Politics
How I Would’ve Handled Subsidy Removal As President – Amaechi
Former Rivers State Governor, Mr Rotimi Amaechi, has said he would have handled the removal of the fuel subsidy differently if he had been elected President, emphasising the need for social housing and job creation as cushioning measures.
Mr Amaechi, who served as Minister of Transportation (2015-2022) and vied for the All Progressives Congress (APC) presidential ticket in 2022 but lost to President Bola Tinubu, shared his perspective on the second day of a democracy conference held in Abuja.
The two-day event, themed “Strengthening Nigeria’s Democracy: Pathway to Good Governance and Political Integrity,” was organised by the African Centre for Leadership, Strategy and Development (Centre LSD), the Centre for Democracy and Development (CDD), the Westminster Foundation for Democracy (WFD), the Peering Advocacy and Advancement Centre in Africa (PAACA), and the National Peace Committee (NPC).
Speaking as a panellist during a session on the “Impact of democracy on the national economy,” Mr Amaechi acknowledged that removing fuel subsidy was unavoidable for any President but questioned the timing and preparedness of President Tinubu’s government.
“There is nobody that would have become President that would not have removed the subsidy. What I don’t know is what time was appropriate for the removal. How prepared was the Tinubu government when he announced the removal?” he queried.
“My wife and children asked me what I would have done differently. My response was this: I would remove the subsidy, but I would not remove it without social housing. Why? With the money saved from subsidy removal and Naira devaluation, it could be used to build between 200,000 and 300,000 houses”, he added.
Mr Amaechi explained that such a policy would not only address the housing deficit but also create jobs across various sectors.
“If you build between 200,000 and 300,000 houses in the states, how many jobs have you created? At least 300,000 bricklayers, 300,000 carpenters, and 300,000 plumbers. By the time you do those things, what have you done? You have put money in the hands of the people,” he stated.
Mr Amaechi also lamented the growing gap between the rich and poor in Nigeria, describing the absence of a functional middle class as a critical challenge.
“The last time we had the middle class was under President Olusegun Obasanjo. He created an economy that generated jobs. Even though some argued it was a shaky middle class that disappeared at the end of every month when salaries were paid, at least we had a middle class,” he said.
He continued: “Now, it’s either you are rich or you are poor. If social housing and investments in agriculture had been implemented alongside subsidy removal, people would not feel the impact as harshly as they do now.”
Mr Amaechi stressed that the government’s use of funds saved from subsidy removal should focus on tangible projects that directly improve citizens’ lives and provide economic opportunities.
The state chairman of the party, Dr Babandi Gumel, disclosed this in a statement signed and made available to journalists on Saturday.
According to the statement, the Jigawa PDP received news of Alhaji Lamido’s suspension with “profound shock and disappointment”.
The statement added that the suspension, which was reportedly based on allegations that Alhaji Lamido attended meetings capable of undermining party unity, amounts to an affront to justice, internal democracy and the reconciliation efforts recently championed by the PDP leadership.
The party stressed that the exercise of legal and constitutional rights within the party should not be interpreted as an act of disunity. It recalled that Alhaji Lamido approached the court after he was allegedly denied the opportunity to purchase a nomination form to contest the position of National Chairman of the PDP.
The statement further noted that the Federal High Court in Abuja, presided over by Justice Peter Lifu, ruled in Alhaji Lamido’s favour by restraining the PDP from proceeding with its national convention until his right to contest was determined.
The Jigawa PDP argued that the suspension appeared to be a punitive action against Alhaji Lamido for seeking judicial redress over an issue on which the court had already found merit.
The party also faulted the decision of the BoT for contradicting recent public statements by its chairman, Senator Adolphus Wabara, who had emphasised reconciliation within the party, admitted past mistakes and appealed to aggrieved members to return fully to the PDP fold.
However, it maintained that suspending a founding member who sought justice through legal means runs contrary to the spirit of reconciliation and healing publicly advocated by the party leadership.
The chairman said the suspension was premature and prejudicial, as the matter remains before the courts. He also described Alhaji Lamido as one of the few founding fathers of the PDP who has remained loyal to the party without defecting, warning that punishing such loyalty sends a negative signal to other committed members.
The party further argued that the action undermines party unity at a time when the PDP requires cohesion to effectively challenge the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC). It also insisted that there is no provision in the PDP constitution that allows for the suspension of a “life member”.
The party called on the BoT to immediately and unconditionally withdraw the suspension of Alhaji Lamido.
It also demanded that the BoT publicly affirm the right of all party members to aspire to leadership positions in line with the party’s constitution and the laws of the country, without fear of victimisation.
It further urged the BoT to retrace its steps, align its actions with its reconciliation agenda, and tender an apology to Alhaji Lamido.
The Jigawa PDP reaffirmed its commitment to a united, democratic and law-abiding Party.
In a statement signed by its Executive Director, Comrade Auwal Musa Rafsanjani, CISLAC warned that if proven, such actions would amount to a serious breach of constitutional order, legislative integrity, and public trust.
The organisation noted that Nigeria’s law-making process is clearly defined by the Constitution, stressing that any alteration of a bill after parliamentary passage undermines democratic governance and the principle of separation of powers.
CISLAC further emphasised that taxation has direct implications for citizens, businesses, sub-national governments, and the overall economy. It stated that uncertainty or a lack of transparency in tax legislation could erode investor confidence and raise concerns about accountability and the possible abuse of executive power.
The organisation described the situation as particularly troubling given the rare inclusive, and thorough public consultation that shaped the law’s final provisions prior to its passage.
“This process brought together taxpayers, civil society groups, professional organisations, the private sector, labour unions, local governments, and technical experts, ensuring that diverse viewpoints were considered and carefully balanced.
“Any unilateral changes to these agreed-upon provisions, made outside the established legislative process and without renewed public engagement, not only breach public trust but also violate the fundamental tax principle of representation, which holds that citizens must have a meaningful voice in shaping the laws that govern how they are taxed. Such actions undermine democratic accountability, weaken the legitimacy of the tax system, and risk eroding public confidence”, it noted.
CISLAC expressed particular concern that uncertainty surrounding the authenticity of the tax law, coming at a time when a new tax regime is expected to take effect, could exacerbate the economic hardship already faced by many Nigerians.
It observed that citizens are contending with rising living costs, inflationary pressures, declining purchasing power, and reduced access to basic services, warning that implementing a disputed tax framework under such conditions, risks deepening inequality, discouraging compliance, and fuelling public resentment.
The organisation stressed that tax reforms must be anchored in clarity, legality, fairness, and social sensitivity, cautioning that any tax system introduced without full transparency, adequate public communication, and legislative certainty undermines voluntary compliance and weakens the social contract between the state and its citizens.
As part of its recommendations, CISLAC called on the Presidency to urgently publish the exact version of the tax law assented to, alongside the authenticated copy passed by the National Assembly, to allow for public and institutional verification.
It also urged the leadership of the National Assembly to promptly exercise its oversight powers to determine whether the assented law reflects the will of the legislature, including a review of the enrolled bill process.
The organisation maintained that any discrepancy discovered should be treated as unconstitutional and addressed through lawful means, such as the re-transmission of the correct bill or judicial interpretation where necessary. It further called for an independent review of the process by relevant institutions, including the Office of the Attorney-General of the Federation and, where required, the judiciary, to establish the facts and assign responsibility.
CISLAC noted that the controversy highlights the urgent need to strengthen safeguards at the legislative and executive interface. It recommended measures such as digital tracking of bills, public access to enrolled legislation, and more transparent assent procedures.
CISLAC emphasised that the issue is not about partisan politics but about safeguarding the integrity of Nigeria’s democratic institutions. It warned that allowing any arm of government to unilaterally alter laws passed by another sets a dangerous precedent and weakens constitutional democracy.
The organisation urged all parties involved to act with restraint, openness, and fidelity to the Constitution, noting that Nigerians deserve laws that reflect due process, the public interest, and the collective decisions of their elected representatives.
CISLAC added that it will continue to monitor developments and engage relevant stakeholders to promote accountability, transparency, and the rule of law in Nigeria’s governance processes.
