Connect with us

Opinion

I Need Endorsements, Please

Published

on

The lingering row between two prominent Yoruba elder statesmen over the endorsement of candidates for the forthcoming Presidential election in the country and the leadership of Pan-Yoruba Socio-Political organisation, Afenifere, has raised some questions in the minds of some concerned Nigerians. Weeks after the acting leader of Afenifere, Ayo Adebanjo and the leadership of the group endorsed the presidential candidate of the Labour Party, Peter Obi, a move which he said was based on the principle of equity, justice, peace and inclusiveness, Pa Reuben Fasoranti, who had resigned as the President of the group, endorsed the All Progressives Congress, APC standard bearer, Asiwaju Bola Ahmed Tinubu. Since then, there have been accusations and counter accusations, some denials of published statements, tantrums from supporters of both notable leaders and all that.
A particular group that has thrown its weight behind Fasoranti’s endorsement of Tinubu is the Ogun State chapter of the National Association of Nigerian Students (NANS). Their reason is simple, “This is not the time for Yoruba to be divided. Election is around the corner and as a leading region in the country, we must unite and all work for the success of our own in the election.”
“We are not tribalistic, neither are we whipping up ethnic sentiment, but for equity and justice’s sake, we firmly believe that this is the turn of the Yorubas.
“We must not allow our sentiment against Tinubu to prevent us from reclaiming power. We, therefore, appeal to the foremost Yoruba leader, Pa Adebanjo, to set aside his grudge or hatred and embrace the APC candidate for the sake of peace, unity and progress of Yorubaland.”
Across the country, the story is the same. As the general election draws near, events have started unfolding. The political atmosphere is becoming more tense. There is a lot of political alignment – defection from one political party to another, politicians desperately looking for the endorsement from one individual, group or another.
Curiously enough, one thing is that when one group kicks off the endorsement propaganda, every other group in the State, constituency or nation as the case may be, will be falling over themselves to register their loyalty and support to the aspirants. Some of the endorsers, we heard, are paid and cajoled into taking the action. All kinds of encomiums are poured on the persons vying for the seats even when these praise-singers do not believe in them.
The other day a story made the rounds about the Traditional rulers from Enugu North Senatorial District of Enugu State, endorsing the current governor of the state, Ifeanyi Ugwuanyi for Senate, presenting him with “Ofo” – the Igbo traditional symbol of truth and justice, a move that had since been described by some people as abominable. They believe that no Nigerian politician is worthy of holding the “ofo” since they do not work to behold truth and justice.
A similar scenario played out in the recent past when some past governors literally turned government houses across the nation to political rally grounds as mobilised people from all walks of life trooped to the government houses to “beg” the governors to re-contest. We have not forgotten the one million-man-march organised by Daniel Kanu and co, clamouring for the transmutation of Late Gen. Sani Abacha to a civilian president. Traditional rulers and tribal leaders mobilised their followers for Abacha. Religious title holders prophesied that he was God-ordained.
The question then is, what is the big deal about endorsement? Is endorsement an assurance for victory in an election? Is it enough to sway voters? What should be the criteria for endorsing a candidate for a political office? A political endorsement according to Wikipedia is a public declaration of one’s personal or group’s support for a candidate for elected office. It is a potent tool to persuade many people to vote for a political candidate. You endorse a candidate because you think he is the best person to hold that particular political office. You have gone through his manifesto, thought through about the personality of the candidate, what he stands for, his values and policies. Does he/she have the capacity, in all ramifications, to occupy the position he is seeking for?
Do the legion of endorsers in this political dispensation factor all these in taking their decisions or are they driven by what they stand to gain personally or because the candidate is of the same faith, political party or tribe with them as the young NANS members said? Let truth be told, how many of these politicians clamouring for endorsement deserve it? What have they done for their people to make the people willingly recommend them for either a second term or higher position?
Many of them during the last electioneering campaigns promised the people heaven and earth if elected only to dump all the promises and pursue their selfish interest as soon as they assumed office. Some of them have held public offices in the past and there are records of their greedy, selfish and corrupt practices while occupying those positions. There is growing hunger in the land, the rate of unemployment soars by the day, our communities lack basic amenities –no water, no road, no electricity. The states and nation face serious insecurity challenges with the crime rate on the increase, our currency depreciates rapidly everyday yet all our leaders talk about is the 2023 elections.
Not a few people have asked how our governors, lawmakers and even the President have time to govern when they use their first two years in office to settle down and the remaining two years to seek re-election or election into higher positions? One therefore thinks that our leaders should concentrate on good governance. They should make life better for the people instead of wasting public funds on lobbying and sponsoring groups to organise endorsement.
Likewise, all the people seeking to take over from the incumbent political office holders come 2023. Their major preoccupation now should be selling themselves to the people, coming up with practicable plans on how they will pick up Nigeria from the depth it has fallen. Let them publicise how they intend to make our refineries come back to life so that the senseless practice of exporting our crude oil and importing refined products will stop.
The candidates, particularly the presidential candidates should show Nigerians their convincing plans of dealing with crude oil theft, fuel subsidy, insecurity, corruption and other challenges facing the country. A golden fish has no hiding place, they say. So, a leader who merits endorsement or re-election does not need to sponsor people to champion that cause. His good works, his reputation, his impeccable track record will definitely speak for him. And for the traditional/ religious/political and other leaders, groups and organisations in the country, who usually see electioneering periods as a period of “harvest” and would go on endorsement spree irrespective of whether the candidates merit the endorsement or not, is it not time they began to place the good of the nation and the generality of the citizens above their selfish gains?
Nigeria continues to sink deeper into a somewhat bottomless pit by the day and if we the citizens fail to set religious, political, tribal and other selfish sentiments aside; if we fail to put the moneybag, sweet-tongued, selfish, corrupt politicians in their place and take back our country next year, then we should not have any reason to complain or yell when they chastise us.
If truly we Nigerians are tired of decades of poor governance in the country, our consideration for who we should choose to take up mantles of leadership at various levels of governance next years should go beyond which candidate has the highest endorsement, who was endorsed by who, who has the most worded manifesto. We must ask ourselves who among the candidates is ready to walk the talk. It is also important to state that if nothing is done about the wave of endorsement which is turning our politics to that of hatred, anger and animosity, peace, unity and love that we clamour for will be far-fetched and our democracy will be worse off for it.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Continue Reading

Opinion

One Attack Too Many 

Published

on

Quote: “Ogoniland does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create more opportunities, empower youths and build a better future.”

The latest attack by Chief Gani Topba on the President of KAGOTE and Chief Executive Officer of Giolee Global Resources Ltd, Chief Lesi Maol, appears to have opened another troubling chapter in the politics of leadership and influence in Ogoniland. While disagreements are inevitable, the frequency and manner of attacks directed at individuals or organisations contributing to Ogoni development should concern every stakeholder. The concluded extraordinary meeting of Ogoni stakeholders in Bori was convened to deliberate on challenges confronting the people, including insecurity, farmers-herders clashes, youth disunity, education and development. It also considered harmonising the numerous youth organisations operating across Ogoniland under a strong and representative umbrella capable of giving Ogoni youths a more coordinated voice. One would have expected such an initiative to attract constructive contributions, especially from those with reservations about it.

Instead, the gathering and its organisers have come under criticism, raising a fundamental question: what exactly is wrong with Ogoni stakeholders coming together to discuss problems affecting their people? If there are legitimate concerns about the meeting, its organisers or resolutions, such concerns should be supported by facts and subjected to constructive engagement rather than personalised attacks. Leadership is demonstrated through service, sacrifice, participation and results. If Chief Gani Topba believes the stakeholders’ meeting was unnecessary or lacked legitimacy, nothing prevents him from convening another meeting and demonstrating that he can attract traditional rulers, professionals, academics, clergy and youths. Different approaches to development should therefore be allowed to compete on their merits.

The proposal for a unified youth platform should equally not be presented as an attempt to silence Ogoni youths. Rather, it should be examined against the reality of numerous organisations claiming to represent different segments of Ogoni youths. Too many competing organisations can create confusion, weaken collective bargaining power and make it difficult for genuine concerns affecting young people to receive coordinated attention. A credible umbrella body, if properly constituted and broadly accepted, could strengthen the voice of Ogoni youths and provide an organised platform for employment, education, skills acquisition, security and governance. Ogoniland has experienced enough institutional fragmentation. Its history contains painful lessons about divisions that allow personal interests, leadership struggles and competing platforms to overshadow collective objectives. The present generation should learn that destroying institutions one does not control damages society.

The question should be: who benefits when Ogoni youths remain divided and every attempt at unity is interpreted as rivalry? Against this background, KAGOTE deserves objective scrutiny rather than blanket condemnation. Any organisation with influence must be accountable, but accountability is different from a campaign aimed at delegitimising initiatives associated with its leadership. Chief Lesi Maol’s activities through KAGOTE and Giolee Global Resources Ltd have attracted attention in areas including skills development, education, youth empowerment and community support. Such interventions should be assessed on their impact and encouraged where they serve the public good. Those who believe Chief Maol is not doing enough should not stop at criticism. They should show Ogoni what they can do better. Where are the alternative skills programmes? Where are the educational interventions? Where are the youth empowerment schemes? Where are the community development initiatives?

It is easy to criticise someone who is building; it is harder to mobilise resources and sustain programmes that benefit ordinary people. This is not to suggest that Chief Maol or KAGOTE should be immune from criticism. No leader or institution should be beyond scrutiny, and legitimate questions about accountability must be welcomed. But responsible criticism should be based on facts, evidence and alternative ideas. Personal attacks and attempts to destroy initiatives simply because their leadership is not controlled by particular interests cannot provide the solutions Ogoniland needs. What is unfolding is bigger than one meeting, one statement or even two individuals. It reflects a broader contest over influence and leadership. If anyone believes KAGOTE is taking Ogoni in the wrong direction, the response is to present a better direction. If anyone believes Lesi Maol is not doing enough, the answer is to demonstrate what more can be done. Ogoni does not need leaders competing over who can destroy another’s platform; it needs leaders competing over who can create opportunities, improve education, promote security, empower youths and contribute to development.

The people are looking beyond rhetoric. They are examining records, observing programmes and measuring results. No individual owns the permanent right to speak for Ogoni or determine which organisation must survive or collapse. Ogoni must replace the politics of personal control with a culture of ideas, service, accountability and measurable achievement. Differences should produce better alternatives, not destruction. Every Ogoni leader and stakeholder should ask whether his actions are strengthening the region or deepening divisions. Ogoni needs people who can build bridges, institutions, opportunities and hope. Those who genuinely love Ogoni should support what is good, correct what is wrong and offer better alternatives. The future of Ogoni will not be secured by destroying its builders, but by encouraging more people to build.

onest people can reach different conclusions based on different experiences and information. Public debate should therefore remain respectful, evidence-based and open to correction. Truth is strengthened by honest examination, not insults, suspicion or personal attacks. The phrase “Truth has no agenda” carries a powerful message. Truth does not belong to any political party, ethnic group, religion or ideology. It cannot be permanently owned or manipulated by those in power. Governments change, institutions rise and fall, and public opinion shifts, but truth remains indifferent to popularity.The real test of character comes when speaking honestly threatens influence, privilege or personal advantage. It is easy to defend justice when there is nothing to lose. It is far more difficult when the truth may cost us something. That is when conscience must rise above convenience.

Society must therefore cultivate a culture where integrity is valued more than comfort and accountability is welcomed rather than feared. Leaders should learn to accept criticism without hostility, while citizens should express disagreement responsibly. Progress becomes difficult when honest questions are treated as acts of disloyalty. Ultimately, every society must choose the future it desires. A nation built on silence cannot sustain justice, while a community where comfort consistently outweighs conscience risks making injustice ordinary. But people committed to truth, even when inconvenient, lay the foundation for stronger institutions, trustworthy leadership and lasting progress. The call is not to condemn those who succeed or to glorify perpetual criticism. It is to remember that privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good. Truth has no hidden agenda. It seeks neither applause nor favour. It simply asks to be spoken, defended and lived. When truth is silenced by comfort, everyone eventually pays the price.

By:  King Onunwor
Continue Reading

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth  

Published

on

Quote: “Privilege should never silence principle, influence should never replace integrity, and personal gain should never outweigh the public good.”

There is an old saying that truth does not fear investigation. Genuine truth neither depends on applause nor seeks permission to exist. It remains constant whether celebrated or rejected, defended or ignored. Yet, in today’s society, truth often competes with comfort, convenience, loyalty and personal interest. This raises an important question: Can a person remain objective after beginning to benefit from the very system he once criticised? Throughout history, reform movements have been driven by courageous individuals willing to challenge injustice despite personal risks. Their commitment to truth sometimes cost them popularity, comfort, freedom and even their lives. History has also recorded instances where influential voices became quieter after receiving appointments, promotions, contracts, political favours or other advantages.

While motivations cannot always be known, such patterns remind us that personal benefit can sometimes influence public conviction. Human beings naturally seek security, stability and opportunities for themselves and their families. There is nothing wrong with success or advancement. The concern arises when personal comfort replaces public responsibility, or privilege becomes a reason to ignore problems affecting others. One of the greatest dangers facing society is not only corruption or poor governance but the normalisation of silence. Systems rarely collapse overnight. They deteriorate gradually when people who know better decide that speaking the truth is no longer worth the personal cost. Every society therefore depends on citizens willing to ask difficult questions, demand accountability and defend justice, regardless of who benefits or feels uncomfortable.

A person who benefits from a broken system may become less inclined to challenge it. This is not true of everyone, and individuals should not be judged without evidence. Many principled people continue to advocate reform while working within imperfect institutions. Nevertheless, personal interests can sometimes soften criticism, dilute conviction or redirect attention from uncomfortable realities.Perhaps the greatest threat to truth is not open opposition but quiet compromise. Censorship is easy to recognise; silence purchased through convenience is harder to detect. When people gradually stop asking questions, demanding transparency or defending principles they once considered important, society should ask whether something has changed. Perspectives may genuinely evolve with new information, but incentives can also influence what people say—or choose not to say.

This is why citizens should not place blind trust in personalities. Ideas, principles and actions should be examined independently. Loyalty to individuals must never exceed loyalty to truth. Political affiliation, professional status, financial success or social influence should not exempt anyone from accountability. A healthy democracy depends on independent thinking, not unquestioning allegiance.The responsibility to speak truth does not belong only to journalists, activists, judges, religious leaders or opposition politicians. It belongs to every citizen. The teacher who refuses to manipulate facts, the public servant who rejects corruption, the business owner who acts with integrity, the parent who teaches honesty and the young person who chooses principle over popularity all contribute to a more just society. However, defending truth also requires humility.

We must not assume that everyone who disagrees with us has been compromised.

By: Michael  Abraham

Continue Reading

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s  Outburst

Published

on

Quote:”Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat”

The recent outburst by the lawmaker representing Edo North Senatorial District, Senator Adams Oshiomhole, over the deplorable condition of federal roads in Edo and Delta states has once again drawn national attention to one of Nigeria’s most persistent infrastructure challenges. During Senate plenary last Wednesday, Oshiomhole criticized the Minister of Works, David Umahi, accusing the Federal Ministry of Works of neglecting major federal highways in Edo and Delta while prioritizing new road projects. According to him, the government should focus on rehabilitating existing roads that have become impassable before embarking on new construction. He identified the Benin-Warri, Benin-Asaba, Benin-Auchi and Auchi-Okene highways as strategic economic corridors that have deteriorated to alarming levels, making travel difficult for commuters and motorists while increasing the cost of transporting goods and services.

The senator also alleged that road projects affecting Edo and Delta states were repeatedly omitted from budgetary provisions and that some interventions were only undertaken following directives from President Bola Tinubu. Ironically, the Federal Government has consistently reiterated its commitment to reconstructing and rehabilitating federal roads across the country. The Minister of Works has repeatedly assured Nigerians that the government is deploying reinforced concrete technology to build more durable highways capable of withstanding the country’s climatic conditions. Despite these assurances, vast sections of federal road across the country remain in deplorable condition. The consequences are enormous. Federal highways serve as the backbone of the nation’s economy, carrying more than 90 per cent of passengers and freight.

They connect ports, airports, industrial centres, state capitals and agricultural belts, facilitating the movement of food, fuel, cement and manufactured goods. When these roads fail, the entire economy suffers. Although the Federal Ministry of Works is responsible for road construction and rehabilitation while the Federal Roads Maintenance Agency (FERMA) oversees maintenance, road maintenance has consistently taken a back seat. The result is a recurring cycle in which newly completed roads quickly deteriorate while existing ones are left to collapse. The economic consequences are severe. Bad roads increase transportation costs, contribute to food inflation, delay the movement of goods from ports to markets, increase vehicle maintenance expenses and lead to avoidable road crashes that claim countless lives every year.

To address these challenges, the Federal Government has introduced initiatives such as the Highway Development and Management Initiative (HDMI), which seeks to attract private investment into road maintenance through concessions and tolling. While the initiative holds promise, public acceptance will depend largely on visible improvements in road quality and transparent management of toll revenues. Similarly, the Road Infrastructure Tax Credit Scheme is designed to encourage companies to finance the reconstruction of strategic highways in exchange for tax credits. While the scheme has shown promise, its ability to address road infrastructure challenges equitably across the country remains to be seen. Other countries facing similar infrastructure challenges have demonstrated that sustainable road management requires a different approach.

Rwanda and Morocco, for instance, have prioritized dedicated road maintenance funds, performance-based contracts that reward quality rather than kilometers constructed, and policies that allocate a significant proportion of road budgets to maintenance instead of new construction. Nigeria can draw useful lessons from these experiences. Maintenance funding should be increased and protected because preventive maintenance is far cheaper than complete reconstruction. Public-private partnerships should be expanded with adequate safeguards, transparent tolling policies and independent monitoring. Development finance institutions should support contractors with affordable financing to minimize disruptions caused by delayed government payments. Road designs should withstand heavier rainfall and flooding, while compensation and right-of-way issues must be resolved before projects begin to avoid unnecessary delays.

FERMA should also prioritize durable, high-quality road maintenance over the shoddy repairs that have become all too common. Ultimately, Nigerians are not asking for perfect roads; they simply want roads that are safe, durable and properly maintained. While new highways are desirable, a well-maintained five-kilometer stretch is often far more valuable to road users than a much longer road that quickly falls into disrepair. The media, civil society, the National Assembly and Nigerians must continue to hold the government accountable by monitoring road projects and demanding better results. Good roads are not a privilege but a right of every citizen. With tax credit schemes, concessions and other funding mechanisms already in place, what is now required is political will, transparency and consistent implementation. However, Senator Oshiomhole’s criticism also invites legitimate public reflection. 

Many Nigerians have asked what the condition of these same federal roads was during his eight-year tenure as Governor of Edo State. Several governors, including those of Rivers State at different times, undertook repairs on critical federal roads within their states and subsequently sought reimbursement from the Federal Government. It is therefore fair to ask whether similar interventions were pursued during Oshiomhole’s administration. Public officials, whether serving or former, should be judged by the same standard. Constructive criticism is essential in a democracy, but it carries greater weight when matched by a demonstrable record of action. Nigerians expect those entrusted with public office to address pressing challenges while they have the authority to do so, rather than becoming vocal critics only after leaving office

By:  Calista Ezeaku
Continue Reading

Trending