Opinion

Nigeria Is Ripe For BVAS

Published

4 years ago

November 28, 2022

The voice of the unpatriotic is unmistakable in the respect that even after 108 years of our marriage, and 62 years of our independence, there is scarcely any policy, technology, or structure that we are ripe for as a nation. And it does not matter if this new thing, whatever it is, happens to be the best for us as a nation. It does not matter if technical innovation is able to leapfrog us, such that we can take our place in the League of Nations. No. The voice of the unpatriotic becomes even loudest, especially when undue political or economic advantage appears to be slipping away, as might be the case in the current election cycle.

The audacity of those with a stranglehold on our country is palpable. Take, for example, the recent utterance of the Kano State Chairman of the All Progressive Congress, Abdullah Abbas in Gaya, when reiterated that the APC will capture Kano by hook or by crook. He said: “People are saying that I should stop saying the APC will capture Kano by hook or crook. I want to tell this gathering that the APC will capture Kano by hook or crook.
Such statements reveal the underbelly of the APC, its National Chairman, Senator Abdullahi Adamu, and others like them, whose chief aim is to retain Nigeria in perpetual infancy even when we have all that it takes. For these men, it is either we standstill or retrogress, not minding that the world continues to move forward. Senator Adamu played his hand during the recent visit of the Commonwealth delegation to the 2023 General Elections at the party secretariat in Abuja.

The APC Chairman voiced his doubt concerning the practicality of using the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) for the transmission of election results in real time from every part of the country. In his thinking, Nigeria is still technologically infantile to make such a quantum leap. To substantiate his position, he raised the issue of network coverage and electricity. But, as a former governor, he might be having selective amnesia. Because, he Must have been more privileged than most Nigerians to know the extent of, and the nature of terrorist operations even in the remotest parts of our nation.

But, of course, these concerns are only a window dressing to shroud the real intentions of his party, which is to derogate, vitiate, and sow distrust in the mind of millions of Nigerians against the capability and the credibility of the new technology. Ordinarily, some may argue that he spoke out of tune, but that thought perished when the party’s National Secretary, Suleiman Argungu doubled down when he stated that power supply would be a major issue in his home state of Kebbi. But again, this argument is pedestrian, in the sense that accreditation has been done using an electronic device provided by the Independent National Electoral Commission in recent elections.

Arguments of this sort from those who ought especially to know, signpost why Nigeria continues to wallow in underdevelopment always scoring own goals, while our target is within reach. We have bought the fallacy of ‘the nascent democracy.’ lying to ourselves that we are young in comparison to other enduring democracies. We say things like, it took America more than 200 years, and they are yet to get it right. But, we forget that when they started, knowledge was not ubiquitous, and that information took days, weeks, if not months to travel. Conversely, we can have the information we want right in the palm of our hands. And, if we have any deficiency, we can immediately bring experts from enduring democracy to train and equip us. No. our problems are self-inflicted, either through our collective actions or inactions. We are our own undoing by design.

The overarching interest of a few has jaundiced and beclouded the outlook of the many. We have accepted mediocrity as a national value and replaced robust debates on key national issues with religious and tribal sentiments and coyish acquiescence. Take, for example, the issue of the State Police, as far back as 2011; former President Goodluck Jonathan expressed the view of the National Council of State when he stated that the political state of the country as of that time was maladjusted for State Police. According to him: “State Police may be theoretically good, but looking at our political environment, it could be abused to the detriment of the country.” Since that time, the lie has been propagated, especially by people from one section of the country. And, they have done everything possible to ensure that the issue is never debated on the floor of both chambers of the National Assembly. You may recall that former Inspector General of Police, Ibrahim Idris echoed the same sentiment, when in July 2017, he mooted that Nigeria, as yet, lacks the political maturity for state police.

Even when the governor under the platform of Southern Nigeria Governors Forum summoned the gumption to demand the creation of state police, President Buhari went on an interview on Channel Television to raise the issue of abuse by governors. Sadly, he is also cut into the same web of abuse, particularly in the manner with which he has relegated Federal Character to the dustbin in his tenure. The fear of the APC and certain puppet masters behind the curtains of power, and control in this country is not unfounded. In fact, the handwriting is on the wall. These men are afraid of one cardinal mantra of a thriving democracy: which is one man, one vote. As February 2023 draws near, it is becoming clearer to them that any popular candidate can win an election in any part of the country. They are on the edge because the era of vote trafficking and vote dump is over. Besides, 2023 is a different kind of election year since our return to democracy in 1999.

This time Mohammadu Buhari is not on the ballot, and again, the battleground is in the North, particularly in three key states of Katsina, Kano, and Kaduna. In Katsina and Kano, it shall be a 3-horse race, but in Kaduna, between the APC, PDP, and the NNPP. However, Kaduna will be different; it will be a 4-horse race, considering that Labour Party’s Vice Presidential Candidate is from that state. Sadly, because the puppet masters are about to lose the ability to stuff ballot boxes, and write election results as they choose, they have taken to farting in the public, while working underground to oust INEC Chairman, Professor Mahmood Yakubu. Unfortunately for them, it appears President Buhari looks to sculpt the 2023 General Election into his magnum opus, after his disastrous seven years of misrule.
Thankfully, the INEC Chairman has sensed President Buhari’s posture and has started to act and speak with renewed boldness. He said: “As I have said repeatedly, the Commission’s allegiance is to Nigeria.

Our loyalty is to Nigerians who want free, fair, credible, and verifiable elections supported by technology, which guarantees transparent accreditation and upload of polling unit results for citizens to view in real-time on Election Day. It is for these reasons that the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System (BVAS) and the INEC Result Viewing Portal (IReV) were introduced. There is no going back on the deployment of BVAS and IReV for the 2023 General Election.”

INEC will deploy a total of 176, 846 Bimodal Voter Accreditation System for the February 2023 general elections, and an additional 17,618 BVAS machines for back-up, with two devices per registration area according to its National Commissioner and Chairman, Information and Voter Education Committee, Festus Okoye recently in Abuja. And, in this case of INEC, the Bimodal Voter Accreditation System, the INEC Results Viewing Portal, and the 2023 General Elections, the time is ripe for a change. Would 2023 General Elections be completely hitched free? I do not know. But I know that the narrow way to political progress and national development is littered with honest imperfections.

By: Raphael Pepple

Opinion

One Attack Too Many

Published

1 day ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

When Comfort Silences The Truth

Published

1 day ago

August 17, 2026

The Tide

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

Opinion

Poor Federal Roads: The Oshiomhole’s Outburst

Published

2 weeks ago

August 3, 2026

The Tide

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