Editorial

Matawalle’s Call For Self-Defence

Published

3 years ago

July 6, 2022

Following the inability of the Nigerian security agencies to ensure the safety of lives and property of citizens and residents of Zamfara State against overwhelming killings, abduction for ransom and raiding of communities by bandits and terrorists, the governor, Bello Mohammed Matawalle, has decided to resort to self-help by encouraging the people of the state to take up arms and begin to defend themselves. This provoked mixed reactions among Nigerians.
While admitting that it is apprehensive about terrorism, the state government said the directive was part of its commitment “to ensure adequate security and protection of lives and property of the citizenry in the state”. Matawalle subsequently asked the Commissioner of Police to develop terms and conditions for the licensing of firearms to residents who were prepared to carry weapons to protect themselves. The military high command has, however, denounced the call.
The Chief of Defence Staff, Lt-General Leo Irabor, said it was appropriate for stakeholders to follow the rules and Constitution accordingly. “We do not take instruction from the state governments. We have a Commander-in-Chief. The constitution gives the right and powers to the C-in-C for the use of the Armed Forces, and I believe what we are doing in Zamfara State and across the states of the federation are not different from the provisions of the Constitution.
“We are there to give support to the civil authority in this case, the police. We are there to ensure that peace returns to Zamfara. The governor does not have the power to ask the Commissioner of Police to issue licences. I am yet to get the details but I do not think that is the right thing to do”, he was quoted to have said. The Defence Chief added that the Federal Government, through the Attorney General of the Federation, was charged with resolving the matter.
The directive not only denies the spirit of the social contract, but shows to what extent the crisis of insecurity in the country has become elusive. Before now, the state government had taken several steps including dialoguing with bandits, banning the use of motorcycles, shutting down petrol stations, markets, blocking phone and Internet services, suspending some traditional rulers suspected to have aided the bandits, including sending people to Saudi Arabia to hold prayers, among other measures.
These steps have failed to address superfluous killings, hence, this latest despairing action to arm citizens who are called upon to be answerable for their safety. Assuming without conceding that this call is apposite in the circumstances, do the citizens have the means to procure multifaceted weapons that can correspond with those handled by the bandits? Perhaps, in frustration, the Zamfara government has deemed that calling people to arm themselves for self-defence is the last resort.
Matawalle was not the first governor who advocated self-defence. Before him, the sullen Governor Aminu Bello Masari, whose state, Katsina, is also in the eye of the storm, made a comparable call after he bargained and extended amnesty to bandits that later infringed on their promise to lay down arms. Benue State Governor, Samuel Ortom, also called on his citizens to arm themselves as part of efforts to rein in banditry in his state. Moreover, Lt-General Theophilus Danjuma made a similar appeal to his Taraba State citizens to take up arms and stand up for themselves against killer-herdsmen.
What is unusual is that Matawalle went one step further by requesting firearms licences to be authorised. Once people comply with this request, there will be a great circulation of small and light weapons with all the aftermath, including the possibility of an anarchic situation. We recognise that the state government has a dilemma. But then, the governor of Zamfara, like some of his colleagues who have issued similar appeals, must fathom that the distress signal is a reflection of a collapse of governance.
This is an unwholesome development that is pointing more and more to a failed state. While the Zamfara State governor’s counsel to citizens of the state to bear arms could be looked upon as a recipe for mayhem, does he have an alternative course of action in the face of the Federal Government’s atrocious flop to secure lives and properties? It must be a serious situation for the governor. But if people are allowed to carry weapons, terrorists could pass themselves off as citizens to get permits. What does the government intend to do about this?
Although Section 33 (2) of the 1999 Constitution allows citizens to defend themselves, the Zamfara situation signals a terrible omen for residents and Nigerians in its entirety. The Firearms Act (2004) provides procedures for citizens who wish to carry firearms. Permits for the use of personal firearms may only be issued by the Inspector-General of Police (IGP). The IGP is to issue such licences upon the principles decided by the President. He can also delegate this power to Commissioners of Police.
Egregiously, the Federal Government’s failure to protect citizens leaves the public with only one choice: to defend themselves. After all, self-preservation is nature’s first rule. Our fear, however, is that we may have finally arrived at the gates of the Hobbesian “state of nature” where human life is “solitary, poor, wicked, brutal and short”. Terrorists who kill, kidnap and occupy people’s land have unconstrained control because this government is not doing enough to keep people safe.
The premonitory signs of the failures of the Nigerian state luxuriate and are conspicuous all over the place. It is usually easier to ask people to arm themselves than to retrieve the projectiles when anarchy boils over. Even if guns in the hands of the common people ultimately result in the trouncing of the terrorists, it might also lead to the emanation of warriors who could divide the space among themselves, as was encountered in Somalia.
It is a severe denouncement of the Federal Government that some heads of subnational governments, out of resentment, are contemplating self-help as an attainable alternative to secure lives and properties within their jurisdictions. This represents a precarious signal for citizens and the global community. The Federal Government has to step up. Undoubtedly, the security situation in the country is tremendous, and it can only get worse unless germane actions, supported by essential political will, are brought to bear on the jeopardy to curb the increasing wave.

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.