Editorial
Buratai And 38 Retired Officers
In 2015, some serving military officers of the Nigerian Army were compulsorily retired from service by the Military High Command for their alleged unprofessional roles in the 2015 general elections, which the authorities described as ‘meddling in the democratic process.’ The officers, ranging from Lieutenant Colonels to Major Generals were also accused of involvement in contract scams. This, according to military authorities, negatively affected the ability and capacity of personnel to deliver on their mandates to protect the unity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Nigeria.
Following the unwillingness of the military authorities to explore all available options and give the affected officers the opportunity to exhaustively defend themselves according to extant military law, the said officers petitioned the Presidency, complaining that they were not given fair hearing as their retirement was concocted and implemented without due process. They alluded to the prescribed Armed Forces Act Cap A 20 of the Laws of the Nigerian Federation 2004, which clearly stipulates the obvious grounds and inclusive process for retirement and possible dismissal of military officers.
In a recent publication titled: “Injustice, Human Rights and the Nigerian Army”, Ishaq Yusuf, described the reasons adduced by the military hierarchy for the retirement of the 38 officers as untenable in military practice, explaining that the officers’ retirement had nothing to do with the exigencies of the Army Code of Ethics and Rules of Engagement. He, therefore, argued that the action contravened the enabling military law and procedure for disciplining and sanctioning ‘erring’ officers. Yusuf further asserted that all military officers accused of the any infraction in violation of the provisions of the Armed Forces Act, were entitled to appear before a court martial to determine the culpability or otherwise of the affected officers, before any forced retirement, in accordance with specific provisions of military law and ordinance.
The Tide agrees no less with the position canvassed by Yusuf. We also support the pleas of the ‘wrongfully’ retired officers as put forward in their petition to the Presidency. Our position is simple: if the Armed Forces Act prescribes diligent court martial process to give fair hearing to those accused, thereby ensuring that justice is served, then, it is incumbent on the military authorities to do the needful. Our conviction is further strengthened by the fact that in a democratic environment in which the Nigerian military now operates, the supreme law of the land – the Constitution – guarantees the right of every citizen to fair hearing, and to be presumed innocent until proven otherwise after the ventilation of extant laws in a legally constituted court of competent jurisdiction.
We, therefore, implore the Presidency to accede to the petition of the 38 retired military officers, and diligently review their cases with a view to providing acceptable legal structure for fair defence of the allegations against them and just determination of appropriate sanctions and disciplinary measures as prescribed by law. Allegations of meddling in the conduct of the 2015 elections and or involvement in contract scams are issues recognised by relevant laws, which have also provided remedies for offenders.
While The Tide does not and would never encourage military participation in partisan politics because it undermines their professionalism and public confidence, it also would not support any action capable of fanning the embers of corruption, whether among public officials in the military or civil populace because it weakens public institutions, scuttles and suffocates economic growth and development, promotes violence and instability while at the same time whittling down national power and global influence.
We make this conjecture because since the inception of the Tukur Buratai-led leadership of the Nigerian Army in 2015, very unconventional means have been deployed in the administration of military justice. We recall that Buratai inherited a court martial instituted by the previous administration to try more than 5,000 military personnel accused of various offences, ranging from mutiny to refusal to obey orders in respect of the anti-insurgency war in the North-East. But rather than following through with the military disciplinary process of court martial, Buratai set up a ‘committee’ which reviewed the cases of the offenders and curiously reinstated 3,032 of them.
We warn that such abuse of due process in the military should not be allowed to fester. This is why we insist that the Military High Command must retrace its steps, and fashion legitimate and acceptable means of dealing with matters affecting the professional conduct of military officers in line with international best practices. This way, issues of crass abuse of human rights and violation of rule of law usually raised by global human rights watchdogs as well as western governments and institutions would naturally resolve themselves. This is our take!
Editorial
Making Rivers’ Seaports Work

When Rivers State Governor, Sir Siminalayi Fubara, received the Board and Management of the Nigerian Ports Authority (NPA), led by its Chairman, Senator Adeyeye Adedayo Clement, his message was unmistakable: Rivers’ seaports remain underutilised, and Nigeria is poorer for it. The governor’s lament was a sad reminder of how neglect and centralisation continue to choke the nation’s economic arteries.
The governor, in his remarks at Government House, Port Harcourt, expressed concern that the twin seaports — the NPA in Port Harcourt and the Onne Seaport — have not been operating at their full potential. He underscored that seaports are vital engines of national development, pointing out that no prosperous nation thrives without efficient ports and airports. His position aligns with global realities that maritime trade remains the backbone of industrial expansion and international commerce.
Indeed, the case of Rivers State is peculiar. It hosts two major ports strategically located along the Bonny River axis, yet cargo throughput has remained dismally low compared to Lagos. According to NPA’s 2023 statistics, Lagos ports (Apapa and Tin Can Island) handled over 75 per cent of Nigeria’s container traffic, while Onne managed less than 10 per cent. Such a lopsided distribution is neither efficient nor sustainable.
Governor Fubara rightly observed that the full capacity operation of Onne Port would be transformative. The area’s vast land mass and industrial potential make it ideal for ancillary businesses — warehousing, logistics, ship repair, and manufacturing. A revitalised Onne would attract investors, create jobs, and stimulate economic growth, not only in Rivers State but across the Niger Delta.
The multiplier effect cannot be overstated. The port’s expansion would boost clearing and forwarding services, strengthen local transport networks, and revitalise the moribund manufacturing sector. It would also expand opportunities for youth employment — a pressing concern in a state where unemployment reportedly hovers around 32 per cent, according to the National Bureau of Statistics (NBS).
Yet, the challenge lies not in capacity but in policy. For years, Nigeria’s maritime economy has been suffocated by excessive centralisation. Successive governments have prioritised Lagos at the expense of other viable ports, creating a traffic nightmare and logistical bottlenecks that cost importers and exporters billions annually. The governor’s call, therefore, is a plea for fairness and pragmatism.
Making Lagos the exclusive maritime gateway is counter productive. Congestion at Tin Can Island and Apapa has become legendary — ships often wait weeks to berth, while truck queues stretch for kilometres. The result is avoidable demurrage, product delays, and business frustration. A more decentralised port system would spread economic opportunities and reduce the burden on Lagos’ overstretched infrastructure.
Importers continue to face severe difficulties clearing goods in Lagos, with bureaucratic delays and poor road networks compounding their woes. The World Bank’s Doing Business Report estimates that Nigerian ports experience average clearance times of 20 days — compared to just 5 days in neighbouring Ghana. Such inefficiency undermines competitiveness and discourages foreign investment.
Worse still, goods transported from Lagos to other regions are often lost to accidents or criminal attacks along the nation’s perilous highways. Reports from the Federal Road Safety Corps indicate that over 5,000 road crashes involving heavy-duty trucks occurred in 2023, many en route from Lagos. By contrast, activating seaports in Rivers, Warri, and Calabar would shorten cargo routes and save lives.
The economic rationale is clear: making all seaports operational will create jobs, enhance trade efficiency, and boost national revenue. It will also help diversify economic activity away from the overburdened South West, spreading prosperity more evenly across the federation.
Decentralisation is both an economic strategy and an act of national renewal. When Onne, Warri, and Calabar ports operate optimally, hinterland states benefit through increased trade and infrastructure development. The federal purse, too, gains through taxes, duties, and improved productivity.
Tin Can Island, already bursting at the seams, exemplifies the perils of over-centralisation. Ships face berthing delays, containers stack up, and port users lose valuable hours navigating chaos. The result is higher operational costs and lower competitiveness. Allowing states like Rivers to fully harness their maritime assets would reverse this trend.
Compelling all importers to use Lagos ports is an anachronistic policy that stifles innovation and local enterprise. Nigeria cannot achieve its industrial ambitions by chaining its logistics system to one congested city. The path to prosperity lies in empowering every state to develop and utilise its natural advantages — and for Rivers, that means functional seaports.
Fubara’s call should not go unheeded. The Federal Government must embrace decentralisation as a strategic necessity for national growth. Making Rivers’ seaports work is not just about reviving dormant infrastructure; it is about unlocking the full maritime potential of a nation yearning for balance, productivity, and shared prosperity.
Editorial
Addressing The State Of Roads In PH

Editorial
Charge Before New Rivers Council Helmsmen

-
Rivers5 days ago
IAUE Governing Council Chair Assures On Mandate Delivery
-
Featured5 days ago
Fubara Tasks New SSG On Honour, Service, Protection Of Rivers Interest
-
Opinion5 days ago
Dangers Of Unchecked Growth, Ambition
-
Editorial5 days ago
Making Rivers’ Seaports Work
-
News5 days ago
RSG Cancels ?134BN Secretariat Contract, Orders Refund Of ?20BN Mobilisation … Revalidates Four Projects
-
Opinion5 days ago
Betrayal: Vice Of Indelible Scar
-
News5 days ago
NLC Faults FG’s “No Work, No Pay” Policy
-
News5 days ago
Group Harps On Empowerment Of Girl Child