Editorial

Justifying Allocations To Intel Agencies

Published

4 years ago

August 2, 2021

The approval of a N4.87 billion budget for the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) by the National
Assembly (NASS) to track, intercept and monitor calls and messages on mobile devices, including Thuraya and WhatsApp may prove to be counter-productive to the constitutional role of the press. Clearly, that seems to be one of the ploys of the Federal Government to subdue the media.
This amount is said to be part of the N895.8 billion supplementary budget presented by President Muhammadu Buhari and approved by the two chambers of the federal parliament after having increased it by about N87 billion. Of that sum, N1.93 billion was earmarked for “WhatsApp Interception Solution” and N2.93 billion for “Thuraya Interception Solution” – a communications system used for monitoring voice calls or call-related information, SMS, data traffic, among others.
Also, Nigeria’s military intelligence arm, the Defence Intelligence Agency (DIA), has secured N16.8 billion for foreign and national military intelligence. The DIA will as well use the funds to conduct enhanced voice and data monitoring. The funds will be used for interception of communications on tactical mobile geological platforms. The agency will also provide infrastructure and establish cyber intelligence facilities and laboratories across the country.
Federal legislators are also working on a series of legislative initiatives to regulate the media. A number of such bills include the Nigerian Broadcasting Commission (NBC) Act and the Press Council Act (PCA). The Buhari’s government has also recently banned the social media platform, Twitter, as it continues to call for support for regulation of online and mainstream media space in the country.
The purpose of modifying the NBC Act and the PCA Act, is not only to intimidate and stifle the press, but also to muffle the basis of our democracy – freedom of speech. Both amendments seek to empower the Minister of Information to issue licences to print and broadcast media, and penalise journalists and media organisations for offences already covered under the country’s penal and criminal codes.
For instance, Section 3 (e, f, and g) of the NPC amendment bill says the body shall “receive, process and consider applications for the establishment, ownership and operation of print and other related media houses; with the approval of the minister, grant print media and other related licences to any application considered worthy of such; monitor activities of the media and other related media houses to ensure compliance with the National Press Code for professional and ethical conduct, including the Nigeria Union of Journalists.”
The bill also provides the minister with the authority to sanction and revoke the licence of any print media that violates the “National Press Code”. Section 33 (3) of the bill also says that “any person who carries news established to be fake news thereafter, commits an offence and is liable, on conviction, to a fine of N5 million or two years in prison or both.”
And the print media that carried the ‘fake news’ shall be liable to a fine of N10 million and/or closure for one year! This clause deliberately ignores existing media laws that provide for retraction and apology when a media organisation errs in publishing an article. It is yet to be seen what is democratic about this proposed law.
In addition, the currently conceived bill aims to regulate internet broadcasting and all online media organisations through a series of broadcasting licences, including licences for live content or Over the Top Television (OTT). Attempting to crack down on online media criticism is patently reckless, and it flies in the face of liberal democracy.
We are totally confident that all the endorsed funds and the review of media laws are geared towards enabling security operatives to haunt journalists and to restrict freedom of information in the country. This is actually another strategy to limit criticism of the government. Why are the authorities not thinking about utilising the enormous funds earmarked for media repression to develop other sectors of the country consistently yearning for consideration?
No opposition party in Nigeria has benefited more from press freedom than the All Progressives Congress (APC). As APC’s spokesperson at the time, the current Information Minister, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, had access to traditional and online media at all times, and his views were widely publicised. Therefore, it is paradoxical that these obnoxious bills are in the process of becoming laws.
Over the last six years, the NASS has adopted, revised or proposed no fewer than five pieces of legislation, all of which have the capacity to restrict the press. These include the Cybercrime Act, the Frivolous Petitions Bill of 2015, the Hate Speech Bill, and the Prevention of Internet Falsehood and Manipulation Bill of 2019. Each of them looks scary enough.
The NASS or any other related legislature must deal with various anti-media bills carefully to avoid overheating the already tense polity. In the past, even under the military regime, Nigerian leaders tried to block the press, but met severe resistance; and only successfully pitched the government against the people and the media and created social unrest.
Certainly, like traditional media platforms, there could be abuse, and this invariably requires some regulation. But given the inherent nature of social media, extreme care must be taken to prevent the child from being dumped with the bathwater. The largely unsuccessful experience of some developed countries that have sought to reduce social media excesses in some respects is very instructive.
In any event, there are enough existing laws in the country’s statute books on defamation, privacy, libel and slander to protect public and private individuals ordinarily. It is important to ensure that the passage of another law on similar matters is not excessive, eventually resulting in needless duplication of laws.
There is no question that the government has to regulate the media in line with extant laws, especially in this period when the country is beset with existential, economic, political and security problems. In fact, the time demands that all security agencies, including the intelligence community, are up and doing.
However, we firmly insist that the massive allocations to the different intelligence services in the country should not be a cover-up to fight the media. Instead, they must be put to good use to achieve the presumed objective of combating subversive activities, crime and criminal elements. No society can stand up to a subjugated press.

Editorial

Resurgence Of Illegal Structures In PH

Published

3 days ago

November 19, 2025

The Tide

The resurgence of illegal structures in Port Harcourt has become a thing of deep concern for residents who remember what the city once looked like and what it has now become. From street corners to backyard spaces, unapproved buildings and makeshift extensions are rising once again, disturbing the orderliness that once defined the capital of Rivers State. The return of this ugly trend signals a worrying decline in urban discipline.

Illegal structures were decisively prohibited during the administration of Rt. Hon. Chibuike Rotimi Amaechi, who enforced the ban in 2008. His government recognised that Port Harcourt was slipping into chaos, and firm action was taken to restore the integrity of the city’s physical environment. What followed was a sweeping clampdown on structures that violated the city’s masterplan.

The enforcement was so severe and so uncompromising that many residents of the Garden City took it upon themselves to demolish their own illegal structures in order to avoid heavier sanctions. It was a defining moment in the city’s recent history, because it demonstrated that with political will and consistent implementation, urban order could be restored.

The demolition exercise brought back the beauty of Port Harcourt. The city began to breathe again as congested spaces opened up and previously blocked access routes became free. There was a noticeable improvement in cleanliness and spatial organisation, and the renewed aesthetic appeal was appreciated by many who had longed for a well-planned urban landscape.

Many backyards became so spacious that they were not only neat but motorable. Before the enforced clean-up, these same spaces had been used for all kinds of menial activities. Some were turned into mechanic workshops, while others were cluttered with kiosks and shanties that distorted the environment. The transformation that followed the demolition was evidence of what strong governance can achieve.

When former Governor Nyesom Wike assumed office in 2015, he sustained the ban and continued the demolition of illegal structures. This ensured that the gains of the previous administration were not eroded. Residents saw a continuation of orderliness and appreciated the consistency in urban policy.

Sadly, today, illegal structures have returned in full force, defacing the state capital and reintroducing the very problems that had earlier been tackled. These structures now appear everywhere, giving Port Harcourt the look of a city sliding back to its infamous reputation as a Garbage City. This development is unacceptable and raises questions about the laxity of enforcement agencies.

We therefore urge the Ministry of Physical Planning and Urban Development to halt this dangerous trend by rigorously enforcing the ban on illegal structures across Port Harcourt. Without immediate action, the city risks losing the gains of years of disciplined planning.

Such structures must be identified and demolished without hesitation, and their owners prosecuted in accordance with the law. This is necessary to send a clear message that Port Harcourt cannot be returned to filth, especially in an era when cities around the world strive to modernise and maintain order.

Additionally, the Urban Development Ministry should intensify the monitoring and control of physical development in the city. Before any new site is approved, the Ministry must ensure that access roads, drainage systems, markets, and other social amenities are included in the layout. Proper planning must precede construction.

The Rivers State Government must take more than a passive interest in the development of virgin areas within the metropolis. It is discouraging that illegal structures continue to spring up even in locations where earlier demolitions had taken place. This shows a lack of consistent supervision.

A responsible government sustains good policies introduced by previous administrations rather than discarding them. The fight against illegal structures should not depend on who occupies the Brick House, but on the collective desire to preserve the city’s integrity.

One of the primary features of a modern city is its aesthetic value, complemented by good roads and effective sanitation. Illegal structures distort these values. They obstruct traffic, endanger pedestrians, and increase the likelihood of accidents. When order is compromised, everyone suffers.

There must also be policies to regulate the indiscriminate sale of properties in the state. Many illegal structures exist because land transactions are poorly monitored. Enlightenment campaigns will help residents understand the dangers and legal implications of contributing to urban disorder.

Finally, the authorities must rise to their responsibilities. The Ministry of Urban Development must take immediate action to restore sanity. Port Harcourt is the only real metropolitan centre that Rivers State can boast of, which means it must be carefully maintained. Its masterplan should not be tampered with, and the city must be preserved for future generations.

Editorial

Certificate Forgery, Loss Of Public Trust

Published

2 weeks ago

November 10, 2025

The Tide

Nigeria has found itself once more in an uncomfortable global spotlight after the abrupt resignation of Geoffrey Uche Nnaji, the former Minister of Innovation, Science, and Technology. The circumstances surrounding his exit were neither dignifying nor reassuring. Instead, they have brought about a profound sense of national embarrassment and institutional opprobrium.

The allegations that Nnaji forged his university degree and National Youth Service Corps certificate have raised serious questions about integrity in public office. The University of Nigeria, Nsukka, (UNN) expressly denied awarding him a degree, stating unequivocally that he did not complete his studies. Such a revelation is not only scandalous but deeply unsettling for a nation already battling credibility deficit.

Even more troubling is the fact that the former Minister, under intense scrutiny, reportedly conceded that he was never issued a certificate by the university. This revelation begs the most fundamental question. Where then did he secure the UNN decree certificate he allegedly tendered upon his appointment? That inquiry alone unravels layers of possible complicity and systematic failure.

This matter has opened a can of worms. It is a sad commentary on a nation struggling to project an image of responsibility and moral uprightness. Instead of inspiring confidence, such cases reinforce the perception that Nigeria suffers from chronic ethical erosion in leadership recruitment processes.

It is particularly depressing that individuals who commit crimes of this nature can simply resign and walk away unscathed, as if public office was a revolving door of impunity. A mere resignation does not absolve one of accountability. It is imperative that those who defraud the nation must be held to legal consequences, not treated as though they merely committed a social faux pas.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time Nigeria is grappling with such an ignoble scandal. A former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Salisu Buhari, was once enmeshed in a forgery controversy over a fake degree and age falsification. Former Finance Minister Kemi Adeosun resigned after being found with a forged NYSC exemption certificate. Such shameful precedents have become almost predictable.

When high-profile officials indulge in such fraudulent practices and face little to no consequence, it sends a dangerous message. It tells ordinary citizens that integrity is negotiable and that laws are flexible privileges reserved for the powerful.

It is unconscionable that the law eagerly pursues the poor for petty infractions while turning a blind eye when the wealthy and politically connected commit more grievous offences. This selective justice is a tragic indictment of our system and values as a nation.

Our leaders, by virtue of the trust placed in them, should be punished doubly when they violate the law. The law must not merely exist on paper. If leaders continue to evade accountability, then what exists is not a legal system but a symbolic facade.

Time has come for the authorities to demonstrate that all Nigerians are indeed equal before the law. That principle, which is the bedrock of every functioning democratic society, must be evident not only in rhetoric but in action.

While it is commendable that Nnaji resigned, resignation alone cannot suffice as closure. We insist that he be properly investigated and prosecuted where found culpable. Likewise, previous offenders should also be recalled to face justice. National healing requires consequences, not concealment.

This scandal exposes the rottenness of our political selection process. It signals that trust has been replaced with convenience and accountability substituted with nonchalance. Nigeria cannot move forward if leadership continues to be riddled with fraudulent representation.

The Department of State Services (DSS) must be held accountable for clearing an appointee whose records were allegedly not thoroughly verified. Screening is not a ceremonial exercise. It is supposed to involve critical background checks and authentication of claims.

Similarly, the National Assembly must put an end to the hollow practice of asking nominees to “take a bow and go.” Ministerial screenings are not social receptions. They are constitutionally mandated checks intended to protect national interest. When legislators fail in this role, the entire country suffers the consequences.

Both the DSS and the National Assembly must reform their processes immediately. The continued casual, wishy-washy scrutiny of appointees is not only an indictment of leadership but a disservice to Nigerians. If Nigeria must rebuild trust and respect, it begins with ensuring that only individuals of proven integrity occupy public office. Accountability must prevail, and the era of impunity must be brought to an end.

Editorial

In Support of Ogoni 9 Pardon

Published

3 weeks ago

November 3, 2025

The Tide

The posthumous pardon granted to the Ogoni 9 on the 1st of October, along with the national honours conferred on the Ogoni 4 by President Bola Ahmed Tinubu, is commendable. It is a bold and humane initiative that signals a readiness to confront the difficult truths of Nigeria’s past. It also speaks to a willingness to mend fractured relationships and begin the process of national healing. This decision, though long overdue, has been widely welcomed and recognised as a considerable gesture of reconciliation.

For the Ogoni people, the development holds profound emotional meaning. Many families lost loved ones to the crisis that engulfed Ogoniland in the 1990s. To see the Nigerian state finally acknowledge that these individuals were wronged is a source of solace. This act affirms that the nation remembers the pain and sacrifices of its citizens, even when they are long gone.

It is widely accepted that the crisis divided the Ogoni people considerably. The internal fractures that emerged during the struggle for environmental justice prevented the area from realising its developmental aspirations. Communities were split, brothers turned against one another, and the collective strength of the Ogoni nation weakened. Despite various interventions from government, non-governmental organisations and international agencies, the deep wounds remained largely unhealed.

Past administrations, particularly at the federal level, failed to demonstrate the political will required to meaningfully address the grievances of the Ogoni people. While statements of sympathy were made and committees were set up, concrete steps were too often absent. The sense of abandonment festered and deepened. In contrast, President Tinubu’s action represents a recognition that a grave error was committed, one that cost lives and damaged a people’s connection to the Nigerian state.

The concerns of the Ogonis, especially regarding environmental pollution and land degradation, remain pressing. The establishment of Hydrocarbon Pollution Remediation Project (HYPREP) was intended to address these concerns, yet progress has been slow and uneven. It is time to ensure that the clean-up and environmental restoration are treated as matters of urgency. In equal measure, the Ogoni people must also give peace a fair chance. They have suffered greatly and lost many illustrious sons. A cycle of distrust cannot be allowed to define their future.

Reconciliation requires both justice and forward-looking commitment. Therefore, the Ogoni people must embrace unity and abandon practices that perpetuate division. They must consider the development opportunities available when they work together with the government. For Ogoniland to thrive, both sides must show willingness to move forward.

Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, deserves acclaim for his contributions toward restoring peace among the Ogonis. His efforts to encourage dialogue and his support for the newly established Federal university in the area reflect a practical commitment to development. We urge him to sustain this approach and continue to stand as a bridge between the state and the Ogonis.

The pardon and the posthumous honours must now create avenues for deeper engagement between Ogoni leaders and the Nigerian state. The proposed return of oil exploration in Ogoniland must be approached inclusively and transparently, ensuring that the people benefit meaningfully from their resources. Economic development must not come at the expense of dignity or community welfare.

However, unity among the Ogoni people themselves is an essential condition for progress. It is disheartening that some have rejected the President’s gesture. This moment should serve as a rallying point rather than a trigger for further division. If Ogoniland is to progress, it must speak with one voice on matters of collective interest.

It is worth noting that several Presidents have come and gone since the execution of the Ogoni 9. Yet it is President Tinubu who chose to take this courageous step. In doing so, he has attempted to correct one of Nigeria’s darkest and most shameful episodes. He has also sent a clear message that the state can, indeed, admit when it has erred.

The pardon signals a broader preparedness to redress past injustices. For too long, Nigeria has professed the intention to build equity while failing to address historical grievances. If national unity is to be genuine, it must be grounded in accountability. President Tinubu’s gesture marks a momentous shift in that direction.

For the Ogoni people, the pardon provides a measure of comfort. It affirms that voices long stifled can still be heard. It also offers hope to other marginalised communities still waiting for justice. Nigeria’s diversity will only become a strength if all groups are assured that they matter.

To ensure that this gesture is not dismissed as mere political theatre, the Federal Government must make good its commitment to the Ogoni clean-up exercise. Words must translate into sustained action. The Ogoni environment must be restored, livelihoods must be rebuilt, and trust must be re-established. Only then will the pardon and posthumous national awards become a true foundation for peace and renewal.