obtaining credits in their choice of disciplines and high scores in UTME. They still graduate at 27 and 28 before proceeding for national youth service.
By: Eunice Choko-Kayode
The recent massacre in Yelewata, Benue State, ranks among Nigeria’s deadliest attacks of
2025. While official figures put the death toll at 59, media reports and Amnesty International estimate between 100 and 200 fatalities. This atrocity extends a decade-long pattern of violence in Nigeria’s Middle Belt, where Beacon Security data records 1,043 deaths in Benue alone between May 2023 and May 2025.
President Tinubu’s visit on 18 June—four days after the 14 June attack—has drawn sharp criticism for its lateness. This delay echoes a history of inadequate responses, with Human Rights Watch documenting similar inaction in Plateau and Kaduna states since 2013, fuelling a culture of impunity. The attack lasted over two hours without meaningful security intervention, despite claims of swift action.
The violence bore hallmarks of genocide, with survivors recounting systematic house burnings and executions. More than 2.2 million people have been displaced in the region since 2019 due to comparable attacks. Data show Benue’s agricultural output falls by 0.21 per cent in crops and 0.31 per cent in livestock for every 1 per cent rise in violence.
Security forces continue to underperform. No arrests were made following the Easter attacks in April (56 killed) or May’s Gwer West massacre (42 killed). During his visit, Tinubu questioned publicly why no suspects had been detained four days after Yelewata, highlighting entrenched accountability failures.
The roots of the conflict are complex, with climate change pushing northern herders south and 77 per cent of Benue’s population reliant on agriculture. A Tiv community leader described the violence as “calculated land-grabbing” rather than mere clashes, with over 500 deaths recorded since 2019.
Government interventions have largely fallen short. The 2018 federal task force and 2025 Forest Guards initiative failed to curb violence. Tinubu’s newly announced committee of ex-governors and traditional rulers has been met with scepticism given the litany of past unkept promises.
The economic fallout is severe. Benue’s status as Nigeria’s “food basket” is crumbling as farms are destroyed and farmers displaced. This worsens the nation’s food crisis, with hunger surges in 2023-2024 directly linked to farming disruptions caused by insecurity.
Citizens demanding justice have been met with force; protesters faced police tear gas, and the State Assembly conceded total failure in safeguarding lives, admitting that the governor, deputy, and 32 lawmakers had all neglected their constitutional responsibilities.
The massacre has drawn international condemnation. Pope Leo XIV decried the “terrible massacre,” while the UN called for an investigation. The hashtag “200 Nigerians” trended worldwide on X, with many contrasting Nigeria’s slow response to India’s swift action following a plane crash with similar fatalities.
Nigeria’s centralised security system is clearly overwhelmed. A single police force is tasked with covering 36 states and 774 local government areas for a population exceeding 200 million. Between 2021 and 2023 alone, 29,828 killings and 15,404 kidnappings were recorded nationally. Proposals for state police, floated since January 2025, remain stalled.
Other populous nations offer alternative models. Canada’s provincial police, India’s state forces, and Indonesia’s municipal units demonstrate the effectiveness of decentralised policing. Nigeria’s centralised structure creates intelligence and response gaps, worsened by the distance—both physical and bureaucratic—from Abuja to affected communities.
The immediate aftermath is dire: 21 IDP camps in Benue are overwhelmed, and a humanitarian crisis is deepening. The State Assembly declared three days of mourning (18-20 June), but survivors lack sufficient medical aid. Tragically, many of those killed were already displaced by earlier violence.
A lasting solution requires a multi-pronged approach, including targeted security deployment, regulated grazing land, and full enforcement of Benue’s 2017 Anti-Open Grazing Law. The National Economic Council’s failure to prioritise state police in May 2025 represents a missed chance for reform.
Without decisive intervention, trends suggest conditions will worsen. More than 20,000 Nigerians have been killed and 13,000 kidnapped nationwide in 2025 alone. As Governor Hyacinth Alia stressed during Tinubu’s visit, state police may be the only viable path forward. All 36 states have submitted proposals supporting decentralisation—a crucial step towards breaking Nigeria’s vicious cycle of violence.
Nigeria’s return to democratic rule in 1999 marked a watershed moment in the nation’s political history. After enduring nearly 16 years of successive military dictatorships, Nigerians embraced a new era of civil governance with the inauguration of President Olusegun Obasanjo on May 29, 1999. Since then, the country has sustained a democratic system for 26 years. But, this democratic journey has been a complex mix of progress and persistent challenges.
The formal recognition of June 12 as Democracy Day in 2018 by former President Muhammadu Buhari acknowledged a long-standing injustice. The annulment of the 1993 presidential election, Nigeria’s freest, betrayed the democratic aspirations of millions. That it took decades to honour this date reflects the nation’s complex relationship with its democratic memory.
One of the most momentous successes of Nigeria’s democracy has been the uninterrupted civilian rule over the last two and a half decades. The country has witnessed seven general elections, with power transferring peacefully among different political parties. This is particularly notable considering that prior to 1999, no civilian government had completed a full term without military intervention. The peaceful transitions in 2007, 2015, and 2023 are testaments to Nigeria’s evolving democratic maturity.
Electoral participation, while uneven, has also reflected a level of democratic engagement. In 2003, voter turnout stood at about 69 per cent, but this figure dropped to approximately 34.75 per cent in 2023, according to the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC). Although the declining turnout raises concerns, it also highlights the increasing expectations of the electorate, who demand credible and transparent elections.
Another area of progress is the growth of a vibrant and free press. Nigerian media has played a crucial role in holding governments accountable and fostering public discourse. Investigative journalism and civil society activism have exposed corruption and human rights abuses. The rise of social media has further expanded the democratic space, enabling young Nigerians to mobilise and advocate for change, as evidenced by the 2020 #EndSARS protests.
Judicial independence has seen mixed results. On one hand, the judiciary has occasionally demonstrated resilience, such as in landmark rulings that overturned fraudulent elections or curtailed executive excesses. On the other hand, allegations of political interference and corruption within the judiciary persist, undermining public confidence in the legal system’s impartiality.
Nigeria’s democracy has also facilitated the decentralisation of power through the federal system. State governments now wield some autonomy, allowing for experimentation in governance and service delivery. While this has led to innovative policies in some states, it has also entrenched patronage networks and uneven development across the federation.
Despite these successes, Nigeria’s democratic journey faces formidable problems. Electoral integrity remains a critical concern. Reports from election observers, including those from the European Union and ECOWAS, frequently highlight issues such as vote-buying, ballot box snatching, and violence. The introduction of the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and electronic transmission of results in 2023 elections showed promise, but technical glitches and alleged manipulations dampened public trust.
Corruption continues to be a pervasive issue. Nigeria ranks 145th out of 180 countries on Transparency International’s 2023 Corruption Perceptions Index, with a score of 25/100. Democratic institutions meant to check graft—such as anti-corruption agencies and the legislature—often struggle due to political interference and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Security challenges have also strained Nigeria’s democracy. Insurgency in the North East, banditry in the North West, separatist agitations in the South East, and herder-farmer conflicts across the Middle Belt have collectively resulted in thousands of deaths and displacements. According to the Global Terrorism Index 2024, Nigeria ranks as the eighth most impacted country by terrorism. The government’s difficulty in ensuring safety erodes public confidence in the state’s capacity and legitimacy.
The economy poses another critical remonstrance. Nigeria’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita stands at approximately $2,400 as of 2024, with over 40 per cent of the population living below the national poverty line. High unemployment and inflation have fueled discontent and disillusionment with democratic governance, especially among youth. Without addressing economic grievances, the democratic dividend will remain elusive for many Nigerians.
Ethnic and religious divisions further complicate Nigeria’s democratic consolidation. Politicians often exploit identity politics for electoral gains, exacerbating social tensions. Although federal character principles aim to promote inclusiveness, they have also sometimes fostered a quota mentality rather than merit-based appointments.
Gender representation remains inadequate in Nigeria’s democratic institutions. Women occupy less than 10 per cent of seats in the National Assembly, one of the lowest rates globally. Efforts to pass gender parity bills have faced stiff resistance, highlighting deep-seated cultural and institutional barriers to female political participation.
Civil liberties, while constitutionally guaranteed, are under threat. Crackdowns on protesters, restrictions on press freedom, and surveillance of activists reveal an authoritarian streak within the democratic framework. The controversial Twitter ban in 2021 exemplified the country’s willingness to curb digital freedoms, prompting domestic and international criticism.
The political crisis in Rivers State embodies broader democratic struggles. Attempts to control the state through undemocratic means expose weaknesses in federal institutions and the rule of law. Immediate restoration of democratic governance in Rivers State is vital to preserving Nigeria’s democratic integrity and institutional credibility.
Local governments remain under the control of state governors, depriving citizens of grassroots democracy. Last year’s Supreme Court judgment on local government autonomy is promising, but state-level resistance threatens its implementation. Genuine autonomy would bring governance closer to the people and foster democratic innovation.
As we mark Democracy Day, we must honour the sacrifices of Chief M.K.O. Abiola, Kudirat Abiola, Femi Falana, Chief Gani Fawehinmi, Pa Alfred Rewane, President Bola Tinubu, and countless others, who fought for Nigeria’s freedom. As democracy in Nigeria continues to evolve after 26 years, this day should inspire action toward its renewal. With despotism and state failure as real threats, both citizens and leaders must take responsibility—citizens by demanding more, and leaders by delivering. Excuses are no longer acceptable.