Opinion

Emohua Political Equation: Matters Arising

Published

15 years ago

July 2, 2010

Partisan politics in Emohua Local Government Area of Rivers State remains one of the most peaceful in the entire state, particularly in the Ikwerre ethnic nationality. Special tribute must be paid to the leader of Emohua Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), Chief Andrew Uchendu.

Hon Uchendu, the member representing Ikwerre/Emohua Constituency at the Federal House of Representatives has been the fulcrum with which Emohua politics revolves. For one thing, the first indigenous Managing Director of Risonpalm Limited, has maintained sharing formula between the constituents of the LGA.

The LGA is majorly peopled by two distinct groups: the Rio and Ishimbam groups. The communities in each of the groups have similarities in their dialects but all subsumes under the Ikwerre language. Most importantly, both the Rio and Ishimbam are large enough to own their local government councils. It is against this backdrop, that Emohua LGA has developed a harmonious sharing formula.

Chief Uchendu has always maintained that preference would be given to communities that have not produced the chairman of Emohua LGA to ensure harmonious zoning system. That is why communities that have never had occupied the chairmanship of the council may heave a sigh of relief. There is no doubt, whatsoever that Uchendu, would remember those communities in order to sustain the formula that had been put in place in the LGA for quite a time.

But interestingly, the elective positions in Emohua doesn’t only consist of the chairmanship position. There is the House of Assembly seat as well as the House of Representatives seat which is often alternated between the two LGAs.

However, the odds favour communities like Egbeda and Ubimini in the present scheme of things, especially as none of them has produced the chairman of the LGA via a general election.

Again, if the zoning formula is anything to go by, these two communities have never been given a chance to occupy an elective position both at the LGA level or the state level.

It is only, Ubimini that has served at the caretaker level. Hon. Allen Nmah, the present PDP chairman in Emohua, who hails from Ubimini had once served as the caretaker committee chairman of Emohua council. Kudos to the Ubimini community, especially as Nmah remains till date, the PDP Chairman. Interestingly, however, Ubimini used to be ruled by the Nye-Nwe-Ali Egbeda/Ubimini communities, who hailed from Egbeda. But the small community seemed to have grown tremendously in politics since the demise of His Royal Highness J. A. Didia. They have a ward to themselves, PDP chairman, former caretaker chairman, among others. Ubimini has been playing Brother Jacob to Egbeda, which Egbeda has become a sort of Esau.

But not to worry, Ubimini may not be the problem of Egbeda as they are the closest neighbour. One thing is certain, in the game of politics; it is a game of numbers. It is for a greater majority of the people. Except otherwise, where majoritarian politics holds sway, the odds favour Egbeda.

Egbeda is decidedly the largest single Ikwerre community. Consequently, it is a community that ought to be wooed by different parties.

But in the present political dispensation, Egbeda is the most maligned among all the communities in Ikwerre ethnic nationality. Workers of iniquity have continually portrayed Egbeda as anti-Amaechi. Pathetically, Egbeda has not done anything to underscore the allegations. The game plan is to totally sideline Egbeda throughout the tenure of Governor Chibuike Amaechi, who is their son.

The question is why should Egbeda be anti-Governor Amaechi who is their kinsman? The allegation doesn’t really make sense. It is blatantly nonsensical. Fine enough, Governor Amaechi’s mother hails from Obohia in Egbeda community. Besides, Governor Amaechi had spent holiday in Egbeda as a boy. I am sure that the Governor remembers his kinsmen whom he spent time with in the good old days. He might not find it easy to forget his friends in Egbeda.

One thing is sure, those who have tried to exacerbate rift between the Governor and his kinsmen through blackmail would obviously not erase the fact that he forever remains the kinsman of Egbeda people, even when he leaves politics. The truth is certainly hard to bear. There is, no doubt, that some Egbeda persons are followers of Celestine Omehia till date. A preponderance of people remained loyal to Governor Amaechi, while he fought his battle at the Supreme Court. There is no community that supported Governor Amaechi enbloc. One wonders why Egbeda people should be worse for it for following Omehia.

It must be pointed out that many politicians and their in Egbede groups did not flirt with the K-12 political camp, yet the entire community was maligned as been loyal to Omehia. What about the leaders of Ikwerre Youth Movement (IYM) and their followers in Egbeda. Most importantly, staunch IYM members like Mr. Bright Ikonwa, who remained loyal to Amaechi, while he fought his battle at the Supreme Court.

Throughout the Supreme Court matter, Mr. Bright Ikonwa continued to be the pillar of IYM in Egbeda. His contributions to the sustenance of the IYM have been phenomenal. Ikonwa has often demonstrated his love for Governor Amaechi in different ways. There is no gainsaying that thousands of youths belong to IYM in Egbeda.

On the other hand, there are other faithful members of the IYM group in Egbeda. The incumbent Vice Chairman of Emohua LGA, Hon Enyie Friday Enyie, has also contributed his quota to the growing number of IYM faithfuls.

Another prominent faithful is Mr. Chinedu Ikonwa, who has also done his beat in the political camp. The list is endless. The truth of the matter is that politics is a game of interest; those who followed Omehia in Egbeda were able to produce a commissioner, despite the brevity of the tenure.

Governor Amaechi should be rest assured that Egbeda people are surely supportive of his administration but he cannot get hundred per cent support from Egbeda just as he cannot get the same from Ubima, his native home. That, ofcourse, is the beauty of politics

In politics, there is no permanent enemy, but permanent interest. It must be appreciated that even the Egbeda people who supported Omehia could be adjudged the best friends of Amaechi because they midwifed Amaechi’s victory.

According to the Supreme Court decision, Omehia had not been Governor in the eyes of the law but an agent of Amaechi. An undisclosed principal is still liable for the acts of his agents. The Supreme Court decision couldn’t have been realized if the PDP had lost.

Consequently, those who sweated in the heat of the sun at Akinima and the remotest parts of the state to ensure victory for the PDP deserve kudos because you cannot put something on nothing. The Bible says “everything worketh for good to them that love God and are called according to his purpose”.

Again, what an Egbeda man wants is that his participation in politics should be able to yield fruits. Nevertheless, I urge the indefatigable governor of the state to discountenance the allegations making the rounds that Egbeda hates him. The peddlers of the rumours are interested in marginalising Egbeda throughout the tenure of the incumbent governor.

Another question that agitates the minds of right-thinking persons is why should Egbeda hate their own son, who is capable of drawing development to the area.

Surprisingly, however, the same person was never hated when he spent holidays in Egbeda as a boy.

As the clock ticks towards 2011 general elections, there is, no doubt, that the workers of iniquity may be at their game again. But Egbeda people would remain resolute in their political participation and in their avowed determination to support the present administration in the state.

While the followers of Rt. Hon. Chibuike Amaechi in Egbeda continue to do their beat in support of the present administration, they should be rest assured that the politics of blackmail against Egbeda would not last forever. Virtue has its own reward.

Chidi Enyie

Opinion

Towards Affordable Living Houses

Published

1 day ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:” Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away”

The rising cost of house rents across cities and urban areas across Nigeria is most worrisome to say the least. More worrisome is the fact that while house rents are on a geometric increase, and the cost of living is astronomically high, the economy has remained most unfriendly and salaries very disproportionate to the basic necessities of life. Some State legislatures, like Lagos, have legislated on house rent control to check the Shylock attitude of some landlords. As good and necessary as such Legislative intervention, the feasibility of effectively controlling housing rents without adequate participation of public and organized private sector in remedying the housing deficit in Nigeria, in my considered view, is like building castles in the air, which will inevitably translate to an exercise in futility.

The reasons are not far-fetched: the spiralling prices of building materials today leaves much to be desired bringing house owners to face the challenge of property maintenance. No doubt the cost of building a house is about ten times more than it was five years ago. It is so bad that people wonder if civil servants and other low income earners can ever build a house. The hyper inflationary trend in the country has compounded the situation reinforcing the reality of the economic law that increase in the prices of essential commodity will inevitably result in increase in the prices of other commodities because the dealers will need to increase the price of their products or commodities to remain in business.

Though Nigeria is not as populous as China with a conservative 1.4 billion population, and having the capacity to provide to the housing needs of her people, it is not saying a new thing that the growing population of Nigeria and rural-urban migration has heightened the quest for decent living houses with more money chasing scarce accomodations.The terms of payment is very outrageous as house agents cash on housing deficit to connive with landlords to unwittingly increase rents and the monetary requirements to access a decent living place. One can’t imagine how a two bedroom flat will go for N1.2 million to be paid for two years, exclusive of the pecuniary benefits accruing to the house agents and legal fees and other outrageous charges.

Corruption is another major problem of housing deficit as government allocations to the housing sector were either outrightly embezzled or misappropriated with impunity. Housing need remains endemic in most nations of the world, including Nigeria. As a basic material necessity, of humans, availability of adequate and affordable housing has become one of the challenges government at all levels, multinational or corporate organisations must grapple with. The United Nations’ Year 2000 Millennium Development Goals which includes “Shelter for all”, has failed to address housing deficits 25 years after it was initiated. According to reports, of a global population of about eight billion people, more than 1.8 billion people live in informal settlements or inadequate housing with limited access to essential services such as water and sanitation, electricity and are often under threat of forced eviction.

One of the most severe violations of the right to adequate housing—homelessness—has been on a steep increase in many economically advanced countries. Housing is a right not a commodity. Increasingly viewed as a commodity, housing is most importantly a human right. Under international law, to be adequately housed means having secure tenure—not having to worry about being evicted or having your home or lands taken away. It means living somewhere that is in keeping with your culture, and having access to appropriate services, schools, and employment. Too often violations of the right to housing occur with impunity. In part, this is because, at the domestic level, housing is rarely treated as a human right. The key to ensuring adequate housing is the implementation of this human right through appropriate government policy and programmes, including national housing strategies.

Adequate housing was recognized as part of the right to an adequate standard of living in article 25 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in article 11.1 of the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Other international human rights treaties have si

nce recognized or referred to the right to adequate housing or some elements of it, such as the protection of one’s home and privacy. According to the UN Charter and Declaration, adequate housing is protected against forced evictions and the arbitrary destruction and demolition of one’s home; free from arbitrary interference with one’s home, privacy and family; and right to choose one’s residence, to determine where to live and to freedom of movement.

Looking at what adequate housing entails, it is obvious that fixing housing deficits is capital intensive project that will be perennial to achieve through private and government synergy. The roles of housing as the basis of stability and security for an individual or family can not be undermined. As the centre of our social, emotional and sometimes economic lives, a home should be a sanctuary—a place to live in peace, security and dignity. According to The United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights the right to adequate housing should not be interpreted narrowly. Rather, it should be seen as the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity. The characteristics of the right to adequate housing are clarified mainly in the Committee’s general comments No. 4 (1991) on the right to adequate housing and No. 7 (1997) on forced evictions.

Therefore, Government at all levels should synergise with the Private sector to intentionally and consciously drive the initiative to mitigate housing deficit in Nigeria. Government budgetary allocations should not be seen as a national cake but be made to perform optimally by those in the saddle. Value should be given to every kobo, while corruption should be checked.

By; Igbiki Benibo

Opinion

The Labour Union We Want

Published

1 day ago

December 22, 2025

The Tide

Quote:”Symbolic street protests are not enough; workers want actions that translate into real improvements in their daily lives.”

It was refreshing to see the leadership of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) finally spring into action after many months of apparent silence. For a long time, organised labour seemed to have slipped into a coma while workers groaned under worsening economic and social conditions. Poor governance, rising insecurity, and deepening poverty continued unchecked, yet labour’s voice was barely heard. This silence understandably drew criticism from workers and the wider public, many of whom questioned whether the NLC was still living up to its historic role as defender of the masses. Historically, Nigerian labour has stood firmly on the side of the people. From the anti-colonial struggles of the 1940s to resistance against military dictatorship and anti-people economic policies, labour has played a critical role in shaping national consciousness. The historic 1945 strike, which lasted 45 days, forced the colonial government to improve wages and working conditions and cemented labour’s place as a force for social justice.

During the military era, particularly under Generals Ibrahim Babangida and Sani Abacha, the NLC was among the few institutions bold enough to challenge authoritarian rule and oppose the Structural Adjustment Programme, warning—correctly—that it would deepen poverty and inequality. Perhaps the most defining moment in recent labour history came in January 2012, when the NLC and the Trade Union Congress (TUC) led nationwide protests against the removal of fuel subsidy by the Goodluck Jonathan administration. The Occupy Nigeria protests paralysed economic activities and forced a partial reversal of the policy, reminding Nigerians of the power of a united and courageous labour movement. Against this backdrop, the NLC’s decision to call a nationwide protest on Wednesday, December 17, over rising cost of living, poverty, and insecurity came as a welcome relief.

It rekindled hope that organised labour is reclaiming its relevance. For workers enduring hardship with little institutional backing, the protest symbolised courage, consistency, and a willingness to confront policies that worsen the lives of ordinary Nigerians. However, Nigerians expect more than symbolic street protests. The real test lies ahead. Labour leaders must counter the long-held perception that union leadership often “sells out” during negotiations, placing personal or political interests above collective welfare. Whether fair or not, this perception has weakened trust in organised labour. As former NLC president Adams Oshiomhole once warned, labour must not become “a pressure group that barks but does not bite.” Workers expect transparency, firmness, and outcomes that translate into real improvements in their lives.

One urgent issue demanding labour’s sustained attention is fuel subsidy removal. President Bola Tinubu justified the policy in 2023 as necessary to curb corruption and free funds for development. Nigerians were promised that savings would be redirected into infrastructure, social welfare, and economic growth. Two years later, however, many citizens see little evidence of these gains. Instead, they face skyrocketing fuel prices, transport costs, food inflation, and an unbearable cost of living.Labour must therefore demand accountability: How much has been saved? Where has the money gone? Which projects are directly linked to these funds? These are legitimate questions that deserve honest answers. Closely related is the unresolved issue of Nigeria’s state-owned refineries in Port Harcourt, Warri, and Kaduna. Billions of dollars have reportedly been spent on turnaround maintenance, yet the refineries remain largely non-functional.

Former NNPC chief Mele Kyari repeatedly assured Nigerians that the refineries would be operational by 2023, promises that were not fulfilled. Today, conflicting claims about their status continue to fuel public frustration.This presents another opportunity for organised labour to assert relevance by demanding transparency on funds spent, current operational capacity, and accountability for failures. Without this, Nigeria risks repeating cycles of waste and deception. Beyond petrol, the rising cost of cooking gas has become a major burden for households. Despite Nigeria’s vast gas reserves, inadequate domestic production, limited processing facilities, and poor infrastructure have made locally sourced gas scarce and expensive. Heavy reliance on imports paid for in dollars means that naira depreciation continues to drive prices upward.

Labour must expand its advocacy beyond wages to include structural reforms that reduce import dependence and shield workers from inflationary shocks. Security also remains a critical concern. While recent steps such as reducing police protection for VIPs and recruiting more officers are commendable, they are insufficient. Nigerian workers still live in fear of kidnapping, robbery, and violent attacks. Many now weigh personal safety before accepting jobs or commuting to work. No worker should risk their life simply to earn a living. Labour must consistently pressure government to prioritise security, intelligence, and community-based policing while addressing root causes like unemployment and poverty. At the heart of labour agitation is workers’ welfare. Nigerian workers need wages that reflect harsh economic realities, not salaries eroded daily by inflation and currency depreciation.

Prompt salary payments, regular minimum wage reviews, inflation-linked adjustments, job security, and enforcement of labour laws are no longer optional—they are essential. Casualisation, arbitrary dismissals, and denial of pensions have become widespread and must be firmly resisted. Most importantly, workers need hope—hope rooted in job creation, affordable healthcare, quality education, and dignity for labour. The labour union Nigerians want is not one that surfaces only in moments of crisis, but one that remains vigilant, principled, and unwavering. It must understand the pulse of the people, confront injustice boldly, and refuse to compromise workers’ welfare for anything less than the collective good.

By: Calista Ezeaku

Opinion

Wike VS Soldier’s Altercation: Matters Arising

Published

2 weeks ago

December 8, 2025

The Tide

The events that unfolded in Abuja on Tuesday November 11, 2025 between the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Chief Nyesom Wike and a detachment of soldiers guarding a disputed property, led by Adams Yerima, a commissioned Naval Officer, may go down as one of the defining images of Nigeria’s democratic contradictions. It was not merely a quarrel over land. It was a confrontation between civil authority and the military legacy that still hovers over our national life.

Nyesom Wike, fiery and fearless as always, was seen on video exchanging words with a uniformed officer who refused to grant him passage to inspect a parcel of land alleged to have been illegally acquired. The minister’s voice rose, his temper flared, and the soldier, too, stood his ground, insisting on his own authority. Around them, aides, security men, and bystanders watched, stunned, as two embodiments of the Nigerian state clashed in the open.

The images spread fast, igniting debates across drawing rooms, beer parlours, and social media platforms. Some hailed Wike for standing up to military arrogance; others scolded him for perceived disrespect to the armed forces. Yet beneath the noise lies a deeper question about what sort of society we are building and whether power in Nigeria truly understands the limits of its own reach.

It is tragic that, more than two decades into civil rule, the relationship between the civilian arm of government and the military remains fragile and poorly understood. The presence of soldiers in a land dispute between private individuals and the city administration is, by all civic standards, an aberration. It recalls a dark era when might was right, and uniforms conferred immunity against accountability.

Wike’s anger, even if fiery, was rooted in a legitimate concern: that no individual, however connected or retired, should deploy the military to protect personal interests. That sentiment echoes the fundamental democratic creed that the law is supreme, not personalities. If his passion overshot decorum, it was perhaps a reflection of a nation weary of impunity.

On the other hand, the soldier in question is a symbol of another truth: that discipline, respect for order, and duty to hierarchy are ingrained in our armed forces. He may have been caught between conflicting instructions one from his superiors, another from a civilian minister exercising his lawful authority. The confusion points not to personal failure but to institutional dysfunction.

It is, therefore, simplistic to turn the incident into a morality play of good versus evil.

*********”**** What happened was an institutional embarrassment. Both men represented facets of the same failing system a polity still learning how to reconcile authority with civility, law with loyalty, and service with restraint.

In fairness, Wike has shown himself as a man of uncommon courage. Whether in Rivers State or at the FCTA, he does not shy away from confrontation. Yet courage without composure often feeds misunderstanding. A public officer must always be the cooler head, even when provoked, because the power of example outweighs the satisfaction of winning an argument.

Conversely, soldiers, too, must be reminded that their uniforms do not place them above civilian oversight. The military exists to defend the nation, not to enforce property claims or intimidate lawful authorities. Their participation in purely civil matters corrodes the image of the institution and erodes public trust.

One cannot overlook the irony: in a country where kidnappers roam highways and bandits sack villages, armed men are posted to guard contested land in the capital. It reflects misplaced priorities and distorted values. The Nigerian soldier, trained to defend sovereignty, should not be drawn into private or bureaucratic tussles.

Sycophancy remains the greatest ailment of our political culture. Many of those who now cheer one side or the other do so not out of conviction but out of convenience. Tomorrow they will switch allegiance. True patriotism lies not in defending personalities but in defending principles. A people enslaved by flattery cannot nurture a culture of justice.

The Nigerian elite must learn to submit to the same laws that govern the poor. When big men fence off public land and use connections to shield their interests, they mock the very constitution they swore to uphold. The FCT, as the mirror of national order, must not become a jungle where only the powerful can build.

The lesson for Wike himself is also clear: power is best exercised with calmness. The weight of his office demands more than bravery; it demands statesmanship. To lead is not merely to command, but to persuade — even those who resist your authority.

Equally, the lesson for the armed forces is that professionalism shines brightest in restraint. Obedience to illegal orders is not loyalty; it is complicity. The soldier who stands on the side of justice protects both his honour and the dignity of his uniform.

The Presidency, too, must see this episode as a wake-up call to clarify institutional boundaries. If soldiers can be drawn into civil enforcement without authorization, then our democracy remains at risk of subtle militarization. The constitution must speak louder than confusion.

The Nigerian public deserves better than spectacles of ego. We crave leaders who rise above emotion and officers who respect civilian supremacy. Our children must not inherit a nation where authority means shouting matches and intimidation in public glare.

Every democracy matures through such tests. What matters is whether we learn the right lessons. The British once had generals who defied parliament; the Americans once fought over states’ rights; Nigeria, too, must pass through her own growing pains but with humility, not hubris.

If the confrontation has stirred discomfort, then perhaps it has done the nation some good. It forces a conversation long overdue: Who truly owns the state — the citizen or the powerful? Can we build a Nigeria where institutions, not individuals, define our destiny?

As the dust settles, both the FCTA and the military hierarchy must conduct impartial investigations. The truth must be established — not to shame anyone, but to restore order. Where laws were broken, consequences must follow. Where misunderstandings occurred, apologies must be offered.

Let the rule of law triumph over the rule of impulse. Let civility triumph over confrontation. Let governance return to the path of dialogue and procedure.

Nigeria cannot continue to oscillate between civilian bravado and military arrogance. Both impulses spring from the same insecurity — the fear of losing control. True leadership lies in the ability to trust institutions to do their work without coercion.

Those who witnessed the clash saw a drama of two gladiators. One in starched khaki, one in well-cut suit. Both proud, both unyielding. But a nation cannot be built on stubbornness; it must be built on understanding. Power, when it meets power, should produce order, not chaos.

We must resist the temptation to glorify temper. Governance is not warfare; it is stewardship. The citizen watches, the world observes, and history records. How we handle moments like this will define our collective maturity.

The confrontation may have ended without violence, but it left deep questions in the national conscience. When men of authority quarrel in the open, institutions tremble. The people, once again, become spectators in a theatre of misplaced pride.

It is time for all who hold office — civilian or military — to remember that they serve under the same flag. That flag is neither khaki nor political colour; it is green-white-green, and it demands humility.

No victor, no vanquish only a lesson for a nation still learning to govern itself with dignity.

By; King Onunwor